text
stringlengths 98
6.42k
| label
class label 2
classes |
|---|---|
This is a rare gem, one that isn't afraid to confront what it means to grow up in 80s America. Set in 80s New York, Silver has lensed an astonishingly authentic view of childhood, surprisingly devoid of sentimentality. She isn't afraid to paint life in realist tones, often shocking the audience with the intrusion of adult behavior upon the young protagonist's life. The issue of class difference is central to the film's development of the two main characters Sarah and Kare; the former a rich Upper East-side innocent; the latter a brash, precocious Italian-Catholic schoolgirl. Yes, this treatment of the different class systems seems rather trite at first, but the complexities of the characters are mapped through until the sombre end, which is a refreshing change from the feel-good nonsense made by Disney et al. This independent film could have been a Disney film; thank Mickey Mouse it wasn't. A testament to the true spirit of independent cinema in the 80s. | 1pos
|
Now this serial had a lot of hype to live up to...I had heard or read that it was one of the best serials ever made from every source I encountered. It was spoken of in the same awed tones as The Adventures of Captain Marvel, Zorro's Fighting Legion, Fighting Devil Dogs, and Drums of Fu Manchu. And it lived up to all the hype.<br /><br />Charles Quigley, David Sharpe and Bruce Bennett are great as the three circus daredevils who join the police in their efforts to stop the escaped convict who is known by the name 39013. The action and thrills are easily on a par with most of the SFX blockbusters today...and these old time SFX are pretty believable too. Just watch the motorcycle racing ahead of the water in the flooding tunnel!<br /><br />This chapter play doesn't really fall into the ruts of many of the genre. The cliffhanger resolutions are all very believable, and there is only about a half a chapter of recap. The acting, beyond the three principals, is excellent. Carole Landis has a minor though pivotal role that really doesn't use her comic talents, but Charles Middleton plays the archtypical villain role that he became known for...especially after he took on the role of Ming the Merciless in Flash Gordon.<br /><br />There are few serials that I can recommend wholeheartedly. But Daredevils of the Red Circle has definitely joined that list! | 1pos
|
The first and most important thing to say about DRIVE-IN MASSACRE is that it is, in fact, a very poorly done movie. People who are looking for quality cinema of any kind should avoid this, although I dare say it is hardly "the worst movie ever made," unless hyperbole is the only means by which you can communicate. The real question of this movie isn't whether it's bad or good; it is whether it's so bad, it's good. For those who like competent camera work, plot progression, and performance, this movie is not for you--make no mistake, DRIVE-IN MASSACRE is the bottom of the barrel (keeping in mind this is coming from someone who believes there is a level below the bottom).<br /><br />The other most important thing to say about this movie is that it is public domain. It can probably be found online for free, and it is available in a number of multi-movie boxed sets (including at least one of the sets with fifty movies). If you really, REALLY want to see it, it is available. As for whether or not you should see it, well...<br /><br />As the title suggests, this is a standard slasher film, originally made for screenings at drive-in theatres during the 1970's. And really, the goal for the drive-in audience wasn't really to be entertained by what was on the screen, but rather, to have what was shown on the screen assist patrons in getting into the pants of other patrons. For those gore hounds, there are some good bloody shots in this movie, and there's one bare-breast shot barely worth noting, but the shocks are cheap and will probably only coax the most squeamish of special ladies into the laps of their horny gentlemen.<br /><br />The plot revolves around, predictably, a series of slasher-style murders taking place at a local drive-in in Anytown, USA. The killer, in this case, is using a sword as his murder weapon, and there are, coincidentally, at least two characters in this movie who were, at one time, experts on sword use. At first, it seems like the killer only targets young couples who are prematurely pregnant. Our red herring, a standard in slasher flicks, is an amusing case as well--another killer, played by horror veteran George "Buck" Flower (he plays the mumbling old man in just about every horror flick out there) is found and shot down, only for the police to discover he's the wrong killer.<br /><br />So, for what its worth, DRIVE-IN MASSACRE does have an audience, just not a wide one. I found it amusing, and others will as well, but don't get your expectations too high for this one. I'd call it "So Bad, It's Kind of Good." Some of the dialogue, what can be heard, is rather amusing. The owner of the drive-in theatre, Austin Johnson (played by a man known only as Newton Naushaus), has some snide but humorous one-liners, especially while chiding the police. | 0neg
|
Well, I have to say i wasn't expecting much from the movie when I saw the trailer. I wasn't wrong. People should beware when movies of the same genre appear in big numbers; it will mean that at least 3 of 4 will be mediocre,bad or no redeeming value,whatever.<br /><br />***Spoilers..maybe*** While the "adventure" focus the most part on the "growing" and "surprinsing"(because nobody can actually explain how many powers Will has or how did he get them)of Will Treston, it also points the relationship of him, with his family(BIG family, by the way), and maybe love-wise. Yet, the prophecy from which he was unaware, suddenly takes part over his life, when he mets "The Raider";he pursues Will,with some dogs you wont see again, he babbles something like "Give me the signs" and runs away scared of some people that calls themselves "Old Ones".<br /><br />Probably, its seems like the "normal" Fantasy-Adventure plot. Boy.Prophecy.Hero.Mission.Some Help.Dangers.Perils.Plot Twist.Final Battle.End...Wow that sounded Like Ocarina of Time. But i was not satisfied by the plot...Will finds the signs...for example,on a Tomb(on the local Church),on her sister birthday present,OK totally unexpected and the SUPER predicted and most obvious sign(The Soul)...but for that, Will didn't even had to walk a mile from his home. His powers...Angered Explosions, "Super Strength"(Sometimes he was a pussy, actually), and Telekinesis( which he didn't care to use it, more than once). But, since all those powers were shitty, many characters actually didn't care to react at them(Will's Sister,Brother) or he was willing to keep them has a secret(Let me tell you a Secret...I have Super Powers). All this...i could easily forget it...but what destroyed me completely...was the "Disco Battle"(Final Fight Between the Old Ones and the Raider)or the Final Fight Between Will and the Raider( The effects of the Light and Dark Energies looked so crappy, a White and Dark Blankets, would have worked better) ************************************ So, Ill give it a 3, because it was not the worst movie i have seen yet...but because of the many plot holes and ...why to put Maggie and Stephen on the promotional poster if they barely acted on the film? Bad advertising | 0neg
|
wow, i was not expecting much from this but found it to be very good! It sure kept my attention. I'm not usually a big fan of this genre of movie. Goldie did a good job. some of the shots happened so quick i wish i had seen it on dvd so I could rewind and take a second look. | 1pos
|
I have seen this movie many times over and I can assure you that it has yet to get old for me. The movie does a great job of allowing the audience to witness first hand and laugh about how difficult it is for a very average-looking middle aged man with no career to juggle his well-off wife and his ambitious mistress. Of course the fact that both main characters are married (George and his mistress), albeit to other people, is the main reason why this heavily vaudeville influenced comedy works so well. Poor Maurice, all he meant to do the day he met Georges was collect knick-knacks to help the poor
Instead he ends up being forced (after a little convincing) to pretend he is George's wife in order to help him hide the affair that his mistress is about to reveal and, in the end, discovers the feminine side he was never aware off.<br /><br />Despite the fact that the two main male characters pretend to be married to each other, there is no gay theme going per se but the comedy clearly arises from the fact that everyone is fooled by Maurice's act as he pretends to be George's homely wife (unlike in The Birdcage, which, although the latter is a very good comedy on its own, I find to have nothing in common with this one. Indeed, the fact that both contain a transvestite is pretty much the only similarity between the two movies since the reasons behind the cross dressing serve very different purposes!).<br /><br />For those of us who grew up in Europe, the whole side story about the Audi lover and the father and son cameos at the dealership made for some most welcome additional insider chuckles! If you are looking for a good laugh, watch this little gem, it is a great way to spend a couple of hours! | 1pos
|
Sorry, but I guess I'm going against the grain on this one. I remember when Michael O'Donoghue was writing for National Lampoon; he had a "how to write a short story" article. The thrust of the piece was -- if you get bored or can't figure out an ending, have your character get hit by a bus. This movie seems to take that approach.<br /><br />The 'miracle' invention that Tesla apparently provided Hugh Jackman's character, which allowed him to duplicate himself, is nowhere referenced in the movie. The ending is a cinematic equivalent of "then he got hit by a bus". In short, I think the audience was cheated. Apparently most of the people who commented on this movie didn't mind that, but I thought it lacked integrity.<br /><br />Beautiful cinematography, tortured accents, and a conceit that's actual a deceit. Not recommended. | 0neg
|
I admit, I thought this was going to be a throw-away film. I have an all-you-can rent membership with Hollywood Video and this was the only new release left on the day I rented this title. I'm a pretty harsh critic of films, so I just knew this was going to be awful. I hadn't read much about Lindsay Lohan (sorry, not of that generation), but I knew she'd been in the news in a bad way some time ago. For the people who rate a film mainly on the actor/actress involved - get a life. Please. Don't troll here. This was a GREAT film. Take a look at my ratings history and you'll see I don't rate movies highly.<br /><br />It's not Grindhouse. It was a lot better. It was almost Memento good. Really. I recommend going into this film with an open mind and you may also end up being pleasantly shocked. | 1pos
|
Take heart, fans of this very true-to-the-novel movie version, the new American channel Pax TV shows this movie sometimes, but unfortunately has cut about 50 minutes from it, making it about an hour and 45 minutes long. Still, it is heartening that this detailed version is faithful to the novel's setting of 1880s London, and the premise that Sarah's father has truly died, altho his "dear friend" finally finds the long-lost Sarah in the end. I would have liked more exterior scenes, but good acting by all.<br /><br />An interesting note - the novel started as a short story called "Sarah Crewe, or What Happened at Miss Minchin's" in the 1880s, serialized for a magazine. Response was so positive, that after the author Frances Burnett had adapted it for the stage at the turn of the century and called it "A Little Princess," she re-wrote the book version, adding length and detail, and calling it "Little Princess" as well. The latter is what most know about and what you will find in the bookstores, but both versions are available on the internet to compare texts. | 1pos
|
The friends Donald made in Saludos Amigos send him several gifts for his birthday. Eventually he hooks up with Joe Carioca and Panchito and they sing the title song before the film turns into a song filled series of travel stops.<br /><br />Over the years I've watched this movie in pieces as the bits showed up on various Disney shows and compilation tapes but until recently I never watched the entire movie together. I had heard that it was quite good. Unfortunately who ever told me it was good never really watched it or hadn't seen it in years.<br /><br />The problem for me is that after a good opening segment of cartoons about birds the film becomes a music and dance fest. Joe Carioca and we get a song on Baia. When Panchito shows up we get surreal animation and some musical travels through Mexico. Its nice but any hope of it being anything more than "music video" is washed quickly away. Perhaps its just a dislike for the images that have been married to some nice songs, but I really don't like this movie.<br /><br />The mixture of live action and animation doesn't really work. Disney had been doing that sort of thing for twenty years prior to the release of this film and I expected more. Mostly the problem is that once the animated characters leave the foreground they look like badly done rear screen projection with all the color washed out.<br /><br />If you must see this, rent it. Actually rent it for the first half, but be prepared to dislike the second. | 0neg
|
**This review is based on the MST3K version of the movie.**<br /><br />This is a movie about a direction-less, spineless, and unlikable "hero" ( or at least the producer's idea of one) named Jodie who drives out to the country to eat his sandwich and meets a farm girl named Melissa. Melissa has a slight problem being that about 120 years ago she sold her soul to Satan and with our "hero" Jodie ( a male ) on the job the chances for correcting this problem do not look good. Jodie ends up spending a couple of days with Melissa at her family's walnut farm with her drab family who we do not care for or find interesting except for her old and ugly sister who makes a few appearances to murder people.<br /><br />The acting is bad but what will really get to you is the SLOW dialog between the two main characters. If you edited out half the gaps between their words the conversation might actually appear to flow normally but since this was not done you are simply left with big gaps where audience members ( the smart ones that is ) will run out of patience and leave the room. It is amazing that the editor left these scenes in; "Yes, no room for improvement here. Another perfect take HA HA!" Speaking of amazing, the song "Amazing Grace" is featured about half a dozen times toward the end of the film. It would have been interesting to have seen this in the theater to see how much the audience groaned when the song started for the third or fourth time. I am sure that a collective "Not again !" drowned out the first measure of the fourth, fifth, and sixth renditions of the song.<br /><br />About the only good thing about the movie is the woman who plays Melissa. She is most pleasant to look at. You think with a few, make that A LOT of acting lessons, her career could have been salvaged but it was not to be. With the mean-spirited and well-crafted remarks of the Mystery Science Theater gang the viewing experience will be about an 8 1/2. This is one of their best projects. They really tear this movie apart which is exactly what it deserves. Without them I only issue this warning; DO NOT WATCH THIS FILM ! YOU WILL BE SORRY ! I GAVE IT A 2 OUT OF 10 AND I MEAN IT !!!<br /><br />**** SEMI-SPOILER AHEAD****<br /><br />Our "hero" Jodie lets us down right to the end of the film. No surprise that a guy who takes THREE DAY lunch breaks is not a champion overcomer of adversity. Non-Christians will find the ending unclimatic but Christians will probably find it offensive much like I did. Remember, throwing a rock or an empty beer bottle at your television will not hurt those who are responsible for this film so just write a scathing review like I did. God Bless Mike and his robot friends. | 0neg
|
This has to be one of the most intelligent movies Hollywood produced in the 1930's; I see it comes from Lewis Milestone, who produced the equally-brilliant All Quiet on the Western Front (1930). These films have almost a European look - appropriate, because the novels are by European writers.<br /><br />You've got to admire Milestone for coaxing a sensitive performance out of Crawford, a woman who was happier when hamming it up. No wonder she didn't like her performance here; she was to genuinely ACT.<br /><br />The story deals with the inner nature of a sanctimonious religious hypocrite, something quite relevant now. A lesser director (and novelist) would have turned Sadie into someone unbelievably virtuous, but Milestone and Crawford show us a much more complex character. <br /><br />The other performances are great, too, especially Huston as the tormented evangelist; try comparing him to the chief satanist in The Seventh Victim (1943). The rain itself deserves special mention as a character establishing the insane claustrophobic atmosphere.<br /><br />The stage version was portrayed briefly in Scarface (1932), another great movie from the 1930's. | 1pos
|
This movie is rated PG which probably warranted. Today's PG films are usually pretty tame but they definitely put the "P" in this rating for a reason. Though they thoroughly enjoyed the "dumb detectives", my 2 young boys, ages 7 and 9, found many of the other characters to be scary and disturbing. Specifically, they found the Lord Morley character to be the most frightening.<br /><br />My 9 year old hasn't been able to go to sleep in his own bedroom for the 2 nights in a row since seeing this movie. He says the images are stuck in his head. My 7 yr old had some issues" with it as well the first night but has since resolved them after considering the whole of the film. <br /><br />Parents might want to preview this film before showing it to their younger children or at the very least watch it with them. This is rather surprising and disappointing for a PG rated film that was written by Tim Conway who was always so very funny on the Carol Burnett show. | 0neg
|
In 1972, MGM was in dire financial straits (like most of the major studios, after trying to come up with another "Sound of Music," and squandering millions in the process). MGM hired TV-executive James Aubrey in a desperate attempt to rescue the studio from oblivion. Aubrey responded by drastically cutting the budgets (and quality) of MGM's film output, and instead concentrated his efforts and the studio's remaining assets on the creation of a vulgar MGM Vegas hotel. Meanwhile, no one was around to run the store on the studio's film output, and "They Only Kill Their Masters" was typical of MGM's theatrical output during Aubrey's Reign of Terror. A cheapjack mystery no better(and in most ways worse) than the average TV movie-of-the-week, this abomination was especially horrific in unintended ways. For one, it was the last movie made on the memorable MGM backlot (soon to be bull-dozed and sold to realtors). Secondly, it reunited two of its top stars of the not-so-distant past, Peter Lawford and June Allyson, who starred in the memorable musical classic "Good News" filmed on that same lot 25 years earlier. To add insult to injury--SPOILER ALERT--an unhealthy-looking Lawford played one of the murder victims, and guess who the killer is? None other than poor Ms. Allyson, playing a homicidal lesbian whose motives remain as murky as everything else in this slapped-together disaster. Congratulations to Mr. Aubrey for cannibalizing the heritage of MGM, its wondrous backlot, and its rightful boasting that its contract players at one time constituted "more stars than there are in heaven" (look closely and you'll glimpse some other stars of years gone by--Ann Rutherford, Edmond O'Brien, etc--wasted in the wreckage). An all-around vile concoction that might have desecrated our memories of MGM for good, had not "That's Entertainment" (a compilation of MGM's greatest stars and musical numbers that became such an unexpected boxoffice hit that it spawned two sequels) come along 3 years later and put June Allyson and Peter Lawford together again exactly where they belonged--back on the (then-demolished) MGM backlot, singing and dancing up a storm to "The Varsity Drag" finale excerpted from. . . not "They Only Kill Their Masters".. . but the one-and-only collegiate musical classic "Good News." | 0neg
|
During the Depression, a young couple goes on the lam after the man is accused of a crime. This gritty drama is an early example of film noir, expertly directed by Lang, the great Expressionist filmmaker, although he sometimes goes overboard with the symbolism. Lang explored similar themes in Fury (with Sidney in a similar role to this), made a year earlier, but this one is better, not marred by the melodrama and overacting of the earlier film. Fonda and Sidney are excellent as the unfortunate couple, helped by a fine supporting cast. Memorable scenes include the escape from prison, tinged with irony, and the finale, as the couple makes a run for the border. | 1pos
|
Well, I hate to burst everyone's bubble before me, but IMAO this was a very ordinary film that was mildly amusing at best. What's worse is that it invokes a hefty glorification of gratuitous violence, so much so that it ruined the film (again IMAO). The violence wasn't ridiculous enough to be a mockery, but an essential part of the film, overstating other perhaps more interesting plot aspects that might have been developed further to a more satisfying - and original - whole.<br /><br />This is a pity, because it was very well acted (these guys shame some of the more recognized Hollywood stars), and the character development wasn't too bad either. And there was definitely potential, some of the peripheral themes were definitely candidates for further development. What ruined it was that the plot was so bloody stupid. This could have been a great movie if the central plot theme wasn't so banal.<br /><br />Sorry I couldn't give it more than two points out of ten, but this is an absolute (rather than a relative) scale, it was definitely a masterpiece for the budget they had. Shame about the subject matter. | 0neg
|
Though I wouldn't expect it at all, this was indeed a good movie. It has his problems (the teenagers are annoying as always, the dialoguse have major problems and the werewolf is not done very good), but you can surely pass over. The very good points: 1. The werewolf is quite crazy. He tears apart his victims, he IS a beast. 2. The werewolf is talking! This is ingenious indeed, I never saw it before, and I saw a lot of werewolf movies. You may think at first it is inappropriate, but I assure you the effect overall is very good. 3. There are pleasant nudity scenes, great tits, and the werewolf even rapes one of the teengirls in her perfect ass, in front of her boyfriend. While rather disturbing, the scene is quite good and adds to the story. 4. The atmosphere is nicely done, quite dark, quite 80's and there IS suspense. I am surely recommend the movie as one of the few werewolf movies made good in the last decades, with Ginger Snaps Unleashed and Dog Soldiers being other two examples in the same vein. | 1pos
|
I never seen the original "Texas Chainsaw Massacre", but the remake looks very interesting & entertaining. Leatherface character is now a legend in horror movies. When he took a face and put it on himself, you feel very uncomfortable in your chair.<br /><br />The sequel of the remake shows the beginning of of cannibalistic, inbred psychopaths family, who kill teens in Texas... Two mos important characters in this movie is Sheriff Hoyt & Thomas Hewitt (Leatherface). The torture them more, than in remake, who been released 3 years ago. Actors acted very creepy, but entertaining. They been so real. They accents makes you feel like in Texas. Acting was nice too. The emotions of teens was like it will be in true life. Dean & Eric fighting ,becouse they are brothers & they will give their life, if other will survive...<br /><br />Sadly, the ending was surprised. They all dead, in other hand - it looks logical. If Chrissie would be survived, she tell everyone about it and the family would be masked and we don't knew, hot the remake comes out... | 1pos
|
There are a couple of prior comments here which opine about this flick's abundance of clichés throughout -- and I agree completely, both with regard to the characters AND the dialog.<br /><br />I'd read about Elizabeth Berkly's awful performance in the equally-awful "Showgirls," which I've never seen - and her performance here, while not awful, is barely up to the standards of Lifetime's worse fare. There was not a hint of depth to her character, but then there probably shouldn't have been. If so, it would have placed the film completely out-of-balance, since there wasn't a hint of depth or charisma - not a trace - in any one character, performer, or portrayal.<br /><br />The principal's handling of Liz's initial complaint after her tutee had kissed her in the hall was laughable. Her husband's initial reaction and advice were likewise (Forrest Gump, attacking Jenny's boyfriend in his car provided a more realistic, intelligent action, and, hell, he was mentally-challenged).<br /><br />The smarmy, unctuous lawyer (excuse the redundancy) father of the lying student actually performed something probably worthy of praise in his performance: he was both laughable and thoroughly annoying at the same time, no mean feat. Her attorney was more of an insensitive nerd, also not unknown in the profession.<br /><br />Finally (and frankly, I rather enjoyed this part), the police were such a collection of insensitive oafs, that you'd rather depend upon Barney Fife, without Andy, to handle all law enforcement and investigation in your community. I know that most real-like cops fall a bit short of the sharpness, intelligence and empathy of the level displayed by most characters on the "Law and Order" series', and the like -- but dolts of this level seem to be a staple on "Lifetime."<br /><br />Finally, I found a kind of "story within a story" fascination with Josh's concoction of his being the "victim" of his teacher. This scripted performance within the story was even worse than his overall performance in the main story. This was something of an achievement, like going from "F" to "F-minus."<br /><br />This whole lame situation should have been resolved - in real life - in about 15 minutes, following a realistic meeting between teacher and school authorities, with husband involved. But then that would have precluded the contrived drama following, and left an hour's blank film in the camera. <br /><br />But the writer(s) here, proved with their ending, they could do even worse. When the situation was finally "resolved" and "righted," this was accomplished in all of about 45 seconds, with no indication of what measures might have been forthcoming in any "real world" context for the perpetrator and his parents, or whether they might have been able to find some sort of path toward redemption.<br /><br />This one's a 2* presentation; the second "*" because it does have some mild "fascination." | 0neg
|
Pretty awful! Only flat jokes, the movie does not make any sense at all. And Meg Ryan was supposed to be the hottest girl ever? What was that all about? That bot-ox face and that flat chest will even fool anyone? Stupid movie, stupid scenes, as someone once said, stupid scenes transitions (like Windows Movie Maker)...<br /><br />I could not laugh at all. I only waste my time and money watching this.... this... well... i think u got the idea.<br /><br />Please go spend your money elsewhere.<br /><br />Poor execution...<br /><br />Two thumbs down! | 0neg
|
Before seeing this movie, you may say to yourself, "Peter Berlin? What's the big deal?" But stay with it, as the story is rewarding. Director Jim Tushinski obviously saw a chance to put the urban gay-lib era of the seventies under a microscope by focusing on one man's story instead of a general documentary--and the man he focused on just happens to be "the" icon of gay sexual life at a certain crossroads. The film's imagery is evocative, the sexuality palpable, and the cameos from Armistead Maupin, Robert W. Richards, and others are witty. But the best moments of this film are during Mr. Berlin's touching recollections about his own life. As Berlin talks candidly about the losses he experienced as the seventies faded into the Reagan years, it's impossible to look away--partly because there are so many men whose experiences are reflected in his story. It's during these revelations that Tushinski knows to keep the camera trained closely on his subject, and these moments are what elevates this film from historical document to riveting cinema. | 1pos
|
This movie is quite OK as a cyber-punk. It is not Oscar material, but I found it totally enjoyable on a quiet Sunday.<br /><br />The story admittedly is a little thin, and some times too emotional but still it was nice to watch. The actors are doing an OK job, and the lead actress is a beauty.<br /><br />The CGI is OK, and the sets have that dark gloomy mood to it. The action sequences was OK choreographed as well.<br /><br />If you like CP movies, then why not. Just don't expect Bladerunner, though even that was deemed doomed in its day. This is a paced action flick, with some love and emotion in to it. | 1pos
|
In Moll's world we let people into our house to yell at us, throw drinks at each other, provoke us, and ultimately commit suicide in our spare room. Then we let their ghost into our bodies to screw up our marriage. OK. Still, it could have been dramatic or entertaining. On the plus side the photography is good and even beautiful in the mountains. On the sort of plus side, there was a thread of tension running through the movie and an atmosphere reminiscent of Todd Haynes's "Safe", though with none of the commitment of that movie. But the story never becomes believable. The relationships are never compelling - none of the depth of character or feeling between people in a movie like Solaris, for example. Consider how much simple human issues like privacy, isolation and irritation add to our sense of the human condition. Then look at the characters of Lemming: any of us would have thrown these people out of our lives after 5 minutes. | 0neg
|
This is probably the worst movie I have ever seen. I actually watched it all the way through to see if it could get any worse than it was at the beginning. It did! It appears to be 2 separate movies spliced together. The only thing interesting about it was the fact that some, if not all of it, was filmed around Melbourne, Australia, where my son attended Veterinary School. If it weren't for the opportunity to pick out recognizable landmarks, this movie would have been unbearable to watch. It was extremely painful to view anyway. It is difficult to tell if the people who put this movie together were serious in their intentions or were just trying for an oddball campy look. In any event it came out badly. | 0neg
|
I'm pretty sure that "I Love You Alice B. Toklas" seemed silly to 1968 viewers, both "squares" and "potheads." Fed electric brownies made from a box (rather than from the most famous recipe in The Alice B. Toklas Cookbook), straight-laced but simmering Harold Fine (sic.!) (Peter Sellers) and perks secretary/fiancée, start giggling even before finishing ingesting brownies. Watching them playing drunks, I marvel that none of the film-makers knew 1) that (ingested marijuana takes some time to kick in and (2) that people who are stoned don't act like people who are drunk.<br /><br />Peter Sellers was good as the seething and very hirsute lawyer, Harold Fine. He thinks he is fine, despite having a nagging and materialistic fiancée (Joyce Van Patten) to augment the nagging of his materialistic and empty-headed mother (Jo Van Fleet wasted in a stereotype Jewish mother role). The nuclear family also jellyfish father (Salem Ludwig) and blissed-out hippie brother, Herbie (David Arkin). Sellers is also good at the end when he has burned out or is on a bad trip and is weary of all the freeloaders who have moved into his apartment (and started to share his flower-child free-spirited bedmate). His goofy "Love, Peace, Happiness" period is silly without being funny. As his muse, Leigh Taylor-Young is very attractive. The fake tattoo of a Monarch butterfly on her upper thigh is treated with reverence by Fine and not doubt inspired fantasies in the male audience of licking it up and proceeding under her very short mini skirts ("free love"). And bubblegum music group Harper's Bazaar supply a typically saccharine title song two or three times to complete the trivialization of the Toklas/ Stein couple.<br /><br />There are some sight gags on psychedelically painted cars and the bizarre couture of the freeloaders (and the family of eleven Mexican client claiming whiplash, all wearing neck braces) and the surprise that a casket stuffed into the back of the psychedelic car Fine has while his car is in the garage doesn't fall out. | 0neg
|
A action/crime/thriller about a women named "the Bride"(Uma Thurman) who was at one time a part of a group of world class female assassins until the leader of the group "bill"(David Carradine) and the other assassins turn on her.They beat her up so bad she goes into a coma 4 1/2 years later she awakens from the coma and seeks the people who tried to kill her and her unborn child so she can kill them.<br /><br />Give me a break this is a very very stupid movie the story is ridiculous a total peace of vile crap.The gore in this movie is like no other movie I have ever seen they must have spent 2 million dollars on fake blood.It was almost sickening to watch the violence in this movie it makes "fargo" look like "the lion king".Uma Thurman's acting was absolutely dreadful.The screenplay was very bad also Quentin Tarantino tried to get clever with the directing but didn't quiet pull it off in my opinion.<br /><br />Best actor/actress-Lucy Liu<br /><br />Terrible,Vile,Disgusting,Movie-Jake Hyden<br /><br />I rated this 2 out of 10<br /><br />2/10 | 0neg
|
I don't believe I have ever seen a worse film in my life. Everything about this movie is the lowest of the low, it is putrid. (And that may be its good point!) Seriously, it is THAT BAD.<br /><br />Shapeshifter is set in some remote prison with guards who have the mentality of a middle-school dropout both in intelligence and training. They walk around the facility with nothing of substance to say or do. There is nothing of quality in this movie, there is no story, no value, no reason to watch. The Shapeshifter appears to be some Russian immigrant prisoner who is able to transform himself into a flesh-eating monster. He starts by biting on his arm until it bleeds, with some terrible music and special effects that will make anyone watching prone to seizures, does some metamorphosis dancing, which takes about 5 minutes for him to change, than becomes this monster, The Shapshifter. The Shapreshifter than eats the flesh of the people at the prison. I didn't even get that far into the movie, but other reviewers have said that he does the same thing EVERY TIME.<br /><br />I cannot think of one positive thing to say about this movie, not one. Terrible camera angles, annoying rap music that has no place or reason to be in any of the scenes, and rapidly changing movements of the director going from shot to shot add up to garbage. This movie is beyond bad.<br /><br />What is even worse, is that some films that are bad at least have some unintentional humor to make them what some industry people call, "Golden Turkeys" The type of movies that are so bad, they are good, because they are corny. Shapeshifter can't even save itself from even the smallest bit of intentional humor to give it any redeeming qualities at all. How did this trash even get made? Shame on The Chiller Channel for showing this garbage, and any other stations that may air it for that matter.<br /><br />This movie should be pulled from distribution and destroyed. If that happened, I guarantee you that whoever had to sit through this moronic film would celebrate. Please don't waste your time with this film. It's an insult to all viewers that this crap was even made. I feel sick and angry just from watching it. I have no idea what the cast and crew were smoking when they made this hideous picture. | 0neg
|
I think that Frasier not good. It does not probably deserve a vote of 1 from me, I used to watch the show happily before I had taste. I just wish my TV remote control had a picture of Frasier with a line through it. I turn the TV on, it is Frasier. It's like my cable lineup is the all Frasier channel, all the time, then, when Frasier is over, Becker reruns. I almost miss the John Laroquette Show. Look, I can't afford them fancy Tivos, I hate turning on the TV and seeing that dipass Frasier. I want to kick him in the nuts. If I ever see him in an airport or anything, I swear to Christ I will kick him in the balls, then I will roar and beat my chest. I think that Frasier not good. Frasier... gay...ish. | 0neg
|
A chess grandmaster (Emmett Clayton) becomes increasingly uncomfortable and anxious on the run-up to a chess match with a Soviet player (Tomlin Dudek) who has come out of retirement especially to play him. When the two meet on the evening before the match and Clayton suffers defeats in both a spontaneous game at a restaurant and a pre-arranged game at the hotel, he decides to take matters into his own hands...<br /><br />The chess environment serves as a particularly appealing and suitably competitive back-drop to this episode for it facilitates an individualised battle of wits between Columbo and murderer.<br /><br />Laurence Harvey (in one of his last performances) is remarkably superb as the multi-faceted Emmett Clayton, whose increasingly disturbing mental state is temporarily overcome by a remarkable assuredness to murder the only threat to his supremacy as a chess champion.<br /><br />The plot is refreshingly original and well-thought-out and the script adds different dimensions to those found in the usual Columbo story, particularly as the murderer has to have two separate attempts at killing off his rival.<br /><br />The whole episode is reasonably well-paced after it carefully sets up the necessary plot information/murder scenario as Columbo tries to unravel the real truth whilst at the same time undermine a very self-confident murderer.<br /><br />The climax contains some of the best scenes: Columbo's harassment of the murderer with damning accusations whilst he tries to play numerous chess games at once; and then in the basement of the hotel as Columbo perpetrates a crafty plot to confirm his suspicions.<br /><br />Two minor gripes:<br /><br />(1) At two key moments Emmett Clayton is able to gain access to Tomlin Dudek's hotel room (once to pack his bag for him and the other time to tamper with his medicines). This happens all too easily: how does Clayton manage to time it when the cleaning lady is/has been in Dudek's room and how does he avoid being seen?<br /><br />(2) Columbo can only perfectly test out his theory at the end when Clayton removes his hearing aid? How did he know he was going to do that?<br /><br />These two gripes aside, this is a well above-average, strong addition to the series. | 1pos
|
i really liked the movie. although there is one thing that i still don't understand very well. my question is about the end so if you haven't seen it don't read this.... alright everything that involved Julie was her imagination just the story for the book. but she met Julie right. so how come in the end when she passes by Julie they don't even look at each other as if they haven't met..... if someone could explain me it would be very helpful. my other interpretation is that she didn't even go to France and everything including the space (house and the swimming pool) was created by her. but that doesn't make much sense. thanks | 1pos
|
If this movie had a point I never discovered it. A very depressing movie which supposedly is about the final evacuation of the residents living in a dam site area on the Northfork River in Montana. The problem is that there is no actual Northfork River in Montana. There are several north forks but they are branches of other rivers which divided into north and south forks.<br /><br /> The opening scene of the movie is a coffin bobbing to the surface of the lake but the scene is never tied into the story and the viewer is left to speculate as to its meaning. But much is left to the viewer's speculation in the movie. Another example is when a team of dam employees responsible for the evacuation of the residents arrives at the dam headquarters, another group of people are departing. Some remark which is almost inaudible is made about these people which makes no sense whatsoever and there is no followup in the movie to explain it.<br /><br /> The movie is butchered into several stories and the film keeps switching back and forth between stories which is quite disconcerting. And the stories are weird. In one of them the occupants of one property refuse to be evacuated because they are living in a home that is built like Noah's Ark.<br /><br /> Another senseless story centers around a sick orphan who is dying and somehow he is sharing his presence with a house full of ghosts and in an orphanage with a priest at the same time. If anyone can figure out what the ghost story was about the author must have explained it to them.<br /><br /> The scenery was stark and the sun never shines. There are snowy mountains in the far distance. I guess the purpose was to set the mood. The time period is set by the fact that the evacuaters all drove Ford sedans of the 1946-48 era although the events are supposed to have occurred in 1955. The acting was mediocre. When I saw the billing for this movie it said that Darryl Hannah was in the picture. If she was, I didn't recognize her but I surmise that she was the ghost lady. | 0neg
|
A tale of super-evolved mutants in a struggle against human oppressors, X-Men is an instant sci-fi classic, combining impressive special effects with an involving plot to create a truly memorable cinematic experience.<br /><br />Lacking the tongue-in-cheek camp of the later Batman films and other recent comic books-turned movies, X-Men draws the audience into its world of mutants and superpowers, and prevents it from becoming tacky or absurd. Not to say that there isn't any humour in the film, in fact it delivers some of the best one liners in a film this year.<br /><br />It is a rare thing for an action blockbuster to feature great acting, but with a cast that among others involves both Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen is bound to be above average. Both Stewart (as Professor Charles Xavier) and McKellen (as Magneto)deliver stellar performances, and their onscreen chemistry is compelling as they play two old friends turned arch enemies.<br /><br />The rest of the cast deliver solid performances, including Hollywood newcomer Hugh Jackman as Wolverine, Oscar-winner Anna Paquin as Rogue, and another rising star Rebecca Romijn-Stamos as the seductive but deadly Mystique.<br /><br />A classic tale of good versus evil, with heroes, baddies, and great special effects, I don't think it's going too far to say that X-Men is destined to be mentioned in the same breath as Star Wars and other all-time sci-fi greats. | 1pos
|
<br /><br />The only reason to watch this God awful movie is for Heather Thomas. The story is stupid.The acting BAD.The special effects(if you want to call it that)are horrendous.Makes you wonder how this sort of drivel gets produced! | 0neg
|
i was pretty captivated by the story - i think i especially liked the end of the film. it made me want to know what happened afterwards to this poor fellow. it is a terrible story and one that has not been told enough i think. it is very nicely shot as well. | 1pos
|
Having experienced some of the same issues as Mendy, I can tell you that this movie is very well done. It has a great script, and the actor who portrays Mendy is superb. Truly, some of the best acting I've ever seen. Also, too many movies portraying Jews look totally fake. This one is the closest to real that I've seen. This movie made me laugh and cry, and stirred my emotions better than a kitchen aid stirs a batter. It was so powerful that I can't bring myself to see it again. But I'm sure glad I watched it once. I would recommend it to anyone, no matter what your background is. It's a great movie that almost everyone can relate to on some level. | 1pos
|
This little picture, a fine Wesley Ruggles comedy, struts along with great pace, and has a great cast with Lana Turner, Robert Young, Dame May Witty, and Walter Brennan. The acting is excellent, the antics unusual,and the comedy delightful. But the thing that is way beyond compare in this picture is the bubbling beauty of Lana Turner at her absolute peak. She carries the day with a sublime sort of sparkling charm as she changes personalities several times just to break her tedium with life. No, she never HAD amnesia, and no, she never wanted to commit suicide! But people will talk. Her beautiful sparkle and comedic charm actually made me weak in the knees. Robert Young does a decent job chasing her down the entire film, but it is Turner's film all the way. | 1pos
|
With 3 kids (now 16, 13, 11) I have seen a lot of kids movies over the years, this one is pretty funny! Even though my kids are getting older they still enjoy watching this movie, and I do too. The dog is so cute and trained so well that you can't help but root for him.<br /><br />If you haven't watched this one yet, I recommend it for a fun family movie evening. Not only is it funny, it doesn't have all those annoying songs that your kids will sing for weeks on end! | 1pos
|
Whether you like "Nighty Night" is dependent on whether you like this sort of thing. I will grant you this, it is not easy to watch at times, it is very dark, often unsubtle, heartless and extremely vicious. But there are some very funny parts too, thanks to the stellar performances and the deliberately over-the-top writing that is most likely to shock people with the amount of depth it goes into. Plus it is very unfliching at how cruel the characters can be to one another. There are times when we find the characters unsympathetic, with the exception of perhaps Cathy and Terry but I personally think that was intended.<br /><br />The performances are stellar. Julia Davis throws herself into this, and gives a genius turn as Jill, an "evil" neighbour and an incompetent hair stylist. Angus Deayton is also superb as Don Cole, who is facing a very difficult situation, as is Rebecca Front as Cathy, a really sympathetic character that we constantly feel sorry for. Overall, clearly this isn't for everyone, but I for one find it entertaining. 8/10 Bethany Cox | 1pos
|
Well let me go say this because i love history and I know that movie is most important piece in our history and it was beautifully executed movie and Julia Stiles became my #1 favorite actress after seeing her in "The '60s" and i own this movie in my video box with many movies and i suggest you to look for her new movies in the future and try to enjoy history!!!! | 1pos
|
This movie is straight pimp. Guns, chicks, chicks with guns, hoes, players, white cops getting spanked by black chicks who carry guns, deals, dopes, drive-bys, cripples and just about everything you want in a movie. Pure visceral fun. If you aren't down for the thrill of this movie go rent a Jimmy Stewart flick and bring your Wonderbread. | 1pos
|
this is the best animation i've ever seen. i found it through digital TV and it really appealed to me. but what i felt and found the most beautiful thing about this movie is its deeper meanings of the relation between black and white.i knew the names would have a meaning and to the end of the film it comes together. Black and white are two kids who grew up together, helping each other protecting "there" city. but more in the end when black lets white been taken by the cops its really starts showing the symbolic meaning of them representing yin and yang, the first example i can give is white talking about that both lost most of there screws but he keeping them all. its like meaning that the one needs the other. my second example is near the end when black meets the minotaur and learning that it is the darkness in himself, with a inner journey he learns that the minotaur wants to let black use all his "dark" powers in the meantime white is freaking out because slowly the darkness (yang) is winning. this symbolism of yin and yang is again shown with the crows and the white dove's. but in the struggle white is showing up in blacks mind and starts bringing black back to his senses thus restoring the balance. even without that symbolism this movie is a must see, but not for young kids | 1pos
|
They say that a student is only as good as their teacher. If this is true, then we the viewer as student have failed miserably. This hilariously dated 1980's film on a college class facing fear straight-on is interwoven with poor 'horror stories' and is mediocre at best. Overacting, clichéd scenes, and 80's fashion fail this film. If you lived the 80's then this may be a fun albeit painful remembrance for you. If not, then you'll cringe not at the horror stories but of the hair and clothes of the actors. There's plenty of other anthology movies out there that far surpass this film. A nude scene here or there might have moved the film to the head of the class, but there is none of that, and without it - and more importantly real writing - this movie flunks for the term. | 0neg
|
I can't believe so many people are calling this a "great" movie, and I really have to suspect that someone paid the reviewer quoted on the box to say that this was "better than The Usual Suspects" (it isn't). Yes, it was made for less than eight thousand bucks, and it shows. Folks, it's a BAD movie! The characters are terrible, the acting is terrible, the story, far from being quick, is a bore. Some people will praise anything independent and low budget just for being that, but not me. Independent or studio, it still has to be good, and this isn't. Yes, I'll give Carnahan all the credit in the world for taking a cheap, awful flick and getting enough juice behind it to market the thing to where it is today, but that's all. This did not belong on the video store shelf, nor did it belong on a channel that viewers have to pay for. It's marketed as a regular film; it should carry a warning that notes what it really is: something just below "demo tape for rejected artist". Do not waste your time. | 0neg
|
A true successor of the Apu trilogy!'Memories in the mist'by Dasgupta artistically and metaphorically inter-wovens the memories and fantasies of a man of his beloved and lost father.Set in the backdrop of North Kolkata,the story paces to and fro between past and present,between reality and imagination,between innocence and lucre!Amongst the numerous metaphors used in the movie,the one which cant be helped mentioning is the reference of the piper which beckons the man to his past,his childhood and his unfulfilled dreams.With this movie,Dasgupta has also endeavored to find the base of our relationships.At the end of the film,the man reveals himself to his father and thus to the audience,and thus forces us to remind of Apu who would,despite hostility as conferred by fate,love and wonder!That is probably the reason some critic has mentioned it as'the closest modern equivalent'to a Ray movie.But whatever international applaud it gets,it may not get along too well with the Bengali audience because of its sheer lack of bangaliyana(Bengali traditions and customs)as compared to a new wave cinema by Ray or Ghatak. | 1pos
|
This show is absolutely one of the worst things anyone has ever spent money to make. Tim and Eric are NOT funny, the sketches have NO subtlety, and the jokes seem to be aimed at a 3-7 year old audience. These people think their humor is "fresh and inventive" and "comic genius". What is genius about two guys getting as naked as cable will allow, and throwing up all over each other? They try and play off the angle that they appear incompetent, intentionally acting poorly and screwing up line delivery. The only thing funny about a terrible show is that someone actually thinks it was good. When you do it on purpose, we all know its a gag, and their is nothing left but a lame show that retards would easily identify as stupid. Totally awful, do yourself a favor and never watch this crap.<br /><br />And if Adult Swim keeps going down this road, I'd stop watching that cheap garbage and wait for the next "smart" network to pick up the good shows. Its bound to happen, adult swim had to come from somewhere. | 0neg
|
Dina and Ronnie are a couple that live a carefree life taking what they want from others. They don't pay their rent, they steal cars, and don't seem to care about the consequences. All of their fun comes to a screeching halt when Dina discovers that she is pregnant. They have no way to provide for a child, so they decide to sell their baby to a desperate couple they find online. Paul and Maria live the perfect suburban lifestyle with a brand new model home and expensive cars, but what they really want has always been denied to them. They cannot have children. The action begins when the couples meet for the first time. Immediately it becomes clear that nothing is what it appears to be. Tension builds as ulterior motives are uncovered on both sides of the deal, and what was supposed to be an easy con for Ronnie and Dina spins violently out of control.<br /><br />The film opens with Dina hitching a ride with Peter, and she recounts her tale through a series of flashbacks. It's a interesting choice for a thriller. If not handled carefully this kind of narrative structure can ruin the momentum of a film, especially one that relies on thrills. However, this film has something more to offer. The best kind of horror film is the one that focuses on social issues or stigmas and turns them around to show us what we are really afraid of. Hindsight is about choice and the consequences of materialism. How much is one baby worth? Or that boat in Florida? How far will you go to get what you want? And why do you want it in the first place? That last question is the most important. It all comes back to morality, and, of course, a nice little twist ending to tie things off.<br /><br />Technically the film is sound. It has some great thrills, built up by creative use of sound and lighting design. The actors deliver well enough and the plot has enough turns to keep people guessing. There's enough gore to keep the spatter crowd entertained, and some depth for those of us who like to look in to film a little more deeply. All in all, definitely worth your time. | 1pos
|
It puzzles me that people hates this movie so much, it's a fun and enjoyable Alien / Predator rip-off with no intentions of being a masterpiece. Look, if you want to see Predator, go and see Predator and not Xtro III. It's as stupid as renting Battle Beyond The Stars and expecting Star Wars!<br /><br />Anyway, a group of marines is stranded on a remote island together with a mean and nasty 2-foot tall alien whose favourite pastime is dissecting humans. The little sneaky alien has some kind of slime that he traps unknowingly B-actors in and he gets invisible as well.<br /><br />OK, it isn't much of a story but Xtro III has nice effects and is surprisingly gory at times. | 1pos
|
Gregory is your average Scottish teenager, interested in football (soccer for us in America)and girls, not necessarily in that order. He falls in love with the new striker on the team, a girl who took his place. When he finally gets up the nerve to ask her out, things don't turn out exactly as he plans.<br /><br />I first saw Gregory's Girl shortly after it was released, when I was an awkward and shy teenager myself. John Gordon Sinclair does a realistic and believable portrayal of Gregory, and the fickle love of an adolescent. I also find the scenes between Gregory and his sister Madeline very touching and heartwarming.<br /><br />This is a feel good movie dealing with adolescent crushes, and is well worth seeing. I wish that it had gone on longer and shown us more of the characters' lives--it just finished too soon. | 1pos
|
I generally like movies that depict anything that is "non mainstream". And I even don't mind gross movies if they are done well.<br /><br />But this movie is a huge disappointment - no real story, no building up any character or situation, extremely bad acting (a school play does far better), the shots were pathetic, the gross scenes were not necessary (nor were they shocking).<br /><br />The close up in scenes is really bad, i think i even spotted a 'cannibal' with long stylish locks! Looks like the directors/producers paid no attention to the movie at all ! <br /><br />With this movie, I've decided to stop watching any more "cannibal" genre movie! | 0neg
|
Alright, I am not sure where to start with this so here goes.. The movie overall was well acted but there was very little a solid acting performance could do so save the weak plot. I am a new father and have a 3.5 month son who happened to be with his mother at the time. The ending to this movie was the most disturbing thing I have seen in any recent movie I can think of. In fact it was so horrifying that I had to see my son ASAP. Please, if you are new parent, do not watch this. I can handle the most gruesome of movies but this, hit to close to home and just haunted me. Honestly, the movie was well done and it was a great performance by Shue. But I will never ever look at her the same again. | 0neg
|
Moving (1988) was an fun film from Richard Pryor. Instead of making another cheesy P.G. rated family film, Mr. Pryor goes back to his adult tinged humor. In this starring vehicle, Pryor stars as a family man who learns that he has to move out of state if he wants to keep his position with the company. CAn the family make a smooth transition from one neighborhood to another? Will they have problems with the new neighbors or the strange movers? Find out when you watch MOVING!!<br /><br />As with all of these type of films, you;ll have the kid who doesn't want to leave and the worried family members about the new community they're moving into. Randy Quaid co-stars (in two roles). King Kong Bundy plays a mover, Stacey Dash makes an early co-starring role as Pryor;s teenage daughter, Dana Carvey guest stars as a weird dude who's hired to drive Mr. Pryor's beloved Saab and Rodney Dangerfield makes an uncredited appearance as well.<br /><br />I liked this movie for some reason. The humor was a little more towards old Richard Pryor. But it's not one of his best efforts. Mr. Pryor would make one more funny movie (Hear No Evil, See No Evil) before illness would force him into early retirement.<br /><br />Recommended. | 1pos
|
Confined to a single set, the master Alfred Hitchcock directs a compelling psychological drama that uniquely challenges the viewer to reflect on his own reactions to the events presented on screen. In the early going, would you have thrown the German overboard, or acted as a humanitarian? What about later, after Willy (Walter Slezak) is exposed as a scheming Nazi captain deftly maneuvering the boat to his own country's supply ship? Would you have the stomach to assist in cutting off a man's leg? The movie doesn't allow much time to think about it, but that's how life works sometimes.<br /><br />The film opened to immediate critical acclaim during it's first week of release, however when a negative reviewer opted to focus on the treatment of Willy's character, it called into question whether the story was sympathizing with the Nazi cause. Fearing even further backlash, Fox studio head Darryl Zanuck withdrew the film from general release. To my mind, the issue was dealt with rather expertly in the story. Even though Willy was a cunning schemer who took control of the boat during a storm, he sealed his own fate by going too far to keep Gus (William Bendix) quiet.<br /><br />Hitchcock accepted a rather difficult task in taking on this assignment. Restricted to just one set, he employed what was until then the most extensive story boarding ever utilized for a movie. The entire movie was drawn out ahead of time, with a myriad of camera angles and weather related elements to convey something different in practically each scene. It works exceptionally well, as one is never left bored with static images or a fixation on any single character or situation.<br /><br />As for characters, the one cast member with any name recognition at the time was Tallulah Bankhead, who portrayed the journalist Constance Porter. Bankhead was extremely difficult for the other players to work with, and she lorded her celebrity status over all of them. Staffers on the film were intimidated by her name dropping, yet in Hitchcock, she found a kindred spirit, someone she could talk with endlessly on the set.<br /><br />For those who scour Hitch's films for his cameo appearances, "Lifeboat" presented a dilemma, but that was overcome with a little gimmickry. During this time, Hitchcock was trying to lose weight, succeeding in going from three hundred pounds down to two hundred. In the movie, Kovac (John Hodiak) is shown reading a newspaper, and the camera lingers on an ad for 'Reduco', a weight loss product and 'Obesity Slayer'. The director's full frame profile is used for the before and after comparison, prompting numerous viewers of the time to inquire where they could buy the product, but of course it was all made up.<br /><br />If ever there was a film that employs symbolism, this one is a treasure trove. It was interesting to me that the first time one gets a view of the entire open sea is right after it's revealed that Mrs. Higley's (Heather Angel) baby is dead. That effectively places the boat's survivors in touch with their own mortality in what might be a hopeless situation. What does it mean when the lone black Joe (Canada Lee) doesn't participate in the gang up on Willy? Gus changes his name from Schmidt to Smith. The prospect of life giving fresh rain is replaced by sunshine instead of a storm, but which is better? There is something meaningful and fascinating to be taken away from this film in virtually every instance.<br /><br />If all that weren't enough, it was an unusual coincidence of timing that had me see this film when I did. The Cardinals captured the 2006 baseball World Series just a couple of days ago by defeating the Detroit Tigers, four games to one. In the story, William Bendix' character Gus ruminates on the state of baseball at that time with - "St. Louie's the team to watch this year"! | 1pos
|
Phantasm (1979) is one of the most imaginative, scariest horror/science-fiction films ever made. From the mind of genius Don Coscarelli, this film is the first in the Phantasm series. It also started another horror icon: the Tall Man. Phantasm starts off like this:<br /><br />Mike (A. Michael Baldwin) has just lost his parents to death. He now lives with his older brother Jody (Bill Thornbury), who's thinking about leaving Mike with a relative and leaving their small town. Mike, not wanting to lose his brother follows him wherever he goes. He even follows Jody to a funeral where he witnesses a caretaker only known as the Tall Man (Angus Scrimm) carry a huge coffin away from the graveyard. Startled, Mike begins to investigate at night by breaking into Morningside Cemetary only to witness a horrific murder by a flying silver sphere. Now, with zombies and cloaked dwarfs chasing him everywhere, Mike and Jody enlist the help of ice-cream vendor Reggie (Reggie Bannister) to fight the Tall Man and find out what secrets he keeps within the mortuary.<br /><br />This film, in all of it's aspects, is perfect. Since this movie was made in 1979, the gore effects look more realistic than anything you'll see in modern horror. It just goes to show you that you don't need CGI to make a film look realistic. The story is well-written. The shocking ending is just great. The editing is okay and the direction is expertly. Even the actors all do their best work here.<br /><br />So if you want to see a scary science-fiction/horror with great gore effects and an even better story, see Phantasm. Also, the sequels aren't so bad themselves. I give Phantasm a 10 out of 10. | 1pos
|
Tuned into this movie late one night as I occasionally like to watch 'B' movies (no pun intended!) just for fun. However I was wonderfully suprised at the quality of acting I found. This movie had all the suspense and drama of jaws, except with bees. And yes the bees were badly rendered, and looked very 2 dimensional, but GET OVER IT, else you'll miss the guts of the movie. Above par acting by most, especially the kids...........<br /><br /> | 1pos
|
Having a child with severe autism, i approach every autistic related movie with caution. The trailer pulls on your heartstrings, the movie however spells out things that parents and siblings experience on a day to day basis. The movie running at 93 minutes, can't ever convey a life with autism, but with the director, seems to have brought her life experience to the screen in a thoughtful and observant way (small observations only people touched by autism would recognise and find funny and painful). Im not sure if viewers with no experience would understand these, which is the most heartbreaking aspect of the whole movie. I wish, i really wish everyone could see this movie, and if one single clip could make a difference, i think the world would be a better place. Overall, its an uplifting movie, but unfortunately it wont change the way most of the world think of this disability. Siblings experiencing or who have lived with autism, I think, will see this movie differently. it does seem to preach to them, how they should behave and what their responsibilities are. We (parents, siblings and autistic children) are still waiting for the definitive movie, that will open the world's eyes. | 1pos
|
I adore this movie. Putting it into words as to why is probably far more difficult for this film than any of the others i have talked about on this website. Firstly i can totally empathise with the lead character.... even down to the the fantastic choice of bands displayed on his wall (the Jam and the Specials although i am not too sure about Patti Smith myself!) We've all probably been in the situations Gregory finds himself in during the movie and this just brings it all back... playing football in the school team (and chatting nonchalently to spectators when should have been keeping an eye on players bearing down on goal), getting into scrapes with teachers and of course that first date with the girl of your dreams. I always come away from watching this movie with a high feel good factor. Gregory ends up with Susan who is far more suited and better for him than Dorothy even if it takes the whole movie for him to discover this. You even feel it will work out for his mates Andy and Charlie as they trudge off at the end in the cheerful knowledge that they can start afresh chasing girls the next day (i love the way Charlie doesn't say a word thru the whole movie, goes along with Andy's silly schemes and eventually gets the last word). In addition to these characters there's a whole slew of fantastic characters such as Steve whos obsessed with his baking enterprise, the eccentric headmaster ("off you go, you small boys,") and of course Mr Menzies the bumbling PE teacher who isn't really taken seriously by the other male teachers in the school and is obsessed with putting together the perfect football team. Another thing i like is the way the younger kids seem more in control and knowledgeable than Gregory and his mates. Gregory's sister is the one with the fashion sense and is the guiding hand in trying to sort out his love life while its Gregory who is the petulant immature one when confronted by his sisters' young admirer at the front door. I think this movie has a refreshing view of the innocence of early school days as opposed to other films which may go down the darker Grange Hill route of drugs/bullying etc. | 1pos
|
As evidenced by the survey of comments on this site alone, people either love or hate this movie. Unfortunately, I hate this movie.<br /><br />I wanted to love this movie. Really. I loved the first one. But "Babe 2" was the worst sort of sequel - not only was it just disappointingly bad, it actually ruined the pleasure you got from the first film.<br /><br />One of the greatest thing about the first film was Babe's relationship with Farmer Hoggett. In "Babe 2," the formerly dignified Farmer Hoggett is only in it for about 10 minutes, but in that short time, he's flung down a well, and then makes goofy gestures. He's completely robbed of his dignity. I mean, did anyone enjoy seeing Farmer Hoggett's head being slammed over and over and passing out?<br /><br />In fact, all the humans in "Babe 2" are frighteningly abused, for no good reason. Mickey Rooney, a very creepy clown, literally just drops dead. Mrs. Hoggett is strip-searched by drug agents, is doused with a bucket of glue, and then is flung around a ballroom on a bungee, dressed in the dead clown's costume, no less. Was this all really necessary? In a movie that kids watch? It wasn't funny, it was just sad. Very sad. Abysmally sad. Not to mention completely pointless.<br /><br />And in the first movie, Babe the pig had a unique mission, making his triumph truly sweet and heartwarming. The storyline was singularly original. And the first movie dealt with some real-life issues (at least in the animal world), which gave weight to the notions of fate and destiny, which was nicely intoned throughout the movie by the narrator.<br /><br />In "Babe 2," all the obstacles are contrived and trivial, so the attendant triumph becomes hollow and pointless. And if you think about it, Babe the pig doesn't actually do anything. He just gets chased around, or just acts witless, and does things that everyone tells him to do. The first movie was about Babe's courage and originality. In this movie, he's led around like... a sheep. (how very ironic.) You never root for him, because he has nothing to accomplish.<br /><br />I was deeply disappointed. I had to watch the first movie over again, just to cleanse my palate, but I'm still in mourning. | 0neg
|
The Untouchables is a horrible movie. David Mamet wrote the script but one couldn't tell unless reading the credits. It lacks Mamets natural flare, that great dialogue and those undertones that made Mamet who he is. I wont get into the historical aspect of the movie sufficive to say there is little. The direction of this movie is crap. Needless to say it was Brian DePalma. He focuses more on the costumes, cars, and scenery of the movie than the acting or script. The best moments in this movie were improvised by Connery (ie. the dead guy shot) and the rest could have been written by anybody who has ever been to a screen writing class. | 0neg
|
This noisy aimless mess was an attempt to cash in on the popularity of Star Wars, released the previous year. Battlestar Galactica was barely able to hang on for one season despite the fertile ground and general acceptance for sci-fi that had been created by the Star Wars hit.<br /><br />This 1978 Galactica, and all the other followup Galactica "movies" and series to come from it in the early 1980's, was poorly written and poorly developed. The final product was so revolting that they even managed to mangle the hackneyed character stereotypes and plot twists that were regularly used to fill out the majority of each week's episode.<br /><br />While fans of the series heap praise on Lorne Greene, John Colicos (and Richard Hatch) for their fine effort, most seem to ignore the fact that these unlucky thespians were working with ridiculous scripts. One shudders to think how much worse the final on screen product would have been if everyone performed as poorly as Dirk Benedict, the intended 'lovable rogue' stereotype who instead came across as the 'obnoxious pain in the a**' stereotype.<br /><br />The final product would have been better suited for Saturday mornings, but the expense of the leading edge special effects (for 1978) forced this to be a prime time offering.<br /><br />Producer Glen Larson has an impressive track record for producing fun, technology-based fare, but Galactica was simply too weak on too many levels. Catch his Buck Rogers, early Knight Rider or Fall Guy for examples of how the genre CAN work without making you wish that the 'bad guys' would win so the series could end. | 0neg
|
Frightened, vulnerable refugees, escaping the political tensions permeating Europe in 1930 (and, we are to assume, the escalating prominence of the Nazi party), come to stay with friends in London; seven years later, having received their British citizenship, the younger sister embarks on a dancing career while the older sister reconnects with her handsome fiancé, now a newspaperman and leader in the political underground. Well-meaning, but drab melodramatics from Britain's Ealing Studios. Late plot-twist involving plastic surgery seems to belong to a different film altogether. Audrey Hepburn, two years before her breakthrough in Hollywood, received her most substantial acting role up to this time playing the dancing darling; she's charming and poised, but the part doesn't offer much beyond showcasing her youthful eagerness. *1/2 from **** | 0neg
|
I didn't really think that "Grease" was as good as people I know say it is, but it's okay. I mean, it's better than most movies I've seen before. It's fun to watch, and the chemistry between Danny and Sandy is all so innocent. It has really great musical numbers sung by Olivia Newton-John, John Travoltra, and the rest of the cast, and it became a cult classic film, which will live forever. Even today, the "Grease" legacy lives on! Not bad. | 1pos
|
This movie is more deceiving than ever, using a suspenseful looking actor like Walken to play in this piece of junk made it look like he had nothing better to do than play a boring role like this one! And the fact that the movie was supposed to be about some witch and you really don't see that until almost the end of the movie but meanwhile you have to sit and watch this boring film while it gets, or tries to get to the meaning of the point and you have to go through this whole trail of boring actors and actresses thinking the whole time of how you passed off another movie and decided on this one and how you have just waisted your money just makes the whole point of time useless sitting there. I'd rather watch cartoons for goodness sakes. Leave this one alone,please! | 0neg
|
I took a gamble by renting this one DVD - it certainly had potential, with the good storyline and great actors (Madsen, Hopper).<br /><br />After 15 minutes however, things really went downhill and it became obvious that this is a total Tarantino ripp-off. The story is very similar to True Romance and the music reminded me of Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction - except that these weren't the original tracks from the 70s :)<br /><br />It's really a b-grade ganster movie with none of the subtle filming or dialogue we get in Tarantino's movies.<br /><br />4/10 | 0neg
|
I just loved this movie! It was so interesting. I was bored one day, and I just turned the TV on to Disney Channel, and Smart House was on. I watched it, and the more I got into it, the more interesting it was. I especially liked the part when PAT became a human. My sister started to watch towards the end, and when she saw PAT become a human, she said that she looked very familiar. After the movie ended, I went online to find out who played PAT, and was surprised to find it was played by Katey Sagel, who I already knew played Cate Hennessy on 8 Simple Rules. I also found out that LaVar Burton directed this film. I already knew about him from what he's most famous for, Reading Rainbow. I always loved that show. Smart House is such a great movie, and I'm not just saying that because I'm in love with Disney Channel. I would love it even if some unknown person made it with $500 just for the heck of it. This movie is definitely satisfying! | 1pos
|
I can see why this movie has been critically buried by a lot of people, but come on! We've all seen way worse! The acting was horrible, the dubbing was atrocious. The story was dumb. But the creature and the story was better than the movie that surrounded it. The gore was fairly decent for low budget trash. I've seen FAR worse. I actually liked the whole tit being ripped off thing. I gave this movie a 3 because yes, it does suck, BUT you could do worse in the horror genre. TRUST ME. Go watch Alex's Apartment, Jack-O, Critters 3, The Howling 7 and then tell me how bad When The Screaming Stops Is.<br /><br />My biggest complaint : why the hell did the cover box show a girl cowering from someone waving a knife? I guess to cash in on the slasher craze. I was expecting a murder mystery movie, and boy thats not what I got.<br /><br /> | 0neg
|
Horror fans -- do NOT believe the hype and false reviews of this movie. <br /><br />I enjoy horror indies. I enjoy campy horror. Campy can be great fun. This is not camp, this is CRAP. <br /><br />Despite knowing that Jamie-Lynn can act under some circumstances, this movie has to have the worst acting I've seen this year. The actors have no screen presence, their fear is totally unconvincing, and they are only funny unintentionally.<br /><br />A fan of campy horror can probably suffer through the distractingly horrid acting, but the worst sin this movie commits is that it doesn't even allow itself to be cliché. Where's the maniac-cam? Where is the beautiful, terrified, but somehow impressively heroic female lead? How about some nudity (the one sexual scene is offensively stupid)? How about having at least one likable character so we, as the audience, can care at all about what happens?<br /><br />This movie was created by filming 70 minutes of fun house ghouls and fog plus 10 minutes of reality-show-quality acting plus 10 minutes of idiotic plot development.<br /><br />This movie wouldn't be worth watching for free. It's so bad that it shouldn't just go straight to video; it should go straight to the garbage. | 0neg
|
The director somehow forgot to TELL A STORY, and he overlooked to DEVELOP CHARACTERS. Incredibly, the action got all mixed up in the editing suite and no one was straight enough to sort it out. That's my guess. What else happens when a bunch of stoned young men get together to make a movie on Grand Cayman? The leading lady was set up to have turned sixteen that very day, when Orlando Mister-Twickenham Bloom pops over to make love with her. Trouble is, she looks about twenty-five. Bloom gets acid thrown in his face by her charming brother, and oh-so-luckily his face is wrinkled up, but both his eyes survive perfectly! The movie started like an international James-Bond-type suspenser, but later turned into a lackadaisical picaresque tale about an ordinary boat-polisher and his burning passion. Yawn. Couldn't be bothered to find out what happened, there was no end for it to happen in. | 0neg
|
This is the basic western of man meets girl, looses girl.<br /><br />The cast is second to none. Mini Series on TV Sam Elliott plays Hugh Cardiff an ex-Buffalo hunter. With his shooting skills he starts the following the shooting competitions.<br /><br />At the shooting competitions he meets Ben Johnson and Timothy Scott, the 3 become good friends.<br /><br />The threesome get into trouble and help each other out. <br /><br />For a historical flare, the threesome even meet Wild Bill Hickok and go into business together. <br /><br />While long for a movie, if you like to just sit down and watch one for a couple/three nights this one is a great one. | 1pos
|
10. The script<br /><br />Uncredited as a scriptwriter is novelist F. Scott Fitzgerald. His love scenes are extremely elaborate and exquisitely structured. They also introduce innovations that have since become clichés and the hallmark of 'women pictures' everywhere.<br /><br />9. The actors<br /><br />Barrymore is unforgettable as the regally cranky Louis XV. Morley gives one of his best interpretations. Schildkraut plays the best two-faced villain of his entire body of work. As for Power... remember the anecdote about the reporter asking romance-writer Barbara Cartland (Lady Di's stepmother) how she could possibly have written so many romance novels before she was even married and while she was still a virgin? Her answer was: 'Oh! We didn't have sex in those days. We had Tyrone Power.'<br /><br />8. The director<br /><br />Van Dyke was an expert at handling large crowds and acts of God. His directing style was a compromise between time-efficiency and giving the stars leeway as long as they respected the general style of the piece. This 'honour system' seems to have encouraged the actors to do their homework and present a credible, coherent performance every time. He also got an assist here from uncredited French genius Julien Duvivier. <br /><br />7. Artistic direction<br /><br />What can you say about a period film that tackled the challenge of recreating Versailles in the XVIIIth century on the MGM back lot? The production values are staggering. The Gallery of Mirrors is actually longer, higher and wider than the original. The costumes tread a fine line between historical accuracy (covered shoulders and revealed cleavage) and the requirements of the movie code (exposed shoulders were tolerated but bosoms had to be covered) but still manage to convey the era and the fairy-tale quality of Marie's court. The costumes were also specially constructed to shine, glitter and shimmer on black and white film.<br /><br />6. Historical accuracy<br /><br />The film's script is based (in part) on Stefan Zweig's groundbreaking biography of the Queen, "Marie Antoinette, Portrait of an Ordinary Woman", which tried to create the first accurate, adult, factual but Freudian-inspired narrative of the Queen's life by using documents and correspondence that had long been overlooked or suppressed. The book was the first to reveal Louis XVI's mechanical sexual problems, which prevented his consummating the marriage during its first seven years (until a slight surgical intervention) and explained in turn the Queen's extravagant spendthrift personality, in Freudian terms, as extreme sexual frustration. This story actually makes it to the screen in a large degree. Compare this to recent biopics like "A Beautiful Mind", whose scriptwriters conveniently 'forget' essential but non-mainstream plot elements like the fact that John Nash's paranoia may have been caused or amplified by the McCarthy era persecution of homosexuals. Some historical events have been telescoped into one another in order to accommodate the general American public's limited understanding of French history and the Orléans character was used to maintain tension by representing the turncoat part of the nobility which exploited MA for their own various agendas.<br /><br />5. The music<br /><br />Herbert Stothart may not be a household word but he did win an Oscar for his original score to "The Wizard of Oz", based, of course in part on Harold Arlen's melodies. Besides giving Miss Gulch/the Wicked Witch her immortal theme, he is also one half of the composing team that produced the operetta "Rose Marie". Stothart shines in two respects: the approximate recreation of XVIIIth century dance music in the court scenes, emphasizing the bored grandeur of the proceedings, and the psychological music that accompanies everything from exciting chase scenes to the love scenes between Shearer and Tyrone. Note especially the use of the harpsichord in a rupture scene between Orléans and MA and the use of the viola d'amour in the garden love scene.<br /><br />4. The cinematography<br /><br />MA is in 'glorious black and white', but especially in the escape to Varennes sequence which has the most credible - and suspenseful - 'day for night' sequence ever filmed. The marriage scene may have inspired Queen Elizabeth II's coronation. Also notable are the matte paintings, the overwhelming use of cranes to move in on particular characters in a crowd scene and the chiaroscuro of the last meeting with Fersen.<br /><br />3. Detail and scope<br /><br />Every scene has something special added to it in characterization, movement, rhythm, lighting, art direction, choreography (and not just in the dance scenes). The costumes could have starred in a picture by themselves.<br /><br />2. The lost art of story-telling<br /><br />This film was planned with intelligence and skill and was built around the principle stated by Selznick when filming GWTW: 'The secret of adapting a book to the screen is to give the impression that you are adapting a book to the screen.' Which means that many literary devices are used to give the story many interesting arcs and recurring themes. The story is well balanced in terms of spectacular action, recreation of important historical events (giving the impression of the passage of time) and intimate scenes. It is truly 'the intimate epic' that Mankiewicz's 'Cleopatra' was supposed to be. Need I add I am really dreading the Sofia Coppola version...<br /><br />1. Norma Shearer<br /><br />Norma Shearer is an unjustly forgotten star of the first magnitude. MA is permanent testament to her uncanny abilities. In this film she portrays the main character from the age of sixteen to her death as a prematurely aged and debilitated woman of 38, all with perfect verisimilitude, thanks to her magnificent vocal instrument and stage presence. As a fairy-queen, she makes Cate Blanchett as Galadriel (in LOTR) look like Carol Burnett's charwoman. Her virtuosity as the fated widowed Queen is all the more poignant when one realizes that at the time she was Thalberg's widow in her last husband-approved venture and that the Hollywood suits were rapidly closing in on her. | 1pos
|
Only the physical attractiveness of the players might cause a viewer to pause when scanning the channels with the remote control. But a charming girl with a pretty face alone does not create drama. <br /><br />Only shallow showbiz actors and directors would think it plausible to present the reunion of a long lost child with her mother and father as a casual and mundane event. Outpouring at the end of long suffering, raw emotion, deep feelings -- all completely missing from FOUND. The big reunion in FOUND is little more than an owner finding misplaced car keys after a five minute search.<br /><br />Only made-for-TV folk think it does not matter when the actors are clearly seen wearing underwear during "nude" love-making scenes. The technical production values are weak, even by low-end cable channel standards.<br /><br />FOUND is painful to watch, not because of story-telling power and emotion, but because the plot has problems and almost each and every scene lacks credibility.<br /><br />FOUND is missing drama. Reader, please don't bother to find FOUND. | 0neg
|
I remember seeing this movie in theatres back in the 80s. But I don't remember it being this lame. The Media Blasters/Shriek Show is a heavily edited version. Most infuriating is the fact that the trailers provided on the DVD show some of the gore that has been edited out.<br /><br />A group of friends decide to take a vacation on a Greek island. But first there's the a long intro kill. A couple goes to the beach. The girl goes swimming and sees a boat, swims to the boat looks in it and sees something that makes her scream. Whatever she sees we don't get to see. Then we see blood appearing in the ocean. The guy is listening to music on the beach and his head will meet an axe.<br /><br />Back in Greece, our group goes to the posh house at which they stay, but there something wrong. Some ghostly woman appears but hides from them. In the basement they find a hysterical woman covered in blood, who warns them of someone. Finally, in minute 52 (!) we finally meet our flesh eater who spends time in some real underground catacombs associated with some church. There we get to see one of the two decent gore scene in the movie.<br /><br />Our villain dispatches a couple of our friends but eventually meets meets a cruel and ironic death.<br /><br />This movie in its rated version is painfully slow, with very little worth seeing. One can't care about any of the characters. One good things is that we get to see why the anthropophagus became an anthropophagus. Presumable there's some connection to the opening scene, but since we don't see that in its entirety, as it is, part of that intro is pointless. The scenery is great, being filmed on beautiful and fascinating locations.<br /><br />I can't recommend the rated version. | 0neg
|
I am now convinced Monte Hellman is one of America's most unjustly overlooked filmmakers. "Cockfighter" was good (easially the best hicksploitation film ever made), "The Shooting" was great, and "Two Lane Blacktop" is simply put a masterpiece. Even though "Easy Rider" came earlier and was much more successful, "Two Lane Blacktop" is a far superior film. The films minimalist style is engrossing throughout, and despite the slow pacing your interest never waivers. Its also the greatest road movie ever made because its thematically interesting unlike many other car films. To call this a car film is akin to calling "2001" a sci-fi film or "The Seven Samurai" an action film.<br /><br />What makes it work so well? For one, the stark minimalism of it all. Hellman proves you don't need flashy effects or a big budget to make a great motion picture (something which Hollywood's school of music video directors hasn't caught on to). Everything is very low key, especially the performances of James Taylor, Laurie Bird, and Dennis Wilson. It perfectly captures the lack of meaning to their lives. Unlike many other counter culture heroes, they seem to be rebelling against nothing except life itself. Secondly, Warren Oates makes the film. Oates is one of the most tragically underrated actors of all time, and this is next to only "Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia" as his best film. In both, he manages to take a desperate and pathetic man and make him all too human. Its a shame that this is so hard to find as its one of the best films of the decade. (10/10) | 1pos
|
A great movie about the prophetic conversion of the Archbishop of El Salvador. The movie details the life of Oscar Romero after being appointed Archbishop. Believed to be the quiet bookworm, a man that wouldn't stir up anything, Romero makes a conversion in order to save his people from the oppressive government. As a result, he is martyred for his beliefs. A great picture to watch and take in. | 1pos
|
This is far and away the worst of Hughes' teen movies. Poor casting and a weak plot doom it. Don't let the appearance of John Candy in this turkey fool you. He is only in the film for a few minutes. Avoid this one at all costs. | 0neg
|
"Pod people" is without a doubt, with no exception, the absolute worst movie I have ever seen. In fact, it is also without a doubt the worst movie EVER made. It makes "MANOS" look like a Disney movie comparison. Everything looks SO ugly in it, and when it's not ugly, it's foggy. Nothing is good about it at all, acting, directing, producing, all terrible. And this has got to have the worst score used in a film ever. 50's sci-fi films look like "Star Wars" in comparison to this tripe. "The Giant Spider Invasion" looks like "Close Encounters of the Third Kind". I hope I never see that red-haired, girly voiced brat again, or his loser family. I can see why they didn't care about him. What kind of lunatics would release this to America, it must be a conspiracy or something. I feel bad for the MST3K writers, to have to sit through this so many times. There must be at least 6 different stories happening at once, that includes the one going on during the credits (I think those are scenes from "The Galaxy Invader", using a bad movie for the credits of a bad movie, idiots). I HATE J.P. Simon, I don't care what other films he's directed, I'm surprised he could find work after directing this film. Geez, just think about how good, exciting, thought provoking films like "Metropolis" get chopped up so badly to the point of scenes being lost forever, and then released, yet films like this are still released in their original form. I hate this movie, and I want all the people involved with unleashing this on the public to know it. | 0neg
|
i just love this film, it's such a shame it isn't on DVD yet. and a copy on VHS recorded years ago (before i was born probably). films of this quality are a rare treat, i can only compare it to those of monty python and the 1980's hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy TV series (the recent film was good but felt a little short).<br /><br />---POSSIBLE SPOILER--- one of my favourite bits is the part where 'the bbc' turns up and announces the news ---SPOILER FINISHED---<br /><br />if this film was re-made i doubt it would be as funny as the original and i'm sure they'd be told to remove certain lines of the script for reasons of political correctness.<br /><br />just hope the DVD is out soon a must for anyone that likes monty python style jokes | 1pos
|
This Duvall feature is quirky, touching, beautiful, odd, and by a man whose politics I do not at all like, yet I have to say that its qualities, including the camera work, the cutting, the music, the actors, the spoken script come close to creating a film Fellini would have been pleased to have authored. The crude, centered, killer played by Duvall has such love for his girlfriend's child it is palpable. The character's professionalism in his trade is of the highest order...the highest order in a lowly profession...though in this instance his job does have positive results in terms of assassinating a monster who took refuge in Argentina from Germany. <br /><br />His little, tightly wound but precise killer is, like the dance which carries the spirit of a place and people in the film, and the panther which his dance teacher admires, is a wary watchful beast whose devotion to the ten year old daughter redeems him in part. Great performances across the board. Gesture, sounds, perfect. Chapeaux. | 1pos
|
The Amazing Race is a show where teams of two race about Earth to win a million dollars at the end (the first to win, of course gets said million dollars). On the way they stop at various locations and must complete tasks. The teams are generally all a type of human or a minority and rarely are normal people used in the series. The tasks involve doing things that happen or are to do with local things, like making pottery or laying bricks or carrying a local creation about. For the most part vehicles, usually cars or 4WDs are provided to help them get about and they are given money for some legs. Since this is reality TV it is always different with no contiguous consistent plot or continuuity apart from reality itself, and so its enjoyability depens greatly on certain variables at the time. However the general gist of the show is quite amusing. It is amazing how weird and unintelligent Americans are, as is clearly shown with many of the teams. Also social observations can be made, as some teams gang to form 'alliances' against others and teams often become aggressive to one another or in the team itself. | 0neg
|
Jet Li really packs a punch in this action farce. I believe it's his best so far...followed by the decent Romeo Must Die and the laughable disaster The One. Bridget Fonda is astounding in this movie. She is a knockout. The villain and his henchmen are magnificent. Exciting and thrilling action at it's finest. 9 out of 10. | 1pos
|
First of all here are some of the comments others have made about this movie: "gritty", "disturbing", "one of the best movies of all time", "don't watch this alone", "powerful".<br /><br />Here are my comments on this movie: "ridiculous", "hilarious", "pile of feces", "made with a two dollar budget", "if any other human being is willing to watch this movie with you, murder them".<br /><br />spoilers** I can't begin to say how many positive reviews I've read about this movie. If you haven't seen it and just read the reviews you'll think this is the most gripping and disturbing war movie ever made. If you have seen it you'll think some retarded apes got hold of a camera, an army-man Halloween costume, and the worst human actor in the world and made a movie in one day. This movie is so bad it's indescribable. So I'll describe it a little.<br /><br />Right off the bat you'll be blown away by the horrible production value and the ridiculous acting in this movie. The first scene shows the main character having flashbacks of Vietnam. And by Vietnam I mean the woods behind the director's house. The set in no way looks like Vietnam, and this dude in no way looks like a soldier. I know the movie was shot in the 70's, but I can't stress enough how bad it looks. Movies like The Shining and Taxi Driver were also made in the 70's and they still look great. So this pile of garbage doesn't get a pass just because of when it was made. Also like I said the acting is bad and I'm way too lazy to break down why, but if you watch it you'll know that it's bad and you don't like it.<br /><br />So anyway, this guy is in 'Nam and he runs into some Vietnamese and he unloads his machine gun rambo-style into some random 'Nam girl. This of course pisses off her family so when he sees this he throws his gun down and runs away like a true soldier. But they quickly catch up with him and begin beating him in some sort of real time slow motion. Meaning I don't think the director knew how to use slow motion effects so he told the actors to move at half speed, which is pretty obvious when they "bash" him in the face with the butt of a gun by gently tapping him on the head.<br /><br />Next thing you know the guy is in New York with his wife and crying baby. His wife complains that he neglects her and the baby and you can't blame him when you see what his wife looks like or what the baby looks like for that matter. His wife isn't a mutant and his baby might be. For the first couple minutes the baby is hidden and you're supposed to assume it's a normal non-mutant baby, but then his wife holds the baby in the light and you see that their baby is in fact a rubber doll with a monster face. What it's supposed to be is a mutant created by this soldier's Agent Orange tainted seed, but what it really is is the worst special effects creature in the history of film. Seeing this infant is supposed to elicit a horrific gasp from the viewer, but the odds are much better that seeing it will make the viewer press pause so they can laugh at it for a while and maybe take a cell phone pic for their wallpaper. The funny thing is other reviewers commented on the sadness or disturbingness of this baby as if it could be taken halfway seriously. Words can't do justice to how hilarious and lame this baby is. The only thing sad about the baby is the fact that this movie isn't a comedy and it's not supposed to make you laugh when you see it.<br /><br />The whole plot of the movie is this guy comes back from 'nam and wanders the streets of NY trying to find work to pay off the debts he owes to some street hoods. I'd have to say this is the most boring part of the movie and yes I realize I just said it's the entire plot. What I'm getting at is the entire movie is boring and terrible. I'd have to say the best part of the movie is the catchy tune they keep looping over and over as he walks the gritty streets. If there were a soundtrack to this debacle I would buy it just for that gritty elevator music.<br /><br />While wandering around he encounters some old friend of his who's a drug addict and other people that you don't care about and can't take seriously.<br /><br />Then as a gift to anyone watching, the movie comes to an end when the guy can't take it anymore and blows his brains out in his apt. Hopefully you didn't put one in the chamber yourself and end your life before this point in the movie. Once again this lame ending is in no way "gritty" or "shocking". Also it should be clear to anyone who's made it this far in my review that I fast forwarded through huge chunks of the movie.<br /><br />So in summary this movie is indeed a nightmare for the viewer. However not in the way the director intended. Rather than shocking you or surprising you this movie will make you poop your pants in sheer amazement at how bad it is. I suppose if the whole point of this movie was to make the viewer relate to the horror and isolation that soldiers felt from being in Viet Nam then it did succeed at that. After sitting through this mess I definitely feel like I went through enough atrocities to be awarded a Purple Heart. | 0neg
|
I tried to watch this film, I really did - I happened to be at someone's home and their young nephew had brought this movie to keep himself entertained. In goes the DVD, and there upon the TV screen I see Mehmet Ali Erbil prancing around in all his glory. The movie banks heavily on Mr. Erbil's "irresistible" charm - To say that the filmmakers overestimated Erbil's abilities is the understatement of the decade.<br /><br />Basically, the film is a campy 'remake' of Dünyayi Kurtaran Adam (AKA: "Turkish Star Wars"; Semi-literal translation "The Man Who Saved the World" ) that retains none of the original film's crude charm. This movie is just so poorly constructed it isn't even as unintentionally funny as the original - There is simply no way to excuse the people behind this film for being so lazy and crass.<br /><br />However, I don't think it deserves to be in the Bottom 100 - It's a trashy movie, there is no sense in debating that point, but there are many other titles more deserving of such an 'honor' both within and outside of the world of Turkish cinema. Seriously, some of the sleazy movies that come on late at night make this movie look like a Shakespearean classic on film.<br /><br />This is type of film that will act as late night filler for years to come in Turkey, but it's hardly the worst thing out there. I do not recommend this movie to anyone other than rabid Mehmet Ali Erbil fans and people who have their heart set on seeing what all the fuss is about. | 0neg
|
When I seen the trailer for this fillm I expected it to be loaded with action and dragons but to my dissapointment it wasn't. Ok you see a few dragons and get a battle with a dragon at the end but thats about it. As for decent action there is only one occassion where this can be seen. I would also say that it is far too short, it only lasts what and hour and a half where it could have easily been streteched to 2hrs at least with maybe showing van Zan killing his first dragon or whatever. Apart from these flaws I do actaully think this is a decent film, well worth viewing. Overall I give it 8/10 | 1pos
|
WOW. I remember the first movie was okay so i decided to see the second one ONLY BECAUSE the trailer made it seem like she was in the same setting as the resident evil 2 video game. The game rocked! Within the first 5 minutes of me watching RE: Apocalypse, I knew it would suck. How crappy was the first scene with those astronauts entering the vault and getting the parasite lose. The movie sucked. Oh my god, i cant stress the fact enough. How is it that you cant shoot one of those licker things in the church with bullets because they dodge them, but the hero of the story can jump off of her motorcycle and crash it into the monster sending both the motorcycle and the monster 100 feet into the air... Then blowing the motorcycle up, a perfectly good vehicle to use during this chaos. This movie was so bad, i thought i was infected with the T-Virus when i had a strange urge to eat the brains of the people next to me in the movie theater... but they wouldn't mind, they were watching the most brainless movie ever. | 0neg
|
One is a good first effort by a novice director. Good acting, excellent special effects and cameos by Cleveland news celebrities make this a relatively painless way to spend a couple hours. The weak points were the script and editing which made the story confusing in some parts and overly simplistic in others. Tomeric shows that he has the technical skill to make a reasonable science fiction movie- it will be interesting to see what he can do with a decent script in a more challenging genre like comedy or drama. | 1pos
|
Awful, awful, and awful ! Even worse than " Brice of Nice" ... Even worse than " Arbres" ... Not even a glimpse of interest ! Vulgar, rogue, ... The only consolation I had was to see it on a DVD . Wasting ten dollars for such a crap in a theater would have been just unbearable !!!!!! I you want to see a Valerie Lemercier at her best, pass your way on Palais Royal and try to find the one and only " The Visitors" DVD one of my funniest movies! Actually, speaking of "Palais Royal", I really don't understand how such good actors like Denis Podalydes or Valerie Lemercier herself have accepted to play in such a movie. Oh, sorry, I was forgetting : Valerie Lemercier is the Director ! As a lesson, good actors don't always mean good film makers. <br /><br />MutantMutton | 0neg
|
Sonatine is the last film in Takeshi Kitano's yakuza related trilogy. The first two films are Violent Cop and Boiling Point. Sonatine is, in a way, a combination of these two films, and it is the greatest in this outstanding trilogy, and Sonatine ranks also to the top in Kitano's filmography with Hana-Bi. Sonatine tells the story of middle aged yakuza boss Murakawa (played by Kitano) and his gang's trip to Okinawa to settle some yakuza wars and return the peace to the criminal underworld of Japan. However, they are assaulted many times there and they are forced to go to beautiful beach location and spend some days there and wait for orders from Tokyo, from the higher yakuza authorities. What follows is all the unique elements from both Violent Cop and Boiling Point and totally stunning and breath takingly beautiful piece of art.<br /><br />There are all the Kitano elements as beautifully present as possible. The scenes are often without too much dialogue, and the film is very symbolical and calm. The faces are among the most important elements in Kitano's films, as there are so many things to be read from characters' faces. Kitano has created this very personal element and it is always there in his films. The setting at the naturally beautiful and uncorrupted seaside has been captured with the camera as brilliantly as we can expect from Kitano; this film is a result that would be born if Kitano had script in which read only one word: Beauty. Similarly beautiful film is his Hana-Bi and Boiling Point has also these elements. <br /><br />The elements of beauty among others are flowers, firecrackers and colors in general. The scenes at the beach as the gangsters play and have fun are so full of life and certain positivism, it is easy to feel a need for crying during those scenes, and I must say that at least equally powerful experience is the mentioned Hana-Bi, translated to Fireworks in English. The theme of Sonatine is that those brutal and violent humans return to the time when they were still innocent and free of all the wickedness of the world. They play so emotionally and devotedly that it is clear they know there is a better place to be than this world. The girl that is raped is perhaps only person in the film who would not hurt anyone and is like angel here. She knows and has learnt many things about life by the end scene, and make sure you watch the film thoroughly and the end credits, too, as there is more imagery after the credits.<br /><br />The music in Sonatine is outstandingly beautiful and sad, and is among the greatest musical experiences I've had the pleasure of hearing. The composer is the same as in Brother and Hana-Bi, and the work is as masterful in those more recent films, too. Violence in Sonatine is as sudden and irrevocable as in other Kitano films, and his films really show the real results and face of violence as a weak souls' tool of communicating. If someone considers Kitano's films gratuitously violent, they miss the whole point of the films; these film analyze and tell more about violence than most Hollywood films have ever done, but to admit this, one has to be able to interpret movies and really understand the abilities and power of Cinema. Kitano's films are far too difficult for many to understand, so it is no use trying to show his films to mainstream audience and people who see (if see!) in films only what is explained and said with easy means. If someone says without arguments or understanding to this art form some Kitano film is bad, stupid, gratuitously and excessively violent, unexplained or something else of the usual statements, it is no use taking those "opinions" seriously or consider them noteworthy because people who say so see exactly things that are NOT there.<br /><br />Sonatine is one of Kitano's most masterful pieces of cinema, and is among the reasons why Japanese (and Orient) cinema is so unique. Sonatine gets 10 out of 10 rating from me, and makes Takeshi Kitano one of the most sensitive, symbolic, stylish in every sense and remarkable film makers of our time, and his films will live as important pieces of history of Japanese and world cinema. | 1pos
|
This film became an icon for me from a very young age. I was just nearly five when this movie came out so I didn't get to see it until a few years later when Channel 4 showed it as a retro late night film. I was an avid skater. I longed for a local roller rink near me, but there was Nothing, only Ice rinks. I took ice skating lessons to help alleviate some of the frustration and then went back and applied some of the knowledge to my skating. Roller Boogie was brilliant for me, because it was cheesy , but most of all one of the very rare films that focused on roller skating - a tough subject to inject into a movie! Terry's car in the movie is beautiful too and those white roller boots! I remember finally getting a pair of all white-leather roller boots, hard to come by over here, but they were the best present ever - I still have them and they still fit and I hope to be wearing them when I teach my niece how to skate too! Roller Boogie as a movie cannot be taken too seriously! It has a feel good factor about it, no obscenities, the music is so retro ( to us nowadays anyway) and I love the skate line at the beginning of the movie - I just wished we had skate lanes like that in the UK! This is a film for those who like skating - don't bother to watch if you are a football fan - you wont get it - its simple teenage, roller skating , good vs bad and I have spent years trying to find a copy to replace my fuzzy VHS-taped from TV-copy. Mine came today, I've watched it, and I will probably watch it in the future when I'm snuggled up on the sofa, full of cold or maybe a hangover and just watch it - it is my feel good movie and one that few will ever enjoy as much as me! xx | 1pos
|
This film held my interest because of the great acting by Ling Bai,(Shen Yuelin),"Edmond",'05, who is a very educated Chinese lawyer and is placed in a very difficult situation in having to defend Richard Gere,(Jack Moore), "Unfaithful",'02, who is also another lawyer from the United States. Jack Moore gets himself in a very bad situation with a young Chinese woman, he some what falls in love with this gal on first sight and winds up in bed with her and all kinds of problems seem to happen. Jack wakes up and can't remember very much of anything that seemed to have occurred with this young gal and winds up being thrown into jail and having to live like a pig in horrible conditions. Richard Gere and Ling Bai are a great combination, however, the film is rather long and drawn out and intends to become a bit boring. | 0neg
|
Interesting premise, but poor ending. Dean Stockwell explains to the family that the aliens can easily track them whenever they use a credit card, etc. The aliens find the family several times.<br /><br />Near the end, after the battle with the aliens at Stockwell's home, the family and Stockwell leave in Stockwell's car. Part way down the driveway, Stockwell passes the father a couple grenades and tells him to blow up the alien's cars, which the father does.<br /><br />The aliens can be clearly seen still standing around, alive and well, yet for some strange reason the family and Stockwell think they will all be safe from that point on. Why? They could see the live aliens in the rear view mirror.<br /><br />The family moves into a new home and the movie ends with a black car pulling up in front of the new home. Knowing the aliens were not dead, and knowing they had easily tracked the family earlier, it was no surprise they found the family again.<br /><br />One other annoying little thing seen so much in movies. When one of the aliens had been shot or otherwise injured and was lying flat on his back, Stockwell went over, squatted down and practically stuck his face in the face of the alien to check it (the alien) out. Gosh, I wondered what would happen next. Of course the alien suddenly reached up and grabbed Stockwell. Surprise, surprise! | 0neg
|
This is the greatest action film ever made. I have been reading other people comments, and most agree, although some people don't seem to understand. They say it is bad because the dubbing is bad (that is the crappy American company that sold you the movies fault, not the movie) or the transfer was bad. Some say it is too violent. Some say the acting is bad. Some said there is not plot. Maybe you watched the wrong movie. No plot? An arms dealer housing his arsenal in a hospital. That is a plot. Maybe you should go back to school.<br /><br />This isn't the greatest action movie ever simply because every action seen tops the other and they are so superbly choreographed. It is cinematically beautiful, Philip Kwok of Five Deadly Venoms fames choreography and role is superb. The Production Design is great, it blends so seemlessly with the lighting. And it features the greatest shot in action cinema history, hands down. The 3 minute shot to Chow and Tony traversing the halls, going up the elevator and killing numerous bad guys along the way is incredible. There has never been anything like it.<br /><br />To all those non believers out there, if you like action movies, you will love this. IF you don't like it, they you are fooling yourself into thinking you are an action movie fan. Now, if only John Woo could make another movie like this instead of the godawful Windtalkers. | 1pos
|
Worth watching as both a vigilante movie and as a meditation on the meaning of family, this movie surprised me with the level of it's performances. Liam Neeson contributed his usual fine job, as did a nicely creepy David Baldwin, and a nice mob boss performance by Andreas Katsulas (better known as the One Armed Man from the Harrison Ford movie of "The Fugitive"). Good little wussy role by Ben Stiller; nice supporting job by Helen Hunt. Patrick Swayze does a good dependable job in this movie, but is outshone by the finely understated performances of the men playing his relatives from backwoods Kentucky. Great use of Chicago locations, though the "L" trains running past my house don't appear to have the conveniently flat roofs to jump on. (Alright, a minor quibble). All in all, quite worth watching. | 1pos
|
To many people bash this movie, and personally, I think it is one of the most faithful adaptations I've ever seen from anything to screen for this time period.<br /><br />THE BAD: The red skull's look at the end of the movie wasn't really all that crappy... it just wasn't the red skull... I have to admit they did take their time to get where they were going in the middle of the movie.<br /><br />THE GOOD: The good greatly outweighs the bad in this film. Matt Salinger does a perfect rendition of Steve Rogers/ Captain America in his childish "gee whiz" kind of way. The Red Skull's make up in the first half of the film is breath taking, and Scott Paulin (with a great assist from the script) gives more character depth to the Red Skull than I've ever seen in the comics. The opening half hour rushes by with grace, ending with a fantastic battle inside a Nazi stronghold, and the climatic battle between Cap and the skull at the end is also unbelievable. And don't get me started on the "Pull over. I feel sick." parts of it.<br /><br />OVERALL: One of the best comic films out there, even after seeing some of today's, it's the perfect adventure for the whole family! | 1pos
|
I was looking through a couple of huge tables of VCDs at a store in Chinatown when I came across this film for about 2 bucks. The plot was about a hit-man in New York City hitting the wrong target and then deciding to protect the right target as a means of penance. I figured it would be great to see city through the eyes of a foreign film crew-I assumed it was a straight Hong Kong film. What the film is is a rather tepid film made in English with Richard Grieco as the hit-man and Maggie Q as the target. Frankly I don't care that Maggie Q is topless. Nor does it really matter that this was the first film shot with the HD cameras that would be used in films like Sin City. What I care about is a good story and this film doesn't really have one. Its nothing we haven't seen before and its told rather blandly. Even a TV movie would make the proceedings this dull and confusing. The Two leads are fine, or as fine as they can be with what little they are given to do. Grieco is basically required to be brooding, and he does it well. All kidding aside he's a good actor but after a few crappy parts like this its understandable that his name often elicits a "who?' when its mentioned. The film apparently isn't available here in the US and having seen the movie I can understand why, its a turkey. | 0neg
|
This poorly scripted short adds nothing positive to Roscoe Arbuckle's career. There are a few good moments, but the storyline is weak, and the direction uninspired. Arbuckle uses the same presentational style he employed more than a decade before, but without the inventive comedy of those years. The character of Windy Riley, an obnoxious buffoon who endlessly boasts, earns no sympathy. One of the few grace notes is Louise Brooks, who all-too-briefly gets to show off her smooth speaking voice and winning dance talent. But she is frustratingly underused and even her face is often hidden by poor blocking. It's too bad that fallen stars like Arbuckle who ended up at the lower-grade Educational Pictures didn't do--or weren't able to do--more with what they had left. | 0neg
|
This is a great contender for the best of the worst. People go to investigate a murder and look for treasure on Snape Island. The gore is pretty graphic if you see a decent version of this movie and the atmosphere is very spooky. An island with just a lighthouse and some spooky caves underneath is a great idea and they use the suspense well. I have NO idea why it got banned in Finland. It is a very funny film as well. Loads of mistakes and a stereotypical cornish sailor named Hamp.<br /><br />''SPOILERS''<br /><br />When one of the girls come in and say 'Dinners Ready' with a bunch of plates there is nothing on the plates at all and why does she drop them all just because she can hear what sounds like a flute playing?!<br /><br />A character named Brom breaks every horror movie rule ever...He drinks, Smokes crack, takes bribes, lies, has sex, tries to steal a bunch of treasure until he gets killed!<br /><br />Hamp the sailor doesn't smile throughout the entire movie until near the end and he gets killed.<br /><br />The boat that there sailing to the island looks like its floating way above the water!<br /><br />Robin Askwith trying to be american. Now THATS comedy! | 1pos
|
no I really don't like this movie, it could have been better, I guess. it's a cool story, and yes, the acting rules, but there's almost no music, and I've seen all of it before. put this film in the trash. do not rent this movie, it's not worth to waste your well earned money!!! | 0neg
|
Obviously, this movie was not made for the kids who grew up with CGI. Anyone with a keen eye for special effects can see how it is done. But in those days, there was only a handful of techniques you could use. This is miniatures and stop motion, and although not in the league of Ray Harryhausen, there is far worse.<br /><br />Some people claim it is a BEAST FROM TWENTY THOUSAND FATHOMS ripoff, a mock buster. I don't agree. All these movies have a similar pattern. Something inexplicable happens, slowly the mystery and the number of incidents grow, a scientist comes up with a possible explanation and then the grand finale where the special effects and the military come in (with lots of - sometimes inappropriate - stock footage).<br /><br />The Giant Behemoth follows that pattern. It takes half an hour before the monster is shown and then you get a good 20 minutes of more than passable special effects. No men in rubber suits here. The scene at the power plant is a classic as far as I'm concerned.<br /><br />For the modern viewer it takes a bit of patience to chew up the first three-quarters of babbling around, but there is enough to keep your attention. Not like It Came from Beneath the Sea where the continuous scenes on the submarine gets you craving for the end.<br /><br />All in all, it is a pretty decent movie. There are far, far worse. | 1pos
|
Granted, this seems like a good idea. Steve Martin, Goldie Hawn, and John Cleese in a Neil Simon comedy. Where can you go wrong? Watch the movie, and you'll find out.<br /><br />In truth, Martin, the lead, is mis-cast. He's not doing the great slapstick he's known for, from movies like "The Jerk", but instead plays a sort of in-between character that doesn't work. Hawn, with no one to play off of, is terrible. Cleese is the only even partially funny member.<br /><br />To top it off, the plot is pretty stupid. I can't say how much of it may have been changed, but the characters seem to lack the slightest bit of common sense. They blunder through New York, not doing anything right, and unfortuneatly, nothing funny. Not only is the whole premise completely unbelievable, it seems to give the message that people who don't live in New York aren't very bright, a theme repeated throughout the movie.<br /><br />In summation, instead of seeing this, go rent the original "Odd Couple" again. | 0neg
|
This movie is not for the weak of mind. The plot is complex. I remember reading reviews that used words like "murky." Since the movie was a bit more complex than cops chasing robbers around some city at high speed most critics lack the intellectual wherewithal to keep track of what is going on.<br /><br />Beginning with a friend's murder in Los Angeles Lt. Barney Caine, LAPD, (George C. Scott) follows a trail which takes him to Europe and leads to a formula for turning coal into gasoline. It takes Caine a while to uncover this and the plot takes a number of twists and turns. The ending can only reinforce one's cynicism about how the world works.<br /><br />The performances are strong and the movie is well worth the time taken to view it. | 1pos
|
Writer/director Pablo Berger's engaging sex comedy has been praised in some quarters as a Spanish Boogie Nights, but it's altogether a gentler, more romantic film.<br /><br />Set in 1973 towards the end of the censorious Franco era, hapless door-to-door encyclopaedia salesman Alfredo (Javier Cámara) is given a blunt choice by his boss accept redundancy or diversify into making 'sex education' home movies with his shy wife Carmen (Candela Peña) for the Danish porn industry.<br /><br />After some hesitation, the couple set to with a passion and become increasingly bold in staging their fantasies for the camera until Carmen unwittingly becomes something of an international sex symbol and Alfredo gets the chance to fulfil his dream of directing a feature film inspired by his cinematic idol Ingmar Bergman.<br /><br />The leads weave a potent and convincing chemistry, both as lovers and as a long-married couple, while Berger lightly coaxes humour and an eccentric romance to the fore. | 1pos
|