text
stringlengths 98
6.42k
| label
class label 2
classes |
|---|---|
This is got to be one of the best Christmas movie's ever made. Olivia Newton-John and Gregory Harrison do a wonderful job in this movie. I would love to see them in another movie together. They act together as well as Olivia and John Travolta do. I recommend this movie to everyone who love's Christmas movie's. Olivia's real life daughter Chloe is also in this movie and she does an excellent job of acting herself. Chloe and her mother Olivia also star in another movie together called The Wilde girl's which is also a movie to see. I believe Chloe will be starring in other movie's, as she is a good actress like her mother. Those who will watch this movie will by no mean's be disappointed. | 1pos
|
I used to subscribe to Toyfare magazine and one of my favorite sections of ANY magazine was "Twisted Toyfare Theatre". I always wished they would do an animated show...Then recently a friend asked if I had seen "Robot Chicken" because it was "right up my ally". What a great surprise!!! Seth Green too!!! Each episode is packed with little skits that is set up like watching T.V. with someone else flipping endlessly through the channels, sometimes sticking to one channel long enough to "get involved", and flipping again. Brilliant! Even the split second skits are hilarious. Definitely designed for adults. I would recommend this to anyone that is a fan of The Simpson's, Futurerama, Ren & Stimpy, Southpark, Star Wars, The Smurfs, and SO MANY other shows that Robot Chicken spoofs - It's animated action figures & toys!!! Picture Knight Rider, Dukes of Hazzard, Mario & Wario, Speed Racer & more all racing in The Cannonball Run!!! With Burt Reynolds and Dom Deluise doing voice-overs!!! Mario Brothers stumble into Vice City (from Grand Theft Auto) and trade the go-cart for a "Pimped ride"!! By far the best is when Darth Vader calls the Emperor after the Death Star has just been destroyed - "what's an aluminum falcon?!" & "oh! just build another one - who's gonna finance that-You?!!" Words are not enough - you just have to see it!!! | 1pos
|
It angers me that this movie is out there in a lot of stores, where many people can make the same mistake I did and rent the damn thing. To its credit, it shows promise from the 20- to the 45-minute mark, but then just falls into an incoherent mess. I've read that this was written between takes, which would explain the ridiculous plot twists that appear out of thin air. The only thing that would explain this movie's existence at all is that some rich kid wanted to see himself in a movie, and hired all his friends to be in it. That would also explain why this utter lack of anything of quality has such good distribution. Don't even rent it to see how bad a movie can be: many of you can make better movies than this. | 0neg
|
Wonderful story line, great actors, priceless characters. It clearly shows to all the similarities between Greeks and Turks who'd mostly like to think they are different. The ugly side of prejudice, family love, day to day lives of a couple of families with socially different backgrounds that were forced to be joined by marriage and a common grandson are all shown on this sitcom beautifully. The acting is superb, there is not a person that appears on this show that I could claim does not belong. My husband and I anxiously await Friday nights each week to watch it. My husband's father was among the Turks sent out of the Island of Crete many years ago, so he can identify with the Greek family that were forced to leave Istanbu. He enjoys the show from 2 different angles. It is nice to see a situation of this sort under a funnier light as opposed to heavy dramatic flavouring! | 1pos
|
One of Surrender's good, early efforts. This is from the same director as Femalien and the two films are pretty comparable in quality. There are several sex scenes all tied around the concept of the main character's trip to a "virtual reality" studio. If the technology shown really existed, the company's profits would exceed those of GM, IBM, Coca Cola and Exxon-Mobil combined. :)<br /><br />A couple of real highlights in the film were the strip club scene and the wet lesbian/three way. But all of the scenes were good.<br /><br />Given the low price and high quality of the video, this is an easy recommendation. | 1pos
|
In my opinion this is, quite simply, the worst series ever made. How it even has the nerve to call itself comedy is beyond me. Maybe, to get swans like Fawlty and Python, you have to go through ugly ducklings like this, but I sure wish we'd never heard of Grace Brothers.<br /><br />It was part of an unfortunate trend in the UK for shows where you always knew what the first words out of a character's mouth would be, followed by an explosion of canned laughter from what I can only assume was a lobotomized audience. Some have compared it to the 'Carry On' movies and, while there is a superficial resemblance to the worst of them, this series outstrips 'em all by a country mile for sheer unfunniness.<br /><br />Unbelievably, it was the most popular comedy series on British TV at one time, and ran for a mind-boggling 10 seasons. Eleven too many for me. | 0neg
|
A pool hustler becomes a member of a pack of hustlers. He rises to the top, but soon finds himself the monkey in the middle of a match between his boss and a crooked cop. <br /><br />Freddie Prinze Jr. seems to have a string of bad films lately, with such titles like Scooby Doo, Summer Catch and Scooby Doo 2. But one only has to look at his film credits to see that he hasn't been in a really good movie at all. His career ranges from teen slasher flicks to a poor excuse for a video game adaption. It seems with Shooting Gallery Freddie is trying to show that he's serious now, and that he's left his Scooby Doo image behind. Well, Freddie, I got a message for ya, keep dreaming'<br /><br />When I first came across Shooting Gallery, Poolhall Junkies rip-off is what came to my mind, but for the sake of an argument, I gave it a chance. After watching it, I still came to the conclusion that it's a poolhall junkies ripoff and a poorly executed one too. The main character here tries to act as if he's cool and slick, but with Freddi Prinze Jr. as your main catch, he's comes off and nothing more then a pretty face who thinks he can shoot some pool. In the final stages of the film, I wanted to cut my ears off I couldn't stand his "broken nose" accent. Ving Rhames makes an appearance. All he does is walk around and chew on alligator feet. He actually does nothing in the film, until the climax when he shoots some pool and a gun. <br /><br />In the film "Rounders" Norton has an ace tattooed on his arm, he says that he has an ace up his sleeve, it worked. In "Shooting Gallery" they get 8 balls tattooed on their arm, with Rhames on his bald head. It shows that their part of a gang...but it doesn't work. Rhames outfit is comical, you should see it to believe it. The plot is poorly written, and one of those, he was hustling everyone from the start type gigs, completely clichéd. <br /><br />The pool shooting is quite good, not better then what is showcased in "Poolhall Junkies" but good nonetheless. Freddie actually shoots some pool here, nice to see that, but it's obvious that the trick shots are done by someone else. I liked the whole switching of the shooting sides that Freddie does near the end though, I thought that was a neat addition. "Poolhall Junkies" has Walken and "Shooting Gallery" has Macfadyen. Macfadyen is definitely the highlight here as the drunk, druggie, poolhall hustler. He brings some enthusiasm to an otherwise dead cast. It was nice to see some life pumped into this dead film, but it doesn't last long.<br /><br />The poolhall lingo consists of what the director has heard and made up. Which is obvious when you listen to other lines such as "If I'm Lyin...I'm Dyin." Some characters names, if you'd like to hear are Paulie the Pawn and Cue Ball Carl. What's with the random words appearing on the screen? Poolhall lingo? Purpose to the script? It was distracting and adds nothing to the experience except confusion and dread.<br /><br />Skip "Shooting Gallery" unless you want a headache from poor acting and a clichéd plot. "Poolhall Junkies" this is not. Unless you're a massive fan of pool, check out something else. | 0neg
|
Absolutely the worst movie I have ever seen. I rented it for my family because the guy at the video store recommended it. He said it was such a good film. I don't know what he was thinking. Normally, when a movie is bad, we turn it off, but this one we watched just so we could tell everyone how bad it was. I recommend that you waste your time to watch it. | 0neg
|
It is a shame this is based on a true story. I bet the real story would be so much more interesting. I felt no symapthy for anyone in this movie, except a little bit of concern for the boy. There was very little sensitivity throughout the entire movie. I was shocked at the approaches everyone took toward an obviously traumatized boy. It ocurred to no one that finding a young boy murdered might damage the kid? And that they tried to reteach him how to talk, as if he never knew how, instead of finding the root of his distress! Thrusting him into environments where he was subject to taunting and torture, without a voice to fight back, apalled me. And that everyone seemed to blame the troubled child without concern for his obvious distress. I bet the story could have been told better. I hope the real story hasn't been tarnished because of an inadequate portrayal of it in a TV movie. | 0neg
|
But who would have known that in 1992? There are enough comic moments to make this show worth watching but not more that twice. I would have thought that it would be a little funnier but the jokes made about Valley girls or girls in general not only ring false, but are almost trite. | 0neg
|
Neat premise, some nifty acting by Dorff and especially Reece Whitherspoon, but unfortunately, this film takes itself WAY too seriously to be taken seriously. This would have made an excellent comedy, and the talent was there in the two leads. Instead, it takes an interesting, original premise and turns it into a preachy borefest. With a lead character like Dorff's, one would assume there would be a little old fashioned, punk rock humor to the proceedings. If I wanted to hear a sermon, I'd start going to church or reading Noam Chomsky (the obvious inspiration for some of this film) books again. Truly a pity, because this could have been a great film. | 0neg
|
It is hilarious to see a detective trying to work while fighting extreme obsessive/compulsive behavior, as well as germaphobia strong enough to merit using anti-bacterial wipes after every handshake. While these tendencies sometimes take center stage, the writing is well-balanced and touching so that it becomes a very enjoyable comedy/drama and not a ridiculous farce. Entertaining and engaging for just about anyone! | 1pos
|
I watched this after taping it from an episode of IFC Grindhouse. It was so boring that I could barely stay awake watching it. Maybe it was because I have never smoked pot and never will that it didn't work for me on any level. It wasn't effective as propaganda or unintentional camp. I fast-forwarded it at some points just because I wanted to get to the ending.<br /><br />Aside from the fact that I have never smoked pot and never will, maybe the fact that I saw it 72 years after it was made would explain why I found zero entertainment value. I applaud Dwain Esper for his hard work keeping the movie Freaks out of obscurity, but this movie just stunk. | 0neg
|
Last night me and 3 of my friends were kind of bored, and i was going through my friends dvds. I came across this huge box set called "night terrors" or something like that. i picked it up and read on the back of the box, the titles of movies. At the end of the list of like ten movies there was this "Sorority House Vampires". I read the tag line aloud which said "death, demon's, and D-cups". We said lets watch it it can be like stupid funny (like the time we watched "the divine secrets of the ya-ya sisterhood" and ran around screaming YA-YA all night) well we put the DVD in and sat back. The first thing we saw was this freakin Chinese lady that was naked (she had pretty big boobies for a Chinese lady)she was dancing to rock music for like 10 min for the opening credits. I said "What the hell this is retarded" but we stuck it out like men. The rest of the movie was this weird vampire whore sucking peoples blood. <br /><br />If you and your buds are looking for a movie with great T&A this isn't the one. I does have some but its not too great.<br /><br />If you are looking for a compelling thriller, this isn't it also. it shouldn't even keep a couple of stoner's attention<br /><br />So the only reason you would want to see it if you're a total goth and your looking For some tasteful goth porn | 0neg
|
Grandiose soap opera drama (isn't life a big soap opera?), beautifully acted, photographed, scored, written, directed. It features incest, pre-marital lust, a teen with a domineering mother, suicide, illegitimate children, murder, more. Lana Turner gives her best performance ever, minimizing any annoying postures, heading a mostly noble ensemble cast, with the possible exception of Lee Phillips, handsome as the small town's new principal, but somewhat grating in character. Diane Varsi, as Turner's daughter is also the narrator, occasionally brilliant, but somewhat monotone in voice. Hope Lange is superb, along with Arthur Kennedy, Betty Field, Mildred Dunnock, Leon Ames, Russ Tamblyn. The New England locations are stunning in Deluxe color Cinemascope, set to a stirring, symphonic soundtrack. The setting is 1940s before and after World War II, but it's most definitely 1957, via the costumes and hairstyles. Based on a bestselling book, and supposedly toned down a bit, the picture was a huge hit for Fox, spawning a mediocre 1961 movie sequel and a highly watched 1960s television series. But don't miss the original classic! | 1pos
|
I happened across this film on the 'World Movies' channel, coincidentally the day after I read Murakami's story (in 'Blind Willow, Sleeping Women'). I really liked the story. So much so that after the first half-hour of the film, I was reading it again, trying to use the book to block out the TV screen. What is the point of this movie? Wait, movie? It isn't really a movie at all, if your requirements for movies go beyond 'being on film'. This is a children's picture-book version of the story. This is the movie's process: Recite the story, almost verbatim, and play tracking shots ad nauseum over the monologue, showing banal instances of what the monologue is saying. Tony and the girl move in together? Lets show her pouring milk! Wife obsessed with clothes? Lets show her wearing clothes! Hell, lets show her, in consecutive tracking shots, wearing SEVERAL DIFFERENT outfits! That'll really drive the point home, that she's a clothes addict. Oh, and don't forget to have a lonely, melancholy piano constantly playing behind the monologue. Because everything's GOT TO BE MELANCHOLY! AND LONELY! God knows we've got no possible other way to convey that, besides the monologue. What do you think we are, filmmakers?!<br /><br />However, I have advice for the director: Go back to 'Blind Willow, Sleeping Woman', and try to adapt 'A Poor Aunt Story'. If you can manage to do that one in the same way you did this one, I'll chain myself to the Eureka Tower, and refuse to come down until you've won the Golden Palm. I have advice for potential viewers, too: The story is just over 20 pages long. You can read it in a quarter of the time it would take to watch this slide-show/movie. And it's even got some humour in it, too. Not everything has to be MELANCHOLY. | 0neg
|
The movie is full of ugly women who are supposed to be hot, and nudity scenes where there aren't any female full frontals, but hairy weasel man-ass. Some of the gore is okay; there's a few scenes where a dude or two suffers genital injuries during oral sex, but the camera cuts to the dudes facial expressions of pleasure then pain, and then the chick spitting blood. Also there's a scene where a characters head is decapitated by an electric drill.<br /><br />The movie's about this wannabe satanist, who gives incantations to Satan while sitting at his bedside wearing his Def Leppard t-shirt, then dreams of this ugly chick who is supposed to be Satan incarnate, or a succubus. Later, this evil horse faced succubus crashes his girlfriend's-sister's lame sorority party of eight people. Most of the film the power is out.<br /><br />Not in the least bit entertaining. Wash your dishes instead.<br /><br />The VHS cover's a laugh though, it says that is was too gory for TV, that's why it went straight to video-- yeah, try to prop up that fragile ego of your's Mr. Filmmaker. | 0neg
|
This film is an excellent Aussie comedy, loosely hung on the frame of an outback romance. I hadn't seen it for years, but it was (finally) released on DVD in June of 2009 so I raced out and got a copy. I'm pleased to say that viewing it again it is as good as I remember it. If you have a friend with a big screen, watch it on that, the scenery is to die for .<br /><br />I am so glad that this film is finally available on DVD: http://www.umbrellaent.com.au/products/show/3/1188 Harold Hopkins and Colin Freils are great in this, a real showcase of Australia, anyone is bound to enjoy it. There are 3 clips available in the national archives here: http://aso.gov.au/titles/features/buddies/ | 1pos
|
This was Al Pacino's first box office success of the 1980s. In 1983, "Scarface" came out and didn't do much business - the critics took a beating on it and Pacino's career suffered quite a deal throughout the decade - "Cruising," "Revolution," and "Author! Author!" didn't help much, either.<br /><br />"Sea of Love" transformed everything for him. It was a success financially and (somewhat) critically, and it helped him get more roles in the '90s.<br /><br />Looking back now, in 2005, it still holds up as entertainment, and sleazy entertainment at that, but the ending is too routine, insulting and oh-so-typical of the genre; it's the "trick 'em at the end" leg-puller where the murderer is revealed to be the most stupid of characters and you can't believe the film's ended on such a low note.<br /><br />The rest of it is actually pretty good. Pacino delivers an unusual performance as a socially and sexually awkward cop who meets a murder suspect (Ellen Barkin) and falls for her, only to realize she may be targeting him next.<br /><br />"Basic Instinct" got away with copying a lot of this a couple years later, but I prefer "Sea of Love." It's erotic and sleazy and entertaining without resorting to cheap tactics like full-frontal nudity. Then again you do get to see Ellen Barkin naked and that's never a bad thing.<br /><br />The movie focuses on its characters, and I liked that. I just wish the ending would have been up to par with the rest of the production.<br /><br />It's an entertaining movie, but don't expect anything of substance. | 1pos
|
i was very surprised that this film was as good as it was. it had some amazing effects like a guy getting his leg cut off and charlie (who was a very very cool guy) gets shot in the belly with a shotgun a couple of times and you see a massive hole in him. the final sewer scenes were great as was the bit with charlie in the market place. very good film.<br /><br />7/10 | 1pos
|
I kept waiting for this movie to begin and then the credits began to roll. I was very disappointed, especially with stars John Travolta and Sean Penn working together. | 0neg
|
Paul Anderson's vision of a movie does not go hand-in-hand with originality of an idea. Mortal Kombat was pretty good (hated the PG-13 rating though). Resident Evil was just okay (rated R but just didn't have the feel). Now, we get Aliens Vs. Predator. Ever since watching the Alien and Predator films from the 80s and 90s, I was expecting something like this. Also reading the Dark Horse comics of these two rival foes was exciting. But, this movie did not live up to the standards of the previous films or the comics. I admit though, some elements did take place, but couldn't make up for the movie as a whole. So, what do we get? A simmered down version of our two favorites slapped with a PG-13?!! Fox should be ashamed. The movie had a cheap, rushed feel to it. Both franchises weren't done justice. Where are the marines? What happened to the fight on the other planet? This movie needed more time and possibly another director (James Cameron or Ridley Scott perhaps).<br /><br />I'm not going to comment on the acting that much because this isn't a movie where dialog is superior to anything else in the movie. The two that really stood out were Sanaa Lathan and Big Boss Hogg Lance Henriksen (still going!!). Sanaa has strong standings to become a great actress. I wish her success in the future. Some of the dialog in the movie was laughably cheesy and unnecessary. Raoul Bova did alright too, but the rest of the cast was just there for the Alien and Predator killing satisfaction.<br /><br />The CG effects in the movie were good and didn't throw the movie off at all. As a matter of fact, CG and some of the fight sequences saved the movie from being a big disgrace to the fans. The predator cloaking was great, and their weapons look more updated from the previous two predator movies. The editing was horrible though. Every time an Alien or one of the predators kill the scene was cut, and I mean CUT!! For those who haven't seen the movie, you will understand why a R rating needed to take place. A fight scene that took place in a chamber, between a predator and an alien, was badly edited. The camera was too shaky, and the lighting was displaced. Also, the slow motion BS is annoying. Besides the flaws, some satisfaction came out of the sequences.<br /><br />Important: The predator should have been portrayed as being more agile and versatile in combat. The aliens should never get the upper hand unless the predator is outnumbered or wounded (READ THE DARK HORSE COMICS OR WATCH THE PREVIOUS MOVIES!!).<br /><br />Overall, this is soaked down to just a decent popcorn flick. I hope that the dvd will acquire a R rating and add more valuable scenes to the movie. The theatrical version just doesn't cut. I wanted to see this more than Spider-Man!! Paul Anderson and company (FOX!! AARGH!!) let me down and also losing respect from me. Hope the sequel takes another turn (also possibly another director) and gives the fans a movie that we deserve.<br /><br />Final Judgement: **/****<br /><br /> | 0neg
|
The final series, this time focusing on WWI. Part of what makes this one work so well is that they point out the negatives of war, especially the more traditional battles, so marvelously; the officers are devoid of a sense of reality beyond their comfy chair and desk, the assignments all contain the unwelcome promise of certain and meaningless death, boredom is rampant during a lot of the waiting, and the front runs out of supplies and the substitutions... you don't want to know(not sure why they felt the need to go into such detail about it, much less have so many of that type of jokes, but I digress). Melchett returns, as a stark raving mad superior, adopting the obnoxious, loud behavior of Laurie, and the two, individually or, better yet, together, lead to many an eye-rolling, funny and memorable moment. McInnerny is back, and going by his wish to avoid being typecast as the innocent, and remarkably stupid, Percy, he instead is cast as a slimy rival to Edmund, with the unbelievably(though based on an actual poor bugger) unfortunate surname of "Darling", creating an utterly hilarious running gag. This has a fantastic main group. The verbal, clever, British material is still going strong, immensely so, and this holds numerous of the greatest lines of the franchise. Satire is also magnificent in this, and it comments on more or less every aspect one could think of, relating to the period and situation. The plots are interesting, well-written(as really everything in this) well-thought out, and rather surprising. Acting is all great, and the guests are impeccable, including the always spot-on Richardson. Blackadder himself isn't downright depressing as he was in the third, which is not to say that the bite and snark that we do love so are gone, not by a long shot. Every episode is excellent, and the ending of the final one is beautiful. The comedic timing is flawless. There is silly stuff, in-between the wit. Almost all of it garners deserved laughs. I recommend this warmly to any fan of these shows, Atkinson and this type of humor. 8/10 | 1pos
|
This movie is a great thriller. The story is really coll and good actors portraying it. It was scary with the kills even though it had slasher movie kills the plot kept you guessing who it was instead of knowing it's some guy from a lake with a hockey mask and no life. Watch the movie and you'll get what I mean when i say "A one man movie". | 1pos
|
I love debate shows, the original Crossfire remains the best, this one is like crossfire on crack, before they put Crossfire on crack and killed the show.<br /><br />This isn't a royal PBS debate show, this is political entertainment, which gets to me after a bit. They really don't take the time to get to the issue and only are interested in letting the guest spout off to each other. But, unfortunately that's the way "news" is these days.<br /><br />I'm very Conservative, but Hannity gets to me. I guess it's his debating style. "What about President Clinton?" he always spouts off regardless of what the issue is. I do agree the debates a better when someone else is hosting the "Colmes" spot.<br /><br />But I'm perplexed, and extremely amused, by the hate filled comments here. Claiming because a show has a rightward tilt somehow it is an indication of a Neo-Nazi take over of America. You can say Colmes is weak, or Hannity is a blowhard, but wishing Hannity death, or blaming this show for "brainwashing" America is intellectually weak.<br /><br />BTW: Bring back Crossfire CNN! | 1pos
|
'Sorry Wrong Number' is an exercise in how to ruin everything that worked in a tightly-written 22 minute radio play, via its transformation into a hideously-padded 90 minute movie. The play was so short as to defy the need for a star but the movie is seen as a chance to sell you Barbara Stanwyck. The idea for the play just didn't have 90 minutes in it.<br /><br />The play built tension by confining listeners along with the invalid protagonist in her bedroom, which rapidly became a cage. Unfortunately it was expanded every which way until the clean machinery of the play is convoluted beyond recognition with plot, plot, plot as far as the eye can see; and secondary characters of no importance whatsoever talking the life out of things. We cut away from the room dozens of times for equally meaningless developments. There's an nightclub floor show. There's a secret chalet on a beach introduced with a clam-digging scenario. There's a chemistry lab, car trips, intrigue, sub-plots
Expanding the play just loused the whole thing up. None of it is of any quality.<br /><br />It's all pointless elaboration of the weakest variety; it has no effect on the outcome. Stanwyck is just plain wrong for the role. You want to see an excellent confined, single-set movie? Rent Rear Window. This is very confused, very limp movie. A model of efficiency converted into a showcase of deficiencies. | 0neg
|
I wanted Chad to get his just desserts and he didn't. I know. But I want to see the downfall of people like Chad. But in real life they do exist and they do achieve. And they are truly heartless. Many CEO's wear this same tag. Power and control and as long as I come out on top, the others be damned.<br /><br />I am tempted to exercise my writing abilities and pen a script where Chad literally goes to Hell. That is what he deserves. That is where he belongs. And yes, Howard ,the weakling, right along with him.<br /><br />I gave this a 9 out of 10. | 1pos
|
I was eager to see Pinero, liking the actor Benjamin Bratt. I thought it might be similar to other Hispanic themed films, like 'Before Night Falls', or 'The Sea Within' - both films that I enjoyed.<br /><br />Unfortunately, that is not the case here. The film falls short on several levels. I thought Bratt overacted, more times coming off like a swaggering quasi-cool Hispanic Matthew McConaughey (and I don't think we need another one) rather than a 'street wise' urban poet.<br /><br />His Pinero character does not have one shred of likability to him, and his art apparently does not age well, for I found the poetry he created somewhat shopworn. Like others, I could see no real reason that this guy was an important character or artist, or why exactly he was a 'New York sensation'.<br /><br />The directing style was also confusing. It's probably just me, but I was sometimes not sure what decade I was in, what action was being 'staged', and what was actually happening in real time. This jump cut editing also seems a bit dated as well.<br /><br />In short, I still like Benjamin Bratt (not that he needs an endorsement), but I did not find this to be a good film. | 0neg
|
This is one of the most unique films I've ever seen, and I'll probably remember scenes from it till the day I die. Beautiful photography? Check. Non-linear plot line and weird storytelling techniques (talking to the audience, language mixing)? Check. Haunting soundtrack? Check. Black humor? Definite check. Some of the most bizarre erotic scenes ever filmed outside of porn? Oh yeah. A mix of utter revulsion and sensuous, wayward eroticism. Certain morsels of cinema that's classified as seriously weird by most run the risk of being weird for weirdness' sake; I'm happy to say that this is not one of them. Everything adheres to the film's internal logic, which would be my biggest criticism of movies that are considered 'out there'. Goes without saying this is not for the faint-hearted. A serious, deranged noir poem, one I will relish springing upon friends without any forewarning. | 1pos
|
I was a bit put off by some of the negative comments, but it is always interesting to then view a film which is praised by some and despised by one or two. As is often the case, the negative views turn out to be more a reflection of personality rather than of serious critical scholarship. <br /><br />Putting together this film was hardly a snap. There are only a handful of survivors still alive and living in central Europe, and some refused to appear in the film. I think the film-makers were very successful in capturing the essence of the homosexual experience during the Nazi times and beyond, as reflected in the footage they obtained from the six or seven survivors who were willing to share their stories on camera.<br /><br />We really don't need any more "education" on Nazi legal machinations or conditions in concentration camps. We ARE interested in the experiences and emotions of these particular people, to see them and hear them, before they are swallowed by the inexorable march of time. The film performs this invaluable service and does it well. <br /><br />The interviews are interspersed with a general historical summary of events and their effect on the gay community in Germany during the years between the two great wars, and later on. Yes, these parts may resemble a special on the History Channel. Nothing wrong with that! <br /><br />All in all, a very professional job and a solid achievement. | 1pos
|
Please please do not put your self through this two hours of rubbish!! Do not get drawn in by the promises of sex, drugs and violence. Really really really really bad movie and cleft lip man (Tom Burke) is a terrible actor.<br /><br />This sums this movie up perfectly <br /><br />"Before I saw Donkey Punch, I was somewhat tolerant of British film. Now I feel inexplicable anger that such raging self indulgent sh*t can still make it onto the cinema screen. The world will shun this movie. There will be mass concessions of people collecting around twenty foot holes dug in the Sahara desert, just so they can symbolically bury the DVD release. " | 0neg
|
Bad acting. Bad storyline. Bad special effects. This movie was a disaster. I love vampire and zombie just as much as the next guy, but this movie sucks. The thing that i hated most was the stupid voice over. Some guy trying to push the boundary on how low his voice can go while recording it on a phone. I also hated that the acting was about as convincing as the acting done in my ninth grade drama class. This low budget film is the lamest attempt of a vampire movie I've ever seen. if u wanna watch a vampire movie watch blade. The guys that made this shouldn't quit their day job. I think rapid fire production (the people that made this) should really think if this is their true calling. | 0neg
|
I watched meanwhile returning from a night out - a bit drunk to be honest-, and found at the beginning amusing it's use of pyrotechnic camera tricks at first, but in a few minutes becomes just plain annoying replacing ideas and emotions with cheap gimmicks, besides the script reeks stupidity and Mexican high-class prejudices ( especially in the central characters.<br /><br />The seduction process it's just plain nonexistent and boring at best, the actor portraying Ulises has really nothing special in him, he's neither minimally good-looking, buoyant, charismatic or edgy he's just plain "cute" and to be honest that sucks in & out the screen, the same goes for the leading lady., she's pretty, but any person who has been in the mall, depicted in the movie knows that more dashing girls can be found there.<br /><br />The "romantic" parts have as much emotion as an infomercial, besides the girl would end death, they could have easily break up, and Ulises end up lamenting her abandoning, just by being boring.<br /><br />The "villains" are all flat images, saying and doing supposedly threatening things, but end up just padding the film.<br /><br />And as for the director's daughter, who told her she has screen presence?, the only thing she does in the film, in her film career is being an insipidly annoying spoiled girl, the scene in which she vomits summarizes his presence in Mexican cinema very well... | 0neg
|
Very well may be one of the worst sci-fi films of all-time! The cast is ridiculously stupid. The effects are laughable. Cool nudity, but I can buy magazines for that. Has anyone noticed the monster here is a genetic mutation, thereby negating the title? Space Maggot forces a 1, and prays there are no sequels. | 0neg
|
The movie has a crazy touch. The cutting may sometimes be a little confusing, but it serves the purpose. I did not know what to expect when I started looking. Was this a dark, depressing thing or a comedy? It was something of both. It was very fun, but still it had a serious and solid base. Why is a bad guy bad? Can the tough guy never get a nervous breakdown? | 1pos
|
This film is a drive-in classic! It is exactly what a low-budget movie should be: never boring. It has it all: broads, guns, bloodshed, redneck preacher-gone-bad. Lynda Carter and Belinda Balaski are the standouts in the cast, primarily when they cast off their duds! I can't wait until this comes out on DVD! It will be a proud edition to my library. | 1pos
|
This was, with all honesty, absolutely terrible. Take a really bad movie, multiply its awfulness by 100, run it over with a tank, dice it up and then glue it back together you'll get Blood Lake. Which isn't really a bad thing, because it's so SO SO bad it's almost kind of interesting. One of the things I thought was humorous was like the 15 minute ending where they showed the killer walking around doing nothing. Also, it was freaky how that scrawny hillbilly kid kept on saying he was going to bang the black chick. And I think they ended up getting it on.<br /><br />You should see this movie, it'll give you a laugh. | 1pos
|
I can't believe someone posted about this film being excessive as it is about excess; this movie is simply awful, over-rated and badly directed. Last tango in Paris is excessive, Cronenberg is excessive, even some other Polanski movies are excessive and thought-provoking and -yes!- exciting; but this one has no storyline, no character development, no excitement and terrible acting: you can surely find better ways to waste your time. | 0neg
|
In his review of this film in "Stracult", Italian film critic Marco Giusti claimed that Franco Nero's performance was undoubtedly the worst he ever gave. Ridiculously decked out as he is in a long blonde mane and hippy garb, he can't be too far wrong I guess...<br /><br />Anyway, Nero plays a bitter loner who, having lost his wife and kid in a traffic accident, voluntarily enlists for dangerous missions for an unspecified organization but then, unceremoniously, quits his job and relocates to a Carribbean island whose seas harbor the carcass of a sunken plane with a fortune locked away in its safe. The problem is that the site is infested with sharks but, of course, Nero has a penchant for killing sharks with his bare hands a' la Johnny Weissmuller. Those sequences depicting Nero's particular skills reach an unheralded level of silliness when he sky dives into the water onto a moving shark and slits its torso open without batting an eyelid! And what about his dragging a shark onto his motor boat after having previously pursued it on foot?! <br /><br />I don't really know why I should go on writing in detail about such trash (especially since most of you probably won't ever have the chance to see this for yourselves) but, then again, why not? Anyway, there's a love scene early on between our Franco and a native girl, a couple of fistfights with the local bully (featuring a running gag of Nero sticking a piece of chewing gum onto his opponent's forehead), an alliance with a buffoonish salvage expert, a member of the organization is hot on his heels, as is the ubiquitous Edoardo Fajardo who is obviously interested in claiming the fortune for himself and, in the climax, an all-out shark attack replete with fake floating limbs.<br /><br />Director Casterallari (who frequently appears in his own films a' la Hitchcock...yeah, right!) has a fairly large part here as a killer pursuing the man from the Organization! He was still fixated on sharks a couple of years later when he made THE LAST SHARK (1981), a film which was partly shot in Malta and featured such second-tier American actors as James Franciscus and Vic Morrow. For his pains, Castellari was even taken to court by Steven Spielberg and Universal Studios for plagiarising JAWS (1975)...although, if one is to believe Castellari's own statements at the 61st Venice Film Festival, Spielberg and Co. were merely envious that THE LAST SHARK had been more profitable (in the expenditure/profit ratio) than JAWS itself...!! | 0neg
|
Though it might well describe a prodigy I point out some of the negative things about this glossy movie. <br /><br />The boy struggles with his feelings and, at least for awhile, under pressure, wants to abandon his training and live a common life. That was seen also in "Little man Tate" or "Searching for Bobby Fischer".<br /><br />Unlike these, though the movie tries to be sentimental, on most parts it is cold. The boy actions are often impudent, especially in relation with his parents. It's not sufficient that he is talented in music art: he must excel in math, sciences, market analysis. <br /><br />The way his parents act is unrealistic. That could be excused if you think it's a "feel-good" movie. The grandfather buys... a flight simulator where he plays... 3000 hours.<br /><br />What is with his mother using English words especially when she must be annoying? Or was that for the line: "Is that your English humor"? There should be other way to suggest snobbery. | 0neg
|
The rise and fall of comic Lenny Bruce (Dustin Hoffman). Bruce was one of the first comedians to use swearing in his act and was actually taken to court over it. The movie also chronicles his marriage to stripper Honey Harlow (Valerie Perrine).<br /><br />Bob Fosse was a strange choice to direct this--he had only done two musicals before ("Sweet Charity" and "Cabarat"), but "Cabaret" was such a huge hit I guess he could pick and choose what he wanted. He shoots it in black and white and uses a documentary style approach by interviewing Bruces wife, mother and agent and then flashing to those scenes. It does work but the film is extremely depressing. The black and white is very stark and gives the film a cold look and feeling. Also, I found nothing funny in Hoffman doing Bruce's routines. It's not that he's bad (he's actually very good), but the tone of the film is not humorous.<br /><br />As I said, Hoffman is good but Perrine is spectacular. She gives a very strong, nuanced performance. Also, she does an extremely erotic strip tease at the beginning of the film and holds her own in a (mild) lesbian scene.<br /><br />It's worth catching but you'll probably be depressed by the end. If this film weren't such a downer it would probably be better known. | 0neg
|
I am a descendant of John Wesley Hardin, of whom this movie was made. My great grandmother was his niece. I think this movie was a marvelous tribute because John Wesley was an educated, cultural person. He just didn't have a lot of patience when it came to certain factors. Like shooting a man for snoring. I am honored that the Hollywood "factor" would cast Rock Hudson as John Wesley, as John W was a very handsome man according to the tintographs I have of him from my g-grandmother. This is an under-rated movie worth watching and the female lead is indeed an actress under-rated - she is lovely and supportive. A grand western! AMB | 1pos
|
I saw the original stage version of Oh! Calcutta! when they performed in San Francisco in the early 1970s. We didn't know what to expect and were a little hesitant about going to a play that was often raided! <br /><br />We paid a princely sum for our tickets - $35 and that wasn't for the first row! Our seats were second row-center and those rows were very narrow! You can imagine our surprise at being so close to the action! As soon as the production began, several people in the front row stood up and left the theater, which only made our seats that much better! <br /><br />It was a great play! We loved it and laughed through most of it. The only tense part of the play was when we heard the sirens of emergency vehicles in the street outside of the theater! For a moment, we thought it was one of the raids! We held our ground and remained seated and were the richer for it!<br /><br />See the movie and see a part of our sexual history! I know I will! | 1pos
|
Robin Williams is probably the best Peter Pan I've seen. Well, at least, a grownup Peter Pan. It's not a usual role for Robin compared to Mrs. Doubtfire or Good Morning Vietnam. He's a workaholic to get away from his family, along with his drinking. Then, his kids are gone and look who tells him that Captain Hook kidnapped his kids. In comes Maggie Smith. She is a wonderful Wendy!! This movie has it's ups and downs, of course. But, Robin's humor along with Dustin Hoffman's performance as Hook and Julia Roberts as Tinkerbell makes this movie a perfect childhood movie that can be watched with the whole family! | 1pos
|
I was looking forward to seeing this, particularly as it features Sean Penn and marks the only film ever to have been allowed access to the inner sanctum of the United Nations in New York. Whilst Sean Penn delivers a typically solid performance (reminding me a little of Robert Di Niro in this), Nicole Kidman is totally unconvincing as a translator at the UN specializing in the language of her (fictional) African homeland. If we accept the plot as plausible (which is already a bit of a leap), you can't help but wonder at the ineptitude of the CIA, FBI, NYPD and other agencies of law and order in dealing with the threat to a visiting African dictator. One man (who had earlier been injured in an explosion) is tasked with tracking down Nicole Kidman alone. He apparently manages, in the space of a couple of hours, to check every airport in the New York area, and call all of her friends and acquaintances. As for the haunting African music which turns out to be coming from Ms. Kidman's flute, well I couldn't help laughing. If you want a movie about international politics and the problems faced in Africa, watch Hotel Rwanda. If you want to hear Nicole Kidman delivering her lines in an endlessly changing accent, this is the one for you. | 0neg
|
This was my sleeper of the year. Little attention was given a film about a kid searching for God after his grandpa dies. Yet young Joseph Cross will win your heart as he starts what could be a terrific career. The film is hardly perfect but is so different from most other films and how can it be so funny. Well it is. Sometimes films work & some don't. If more people saw this gem of a movie, then more would love it. | 1pos
|
Considering that my country is a neighbor of the former Yugoslavian Federation, I guess I know a lot more about that conflict than the other western-world viewers... When I saw it, I simply could not take sides... was it the muslims or the serbs to blame? I guess neither... Yugoslavia was of no use anymore... communism was down in Eastern Europe, there was no need for an western-oriented outpost behind the Iron Curtain... so NATO decided it must be somewhat erased, diminished... I am ashamed to admit that at a certain point during this war, the leaders of my country sold out to NATO like prostitutes and allowed Alliance planes to cross Romanian territory en-route to the conflict zone... OUR NEIGHBOURS.<br /><br />So, the main character should be viewed as a basic person who lost his family and is loosing more and more of his soul as time goes by and he pursues his vengeance... as soon as you attach a Citizenship (American) and a Name (Guy) to his personna he becomes the representative of a nation that has been policing the World for its own dirty purposes for the better part of the 20th century... and then it becomes much harder to root for him... too bad ... Why is it that in every movie, the main characters have to be Americans? <br /><br />There are some moments during this movie that made my heart stop, like the massacre near the bus... such pain, such rage, such unrelenting hatred against the humanity itself...<br /><br />Either way, the film is very powerful and it depicts only a small amount of the atrocities that took place during that war... We should have learned a lesson back there... but we are at it again... I guess this is the tagline of the movie: War is bad... war is in our nature... WE ARE BAD! | 0neg
|
David Decotau is a competent director. He has directed numerous Full Moon pictures like Puppet Master and Shrieker under pseudonyms. Those were both good films. However, his homosexuality seems to be his main motive for directing these days, and young buff guys in their boxer briefs seem to be his major visual reference. This is all fine and well, but he disguises these films as teen horror movies, not unlike Scream, and packages them the same. A typical straight male is not going to enjoy this type of movie, unless he is hiding something! I am getting sick of Mr. Decotau's films. They are polluting movie shelves and, quite frankly...gay or not, are really bad movies. This man ran out of steam long before Full Moon ran out of business. He must be stopped! | 0neg
|
If I had seen this film before reading the book first, I still would not have liked it very much. However, as I had read the book, I cannot write this review without comparing the two.<br /><br />Compared to the book, this film was horrible. Not merely because the pace was slow, or because of the pointless changes they made to the plot in places.<br /><br />No, what ruined it for me was the choice of actors. There is not a one, I think, who completely fit their character, but more so for the main characters. Take Kristin, for example; in the book, she is, at the oldest, about 18. And yet the actress looked 28. Kristin is described as being incredibly beautiful; and yet, the actress was, if not directly ugly, certainly not pretty or attractive in any way. Kristin is supposed to be sweet, innocent and mild of manner--in every way the epitome of the the gentle young virgin. And yet I saw few such characteristics in the way the actress portrayed her.<br /><br />And Erlend. Erlend was supposed to be handsome, dashing, sweeping her off her feet. The very Romeo to her Juliet. The actor looked retarded half of the time, his mouth hanging open; the other half was nothing special.<br /><br />And then there are the pointless changes in the other characters. Kristin's bedmate, Ingebjørg (and she was the ONLY bedmate...Helga was very little involved with anything in the book) was supposed to be blonde and very fat. Kristin's father was supposed to be very fair and knightly. Likewise, her almost-fiancé was supposed to be plump and talkative, too. And her sister was supposed to be about 6 years her younger; NOT the same age.<br /><br />Possibly petty complaints: but actors make the film. Choose actors that cannot play their part, and you have a bad film. It's as simple as that. If you want to adapt a book to the screen, please do so as accurately as possible. Truth be told, I couldn't make myself watch the last half an hour of the film, it was annoying me so much. In the book, in liked Kristin; I had sympathy for her cause. In the film, I did not, at all. | 0neg
|
Having become interested after slowly being drawn in, by the tease of what was to come I battled through poor acting and sets, for the end finale. Of course, what does this say about me? However, reading so many of the comments here about the authenticity of the tape and the characters, I would point out this. At the end, in the credits, it does say that all the characters and events are fiction and any relation to any real character or event are purely coincidental.<br /><br />The premise for the film is good, based on how voyeuristic we, as cinema goers and a society, have become but it doesn't do itself any favours by being so badly made. | 0neg
|
When I first heard that a movie is going to be made by the book "Eragon" by Christopher Paolini, I must say I was very delighted, and I was even more delighted when I heard that Stefen Fangmeier will be the director. I have read the book, and thaught:"What a great movie this is going to be". Unfortunately, I was wrong. First of all, I would dare to say that half of the events that happened in the book weren't shown in the movie at all(reason: Lord of the Rings has less then 400 pages and the movie lasts around 3 hours; Eragon has around 500 pages and it lasts around hour and a half). As a result, instead of complexed, unpredictable fantasy plot you get simple, one-way heading fairy tale. Characters that play very significent role in book(like Murtagh, Ajihad and Angela) are hardly even mentioned in the movie, so that it becomes centered on pretty much only 3 characters-Eragon, Saphira and Brom. Villains and locations lack imagination, so they look cheap and ordinary. Choice of actors is, in my opinion, good, except Edward Speleers. There are way too much "memorable quotes" in the movie, so that movie becomes kind of too much theatrical.Everybody, from director to actors failed, but still, I personally bealive that the biggest failure is Peter Buchman, screenwriter. Although he had a fantastic material to work on, he managed to ruin it, and make a pathetic screenplay from a fantastic bestseller. Only bright side of the movie is always top-of-the-class John Malkovich(King Galbatorix), pretty solid performance by Jeremy Irons (Brom), but most of all dragon Saphira (voice by Rachel Weisz, whose vocal abilities are on very desirable level) | 0neg
|
Adam Sandler as Happy Gilmore brings laughs once again to the career of Adam Sandler. This movie is one of the movies Sandler started out with. Billy Madison and Happy Gilmore are both the two movies Adam Sandler started out with. Going Overboard was no professional movie at all. With Billy Madison and Happy Gilmore you have Happy Madison Productions. Happy Madison has done well good movies. They did the first Deuce Bigelow and they did Dickie Roberts Former Child Star. Adam has come from Saturday Night Live with all he knows and has acted with what he knows. David Spade, Chris Farley, Dana Carvey, Mike Myers, Ben Stiller, Steve Martin, and Bill Murray are the other men who have done well after Saturday Night Live. Adam Sandler still has a great career ahead of him. | 1pos
|
Making a movie like this one should not be legal. With a cast completely devoid of talent and a story that prompts you to pinch yourself out of the nightmare this movie epitomizes the word terrible. Don't see it unless you find migraines endearing. | 0neg
|
This movie was a nice surprise,the cast did a great job and Thora Birch showed she can be a very diverse actress.I will buy this DVD very soon,so I can share it with my friends and get their thought on it.I don't agree that this qualify's as a true horror movie, but the directer does a great job!With the script,and the actors earned their money.Great movie with a lot of good guessing and some on the edge of your seat moments.The American audience has a different view on most English made movies .I think not enough of them make it to the states to be seen!This should have had advertising and a lot of promotion along with a movie premier,with the cast on hand opening night the studio would have made a great deal more money with this one. | 1pos
|
Ask me what time it is. Very very very strange and very entertaining bit of European cinema from Wacko Jaco Van Dormael, a former circus clown turned director. This film about fate, love, and childhood fantasies gone awry is very hard to describe. Imagine a kids film directed by Lars Von Trier, add a dash of "Amelie," a scent of "Donnie Darko," a sprinkle of Lynchian strangeness, and a good heaping of Terry Gilliam inspired wackiness, place in a blender, then travel back in time (as this movie came long before and probably inspired "Amelie" and "Donnie Darko") and voilà, you'll have "Toto." Sometimes heartbreaking, sometimes funny (everybody seems to love those dancing tulips), sometimes weird, always captivating, this is a film for people who enjoy non-linear and creative story-telling. Also, that much talked about floating plastic bag stuff from "American Beauty" is taken straight from this film's unforgettable final scenes. Dormael seemed to have so much good stuff going on in this film, it's ashame he's only made one film since this, as any film buff who watches it will no doubt imagine a few more great films being pulled out of Dormael's magician's hat. | 1pos
|
It's not often that you see a film that is pure, unmitigated crap. This is one of them. (Hell, even the 2/10 rating is generous)<br /><br />The humour used is film is unspeakably infantile. Some of if, though, is very much of its time. There are some sly digs at the cult of celebrity and Britain in the 1980s.<br /><br />The only thing in this film that did it for me was Mel Smith's slightly sympathetic role as the unfortunate alien, Bernard. While we're on the subject, I don't even know why Smith, and his co-star, Griff Rhys-Jones ever bothered making this piece of trash in the first place!!!<br /><br />One major turn-off for me was the rather gaudy, tacky, cheaply-made look of the film. In fact, the whole thing looks rather false and plastic!!<br /><br />Compared to "Morons From Outer Space", director Mike Hodges' previous effort of the decade, "Flash Gordon" look like a Bafta award-winning masterpiece.<br /><br />If you've got nothing else better to do, I really would NOT recommend renting this film out!! | 0neg
|
Most of these 9/11-Conspiracy Theorists think that USA, Jews or India planned 9/11, to blame it on the Muslims - do harm Islam, or to start a "war on Terror" (to get more power and oil). What a great idea.... for a movie. Because it would be a great plan, if it could be executed without anyone knowing. <br /><br />9/11 happened, and the conspiracy theories was there - from the start. Many conspiracy theorists believed that USA or others planned 9/11, even though they had not examined the subject - it was their prejudge, that USA or Jews are behind every bad thing happening in human history, from the biblical-flood, to the plague in the middle-ages to finally 9/11. <br /><br />The thing is that conspiracy theories WANTS Jews or USA to be the one responsible - and they fit one-sided facts and witness-testimony into their theory. <br /><br />The problem with conspiracy theories is that they are not scientific of nature - but political. <br /><br />Conspiracy theorists, when they are making their conspiracy theory, starts with the conclusion and then works his or her way from there. What ever fact nearly fits the theory are made to fit, no matter how much they have to manipulate. <br /><br />Conspiracy theorists would never exist if they wanted to listen to people, beyond themselves. Conspiracy theorists only believe in them selves, or kindred spirits, they are like religious fanatics. They don't want to listen to other people. <br /><br />These 9/11-Conspiracy Theories all have logical explanations. If only the Conspiracy theorists had the brains or will to do their own research, and listen to other people. There is a logical explanation for all the 9/11-Conspiracy theories. Just look here: 911myths.com But I know that 9/11-Conspiracy theorists will never look at the site, only because they want to keep their prejudges that Americans or Jews are behind every evil act in the history of the world, including 9/11.<br /><br />About 9/11: <br /><br />If USA planned 9/11, then why haven't a single person from the Police, Fire fighters, NSA-, FBI, CIA, Military, Air-traffic-control-people, most of the house of representatives, demolition-experts, Scientists, rescue-workers and the whole Bush-administration squealed and told the world about the largest mass-murder in modern American History? Why haven't someone revealed this great secret? Because an attack of that magnitude, on its own soil, would involve thousands of the governments own people, and these conspiracy theorists tell us that all these thousands of people had no ethical-problems with keeping the secret of this mass-murder.... Conspiracy theorists live in a fantasy-world.<br /><br />USA did not plan 9/11, all logic and reason speaks against it.<br /><br />Also, if the USA planned it, then why did they use 19 men from Saudi-Arabia??? Would it not be more clever to use 19 Iraqies, Iranians, Afghans or maybe even North-Koreans as patsies??? If people from Iraq would had been in the airplanes 9/11, then the "war on terror" would have been more easy to justify. And if this USA-Shadow-Government planned 9/11, then they would not have used 19 Saudies.<br /><br />USA, Jews or India did NOT plan 9/11, get over your childhood-fantasies conspiracy-theorists!<br /><br />Sane people, please click onto this site, it will answer all questions about the 9/11-conspiracy theories:<br /><br />911myths.com | 0neg
|
It almost looks like Boris Karloff eventually became the embodiment of the horrific monsters he played for a period of approximately 50 years. Why? Because even for several years after his death, he kept on appearing in tiny horror productions like as if he was still amongst the living. In reality, however, these movies were completed since years already but they never got released immediately for whatever reason. In fact, Boris himself never got the see the four last films on his own repertoire ("Island of the Snake People", "Cauldron of Blood", "The Fear Chamber" and "The Incredible Invasion") and that's probably a GOOD thing, considering the quality of these films. They're all uninspired and dull films, cheaply produced with foreign money and directed without the slightest sense of professionalism. Jack Hill, creator such cool movies like "Spider Baby" and blaxploitation-classic "Foxy Brown", is credited as co-director but his influence is barely noticeable, to say the least. This movie features an incredibly overlong opening scene in which a freaky midget resurrects a dead girl from her coffin. The sacrifice of one single chicken and a crazy voodoo-dance apparently suffice for that. The only point of this intro is to make clear that the events take place on an island where the natives still practice the voodoo religion and that they're capable to do supernatural things. Boris Karloff's character is somewhat the patriarch of this island, and he certainly doesn't like it when an ambitious police lieutenant arrives to clean up the place. "Island of the Snake People" is a very slow and tame movie, despite the premise of resurrected corpses and ancient voodoo rituals. The zombies look deader than when they actually dead, so certainly don't expect any brain-devouring monsters that hunt down everything that moves. The concept is actually similar to such films as Jacques Tourneur's "I walked with a Zombie" or "White Zombie", since the living dead serve as slaves to work in the fields. Naturally this movie lacks the style and frightening atmosphere of the aforementioned titles and even the make-up effects are poorer, despite being made over 30 years later. Boris Karloff is great as always, but he can't carry the whole movie by himself. Instead of letting him run crazy snake cults, they should have allowed him to enjoy a quiet and peaceful last couple of years. Poor Boris. If it's any consolation, you'll be remembered for earlier films a lot more. | 0neg
|
It's rare that the same creative team are still around 4 films into a series, and even rarer that a 4th film has anything new to add, so this makes a refreshing change.<br /><br />The tone is a little uneven, with Coscarelli seeming torn between delivering the slapstick gore and laughs of the previous 2 sequels and going for the darker more surreal approach of the first movie, so a lot of Reggie's scenes seem like they could have been pasted in from a different movie. Speaking of which large chunks are made up of deleted scenes from "Phantasm", which, while suggesting money problems during development, actually works very well in bookending the events so far.<br /><br />It also goes some way to filling in the gaps, giving the Tall Man a proper origin story and answering a few questions while still leaving enough up in the air to justify the 5th film which is apparently in production currently.<br /><br />That said, even if a 5th film never materialises, this makes a nicely apocalyptic ending to a series that has actually come to life in it's sequels. There's still plenty of laughs, but there's a very downbeat tone and some nicely creepy touches, making this a very enjoyable, if slightly schizophrenic addition to a fun series. | 1pos
|
This movie had it's ups and downs. I enjoyed the scenery in India and the way the people of India dressed, danced and all the things that make India so colorful and different. It acts on the religon and culture of India. But what this movie could have done without is the couple that traveled there. They were so annoying I forgot who they were. I know the man was named Micheal and he was having problems in his relationship with his girlfriend for God knows why she tries to make the relationship work out with Micheal as he tells her that he's leaving her and going to India to check out some Budahs. They decide to go and while they are in India they come across a strange lady that claims to be a reincarnation of a servant girl that once lived in a paradise garden with royal subjects. The girl in the past falls in love with another man and seduces him but there is no indication of what happened to them other than the fact that they fell in love. Centuries past and in comes Micheal and the strange lady stops at nothing to get him back. Micheal soon begins to think the lady is crazy for accusing him of being a reincarnated monk and she finds herself lost. | 0neg
|
The two opera singers are SUCH bad actors, I wondered if they were out of budget for some competent ones. The lip-synchronization was TERRIFYING. They didn't bother AT LEAST watching some operas to see that a soprano cannot possibly sing all those high notes with her mouth almost closed and relaxed like she's singing Christmas songs in a family event. Even Kathleen Battle cannot do that.<br /><br />I wouldn't even want to talk about how RIDICULOUSLY WWI was depicted. Honestly! People DROWNED in mud in Passchendale (sp?) and here's we've got solid ground, tidy trenches, healthy soldiers, etc....<br /><br />Bad dialogues (i.e. 'I have lice')???!!!!! There are far too many fictitious characters. People had shell shock. Here, we've got plenty of characters that seem like Harry Potter counterparts. As somebody else also stated.<br /><br />NOT worth watching. EXTREMELY overrated and boring. By the time I watched half of it, I thought it was an avant-garde movie because it also seemed so naive, but the directors were clearly striving for a typical, joyful Christmas film. And they failed. | 0neg
|
Shirley's dad doesn't have the money to bet on a horse race so he puts up his daughter as collateral! Furthermore, nobody finds this particularly alarming. Shirley takes being abandoned by her father and living with seedy strangers pretty casually. It's supposed to be a charming comedy based on a Damon Runyan story, but the plot is not only boring but rather disturbing, and it's hardly worth a chuckle. Fortunately for both Menjou and Bickford, they would survive this and go on to make some fine films. Sadly, Dell, who plays the love interest of both Menjou and Bickford, died in an auto accident only a week after the film was released at age 19. | 0neg
|
MGM had Greta Garbo quite busy making films during 1928 and 1929 as the studio saw the approach of sound film possibly destroying one of their top assets. Nobody knew what the outcome of Garbo's career would be at the time.<br /><br />Thus Greta Garbo made silents until 1930's "Anna Christie". This silent film is not really silent at all. It has a very sophisticated score for its time, including sound effects, crowd noises, and even singing during musical numbers, with long shots of the singers so you can't see that there is no true synchronization with the singers themselves.<br /><br />The story is that of 50ish John Sterling (Lewis Stone) and his young wife, Lillie (Greta Garbo). The two are embarking on a cruise to Java so that John can mix business with pleasure. His business is to look over some plantations that he may buy. The pleasure is his desire to hunt and shoot a tiger while in Java. On the boat the couple meet Prince De Gace, played by Nils Asther. John is by no means a neglectful husband, but at age 50 he has largely left his romantic days behind him. This makes Lillie a likely target for the charming prince and his silver tongue. He makes a play for her right off the bat, and continues his chase as the Sterlings remain guests in his home. Lillie is torn, but tries her best to avoid the prince and his advances. One night during their stay, after returning from a day of looking at plantations, John sees the silhouettes of the prince and Lillie on the drawn shade of the house just after the prince has grabbed her for a quick kiss. What will John do about this situation? The acting in this film is quite well done. Asther comes across well as the slimy but attractive prince, and Lewis Stone was a wonderful silent actor. His surprise when he first sees the couple in an embrace, and his look of both great disdain and knowing when he later sees the prince flirting with a servant girl says it all. Yet, like Garbo, some of his best performances would come with talking pictures where he could both artfully play the cad in the MGM precodes as well as Judge Hardy of the Andy Hardy series fame.<br /><br />Existing prints of this film are quite well preserved, and I highly recommend it for silent film enthusiasts. | 1pos
|
This film captures perfectly one of the many faults of capitalism, it portrays an extremely sad situation of the desperate struggle that some people have everyday to earn money. In this case it follows the exploitation of foreign workers who came to England (London) in desperate search of work, and the lengths they will go earn money. The central character (Angie) played by Kierston Wareing is a self employed recruitment agent an ambitious and vibrant women who wont take no for an answer, she has a certain cheek and charm that is compelling and shows us some level of kindness, but also has a darker side which she has no problems in showing to people. Her friend and flatmate (Rose) played by Juliet Ellis is portrayed as the more rational minded and frankly kinder person, who relapses that sometimes it's not always about the money. An inevitable twist of faith comes for Angie where she is put in the position of victim, but does this change her views on life?<br /><br />It is very well directed, showing the viewer the dull and bleak industrial estates and caravan parks of London which really suits the story and the depressive feel of the script.<br /><br />Ken Loach and Paul Laverty done a great job with this film and like most of Loachs films is a striking and damning account of the depression to be found in working class England. | 1pos
|
Emissary was Deep Space Nine's pilot episode. And not a bad one either. A fitting beginning to a 7 year story.<br /><br />I don't think it was perfect, like The Next Generation's Encounter at Farpoint, but it did introduce all the characters and settings of this incredible show. Emissary reminds me of Babylon 5's Pilot Episode: The Gathering, which was aired a month after Emissary.<br /><br />Deep Space Nine's first couple of years weren't THAT great, but then the show started to rise with a great storyline and great situations, such as the Klingons' separation from the Federation, Sisko's destiny and the Federation's war against the Dominion and Cardassian alliance. And Emissary was the 2 hour series premiere that gave birth to all this. Emissary has a good storyline. Sisko's encounter with the prophets beat any alien encounters ever seen before in Star Trek history. Sisko's background related to the Battle of Wolf 359 as well as his meeting with Picard make the series an excellent sci-fi drama. Kira started out as the angry vengeful Bajoran and grew intensively over the past 7 years, becoming an incredible leader and fighter. I was astonished to see Miles and Keiko O'Brien becoming part of the show, which affected deeply their personal lives as they moved from the excessive perfection of the USS Enterprise to the station that resembles our gritty reality rather than Roddenberry's perfect future.<br /><br />Rick Berman and Michael Piller did a great job creating this show and keeping it alive and healthy after Roddenberry's death, while giving a fitting end to The Next Generation.<br /><br />Paramount Pictures did a great job, creating both the pilot and the show. I give Emissary a 9 out of 10. | 1pos
|
I have to disagree with the previous commentator's opinion. Washington's accent was about as spot on for a "Yank" as was we'll say Pitt's was in "Snatch" to an Irish tinker's. The movie while obviously low-budget (no different than we'll say "My Beautiful Laundrette" or "Mona Lisa" at this particular time in UK productions), yet its concentration on the inherent drama of a confused and conflicted ex-Para in a non-empathetic society totally over-rode its budgetary limitations. <br /><br />This was an above-average movie (and a rare one) of its genre and adequately displays Washington's versatility as an actor. | 1pos
|
What a musical masterpiece that movie is. Just listen to the variety of songs and styles provided by Bette Midler and the rest of the cast. But the story has it's downside. Too many subjects, too many levels, and the make up department didn't do their best job when giving Midler and Caan the "age" look. It's too plastic. But Ms. Midler still is a great singer / actress under the bad make up, so I can still recomend this movie. Bring tissues! | 1pos
|
When I was a boy, Madame Satã was a legend in Rio de Janeiro. João Francisco dos Santos was born in the turn of the century, and was famous for being a very controversial person: homosexual, black, poor, artist, a very violent and excellent fighter and a symbol of Lapa, where he lived. This movie is the dramatization of the ten years before the creation by João Francisco dos Santos of the character Madame Satã, inspired in the 1930 Cecil B. DeMille's Madam Satan (unfortunately, this movie has not been released in Brazil and I have never had the chance to see it). 'Madame Satã' is another great example of the marvelous moment of the Brazilian Cinema. The direction is very precise, using old parts in the city of Rio de Janeiro specially in Lapa and Santa Teresa and a high level photography to recreate life in the 30's in Old Rio. The cast is fantastic, highlighting the performance of the stunning Lázaro Ramos, who is also the leader actor of the excellent and very recommended 'O Homem Que Copiava'. The story, as I previously mentioned, is limited to a short period before the raise of Madame Satã to the scenario of Rio de Janeiro and is very realistic, inclusive showing the homosexual activity of João Francisco. My vote is eight.<br /><br />Title (Brazil): 'Madame Satã' | 1pos
|
I'm kicking myself for having missed this show until the final week of the first season (at least I managed to catch several repeats inside of a single night!). Whatever I've been gallivanting about doing on Friday nights can't have been as good as this.<br /><br />While some might object that the show anthropomorphizes, despite its naming of the little creatures and its soap-ish format it doesn't go overboard in this respect. Meerkats are very social animals to begin with, and it's part of what makes them ideal for this kind of program. Also, while some would argue that it was unconscionable to let some of the animals die, I am inclined to disagree. I had a hard time with watching the loss of pups, and if the show were filmed as entertainment alone, I'd not have condoned such noninterference. But it isn't. It's science first, and scientists filming in the wild generally interfere with nature's own course to the least extent possible. There's room for argument about this practice, granted, but the sadnesses that happen on this show are NOT simply human hard-heartedness.<br /><br />That said, sadness doesn't last long at Meerkat Manor. These are some very funny, frequently affectionate, and bold little creatures. They are fascinating, they are captivating, and they are downright addictive, so do plan to curtail your social life accordingly--or tell all your friends and get a bigger couch. | 1pos
|
I was drawn into this unusual independent film on cable. I call it unusual because how often are men really truthful about their actions and desires? I felt the man who made this wanted to be understood.<br /><br />If you like it, make sure to catch the follow-up film called "Manhood". I felt so lucky to stumble across it. The actors who play Jack, Faith, and their son are in this one too. How lucky is that! Jack's relationship with his son is touching, and rings very true.<br /><br />I hope there will be a third installment here, making this a trilogy. Can Jack overcome his inner dog? I believe men are really like this, and am so impressed with the honesty here.<br /><br />Just a note on the music, there is Bruce Springsteen music in both films. I don't think "The Boss" allowed his songs to be used here because he needed the money. Check it out! | 1pos
|
Disposable twenty-somethings, each a stereotypical self-absorbed kid with designs on winning a cool million on this reality show which is a cross between Survivor and Real World, find themselves in quite the dilemma:the producer of the show they represent is a deranged sicko, his psychopathy a result of his dismissal on a "Bachellorette" type of reality show, using his equally nutty brother, who hangs on his every command, to carry out a massacre, because you see once a contestant is eliminated or "voted off", they really are ELIMINATED.<br /><br />The film's sole novelty is seeing Edward Furlong as the nutcase producer, who opens the film stalking Jaime Pressly(..I guess she was friends with the director or something, stopping by because she owed him a favor, I guess), successful in getting revenge for how she duped him in front of millions of viewers for another. Furlong sits in this room, watching monitors placed throughout the mansion and it's grounds, his voice barking orders and teases to the contestants, before and after they discover what happens once you are a loser.<br /><br />The games become more and more clever and violent as times goes by(..not enough to satisfy, however), the remaining survivors trying to form a plan to escape their unfortunate predicament. The cast chosen are all attractive, with athletic, toned bodies, their attitudes and mores appropriate for each stock character, represented by the actors / actresses without a hint of depth..they are designed specifically one-dimensional, representing the hunky bad boy, hick cowboy, Latina chick with an attitude, gay and slightly chubby goofball, shy Asian girl with martial arts skills, black intellectual(..his dialogue, particularly when he speaks "scholarly" is as artificial as it gets), hot beach bunny who comes from money and is easy to seduce, etc.<br /><br />Don't worry, the film also provides the viewer with the token blonde "final girl" in Laura Ramsey(..one of the new horror "it girls", having starred in such recent flicks as "The Covenant", "Venom", and "The Ruins") so that all the slasher guidelines are fulfilled. The violence is tame(..the usual beheading, followed by the head roll down a hill, an arm taken off, finger hacked away, all presented in such a way that look completely underwhelming) and I think one can tell that most of the money went to Furlong instead of proper make-up effects trumping our desire to see these characters die in a properly horrible manner. We aren't even given any nudity as I guess these girls were too prudish to bother flashing us some skin for burdening ourselves through this crap. The film's goal is obvious..a black comic parody on reality programming, and using the slasher template as a means to kill off these greedy partyers who enjoy the lavish location before terror descends upon them. Furlong is often remarking to himself, inside his "headquarters" regarding what his future victims discuss with themselves, and his character, devilish grin intact, peeps on the sexual(..and bathroom) activities of the females. The reactions of the characters as they are terrorized might amuse, since I'm sure many of us have fantasized, in times past, the demise of these immature reality show types who back-stab and bemoan each other for financial gain or if just for the hell of it. Susan Ward is your eye candy for the movie, the sex pot who gets a little "off the top" when she attempts to escape from the grounds. A constant is near-escapes and how Furlong, time and again, prevails to stop them in the nick of time. Daniel Franzese is Furlong's unstable, mentally handicapped and easily manipulative brother Claude. Another movie pointing out poor Furlong's faltering career. | 0neg
|
"Galaxy of Terror" is a movie that I saw for the first time almost 20 years ago and my reaction to this movie back then was "OH THIS MOVIE IS DISGUSTING!!!" I just saw it again recently, and my reaction was pretty much the same as it was the first time. "Galaxy of Terror" is a gory, disgusting low budget sci-fi/horror flick that's nothing more than a third-rate ripoff of Ridley Scott's far superior 1979 classic "Alien". You want to know the funniest thing about this movie? It's hard to believe that James Cameron was the production designer of "Galaxy of Terror". Yes! This is the same James Cameron who went on to direct big box-office smash hits such as the first "Alien" sequel "Aliens, the two "Terminator" pictures, "The Abyss", "True Lies", and the current #1 box-office blockbuster of all time, the Oscar-winning "Titanic". Of course the big excuse for Cameron's presence here is that he was very much unknown when he worked on "Galaxy of Terror". I'm sure today that this movie is one project that he never mentions. And well he shouldn't. Another funny thing about "Galaxy of Terror" is the cast. What long time veteran character actor Ray Walston is doing in this movie is an enigma. Robert Englund is also featured here, a few years before taking on his most famous role, that of Freddy Krueger in the "Nightmare on Elm Street" movies. And Erin Moran of TV's "Happy Days" should be ashamed of herself for agreeing to appear in this (she also gets the unfortunate task of having the most gruesome sendoff in the film, a moment that still makes me cringe big time). "Galaxy of Terror" was produced by low-budget meister Roger Corman. Low budget indeed. This film is so poorly made that you never get a good look at the monsters featured on screen. The special effects are cheesy; the screenplay appears to had been written in 2 days; and the acting is pathetic. But what keeps "Galaxy of Terror" from being one of the very worst movies ever made is that it's over in 81 minutes, and it's quite fast-paced. So it ends fast. Plus there are a couple of entertaining moments that were kind of exciting. But overall, it's really not worth anybody's time. Unless you want to watch some truly sickening moments, then tune in. If you dare. <br /><br />*1/2 (out of four) | 0neg
|
Don't be fooled by the # of perfect 10's this has been given or by anything over a 7.5 rating. It's not quite that good. It's more your general, run-of-the-mill, movie-of-the-week... another of those oh-so-common Based On A True Story Of A Southern White Trash Trailer Park Woman With A Wickedly Messed Up Life. The story is kind of interesting but the character development fell short as did the script and acting talent. The last 25 minutes or so woke me up and got me re-interested with the slight twists, turns, and wows but the first 90+ was a pretty big Yawn Question Mark Yawn. Why exactly did this woman do what she did? What made her so screwed up? It needed less commercials and a better writer and maybe this story could have been better told. Oh well. I won't tell you not to see this because if you're ever on a game show with a topic of Serial Killer Southern Women, you might be one up on your competition... but surely don't go out of your way to see this one. It's only average to below-average and you won't miss anything. | 0neg
|
A mysterious princess arrives at the Chan home, where she is shot. Collapsing, she manages to write, "Captain K," on the desk pad. "Are you sure she's dead, Pop?" Tommy asks. "Death, my son, is the reckoning of heaven. In this case, most complicated reckoning," states philosophical Charlie, lifting a line from Biggers' Behind That Curtain.<br /><br />This one, Number 42 in the series and the first with Roland Winters in the title role, does not augur well for the remainder of the Monogram efforts in this inept re-make of Mr Wong in Chinatown. Mr Winters is a poor substitute for Sidney Toler (not to mention Boris Karloff). He moves stiffly, and his accent is poor stuff indeed. A less inspired actor to play the part of Chan could not possibly be imagined, although I should mention that Winters was to improve considerably in his later Chan characterizations.<br /><br />Scott Darling has done very little to update his Wong script and changing the dwarf to a small boy is just about the last straw. Also, Beaudine's direction does not compare well with Nigh's. Admittedly, this entry has obviously been made on an extremely tight budget. | 0neg
|
It's too bad, too, because the idea had a lot of potential. It just needed a better script, better songs, actors who could actually act and a director who knew what he was doing.<br /><br />Mostly though, this movie is an exercise of ego for one Joe Brooks. He directs, he acts, he sings, he produces. Presumably, he also cast Shelley Hack, whose last name pretty much sums up the state of her acting ability, in the lead female role.<br /><br />Where to start? The acting, if it can be called that, is an abomination. Shelley Hack is leaden and Joe would be lucky to be so good. He plays a jingle writer who aspires to greater things. Judging from the music, he's found his niche with jingles. It has a certain Barry Manilow light quality to it. Imagine hell being trapped in an elevator for all eternity with muzak playing Joe Brooks greatest hits, and you'll begin to get a taste for just how bad it gets.<br /><br />Especially when Joe starts to sing. When Joe made "You Light Up My Life," the first decision he made was to dub Didi Cohn's voice with Debbie Boone's. Would that he showed as much sense here. Somewhere out there, cats start to howl when Joe sings.<br /><br />The bottom line, watch if you must, but remember to bring a book to read. It's two hours of your life you'll never get back | 0neg
|
At first, I thought that this is a comedy about those people coming from outside back to Russia, and experienced an entirely different cultural shock. It is actually a very serious movie, and it glued me to the screen for the entire two hours. It just feels so short when the movie ended.<br /><br /> I have seen quite a few movies about the horror living in a socialist country. However, I think there should also be a few good movies that tell the other side of the story. This movie is very authentic describing the horror and fear that people live under constant surveillance. And they can not go back ever again. The sacrifice the husband made, you can have a good heart cry over this movie. <br /><br /> If you have time, you should also listen to the directors' commentary. I think that the best part in this movie is about them going to the France Embassy of which the guard looked at their different shoes.<br /><br /> The love, the tenacity, the emotions are just so real. | 1pos
|
This movie was quite disappointing. I sat down, ready to watch the last Peter Sellers Pink Panther, and got a retrospective with a throwaway plot pieced together from outtakes and non-Sellers moments introducing well-known clips. I should have stopped the tape when Somebody takes the Pink Panther without even tripping one alarm.<br /><br />What starts out as a movie funny enough to watch, even if the plot seemed a little overdone, screeches to a halt as soon as Clouseau's plane vanishes. The closest anybody comes to trying to solve the mystery is the scene when the reporter is threatened by the mob boss. Otherwise, it's just a retrospective.<br /><br />I was getting the feeling the movie wasn't going to move before David Niven's character (dubbed badly and most distractingly) made those comments about how the world needed men like Clouseau, etc, etc, indestructible... yawn. From there on, with the exception of Clouseau's youth flashbacks, the only great laughs came from clips pillaged from other movies.<br /><br />This movie's comedy leans heavily on Dreyfus' new relapse, a subplot that was getting tired ever since they disintegrated him in "Strikes Back" Just when it seems that the movie is going to start moving again, it does. To the credits. Clouseau is not found, that is a mystery for the next movie to solve.<br /><br />Peppered with characters I never thought or cared to see again, (Colonel Sharky, et al) the plot is shaky if even near-nonexistent. This documentary laughingly called a movie gets a four only for the top-notch job editing together cut scenes into enough plot to get the audience to stay for the other sixty minutes. Don't waste your time on this movie more than once. | 0neg
|
A crazed computer genius named Goad (Laura San Giacomo) sets a spaceship named the Agamemnon, loaded to the gills with an highly unstable substance, on a collision course with the Earth! The Agamemnon has been encoded by Goad to start on its preprogrammed destination once it is revived by a salvage team. J.T. Wayne (Sandra Bernhard) is the Captain of the Salbor, the salvage ship that undertakes said mission. Things go awry for the Captain however when a portion of her assembled crew lead by her former lover, a cutthroat type named Vendler, double-crosses her and looks to gain the valuable Solarium aboard the ship for himself. However he didn't count on Goad's reprogramming of the ship's systems. Yet even in the face of defeat, Vendler refuses to give up his hold on the ship or listen to reason or logic. Now as the clock ticks down to a collision with the Earth, Wayne and her new crewman, a former bartender named Lennon (Cameron Dye), must try and find a means of stopping the Agamemnon or millions on Earth will die! <br /><br />Well I have to admit this is competently made. They keep the action moving nicely along and the visuals often prove distracting and interesting. The whole concept with Goad shows some level of originality and I enjoyed Laura San Giacomo's performance as a crazed computer programming genius who has a God complex and an obsession with quoting Shakespeare. Where this falters is when our story changes its focus to J.T. Wayne, played by an horrifically miscast Sandra Bernhard who constantly uses the catchphrase "And Don't You Forget It!" and basically goes all out to put off any male in the movie, including the man who is supposed to be her love interest. The failed attempts at humor in the film are far more likely to make viewers shake their heads in disbelief than cause them to laugh. In fact, this film frequently has this effect on any viewer who can manage to sit through the whole thing. To me, it is this element of "I just cannot believe what I am watching" that makes this so bad it's almost good. | 1pos
|
Dr Dollitle 2 was a fairly good movie with a strong cast but it just didn't do it for me. I found it pretty boring because what to like about. Not much because it's been done before. It was very distasteful but the voice actors were alright. I guess i expected too much from this movie as i do for a few movies. I bought this movie for Australian $15 a few years ago, most like it's $10 now because it wasn't that good or popular. I Just wish this movie could have a better storyline because "saving the forest" has been done before and it's common to viewers. They need to have a great idea that's never been done before and really wild. | 0neg
|
If you're into stock trading and if you've read Nicholas Leeson, it might help you enjoy this movie. If you're not, you might need to view a couple of times before the story grows on you.<br /><br />I'm still not sure how I can summarize best the story for you: Ewan McGregor plays Nick Leeson, a stock trader for England's Fairbank is given a mission in New Delhi. He builds up a team with people who know nothing about stock trading and together they'll play with the Nikkei. As they're "playing", mistakes are made by Nick's team and he wants to cover them up by opening up an account called "88888". Soon, he'll start gambling with the bank's own money. Unfortunately, the losses grow bigger and bigger until the bank goes broke.<br /><br />Since there is no real action, and it's really told like a story and not like a movie, you really have to rely on the actors' skills to appreciate the movie. | 0neg
|
I've been on the IMDb since 2001 and have written very few reviews, but this movie was so bad that I feel compelled to warn everyone I can. I can honestly say that this movie has no redeeming features and is one of the worst movies I have ever seen.<br /><br />You've already seen the plot outline, but it doesn't give tell you enough.<br /><br />You've got 4 thugs who rob a gas station, then decide to stay and work there all night, presumably to make some money. Of course, given their violent carefree tendencies, they would logically just go rob some other business. Instead, they stay and willingly work a crappy service sector job that most people don't want.<br /><br />Their staying there is mostly a vehicle to provide encounters with obnoxious customers, à la Clerks, but any comedic value in these is squandered.<br /><br />The biggest flaw would be the characters. The protagonists are just violent and obnoxious thugs with no charisma whatsoever. The growing group of hostages consists of one-dimensional whimpering crybabies, which wears thin very fast. There isn't a single likable person among the whole cast.<br /><br />After 45 minutes of pointless slapstick with nary a funny occurrence, the film takes a wild stab at character development, showing why these thugs are the way they are. But it's all very shallow and perfunctory.<br /><br />The technical aspects of the film are also severely wanting. The camera-work is rough and jarring, the editing is mess and the lighting (or lack of it) is a disaster.<br /><br />The "comedy" is repetitive and unfunny, the cast is totally unlikeable and the whole movie is an aimless mess. I watched the whole thing in hopes that it would improve. It doesn't. In the end, it's just a lame and boring disaster. There are many good Korean films. Go rent a different one. | 0neg
|
"Wanted-Dead or Alive" was a half hour western series appearing on CBS television for three seasons from 1958-1961. The series actually got its start as an episode of another popular TV series of the time, "Trackdown", during the second half of the '57-'58 TV season. "Wanted-Dead or Alive" starred Steve McQueen as bounty hunter Josh Randall in what was a very good start to an outstanding acting career in feature films. As played by McQueen, Josh Randall was the most laconic of a broad television landscape of would-be laconic western series heroes.<br /><br />Josh Randall carried a sawed-off 44/40 Winchester carbine (his "Mare's Leg", as he called it) on his hip instead of the traditional Colt 45 pistol. This of course played into the TV "cool factor" as his weapon made a much louder, more devastating sound when fired and of course had much more "stopping power" upon impact with the intended victim. Cool! Although "Wanted-Dead or Alive" was truly nothing out of the ordinary in terms of content or quality compared to other like fare of the period but Steve McQueen as Josh Randall and his unique weapon made this a "must watch" series. Only Paladin was better and "cooler" than Josh. | 1pos
|
"Camp" is a fun movie going experience. Combining elements of teenage summer camp coming of age stories, interwoven with musical theater performances, "Camp" doesn't cease to entertain. The cast of unknowns may not have the acting chops of more seasoned veterans, but their sheer musical talent compensates for this. | 1pos
|
A tightly woven murder mystery highlighting a brilliant performance by Mia Farrow. I first learned about this movie on the mia-farrow.com website and saw a photo from it. She is simply breathtaking in this movie as she ranges from shy innocent to the final climatic scene where all is told.<br /><br />The scenes along the nile are beautiful to behold. It is too bad that Mia did not get a chance to do more movies of this caliber.<br /><br />Nivens plays a great role also.<br /><br />The snake scene is one of my favorites, especially the reaction of the manager of the boat they are on.<br /><br />The plotting is fast paced and you really don't have a clue who done it until the very ending. It is a complete surprise. As is usual in a Poroit mystery, all of the main characters, and even the non-main characters may be the guilty party, so you always have to watch for all the twists and turns.<br /><br />Cheers indeed! | 1pos
|
I hated the original XTRO but I did recognise there`s something bizarrely unique about it and that it does have a cult following , but there`s nothing unique about this " Sequel " it`s just an ALIENS clone with only Paul Koslo treating the film with the contempt it deserves . In fact it`s not even bad enough to be good which explains this very short review | 0neg
|
This is a top ten pick for me. It's not so much the Orwellian culture it depicts. It's about our humanity; what we are. The shadow of the huge lectern where Fritz Weaver lords it over the accused. His incredibly emotive speech method. It's Burgess Meredith, seemingly cowering at first and then realizing that if his life is to have worth, he needs to make a final statement. While there is a bit of religion thrown in there, I like to think that it is the wish of this man to simply live out the last moment of his life on his own terms. Meredith, as I've said before, is a great actor. His calmness and grace in this role make this otherwise simplistic tale sing. The meek shall inherit the earth I guess. | 1pos
|
I strongly disagree that people say this film is rubbish because it is my favourite film. Dan Aykroyd plays a great role in Getting Away With Murder. All through the film we are unsure what is coming next. If you like serious films this is a film for you. In my views it gets 10 out of 10. | 1pos
|
México did it again. That regular vision of us, with fairy tales sceneries and realismo mágico stories, has been implanted in this romantic comedy featuring (once again) mostly people from TV. From starters, Ladies' night doesn't look for a profound meaning, but the lightness that bears it's plot is more than just simplicity; it's almost insulting. The story centers in Alicia (for Alice in wonderland, played by Talancón), a candid woman whom has never been really understood since her childhood and that spends her life in a world of fantasy that she draws by and for herself. Her wedding is only a week away and she's engaged to Fabián (Corres), the editor in a teen magazine, and his coworker and best friend is Ana (de la Reguera), a "rebel type" girl who's more than evident that has a crush on him. Ana doesn't like Alicia and vice versa, so when the bachelorette party for Alicia comes, an uninvited Ana comes along and she as a secret surprise for the party, she hired a male stripper named Rocco (Guzmán) to spice up things, 'cause Ana and her friends are very uptight. But, after performing his act, fate arrange things for an instant click between Rocco and Alicia. Then, after some events that involves a small robbery and a video tape with scenes from a previous encounter between Ana and Fabián, both girls have to go after Rocco but with different intentions: while Alicia tries to find him to make up her mind about the marriage, Ana tries to recover the tape so Alicia won't find out.<br /><br />This plot leads to an odyssey through México City with Alicia and Ana, and it is also the perfect excuse to create a romantic comedy to be treated under the label of a buddy movie but with girls. It's the same old song in which two antagonist characters comes to the end of the trip becoming best friends (take Por la libre as an example) and OK, even if this is not new neither anyone expects it to be, is in the way the plot develops where lies all the holes, failures and misguiding. Also, the level of intelligence in it has been dumbed so low that it couldn't be done without hurting the whole idea, and not to mention that the acting is flat, the characters are unidimensional (it's profiles are based on clothes, not in personality), and the language they use sounds pretty much fake.<br /><br />Basically, Ladies' night is a very light motion picture with it's target on girls who are supposed to talk "dirty" and feel cool about it. There's some sexual situations but none of them are graphic neither sensual, and for the "irreverent" parts it uses the source of cartoons. And don't get me wrong, this is not about a hunger for seeing flesh but for watch witty, edgy material, that even if it can't really entertain us, at least be one that can make us feel the real needs in the main roles for each other, the deep passion we are supposed to buy, and the fire that burns only as minimum sparks in here. In the end, this film comes across as one more light teen mexican movie which is predictable, not funny, and with no good things to offer at all. | 0neg
|
I first saw this movie on late night TV and was captured by the really funny lines and characters...all of them. This film probably appeals to a more mature adult who can recall the ethnic differences of our friends and lovers that made life both difficult and, in retrospect, humorous at the same time.<br /><br />I asked Joe Bologna after a recent stage performance why this film was not on video and his response was, "You'll have to ask 20th Century F0X."<br /><br />It's unfortunate for those of us who think this film should be the real "classic" shown yearly. It is an underappreciated gem. | 1pos
|
I think that this picture is the finest war story since I saw Saving Private Ryan. Clint Eastwood has outdone himself with this realistic portrayal of the fight in the Pacific in World War 11, There is no outstanding cast in the movie but all the characters did a fine job with their parts. The photograph of the Marines raising the flag on Iwo Jima is well know to most all of us, but the story surrounding the photograph was not as well know. Thanks to Mr Clint Eastwood's fine directing the facts are now spread before us. The actor who played the Indian was outstanding in his part and we should see more of him in the future. I am sorry that I do not know his name but he filled the part with a lot of feeling. If you like war stories, please don't miss this movie and you will be missing a winner!!!! | 1pos
|
Just when you thought you had seen one of Dennis Hopper's worst movies ever, along comes "The Amarican Way", and a new contender for worst of the worst is born. The script is like a free fall from the heavens, finally crashing to earth in such a predictable manner, there is nothing left. Don't ponder for meaning, because if this is an anti-war movie, it fails to prove any point other than mayhem. More like "The Groove Tube" or "Kentucky Fried Movie" on acid, only the most tolerant viewer will remain through the entire film. In fact, the only relief from the random dialog in the plane is the few welcome moments when the viewer is back on planet earth, a place this entire production has never been. Definitely the cream of the crap, and a must miss, avoid, movie. - MERK | 0neg
|
This poverty row adaptation (courtesy of Monogram) of the Charles Dickens classic has about as much finesse as a school pageant, despite the appearance of old pros like Irving Pichel (as Fagin) and Lionel Belmore (as Mr. Bumble). As a matter of fact, while the film has a couple of choice moments in its second half, any good intentions are done in by some serious miscasting: an overage Artful Dodger (Sonny Ray) and Nancy (Doris Lloyd) and, worst of all, an unsympathetic Oliver (Dickie Moore). Rather than proving an asset, its short running time (70 minutes) gives a careless, rushed air to the proceedings and ensures a total absence of the visual poetry which marked David Lean's definitive 1948 version. | 0neg
|
This is the movie to see for those of you who have troble with slow pace and tedium of silent movies. This is an action packed thriller. Complete with an incredible actor, doing his own stunts decades befor Jackie Chan, and not to mention he wrote and directed this movie.<br /><br />So, Johnny Greys just a regular old guy living in the south, running his train, "The General" , around the south in like the middle of the civil war. Some how or another the yankees steel the train and drive it off. well, Johnny wants his beloved train going in to enemy hands to he sets off after it. The meat of the movie is increble whil E Coyote stunts as Buster Keaton, as Johnny, trys to catch his train.<br /><br /> | 1pos
|
Top stuff. I've only ever seen episode 1 but I'm always on the lookout for the others. I loved the bit where Van Patten tried to use the approved "sleeper touch" technique to subdoo a baddie, and it didn't work !<br /><br />Van Cleef's arrow-catching stunt was very impressive, and he handled that scene and a lot of other equally unlikely frames like the true pro that he was. Keeping a straight face through the takes must have been hard work at times for a guy who had worked with directors the caliber of Fred Zinnemann and Sergio Leone.<br /><br />Demi Moore would likely prefer that her appearance in this B-grader remained largely forgotten, but we all have to start somewhere, and the show was probably a lot of fun to make. <br /><br />R. B. | 1pos
|
With the release of Alien Vs Predator i decided to watch the original Predator movie today. I've seen Predator many many times since i first watched it back in 1989 and i love it each and every time. I think Predator 2 has a slight edge over this but Predator has a slight edge over Aliens BUT i think they are all extremely excellent films.<br /><br />Just in case you don't know, it's about a big alien whose race lives to hunt worthy prey and Arnold Schwarzenegger's team of commandos are that such prey. The commandos are sent into a South American jungle to find some missing airmen who are being held by guerrilla's. They do what they got to do which attracts the attention of the predator who is hunting in the area. So the predator goes and hunts the commandos with the aid of his kick ass weapons and cloaking device. The commandos also have a female prisoner.<br /><br />I think the whole sub-plot about the so called missing airmen isn't too important to the viewer but makes it possible for the commandos to be there. The entire concept of Predator is really clever and it certainly made me sit on the edge of my seat while watching it the first time. It is kind of spooky in a terrifying way as we don't see the predator properly for ages but see through his eyes which adds to the tension.<br /><br />The effects are great, the acting is OK and the story is cool too. I really like the music and especially the spooky twisted jungle sounds that we hear when we see through the eyes of the predator. This is a sci-fi action movie that isn't just full of cheap explosions. It really does have great atmosphere. Everyone who likes sci-fi and/or action movies should like this. If you don't then your taste in movies suck! This in my humble opinion is probably the second best sci-fi movie of all time.<br /><br />Alien Vs Predator has little of what made this so excellent so if you haven't seen Predator and thought AVP sucked don't think that this will. Predator is absolutely fantastic viewing. 10/10 | 1pos
|
This is like Rudy for the birds. In this movie Ewan McGregor plays Valiant, a young pigeon during WWII hoping to join the Royal Homing Pigeon Service (RHPS).<br /><br />Valiant is younger and smaller than his fellow recruits, but has high spirits. The RHPS has suffered great losses during the war. Squadrons A thru E have all perished to Von Talon's (Tim Curry) falcons. It is up to Valiant and the rest of squadron F to get the correspondence back to England.<br /><br />This film was cute and maybe kids will like it, however, I was disappointed. There is not a lot to the story. Bird joins service, bird save the day, and that is about it. The movie is a little more than an hour long. In it's defense, the animation was good.<br /><br />There are a few laughs from John Cleese who plays Mercury (a pigeon who gets captured) but not enough for the whole movie. Most of the other characters really lack personality. Unless the kids really want to see this, I would not recommend it. | 0neg
|
With two competent leads (Johnny Messner and Jon Huertas as paramedics abducted by a cult), one fairly entrancing nemesis (Daniel Benzali as the cult leader), seeds of a good story and decent direction, one immediately thinks this movie could have been much better.<br /><br />Writers Daniel Myrick, Julia Fair and Daniel Noah seem to have come up with a basic idea, without being able to elaborate the concept further. The result is a story with few interesting elements in-between its introduction and conclusion, and no rhythm whatsoever.<br /><br />Details of the cult are brushed over. Viewers are probably supposed to see this as shrouded in mystery but instead, the sentiment is that the writers failed to flesh out these things. And since none of the imagery, dialog or plot element is particularly engrossing, we can't take a "mind trip" as if this was a Lynch movie either, because use symbolism in this film is weak and immature.<br /><br />Director Daniel Myrick (Blair Witch Project, The Objective) has done much better in the past but here, there's simply not enough happening to sustain our attention for long. If the details were to remain that sketchy, I think this would have been better off as a sort of Twilight Zone TV episode.<br /><br />I appreciate the attempt but this is Myrick's weakest movie I have seen. | 0neg
|
I love all of the quirky parts in this movie! One of the best scenes is when Charlie (Meyers) is watching "A Current Affair" while using a theighmaster! Charlie's dad (also Meyers) is hilarious with his outrageous Scottish accent and rude personality. And Rose, Harriet's strange sister, is funny when she offers to make a wonderful breakfast for Charlie. The last 20 min aren't quite up to par with the rest of the film IMO, but over all I gave it 8/10 stars. | 1pos
|
The new action-thriller, Terminator Salvation is not great, but if it proves one thing: an action film can be mindless and moodless and still be good. Terminator 3 was terrible, yet a lot of people still liked it. Terminator Salvation is good, but people seem to hate it. This is a sign that more and more people these days have to see sophisticated films in the theater, even if it means seeing mostly bad films. Yes, there are a lot of good sophisticated films, but when something as brainless and moodless as this comes around, I'm still able to enjoy it. This movie nicely follows two stories mashed into one: John Connor (Christian Bale) waking up and discovering a whole new world, and then meeting Kyle Reese (Anton Yelchin), and Marcus Wright (Sam Worthington) fighting war on the other side of the new world. I respect, and quite like what they're trying to do here: telling us what we might of missed in the other Terminator movies. The film is nothing new or special, but just a good old recommendable fun time at the movies. PS, anyone looking forward to the Arnold Schwarzenegger cameo will not be let down. | 1pos
|
Most folks don't have things quite as bad as the anti-hero of this film. This guy is a Viet Nam vet, who exists with his wife and his mutated baby son in a dirty run-down apartment and can't get a job to save his soul. He wanders the streets endlessly looking for work or whatever, because thanks to being captured and tortured by the Viet Cong he's not doing too well with his mental health. There's no food at home and the baby cries all the time, and it's sort of a cross between a melted child's doll and the goat-baby thing from Eraserhead. We have plenty of drug dealers making a living though, and lots of desperate people out there wandering the streets through landscapes that are depressing and barren. Most notable is a junkie trying to get his fix with a coat hanger. This is by no means an uplifting film and yet it has a certain gritty nastiness about it that's compelling to watch, kind of like a car accident where you don't want to look but can't stop yourself from doing it anyway. Creepy and depressing, but still worth seeing if you can stomach it. 7 out of 10. | 1pos
|
Subsets and Splits
No saved queries yet
Save your SQL queries to embed, download, and access them later. Queries will appear here once saved.