text
stringlengths 4
19.4k
| label
class label 2
classes |
|---|---|
It's a fun show to watch. I am glad I have it on DVD. | 1positive
|
How can you go wrong with the Three Stooges?I am a Three Stooges fan from way back and I have to admit this is not the best of their movies. The Three Stooges (Moe, Larry, and Curly Joe) stand in for the Dwarfs (the boys are house-sitting for them while they are away), Carol Heiss (1960 Olympic skating champion) is Snow White and the setting is in the fairy tale of castles and forests. You will still be pleased with a pie in the face but there is not a whole lot of other slapstick.The plot is essentially the same as the fairy tale. The Stooges are substitutes for the vacationing Dwarfs, and responsible for uniting Snow White with her Prince. The Prince has grown up with the Stooges, who have a traveling medicine show, when they rescued him from an assassination attempt engineered by Snow White's stepmother, the Queen. | 0negative
|
Pathfinder is about a hero rising up to defend the native americans, great movie to watch. | 1positive
|
Why would someone make this movie? Waste of money, time, and it hurt my brain. Now I'm going to watch some old Bill Nye shows so I can be happy with myself again. | 0negative
|
I turned this movie off right when a man randomly starting crushing puppy skulls with his high heeled shoes (note: they were alive.). This is the most disturbing movie I have ever seen. I do not flinch watching Kill Bill or Bravehart, and Saving Private Ryan's gore did not catch me as particularily over the top. However, this movie and its makers are morally reprehensible. Do not watch this movie, it will degrade the morality of the viewer. If you like this movie you have no soul. | 0negative
|
A group of college kids are on their way home for Thanksgiving break, when a demonized turkey is unleashed upon them! This bird means business as it hacks, stabs, shoots, and rapes its way through the cast! The feathery fiend has no shame, using horrid one-liners to add insult to grievous bodily injury! Can this putrid poultry be stopped before our heroes are turned into cranberry sauce? THANKSKILLING is one of those ultra-schlockers that will make most "serious" film-lovers corrode on the spot. For the rest of us, it's just hysterical! Prepare for 100% pure idiocy... P.S.- It would have been better if it had been a tad shorter, as the middle section drags a bit... | 1positive
|
At first I thought the movie was way too predictable, but then I thought 'oh there'll be something good at the end' and then I started thinking up some things. Usually I'm right on it, but I did not expect this ending. The ending made the whole movie, not to mention the really, really cute guys, especially****** Spoiler Space***************(characters names from the movie) Wyatt, Mason, and Corey. | 1positive
|
So adorable! I loved it! All three are really good movies! You can't go wrong with animated animals! Chris Rock is the rock! | 1positive
|
Its my family it was very slandering character wise. Never saw it till now! Never wanna see it again ever!! | 0negative
|
It's ages since I've been so torn in my rating.Plot in a few words - wealthy gay couple decides to adopt a baby. The waiting list is long, so social worker (Gloria) gives them a chance to become foster parents and leave two boys at their house.Nothing goes well from the very beginning and arrival of drunk mother of these two only worsen situation.But this is an american production. So, there must be a happy ending...And that is one of the reasons I lower my rating. The final part of this film is so sweet that I got tooth-ache:(Another reason why I am disappointed about the whole story is one particular scene - worth the biggest drama queen in the world. Throwing himself on the hood? With a fake gun in his hand? (so fake, that even kids wouldn't believe that it's a real weapon!). Screaming with pitch voice? Yep, it's our hero, local saviour - Phil. Too much for me.It put me off.If you plan to buy it, rent first. | 0negative
|
I finally found it. Now I know I didn't imagine this movie. It starts of with two guys camping. A meteor crashes near them and then they get killed by something.Afterwards the creature shows up in the basement of this house. It also is spawning little alien parasite slug looking things. It kills the parents. Thn the electrician gets killed later on when he tries to fix the wiring. You have to see it to enjoy this. It also helps if you like this types of films. | 1positive
|
So I read about the movie on Amazon and checked out the top few reviews & thought - hey, my kids are 5 & up. We'll watch this together to introduce our home study unit on Australia.NOBODY MENTIONED THE TERRIFICALLY VISUAL & HORRIFYING SCENE RIGHT UP IN THE FIRST MINUTES. Poetic? I think not!Dad's brand of loosing it means that he tries to kill the kids (all played out on the screen so you can't wonder about it - he tries to shoot them then lure them back & finish off the job). When he fails to kill the kids, he blows out his own brains & lights the car and himself ablaze! The camera doesn't miss the gory bounce of dad's blown out head bouncing in front of the burning VW. and "poetically" flashes back to that several times in the first 30 minutes or so.When the camera panned in for "crotch stares" of the aborigine's bum & then captured the sister's panties as she swung on the tree we clicked off. I had no idea what was coming next - another dead dad bounding in front of the burning VW, maybe a little Aborigine on School Girl lesson on the birds & bees? I dunno.This is definitely not rated for a reason... it's not because of frontal nudity on the Aborigines checking out dad's charred VW. It's not for the girl in her bra washing clothes at the waterhole. Its for graphics we don't want to explain to kids - suicide and homicide to start.Word to the mothers.... Caution! | 0negative
|
On the cover by supposed 'reputable' reviewers, it stated such things as 'uproariously funny,' but after 3o minutes and much fast forwarding attempting to get to any funny stuff, I could take no more.If one finds vile, graphic toilet scenes, or someone spitting at others from a rooftop, or predictable, stereotypical character behavior funny, then this may be the movie for you. | 0negative
|
For those who are facinated by Jacky Chen's incredable stunts, well, here is a rude awakening. He's been doing that for more than 20 years, and as a person growing up with Hong Kong Kong- Fu movies, I can attest that most of his moves, his stunts, even the facial expressions, the innocent looks from Rush Hour are deja-vus from his earlier Chinese movies. The only difference is that Jacky in the 90s is much older,, and he did all his stunts while he was still young | 0negative
|
DAREDEVIL is a film that needed a lot of fixing up. One of the main and most interesting characters gets the kicked out the picture half way through. Conceptually it kept close to the original comic but it lacked the story. The film's visual style was also a little confusing in parts. It is one of those films that tells the origins by starting with an event at the beginning that isn't explained until the end. Very disappointing when you realize it was nothing special.Directed by Mark Stephen Johnson (Jack Frost, Ghostrider) the film is a little slow and dark in the beginning. The story doesn't start to get interesting until the main temptress played by Jennifer Garner (Pearl Harbor, Catch Me If You Can) shows up and has some great fighting sequences.The most interesting character is Collin Farrell (S.W.A.T., Phone Booth) interpretation as Bullseye. He is exciting and evil and really seems to be the only one who is having fun in the film. He is energetic and exciting.The story is that of the making of the Vigilante known as Daredevil. The beginnings are shallow and short and the accident not really explained much and the father is played by David Keith (Office And A Gentlemen, Firestarter) who gives a short but meaningful performance.Now as for Ben Afflect (Sum of All Fears, Pearl harbor, Armageddon) as Daredevil, he was week. He was more interesting as the alter-ego Matt Murdock. Even that was a a little shallow.Overall it is an okay rental movie and certainly watchable on cable - but nothing to write home about. I think they rushed the script to ride the tales of the Brilliant production of Spider-Man. That was good writing and production. 5-20-03 | 0negative
|
Okay this is not a great movie,but it is fun to watch. The main reason I bought this is that I fell in love with Michelle Johnson in the Movie Far and Away and I must have everything she's acted in.That being said it is funny and some of the scenery is beautiful even when Michelle's not in the movie | 1positive
|
This movie is horrible. Terrible. It's like watching a bad european movie. No plot, acting was terrible. I liked Milla Jovavich in the Resident Evil Movies. In fact, I first thought this was part 3 and was anxious to check it out. But, it had no ties to the Resident Evil movies. Boy was I glad about that. It would've tainted that franchise. This movie was so stupid. I didn't care for the characters at all. She should've not done this movie. But, I guess all actors/actresses need to do a movie like this to cause them to realize that they need to be careful about their careers!!! | 0negative
|
Pathfinder is a really well done film. Great landscapes, costume design, acting and plot. The movie is underrated and underappreciated. It reminded me a lot of Apocalypto meets 13th Warrior, and skips cheezy liners and zingers, and a flashy soundtrack. Not to be missed by epic film and dark ages history buffs alike. | 1positive
|
I am so annoyed with myself for not bothering to read these reviews before buying! East Coast mom is on the money with her report that the movie is dark and scary. WHY WHY WHY would Mattel take a beautiful fairy land and a cute message and make it SCARY is beyond me. The music is scary, the scenery and characters quickly turn scary, the villian fairy is scary, and there are very few scenes that show off the fun and beautiful things that I thought this movie would be all about. Neither my 4 nor my 6 year-old were able to watch the whole thing - we gave up about 20 minutes into the movie and fast forwarded to the last two minutes for the sure thing happy ending. The movie is going in the trash where it belongs! Booooooo, Mattel. | 0negative
|
Theatrical Release: March 30, 1961Director: Marlon BrandoRuntime: 2 hours and 21 minutesStars: Marlon Brando, Karl Malden, Pina Pellicer, Katy Jurado, Slim Pickens, Ben Johnson, Sam Gilman and Larry DuranDVD INFO: Since "One-Eyed Jacks" is public domain it has been released by numerous dvd companies with varying levels of quality. One version I saw was so bad it was unwatchable, but I can highly recommend two: Digiviw (which is available for a buck at Wal-Mart) and Platinum Disc Corporation (or PDC Home Entertainment). Both of these versions are WIDESCREEN (despite the fact that the Digiview version erroneously says on the back cover that it's full frame) and the picture quality is very good. So don't let the fact that these versions are usually sold for a buck fool you; these are quality dvds worthy of your video library. Other reviewers here at Amazon testify that the Front Row version is very good as well.THE STORY: Dad Longworth (Malden) literally "takes the money and runs" as he leaves his young partner in crime, Kid Rio (Brando), behind to rot in a Mexican prison. Rio escapes 5 years later with only vengeance on his mind. He finds Dad in Monterey, California, now a respectable town Sheriff with a Mexican wife (Jurado) and step-daughter Louisa (Pina), living the American Dream on the beautiful Pacific coast. The situation is complicated by Rio's teaming up with two lowlife criminals whose only intent is to rob the Monterey bank, as well as Rio's romantic dallyings with Louisa."One-Eyed Jacks" was Brando's only stab at directing and his original cut of the film was twice as long (!). I would love to see this director's cut, which HAS been shown on TV, but this 141-minute cut is fine as is.Not only is "One-Eyed Jacks" one of the best Westerns of all time, it's also one of Brando's top films, along with "Mutiny on the Bounty" (1962), "The Young Lions" and the underrated "The Missouri Breaks," not to mention "Apocalypse Now."What makes it so great? Numerous things. Brando is at his most captivating here, but the story is entrancing as well, even though it's much more of a slow drama than an action/adventure film. When it comes, however, the action is quick and realistic.There are numerous themes running through the long story. One of the major ones is the clash of the misfit with conventional society. Since society is composed of a bunch of conformist misfits, the misfit must learn to conform if s/he wants to fit in and succeed. In other words, if you want to 'make it' in conventional society it's necessary to hide your problematic past & flaws and put on a front of respectability. Dad Longworth has figured this out and he's not about to allow Rio to ruin it for him. (I'm not saying I completely agree with this as I don't believe in being fake, just that it's one of the major themes of the story).I would like to offer a word of defense for Dad Longworth here. Although it was wrong for him to take the money and leave Rio to be captured, one can't help but empathize with him and the reasons why he gave in to the temptation. If he went back for Rio there was a high risk of getting captured or killed. The safest and most promising route was the selfish route. The good thing is that Dad wisely took advantage of this opportunity and made a good life for himself in Monterey. He was obviously sick of his criminal lifestyle and wanted a real life, a real job and real family. He was getting on in years and knew that this may well be his final opportunity, so he took it.The problem is that one's past always has a way of haunting us, which is another theme of the film; hence, Rio walks back into Dad's life 5 years later and his American dream is seriously threatened. Notice Dad's rage when he whips/beats Rio to an inch of his life; he's doing everything in his power to kill the ugly phantoms of his past, which is why he tries to get Rio hung on false charges later in the story.Another theme is redemption and how love is tied to any such positive transformation. Both Dad and Rio are criminal scumbags, but both desire redemption and a better life. The love of Dad's wife and the Monterey general populace brings this out in Dad, whereas Louisa's love for Rio slowly changes him. Near the end we plainly see that Rio no longer wants to kill Dad, he doesn't even want to see him; all he wants is to run off with his lady love. If Rio remained the same person he was at the beginning of the story "One-Eyed Jacks" wouldn't be half the film it is.In addition, Dad's love for Katie, his Mexican wife, is what delivered Katie and Louisa "from the beanfields," as Dad puts it.Love goes hand-in-hand with loyalty or faithfulness. We see this in Rio's likable Mexican sidekick, Chico (Larry Duran).One of the best qualities of "Jacks" is that it's refreshingly realistic. There's no goofiness, unbelievable one-liners, over-the-top action or excruciatingly dated aspects.Speaking of dated, although the opening credits sequence and score are dated and boring, the rest of the film isn't. So don't let this sequence cause you to tune out. The rest of the score (by Hugo Friedhofer) is great."One-Eyed Jacks" was the obvious precursor to the Spaghetti Western. For instance, the protagonist is a dyed-in-the-wool "cool" anti-hero (like, say, Eastwood or Bronson). The main difference between "Jacks" and most Spaghetti Westerns, however, is that "Jacks" has a truly worthwhile story wherein numerous gems of wisdom can be gleaned, which can't be said about films like "The Good, the Boring and the Ugly" (don't get me wrong, I love the music and style of that film, it's just that the plodding story and scumbag characters leave much to be desired); also the anti-hero in "One-Eyed Jacks" slowly transforms into a potentially positive member of society.The film's influence goes well beyond just the Spaghetti Westerns. Take, for instance, Brando's crucifixion-style beating and long restoration. The film "Conan the Barbarian" pretty much ripped-off this entire sequence; Arnold Schwarzenegger even admits to it.Pina Pellicer does an outstanding job as Rio's girlfriend Louisa (Dad's step-daughter). Although she's definitely good-looking she's too skinny for my personal tastes. Spiritually-speaking, however, she's incredible. Although she commits a foolish error by sleeping with Rio after the festival (she probably had too much to drink -- another error), on a whole she's the epitome of love, virtue and spirituality. Again, this love is the key factor in Rio's positive metamorphosis.Unfortunately Pina committed suicide three and a half years after "Jacks" was released. Thankfully we have this film to remember her beauty and virtue. She deserves to be honored."Jacks" was filmed entirely in California with all the coastal sequences photographed on the Monterey Pennisula, including Pebble Beach. This is one of the only Westerns where you'll see the Pacific Ocean, and it's truly glorious! Other locations include Big Sur and Death Valley.CONCLUSION: Don't miss out on "One-Eyed Jacks," Brando's only directorial effort. It's truly one of the GREAT Westerns, as well as one of Brando's most captivating performances.Hopefully they'll release the 5-hour "Director's cut" one day. | 1positive
|
This movie is probably the most detailed movie yet on Auschwitz but despite saying that it is still plagued with real inaccuracies that can't be forgiven. The most notable being the true role of SS Hauptscharfuhrer Otto Moll who in the movie is relegated to being a very minor character and acutally has been demoted in the film. In the film he is represented as a Scharfuhrer and subordinate to oberscharfuhrer Muhsfeldt. As stated above in actuality Otto Moll was a Hauptscharfuhrer (SS Master Sergeant) and was Muhsfeldt's boss. Moll ran and was chief head of the extermination zone at Auschwitz which included all 4 of the birkenau crematoria. It was Moll who organised the acutal murder of pretty much every victim of the gas chambers and the burning pits or pyres. Get it right Tim...this is unforgivable...Muhsfeldt did not have that much responsibility, he was only the boss of Crematorium II not the entire extermination plant.Also, pretty much every character in the movie is a weasel who you don't care if they live or die. But this in actual fact is probably pretty accurate as the members of the sonderkommando had to lie, cheat, steal and kill in order to survive.All in all though it is a pretty decent movie....more like a tele movie than a major motion picture....although there was many acts of brutality the film doesn't dare go near....the mass shootings at the burning pits where babies and kids were chucked in alive by Moll for example...I suppose no-one has the balls to depict these acts in any film..... | 0negative
|
This is not a bad film if you look at it as a piece of film making. The acting is not bad, the directing is not bad and the over all film is not bad. It is also about an important subject. BUT... it is do depressing that I can't think of any reason that I would want to watch it again and if I would have know how depressing it was I wouldn't have watched it in the first place.Depressing. | 0negative
|
Too bad 24 is over. Love to watch the reruns on DVD though. Will have to look for earlier seasons to add to my collection. | 1positive
|
BWP has some tense moments. It remains interesting for most of the 70 or so minutes it runs, partly because I was expecting to be frightened by something (I never was), and also that I would finally find out what all the fuss was about. I think the fuss was this: people were actually dumb enough to think this was real. If that were the case, then yes, this movie WOULD be the scariest film of all time (yet not the scariest work of fiction - Orson Welles achieved that with his infamous radio broadcast). Yes, I did find moments that were eerie, partly because of the fact that there were no obvious Hollywood camera techniques used that remided you this was just a movie. Occasionally it seems like something more. Occasionally. Yet the trouble is, this is not the scariest movie of all time, or if it was, it does so because it exploits (admittedly not that smart) people's gullibility and ignorance. I do not find this particluarly admirable. To say this movie is near the level of "The Excorcist" makes me extremely sad. The latter movie actually earned its thrills through talent and imagination. BWP does it by deceptive marketing hype. There are deadly problems with this movie, though. One is that it is too short. Which is in a way a blessing, because the movie gets tiresome rather quickly. The actors are unable to come up with anything that is interesting enough, rather than swear at each other, and get scared. Yet herein lies the problem; I do not consider BWP to be a feature length movie. When it finishes (and the ending is confusing and bad), there is a sense of, "That's a joke, right. Where's the rest?" But it's over. It did not seem as if I had actually watched a movie. But it gets worse. There is no pay-off. You are frightened by a witch throughout the movie, but the audience is never treated with enough respect to SEE the witch. This is unacceptable, mainly because it goes against every rule not only in filmmaking, but in suspense in general. You can't have buildup without release. You cannot have leadin without leading any where. If BWP were a house, it would have no roof. Yet we are patiently told by BWP's defenders that the reason why we needed to see the witch is an example of our lack of attention span or imagination. That's wrong. We needed to see the witch because it, if the scene were done correctly, we would have been frightened to death by it. BWP *succeeds* in building tension. But it does nothing about it. Any one who knows about film will know what I mean by this - we could have had a quick glance at the witch, even for a microsecond, it wouldn't have mattered. There would have been a myriad of ways to make the shot look spooky. Perhaps the film-makers were just too stupid to know how to light it, who knows? It's true that a lot of critics like this film, but I am sure a lot of them feel rather uncomfortable about giving it so much praise. Simply because something is different, does not necessarily mean it is artistic or good. I cannot personally respect those reviewers who did not give the audience adequate warning about this movie and who unwittingly (or wittingly?) added to the hype surrounding it. | 0negative
|
It still never ceases to amaze me how this high-spirited action-packed gem escaped me for all these years. My earliest recollection of this film is when I was still in grammar school catching the trailer's most infamous and notorious Harrison Ford moment when he quotes, "Get off my plane"!. (Priceless) Now, after all of these years have passed I can at least say that this film did not disappoint as the solid acting and fast paced action held my attention throughout the film in it's entirety. Upon viewing this film in the Blu-Ray format it made me regret not seeing it in theaters in a sense. On a more positive note, this blu-ray disc truly utilizes it's full potential of technology; moreover, it's patriotic epic score composed by the one and only Jerry GoldSmith which is also accompanied by a great sounding lossless audio track will really satisfy the home theater buffs. On an even more positive note, I feel this Blu-Ray disc was not far off or short for that in matter in delivering a true realistic theater experience because it was quite superb on many levels. I will elaborate more on these technical specs later but for now I will give a very brief summary here.President Marshall, played by a more youthful looking and middle-aged (Harrison Ford) is held hostage along with his family and staff members on Air Force One after American Special Forces capture general Rodek who is the leader of Kazakhstan. President Marshall leaves a gorgeous and enormous looking Moscow dinner hall after delivering a very brief subdued and yet powerful speech concerning terrorism and foreign policy. Upon boarding the plane we are introduced with Ivan Korshunov who is played by the versatile and ever so impressive (Gary Oldman) While Air Force One is in flight, the audience discovers a mole in the secret service that is able to board Ivan and his other supportive terrorists companions. The secret service wastes no time in starting the bloodshed as he fires two bullets into two cabinet member's heads while they were discussing and briefing on important foreign policy matters. Soon the trails of a smoke grenade released by the secret service man signal Ivan and his ultra radical friends to unleash hell on the president and everyone else on the plane; and, that is exactly what they do because they are incredibly vengeful, bitter and quite keen on releasing General Radek.Since we are dealing with Blu-Ray technology I always feel it is appropriate and mandatory to analyze and review the technical specs because that is what we are paying top exorbitant dollar for right? If we weren't receiving an upgrade we might as well be buying VHS right?Well I am astounded to announce that, Blu-Ray fans won't be disappointed in this department either because the picture and sound looks and feels incredibly sharp, precise and most importantly very consistent. Despite the film's age, this disc completely revives and revamps it to a more recent looking film even with the sparse and light 90's grain subtlety prevalent throughout. Fortunately, this minor set back hardly retracts or dilutes any of the overall quality of this pristine transfer. More importantly, flesh tones are smooth and detailed throughout; hair and fabric emit some fine detail particularly in the darker interior shots of the control panel sequences. The blue colored control panel scenes are quite remarkable in the sense that it really enhances facial hair and flesh tone depth to a more elevated level of clarity in any parts of the film. Personally, no other scene compares to this high level of detail in my opinion. This attribute is more specifically shown when Gary Oldman is losing his patience when he frustratingly articulates his demands to the vice president with impunity and anger. Apart from the control panel scenes, the rest of the film does not fail to deliver in expressing some vibrantly smooth scenes in the conference rooms, bag storage area as well as the smaller private rooms (Bathroom, lounge rooms). The majority of the film takes place in the interior of the plane during the night with some interwoven scenes of the white house conference rooms so you will have to keep this in mind in order to regulate any misguided expectations. (In terms of settings, not an entire amount of variety here)The Sound is excellent, as the flawless lossless 5.1 audio will give all your speakers quite a bit of attention; the dialogue is crisp, articulate, clean and very pleasing. I was able to make out every spoken word without any complications. You will truly appreciate the opening-firing scene at the headquarters in Kazakhstan when general Rodek is captured. Moreover, AK-47's, Mp5 and Mp5k's fire and pierce with unbelievable force and dominance, but that's not even the bread and butter here folks. The automatic sub-machine guns truly immerse you in its breath taking firepower during the first plane shootout when the terrorists kill the majority of the President's staff on board. Listen carefully to the bullets ricocheting off metal stairs or penetrating through bathroom doors. I fully appreciated the gunfire sounds in the bag storage area where President Marshall hides; it is quite impressive and mesmerizing actually. One will also quickly observe how much attention is given to the sub-woofer and rear channel speakers during the exterior night shots of the plane in fight; engines will roar loudly and thoroughly producing a strong vibration in any floor of your house. As a result, this creates a very strong acoustical sound range leading the front channel speakers and gradually dissolving to the rear. The introduction of the F-16 fighter jets following Air Force One leaves no speaker unscathed; the incessant accelerating engine power might cause one to grip on to their seats. (Well, at lease for me it did) These types of aerial vehicular sounds are nicely calculated in between scenes of dialogue and dominate the last half-hour of the film. Even though I have never seen this film on standard dvd I feel it is appropriate and safe to say that this is a serious upgrade for home theater fans. Although I wouldn't say this is an outstanding Blu-Ray film, I will say it is a solid one because it delights and pleases wherever possible. In that regard, it is worth the purchase.In regards to the acting, Harrison Ford Fans or in my case die-hard Gary Oldman fans will be impressed here. A multi-talented and quite younger Gary Oldman emits a more vengeful and retrained type of villain here as opposed to some of the former impulsive, unbalanced psychotic characters he plays. His anger is explosive and expected when provoked and his calmness is professional when in control; he practically has zero empathy for anyone on board as he kills relentlessly with his crew. Harrison Ford, on the other hand, plays a very likeable president; his assertiveness and confidence in times of panic and danger will definitely satisfy his plausibility as an authority figure as well as a favorable president. Besides the main actors, Glenn Close ( The Vice president) along with William H. Macy and Wendy Crewson (the first lady) are serviceable to say the very least.In conclusion, Air Force One will definitely please most fans of far-fetched action packed high explosive films while simultaneously satisfying the technical crowd who thoroughly enjoy seeing their films being treated in a careful and respectful manner. | 1positive
|
Leap Frog is an excellent toy company. All of their products are well made and educational. Our two year old son loves Scout. He has a Scout "leap"top, a Scout stuffed animal, a Scout Tag Jr. reader, and all of the Scout apps available on iTunes. When I saw this video was available, I figured he might like it.He doesn't just like it, he LOVES it! It is an excellent video. We do not allow our son to watch TV shows or movies that aren't educational. However, many of the education videos and shows out there can be boring. This video satisfies both mom and dad and the kiddo! The songs are cute and catchy (we all find ourselves singing them!), and our son can actually count items (so, for example, if he sees 3 blocks, he can count them, saying "One block, two blocks, three blocks!" How many two year olds can count?!) He can also count by twos. He learned those concepts from this video.To the parents who complain about the songs being cheesy, well, what do you expect? Its a kid's video. The songs are cheesy, yes, but cheese works. Yes, they get stuck in your head...but they get stuck in your child's head too, and isn't that the point? | 1positive
|
I really love this story of the Bravermans. They are all interesting and I think the show is well produced. | 1positive
|
This is one of the best classic chick flicks I've sen in a while. It's heavy on the romance but the main thrust is that a woman can overcome any obstacle in her path if she just stays true to herself. Of course the mainstay of the film is her competing with another woman for the man she loves, but that's incidental to the overall theme of female courage. It's a strong showing from the 1940s and very well preserved. | 1positive
|
This little gem was apparently lensed independently and then picked upo by notorious shlock-pushers Troma for distribution. I can handle "Mother's Day" "Bloodsucking Freaks" and "Class of Nuke 'em High" from the boys of Troma, but this one takes a little more patience and stomach than I may have.If you want poor acting, a horrible plot and even worse effects, I can't think of a better place to send you than BCAP. If any of these actors worked outside of this film (or maybe cable access) I'd be highly surprised. The plot and script was probably hatched between commercial breaks during Monday Night Football. The effects are weak even by Bollywood standards circa 1981.IF you must know, the "film" follows the tale of a father and son who meet tragedy on a camp out. When the dad's ankle is snared in a bear trap and the son unable to retrieve help ( I thought he was pretty lame, even for an 8 year old) the near death father falls into dementia and encourages his son to cannabalize him for survival. Oh, all while the school teacher father is quoting Olde English or "Angel Accent" or Anglo Saxon lore . Naturally years later, the kid runs loose through the backwoods of the "New Jersey Bible Belt" (where?!?) terrorizing the God-fearing townfolk and kidnapping other kids for his flesh eating cult.If you see BCAP, you will bear witness to some of the worst on-screen detecive work ever filmed as the "good guys" in the film attempt to find the culprit. Personally I don't think these pseudo-intellectual wannabe sleuthes couold solve the "Jumble" puzzle in the local newsrag, but painfully they work through the mystery and burn some valuable film time that could have been wasted on the bad effects.Now the efects were made in the days before CGI and also apparently in the days before realistic fake blood, arrows and axes without visible fishing line attached and directors who could tell actors portraying the deceased the simple command to "not breathe visibly on-camera".I still rate this dud 2 stars, better than I will a high budget H'wood outing with 100x the budget and sppoiled prima donna players. It's worth a laugh for crap-fans or maybe as a good punishment to make your kids watch when they are bad and you take their Playstation away. | 0negative
|
Well you can read this movie as you have read my title. This is not a scary movie at all. There is no plot in this movie it is just about these kids going out in the forest and getting lost while (supposedly) being chased by these witches. I give this movie 2 stars because it really didn't go anywhere. You didn't find out about anything and to tell you the truth it was kind of stupid. Many people liked it and I have nothing against that but if you read reviews before you watch movies take it from me.... DO NOT BUY THIS FILM. The last ten minutes is the scariest and even that is kind of stupid. | 0negative
|
A beautifully filmed piece of worthless sheet of Anti-American propaganda: Leni Riefenstahl would be proud.Back in the old days (pre-1940), Ivy League schools weren't meritocracies but sylvan glades where the sons of wealthy East Coast patricians gambolled and frolicked before taking their rightful place running government and corporations like the good oligarchs they were. And this film purports to get to the psychological and sociological roots of how very very evil all that was....and still is.Which is why it is a beautifully gilded crock of smelly horse pucky, with clouds of green bottle flies dining on its moist putrid reek. It was so bad I could not stop watching, and eventually started laughing.For those of you who want to cut-to-the chase for the thesis here is the stunning, original, insightful, startling, brave, rebellious, and groundbreaking insight this monumental film contributes to history (the "Oscar" statuette for the first time-ever! bends at the waist and bows his head).................shhhhhhh....sshhhhhhhhhh.....De Niro is about to pronounce... (a kind of hush falls over humanity as we anticipate this genius .....as he proclaims the dawn of a new age with his word)...."WASPs are evil."There it is. The WASP sense of entitlement, noblesse oblige, privilege, power ...it is all a mask for murderous racist misogynistic eugenic horror. These guys don't need triple-K hoods because they have old school ties instead.Okay, the good things: this is a beautifully filmed movie, with absolutely lovely sets, the art direction and the cinematography and yes, even the direction is excellent.Tammy Blanchard is stunning as Laura, an old girlfriend of the hero whose presence and then absence from his life provides leitmotifs of loss throughout. Her performance alone is worth watching this film, and she was so good I'm going to seek out her other work just based on what she did here.William Hurt is particularly well-cast as a leading patrician spook and delivers his usual good performance.Angelina Jolie is okay, but you can't ever get into her character because De Niro's direction, and her wardrobe, and her makeup all were carefully constructed to say only one thing and one thing loudly "HEY LOOK! WE GOT ANGELINA JOLIE IN THIS PICTURE! PRETTY SWEET, EH?!" it is impossible to forget that it is *her* and not *her*character*.The minor characters outshine the stars throughout. Joe Pesci is dead on in a small artful cameo (and I usually hate him) where he creates a *character* that is different from himself. You actually have to blink to make sure it is him.Which brings us to Matt Damon, who mysteriously does not appear in this film. Why De Niro cast the Damon puppet from Trey Parker and Matt Stone's "Team America: World Police" for the lead role will perhaps forever remain a mystery in annuls of Movianna (perhaps budget constraints is the explanation).The Damon puppet gives a credible but wooden performance in its limited, expressionless, range. And perhaps this was De Niro's goal. But the difficulty is the blank grain of the barely painted static wood block simply doesn't point to any interior conflict that is the entire subtext and purpose of the film. Other critics have projected their own emotional reactions to the *script* and *plot* onto the puppet's performance, but even with clever lighting and muted shadows (all stolen from Riefenstahl and German expressionism) the puppet remains, well, a puppet. Its ceaseless repetition of the one line "Matt Damon" got pretty tiresome, as were the 50's style half-horn rim glasses superglued to its ears. De Niro simply went overboard in trying to cast for a wooden performance, but we can suppose he did not want to take the risk of having a flesh and blood actor who might comprehend what was going on.Which leads to the other bad things in the film (a list of endless cliché's begins here): WASPs are emotionless, secret societies are evil, wealth is abused, cripples and blacks are not worthy of the love of gods, government is there for the privileged, WASPS are actually cyrpto-Nat-zees, women aren't worthy of respect and are nothing but breed cows and catchers mitts for our genetic sputum, etc.But the biggest, unresolved, and forever bizarre bug-a-boo of Hollywood is a thesis that is paradoxical and has mutually exclusive axioms: The CIA is so powerful it can do anything and it is simultaneously an organization of incompetent buffoons motivated to do foolish counterproductive and damaging things. The Good Shepherd manages to make the case for both ideas and as far as I can tell, is serious.I really could not stop laughing. This is the biggest pot of poo I have ever seen, and if there is a single creative or original idea in the whole mess of twaddle, I'll be flummoxed if I could find it. Like the boy happily and energetically digging through a pile of manure expecting to find a pony at the bottom of it, I kept watching. But nope, as the credits rolled it became flabbergastingly evident that De Niro was serious and this was his real expression and intent.Your time would be better spent making shadow puppets with your hands and naming lefty "cliché" and righty "Jolie" unless you, like myself and "Sprockets" Dieter say:"Did you mean for me to scream?" | 0negative
|
This movie is great! It's funny and scary! There are some really funny, laugh out loud parts and then suddenly you're jumping out of your skin from being scared! Unique and very well done! Very refreshing movie! | 1positive
|
Seriously, between this, the goofiness ofTransformers, the poor man's Hitchcock ofDisturbia, and the god-awfulness ofIndiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, Mr. Lebeouf is on a very profitable bus straight to cheesytown. Move over, Pauly Shore, there's a new star who we won't be able to take seriously in 5 years or so. "Eagle Eye" is a film that will appeal to a broad audience of small-minded film fans. People who consider themselves above science-fiction and yet have a complete inability to comprehend concepts like themes, metaphors, nuanced storytelling, and imagination go ahead and change my rating to 5 stars, because this movie was made with you in mind. But for those of you who have seen2001 - A Space Odyssey,V for VendettaThe Terminator,The Matrix, or any number of the other embarrassingly superior films casting light on the dangers that Artificial Intelligence and Big Brother could very well pose to our future should not waste two hours on this under any circumstance.Picture a team of producers brainstorming this concept. Let's blatantly rip off the best science fiction stories, but set it in the present day and make it so ridiculously over-the-top that spaceships, time traveling, and aliens seem realistic in comparison. Then disguise it as a PG-13 thriller, add tons of obnoxious and pointless big-budget effects, and then just a dash of everybody's favorite political sport: bashing the Bush administration. The people who enjoy this sort of film will almost certainly be too dense to catch the relevancy, those that do take note will feel like super-geniuses for finally being able to read between the lines (at least when the lines are shoved right up into their face), and anybody with more than half a brain but no cinematic taste will likely overlook the fact that the film is as dumb as a sack of rocks because they will be too busy applauding it for stating the extremely obvious. Around 75% of Americans say Bush is a tool. The other 25% know he is, but are too obstinate to admit their side screwed them and the rest of the country over for no good reason. Political commentary aimed at patting the vast majority of 20/20 hindsighters on it's collective back loses it's edge and it's point. Even when "Eagle Eye" tries to do good, it fails because it's still just reiterating what we already know in the most tedious and corny way possible. I'll take my robots and spaceships now, please."Eagle Eye" is hardly the worst film out there and at least it tries on the surface to be politically relevant and reach the braindead masses. That's more than a lot of the garbage out there gives us. There are some good visuals, the performances aren't bad, and on some level I do enjoy the tribute paid to "2001". Also, Rosario Dawson is hot. She usually picks her roles better than this (A LOT better), but I'll give her a pass this time.The way the film is set up as a by-the-books thriller that slowly reveals it's sci-fi twist may blow the minds of cinematic idiots, but to a fan of the art form, it's actually insulting. It begins with mysterious phone calls to our two protagonists from an all-seeing, all-knowing, all-controlling feminine voice. The voice coerces them with threats into performing task after task after boring task while the audience feels coerced into waiting to see what this is all about. Long story, short: Operation Guillotine is in effect. If our heroes don't think fast, a secret military project known as Skynet....err I mean Eagle Eye is going to behead the American government with a child's musical instrument. Why this is a bad thing is never really explained. I guess it's because killing is, like, bad and stuff.We all know theNational Treasure-loving masses are easily impressed with needless plot complications that make no sort of realistic sense but sound cool on the surface. This one takes it to a new level. The all-knowing, all-seeing aspect of this gets old fast and it takes up about 1 1/2 hours of the film. It just pounds you in the face over and over until you are begging the story to progress in some meaningful way. The plot itself is interesting in it's intricacy if that's your cup of tea, but that genre of storytelling wore out it's welcome with me by the time I finished the first of theOcean's Eleven/Twelve/Thirteenfilms. We get it, you Hollywood writers have too much time on your hands and feel compelled to one-up every film that comes out with silly twists and super-complex plots that have no basis in reality and work big-budget effects in. Wow, you guys are really smart but here's a thought: get some original ideas and stop copying off each other. This cinematic inbreeding is killing the art form. The economy has nothing to do with the film industry recession, just askThe Dark Knight. People are just sick an tired of paying to see the same ridiculous nonsense over and over. Hollywood's elite need to get off their duff and give us some quality entertainment before we the fans put our own Operation Guillotine into effect.If "Eagle Eye" can serve as a buffer between the humdrum, dime-a-dozen mainstream thriller and legitimate creative science fiction works then perhaps it can do some good and convert some of the closed-minded to the real meat of genre filmmaking. In spite of it's cheesiness and reliance on big dumb special effect and big dumb plot twists, its pretty watchable and should work for the sort of people that enjoy those sorts of movies and have a limited knowledge of cinema and politics. But I am a geek and this movie gave me more eye-rolling and irritation than anything else. If you are also an eye-rolling sci-fi nerd, you have been warned. If you are all about empty flash and big dumb boom, then enjoy but don't forget to check out the real deal as well. | 0negative
|
This is just a fun movie. We are in our 60's and find the Madagascar series to be enjoyable and love, love, love the penguins! | 1positive
|
I guess there are guys who are so insecure they can't deal with life issues like breaking up with someone but Christopher is in need of some serious help. It was almost painful to watch him try to find happiness moving from one guy to the next as if his happiness was dependent on having a steady boyfriend. Imagine calling into work and asking for repeated weeks off because you were having a tough time dealing with this or that boyfriend issue. Very unrealistic -- fire him!! I am having a real hard time trying to figure out why this is rated more than 2' | 0negative
|
I wasn't aware of the original. Almost "clever", but fails miserably at the end, huge let down! | 0negative
|
Ever since I was little I have absolutlely hated this movie with a total passion. I hate to sound negative as I talk about something but I just can't stand this movie. I believe that the whole of movie's about evil dolls are becoming so stupid because they have been overdone. I mean what is the premise for a movie like this. It is a horrible plot and leaves nothing to the imagination (If you would just sit down and think about it). I'm sorry but it gets the one star because I just can't like a movie that has an evil doll as one of the main characters. | 0negative
|
Midnight Cowboy is a good film but not perfect. When this film was released, it was rated X but if this movie was made today it wouldn't shock people like it did then. The best thing about Midnight Cowboy is the acting, Jon Voight and Dustin Hoffman are electric. Complicated and gritty film but one to see, enjoy! | 1positive
|
Excellent series! Did not have Showtime when first broadcast, so it was worth it to buy this and catch up, now that I have Showtime available!! | 1positive
|
For those like me who are exploring the world of old movies for the first time, there is an excellent list at the NY Times website called "The 1000 best films ever made." This is one of those films, and I'm enjoying following their recommendations as opposed to just clicking on TCM or AMC and seeing whatever's on.But that doesn't mean I always agree with those recommendations. I'm not particularly a fan of this genre, so it takes something really special to appeal to me. If this describes you too, skip "Silk Stockings" and go directly to Fred & Ginger's earlier films "Top Hat" and "Swing Time." Although this film with Fred & Cyd Charisse has its moments (Janis Paige gets some laughs, Charisse has a terrific solo dance number where her dour Communist character finally gets into those silk stockings, and this is the only place you'll ever see Peter Lorre sing and dance), ultimately it just drags. One could never say that about the above-mentioned Fred & Ginger classics.Even the score by the legendary Cole Porter has zero memorable tunes...again, unless this type of film is your cup of tea, in which case it'll appeal to you. As for me, by the final half-hour I was continually amazed the film wasn't over yet, as another scene and then yet another scene started up while I was hoping for "The End." And it's actually surprising to me to find that this film is considered a comedy; other than Paige, I got zero laughs out of it. And Astaire, now middle-aged in 1957, is a shadow of his former self. Ultimately I just shut it off before the ending because I was falling asleep, so even though the film has its moments I give it only one star. A sleeping pill deserves no more. | 0negative
|
Being able to understand what the characters were saying might have made a major difference in my rating, but this movie is totally not understandable. The heavy accents made it impossible for us to watch more than 10 minutes of the movie. It was a pure pleasure to turn it off.Unless you were born in Ireland, you may have trouble understanding what they are saying. I feel this DVD was truly money wasted. | 0negative
|
Miami is the most talked about city of the year 2006.First, there was the Miami Heat that won the title of the NBA finals championship, and then there was Miami Vice that wins the title of lamest excuse for a movie.Michael Mann (Heat) directs the film based on the famous 80's TV series with the same title. Colin Farrell (The Recruit) and Jamie Foxx (Ray) star as Miami detectives Sonny Crocket and Ricardo Tubbs, originally played by Don Johnson and Phillip Michael Thomas respectively, who go undercover and become extremely involved in a drug ring. Sonny falls in love with the wife of a major drug trafficker, and Ricardo puts his family life on the line.There's plenty of scenes of the Caribbean (no pirates though!), unnecessary nudity and sex (especially the dreadful Jamie Foxx shower scene), very little action, but perfectly shot action (Michael Mann is an expert at shooting action sequences, just watch the Downtown L.A. shootout scene in Heat for extra proof), and dull performances by the entire cast, with no exceptions. The plot, along with Mann's gritty cinematography, seems disturbingly hazy, and the resolution leaves you hanging like Colin Farrell's laughable mullet.Not recommendedD | 0negative
|
Loved the series already, started watching the show a few episodes into season two, received this as a Christmas gift, and am so enjoying episodes that I hadn't seen before. Lucky me that my son knows how to find my Amazon wish list! | 1positive
|
This is one of the most startling beautiful films I have ever run across.It is set in desert region that neither Utah nor Arizona can duplicate. The basic story is, I suppose, a farce in which various people come to untimely ends, the action interspersed with fabulous ballet---a canon advertisement, a pizza style noodle preparation involving numerous people, and so on---- It includes some character types only found in Chinese films like a sort of "Baby Huey" character, one assumes to be an eunuch but who seems to have eyes for one of the girls in the shop, and an old miser who is preoccupied with his image, and so on. All this takes place somewhere near a gate in the great wall in some ill defined time in the past when guns and bullets were made one at a time. It isn't, however, just a noodle shop in the desert, it is a beautifully created and lighted noodle house in the middle of a fabulous desert where it has no business being at all. Every shot is a study in chiaroscuro in colors both brash and harmonious such as Caravaggio would have approved.There are a few things that I really don't understand. In the opening sequence the lady manager of the house buys a gun from a traveling merchant in order to have power that she lacks in her social setting. In the course of dickering over the price of the gun they go through the old routine of one character offering an ever rising price starting at one and ending at ten while the other offers and ever decreasing price, but instead of meeting in the middle at five they keep going until they arrive at the other persons starting price, the seller offering the gun of one dollar and the buyer offering ten. It's an old gag, yes, but it is nicely done here except for one thing, the haggling is done in English. This DVD is in Cantonese but i first saw it in Mandarin. The merchant looks persian, as do his assistants, and the Chinese are all Chinese. Why are they arguing in English? I have no idea, but it is one of those moments when you feel like you missed something and it is my guess that it is a Chinese joke that nobody will ever explain to me. They all apparently know English because they just finished a short argument over the phrase "must die," which someone misunderstands as "moose die." I don't believe they have moose in the desert in China, but, again, I have the feeling that I have missed something.All that as it may be, I highly recommend this film. Did I mention it is one of the most beautiful films ever made? Yes, I think I did. | 1positive
|
I'll admit the movie's plot leaves much to be desired but if your a fan of Wesley Snipes, Woody Harrelson, or the heavenly Jennifer Lopez then this is a movie that you would enjoy. The action was great, and it kept me into the movie. Though, with Jennifer, there was no leaving anyway. | 1positive
|
The movie was very disappointing. The movie ending was not similar to the ending of the book. The book was excellent. | 0negative
|
One reviewer wrote the review about the "Super Ants"....this is not that movie.This movie staring Dean Cain bites big time, unless you like movies about chases....there are several car chases, car chasing man, man chasing man, helicopter chasing car....Get the point?The plot is strained through out the movie in dribbles... if you can make it through the endless sceens showing actors walking around doing nothing,walking or staring blankly (probably wondering if this movie will ever be over).*** Fast forward special*** | 0negative
|
The film is an excellent rendition of a fine Eugene O'Neill play made into a movie. Garbo is superb. Of note, the "package" is two films, one in German, one in English. This is a must see for Eugene O'Neill fans as well as film buffs. | 1positive
|
I only heard about Kaufman a couple of years back on Comedy Central ("Andy Kaufman: I'm from Hollywood" which shows every 90 days), but was only a retrospective of the intergender/Jerry Lawler controversy. I had only rented "MotM" from Blockbuster, just as about I was going to get "A Fish Called Wanda" (Don't I have some tastes for an 11 year old?). Bad choice. Besides, even most Monty Python solo projects are better. "Moon" was a lot of spam, bacon, tomato, and spam. <g> Jim Carrey as Andy as the Foreign Man from Caspiar (Latka Gravas, for Taxi fans) even admitted it was stupid at the beginning of the movie, but probably only to get the misunderstanding people out of the theater when it was being shown in cinemas. The Foreign Man did say one truth, though, "The most important things in my life are mixed around...", and some characters were created for dr, dr, dramatic purposes. Look at the end of the credits, it's there. Andy's writer and best friend, Bob Zmuda was in the film somewhere, but not as himself! That makes the film worse! There was a producer (?) named George Shapiro, and a character by that name was in the movie (Well, he might have had to do with Andy, but Danny DeVito? <Latka>NNNOOOOOO!</Latka>). If you even try to get the movie, get a DVD-ROM drive, if you don't already ahve it, and the DVD with real Kaufman features. This rating would have got 5 if it had been a real bio and not a dramedy. VVOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLAAARE... can't judge on Tony Clifton, though. This movie is "like something my dog puked up!" Two stars if not 1, court adjourned. | 0negative
|
This movie is bizarre! But totally fun to watch. The eroticism is palpable. A must item for any vintage collector. | 1positive
|
I did enjoy this web series on DVD, however honestly the poor quality elf ears on Felicia Day stuck out like a MOLE that kept my eyes looking at how poor they were. This one aspect really ruined this web series for me so much that I tossed the DVD in the trash.Over all I did enjoy the web series except when Felicia was on screen.. Then we are back to the ears problem. I did like all of the other chars and I even liked her character. It was once again a problem with the ears..Did I mention the ears? Dear god just CG out those ears and reissue this video. Anything would be better... | 0negative
|
I am a devout Trekker, I came of age during the time that the original series aired. I found it childish and I had no interest in watching it. However, Gene Roddenberry's vision inspired me, I had the feeling that better things were on the way. I was right, the Next Generation series was proof that his vision was alive. Further proof was provided by Deep Space Nine and Voyager.The fetus, the original series, was simply an absurd "William Shatner Show", the acting was ludicrous and Shatner's overweight and over acting destroyed the essence Roddenberry intended.The Star Trek legend was born when Patrick Stewart and company came on TV in 1987. Before TNG, Star Trek was childs play and nothing more. No exploration of characters was possible with Shatner's vanity, he ruined the original series. Majel Roddenberry said that and I agree with her. | 0negative
|
true classic from Sam Peckinpaw with many symbolic moments, jason robards is terrific, other character actors are righton, love it | 1positive
|
Much has been made of the courage and heart that went into the making of "Salt of the Earth." After considering these facts, modern viewers are left to wonder how well the movie has held up over the years. Sad to say, it hasn't. First of all, the production values of the film are extremely poor. The cinematography is washed out and grainy, and the dialogue is laugh-out-loud melodramatic. Fans will say that this is because the film was under fire from the beginning, and perhaps the cinematography, painful as it is to watch, can be forgiven. The script cannot, however, as it is blatantly clear that the writer was more intersted in getting his message across than giving the audience a well paced story. While this style of writing may inspire people already committed to the writer's cause, it will alienate the undecided who came expecting a decent movie. Thus writing for melodrama hurts the cause more than it helps it. "Salt..." suffers further when it is held next to movies like Enrice's "Spirit of the Beehive." The latter film was also made under the spectre of censorship, but its production values are excellent, proving that a truly talented director can produce a good quality movie and get a message across despite adverse conditions. Even if one forgives these facts, however, the film still fails modern audiences because of its datedness. Although modern social activitsts are loathe to admit it, the American labor movement has progressed greatly over the last 50 years. A White, college student activist who sees this film and is inspired to search the southwest looking for oppressed towns to liberate is likely to be very disappointed, as wage gaurantees, working hour caps, overtime laws, group health plans and spanish speaking lawyers who specialize in labor law have changed the scene dramatically since 1954. In short, although "Salt..." deserves a modicum of recognition for the bravery of its very existence, the film's only real value is as a historical curiosity and a rallying call to radical activists who cannot see that the era of the film has long since passed. | 0negative
|
No real story line. No good acting. Not enough or good nudity, no real sex scenes. I am not sure what is positive about this movie? I am not good at narrating movies but I can tell you that out of blue one woman shows up at the door steps of another female and announces she is the one her dad is renting, allowing to stay? her in the guest house. Next thing you know, these two are kissing and they are in bed. No real nudity, other than brief flashes. Sex scene were amateurly done without really showing any skin at all. So,this is a waste of your money movie. | 0negative
|
The quality of this film was terrible although I have to admit that I have seen/heard worse. The auditory part was the worst, although the acting was sporadic in quality. I did not recognize a sick-looking Michael Rennie (as Montgomery) at first because it did not sound like him; for some idiotic reason, they had someone else speaking for him. As for the weaponry shown in the movie, it was a mishmash.The film's plot revolves around the battle of El Alamein, as seen from an Italian force. I have to admit that initially I was snickering about the Italians' portrayed bravery, since the Italians' reputation throughout the war, from beginning to end, was that they were all pathetic cowards, as bad as the French. Then I remembered that in North Africa there were indeed notable exceptions and there were several Italian units that had balls: the Bersaglieri, the Folgere, the Ariete. Unfortunately (for them), the incompetent Duce did not supply them well at all.There were three details worth mentioning. One, they should have actually shown the Germans stealing the Italians' transportation so that they could save their own hides. Some allies! The other detail that they did show was that occasionally the British murdered POWs; that's a part of history that we're not supposed to mention, though it did happen. The third had a tank battalion going against the defenders and the tanks did not have infantry support?? | 0negative
|
already recommended it to my friends. hilarious at times, thought provoking at others. watched it with my boyfriend. he really liked it too. her next movie looks like it will be good too "Do I need this?". | 1positive
|
I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. When I first saw the trailer I thought it looked interesting, but apparently no one else did. After seeing the positive reviews and hearing from friends that it actually was a very funny movie, I decided to pick it up on BRD (my first BRD btw). While the story isn't particularly original and a bit predictable, it walks the line between having a heart and over-the-top-and-frequently-crude humor perhaps better than any movie since the original American Pie (the fact that Sean William Scott is in this movie is just coincidence). And this is a comedy after all; people are expecting feel good laughs--not crazy plot twists.I think most people know about the main characters, who do an excellent job, as well as the plotline, so it's worth mentioning that the auxilary characters are hilarious, especially Jane Lynch. Her friendly and well-meaning but borderline-psychotic demeanor is hysterical. I also enjoyed the overzealous dweeb who's volunteered for over 5 years for Sturdy Wings (the "Big Brothers" type of organization Lynch runs), and the "King" and his minions in the fictitious role-playing game that Augie (McLovin') takes part in. Almost all the characters add a little something to the movie, which is great.As for the added content, the deleted scenes are, as expected, hilarious. Blu-Ray exclusives include things like Blu-Ray Live, which connects you to the internet for some exclusive content, and the ability to cut out certain scenes. I haven't gotten too much into it, but it adds some longevity to the entertainment of the product if that's your thing.Anyway, if you thought the previews were ho-hum, don't let that fool you. This movie was perhaps one of the biggest surprises of the year, with a light hearted but solid story and, most importantly, huge laughs. | 1positive
|
This film is a classic and I love it now as much as I loved it when it came out, a must have for any collection | 1positive
|
read the novel. it was ok. saw the movie. got the director's intention. but some big problems. blanchett as dietrich/garbo. not a good idea. she's great, just poorly directed. too bad. clooney? he'll do. the problem is he is not a facially or emotionally conveying, expressive ennough actor to pull off a 'presentational' acting performance. he just comes across as moving stone. the soundtrack, at least on the dvd, is defective: dialouge is barely audible, have to raise the volume, then the music screams out. total imbalance and really irritating. my worst gripe is the lighting. sorry. it's all washed out. loved the black and white choice. obvious in this instance, but film noir did not wash out faces to the extent they are walking lightbulbs against a sheet of black construction paper. so who did the cinematography? i'm not in the film business, but the choices were right, just poorly executed. too bad. this kind of film, on paper, is what i dream of as a moviegoer. | 0negative
|
Probably one of the worst "horror movies I've ever watched. Please for the love of God don't spend your money on it it's a waste of your time. Basically it's a badly filmed version on paranormal activity. You couldn't hear a word they would say and the camera would "cut" out at scary parts. Also they use something extremely vulgar and uncalled for they made a pregnant woman cut out her baby. They shouldn't have went that far . NEVER WATCH IT AGAIN. | 0negative
|
Okay I'm a native Japanese born and raised in city of Fukuoka (1.5M people) (Fukuoka is mentioned (briefly) in the movie!)I'm telling ya that Tokyo is a dead city which is constantly dying even further, but Fukuoka is much more international, cosmopolitan place and people are happier and less cold there. Yokohama(Kannai and Minato Mirai 21) is underrated too.Basically, I didn't understand this film. Even though I do understand that this movie is about culture shock. I suppose that what kept me from enjoying this film is, whether intended or unintended, emphasis on strangeness and weirdness, even to the eyes of most of the Japanese.Which are... the leg-wiggling Tokyo prostitute shouting "lip my stocking! oh! oh!..." etc... and the old man sitting on a lined up chair, pointing at the air, moving his finger around, around, and around....you know, not all Japanese are like that.About the imagery... at first I thought it was like a cheap home-movie. But when I watched it the second time, I saw some eleganceI am deeply compassionate about the loneliness of Bill Murray, but somehow not of Sophia. I don't know why... She was listening to this self-help CD even though she is not from any west coast hippie towns in the United States... hmmm, strange. Oh well.In conversations in this film. I find a lot of intelligence and elegance, and (only) some snobbishness which I like (I mean it.) So I give this movie another star. | 0negative
|
"Chicago: Live in Concert" is an excellent concert.Please note that this blu-ray is a re-release of "Soundstage Presents Chicago-Live in Concert" which was recorded June 2003, in the city of Chicago. The show is part of a series of live concerts by Soundstage, a TV show, produced by Chicago's public television WTTW and HD Ready.Instruments have a full and rich sound and the vocals are great. Horns, a hallmark of Chicago, are exceptional. The flute and keyboards, among other instruments, are notable. There is also a drum solo.Audio choices are DTS-MA 5.1 Surround and LPCM Stereo. Audio was great on LPCM Stereo which I listened through the speakers on my hi-def TV.The concert contains 15 songs and is about 1 hour and 21 minutes. I enjoyed most of the songs and it flew by pretty fast for me.Track listMake Me SmileColour My WorldNow More Than EverIf You Leave Me NowDialogueHard Habit to BreakSaturday in the ParkBeginningsJust You 'N' MeDoes Anybody Really Know What Time It Is?Feelin' Stronger Every DayI'm a ManHard to Say I'm Sorry/Get AwayFree25 or 6 to 4Robert Lamm, Lee Loughnane, James Pankow, Walt Parazaider, Bill Champlin, Jason Scheff, Tris Imbodden, and Keith Howland are the band, Chicago, in this blu-ray. | 1positive
|
This movie isn't anywhere near as good as the original. It isn't really a blaxploitaion movie at all. It seems more like they were experimenting, trying to see if a black female lead could carry a non-black movie on her own. It was a somewhat interesting movie, maybe for historical value, but not really entertaining at all. A typical "kung fu" movie of the era. The sad part was this character wasn't really the same one that I liked from the original movie. And I don't think Ms. Dobson showed her hair at all throughout the movie, she wore hats the whole time. I was so distracted trying to figure out what was wrong with her hair. | 0negative
|
This movie fails on essentially every level it can fail. The idea is bad. The script is bad. The costumes and hair styles are bad. Even most of the acting is bad. How this ever got a green light is beyond me, particularly given that, though not a tremendously expensive production by any means, the money spent making it is far above what it deserves.Science Fiction, or in this case Speculative Fiction, has always been a fertile ground for film making. And a lot of guys have figured out how to do it. Even some movies with really wild plots have been able to get the audience to suspend their disbelief. But if a viewer believes any of this they have serious issues.Here's the scoop. The corporations own the world and one of them, "Hope Industries", figures that normal advertising is no longer effective and cooks a scheme to plant ads directly into someone's brain via a circuit implant. It's still in the test phase so they're working out the bugs. They stage a car accident with Cuba Gooding Jr. to provide the opportunity to implant the chip in him and the plot takes off from there.He gets help from an outlaw group of rebels intent on bringing Hope Industries to its knees. There are only 4 of them so it's a daunting task to be certain, but they're computer geniuses and can hack and gain all sorts of intel at lightning speeds. And Hope Industries, with it's near limitless resources, seems to have weak spots all over its operations. It's amazing how even low level people in the company, even actors it their commercials, have information pertinent to the company's goings on.That's as far as I'm going there. Just let it be known that this movie is dumb beyond the meaning of the word. All those involved must have led lives devoid of the movie going experience. Now granted, I've seen way too many movies in my life, and I've got more than a few years under my belt, but even someone with way less viewing experience than myself can see that this is simply an inept venture into the genre.Wasn't Cuba Gooding a good actor once upon a time? What happened to him here? And Val Kilmer. On the cover art he looks like the Val of days gone by. In the movie he looks like he crawled out of the bottom of a bottle. Michael Ironside phones in his performance. This is just a wasted effort all the way around. Don't waste your time or money. | 0negative
|
streep shines, but as a movie this is labour propaganda and a shameless abuse of one of freedom's greatest heroes. | 0negative
|
I would have preferred a video with more sensationalism. Robyn Symon reveals how The Church of Scientology systematically discredited Werner Earhard and how mass media only covered the scandal and didn't care when the accusation were proven false. I get off on those kind of stories which can be found in this hard hitting documentary.Instead, this 77 minute documentary gives you the building block technology of transformation, the ideas and methods that have retooled modern western business and quantum learning.The bonus material includes shockingly candid scenes straight from est. If you ever wondered what the big hoopla about Landmark Education's The Forum, you can now see the technology in action. You can watch how Werner separates a participant from their story, an identity that had been holding them prisoner. This video teaches you how to use your mind for a change that will give you completion of your past so that you are present and responsible for yourself in a new way.Of course the video is not without its detractors. Critics of The Forum discuss how Werner is discussed as victimizing the victimized and compounding their pain. Others hold that this process is the key to letting go of the authentic benefits of being a victim.This video is not for the intellectually squeamish. | 1positive
|
This is a lower budget revenge flick with just not enough going for it.Here's the scoop. A Russian crime syndicate imports girls to Toronto for the sex trade but the girls think they are going to perform maintenance duties. Some disappear and the mute sister of one of the disappearees is headed for Toronto to do in all the bad guys.The schtick here is that you have a pretty, shapely, mute girl doing the violence. Other than that there is not much new. She weedles her way into various places and situations involving the traffickers and, when the time is right, does her thing. Only one of the kills has any degree of cleverness to it so don't expect anything to tickle your grey matter. There is one twist in the plot near the end that is both interesting and ironic but it's not enough to redeem this unremarkable movie. Most of the acting is not very good. The production values are lacking. One of the cameras had a lens that was either dirty or pitted. In either case it was a distraction. The sound editing and mixing was OK but nothing notable. There was a reasonable amount of nude female flesh on display and my guess is the producers figured this would get them in the door. I guess it did because here it is.It doesn't hurt to watch this movie, and it clocks in at just under 90 minutes so it won't tax your time, but unless you need to see every revenge flick ever made you won't hurt yourself by giving this a pass. | 0negative
|
Worst abuse of good actors I have ever seen. Way too long. These bad financial times have made good actors do lousy movies. What a dissappointment. | 0negative
|
What do you do when the law doesn't help? After his brother is brutally murdered Sherriff Spencer (Luke Goss) is let down by the people he hoped would help. Taking matters into his own hands he goes undercover in the gang that did it in order to get revenge. Looking at the cover it seems like another 50-cent/Val Kilmer movie, which makes you think twice about getting it. Vinnie Jones, Fiddy and Kilmer have a total screen time of about 2 minutes. Luke Goss is the main star of the movie. I was not expecting alot being that I thought it as a 50 cent/Kilmer movie, although "Gun" was not as bad as I expected so I had a little more expectations for this one. This was a movie that started off flat and never improved. The acting wasn't as bad as I expected though. It was not terrible, but had all the drama and excitement of watching a dog play fetch, fun for a while then just sitting waiting for it to end. This is a movie that a lot of people will like, I just can't get into this kind of thing. I give it a C-.Would I watch again? - No I wouldn't | 0negative
|
Poor content. Had to read what was going on by reading the screen as most of it was in another language. | 0negative
|
What happens when you throw together wealthy, attractive Orange County women? Drama, naturally. Add a healthy dose of alcohol and the claws come out! It's a guilty pleasure to watch the women spar with each other in one cat fight after another. Watch for utterly mindless entertainment! | 1positive
|
Now, I will admit. I did go see it when it first came out, but this movie is a pure joke. Not a horror film and not a comedy either. Murphy looked ridiculous w/all that stuff on. Angela, Kadeem (who's acting is mediocre already), and Allen...you guys could do so much better.I don't think I can say much more. | 0negative
|
I have seen the Memphis Belle documentary more times than I can count over the past 50 years. I have seen the actual plane twice. I even have the nose art tattooed on my leg. With all of that I still found this product interesting. There was new footage that I had not seen and was not in the original documentary. The picture quality was first rate. If new to this story a person can learn the basic facts of this plane and her crew. Those of us who know the history will still enjoy this film. The crew who flew her have all passed on but the "Memphis Belle" and her story live on. | 1positive
|
Before the review I wanted to point something out in response to J hemphill's review. Brandon Lee WOULD have actually been in other Crow movies if he had lived. He was signed on for three crow films before he died. They deliberatly had Albrecht shoot Grange in the chest(Tony Todd in the final gun battle in the cathedral) so that he could reprise his role in the sequel (there would've been a reveal that he was wearing a bullet-proof vest).On to the review...{rant}The first Crow film has been my all time favorite movie for the past 11 years (my god has it been that long) and I feel that the producers have been milking a dead cow since the second film was put into production. They're all more like bad remakes then sequels anyway...what's up with them all having make-up? I wish we could've seen Rob Zombie's version of a crow movie (he was the original writer/director of #3). He actually wanted to do something unique with the crow mythology...and he would not have put make-up on the 'crow' character because it was Eric's and Eric's alone{end rant}I'm still going to catch the flick for mere curiostity though. Cant be worse than the last one and David from Angel is one cool cat. We'll see. | 0negative
|
A fun movie to watch that added to the legend of Jesse James. Was he the Robin Hood of the west as the movie protrays? Who cares, this is just classic old time western fun. A great cast that Includes Tyrone Powers Jr., Henry Fonda and Randolph Scott!! That is three aces right there.Follow the adventures of the James boys as they are almost forced to attack the evil railroads and the robber barons that ran them. Doesn't that sound familar in this age where many people distrust the big corporations of today? Really though, do not get to philosophical over this. It is a western, and a good one at that. | 1positive
|
"Breaking Bad" isn't in the same exalted ranks as "The Sopranos", but it's good enough and different enough to easily get five stars.Vince Gilligan, the series' creator, says it can be viewed as a comedy, and the first two episodes are blackly funny throughout. The tone is Hitchcockian, and Gilligan borrows freely from The Master, even going back as far as "The Lodger". I leave it to you to find the other references and takings. (The following episodes are more-fitfully funny, with the theft of the methylamine being the most-broadly humorous.)The most-obvious Hitchcockian element is having the audience thoroughly identify with the character we /aren't/ supposed to identify with -- Walter White. He didn't /need/ to cook meth -- his former business partner would have covered his medical expenses -- but he does it anyway. Gilligan enhances our sympathy for Walter by surrounding him with thoroughly unlikeable and/or stupid people * -- his sister-in-law (a shoplifter), his brother-in-law (a macho DEA cop), his drug-dealer associate (who, as they say, couldn't pour piss from a boot if the instructions were printed on the bottom), and worst of all, his wife. Skyler White (her name "says it") is a self-centered, judgemental, ungrateful person who's more interested in "communicating" with her husband than in loving and supporting him. When Walter is finally willing to tell her everything, she refuses to listen: "I don't think I could handle it." (What did he ever see in her? What did he ever do to deserve such an uncaring b****?) The only sympathetic major character is Walter's son, played charmingly by R J Mitte.Gilligan also borrows another Hitchcock theme -- we never /really/ know what's going through the minds of the seemingly "good" people we associate with. Much of "Breaking Bad" riffs on this theme.Gilligan has no problem appropriating scenes from famous films, such as "GoodFellas" and "The Manchurian Candidate". He doesn't do this often enough to be annoying, though.The quality of acting is not particularly high. John de Lancie, an actor I normally don't much care for, gives an understated and effective performance as the father of a junkie, and Bob Odenkirk is just plain wonderful as a corrupt lawyer with high ethical standards, but most of the actors (especially Christopher Cousins) seem to have been rounded up at a garage sale, Aaron Paul being the principal exception.Bryan Cranston pretty much carries the series. The scripting is rarely less than acceptable -- but similarly hardly ever inspired. For Cranston, it doesn't need to be, because he's given many opportunities to /show/ us, with his face and body, what his character is thinking, rather than reading lines. It's a solid performance.There are surprising technical errors. An explosion strong enough to blow out windows would also likely blow out the eardrums of anyone present. And it's unlikely that two gallons of hydrofluoric acid would be enough to dissolve a human body /and/ take out the tub and the floors beneath. It's such nasty stuff that it's /highly unlikely/ gallon jugs of it would be sitting in the supply room of a high-school chemistry lab.* It took a while to figure this out. My initial reaction was that the actors were either miscast or poor actors. But the characterizations appear to be intentional. | 1positive
|
Movie rating: 3 starsSound quality: 1 star (Note: This review is of the Silver Screams DVD release).William Castle's classic "gentle" horror in which millionaire Frederick Loren (Vincent Price) offers five people $10,000 if they survive a night in a haunted house. I'm sure if you buy this from Amazon, you'll be fine. I just thought I'd better let Australasian readers know that they should avoid the Mira Entertainment DVD release of HOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL as you can't hear a thing. I had to turn the volume on my TV and DVD player up to max, and I still couldn't hear it. This really annoyed me as I'm a huge Vincent Price fan. But don't let this put you off buying other Mira DVDs. I have several more DVDs distributed by them and the sound quality is fine. Just avoid HOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL. Buy it here instead. | 0negative
|
I rented this movie to watch with my 4 year-old son. Even he thought it was boring - and he was the one who picked it out becuase he liked the "Garfield" ride at Kennywood amusement park. I haven't seen a more pointless movie in years. The plot was mishmash of other plots, with the most obvious part taken directly from "Toy Story 2" (which did the rescue-a-friend bit infinitely better). Bill Murray sounds incredibly disinterested, even for him. Breckin Meyer is a sin against film and Jennifer Love Hewitt's career can be summed up in the fact that "I Know What You Did Last Summer" was the high point.Bottom line - don't bother. | 0negative
|
On top of being a stereotypical dumb action movie, Doom has all of the characteristics of a disaster on film. The first flaw is the terrible acting on the part of The Rock. Granted he looks badass holding an assault rifle, but when he opens his mouth, the problems start. He is just not a convincing actor at all. No one else in the film stands particularly above the mediocre mark either.Another problem we have is with the screenwriting. They took an already one dimensional actor (The Rock), and had him play the one of the most predictible. one dimensional characters I've ever seen. His personality can be summed up it three words, KILL KILL KILL. He just came off as cheesy, to the point where if he started giving demons the Rock Bottom and People's Elbow, I wouldn't have been surprised. Each character is a stereotype. During the film, I was making bets on who was going to die first. Following the action movie cliche, I picked the blackest character in the film. My girlfriend picked a creepy white guy. I won.Another crippling point to this film is the lack of action. They spent way too much time just creeping through dark hallways and to little actually killing things. Before the First Person Shooter sequence, they only kill about 5 demons, if even that many. Sure, the first person shooter sequence was cool as hell, but it lasted only about 5 minutes. I thought from the ads that a huge chunk of the movie was going to be like that. I wanted more of it throughout the movie. The action wasn't plentiful enough to keep me entertained.The Final Word - This is one of the dumbest of the dumb action movies that I have ever seen. It's like XXX: State of the Union dumb. I laughed through all most of the "scary" or "suspenseful" parts. It's pretty terrible in all respects, and even if you're a fan of the game, you'll still leave dissapointed. | 0negative
|
This could have been the new age Gremlins, but what it is really dull and predictable. 4 aliens decide that a summer home is the place to start an invasion and its up to a pair of teenage boys, a pair of twins and their good hearted little sister to defend the place. They defend the place by using the heat, and the aliens own sci-fi age weapons. All while keeping it from their parents, a local officer and grand mother.Although the movie has Kevin Nealon, Andy Rictor and Tim Meadows are in the movie, they could really do less in it. It's all focused on the kids, which I suppose it should be, its a kids movie.As for the aliens, they aren't ruthless or scary, because this is a movie for kids. If anything they're little formulaic. There is a leader, a female, a thug and a good hearted one that questions the leader. Pretty typical.The only redeeming factor was a remote control character named Ricky. Ricky starts out as the jerk older boyfriend of the main character's older sister. When the aliens strike, they shoot him with a gun that makes him remote control. Naturally hilarity insues as the aliens, and children can make him talk, act like a goof, back flip and anything else. Its almost like children wrote the movie. He is a great source of comedy and if he weren't in it, the movie would be very bland and run of the mill. In fact the movie should be called "Aliens control Ricky."Other than Ricky, it's just a chore to sit through. The movie feels very stale, very quickly; after all, 99% of the movie takes place in a single house within a single day. | 0negative
|
I have watched this movie only once so far but the images from the movie have really stuck with me. Just when you think you've seen it all about The Holocaust, there's another, more horrible, story to shock and sicken people.Roman Polanski, who won the Oscar for Best Director, took Ron Harwood's adaptation of the late Wladyslaw Spzilman's book of the same name and delivered stunning visual testimony to a black period in human history, throwing in some of what he saw as a boy in the Krakow ghetto.There is no need to rehash the plot, as everyone is familiar with it. Bottom line: Polanski and star Adrien Brody deserved their Oscars (and the movie should have received the Oscar for Best Picture).Read the book, watch the movie, and you'll learn to appreciate things a little more than before. | 1positive
|
This item arrived on time and was shrink wrapped. I was really glad to have saved a bunch of money and the product looked unused. Unfortunately,disc one was marred by a scratch that wouldn't allow the player to proceed past about the 2/3 point of the film. Due to the low cost of the item it wasn't worth going through the return process so now I have only one disc that's fully functional. | 0negative
|
The third season brings just as much entertainment as the first two seasons. DD is his normal self at first, but then starts an enormous transformational process. The season finale is one of the best of any show I've ever seen. I just ordered season 4 to make sure I see how it all pans out. | 1positive
|
This I the classic martial arts movie. Predictable, but who cares. Excellent correography, plenty of fight scenes, any a bad guy you love to hate, knowing the physically smaller wing chun master will kick his ass. | 1positive
|
The word hokum originated as stage slang when people put together the words "hocus-pocus" and "bunkum". One of its central meanings is a nonsensical waste of time. The word hokum could have been invented to describe "Bulletproof Monk"."Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon" notwithstanding, Chow Yuen-fat should never have moved to Hollywood. With the exception of that movie, which was partly Hong Kong produced anyway, he hasn't done a decent piece of work since he went there. And he's done less work there in the past seven or so years than he used to do in one year in Hong Kong."Bulletproof Monk" is yet another addition to the genre that might be known as lousy movies based on indifferent comic books. It begins moderately spectacularly with a fight on a rope bridge hanging over a ravine. The monk with no name (Chow Yuen-fat) is fighting his master. He proves his worth, and his master tells him he's now ready to look after the Scroll of the Ultimate."Whoever reads it aloud in its entirety," says the master, "will gain the power to control the world." The question to ask ourselves is why the deities, whoever they are, created such inflammatory objects in the first place.This supposedly takes place in 1943. The Nazis turn up to capture it, but Chow Yuen-fat's character escapes, and the movie flashes forward to the present and a nameless city that might be New York but is nameless because this is a cheap movie and the budget only stretched to filming in Canada. Sixty years have passed and the ageless monk is soon to find the person who is to replace him as the scroll's guardian.The monk, scroll in briefcase, encounters a pickpocket named Kar (Seann William Scott). Kar manages to steal the scroll, which is pretty dumb of the monk considering he's supposedly the top dog in the job of protecting it, after which he's taken to the underground den of a gang of thugs. This gang is led by Mr. Funktastic (Patrick Hagarty), who has his name tattooed across his chest, and also includes the beautiful Bad Girl (Jaime King), who turns out to be not so bad after all.As well as "Bad Girl", there's genuine feminine villainy in the role of Nina (Victoria Smurfit), who is a third-generation Nazi."Bulletproof Monk" was written - if that's the word - by Ethan Reiff and Cyrus Voris, and based on the comic book by Brett Lewis and RA Jones. John Woo and Terence Chang played a part in producing it, once again apparently proving my theory that the reason some Hong Kong film-makers do OK in Hollywood is that at least one area of Hollywood has fallen off in quality enough that even the more mediocre of Hong Kong movies can get made there now.It's all directed, pretty much as dully as possible, by a guy called Paul Hunter who apparently previously directed music videos. This movie has none of the slickness of style you associate with music video directors, and I don't mean that in a good way. The cinematography by Stefan Czapsky is lacklustre.Even Chow yuen-fat isn't looking so good in it. He's put on weight. He has a lousy haircut and lousy lines to speak. He's doing more acting in English, and - unfortunately - his acting in English is not much better than Sammo Hung's. Let's hope that another Asian film-maker will give him the chance to do something decent soon. Seann William Scott - who was in "American Pie", "Road Trip", and "Dude, where's my car?" surprised me by being more watchable.But it doesn't make any difference. "Bulletproof Monk" is all garbage anyway. And garbage with no style, which makes it even worse. | 0negative
|
I ordered this item around the 1st of November and the money was taken out of my checking account. I have been waiting and waiting for it to arrive. On December 8th I got a notification from Amazon that they were crediting my account and this item was not coming. No explanation on why this seller held on to my money since the first of November or why this item was suddenly not coming. Had I known - I could have gotten it on the day after Thanksgiving at a lower price but since I had already ordered it I was just waiting for it to come.This was a bad experience. I had to give one star just to be able to write a review. | 0negative
|
I hate to give 2 stars to a Romero film but this film is so bad,i love romero satire and criticism but he have to balance this like he did in his first 3 films,they had all that but they were scary too. | 0negative
|
How did Halle play the race card? Let's compare 2001's Monster's Ball to 1994's Jason's Lyric (unrated version). Once you see the similarities between these two films you'll understand how the race card played in the Oscar win in 2002.Both Monster's Ball and Jason's Lyric are set in the Deep South. Both stories are bleak.Both Monster's Ball and Jason's Lyric have troubled primary characters dealing with the death of a loved one Hank Grotowski is dealing with the suicide of his son. Jason is dealing with murdering his own father.Both male leads are emotionally abused by a family member. Hank is abused by his racist father. Jason is abused by his ne'r do well brother who has been released from prison.Both Male leads work in low wage jobs. Hank is a prison guard. Jason is a clerk in a TV repair shop.Both Male leads long for something better. Hank wants to get away from his father. Jason wants to get away from his surroundings.Both Female leads work in a food service establishment. Leticia Musgrove works as a waitress in a diner. Lyric works as a server in a restauraunt.Both lead characters come together as a result of troubling circumstances. Hank and Leticia come together as a result of her husband's execution and the death of her son. Jason and Lyric come together as a result of dealing with his brother's problems.Both films have an obese character. In Monster's Ball it's Leticia's son. In Jason's Lyric the fat person is Lyric's best friend.Both films feature graphic sex scenes. Monster's Ball features a group of graphic sex scenes between Leticia and Hank where Halle Berry gets nude with Billy Bob Thornton. In addition, there's a graphic sex featuring Heath Ledger and a prostitiute. In Jason's Lyric Jason and Lyric have sex out in a feild. In this graphic sex scene Jada Pinkett and Allen Payne both get nude. In additon, Jada and Allen have sex in the TV repair shop. Furthermore the fat girl and Treach get seminude in an alleyway during their sex scene.Both films feature suicides. In Monster's Ball, Heath Ledger's character kills himself. In Jayson's Lyric Bokeem Woodbine's character kills himself.In the end Hank kicks his father out and moves Leticia in. At the end of Jason's Lyric Jason and Lyric finally get on a bus and leave their bleak surroundings once and for all.Both Monster's Ball and Jason's Lyric were made with low budgets.The only difference between these two films is that Jayson's Lyric had an ALL BLACK CAST and a BLACK DIRECTOR and Monster's Ball had a MIXED CAST WITH A FOREIGN DIRECTOR. The critics roasted Jason's Lyric; those same critics years later applauded Monster's Ball a film with the exact same plot as Jason's Lyric a film they bashed. Both Jada Pinkett and Halle Berry were given critical acclaim for their perfomances, but the Academy chose to give Halle Berry the Oscar nomination and the win.Why? The only real difference between these films is the race of the male leads and their family. Billy Bob Thornton was white,and the actors who played his family were white. Allen Payne was black and the actors who played his family were black.Both films were controversial due to a graphic sex scene. Jada Pinkett's "performance" in Jason's Lyric was just as "riveting" as Halle Berry's in Monster's Ball. However, Jada Pinkett wasn't lauded as a "trailblazer" she didn't get to go on Oprah and talk about how powerful a "love story"Jason's Lyric was, how great an actress she was, and most of all, she got no Oscar nomination. Worse, they were planning on rating Jayson's Lyric X if the sex scene wasn't cut down some. Why? Because Jason's Lyric was a black film made by a black director. Perhaps if Jada Pinkett would have had a graphic sex scene with a white man instead of a Black one she would have been the one holding the gold statue on Oscar night in 1994 | 0negative
|
Powerful, provoking film full of raw emotions. The story plods along very slowly and what it lacks in plot it more then makes up for in splendid acting and story telling. You will be a better person for having watched it.This is a new kind of role for Patrick Swayze, who is still a terrible actor, in my opinion... thus 4 stars and not 5. But, he's not dancing with a doctor's daughter, he's not blowing anything up, instead he's a kind-hearted but stern marine sergeant who's been put in charge of a Vietnam refugee camp and finds himself more involved with the lives of the camp members then he ever expected.We become familiar with a small handful of the refugees and the pain and loneliness they are feeling. Families have been torn apart, loved ones lost, children left orphans, husbands and wives lost forever. But at the same time, we also see the heeling also starting. New relationships begin, new love is found, old wounds heel, and most importantly, the newly arrived refugees begin to understand the potential of life in America and look forward to finding a "sponsor" so they can leave the camp and begin life in a new world.This is no action packed thriller, or even an academy award winning drama, but it is most certainly a movie that will tell a story you most likely knew nothing about before, and will leave you more open minded, educated, and compassionate. I would recommend watching as a double header, to be followed up with a light-hearted romantic comedy. | 1positive
|
If you like comedies, you will love this! Louie Anderson is too funny, in fact the whole cast will crack you up! The casting of the particular actor/comedians for the various roles was perfect!A good comedy for the whole family! | 1positive
|
Ok this is gonna have major spoilers for the end of the film, soSPOILER ALERT**********This is just for everyone who's confused as to Hayley's motive and maybe views her character as hollow or not fleshed out enough to their liking. In the movie it is heavily implied that the "missing girl" seen on a flyer at the beginning of the film, the girl Patrick Wilson's character witnessed being killed, was a close friend of Hayley's. Thus, as she admits on the roof at the end, she formulated this idea and killed the man who murdered her friend, but before he died he told her there was another person involved, and now she's come after him to finish the job. So, her intention is basically to avenge the murder of her friend. Get it now?*********SPOILER ALERT | 1positive
|
Charlton Heston is certainly one of the all-time larger-than-life acting greats and he shows it here the way he admirably tackles the role of Moses from rich desired youth to seasoned, religious pious elderly Hebrew leader. Good support he gets from Yul Brynner (as Rameses!), Anne Baxter, Edward G. Robinson and Yvonne DeCarlo! The authentic Egyptian locations courtesy of talented director Cecile B. DeMille enhance this powerful, very important Biblical story. See my amapedia below for my review of the '23 film (also by DeMille!). | 1positive
|
Another one of those movies where all the men are stupid or evil. Would go great on Lifetime. | 0negative
|
These Step Up movies are great to watch dances are top of the line wish I had of seen it on the big screen they keep changing the lead actors yet don't miss a step all in all a great fun movie to watch. | 1positive
|
This video is horrible. I don't know if this guy has had any formal training at all. Everything was very basic, very basic, information. There is much better information for free on YouTube. The quality of the video itself is extremly amateurish and very poorly produced. The video quality is bad, the lighting is bad, and the audio is bad as well. It's really just some guy with a handheld camcorder talking like he knows something about filmmaking. It just seems like he might have read a book, invited some girls over, and then attempted to talk about what he read. If you know nothing about videography or filmmaking, you couldn't do much worse than this. He should be ashamed of himself for his complete lack of effort. | 0negative
|
As far as enjoyable movies go, this was not one of them. There are some people who enjoy dark humor. This movie definitely crosses the bridge into "just an awful plot to begin with".Towards the middle of the movie, as the plots to remove the old lady upstairs continue, my girlfriend told me that it would still be "allright" to watch if the ending was satisfactory. After a few more attempts to remove the old lady, she revised her opinion to "no good ending could ever save this movie."If you are looking for a mix between Scooby Doo and Home Alone 2, with some awful writing, you have found it. | 0negative
|
I was hyped to see this movie after reading the reviews, but once again you guys let me down. The fight sceens are not bad but not the best. I think it was an ok movie but i wish i hadnt bought it. | 0negative
|
This film is bad!I saw it on the first night it came out,and boy was it a waste of money!The film is about a guy training to be a cop but he never passes the test.Shortly after words he has a car accident. He is found by a strange doctor who replaces his damaged body parts with animal body parts,causing him to act in different ways.I am a fan of Rob Schneider but this just was not good.If you go see this film I wish you good luck.Later. | 0negative
|
I have seen this new "Director's Cut" and it is only THREE minutes longer than the original. I can't even tell you what the difference was.I liked this movie, but this re-release is just plain greedy on the part of the studio.And shame on Antonio Villaraigosa for letting a studio buy our city for a day to promote this rip-off.ONE STAR! | 0negative
|