Jules Gets Four Stars
	Suzanne Brockmann is an unbelievable writer and her stories always draw me in.  The "mystery" portion of the story and the romance between Jane and Cosmo left a little to be desired.  I really didn't understand why Jane had to have her alternative personality as Mercedes and Cosmo was a little to soft for keeping up the hardened SEAL persona.  These particular characters seemed a bit empty compared to Jules and Robin, who clearly stole the show in this book.

As a matter of fact, of the different plots and stories going on in this book, Jules' was the best.  It was not only very well-written and sweet, but even as a hetrosexual female, I could identify with Jules and how he felt at times because what was happening to him, happens to all of us, whether you are in a gay or straight relationship.  I am really hoping that Jules either gets his own book, or has more appearances in future novels where he does find true happiness. I do share Ms. Brockmann's opinion when it comes to differences in appearance, nationality, sexual orientation, etc. and I really like how she includes this in her books.  As far as I'm concerned love is love, no matter what and it's portrayed beautifully here.

Please Ms. Brockmann, don't allow the naysayers to steer you away from this storyline, it's a very good one


Excellent beginners book
	I bought this book to start free weight training at home.  It is wonderful for home use.  The author describes the benefits of weight training and how to lift weights properly(which I found very useful as a first time weight lifter).  I love the descriptions that the author gives for each exercise.  The author also color codes which exercises to do for each level of training.  I would highly recommend this book to anyone who is first starting out with free weights.


My son chose his school here
	My son had visited several colleges, and was having a terrible time figuring out which ones he would "fit in" and get the best educational experience from. He ended up reading this book and visited a few of them that he liked the descriptions of. After applying to, and getting accepted at, four of the schools in this book (and two not in the book) he ended up at Denison University. He's in his second year, and just loves it. I've always felt a little "indebted" to this book, so I thought I'd leave this review


Valuable asset
	This book is a great thing to have for anyone involved in the world of theatre.  It does the hard work of picking out a crucial 16-bar piece of a song for you!  Great for auditions.  The book has selections from musicals (old and new, familiar and rare), as well as movies (even some Disney!).  There's one for every vocal part.  Granted, not every piece is exactly 16 bars.  Some go a bit over, but this is usually excusable due to proper phrasing.  It's well worth looking into for those who are just starting out.  It's also a way of introducing yourself to a variety of musicals


wow
	This is a great compliment to the more project-based MAKE magazine, as it focuses a little more on the personalities of the "makers." Of course, it also describes (and shows, in beautiful photographs), their projects, but it's a great way to see into the personal side of the amateur engineers, bored brainiacs, and fringe-worthy souls who are the heart of the newest form of the DIY geek culture: creating incredible, real-world projects, from the mega (a home built submarine for 3) to the micro, (a diy bat detector), to the whimsical (a Lego blocks project that will solve the Rubik's Cube).

If you're a vociferous reader of Slashdot, you may have seen some of these projects before, but the book really gets into the motivation behind them.

Production values, writing, and design are superb, and of course, URLs are provided so you can find out more on the makers' sites.

Bottom line, this fascinating survery of Make culture (and cool projects) is a must for every geek's coffee table, and it's also a great way to introduce your mom into what it is you actually do with your spare time..


Fakebuster
	A narrow book for a wide-range art specialists. Needs to be supplemented with other Amazon 4-5 books concerning the problem of forgery


Indispensible for the Sword Fancier
	I'm not the expert fencer I long to be (yet), but I do have an ever-growing collection of swords, mostly gifts from grateful Spanish patrons, but I've also been able to purchase and acquire blades from several countries. The pride of my collection is a fairly well-preserved Roman sword from the reign of Trajan.

Burton was, as we all know, something of a dabbler. In this book, he offers us not only straight history of the sword, but also countless fascinating bits of sword lore. I quite frankly can't imagine any sword lover being without this book.

I am looking for a first edition, but for now, this reprint is a valued part of my library


Peter Robinson - A Great Talent!
	I admire an author who deviates from a standard formula and the interweaving of two cases really works in "Piece of My Heart." DI Stanley Chadwick faces a murder case in 1969 against the backdrop of a rock 'n roll concert. His teenage daughter has facts to hide and DI Chadwick walks a fine line. DCI Alan Banks is seeking a murderer in 2005 which eventually connects with the 1969 murder.

The plot has already been outlined, so I'll just say it's a delight to visit DCI Banks again. I'm never disappointed


Great book
	This book is the best book on Rand's esthetics I've ever read; in fact, it is the only book on the topic that I know of.  It is refreshing to see that the authors are objective and critical; they are not slavish cultists  savoring every last word written by Rand.  They approach the material with  critical distance and do an excellent job of placing Rand's work in the  larger history of esthetic theory.  They demolish abstract art, and devote  considerable energy to discussing Rand's definition of art.  They even  propose their own individual alternatives!   If anything shows  independence, it is this willingness to debate the differences between the  authors of the same work!  Remarkable!  The world of Rand commentary is  filled to the brim with sectarianism and partisanship.  That is clear just  by reading one of the reviews here, by people who are devotees of certain   quot;scholars quot; who do nothing but repeat the catechism.  They take  swipes at genuinely independent work anytime it is published; that is why  they hate this book.  Because it is independent-minded.  Judge for  yourself.  Don't be fooled


Mr. Explainer does it again
	When I read Ron Penton's first book, Data Structures for Game Programming, I couldn't wait to see what he did next. MUD Game Programming lived up to all of my expectations, and indeed surpassed them.

The author has an extraordinary knack for making complex topics understandable -- and, equally important, making them interesting. Reading MUD Game Programming is like having a friendly, cheerful expert sitting down next to you and showing you the tricks of the trade. Instead of just telling you what to do, he explains the thinking behind the decisions that go into the design of a complex program such as a MUD server, enabling you to make the decisions that are right for your own project, which might not be the same. You end up with not just knowledge but understanding.

I highly recommend MUD Game Programming to people doing any type of network-based multiplayer programming, not just traditional MUDs. I'd give this book six stars if they'd let me


Fabulous history
	I studied the medieval Islamic world a little in college, and fell in love. It's a fascinating age in which Central Asian Buddhists, North African nomads, Ethiopian slaves, Greek cave-dwellers, Persian aristocrats, Arab bureaucrats and a host of different cultures came together, mixed, wrote wonderful literature, and lived the kind of drama that makes history fun. But it's hard to find anything written about the time that isn't arcane professor babble or Islam 101. (You know, "There are five pillars of Islam..." Snore.)

Here Hugh Kennedy has written the book I always wanted. He wisely concentrates on medieval Islam's golden age, the early Abbasid dynasty, when Baghdad ruled a large portion of the world-and, even more astutely, on the dramatic stories and personalities of the court. Let's face it, you read about the Abbasids because you want to know how the slave girl Khayzuran not only managed to marry the caliph but to quell a military revolt, why her son Harun al-Rashid was immortalized in The Arabian Nights, and why the all-powerful Barmakid family suddenly fell from grace to prison and execution. Kennedy brings the caliphs and their families to life. He's up front about the fact that the book is about aristocrats, but the common people of Baghdad, the "pickpockets and sellers of cheap sweets" who fought back when their city was besieged, and the middle class who developed Islamic tradition dance around the edge of the narrative.

Kennedy doesn't believe everything he reads, and doesn't think you will either. He repeats stories-like the "harem intrigue" tales, in which devious women are blamed for various deaths-that are almost certainly not true, but tell us something about the people who believed them, and are still enormously entertaining. He also is frank about the same-sex relationships, male and female, that were a part of the era's culture, without the awkwardness of many modern historians. And he's smart enough to explain the geography-why southern Iraq could support such a fabulously wealthy monarchy, and why the Afghanistan/NE Iran region was so critical to the faraway Middle East-in a way an American can understand. Very rare for books on Islamic history, the book boasts an excellent map, naming both cities and regions-invaluable for a hapless Westerner who doesn't know where the major cities of Iran are today, never mind where long-gone kingdoms like Yamama and Ushrusana used to be. There's also a surprisingly good index (another rarity).

The book isn't flawless. Kennedy twice awkwardly interrupts his straightforward account of political events with fascinating chapters on aspects of court culture-palaces, poetry, science, and (my favorite) women's lives. Unfortunately, this structure means the reader learns about the palace Mutawakkil built before she knows enough about him to care, and doesn't hear anything about Ma'mun patronage of scientific research until long after he's dead in the main narrative. The last chapter goes into far too much detail about the depressing downfall of the dynasty, short-changing a more interesting discussion about its legacy. But all in all Kennedy does a great job, and I for one plan down to hunt down his earlier books.

If you know nothing about Islamic history and want an accessible introduction to an fascinating period, or like me know a little and want to learn more, I highly recommend this book


it's like a little post-relationship Bible
	Since almost all of my good girl friends (including myself) have gone through nasty breakups lately, I have become much like the Gideons in that I have practically resorted to buying a case full of these fabulous books and carrying them around in my trunk, distributing them to my poor,  heartbroken friends. It is the perfect thing to read when you're in that  post-breakup stay-in-bed-in-your-pyjamas-and-eat-ice-cream stage.  Beautiful, beautiful work. If all you have to complain about this book is  that you didn't learn how to properly can, you're missing the point. Pay  the extra 5 bucks and spring for the lovely hardcover -- it's worth it. I  cannot say enough wonderful things about this scrumptious, funny, simple  little insightful jewel! Mwah


Great read - like James Fenmore Cooper -
	I really enjoyed this work. Didnt know this guy won a Pulitzer but it figures. I was swept away by the imagery created by this master. It was evocative of Cooper (although he surpasses Cooper), and McMurtry and the guy who wrote  quot;all the pretty horses quot;. The  quot;master quot; can always create the world to drown the reader in - this guy is great - I plan to read the whole series..


2 years...
	It's been around two years since I first read this book, and i must say i reference it to people all the time.  the reason: it is so darn fascinating.  i really liked how the author put things in context and made me think about media forms and how we transfer data.  if i gave you an 8-track tape right now, would you know what to do with it to get the info contained on it?  younger folks might not know what it is.  they would recognize tape (maybe), but 100 years from now, how many players would be around?  the book talks about a project the author was on.  a nuclear waste site in new mexico needed to have a way to communicate to humans (or others) in the future that the site is radioactive.  since the radiation could last 10,000 years, the message would have to be able to be understood centuries from now.  what would the message be like?  if you read the book you'll find out!  lots of different ideas are kicked around and i just couldn't put the book down.  buy it, have fun


A great book by a BTDT (been there, done that)
	Harvey Mackay was one of the first authors I had read on how to run a business.  The book is written in an entertaining manner, and contains a great deal of fantastic advice.

To this day, friends who were around me when I read this book in college will quote parts of it back to me.

It contains tidbits of guidance, some great, some small.  All good.


Nicely Done -- Wish He'd Write Another
	This novel is more enjoyable than the Flanders Panel, but still not up to the level of the Fencing Master or his recent series, the Captain Alatriste books. The characters are well drawn, the setting comes alive, and the story flows. There are a few sections of the book that need some more editing to make them a bit more crisp, but I cannot tell if that is due to the translation or is in the original. The only real disappointment came when I finished the book:  I wish there was a follow-up


Mostly true, except for the information from McNamara
	People were looking for a book that could grab them about Nam when this was a best seller in 1972, and this book has details that people were not getting from television or the front page of newspapers in those days.  Magazines that published book reviews typically had a view of Nam that was tuned more to the nuance of individual points of view than the geopolitical justifications which failed to consider the nature of the situation in Nam itself as a primary consideration.  Portions of this book originally appeared in `The New Yorker,' so the author was becoming widely known as this book was being prepared.  Frances FitzGerald's original trip to Vietnam was in February to November of 1966, and resulted in articles for the `Atlantic Monthly,' the `Village Voice,' `Vogue,' etc.  People who read fashion magazines were particularly interested in what a nice girl might think of a situation like Nam, where large numbers of young Americans were being subjected to a military view of the situation on a personal level so intense that most publications would refrain from printing the kind of expressions which naturally describe the emotional shock of being shot at or booby trapped in some more surprising fashion.

This book is not perfect.  The only listing for `Tonkin Gulf Resolution' in the index is for the page on which President Johnson's use of the Resolution is questioned by Senator Fulbright in 1966.  That was the time this book is mainly concerned with, but it gives an enormous amount of background information.  It is possible to find a listing in the index under ` GVN' for `and U.S. entry into the war, 354' which gives the page that reflects Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara's testimony to Congress that:

"It was in response to an amphibious sabotage raid by GVN forces that North Vietnamese PT boats attacked the U.S. destroyer Maddox, mistaking it for one of the South Vietnamese vessels."  (pp. 352-353).

Actually, the OPLAN 34A attacks along the Gulf of Tonkin coastline were operations planned and approved in Washington, D.C., and McNamara lied about South Vietnamese operations to maintain the secret status of U.S. operations, during which the North Vietnamese PT boats were responding to recoilless rifle fire from a small boat when American intelligence informed the Maddox that it was about to be attacked.  Radio intercepts of North Vietnamese naval messages on August 4, 1964, were used to convince LBJ and Senators that an attack had occurred when two American destroyers were picking up radar ghosts and sonar readings off the reflection of a hard-turned rudder, as shown by subsequent tests.  Edwin E. Moise's book, TONKIN GULF AND THE ESCALATION OF THE VIETNAM WAR has much more information about that secret circus stunt.

Jeffrey Kimball's recent book, THE VIETNAM WAR FILES:  UNCOVERING THE SECRET HISTORY OF NIXON-ERA STRATEGY, contains a reference to the author of this book in a Memorandum by Dwight Chapin to Haldeman, January 18, 1973, about a month after heavy bombing near or in Hanoi to get some ceasefire agreement signed, hoping it could be called `The Peace Announcement' (p. 288) and attempting to describe a point of view different from what intellectuals were expecting.

"The FitzGeralds and the Fondas, the Halberstams and Harrimans, the Clarks and Ellsbergs and Baezes are poised in the wings just waiting to treat the end of the war as their victory and to so opine from coast to coast."  (Kimball, p. 291).

I have the First Vintage Books Edition, August 1973, which was after Dwight Chapin's Memorandum, but I am not sure if American bombing in Cambodia had ended when the actual paper in this book was printed on.  There are only six lines of listings in the index for Cambodia, mostly on general issues, but the week I spent there was hardly earth-shaking.  Of more interest to me was the report in FIRE IN THE LAKE about the An Lao valley, where the battalion 1/12th Infantry from the 4th Infantry Division spent the months from September, 1969 to January, 1970.  I believe this was our first free fire zone, with a base high above a village that had been destroyed, surrounded by paddies in which elephant grass was growing instead of rice, but enemy soldiers were found harvesting highland rice on the hillsides.  Enemy contact was the only kind we had, after all other possibilities had been eliminated in the manner described in this book.

"In Operation Masher/White Wing alone--a multi-regimental sweep through the north of Binh Dinh province--the Allied forces, by the estimates, destroyed an entire enemy division.  In the process they left hundreds of civilians dead and wounded and `generated' so many refugees as almost to depopulate the fertile An Loa valley."  (p. 405).

"While the American troops opened roads and `cleared' great stretches of territory, the Front guerrillas came back into every area except those heavily garrisoned by U.S. troops.  By the end of 1966 the NLF continued to govern the An Lao valley as well as the suburbs of Da Nang, Hue, Nha Trang, and Saigon."  (p. 406).

There is only one line in the index for Frantz Fanon, but anyone who is interested in how FitzGerald saw a link between revolution against colonial powers in African and Arab countries and the situation in Nam, "including the belief in Fate and the symbolic killing of self, which he called `the behavior patterns of avoidance. . . . the sudden crime waves that spread through the cities, the tribal warfare, and the fierce, irrational feuding of the native sects.  As he explained them, . . ."  (p.509).  You wouldn't want to believe how true the stuff in this book could be today


It's nasty and the kids love it
	I bought this for my classroom bookshelf. I teach 7th grade science and my kids fight with each other to read it


Must have
	This book brings together, pratical budget concerns with fashion, which are often in two totally different universes. Not worlds, universes.  In the fashionista there is everything from how to get wine out of a shirt to when to know if you should splurge on a coat. In the worlds of increase American debt, this book should be on everyshelf in America!  It is light portable and she is extremely funny!  Two thumbs up


Not Perez-Reverte's best, but entertaining
	If I were to choose the two best novels by this author, they would be The Nautical Chart and The Queen of the South.  The Fencing Master, by comparison, isn't as lively or as intellectually thrilling -- but it is a chewy read.  I particularly loved the characterization of Don Jaime as an older man realizing what he has lost in his life.


One of the worst movies I have ever seen.
	This entire movie could have run in only 20 minutes and you wouldn't miss anything and might even enjoy it. Unfortunately it ran 88 minutes too long and I couldn't wait for it to end.  I saw it in the theater and the people all around me were all complaining how boring it was. At least a quarter of them walked out before the end. It's that bad. It's a shame, I love a good suspense/horror movie and the decent actors in this movies were waisted


Fun to Watch
	Fun to watch but my 9 1/2 yr. old daughter could not follow the moves.  Neither could I for that matter.  We tried to learn the moves through "breaking it down" but there is just not enough repetition.  Too complicated.


Did we see the same movie?
	Every review I've read about this movie pops and fizzes with praise and I just don't get it.  No one speaks until practically 10 minutes into it, and by then you're so confused by the random scenes thrown together and the cyrilic letters, it makes it hard to enjoy what comes next.  If you like extremely BROAD slapstick humor and find that totally charming, then I guess I can see the appeal.  Everyone talks about how this movie spawned so many catch phrases.  I have to wonder what they could be: "Damned Melon!" or "I passed out when I broke my wrist, and when I woke up, the cast was already on!"???  I will say listening to the dubbed english and having the english subtitles on at the same time does add some humor, because they say completely different things, or omit speech altogether.  In sum, don't waste your time


Not too impressed
	The acting was very good. The pace was adequate. However, the plot was predictable. The movie just reeks of the intelligent thriller syndrome. Clive's character kept calling this the perfect robbery. The characters talk about the relative intelligence of the other characters or how the other characters can't possibly know what is going on. I'm still not sure what Jody Foster's character brings to the plot.

Any way, they do stupid things. The bank robbers dig a latrine in a storage closet. You don't know the hole is a latrine until the end of the movie. However, they do call it a "s--thole during the movie. They spent hours on this hole. Why not use a bucket instead of a hole in the floor for a latrine? They even brought buckets in with them. They were disguised as painters. Why couldn't Clive's character use a bucket with chemical treatments instead of a hole in a floor of a bank for a latrine.

Finding plot holes in this movie is like shooting fish in the barrel. Furthermore, the plot is so predictable that it made the movie drag. I have to be honest, I didn't guess the ending. I kicked myself for they gave plenty of clues. For example, a big one is the title of the movie. However, the lame clues (the s--thole) acted like red herrings. They threw me off the scent.


More "Lost Cause" Mythology
	It's amazing how Hollywood and the publishing industry have bent their knees to Secession mythology, from Birth of a Nation to the present example of melodramatic falsification. This is a very dull, shapeless, stilted movie. I wouldn't bother to denounce it on artistic grounds, but since it is above all a piece of propaganda, I'm compelled to condemn it as history. What it presents is the "War between the States" version of the Civil War, in which the gallant Southerners defend their homes,their beloved hills and dales, their cultured lives from the inexplicable invasion of the rude hordes of the North. There are only two Black characters, both sentimentally loyal to their Southernness and their masters; otherwise, slavery is beside the point. The generalship of Lee and Jackson, of course, is idolized, while the Northern officers above the rank of colonel are portrayed as fools. The battle scenes are perfectly predictable; guys charge on foot, other guys shoot, the fields are littered with bodies. Wouldn't a little exposition of the logistics of those battle been more interesting? How real is it to show only one train, and that Southern, in a war won more by transportation than by musketry? If you are a believer in the myth of the Lost Cause and the justice of Secession, if you have ever cottoned to the notion that the War wasn't really about slavery, then I challenge you honor! I defy you to read just one heavy, scholarly book, Arguing About Slavery by William Lee Miller, a professor at the University of Virginia. It retells the debates that occurred in the House of Representatives, over slavery, in the 1830s, twenty-five years before the election of Lincoln. The uncompromising sectional hatred expressed in those debates will surely convince you that the Civil War had deeper roots than you thought, and that slavery Was indeed the central issue for both sides, Blue and Grey


Sex in quarantine
	Maybe for some people, to spend 40 days without sex is not big deal, but in Matt Sullivan's case, it could be a total nightmare.
After his girlfriend Nicole leaves him, Matt spends about six months devouring girls, until he starts to hallucinate. Advised by his brother, Matt decides that celibacy is the answer to his problems, and proposes to go through lent without sex.
For Matt's friends, this odyssey is as absurd as impossible, and immediately they take advantage of the situation to make bets about how long will last Matt's abstinence. He doesn't have it easy, as many temptations will make him suffer, and even smell the possibility of a new love.
40 days and 40 nights is a movie that tries to get the most comedy possible out of the sexual frustration of his leading character. In a similar way that other grotesque comedies have try to explode in the past years, this film tries to sell us the idea that relationships based only in sex are less satisfactory than those based on love. OH. WHAT A SHOCKING DISCOVERY!


movie reviews crossed: kitty foyle   johnny belinda
	Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com essential video
After initially rejecting the role as too sentimental, Ginger Rogers found the title character of Kitty Foyle to be an Oscar winner and a career breakthrough. Released in 1940, only a year after her nine-picture partnership with Fred Astaire ended, Kitty Foyle helped establish Rogers as a nonmusical box-office star. The film portrays a white-collar working girl who receives a warm and welcome marriage proposal from Mark (James Craig), a kindly but humble doctor. As soon as she accepts, however, she receives a different proposition, this one from her former love, wealthy socialite Wyn (Dennis Morgan), who plans to flee his life and his wife and asks Kitty to join him and live in unwedded bliss in South America. Kitty then recounts her life in flashback to help her choose which man to love. Rogers gives an appealing performance as the feisty yet vulnerable Kitty, who makes up in moxie what she lacks in social status. Did she really deserve the Best Actress Oscar over Bette Davis in The Letter, Joan Fontaine in Rebecca, Katharine Hepburn in The Philadelphia Story, and Martha Scott in Our Town? Well, evidently Rogers had real-life moxie too. --David Horiuchi

Product Description
Known for light comedies and her partnership with Fred Astaire, Ginger Rogers stepped off the dance floor and into 1940's Oscar spotlight with her Best Actress turn as Kitty, an indomitable working-class girl who endures the rejection of Philadelphia society, makes her own way as a single woman and ultimately chooses between an unmarried arrangement with Main Line scion Wynnewood Strafford VI (Dennis Morgan) or marriage to a struggling physician (James Craig). Rogers' deserved Academy Award confirmed she was more than a dance star - a fact humorously underscored when she returned to the studio and was greeted by staffers and actors in top hats and tails. Jane Wyman won the Best Actress Academy Award for her sensitive portrayal of Belinda, capturing the girl's affecting isolation, awakening desire to learn and ultimate triumph. Directed by Jean Negulesco and co-starring Lew Ayres, Charles Bickford and Agnes Moorehead (all four Oscar nominees* for their fine work), Johnny Belinda (nominated for a total 11 Oscars including Best Picture) blends atmosphere, nuance and high drama into a heartbreaking classi


Is ''cringe-worthy'' a word?
	I'm surprised by all the praise this movie gets here at Amazon and beyond. There really wasn't much here I liked. The soundtrack was the usual "pap" you'd expect from a family friendly movie, though the sets were nice. It seems this movie was just miscast. Mel just doesn't do comedy all that well, at least for a lead role. Jame Garner, the reason I bought this seems more like a bystander. And Jodie is Jodie and I never bought for a moment she was her character.

Although the cast is a powerhouse (on paper), sadly the chemistry never really works and the jokes are just cornball. An example: There was a sequence when Bret asks his friends (who are standing behind him) to whistle to reveal themselves to some bandits he was confronting; which as it turns out they are unable to do. Instead Jodie and James, blow madly, just like the movie.

This movie reminds me a HELL of a lot like ''The Three Amigo's''; on paper you would think it couldn't miss, but on film it's painful to watch


And who could that be stalking us now?
	Along with the nanny, the stepdad, the cable guy, the 14-year-old girl with a crush... we now have the PHOTO PROCESSING CLERK to fear! Yes, everyone is out to get us.. or at least that's what Hollywood would have us believe.

I am getting sick of films like this that constantly contort  normal healthy human interaction and community relations into perverse horrors that are far from reality. No wonder we live in a culture of such exagerrated suspicion, mistrust, fear (and the resulting isolation) when we have films like this constantly stoking these fears of people around us.

Yes, films like these have their place. However, I think Hollywood has taken it a bit too far and needs to pull itself back into reality.


no title
	Well, I sure could have skipped this one.  I well remember the critics raving over this on television, but why is beyond me.  Mostly, I was just plain bored.  There simply was no depth at all, just bunches of short takes and wise cracks.  Bush was just downright dirty, making insults and slurs all over the place, something I do not consider an appropriate attitude in a man who would be President.  And it is interesting that in one of the reviews it was noted that Mary Matalen, the deputy manager of Bush's campaign and very acid-tongued (maybe she wrote some of the slurs Bush used), is now the wife of James Carville, top strategist for Clinton's campaign, and basically the star of the movie.  But all the scenes were focused on the funny quip, the bon mot, no long scenes of the nitty-gritty work, or any answers to any questions about Clinton either, for that matter.


Where is the salsa?!?!?
	So I bought this movie because some of the reviews said that the acting was terrible but the dancing was amazing.
Well, anyone who thinks that the salsa dancing in this movie is amazing, awesome, good, or ok, has never actually SEEN salsa dancing!!
I am a salsa dancer, and this movie was HORRIBLE!!!  I have seen amazing dancing, and good dancing.  This was TERRIBLE dancing!  And there was hardly any salsa!
It was 80s dancing to salsa music!  That's IT.  The only time there was actually salsa dancing was when the main character was training with the club owner.  Other than that, it was just 80s dancing to salsa music.  That's it.
If you want to see salsa dancing, I DEFINITELY DO NOT recommend this movie.
If you want to see horrible acting, and old 80s dancing, then I recommend this movie...
There was only one thing that I liked about this movie.  The appearances made by Tito Puente and Celia Cruz.  That was great to see, but not worth buying the movie for....
Oh, and the story line?  What was it again????
Yeah...
I love movies, good ones and bad ones.
But this one???  The WORST movie I have seen so far...

To the best of my knowledge, there aren't actually any movies with really good salsa dancing.
Hopefully, someday, there will be


Terrible Movie
	From start to finish a total waste of time.  I viewed this movie with some of the single women from my church including a recently married woman, we were all appalled at how desparate this "Pamela" was note to the director not all women waiting on God are that desparate.  The so called Christian principals in this movie were laughable.  At the end of the movie I found myself apologizing to my guests for wasting their time


No Diamonds....Just Rough
	This movie was so horrible I don't know where to start. Maybe I could start with the fact the actors were so horrible it was as if the director picked them randomly off the street. Or maybe he just casted his own family...at any rate they were untrained and stale. Secondly, I had a serious issue with this movie not following basic christian principles. If Tyler Perry manages to tone down the swearing in his semi-christian plays, why wouldn't this movie director have enough sense to follow suit...If you're trying to actually sale to a christian audience. Furthermore, I thought the bible said a little something against divorce; like it wasn't permitted unless your spouse commits adultery/fornication. This movie seems to say it's okay to go against the word of God if you're in love. In fact, christianity was more of a theory in this movie than it was a practice....by even the protagonist! I laugh as I think of the scene where Ce-Ce Peniston's character says seductively, "I'm looking for a man with his mind on Jesus" Yet she's dressed like a hooker. Speaking of clothing, why did Ce-Ce seem to change outfits even in the middle of scene. They go on a date and she's dressed one way, by the time they come home she has on something different; with no logical explanation. And please explain why they had someone's grandfather playing the role of Rico Suave. Maybe the movie would have actually been worth while had he looked more like the man of any woman's dream. I felt more like telling him about AARP than I did falling in love with him. In addition, the soundtrack, IT-WAS-JUST-ANNOYING. At some parts it was even hard to hear what the characters were saying because of the music. I just wanted the maddness to stop! Lastly, It seems as if the director tried to portray single church women as being overwhelmingly desperate (although some are) However, having pamela fall so quickly for bryant was just, well, almost juvenile...perhaps even a disrespect to women at large. Overall, this movie made me want to puke. PASTOR Larry "Flash" Jenkins really needs to get some true insight on the conditions of the church and maybe even go back and read the bible for himself for clarity


this one deserves a big fat zero
	this has got to be one of the WORST, most unrealistic movies to date. i never have high expectations for lesbian flicks--rarely are they done well. this one, however, takes it to a whole new level. what was courtney love thinking?!

you'll regret wasting your money on this. i can't even fathom why it's gotten decent reviews so far


Fun interviews, but NO song shown in entirety
	Cheap Trick is undoubtedly one of the best live acts around today.
They have such great stage charisma, top notch talent, and they consistently get better with age!  What other band sounds better 30 years later?

After my disappointment with the Special One CD, I was excited to hear about this DVD; I heard most Special One songs live, and couldn't understand why they translated to tape poorly.  Having these songs stripped and performed live would be exactly the hot product to put out.  And the songs DO sound much better now, such tremendous intensity Robin has live, the guitars and bass sound great, and there's a great build up to the climax of each song.

However, what's really the downer about this DVD is that although you get fun fictious anecdotes and silly interviews of the band between every track, you then get 2/3 of each live song.  NOT A SINGLE SONG APPEARS HERE IN ITS ENTIRETY.  It's like a Behind the Music (without drama or drugs) based around a new live show.  The banter is great, but this clip-show format KILLS the replay value of this disc.

The closest comparison I can give is the 2-DVD version of Silver, how the second DVD has fun clips and chat between tracks and then overlays into the songs.  That's exactly what this is like, however, you do not get the benefit of the complete uncut show.

Bonus features are fun, with the band and their families visiting Japan, although the two live special appearances they played are again not shown in their entirety.

Perhaps someday we'll get the Budakan show on DVD or an updated Every Trick in the Book DVD.

Update 6/14/05:  Exactly a year later, I've still yet to pop this into my DVD player for a second watch, and Cheap Trick's still my favorite band.


Too Sympathetic Towards Da Vinci Code, One-Sided Experts, Still Debunks!
	This DVD gives documentary coverage concerning such DA VINCI CODE topics as Rosslyn Chapel, the Priory of Scion, the Knights Templar, the Gnostic Gospels, Le Dossier Secrets, Da Vinci paintings, and Opus Dei.

This DVD, BEYOND THE DA VINCI CODE seems to bend over backwards, measuring every narrated word, to try to support and be sympathetic towards the Dan Brown allegations made in his novel--despite the evidence and expert interviews that they themselves provide in this documentary, they still seem to be in favor of what Dan Brown has written in the DA VINCI CODE.

Out of a half dozen expert interviewees, the most notable are two "big" names who are MAJOR influences on THE DA VINCI CODE book. Margaret Starbird, author of THE WOMAN WITH THE ALABASTER JAR; and Richard Leigh, one of three authors of HOLY BLOOD, HOLY GRAIL, (which was a NY Times Bestseller in 1982), both appear throughout this program.

These two are probably the biggest proponents of the Jesus/Magdalene conspiracy today, after Dan Brown himself. So it is especially meaningful when Richard Leigh and Margaret Starbird disagree with what Dan Brown has written!

According to expert interviewee Richard Leigh, though THE DA VINCI CODE book says that the Knights Templar found documents to prove the Jesus/Magdalene conspiracy, in reality, NOBODY knows what, if anything, was found by the Knights Templar in Solomon's Temple.

Leigh also says the whole business about the pentagram, pentacles, 5-pointed stars as mainly representing the "sacred feminine" is NONSENSE--that symbol has been used throughout history to represent other things just as often!

Richard Leigh also explains that the original Priory of Scion was last referenced in 1619, but the modern day Priory of Scion people from the last 50 years are "bonkers," trying to present a hoax of the LE DOSSIER SECRETS, to try to gain political influence for themselves.

This LE DOSSIER SECRETS, which appears on the bogus "FACT" page at the beginning of THE DA VINCI CODE book attempts to show a traceable genealogy of descendents of Jesus, but has been debunked for decades in France. It does NOT belong on a page titled "FACT" in the DA VINCI CODE book! That is very misleading, not factual. Brown says the LE DOSSIER SECRETS were discovered, but leaves out the fact that they are commonly known to be phoney!

Margaret Starbird, another major influence on the Dan Brown novel, says that even though she believes in the Jesus/Magdalene bloodline, there is NO PROOF of the bloodline lasting into the French Merovingian line of kings, circa the first millenium A.D.

The documentary, using other expert interviewees and location footage, goes on to debunk the ridiculous claim of the Rose Line alignments being found in significant locations throughout THE DA VINCI CODE novel; as well as showing there is no evidence that Leonardo Da Vinci was a member of the Priory of Scion, let alone the Grandmaster; the rose is NOT the symbol for the Priory of Scion; and Opus Dei has NO INTEREST in the "secret" bloodline of Jesus/Magdalene because they don't believe it even exists.

Sadly, most of the debunking occurs towards the end of the show, in brief statements, before quickly moving on to the next topic; while most of the screen time is spent romanticizing and retelling what Dan Brown's DA VINCI CODE book claims about the Jesus/Magdalene conspiracy.

Overall I was disappointed by this HISTORY CHANNEL DVD for presenting such seemingly wishful support while showing that so much just ain't so in the DA VINCI CODE book--though I am not surprised, the HISTORY CHANNEL usually sides against Christianity on issues to support atheism in their shows, in my opinion.

A much better DA VINCI CODE debunking DVD is BREAKING THE DA VINCI CODE, which more clearly presents the evidence without romanticizing the novel's lies about history and Jesus


Only mildly interesting, and no "classic"
	I saw this at the library and brought it home, thinking it might be interesting to watch. I very rarely watch films made after the 1950's, but this one looked as if it could be enjoyable. It ended up being only mildly enjoyable, and a bit boring. I felt that within all the time it ran, we didn't really get a good understanding of the inner being of the main characters; seemed to remain in shallow waters all along. The film was sort of good...pretty photography,and for the most part it seemed like the costumes, hair, way of speaking, etc. were accurate for the time period (so often such movies are so obviously modern people dressed up and pretending to be from way back when) but something just wasn't quite right, and it is hard to know exactly what it was. I was surprised and disappointed that there was quite a long scene with male nudity which to me was quite unnecessary and inappropriate. I think the whole swim scene could have been done effectively without showing full nudity. I am grateful the women in the film remained properly clothed. So I would not recommend this film for families with young  children, because of the nudity.


This Disney release was rushed.
	I'm a language teacher and I have a number of DVDs that I use at school as language tools.  DVDs are great because they're inexpensive teaching aids when it comes to foreign languages...but only when the DVDs actually have other tracks than English.  Nowadays practically every released movie has language tracks and sometimes subtitles in other languages but this DVD seems like a hearkening back to the dark ages when people were lucky just to get a movie on this format and no extra effort whatsoever was put into a movie's release on DVD.  I was pretty disappointed to discover just as the DVD was shipping that it wasn't what I thought it was going to be.  I suppose it's my fault for assuming, but I feel ripped off just the same


The cell phone is the main character
	The most interesting part of this action movie is the centrality of the cell phone. The movie is a Nokia product placement, highlighting what awful danger you are in if you are not connected and, conversely, what a phone can do for you if you have one. The plot centers on Jessica (Kim Basinger) who is abducted because the bad guys think she has something that they need. Mystery #1: What is it?

After lots of running/driving in various parts of L.A. the bad guys round up Jessica's family, while on the other end a pretty guy turned superhero and a would-be day spa owner cop are trying to help them. Mystery #2: how will the cell phone save the day?

Mystery #3. Watch for the credits at the end of the film. They show up on a...? Yep, you got it


Horrible DVD transfer
	This is the WORST transfer of a movie (that is not a tape-to-tape before DVD bootleg) that I have ever seen.  Many scenes in the daylight show a jiggling reflected lights, or so it appears, and lines dance around with the sound.  It was so bad I thought it was in individual damaged DVD, until I read other reviews here and on IMDB.

This is far worse than most cheapie transfers that are no longer owned but are in the public domain.  At least in those instances they usually have the excuse that the print they are working from is old and worn.  I have a much better video of Exodus on VHS tape in EP!

And this movie is currently being offered at Amazon for $14.95.  Don't bother!  Tape it off TCM and you'll have a far higher quality visual record.

As for the movie itself, despite good actors and one of the most wonderful music scores, it's very flat.  Kirk Douglas would have been a far better choice than Newman, who acts like he just came off a binge after a losing pool streak.  Nonetheless, it should not be sold with in lousy visual copies


watered down unanswered questions
	I unfortunately bought 4 of the ramtha dvds at the same time.. this was the best of them.. the others were pure wastes of money. While this one didnt answer many questions and ramtha takes forever to make a point. if you've seen "what the bleep" dont waste your time or money on these ramtha dvds.


An Invitation to Open Your Wallet...
	Wow!  Practice a few vapid platitudes and wield some handy aphorisms and woo-woo sounding phrases, change your voice, and you, too, can be a CHANNELER! For money!  I'm definitely in the wrong occupation.  Has anybody ever thought to question "Ramtha" on a few specifics that a 35,000 year old being from "Atlantis" should know?  Did Ramtha's ancient society speak Indian-accented English?  What an amazing stroke of luck!  What did Ramtha's people do for agriculture and diet, how was his/her society structured, what tools did they use, and where was "Atlantis" precisely located?  I'm certain that archaelogists and anthropologists could benefit from such knowledge that such a wise being could impart after miraculously surviving 35 millenia--or how many years precisely, and in what reckoning?  Could Ramtha show us some writing samples in Atlantean script?  Linguists could help here.  Or--is it just possible that JZ Knight and her kind are great at pulling one over on us because we WANT and NEED to believe?  Isn't that a more realistic explanation?  What does that say about those who buy into this?


Pretty Woman Meets Toxic Tort
	Even though I would agree that "Erin Brockovich" is an entertaining movie, Julia Roberts performance in it is no more Oscar-worthy than was her performance of a prostitute in "Pretty Woman."  I am second to no one in enjoying a good "David and Goliath" story, but this movie has such shaky roots in reality, it is more of a tall tale, than the "true" story of a historic class action suit that, I would imagine, left more unhappy plaintiffs, than it did satisfied ones.  However, as the movie title implies, this is indeed Erin Brockovich's story, in the same way that the "Xena" character is the main attraction in "Xena: Warrior Princess" (though it should be noted that Xena's wardrobe is considerably more modest than that of the Erin Brockovich character).

Erin Brockovich is a vain, brassy, boorish, single mother of three young children, with no marketable work skills, a transparently opportunistic manner, who dresses very much the same way as the prostitute character Roberts played in "Pretty Woman" (prior to Richard Gere's character taking her on the infamous Rodeo Drive shopping spree).  The movie's beginning finds Erin unemployed and pursuing a personal injury lawsuit in connection with an automobile accident; her lawsuit is lost, primarily thanks to her own disastrous testimony (swearing, cursing and shrieking from the witness stand) while being questioned by opposing counsel.   Unbelievably, Erin parlays the failed lawsuit into a job at her attorney's (played by Albert Finney) firm, mainly by pushing her way into the office and ensconcing herself at a desk.   Later, while handling the paperwork for a run-of-the-mill, pro bono, real estate sale, Erin discovers the file contains the seller's medical records, that, for reasons she (correctly) does not understand, seem to be of particular interest to the buyer, the mega utility company, Pacific Gas and Electric.  Erin independently embarks on her own personal investigation of the case and discovers that PG E had (for decades) negligently contaminated the ground water (surrounding one of their power plants in/near Hinkley, CA on the edge of the Mojave Desert) with toxic, hexavalent chromium.  This discovery leads to the queen mother of all class-action lawsuits (at least in terms of the award), in which hundreds of Hinkley residents sue PG E (by and through the representation of Erin's boss) in a toxic tort action that eventually nets a 330 million dollar settlement for the plaintiffs.

Roberts gives a photogenic, if not especially gifted, performance in her role as Erin. The movie contains a plethora of flattering shots of Roberts (literally gushing out skin-tight, low-cut, bustier-inspired "work clothes" that would never be permissible attire for any employee of a law firm on this planet) as she engages in warm and fuzzy discourses with the unsuspecting and unsophisticated Hinkley residents. While there is much to be said for Erin's apparent drive and tenacity as she pursues the plaintiffs in the suit, she is not an especially likeable character; rather, she is rude, verbally abusive and only conciliatory and kind when and if it serves her interests.

Albert Finney is considerably more appealing and believable as Ed Masry, the aged and  weary attorney who is Erin's boss.  The bantering that occurs between the two is generally amusing; unfortunately thanks to the inept direction and camera work, the focus for these scenes seems to be more on Roberts (strutting about in short leather skirts and noisy, five-inched-heeled mules) than on the sometimes-interesting personality dynamics that seemingly exists between the two characters.  Aaron Eckhart plays the affable, gentle biker and next-door-neighbor, George, who becomes Erin's boyfriend-by-convenience.  The "convenience" factor is totally one-sided and for Erin's benefit exclusively; she  unabashedly uses George for free, live-in childcare, thereby giving her the necessary freedom to assist Masry as they put together the historic case.  Erin eventually winds up receiving a staggering two million dollar "bonus" check  (from Masry) when the tort action case settles; contrastingly, George gets a "thanks" for his nanny services from Erin and his walking papers.

The plaintiffs in the case are an assortment of simple individuals with unpretentious outlooks on life, who have been dealt a dirty hand by the utility giant.  Though the Hinkley residents are sympathetically portrayed, make no mistake-this movie is about Erin Brockovich (indeed, I do not think there is a single scene in which the chacracter is not present) and less about the brave struggles with life-threatening, generation-spanning illnesses that the real-life plaintiffs were forced to face, due to the toxicity in their water source.  Erin Brockovich is presented to the viewing audience (in typical Hollywood fashion) as a sort of heroine; but in fairness it would seem more accurate to say that she was a woman who indiscriminately used people, walked on others when necessary and seized opportunity after opportunity until she eventually struck it lucky and got rich.  Is the movie entertaining-absolutely.   Inspiring- not even slightly.


Worst workout ever
	This is the worst Workout tape that I have ever purchase, the trainer switches moves to quick and doesnt explain what she is doing like she expects you to know before hand what she is about to do. I am personally gonna smash my copy of it. Only reason I gave it 1 star is because the ratings dont go lower


Liked this one the least......
	maybe because I didn't like Porco. Everything was sub-par for me. Animation is definitely not as good as his later movies. Not enough weirdness, tried too much for the plot. Everything was just too ho-hum. As if he tried to carry the whole movie on Porco's shoulders. But once you got past the fact that everyone else was human and Porco was a pig there wasn't anything else there.


That's The Grudge, huh?
	This was not very good, in my opinion. The Ring scared the bejeezus outta me. This was not scary. Two weeks afterwards, I still find my mind wandering about one thing...why the heck didn't they just kick that little boy in the head and send him accross the room? If I walk into my house and see a half-naked boy meowing and hissing at me, I'm gonna flip him over my knee and give him a good spankin


You've Got to be Kidding Me
	While some movies require that you throw out your disbelief, I had a very hard time doing so with this movie.  This movie was just plain stupid.  They should have kept this film story in the states.  Once everything moves over to Tokyo, the film plummets into inauthenticity the likes of which I haven't seen in a long time.  I would have respected the film 1,000 times more had it ended when the main character goes to Japan.

So let's get this straight, Japanese high school students act like American high school students?  Lucas Black's character is simply told to go to a Japanese high school where he will simply pick up the language and make do?  Everybody speaks English ? His father lives in a tiny apartment yet has a garage that's about double the size of his apartment?

I would have much preferred subtitles and a story that felt, looked and sounded more Japanese.  Japanese students are among some of the most polite students you will ever meet.  The Japanese culture is steeped and immersed in being respectful, polite and dutiful.  Real Japanese high school students would be embarassed by the way their culture was represented here.  Actually they probably wouldn't be embarassed, they would laugh at the film's poor attempt in showing true or even remotely true Japanese culture.  Japanese culture is not steeped in American hiphop and egocentric behavior and it's a pity so many Americans will see this film and actually think that Japanese students are just like American students.  There would be nothing further from the truth.  Japanese students do not act, look or sound like what was filmed here.  Not by a long shot.

Given my dislike of how the Japanese culture was handled in this film, it left me finding the plot irrelevant.  The plot was OK but it would have been much better if they had either stuck to a more authentic representation of Japanese culture or kept the story in the states.


Downright Abyssmal
	I'm making an exception to my usual practice of not reviewing anything on amazon, due to the utter vileness of this movie.  I saw it when it came out in theaters and hated it, and then a friend purchased the DVD and convinced me to give it a second chance...  all in all, this movie ended up taking about four hours of my life that I will never get back.

The performances are thin and uneven, the plot is inconsistent, and the dialogue sounds like it was pulled from fortune cookies made by the cast of Friends.  To be fair, this movie does face several major obstacles.  It has the misfortune to depend on the "acting" of glorified Ken doll Freddie Prinze, Jr. and the vastly overrated Julia Stiles, and in addition to trying to rise above these challenges, it also attempts to survive the intrusion of Ashton Kutcher.  It fails on all counts.

I do not hate the whole romantic comedy genre; nor do I hate the "teen" movie sub-genre, under which some would place "Down to You."  (In fact, "Can't Hardly Wait" is one of my favorite movies.)  I simply hate BAD movies, and this movie is a true abomination.  If you enjoy the experience of wanting to drill into your own skull, then by all means, buy this DVD.  If, however, you value your sanity, then please do not make the same mistake I did; stay far, FAR away from this movie


Treasure fans Beware!
	Many of these shorts on this DVD (as well as the other DVD's in this series) have been on the treasures allready so i recomend passing on these DVD's besides all the dirt and the bad restoration you'll see on the cartoons


Pretty Revealing
	This DVD exposes the Ultimate Warrior as 25% postitive and 75% negative.
I do believe that Jim Hellwig does suffer from narcissm in relation to his ongoing identity crisis.  Just another case of a wreslter who couldn't seperate himself from the character, and even still till this day as he is retired give speaches to colleges.  The only thing that bothers me is that Jim Hellwig wasn't involved in this dvd to give his perspective and opinions.  He was offered to participate and again offered to make his story heard before and after the fact.  Jim Hellwig declined,   used it as another opportunity to initiate a lawsuit.
This guy did make an impact in the wrestling world, but it was too shortlived.  Fans can chalk it up as a cool memory, but unfortunately not one linked with any high level of respect like we can with Flair, Piper, Hogan, and the most respected of all The Undertaker


Loaded deck shoots blanks
	Considering the sensational cast (Eli Wallach, Terrence Hill, Bud Spencer, Kevin McCarthy and Brock Peters), the Euro-western era it was made in and the locations where it was shot, Ace High is a major disappointment. The plot is uninvolving and incoherent, the cinematography is cramped and completely lacking in style, the music is weak during a time that spawned so many memorable soundtracks and the direction lacks any focus whatsoever. The editing looks like it was performed with a butcher's knife. After the first ten minutes, I knew I'd made a mistake buying it. A boring 120 minute piece of junk, Ace High is hopelessly outgunned by any number of great Italian westerns including Corbucci's The Mercenary or Parolini's Sabata series. Save your fistful of dollars for a better film


The Character of Martha Dunstock
	Rather than give another general review as others have kindly done,  my review focuses on one aspect of the film, indeed one character, that of Martha.

Martha Dunstock is known throughout the film as Martha Dumptruck. Even the film credits include the nickname `Dumptruck' besides the character's surname (evidently feeling the need to labour the point). Portrayed as unattractive and pathetically grateful for any attention she is given, she unwittingly provides the Slater character with information enabling him to murder a student. Later, when the cult status of the `suicides' (that is, murdered students) becomes apparent, Martha attempts her own suicide by walking into the path of traffic. But her attempt is shown as a failure. At the end of the film Martha is bruised and now disabled, in an electric wheelchair. Ryder's character, having finished her voyage of self-realisation, rejects the school Prom night and instead invites Martha to stay in with a video and popcorn. Martha gratefully accepts and the closing scenes show Ryder walking along the corridor while Martha encircles her like a planet around the sun.

The image of Martha in her wheelchair, an object of pity for Ryder and for the audience, signifies to us fears of being different, of not being beautiful, of not being loved and respected. Martha is the person we are all frightened of becoming. She is given no means of solving her predicament by the film maker. And though some of us in the audience may be fat, or disabled, or both, we may yet still fear Martha, and are invited to consider Ryder's protagonist's journey of self discovery as our own, even is in physical and social reality, we are more like Martha.

For this reason, `Heathers' fails as an exploration of the `Hell' of High School ( a description often used by Buffy/Angel/ Firefly's Joss Whedon). Those in the audience NOT as thin and complying with Western standards of `beauty' as the protagonists (probably the majority of us) ultimately may find the so-called subversion of cruel hierarchy in this film just that little too shallow, leaving a bitter after-taste. The way `fat' people are portrayed in films such as these unfortunately often reflect the predictable, transparent and absurd fixations of the film makers. Sadly this is happening even today - in some ways it has gotten even worse since the Western World decided to wage a 'war on fat' (to quote Paul Campos) - and even at best it is lazy film-making.


One Starr is far, too much
	Those of you who remember Ryan Starr from American Idol know why she quickly became "has been" material for VH1's the Surreal Life. Ryan Starr also happens to be the worst actress I have ever watched on film, television and or commercials.  The director must have agreed with me becaue there are very few shots of Ryan that last more than 10 seconds at a time.  Her dialogue is kept short and simple, and when she does have more than 3 lines at once, the complete lack of feeling, expression   emotion in her voice makes you consider turning off the movie and doing something worthwhile, like cleaning out the fridge or picking at your hang-nails.  That is all I can say, I would really like to put this movie behind me and never speak of it again


Disingenuous Tripe
	Whatever else the GLTB community may find laudable about this waste of a video disk, the undeniable fact is that the cover blurbs coyly and disingenuously suggest that it is a comedy, and that is a boldfaced lie.  Featuring world famous funny man Dom DeLuise, the movie is described as what happens when he casts real life lesbians in the roles of two on-stage lesbians...and "sparks fly."  As it is, the only sparks that probably flew occurred when someone with greater sense tried to set fire to the master reels and destroy this boring piece of tripe.

From the movie's self-proclaimed description, and with DeLuise in a major role, the comic possibilities that suggest themselves to the potential viewer are endless:  Does DeLuise KNOW that the actresses are lesbians?  Do the production's other members? Does that derail the production?  What mayhem ensues?

In point of fact, however, the single attempt at "comedy" comes from DeLuise's portrayal of the director as a prissy, fastidious old queen, pampered and catered to by his boy-toy assistant each time he gets the vapors and overheats.

The bulk of the movie is essentially dull documentary monologue, as the "actresses" explain to the camera their respective experiences in being cast in the roles of on-stage lovers.  Unfortunately, there is nothing endearing or even slightly interesting about either character and the result is a great bore.  The few flashback scenes where the viewer actually sees the two characters practicing their on-stage roles under DeLuise's fevered direction come across as uncomfortably voyeuristic.  There is an inescapable feeling that the camera, the viewer, AND DeLuise, are intruders.

About the only thing that CAN be said about this film is that Director Lee Friedlander mercifully eschewed the usual Hollywood practice of casting preternaturally beautiful women in the lead roles, thereby adding at least a touch of reality to this otherwise banal effort; the lead actresses look like just any two women off the street.  Other reviewers have commented on the bad, infomercial level acting of the two lead characters.  Whether or not that is accurate depends upon whether the leads, Robin Greenspan and Lacie Harmon, are actually lesbians simply playing themselves.  If so, then this IS bad acting.  If the women are straight, however, one has to at least give them credit for convincing performances.  Sadly, there is not much other credit to be given to anything else about this film.


The Perfect Prescription for Insomnia
	Normally I love documentaries.  I've watched hundreds of them and with one exception I have loved them all.  However, OUTFOXED is the single most boring film I have ever seen.

A relentless rant against Rupert Murdoch's cable news station, this film could possibly interest someone who is singlemindedly obsessed with Fox News, but I cannot imagine that anyone on earth is interested enough in Fox News to remain awake while watching this movie.

Watching OUTFOXED makes me realize what a genius Michael Moore is.  Whether you love him or hate him, whether you agree with him or not, you have to admit his films are entertaining.  This film, however, is a major bore.

- Regina McMenami


Insert pun with word "con" here...
	"Con Express" has lots of action in it, which is great because this hides the poor writing and uninteresting characters. Unfortunately, the action isn't enough, and in between stunt pieces and shoot-outs, the audience is tempted to doze off. City Heat Productions isn't really known for producing films of the highest quality, so usually I go easy on them. If this were a big-budget company producing this, I'd be inclined to pan it entirely. But I wasn't expecting much and got a little more than I bargained for. The action is, for the most part, pretty good but nothing competitive with your usual dumb action movie. Flanery and Vosloo are perfectly casted, but everyone else seems to stiff to add any more flow to the movie. Vosloo especially appears to be enjoying himself as an over-the-top bad guy hijacking a train containing deadly chemicals. The film moves fast and contains shades of better movies like Under Siege 2, Con Air, Spy Game, and Speed. If you liked those, you probably won't mind this one too much. Just go easy on it


A very long political attack ad
	I was trying to think of the best short description of what this is. Sure it's a propaganda film but that doesn't mean much to most people. However, most people have seen attack ads around election time. That's what this is, a very long political attack ad, full of all the things we commonly see in such ads: distortions, sarcasm, scary close ups, mood music, mocking tone, glaring omissions, out of context quotes, etc.

That said, the most rewarding review so far must be the one by AT "DL" (New York), who basically condemns Michael Moore as pro-Bush because Fahrenheit 9/11 doesn't say Bush engineered 9/11 himself. What's next? A review that condemns AT "DL" (New York) as pro-Bush because his review didn't say that Bush flew the planes himself? Or that Bush is an alien who gave birth to Saddam and Osama on a UFO?

Just when you think you've seen the craziest conspiracy theory ..


quot;Golden Coach quot; ruined by bad mastering at end
	The DVD for  quot;The Golden Coach quot; is for the most part fine, but the final minutes, which are crucial to the full impact of the film, are ruined by deplorable mastering. The scene appears to be out of focus and the colors are washed out to the point of barely being able make out what is happening. I believe Criterion made some kind of mastering error, because Martin Scorsese's introduction to the film explicitly refers to the wonderful restored ending of the film. Criterion should withdraw the DVD and offer a replacement


NOT WORTH THE MONEY, OR THE TIME
	I WAS VERY DISAPPOINTED WITH STEVE'S PERFORMANCE.  EVENTHOUGH IT TOOK A LOT OUT OF HIM TO REFRAIN FROM SWEARING, HIS MATERIAL TOWARDS THE END OF THE SHOW BEGAN TO DWINDLE TO THE POINT THAT IT JUST BECAME PLAIN IGNORANT, ESPECIALLY IN THE PART WHERE HE WAS EXPRESSING HOW HE WOULD "KILL SOMEONE", ETC., AND GLOATING BOUT IT.  AFTER I BOUGHT IT, I LATER CAUGHT IT ON A CABLE NETWORK.  GOD MAY NOT BE "THROUGH WITH HIM YET", BUT IT WILL BE UP TO HIM (STEVE) TO REPENT ON HIS OWN.  THIS MAY BE GOOD HUMOR FOR A MORE COMPLACENT CHRISTIAN AUDIENCE


This movie is a clunker
	Wasted talent.  None of the characters are believable in the roles they are portraying.  Some funny stuff.  Craig Ferguson can do better.  Charlotte Church should stick to singing as acting is not her forte.  Every thing in this movie seems forced and there is no chemistry between the characters


Monumental issues, but fails to convince
	I have been a Le Carre fan until the end of the Cold War. I somehow still managed to follow him later for some time. But now it is over, definitely. I disliked this novel, and the movie is obnoxious. Rachel Weisz is quite ridiculous in her part. Which idiot nominated her for her Oscar is beyond the point. Zellweger got an Oscar for an even more horrible performance recently, in the otherwise quite acceptable Cold Mountain. And even the otherwise great Blanchett had to turn in an awful performance in The Aviator to get one. (Why can these nice girls not get one for one of their good movies?)
My conclusion: this world is strange. It has no idea what is good and what not.


Profoundly unfunny and completely unwatchable film.
	Completey and utterly unfunny performances by Oldman and Roth. Stoppard may be a brilliant playwright but a filmmaker he is not, having botched a great potential for his play on the big screen. We get instead a literal and utterly uncinematic treatment of his much-touted play. Watching the first fifteen minutes of "heads, heads, heads, heads, heads, heads, heads, heads, heads," is colossal torture, like status elipticus. It's suited to the stage maybe but can never play well on the big screen. Having hopes it might pick up, that was dashed as the entire film seem to lack any momentum or any type of cinematic sensibility whatsoever. A classic blunder of failing to recognize two different mediums. Don't take my word for it, watch it yourself and see.


The InCrowd is out.....
	Susan Ward,coming out of daytime and primetime soaps on TV, gave movie acting a try with this rather lame picture from AOL Films.    Director Mary Lambert tries and fails to give us a Basic Instinct story with zero script and while this was a studio pictures, it looks like Warners gave them a fairly low budget to work with.  As the lack of film sets show.   If you like Susan Ward, then give this a movie a try, if you want to hope that she gets better film roles in the future, DON"T FIND IT HERE


Is The DVD Cover Familiar To You?
	This is a pure Rip-Off from the cover of Aerosmith's Live Bootleg album from 1978...Where's the shame? Too bad Twilight are not original enough to come up with their own cover.

In another words, this DVD is pretty suck and the originality here is nowhere to be found...Especially on the cover art that they stole from a much bigger band.


DEAD MOVIE
	Shame on talented actors like Maura Tierney and Jerry Orbach for their involvement in this laughably bad mystery movie.  Uninspired direction with a trite and convoluted script combine with terrible acting to make a movie that has little to recommend it.  "Star"/co-writer John Romo is one of the worst leading men to come around the bend in some time, and this is his only film, and I can see why.  He plays a private investigator who finds himself looking into the murders of several lingerie models whose underwear was designed by Tierney, who also works in a local factory run by Orbach.  Dennis Christopher shows up as a seedy illegal alien investigator; and June Lockhart and Lyle Waggoner lend their names to supporting roles as Tierney's estranged parents.  The movie professes to make some statement on the poor treatment of immigrants but it's so shoddily included, it makes no statement at all.
Little heard of movie; I can see why


fake "Dog Whisperer" - studious ignorance
	Cesar Milan, the so-called 'dog whisperer', bases his training methods on a dog behavior model that is so out of date as to be archaic - from the dinosaur age. He teaches that dogs base all their behavior on their pack status, and that you need to use painful 'corrections' to convince them that you are Alpha. This idea hasn't the slightest shred of evidence going for it.

Yes, dogs do have dominance roles, but that hasn't the slightest thing to do with problem behaviors. Dogs do 'bad' doggy behaviors because they work. Dog guards his food bowl? Dog wants to keep food and knows that growling keeps you away. Dog pulls on the leash? Dog wants to get somewhere faster and knows that pulling speeds things up. The dog doesn't care whether or not you're alpha; he only cares that what he's doing works to get him what he wants.

Technically, Cesar's methods work. But they use force, fear, and pain to teach the dog, when you can teach the same things faster with the proper positive motivation and non-forceful techniques. I have three hyper, active, highly driven Border Collies, and they're all very obedient and mannerly. They don't haul me around the leash, nor do they leap at guests, nor do they ignore me when I tell them something. And I don't need to be 'Alpha' to get them that way; neither does anyone else.

I strongly suggest that you don't buy this item. Good books to start with are Karen Pryor's 'Getting Started: Clicker Training for Dogs', Melissa Alexander's 'Click for Joy!' (also with a great problem solving section), and Jean Donaldson's 'The Culture Clash'. You can easily have a happy, obedient, well behaved dog without causing him fear and pain


Movie great, DVD substandard
	The sound on this DVD is absolutely horrible.  The dialogue is at a much lower volume than the music and sound effects, making it impossible to view without constantly tinkering.  I also have the VHS, on which the sound is perfect, so I can still watch this wonderful movie.  But I would sure like to get my money back for the DVD


This review is more about the movie transfer than the movie
	This review is more about the "SuperBit" transfer of the movie to DVD than the movie itself.  The movie itself is great and I highly recommend it.

However, the transfer on to this 2002 "SuperBit" version is very lacking in several areas.  The SUPERBIT idea is a good one that is poorly executed on this transfer.  The original intent was to maximize video and audio quality by limiting or even eliminating extra features (like trailers, documentaries, featurettes, and "Making-Of" snippets) to reserve space such that the movie can be presented in the highest quality.

They have failed to do that here.  The video and audio quality are not what they could be.

First, the movie is encoded onto a DVD-9 RSDL disc.  This means the DVD is capable of storing 9.5 GB of data.  However, not even 6 GB is used. As a result, the video and audio quality is not what it could be.

"Panic Room" is a 112 minute movie.  Any movie that is 2 hours long or less should be able to easily fit on a DVD-9 disc at maximum encoding rate, provided no extra features are placed on the disc. The maximum video encoding rate to fit a 2 hour (or less) movie onto a DVD-9 disc is 9.8 Mbps.  However, this SuperBit version averages only 6.5 Mbps.

This SuperBit version offers audio encoding in 3 types: Dolby 2.0 Surround 192kbps, Dolby Digital 5.1, and DTS 5.1.  At first glance this is great news, until you discover that the DTS encoding isn't as high quality as it could be.  The DD 2.0 Surround is presented at a bitrate of 192bkps as expected.  So is the DD 5.1 at the expected 384kbps rate.  DTS 5.1 can go as high as 1536 kbps, but on this disc is presented at only 768 kbps.  This is unsatisfactory given the fact that one-third of the available disc space of the DVD-9 isn't even used.  The DTS encoding rate should be at least 1024 kbps for a movie like this.  This would represent a 33% increase in filespace for the audio portion, but a much larger increase in audio quality to the human ear.  The filespace increase would be only about 256 MB, which is very reasonable when you have over 3 GB of space not even being used.

If they had encoded "Panic Room" on this SuperBit disc at an average video bitrate of 9.5 Mbps, and removed the trailers and features, they would have had enough space to present all three audio encodings above, especially the DTS 5.1 encoding at the 1024 kbps rate I stated.

Such an encoding process would have used 9.4 GB of the 9.5 GB of available space.  A much better way to fill up the DVD-9 disc and adhere to the spirit of the SuperBit ideal.  The result would have been a movie encoded to DVD-9 at a much higher video and audio quality than what was presented on this disc.

I notice that they will be offering a repackaged SuperBit version in October 2006.  Hopefully that version will fix the flaws I just mentioned and present the movie in the highest encoding rate both video-wise and audio-wise.  It might even offer the better DD-EX 6.1 and DTS-ES 6.1 audio encodings for that extra rear center channel that many A/V receivers can process now.

Another thing I am noticing is that many times, for popular movies, they are released them in 2-disc editions.  The first disc contains only the movie and the second disc is all the extra stuff.  If the movie contains both DD and DTS encodings on the first disc, with a very high video bitrate of 9.0 Mbps or greater, it is already in the SuperBit mold.


Zero stars: Fincher, what exactly were you thinking?
	I got nothing to say. Was this supposed to be intense? Was this supposed to be a thriller? It was boring. Horrible acting, except for Forest Whitaker: but even he couldn't save this one. Pure Fincher? Pure trash. Horrible, horrible, horrible. Quite possibly one of the worst movies I've ever seen. I am just too upset to type, I can't believe I actually waisted my time with this


Femme Fatales or Very Lame?
	Terrible direction, terrible writing, it almost feels like the director didn't know what he was working with. Although this movie wanted to be in the same race and quality of the movie CLUE, it fails to realize that the plot and characters are incredibly riculous and not funny ha ha but funny stupid. It was a total watse of good celluloid


Pan and Scan - DVD is NOT letterbox!
	The film deserves 5 stars but the DVD only gets 1.  Why:  no letterbox format.  After waiting years for this fabulous film to come out on DVD, why would they give us full screen / pan   scan?  Yes, the quality and color are great but oh, what we're missing on the sidelines


Sorry, Spy Hard is a waste of time
	I love Leslie Nielsen, but this movie is not funny. His better movies are Wrongfully Accused and the Naked Gun movies


Quack,Quack!
	"The Hospital" as well-crafted as it is is a wholly unpleasant viewing experience.  It is not so much a dark comedy but a mean-spirited one.  I was a fan of Paddy Chayefsky's "Network" and at least that film had a little bit of light to compensate for the darkness.  I'm led to believe that Chayefsky must have had a bad experience with the medical profession and this resulted in him skewering it as a whole.  If George C.Scott's character is supposed to be the voice of reason why is it that when he's not brooding, drinking, or contemplating suicide he's off on some rant?  Diana Rigg is completely wasted in this film.  Her whole purpose here seems to be to sport a short mini-skirt and be ravaged by Scott's character.  The film is also not helped by the lead-footed direction of Arthur Hiller.  The medical profession can be lampooned but don't look for it in this uneven tirade of a film


There's no person like this person
	Betty Hutton has a colossal amount of energy. She seems to be doing everything she possibly can to be entertaining. She's a good sport about a funny but unflattering getup in her early hayseed numbers. Her voice is sturdy, durable, indestructible.

But oh my God, her acting choices ... She and the Indians are stampeding around with performances far too broad for the medium of film (whereas Buffalo Bill, allegedly a larger-than-life character, looks like a corpse by comparison, and Howard Keel, in only his second film, must manage to act like these are human beings he's relating to).

Take a look at Betty Hutton's reaction upon seeing Howard Keel for the first time -- the mugging would be considered "a bit much" if seen from the back row of an amphitheater. At best, her performance is clownlike; at worst, it's apelike. Little of her performance overlaps with what we know as humanity. It's a magnificent effort, and a stunning testimony to her desire to please, but her comedy has no reality, no nuance, no connection to any sincere emotion. She seizes on "hick" and drives that into the ground, then she plays nothing but "infatuated" for a while before toggling to "resentful" and so forth ... It's a series of masks and set pieces, but it's not a character. Judy Garland was in sad shape at that point in her life, but even then she would have been able to find the vulnerability flickering behind Annie's rootin'-tootinest moments, and she wouldn't have neglected Annie's grit even in the melting sentimental scenes. Nobody can do vulnerability like Judy, and yet few are identified so strongly as survivors -- both qualities that would serve this character. Annie could be a wonderful character, a great self-conflicted mess of strength, longing, guts, femininity, skill, naivete and worldiness, all trying to cohere into a woman who can win her man -- but instead Betty Hutton makes her a pop-eyed, crude cartoon with the subtlety of an iron skillet. I am surprised that Hutton didn't insist on doing the role with a couple of teeth blacked out. Maybe they just wouldn't let her. The scenes where she tries to read out loud are compelling for the way they illustrate someone playing for a cheap laugh, oblivious to any further potential the character and situation might provide.

I kept replaying scenes over and over in awe before moving on, and the memory of Betty Hutton's performance is branded on my brain, but it's because this performance seems like it's following the traditions of some other culture, some other world. It's like going to a sideshow.

That said, the tunes are a non-stop parade of hits -- there probably isn't any other show in which the composer so successfully nails so many numbers one after another, in wildly different styles, with effective melodies worth remembering. The classic tunes just keep coming. The movie works as spectacle and songfest, and as a startling specimen of what audiences would swallow in the days before political correctness. But if you're looking for a portrayal of a woman with genuine feelings and motivations, you might be distracted by the gorgeous blonde chimpanzee who steals all her scenes.


A B-movie with a little more substance
	Michael Moriarity is my hero! He is just one of the coolest actors in my opinion. He has done such great B-movies as this, Q, and It's Alive 3: Island of the Alive. How awesome is he?? Anyways, I think that this movie was hilarious! I think a lot of people take this movie too seriously, thinking that it is going to be your typical movie. But you shouldn't because not only is this a B-movie, but IT IS supposed to be funny. My favorite part is when "the stuff" started bubbeling out of the ground and that old hick guy just starts eating it. Who would do that?? I just started laughing by butt off when that happened. So if you watch this movie, just sit back and enjoy it for what it's worth, don't be too critical on it.
What I learned from The Stuff: Dairy products are evil! Especially if they come from with in the earth!
If you like The Stuff, I recommend: Watching other B-movies, such as Island of the Alive 3, Zombi 3 and 4, etc


What a Letdown!
	I love Jeff Goldblum, but he didn't carry this film. The film was ruined for me the second Julane Moore (yuck!) and the ridiculous, lame token Black daughter of Goldblum showed up no doubt to satisfy nauseating political correctness in Hollywood all at the expense of this bust of a film. It's obviously too much to ask for a white protagonist to actually have a white daughter. What a concept. It just added to the disbelief of the characters (stay Goldblum), the storyline, and the ultimate letdown of this much anticipated sequel. Jurassic Park III wasn't much better


Great visuals but couldn't stomach the horrible dialogue
	I am a big fan of Frank Miller's work and I loved reading the graphic novels the movie was adapted from. When I saw this film I was blown away by the visuals. It had an amazing graphic style that was very different than anything I had seen in a movie before.

Having mentioned it's good points I have to say I was enormously disappointed with the dialogue and some of the story adaptation to screen. It seems to me those involved in the screenplay and production were too concerned with adapting this in an overly faithful manner from the graphic novel to the big screen. For the most part the bad dialogue and some of the terrible acting in parts were just too painful to sit through. I had to keep checking to see if my ears were bleeding yet.

Each extraordinarily bad line or horribly acted sequence made we wince like I was being mugged. What works in a graphic novel doesn't necessarily work as well when adapted directly to screen without a bit more adaptation than you'll see here. All the characters were severely and tragically 2-dimensional with none of the depth you get from reading the graphic novel and very little attention was paid to developing better dialogue suitable for a big screen experience. Also, many of the big name actors in this movie were capable of much better performances than they displayed here.

Purists and rabid fans of the graphic novel may be capable of somehow finding a way to look past all the terrible acting and awful dialogue that is rife throughout the film. However, my bottom line opinion is it's a good film to watch for the visual look only, but you will almost certainly enjoy it far more if you keep the 'mute' button on. This film had the potential to be truly great but it is extremely disappointing that it fell so far short of that mark


Big name cast adds up to unfocussed dud. The worst movie of this genre.
	Incredible does describe this movie- incredibly bad! This movie doesn't know what it wants to be. At times one can see attempts to recreate and milk the genuine rage and drama of "Mississippi Burning" or the anger and impunity of "Ghosts of Mississippi", or a hybrid of those and bits and pieces of other movies of this genre. At other times it looks like its just trying to draw from the sex appeal and cheesy interaction of 2 of its main actors, Matthew McConaughey and Sandra Bullock. As a result this movie picks up the rear in that genre's list of movies for lack of originality, and the scattered hodge podge statements it tries to make. Some of my favorite actors are wasted, either by being given cliched dialogue, over acting, or being put there merely for their brand name with no script to support their presence. If this script is considered a great adaptation of a great book, then I have no interest in reading the book. I'm sure the idea and the premise looked good on paper. But the direction doesn't guide the story with any coherence or identity of its own.  Bullock is mere cheesecake and is unbelievable in her role, proving she's only worthy of b-grade "Miss Congeniality" type crud.  McConaughey over acts so much (as can be said for Keifer Sutherland and others) that it can be said he balances out the under acting of Patrick McGoohan, Kevin Spacey and Donald Sutherland. Samuel L. Jackson should be ashamed of himself of not only his worst performance ever, but also easily his worst choice of movies to participate in.  Even the extras in this movie are horrible. Enough can't be said about the terrible direction in this movie, equating elongated facial shots with drama to a fault, making Sergio Leone westerns look much more authentic by comparison. This is not "a powerful film." It's a powerful attempt at using a big name cast, a brand name book and a capable director to use material that they know would easily jerk the emotions of its audience, and in doing that they resort to all the cliches of this genre scattering the story line in so many directions, culminating in an over the top, pleading hunk of cheese summation scene by McConaughey that wouldn't hold water in any real court of justice. Maybe people claim greatness to this movie out of guilt, or because they haven't seen quality comparisons and classics like "Mississippis Burning," that has both a great script and fabulous acting. I don't know. All I know is it tugs from so many hokey directions it takes the final scene to remind everyone how it started. Among the top of my most over rated movies


SUCKS!
	Unless you enjoy movies that are not funny, not scary, and have the worst actors this side of rodeo clowns, DO NOT WATCH this series of horrible flicks.  Putrid!  Not even "so-bad-it's-funny". Absolutely the worst films in the history of mankind!  Heed my warning!  SUCKS!!


Cult classic...please, a waste of my childhood
	i actually saw this movie when i was 7 and it freaked me out abit, but i mean the brother was basically a blob with a face and the story was as bad as the acting. The ending was garbage and it had nothing to offer in todays world.Dont even rent this, i dont even know why you are considering the film.

I only give it a 2 star rating because t managed to scare a seven year old and i havent forgot how dumb the film was since.


Unbelieble bluff
	I read some good reviews about this movie. In adition, I respect french's cinema, they usually gives us interested and unconventional movies. So, I bought "Spanish Apartment".
A big dissapointment. Hughe one.
It's candid, it's "naive", it's boring, with poor ideas, poor acting, very predictable. There's a lot of good movies around you, don't waste your time in this one


Bette and Woody?
	Bette Midler and Woody Allen together would make one think of a movie that is very funny and pleasing. Instead here we get one that has more romance and drama than comedy as Bette and Woody play a couple who is celebrating their wedding annivesary as their children have both left for school. They also discover that they have been cheating on one another. The movie gets boring rather fast as Bette and Woody are the only ones we get to see as there are very few supporting characters. I would have expected better from these two


I hated this film
	....for several reasons.  Apparently, the other online reviewers are extremely over-analytical in their critiques of this film.  The DVD's jacket has a quote from Rolling Stone..."Think 'Sex and the City' with men!"  Well, I say, "Think again."   As an avid watcher of "Sex and the City", this film has little if any comparison to SATC.  Firstly, this film is not a comedy.  There were very small instances when I kind of chuckled, but could barely muster a real laugh.  Actually, towards the end of the film there is so much constant screaming and fighting that I kept hitting FAST FORWARD on the remote (those of you who regularly depend on reviews for movie choices know exactly what I mean here!).  The characters are presented in a confusing fashion with only snippets and glimpses into each person's life.  These disjointed glimpses don't give the viewer time or depth to care what happens to any of the spoiled rotten characters.  Yes, they are all bored whether they are in their 30's or their 50's.  Yes, they all want to break away from the mundane by running away or having affairs.  I usually enjoy movies with this breaking-away-from-boredom type of plot for example...Pane e Tulipani (Bread and Tulips), Facing Windows (also starring Giovanna Mezzogiorno and a MUCH better film), Under the Tuscan Sun, Shirley Valentine, A Month by the Lake, etc. The Last Kiss does not deliver anything near what these other films do, however.  The viewer is left with no warm feelings about life's decisions, only a twist ending that will make you furious and sick for having spent two hours watching this film


Not worth your time
	I was unfortunate enough to have stumbled across this in 2004.  I was thinking it would be a good sit down and watch type of movie, but it was really lackluster.

The acting is wooden, the script is very lame, and worst of all, the action isn't very exciting.  I expected a much better movie from director Richard Donner.  There is a battle scene, and there are action scenes, but they just aren't exciting.  When the action isn't exciting, you better have a good story.  The story here is alright, but certainly not enough to save the movie.

I don't hate any of the actors, they are decent when they have something to work with.  Here they had nothing to work with, so they obviously didn't do too well this time.

This really isn't worth your time.  I gave this to the thrift shop after I got it, and I feel sorry for the person who bought it there


Fock You!
	This movie was AWESOME!  Ben Stiller is a comic GENIUS, he's the new Jerry Lewis!  DeNiro, AWESOME!  Hoffman, AWESOME!  Streisand, AWESOME and still very sexy for an old liberal ho!  I thought the sight gags were priceless, and the plot line serene!  This was Hollywood movie watching heaven!  This film should have won some Academy Awards!  I mean if Marisa Torme can win for My Cousin Vinnie, these A-1 actors should've at least been nominated!  This is a highly entertaining film, and I recommend it to every and anyone to see, but wear your Depends, because you might pee yourself from laughing so hard!  Dubya 99, you don't know what in the FRIGGIN' H E L L you're talking about!  Yeah like we're suppose to take the opinion of an anti-social loser, that complains about going out to the movies?  Stay home, I'm sure Dateline NBC will be calling soon about that episode they had recently


A horrible movie attempting to use Snipes name
	This truly is a horrible movie.  7 seconds, huh, yeah 7 seconds to realize I made a mistake in renting it.  The acting is horrible, the plot is horrible, the filming is horrible...  Everything is horrible!  I was hopeful because of Snipes, which is why I rented it despite not ever seeing the movie anywhere before in the theaters.  The guy at the store even told us that he was told it was a good movie!  Snipes couldn't even do the fight scenes and make them look real.  The ending is a car chase that ends so abruptly that you suddenly see them sitting next to a pond behind their house completely in love!  Huh, they were a romantic interest?  They hinted at it, but never showed this happening.

Do not rent or buy this movie.  Stay away, or you will be sucked into it shaking your head wondering why you rented this movie


A Big Waste Of Time!!!!
	I loved the original movie, and I love Johnny Depp so I thought this movie would be awesome.Wrong wrong wrong!! First of all, the child actors were horrible, well the Charlie and Mike characters were ok, but the two girl actors were the worst I've seen in a long time. And what did they do to Johnny Depp? He was so creepy and weird. I took my nine year old to see it in the theater, and even she almost fell asleep. If you really want a treat watch the original with Gene Wilder


Why did they bother?
	The books are witty and charming. This, in stark contrast, is formulaic schlock. Americans -- and much of the world's consumers -- prefer their entertainment predigested so it doesn't require chewing, so they consume the same nutritionless movieland cliches endlessly.

In the land of limitless equality, everything is reduced to equal tastelessness. If you want impart the capacity for discernment to your child, you could start by avoiding this twaddle. The Eloise books are special, while this movie is mere product


Very biased- A HUGE disappointment
	When I purchased this DVD, I was hoping to get the complete picture- an unbiased presentation. From scratch I could sense what was to come. Bad presentation coupled with one sided propaganda forms the crux of this DVD. It is not well researched and very important issues have been completely omitted. What little was discussed appeared to be very tainted.
I definitely did not expect National Geographic to come up with this kind of a DVD. I will definitely think TEN times before I purchase anything from them. Maybe they should just stick to wildlife/geography/ecology and leave history/religion/spirituality alone


some good stuff, but lots of uninspired episodes as well
	Though I'm still a big South Park fan, I do think that the quality of the show has progressively declined over the past three seasons.  This season has its standouts, most notably the truly demented Christmas Critters episode, but it also has incredibly lame episodes like the dance off and election episodes.

To make matters worse, Matt and Trey put next to no effort into providing any extras for fans who pony up top dollar for the dvd collections.  A show like the Simpsons not only has more episodes per season and sells for the same price but the people involved in the Simpsons go the extra mile to satisfy fans:  full episode commentaries with writers, producers, directors, voice actors, etc as well as deleted scenes and other special features.  Matt and Trey provide generally uninteresting "mini commentaries."  No doubt about it, the boys are just generally "phoning it in" at this point, seemingly caring only about continuing their franchise and maximizing their profits for as little effort as possible


Damaged
	I hear this is a good movie, but can't play it as the DVD is visibly damaged.  So what about Quality control?  This disc should never have gotten out the door, but the odd thing is, I ordered 2 DVD's from Amazon - different titles, both damaged.  Are you guys buying 2nds and pawning them off on us?  "F


Spaced Out Reviewers
	I usually trust Amazon reviewers on movie reviews, but this time ....NO WAY!   This silly, totally predictable film left us playing with the cat for our evening entertainment, hoping the movie would liven up.  Sadly, it didn't. To those who rave about the film...you must be in another dimension or something.  Thumbs DOWN.


A little dissappointed
	I liked the shows when the 1st ran on tv; the unrated didn't quite live up to my expectations


Painful to watch...
	Another product of Hollywood's "Karaoke Culture".  In an age where we see cinematic remakes of every kind, we have in "U-571" an outrageous attempt to borrow from the success and acclaim of "Das Boot".  But instead of a gripping war drama that reveals the tragic waste of war, we get a cheap flag-waving pile of Hollywood propaganda. The lighting, camera angles and claustrophobic set are obviously inspired by DB. But the bigoted innacuracies (German submariners machine gunning helpless sailors) and absurd scenarios (an incredibly lucky stern shot sinks a destroyer in hot pursuit) put this ridiculous movie in its own category. U-571 is just another thin, over-promoted, throw-away movie you'll forget the day after you see it