Question: How is film?

I fell asleep on this film a few years ago when I started it too late the night before it was due back at the video store.  It's not what I expected of a so-called "cult" film, or even a sci-fi or troubled-teenager genre flick.  Now, having some more time and patience, I gave this Director's Cut the careful attention it deserves, and the rewards are considerable.  The 26-year-old Kelly shoots movies like a pro if not an art movie director.  None of the "shock editing" that we've become so accustomed and desensitized to.  Instead, he favors long takes, slow pacing, and some of the most fluid camera movement in recent memory.  Moreover, he has a true artist's eye for shot composition, using the 2.5:1 anamorphic lens to maximum aesthetic and narrative effect in practically every frame.All the same, I've just ordered the earlier, shorter version to see if some of the apparent flaws I noticed in the Director's Cut are lessened.  For one, some of the scenes are overly formulaic and obvious--both in the scripting and filming.  The hypocritical, self-righteous characters are played quite loudly, bordering on flat caricature.  Moreover, Kelly pulls gratuitous tricks like mocking them with "fast action" shooting (whereas the youthful romantic hero and heroine, of course, are shot in slow motion).  Drew Barrymore seems to occupy unnecessary screen time toward the end of the film, tilting this POV film to her situation rather than Darko's.  Also, all the time-travel nonsense, which I understand has been exaggerated in both this version and on a Johnny Darko website, could be reduced to the betterment of the film, imo.  Still, the script is light years ahead of juvenilia time-wasters like Dazed and Confused (unless you're a teenager).Although Kelly talks about the film as Reagan-era social satire (an easy target, since the 80s were a rerun of the repressive 1950s), the movie is less about an historical period than about other movies: in fact, it's a collection of mirrors reflecting other movies.  Several shots of Darko recall Norman Bates, when we learn about his dual identity at the end of Psycho.  Darko's alter ego, Frank, recalls Jeffrey Beaumont's dark twin, Frank (Dennis Hopper), in Lynch's Blue Velvet.  The playing off of psychological vs. chronological time, challenging the viewer to decide which temporal dimension he is currently viewing, reprises Lynne's remarkable film, "Jacob's Ladder."  And the time-travel theme owes less to "Back to the Future" than "serious" science fiction movies like "12 Monkeys" and the 30-minute influential French film classic by Chris Marker: "La Jetee."But most strikingly, the film echoes the central theme of Burgess/Kubrick's "Clockwork Orange," where Alex and his Droogs talk Nadsat and commit rape and violence to assert their free choice and humanity in a world that threatens to "condition" them, transforming them into deterministic machines.  Two key moments in Darko: the intercut chapter with the quote, "The Manipulated Living will do anything to save themselves from oblivion," and Darko's conversation with his science teacher, who explains to him that if he were able to know his future, he would have a choice to accept or avoid it, which means that destiny would come to an end.This is a film that celebrates choice--not just its characters' but the viewers'.  Moviegoers need not subject themselves to mindless surrogate experiences in virtual reality, pretending that loneliness and fear are more imagined than real. The attentive viewer is likely to feel that the disturbed teen protagonist has made some significant choices which, however risky or even deadly, have prepared him to face the difficult circumstances of life that none of us can control.Finally, this is a director who definitely knows Catcher in the Rye, infusing his main character with so much of Holden's spirit (obsession with sex and death, impatience with phoniness and pretense, adoption of grandiose thinking and a savior complex) that Donny Darko becomes the "everychild" in each of us, more recognizable than we may be inclined to admit.

Answer: this film a few years ago

<hl> I fell asleep on this film a few years ago when I started it too late the night before it was due back at the video store. <hl> It's not what I expected of a so-called "cult" film, or even a sci-fi or troubled-teenager genre flick. Now, having some more time and patience, I gave this Director's Cut the careful attention it deserves, and the rewards are considerable. The 26-year-old Kelly shoots movies like a pro if not an art movie director. None of the "shock editing" that we've become so accustomed and desensitized to. Instead, he favors long takes, slow pacing, and some of the most fluid camera movement in recent memory. Moreover, he has a true artist's eye for shot composition, using the 2.5:1 anamorphic lens to maximum aesthetic and narrative effect in practically every frame. All the same, I've just ordered the earlier, shorter version to see if some of the apparent flaws I noticed in the Director's Cut are lessened. For one, some of the scenes are overly formulaic and obvious--both in the scripting and filming. The hypocritical, self-righteous characters are played quite loudly, bordering on flat caricature. Moreover, Kelly pulls gratuitous tricks like mocking them with "fast action" shooting (whereas the youthful romantic hero and heroine, of course, are shot in slow motion). Drew Barrymore seems to occupy unnecessary screen time toward the end of the film, tilting this POV film to her situation rather than Darko's. Also, all the time-travel nonsense, which I understand has been exaggerated in both this version and on a Johnny Darko website, could be reduced to the betterment of the film, imo. Still, the script is light years ahead of juvenilia time-wasters like Dazed and Confused (unless you're a teenager).Although Kelly talks about the film as Reagan-era social satire (an easy target, since the 80s were a rerun of the repressive 1950s), the movie is less about an historical period than about other movies: in fact, it's a collection of mirrors reflecting other movies. Several shots of Darko recall Norman Bates, when we learn about his dual identity at the end of Psycho. Darko's alter ego, Frank, recalls Jeffrey Beaumont's dark twin, Frank (Dennis Hopper), in Lynch's Blue Velvet. The playing off of psychological vs. chronological time, challenging the viewer to decide which temporal dimension he is currently viewing, reprises Lynne's remarkable film, "Jacob's Ladder." And the time-travel theme owes less to "Back to the Future" than "serious" science fiction movies like "12 Monkeys" and the 30-minute influential French film classic by Chris Marker: "La Jetee. "But most strikingly, the film echoes the central theme of Burgess/Kubrick's "Clockwork Orange," where Alex and his Droogs talk Nadsat and commit rape and violence to assert their free choice and humanity in a world that threatens to "condition" them, transforming them into deterministic machines. Two key moments in Darko: the intercut chapter with the quote, "The Manipulated Living will do anything to save themselves from oblivion," and Darko's conversation with his science teacher, who explains to him that if he were able to know his future, he would have a choice to accept or avoid it, which means that destiny would come to an end. This is a film that celebrates choice--not just its characters' but the viewers'. Moviegoers need not subject themselves to mindless surrogate experiences in virtual reality, pretending that loneliness and fear are more imagined than real. The attentive viewer is likely to feel that the disturbed teen protagonist has made some significant choices which, however risky or even deadly, have prepared him to face the difficult circumstances of life that none of us can control. Finally, this is a director who definitely knows Catcher in the Rye, infusing his main character with so much of Holden's spirit (obsession with sex and death, impatience with phoniness and pretense, adoption of grandiose thinking and a savior complex) that Donny Darko becomes the "everychild" in each of us, more recognizable than we may be inclined to admit.

I fell asleep on <hl> this film a few years ago <hl> when I started it too late the night before it was due back at the video store. It's not what I expected of a so-called "cult" film, or even a sci-fi or troubled-teenager genre flick. Now, having some more time and patience, I gave this Director's Cut the careful attention it deserves, and the rewards are considerable. The 26-year-old Kelly shoots movies like a pro if not an art movie director. None of the "shock editing" that we've become so accustomed and desensitized to. Instead, he favors long takes, slow pacing, and some of the most fluid camera movement in recent memory. Moreover, he has a true artist's eye for shot composition, using the 2.5:1 anamorphic lens to maximum aesthetic and narrative effect in practically every frame.All the same, I've just ordered the earlier, shorter version to see if some of the apparent flaws I noticed in the Director's Cut are lessened. For one, some of the scenes are overly formulaic and obvious--both in the scripting and filming. The hypocritical, self-righteous characters are played quite loudly, bordering on flat caricature. Moreover, Kelly pulls gratuitous tricks like mocking them with "fast action" shooting (whereas the youthful romantic hero and heroine, of course, are shot in slow motion). Drew Barrymore seems to occupy unnecessary screen time toward the end of the film, tilting this POV film to her situation rather than Darko's. Also, all the time-travel nonsense, which I understand has been exaggerated in both this version and on a Johnny Darko website, could be reduced to the betterment of the film, imo. Still, the script is light years ahead of juvenilia time-wasters like Dazed and Confused (unless you're a teenager).Although Kelly talks about the film as Reagan-era social satire (an easy target, since the 80s were a rerun of the repressive 1950s), the movie is less about an historical period than about other movies: in fact, it's a collection of mirrors reflecting other movies. Several shots of Darko recall Norman Bates, when we learn about his dual identity at the end of Psycho. Darko's alter ego, Frank, recalls Jeffrey Beaumont's dark twin, Frank (Dennis Hopper), in Lynch's Blue Velvet. The playing off of psychological vs. chronological time, challenging the viewer to decide which temporal dimension he is currently viewing, reprises Lynne's remarkable film, "Jacob's Ladder." And the time-travel theme owes less to "Back to the Future" than "serious" science fiction movies like "12 Monkeys" and the 30-minute influential French film classic by Chris Marker: "La Jetee."But most strikingly, the film echoes the central theme of Burgess/Kubrick's "Clockwork Orange," where Alex and his Droogs talk Nadsat and commit rape and violence to assert their free choice and humanity in a world that threatens to "condition" them, transforming them into deterministic machines. Two key moments in Darko: the intercut chapter with the quote, "The Manipulated Living will do anything to save themselves from oblivion," and Darko's conversation with his science teacher, who explains to him that if he were able to know his future, he would have a choice to accept or avoid it, which means that destiny would come to an end.This is a film that celebrates choice--not just its characters' but the viewers'. Moviegoers need not subject themselves to mindless surrogate experiences in virtual reality, pretending that loneliness and fear are more imagined than real. The attentive viewer is likely to feel that the disturbed teen protagonist has made some significant choices which, however risky or even deadly, have prepared him to face the difficult circumstances of life that none of us can control.Finally, this is a director who definitely knows Catcher in the Rye, infusing his main character with so much of Holden's spirit (obsession with sex and death, impatience with phoniness and pretense, adoption of grandiose thinking and a savior complex) that Donny Darko becomes the "everychild" in each of us, more recognizable than we may be inclined to admit.


Question: How was the episode?

The third season of Family Guy is unfortunately the last, but knowing it was bound to get cancelled, Macfarlane just made it absurd.  He really pushes the envelope and makes some completely hysterical episodes.  Ironically, the episode that got banned from Fox isn't nearly as controversial as some of the ones that did make it on.I cannot stress how funny the show was.  The cutaways make it what it is.  Peter soiling himself at the dinner table was one of the most random and crazy moments of the show, but still absolutely priceless.  The fan request episodes are totally out there, but they still are priceless.  And Death going on a date...PRICELESS!Do yourself a favor...get the DVD set and Season 1/2 and watch this on Cartoon Network or whatever you gotta do to see it!

Answer: He really pushes the envelope and makes some completely hysterical episodes

The third season of Family Guy is unfortunately the last, but knowing it was bound to get cancelled, Macfarlane just made it absurd. <hl> He really pushes the envelope and makes some completely hysterical episodes . <hl> Ironically, the episode that got banned from Fox isn't nearly as controversial as some of the ones that did make it on. I cannot stress how funny the show was. The cutaways make it what it is. Peter soiling himself at the dinner table was one of the most random and crazy moments of the show, but still absolutely priceless. The fan request episodes are totally out there, but they still are priceless. And Death going on a date... PRICELESS!Do yourself a favor...get the DVD set and Season 1/2 and watch this on Cartoon Network or whatever you gotta do to see it!

The third season of Family Guy is unfortunately the last, but knowing it was bound to get cancelled, Macfarlane just made it absurd. <hl> He really pushes the envelope and makes some completely hysterical episodes <hl>. Ironically, the episode that got banned from Fox isn't nearly as controversial as some of the ones that did make it on.I cannot stress how funny the show was. The cutaways make it what it is. Peter soiling himself at the dinner table was one of the most random and crazy moments of the show, but still absolutely priceless. The fan request episodes are totally out there, but they still are priceless. And Death going on a date...PRICELESS!Do yourself a favor...get the DVD set and Season 1/2 and watch this on Cartoon Network or whatever you gotta do to see it!

<hl> He really pushes the envelope and makes some completely hysterical episodes <hl> .


Question: What about the extra?

This is a hard movie for me to review since I was a big fan of Ang Lee before I saw this for Sense and Sensibility, Eat Drink Man Woman and a couple others. I liked those past 2 movies more, but this is a very good movie. Zhang Ziyi is great in this film actually all the actors do a very good job in it. There are some very good action scenes also with a nice soundtrack. The DVD is good just picture quality isn't the best but this was suppose to be a small film that got produced by sony pictures classic and just got popular on word of mouth. The dvd has good extras Ang lee comentary and making of and others. I think the film plays better with the original Mandarin audio track which you can select with subtitles, since it's all the actors real voices. But some may prefer the English track without subtitles, at least you are given the choice. There are some amazing scenery shots in this film also.

Answer: The dvd has good extras

This is a hard movie for me to review since I was a big fan of Ang Lee before I saw this for Sense and Sensibility, Eat Drink Man Woman and a couple others. I liked those past 2 movies more, but this is a very good movie. Zhang Ziyi is great in this film actually all the actors do a very good job in it. There are some very good action scenes also with a nice soundtrack. The DVD is good just picture quality isn't the best but this was suppose to be a small film that got produced by sony pictures classic and just got popular on word of mouth. <hl> The dvd has good extras Ang lee comentary and making of and others. <hl> I think the film plays better with the original Mandarin audio track which you can select with subtitles, since it's all the actors real voices. But some may prefer the English track without subtitles, at least you are given the choice. There are some amazing scenery shots in this film also.

This is a hard movie for me to review since I was a big fan of Ang Lee before I saw this for Sense and Sensibility, Eat Drink Man Woman and a couple others. I liked those past 2 movies more, but this is a very good movie. Zhang Ziyi is great in this film actually all the actors do a very good job in it. There are some very good action scenes also with a nice soundtrack. The DVD is good just picture quality isn't the best but this was suppose to be a small film that got produced by sony pictures classic and just got popular on word of mouth. <hl> The dvd has good extras <hl> Ang lee comentary and making of and others. I think the film plays better with the original Mandarin audio track which you can select with subtitles, since it's all the actors real voices. But some may prefer the English track without subtitles, at least you are given the choice. There are some amazing scenery shots in this film also.


Question: How interesting was the commentary in the movie?

I think this is the way to buy this set.  The widescreen version originally had a problem with the last two movies, and I wouldn't get that until I knew for sure it was fixed.  Besides, since these are movies kids will appreciate most, the full screen versions tend to be what kids like (even though I always prefer widescreen).What I discovered is that my younger children did not know these movies.  I wondered if there being twenty years old would keep them from enjoying them.  I shouldn't have worried.  They enjoyed them immensely.  There were some cultural references that they did not get until I explained them (more from the 50s than the 80s), but that helped them gain some perspective on how culture changes over time.Unlike "The Lord of the Rings", this was never meant to be series of movies.  However, the huge global success of the first film led to the other two.  One evidence that a sequel was never planned is discussed in one of the extras.  It was pointed out that if they were setting up a sequel in the last scene of the first film, they would not have brought Marty's girlfriend in the car.  Having her there created tremendous problems in the second film, as you know if you have seen that film.The first film was inspired by the notion of a teenager discovering that his parents were once his age.  The time travel is the means to make that discover happen.  While the danger of changing the future is always there, it doesn't always have to be for the worse.  It sets up some very interesting notions about time travel, but it isn't really a movie about that or special effects.  It is about growing up in whatever time one lives and finding a deeper connection with one's parents and their lives.The second film begins in the future (building on the ending of the first film).  Because of something Marty was thinking about doing there and Biff acts on, the whole of history is changed again, and this time for the worse.  Doc Brown and Marty have to go back and prevent that change from occurring.  This leads to some very complex plotting because we have Marty's parents living their lives, Marty from the first film doing his thing, and now Marty from the second film coming back there to try and undo what Biff from the future has set in motion.  We learn from the extras about how hard these shots were to accomplish using the new Vistaglide from ILM.  Nowadays, it would be easy in digital, but unavailable in 1988.The third film was shot while the second film was in editing.  Doc Brown (Christopher Lloyd) is the romantic lead in this film!  It is set in the old west.  At the end of the second film the flying time machine is struck by lightening and disappears.  Moments afterward a car drives up from Western Union delivering a letter they had on file for seventy years.  Brown explains to Marty that he is happy in the past and to not come for him, but tells him how he can get home to his time in 1985.  But Marty learns that Brown was murdered shortly after the letter was written and is determined to go back and get him.The problem is how to get from 1885 to 1995 without any gasoline to get the car up to 88 mph and how to get there before Doc is killed.  Do they make it?The extras are interesting and useful in understanding the making of the films.  There is commentary that you can listen to for all three films as well as short documentaries, some deleted scenes, and a few outtakes.Buying the movies as a trilogy this way is quite affordable and the extras make it an even better buy.Recommended!  However, beware that in the mid 1980s that most of the successful teen films were "R" rated, so the studios made sure there was some swearing (mostly the SH-word) to make it a bit more "mature".  It kind of sounds out of place today - which would likely have WORSE language.  These films are rated "PG" and that seems right.

Answer: interesting and useful in understanding the making of the films

I think this is the way to buy this set. The widescreen version originally had a problem with the last two movies, and I wouldn't get that until I knew for sure it was fixed. Besides, since these are movies kids will appreciate most, the full screen versions tend to be what kids like (even though I always prefer widescreen).What I discovered is that my younger children did not know these movies. I wondered if there being twenty years old would keep them from enjoying them. I shouldn't have worried. They enjoyed them immensely. There were some cultural references that they did not get until I explained them (more from the 50s than the 80s), but that helped them gain some perspective on how culture changes over time. Unlike "The Lord of the Rings", this was never meant to be series of movies. However, the huge global success of the first film led to the other two. One evidence that a sequel was never planned is discussed in one of the extras. It was pointed out that if they were setting up a sequel in the last scene of the first film, they would not have brought Marty's girlfriend in the car. Having her there created tremendous problems in the second film, as you know if you have seen that film. The first film was inspired by the notion of a teenager discovering that his parents were once his age. The time travel is the means to make that discover happen. While the danger of changing the future is always there, it doesn't always have to be for the worse. It sets up some very interesting notions about time travel, but it isn't really a movie about that or special effects. It is about growing up in whatever time one lives and finding a deeper connection with one's parents and their lives. The second film begins in the future (building on the ending of the first film). Because of something Marty was thinking about doing there and Biff acts on, the whole of history is changed again, and this time for the worse. Doc Brown and Marty have to go back and prevent that change from occurring. This leads to some very complex plotting because we have Marty's parents living their lives, Marty from the first film doing his thing, and now Marty from the second film coming back there to try and undo what Biff from the future has set in motion. We learn from the extras about how hard these shots were to accomplish using the new Vistaglide from ILM. Nowadays, it would be easy in digital, but unavailable in 1988.The third film was shot while the second film was in editing. Doc Brown (Christopher Lloyd) is the romantic lead in this film! It is set in the old west. At the end of the second film the flying time machine is struck by lightening and disappears. Moments afterward a car drives up from Western Union delivering a letter they had on file for seventy years. Brown explains to Marty that he is happy in the past and to not come for him, but tells him how he can get home to his time in 1985. But Marty learns that Brown was murdered shortly after the letter was written and is determined to go back and get him. The problem is how to get from 1885 to 1995 without any gasoline to get the car up to 88 mph and how to get there before Doc is killed. <hl> Do they make it?The extras are interesting and useful in understanding the making of the films . <hl> There is commentary that you can listen to for all three films as well as short documentaries, some deleted scenes, and a few outtakes. Buying the movies as a trilogy this way is quite affordable and the extras make it an even better buy. Recommended! However, beware that in the mid 1980s that most of the successful teen films were "R" rated, so the studios made sure there was some swearing (mostly the SH-word) to make it a bit more "mature". It kind of sounds out of place today - which would likely have WORSE language. These films are rated "PG" and that seems right.

I think this is the way to buy this set. The widescreen version originally had a problem with the last two movies, and I wouldn't get that until I knew for sure it was fixed. Besides, since these are movies kids will appreciate most, the full screen versions tend to be what kids like (even though I always prefer widescreen).What I discovered is that my younger children did not know these movies. I wondered if there being twenty years old would keep them from enjoying them. I shouldn't have worried. They enjoyed them immensely. There were some cultural references that they did not get until I explained them (more from the 50s than the 80s), but that helped them gain some perspective on how culture changes over time.Unlike "The Lord of the Rings", this was never meant to be series of movies. However, the huge global success of the first film led to the other two. One evidence that a sequel was never planned is discussed in one of the extras. It was pointed out that if they were setting up a sequel in the last scene of the first film, they would not have brought Marty's girlfriend in the car. Having her there created tremendous problems in the second film, as you know if you have seen that film.The first film was inspired by the notion of a teenager discovering that his parents were once his age. The time travel is the means to make that discover happen. While the danger of changing the future is always there, it doesn't always have to be for the worse. It sets up some very interesting notions about time travel, but it isn't really a movie about that or special effects. It is about growing up in whatever time one lives and finding a deeper connection with one's parents and their lives.The second film begins in the future (building on the ending of the first film). Because of something Marty was thinking about doing there and Biff acts on, the whole of history is changed again, and this time for the worse. Doc Brown and Marty have to go back and prevent that change from occurring. This leads to some very complex plotting because we have Marty's parents living their lives, Marty from the first film doing his thing, and now Marty from the second film coming back there to try and undo what Biff from the future has set in motion. We learn from the extras about how hard these shots were to accomplish using the new Vistaglide from ILM. Nowadays, it would be easy in digital, but unavailable in 1988.The third film was shot while the second film was in editing. Doc Brown (Christopher Lloyd) is the romantic lead in this film! It is set in the old west. At the end of the second film the flying time machine is struck by lightening and disappears. Moments afterward a car drives up from Western Union delivering a letter they had on file for seventy years. Brown explains to Marty that he is happy in the past and to not come for him, but tells him how he can get home to his time in 1985. But Marty learns that Brown was murdered shortly after the letter was written and is determined to go back and get him.The problem is how to get from 1885 to 1995 without any gasoline to get the car up to 88 mph and how to get there before Doc is killed. Do they make it?The extras are <hl> interesting and useful in understanding the making of the films <hl>. There is commentary that you can listen to for all three films as well as short documentaries, some deleted scenes, and a few outtakes.Buying the movies as a trilogy this way is quite affordable and the extras make it an even better buy.Recommended! However, beware that in the mid 1980s that most of the successful teen films were "R" rated, so the studios made sure there was some swearing (mostly the SH-word) to make it a bit more "mature". It kind of sounds out of place today - which would likely have WORSE language. These films are rated "PG" and that seems right.

Do they make it?The extras are <hl> interesting and useful in understanding the making of the films <hl> .


Question: How do you like the film?

This a pretty good movie and it had A LOT of blood. However, it did not have enough depth. They could have added some more to the movie but it was alright anyway and it makes you want to watch the sequel. The movie did have some good fight scenes though. Overall it was pretty interesting to watch so if you are looking for a good action movie, this is a good one to see. However, warning, this is not for the faint of heart. There is much blood and gore.  But if you don't mind watching someone getting their head chopped off and then seeing the blood spill out of their lifeless body then by all means this is the movie for you. By the way all of the blood looks extremely fake and seems to be made the same way the blood was made for the comic book scenes. What a pity.

Answer: This a pretty good movie and it had A LOT of blood. However, it did not have enough depth

<hl> This a pretty good movie and it had A LOT of blood. However, it did not have enough depth . <hl> They could have added some more to the movie but it was alright anyway and it makes you want to watch the sequel. The movie did have some good fight scenes though. Overall it was pretty interesting to watch so if you are looking for a good action movie, this is a good one to see. However, warning, this is not for the faint of heart. There is much blood and gore. But if you don't mind watching someone getting their head chopped off and then seeing the blood spill out of their lifeless body then by all means this is the movie for you. By the way all of the blood looks extremely fake and seems to be made the same way the blood was made for the comic book scenes. What a pity.

<hl> This a pretty good movie and it had A LOT of blood. However, it did not have enough depth <hl>. They could have added some more to the movie but it was alright anyway and it makes you want to watch the sequel. The movie did have some good fight scenes though. Overall it was pretty interesting to watch so if you are looking for a good action movie, this is a good one to see. However, warning, this is not for the faint of heart. There is much blood and gore. But if you don't mind watching someone getting their head chopped off and then seeing the blood spill out of their lifeless body then by all means this is the movie for you. By the way all of the blood looks extremely fake and seems to be made the same way the blood was made for the comic book scenes. What a pity.

<hl> This a pretty good movie and it had A LOT of blood. However, it did not have enough depth <hl> .


Question: Is film good?

I suppose I was nave to think that this third installment of the Twilight cultural phenomenon would be any better or more interesting than the first two "films" in the series. To be honest, I watched this (and read the first three books) out of a sense of pop culture obligation--I do need to stay abreast of the popular trends in YA literature and culture. Sometimes that obligation is enjoyable and rewarding (e.g., the Harry Potter novels and films), and sometimes that obligation is an excruciating act of penance (e.g., any and all things Twilight). What can I say to express the profound artistic void that this film represents? That the acting is wooden and hammy? That the story is about as interesting as watching bread mold? That the script is amateurish and insipid? That the film looks as if it were shot in a teenager's basement and backyard? That the special effects are, in effect, anything but special? That the only thing worth looking at in this entire film is Taylor Lautner's bare torso? I shudder to think that the final installment of this series will be divided into two films. Please, have mercy and end this entire Twilight fiasco already.

Answer: would be any better

<hl> I suppose I was nave to think that this third installment of the Twilight cultural phenomenon would be any better or more interesting than the first two "films" in the series. <hl> To be honest, I watched this (and read the first three books) out of a sense of pop culture obligation--I do need to stay abreast of the popular trends in YA literature and culture. Sometimes that obligation is enjoyable and rewarding (e.g., the Harry Potter novels and films), and sometimes that obligation is an excruciating act of penance (e.g., any and all things Twilight). What can I say to express the profound artistic void that this film represents? That the acting is wooden and hammy? That the story is about as interesting as watching bread mold? That the script is amateurish and insipid? That the film looks as if it were shot in a teenager's basement and backyard? That the special effects are, in effect, anything but special? That the only thing worth looking at in this entire film is Taylor Lautner's bare torso? I shudder to think that the final installment of this series will be divided into two films. Please, have mercy and end this entire Twilight fiasco already.

I suppose I was nave to think that this third installment of the Twilight cultural phenomenon <hl> would be any better <hl> or more interesting than the first two "films" in the series. To be honest, I watched this (and read the first three books) out of a sense of pop culture obligation--I do need to stay abreast of the popular trends in YA literature and culture. Sometimes that obligation is enjoyable and rewarding (e.g., the Harry Potter novels and films), and sometimes that obligation is an excruciating act of penance (e.g., any and all things Twilight). What can I say to express the profound artistic void that this film represents? That the acting is wooden and hammy? That the story is about as interesting as watching bread mold? That the script is amateurish and insipid? That the film looks as if it were shot in a teenager's basement and backyard? That the special effects are, in effect, anything but special? That the only thing worth looking at in this entire film is Taylor Lautner's bare torso? I shudder to think that the final installment of this series will be divided into two films. Please, have mercy and end this entire Twilight fiasco already.


Question: What's your name?

A New Hope (episode 4) was a really good movie.  Empire Strikes Back (episode 5) was the best of the bunch; things went down hill from here.While Revenge of the Sith was the better of the final three installments, it still is weak when compared with episodes 4 & 5. Yes, the effects are great and there is a lot of action. It's just that the characters are weak, the acting is poor and the script - let's just say that George had too many "yes" men working for him.His last three movies have all had terrible scripts that not even good actors could make interesting. I still cring at the thought of Sidius lying on the edge of the building... all funked out from bad effects of the force and looking up saying "no...No...NO!!!".  If this doesn't suck I don't know what does.I watched it - twice for that matter.  After all I was reared on Star Wars.  I had to see how it ended... uh .. began... um middled. What ever, I had to know the whole story.Here's a word to the wise.  Once you've watched episodes 1, 2 & 3 do yourself a favor and jump right to Empire Stikes Back and renew your appreciation for the Star Wars saga.

Answer: Empire Strikes

A New Hope (episode 4) was a really good movie. <hl> Empire Strikes Back (episode 5) was the best of the bunch; things went down hill from here. <hl> While Revenge of the Sith was the better of the final three installments, it still is weak when compared with episodes 4 & 5. Yes, the effects are great and there is a lot of action. It's just that the characters are weak, the acting is poor and the script - let's just say that George had too many "yes" men working for him. His last three movies have all had terrible scripts that not even good actors could make interesting. I still cring at the thought of Sidius lying on the edge of the building... all funked out from bad effects of the force and looking up saying "no...No...NO!!!". If this doesn't suck I don't know what does. I watched it - twice for that matter. After all I was reared on Star Wars. I had to see how it ended... uh .. began... um middled. What ever, I had to know the whole story. Here's a word to the wise. Once you've watched episodes 1, 2 & 3 do yourself a favor and jump right to Empire Stikes Back and renew your appreciation for the Star Wars saga.

A New Hope (episode 4) was a really good movie. <hl> Empire Strikes <hl> Back (episode 5) was the best of the bunch; things went down hill from here.While Revenge of the Sith was the better of the final three installments, it still is weak when compared with episodes 4 & 5. Yes, the effects are great and there is a lot of action. It's just that the characters are weak, the acting is poor and the script - let's just say that George had too many "yes" men working for him.His last three movies have all had terrible scripts that not even good actors could make interesting. I still cring at the thought of Sidius lying on the edge of the building... all funked out from bad effects of the force and looking up saying "no...No...NO!!!". If this doesn't suck I don't know what does.I watched it - twice for that matter. After all I was reared on Star Wars. I had to see how it ended... uh .. began... um middled. What ever, I had to know the whole story.Here's a word to the wise. Once you've watched episodes 1, 2 & 3 do yourself a favor and jump right to Empire Stikes Back and renew your appreciation for the Star Wars saga.


Question: What is the number of this episode?

In the fall of 2008, I tuned into this show because of brilliant director J.J. Abrams (creator of LOST, my all-time favorite TV drama). I watched roughly two thirds of the first season (until about February) and decided to exclude it from my weekly TV "regimen". Though some episodes were very interesting and entertaining, most others felt like fillers that weren't really leading anywhere. Plus, even the "cannon" material didn't really get off the ground. It was kind of like watching The X-Files without any mythology...it would be decent, but nowhere near special.However, as a recent Christmas gift, I was given the entire first season on DVD and prodded to begin where I had left off with the promise that the show would begin to blow my mind. I reluctantly agreed, as once I cast away a show I usually don't return, and picked up on the 14th (of 20) episode entitled "Ability". Within a few days, I was quickly finished with this season and scrambling to catch up on Season Two before it returns to the air!Basically, the show is about the aptly-named "Fringe" division of the F.B.I., including three main participants:Walter Bishop, a once-deranged scientist, now somewhat (!) sane, who conducted crazy physics experiments in his younger years that come into play nearly every week.Peter Bishop, son of Walter, who seems to just blend into the background at times but may, as Season Two rolls along, just turn out to be the most fascinating character of the whole show.Olivia Dunham, lead FBI investigator, who not only does the field work but also is tied to the Bishops due to strange happenings in her childhood.This Fringe division investigates an abundance of strange/paranormal events that comes to be known as "The Pattern", which (in the early goings) all seems to point to the uber-company Massive Dynamic (led by the shadowy Nina Sharp). The goal is to determine why these freakish events keep occurring and discover their source.As I mentioned earlier, the first two thirds of this plotline never really get off the ground. Peter is more annoying than anything, Walter is just a nut, and Sharp's Massive Dynamics isn't developed enough to really hook you in. Plus, Dunham is more preoccupied with communicating with her murdered FBI partner John Scott than with anything that the Bishops have to offer. However, once the Scott storyline is put to rest and the ZFT/William Bell angle is picked up on in "Ability", that is when the show goes from borderline to incredible. The characters become much more human, the plot will have you hanging at every turn, and the sheer brilliance of the writing will astound you.Think of it this way...it is like a combination of the X-Files mythology (although even more interesting and better thought-out), the heavy physics concepts from Season Five of LOST, and even the Stephen King "there are other worlds than these" concept that spawned the incredibly popular "Dark Tower" books.Thus, I urge you to PLEASE not give up on this show until you have watched the entire thing. It starts slow and looks to be wallowing around for awhile, but (I guess) never should we doubt the mind of Mr. Abrams. The final scene of the season? Let's just say that you will be picking your jaw up off the floor.

Answer: Five

In the fall of 2008, I tuned into this show because of brilliant director J.J. Abrams (creator of LOST, my all-time favorite TV drama). I watched roughly two thirds of the first season (until about February) and decided to exclude it from my weekly TV "regimen". Though some episodes were very interesting and entertaining, most others felt like fillers that weren't really leading anywhere. Plus, even the "cannon" material didn't really get off the ground. It was kind of like watching The X-Files without any mythology...it would be decent, but nowhere near special. However, as a recent Christmas gift, I was given the entire first season on DVD and prodded to begin where I had left off with the promise that the show would begin to blow my mind. I reluctantly agreed, as once I cast away a show I usually don't return, and picked up on the 14th (of 20) episode entitled "Ability". Within a few days, I was quickly finished with this season and scrambling to catch up on Season Two before it returns to the air!Basically, the show is about the aptly-named "Fringe" division of the F.B.I., including three main participants:Walter Bishop, a once-deranged scientist, now somewhat (!) sane, who conducted crazy physics experiments in his younger years that come into play nearly every week. Peter Bishop, son of Walter, who seems to just blend into the background at times but may, as Season Two rolls along, just turn out to be the most fascinating character of the whole show. Olivia Dunham, lead FBI investigator, who not only does the field work but also is tied to the Bishops due to strange happenings in her childhood. This Fringe division investigates an abundance of strange/paranormal events that comes to be known as "The Pattern", which (in the early goings) all seems to point to the uber-company Massive Dynamic (led by the shadowy Nina Sharp). The goal is to determine why these freakish events keep occurring and discover their source. As I mentioned earlier, the first two thirds of this plotline never really get off the ground. Peter is more annoying than anything, Walter is just a nut, and Sharp's Massive Dynamics isn't developed enough to really hook you in. Plus, Dunham is more preoccupied with communicating with her murdered FBI partner John Scott than with anything that the Bishops have to offer. However, once the Scott storyline is put to rest and the ZFT/William Bell angle is picked up on in "Ability", that is when the show goes from borderline to incredible. The characters become much more human, the plot will have you hanging at every turn, and the sheer brilliance of the writing will astound you. Think of it this way... <hl> it is like a combination of the X-Files mythology (although even more interesting and better thought-out), the heavy physics concepts from Season Five of LOST, and even the Stephen King "there are other worlds than these" concept that spawned the incredibly popular "Dark Tower" books. <hl> Thus, I urge you to PLEASE not give up on this show until you have watched the entire thing. It starts slow and looks to be wallowing around for awhile, but (I guess) never should we doubt the mind of Mr. Abrams. The final scene of the season? Let's just say that you will be picking your jaw up off the floor.

In the fall of 2008, I tuned into this show because of brilliant director J.J. Abrams (creator of LOST, my all-time favorite TV drama). I watched roughly two thirds of the first season (until about February) and decided to exclude it from my weekly TV "regimen". Though some episodes were very interesting and entertaining, most others felt like fillers that weren't really leading anywhere. Plus, even the "cannon" material didn't really get off the ground. It was kind of like watching The X-Files without any mythology...it would be decent, but nowhere near special.However, as a recent Christmas gift, I was given the entire first season on DVD and prodded to begin where I had left off with the promise that the show would begin to blow my mind. I reluctantly agreed, as once I cast away a show I usually don't return, and picked up on the 14th (of 20) episode entitled "Ability". Within a few days, I was quickly finished with this season and scrambling to catch up on Season Two before it returns to the air!Basically, the show is about the aptly-named "Fringe" division of the F.B.I., including three main participants:Walter Bishop, a once-deranged scientist, now somewhat (!) sane, who conducted crazy physics experiments in his younger years that come into play nearly every week.Peter Bishop, son of Walter, who seems to just blend into the background at times but may, as Season Two rolls along, just turn out to be the most fascinating character of the whole show.Olivia Dunham, lead FBI investigator, who not only does the field work but also is tied to the Bishops due to strange happenings in her childhood.This Fringe division investigates an abundance of strange/paranormal events that comes to be known as "The Pattern", which (in the early goings) all seems to point to the uber-company Massive Dynamic (led by the shadowy Nina Sharp). The goal is to determine why these freakish events keep occurring and discover their source.As I mentioned earlier, the first two thirds of this plotline never really get off the ground. Peter is more annoying than anything, Walter is just a nut, and Sharp's Massive Dynamics isn't developed enough to really hook you in. Plus, Dunham is more preoccupied with communicating with her murdered FBI partner John Scott than with anything that the Bishops have to offer. However, once the Scott storyline is put to rest and the ZFT/William Bell angle is picked up on in "Ability", that is when the show goes from borderline to incredible. The characters become much more human, the plot will have you hanging at every turn, and the sheer brilliance of the writing will astound you.Think of it this way...it is like a combination of the X-Files mythology (although even more interesting and better thought-out), the heavy physics concepts from Season <hl> Five <hl> of LOST, and even the Stephen King "there are other worlds than these" concept that spawned the incredibly popular "Dark Tower" books.Thus, I urge you to PLEASE not give up on this show until you have watched the entire thing. It starts slow and looks to be wallowing around for awhile, but (I guess) never should we doubt the mind of Mr. Abrams. The final scene of the season? Let's just say that you will be picking your jaw up off the floor.


Question: How is the movie?

Very different from your standard Will Smith movies. His acting was very robotic but that's what the role called for. I waited to get this movie on redbox due to all the bad reviews. But I have to say I enjoyed the film. It keeps your attention. Not a holy cow great film but worth watching. Now I do have to agree with the reviews on Will Smith's son's acting. I was very surprised especially after seeing him in Karate Kid that his acting was this poor. Everytime time he spoke his dialogue it seemed like he was reading it off a script. Very unnatural and awkward. His english pronunication was also bad. What happened to this kids acting. If he wasn't Will smith's son I doubt he would have ever been cast in this role. Whenever I see that Will Smith is in a movie I always expect a great film. This is not the case with this movie but worth seeing for a redbox price of $1.30

Answer: redbox due to all the bad reviews

Very different from your standard Will Smith movies. His acting was very robotic but that's what the role called for. <hl> I waited to get this movie on redbox due to all the bad reviews . <hl> But I have to say I enjoyed the film. It keeps your attention. Not a holy cow great film but worth watching. Now I do have to agree with the reviews on Will Smith's son's acting. I was very surprised especially after seeing him in Karate Kid that his acting was this poor. Everytime time he spoke his dialogue it seemed like he was reading it off a script. Very unnatural and awkward. His english pronunication was also bad. What happened to this kids acting. If he wasn't Will smith's son I doubt he would have ever been cast in this role. Whenever I see that Will Smith is in a movie I always expect a great film. This is not the case with this movie but worth seeing for a redbox price of $1.30

Very different from your standard Will Smith movies. His acting was very robotic but that's what the role called for. I waited to get this movie on <hl> redbox due to all the bad reviews <hl>. But I have to say I enjoyed the film. It keeps your attention. Not a holy cow great film but worth watching. Now I do have to agree with the reviews on Will Smith's son's acting. I was very surprised especially after seeing him in Karate Kid that his acting was this poor. Everytime time he spoke his dialogue it seemed like he was reading it off a script. Very unnatural and awkward. His english pronunication was also bad. What happened to this kids acting. If he wasn't Will smith's son I doubt he would have ever been cast in this role. Whenever I see that Will Smith is in a movie I always expect a great film. This is not the case with this movie but worth seeing for a redbox price of $1.30

I waited to get this movie on <hl> redbox due to all the bad reviews <hl> .


Question: How is a cinematography wonderful?

This gorgeous film has nothing to do whatsoever with the explosion of the planet. That is purely symbolic. It is a film solely about the massive depression and isloation of a family, and it focuses purely on two siblings, and how they are dealing with familial dysfunction, and their own mental self-destruction. The cinematography here is outstanding, the "choreography", if you will, pure genius, and the acting/direction of the highest quality. Not a film made to please the "masses". It's not Spielberg or Howard. This film, like Bergman's, deals with the complexity of feelings and the interaction of its characters. It is by far the best performance ever by Dunst, and where has the brillant Charlotte Gainsbourg been all my life (what a "face" packed with character). The demise of the planet is merely a set-technique to add drama and a background to a fascinating saga of psychological character. A fabulous movie, with great depth, emotion, and  artistic innovation.

Answer: The cinematography here is outstanding

This gorgeous film has nothing to do whatsoever with the explosion of the planet. That is purely symbolic. It is a film solely about the massive depression and isloation of a family, and it focuses purely on two siblings, and how they are dealing with familial dysfunction, and their own mental self-destruction. <hl> The cinematography here is outstanding , the "choreography", if you will, pure genius, and the acting/direction of the highest quality. <hl> Not a film made to please the "masses". It's not Spielberg or Howard. This film, like Bergman's, deals with the complexity of feelings and the interaction of its characters. It is by far the best performance ever by Dunst, and where has the brillant Charlotte Gainsbourg been all my life (what a "face" packed with character). The demise of the planet is merely a set-technique to add drama and a background to a fascinating saga of psychological character. A fabulous movie, with great depth, emotion, and artistic innovation.

This gorgeous film has nothing to do whatsoever with the explosion of the planet. That is purely symbolic. It is a film solely about the massive depression and isloation of a family, and it focuses purely on two siblings, and how they are dealing with familial dysfunction, and their own mental self-destruction. <hl> The cinematography here is outstanding <hl>, the "choreography", if you will, pure genius, and the acting/direction of the highest quality. Not a film made to please the "masses". It's not Spielberg or Howard. This film, like Bergman's, deals with the complexity of feelings and the interaction of its characters. It is by far the best performance ever by Dunst, and where has the brillant Charlotte Gainsbourg been all my life (what a "face" packed with character). The demise of the planet is merely a set-technique to add drama and a background to a fascinating saga of psychological character. A fabulous movie, with great depth, emotion, and artistic innovation.

<hl> The cinematography here is outstanding <hl> , the "choreography", if you will, pure genius, and the acting/direction of the highest quality.


Question: How are the storylines?

I did not think I would like this show, not being a great fan of Sherlock Holmes in the past. However, the show is so well written and the acting is terrific. The lead actor, playing Sherlock, does a fantastic job creating a brand new Sherlock, original and interesting. The show is funny, smart, and addictive.

Answer: The show is funny, smart, and addictive

I did not think I would like this show, not being a great fan of Sherlock Holmes in the past. However, the show is so well written and the acting is terrific. The lead actor, playing Sherlock, does a fantastic job creating a brand new Sherlock, original and interesting. <hl> The show is funny, smart, and addictive . <hl>

I did not think I would like this show, not being a great fan of Sherlock Holmes in the past. However, the show is so well written and the acting is terrific. The lead actor, playing Sherlock, does a fantastic job creating a brand new Sherlock, original and interesting. <hl> The show is funny, smart, and addictive <hl>.

<hl> The show is funny, smart, and addictive <hl> .


Question: How is movie?

Now before my 1st 20 years ago review for the month of May X2 I thought I would review the 1st X Men movie as a kid you know I was a fan of the animated X Men show I had a lot of the toys & of course I was a fan of the animated show from the 90's & I always wanted a movie made about The X Men. So in the year 2000 X Men was released in theaters. Now I do enjoy all 3 movies cause I can get some entertainment out of The Last Stand but I have my problems with it & it's not as good as the 1st X Men movies. But getting to this review X Men was directed by Bryan Singer who directed the sequel to this movie as well as Apt Pupil The Usual Suspects & unfortantly Superman Returns. It stars Patrick Stewart as Professor Xavier, Ian McKellen as Magneto, Hugh Jackman as Wolverine, James Mardsen as Cyclops, Famke Janseen as Jean Grey, Halle Berry as Storm, Anna Paquin as Rouge, Rebecca Romjn as Mystique & Tyler Mane as Sabertooth. The story is you start off in 1944 in Poland a boy named Eric Lehnsher who is seperated from his parents & they are being taken off to a gas chamber. This scene imo is better than X Men First Class where the guards are holding him back from getting to his parents & his mutant powers are triggered & he bends a metal gate the effects are so much better than those Secret World Of Alex Mack effects in First Class. So Eric goes on to become Magneto. Then you get to 50 years later you're introduced to this girl nmaed Marie who kiss her Boyfriend & she has mutant powers that that can take away peoples life force. It nearly kills her Boyfriend & he was put in a coma for 3 weeks Marie runs away from home & goes by the name of Rouge. She ends up in northern Alberta Cnaada she sees this cage fight going on where Wolverine is kicking a  s  s. Some guys start hounding Wolverine & pulls his claws out & The Bar Tender pulls a Shot Gun out on him Wolverine cuts it in 2. While he is leaving he discovers Rouge hiding in the back of his truck. He lets her go along. They are attacked by Sabertooth who works for Magneto but they are saved by Cycolps & Storm. Then you haved this Senator named Robert Kelly who wants to start up a Mutant Regerstration Program during the hearings he debates Jean Grey meanwhile you have Professor Xavier spot his old friend Eric & as you should know they have different view points Xavier wants peace with Mutants & Humans while Magneto wants a war. Patrick Stewart & Ian McKellen had a good back & forth with each other in these movies. I have heard people say Professor X & Magneto in X Men First Class was better I'm sorry but James McAvoy is a bad actor & Michael Fassbender is an overrated actor & that movie is a crime compared to what was told in the animated series. Then you get to the mansion where Wolverine comes to & tries to escape he looks for Rouge but meets Professor Xavier he is told that this is a school for mutants & how he can help him figure out his past. Meanwhile Magneto hatches this plot to capture Senator Kelly & another of Magneto's hench men Toad is flying the helicopter & Mystique a shape shifter turns into 1 of Senator Kelly's aid's. Magneto infects him with Mutant powers. He escapes & tells The X Men what Magneto is up to. 1 night Rouge hears noises coming from Wolverine's room she goes to check on him he accidently sticks his claws in her & she starts to absorb his power. Mystique transforms into this student named Bobby who is a love interest of Rouge's & tells her that everyone is mad at her & she should leave. Mystique sets up Cerebro the supercomputer of Professor X uses to kill him. Rouge is tracked down to a train station. The Professor has Cyclops & Storm go to get her he has Wolverine stay he fells that Magneto is trying to but Wolverine takes Cyclops motorcycle & goes to get her anyway. While he talks to Rouge Magneto shows up takes Rouge the police try to stop Magneto but that doesn't work out for them. When Magneto turns the cops weapons on them Xavier uses his powers to save them. They figure out why Magneto took Rouge cause with her he can infect many people. Cause the machine he used on Senator Kelly nearly killed him. When The Professor used Cerbro it nearly kills him leaving him in a coma. You have the team suit up & go after Magneto. There is  this summit going on with all these World Leaders & Magneto wants to inffect them. The X Men fight off Mystique & Toad. Mystique transforms into Wolverine her & Wolverine have a pretty good fight. Meanwhile Storm,  Jean Grey & Cyclops have their troubles with Toad. Toad also spits some kind of slime into Jean Grey's face. Storm defeats & of course she has this stupid line. Then you have this scene where Mystique turns into Storm & she tells Wolverine they need to regroup but Wolverine knows it's not Storm by her scent & he stabs her in the stomach. Then you have scene that I felt this is what animated series Wolverine would say when Cyclops & Storm think Wolverine is Mystique & Cyclops wants him to prove it Wolverine says "You're ad  i  c  k." They get to the top of The Statue Of Liberty where Magneto traps them he also uses his powers to to move Wolverine's arms to his chest. Wolverine injures himself to break free has a good fight with Sabertooth he kills Sabertooth. Storm & Jean Grey compine their powers to get Wolverine to the top of the machine where he destroy's it & saves Rouge. Magneto is defeated you have Professor X tells Wolverine that there is this abandoned Military Base in Canada that might hold some secret of his past. The group find out Mystique is still alive & she is impersonating Senator Kelly. You have a great ending where you have Magneto tells Professor X that he will eventually escape & Xavier says he will be there to stop him. Now getting to the things I didn't care for they focused on Wolverine & not the entire X Men which they do a lot in all 3 movies  mainly in the 1st & 3rd. I didn't like what they did with Robert Kelly seeing as his character got important in the animated series. But the rest you had a cast that clikced well humor that worked good directing by Bryan Singer. Patrick Stewart was did a great job. Ian McKellen was great. Hugh Jackman pulled the role of Wolverine off so well. James Mardsen did a pretty good job. Famke Janseen was good. Halle Berry was decent. Anna Paquin was good. Rebecca Romjin was decent. Tyler Mane was ok. There isn't much more to say if you haven't seen X Men go see it along with the much better sequel X2. The next review will be 20 years ago X2 X Men United.

Answer: that movie is a crime

Now before my 1st 20 years ago review for the month of May X2 I thought I would review the 1st X Men movie as a kid you know I was a fan of the animated X Men show I had a lot of the toys & of course I was a fan of the animated show from the 90's & I always wanted a movie made about The X Men. So in the year 2000 X Men was released in theaters. Now I do enjoy all 3 movies cause I can get some entertainment out of The Last Stand but I have my problems with it & it's not as good as the 1st X Men movies. But getting to this review X Men was directed by Bryan Singer who directed the sequel to this movie as well as Apt Pupil The Usual Suspects & unfortantly Superman Returns. It stars Patrick Stewart as Professor Xavier, Ian McKellen as Magneto, Hugh Jackman as Wolverine, James Mardsen as Cyclops, Famke Janseen as Jean Grey, Halle Berry as Storm, Anna Paquin as Rouge, Rebecca Romjn as Mystique & Tyler Mane as Sabertooth. The story is you start off in 1944 in Poland a boy named Eric Lehnsher who is seperated from his parents & they are being taken off to a gas chamber. This scene imo is better than X Men First Class where the guards are holding him back from getting to his parents & his mutant powers are triggered & he bends a metal gate the effects are so much better than those Secret World Of Alex Mack effects in First Class. So Eric goes on to become Magneto. Then you get to 50 years later you're introduced to this girl nmaed Marie who kiss her Boyfriend & she has mutant powers that that can take away peoples life force. It nearly kills her Boyfriend & he was put in a coma for 3 weeks Marie runs away from home & goes by the name of Rouge. She ends up in northern Alberta Cnaada she sees this cage fight going on where Wolverine is kicking a s s. Some guys start hounding Wolverine & pulls his claws out & The Bar Tender pulls a Shot Gun out on him Wolverine cuts it in 2. While he is leaving he discovers Rouge hiding in the back of his truck. He lets her go along. They are attacked by Sabertooth who works for Magneto but they are saved by Cycolps & Storm. Then you haved this Senator named Robert Kelly who wants to start up a Mutant Regerstration Program during the hearings he debates Jean Grey meanwhile you have Professor Xavier spot his old friend Eric & as you should know they have different view points Xavier wants peace with Mutants & Humans while Magneto wants a war. Patrick Stewart & Ian McKellen had a good back & forth with each other in these movies. <hl> I have heard people say Professor X & Magneto in X Men First Class was better I'm sorry but James McAvoy is a bad actor & Michael Fassbender is an overrated actor & that movie is a crime compared to what was told in the animated series. <hl> Then you get to the mansion where Wolverine comes to & tries to escape he looks for Rouge but meets Professor Xavier he is told that this is a school for mutants & how he can help him figure out his past. Meanwhile Magneto hatches this plot to capture Senator Kelly & another of Magneto's hench men Toad is flying the helicopter & Mystique a shape shifter turns into 1 of Senator Kelly's aid's. Magneto infects him with Mutant powers. He escapes & tells The X Men what Magneto is up to. 1 night Rouge hears noises coming from Wolverine's room she goes to check on him he accidently sticks his claws in her & she starts to absorb his power. Mystique transforms into this student named Bobby who is a love interest of Rouge's & tells her that everyone is mad at her & she should leave. Mystique sets up Cerebro the supercomputer of Professor X uses to kill him. Rouge is tracked down to a train station. The Professor has Cyclops & Storm go to get her he has Wolverine stay he fells that Magneto is trying to but Wolverine takes Cyclops motorcycle & goes to get her anyway. While he talks to Rouge Magneto shows up takes Rouge the police try to stop Magneto but that doesn't work out for them. When Magneto turns the cops weapons on them Xavier uses his powers to save them. They figure out why Magneto took Rouge cause with her he can infect many people. Cause the machine he used on Senator Kelly nearly killed him. When The Professor used Cerbro it nearly kills him leaving him in a coma. You have the team suit up & go after Magneto. There is this summit going on with all these World Leaders & Magneto wants to inffect them. The X Men fight off Mystique & Toad. Mystique transforms into Wolverine her & Wolverine have a pretty good fight. Meanwhile Storm, Jean Grey & Cyclops have their troubles with Toad. Toad also spits some kind of slime into Jean Grey's face. Storm defeats & of course she has this stupid line. Then you have this scene where Mystique turns into Storm & she tells Wolverine they need to regroup but Wolverine knows it's not Storm by her scent & he stabs her in the stomach. Then you have scene that I felt this is what animated series Wolverine would say when Cyclops & Storm think Wolverine is Mystique & Cyclops wants him to prove it Wolverine says "You're ad i c k." They get to the top of The Statue Of Liberty where Magneto traps them he also uses his powers to to move Wolverine's arms to his chest. Wolverine injures himself to break free has a good fight with Sabertooth he kills Sabertooth. Storm & Jean Grey compine their powers to get Wolverine to the top of the machine where he destroy's it & saves Rouge. Magneto is defeated you have Professor X tells Wolverine that there is this abandoned Military Base in Canada that might hold some secret of his past. The group find out Mystique is still alive & she is impersonating Senator Kelly. You have a great ending where you have Magneto tells Professor X that he will eventually escape & Xavier says he will be there to stop him. Now getting to the things I didn't care for they focused on Wolverine & not the entire X Men which they do a lot in all 3 movies mainly in the 1st & 3rd. I didn't like what they did with Robert Kelly seeing as his character got important in the animated series. But the rest you had a cast that clikced well humor that worked good directing by Bryan Singer. Patrick Stewart was did a great job. Ian McKellen was great. Hugh Jackman pulled the role of Wolverine off so well. James Mardsen did a pretty good job. Famke Janseen was good. Halle Berry was decent. Anna Paquin was good. Rebecca Romjin was decent. Tyler Mane was ok. There isn't much more to say if you haven't seen X Men go see it along with the much better sequel X2. The next review will be 20 years ago X2 X Men United.

Now before my 1st 20 years ago review for the month of May X2 I thought I would review the 1st X Men movie as a kid you know I was a fan of the animated X Men show I had a lot of the toys & of course I was a fan of the animated show from the 90's & I always wanted a movie made about The X Men. So in the year 2000 X Men was released in theaters. Now I do enjoy all 3 movies cause I can get some entertainment out of The Last Stand but I have my problems with it & it's not as good as the 1st X Men movies. But getting to this review X Men was directed by Bryan Singer who directed the sequel to this movie as well as Apt Pupil The Usual Suspects & unfortantly Superman Returns. It stars Patrick Stewart as Professor Xavier, Ian McKellen as Magneto, Hugh Jackman as Wolverine, James Mardsen as Cyclops, Famke Janseen as Jean Grey, Halle Berry as Storm, Anna Paquin as Rouge, Rebecca Romjn as Mystique & Tyler Mane as Sabertooth. The story is you start off in 1944 in Poland a boy named Eric Lehnsher who is seperated from his parents & they are being taken off to a gas chamber. This scene imo is better than X Men First Class where the guards are holding him back from getting to his parents & his mutant powers are triggered & he bends a metal gate the effects are so much better than those Secret World Of Alex Mack effects in First Class. So Eric goes on to become Magneto. Then you get to 50 years later you're introduced to this girl nmaed Marie who kiss her Boyfriend & she has mutant powers that that can take away peoples life force. It nearly kills her Boyfriend & he was put in a coma for 3 weeks Marie runs away from home & goes by the name of Rouge. She ends up in northern Alberta Cnaada she sees this cage fight going on where Wolverine is kicking a s s. Some guys start hounding Wolverine & pulls his claws out & The Bar Tender pulls a Shot Gun out on him Wolverine cuts it in 2. While he is leaving he discovers Rouge hiding in the back of his truck. He lets her go along. They are attacked by Sabertooth who works for Magneto but they are saved by Cycolps & Storm. Then you haved this Senator named Robert Kelly who wants to start up a Mutant Regerstration Program during the hearings he debates Jean Grey meanwhile you have Professor Xavier spot his old friend Eric & as you should know they have different view points Xavier wants peace with Mutants & Humans while Magneto wants a war. Patrick Stewart & Ian McKellen had a good back & forth with each other in these movies. I have heard people say Professor X & Magneto in X Men First Class was better I'm sorry but James McAvoy is a bad actor & Michael Fassbender is an overrated actor & <hl> that movie is a crime <hl> compared to what was told in the animated series. Then you get to the mansion where Wolverine comes to & tries to escape he looks for Rouge but meets Professor Xavier he is told that this is a school for mutants & how he can help him figure out his past. Meanwhile Magneto hatches this plot to capture Senator Kelly & another of Magneto's hench men Toad is flying the helicopter & Mystique a shape shifter turns into 1 of Senator Kelly's aid's. Magneto infects him with Mutant powers. He escapes & tells The X Men what Magneto is up to. 1 night Rouge hears noises coming from Wolverine's room she goes to check on him he accidently sticks his claws in her & she starts to absorb his power. Mystique transforms into this student named Bobby who is a love interest of Rouge's & tells her that everyone is mad at her & she should leave. Mystique sets up Cerebro the supercomputer of Professor X uses to kill him. Rouge is tracked down to a train station. The Professor has Cyclops & Storm go to get her he has Wolverine stay he fells that Magneto is trying to but Wolverine takes Cyclops motorcycle & goes to get her anyway. While he talks to Rouge Magneto shows up takes Rouge the police try to stop Magneto but that doesn't work out for them. When Magneto turns the cops weapons on them Xavier uses his powers to save them. They figure out why Magneto took Rouge cause with her he can infect many people. Cause the machine he used on Senator Kelly nearly killed him. When The Professor used Cerbro it nearly kills him leaving him in a coma. You have the team suit up & go after Magneto. There is this summit going on with all these World Leaders & Magneto wants to inffect them. The X Men fight off Mystique & Toad. Mystique transforms into Wolverine her & Wolverine have a pretty good fight. Meanwhile Storm, Jean Grey & Cyclops have their troubles with Toad. Toad also spits some kind of slime into Jean Grey's face. Storm defeats & of course she has this stupid line. Then you have this scene where Mystique turns into Storm & she tells Wolverine they need to regroup but Wolverine knows it's not Storm by her scent & he stabs her in the stomach. Then you have scene that I felt this is what animated series Wolverine would say when Cyclops & Storm think Wolverine is Mystique & Cyclops wants him to prove it Wolverine says "You're ad i c k." They get to the top of The Statue Of Liberty where Magneto traps them he also uses his powers to to move Wolverine's arms to his chest. Wolverine injures himself to break free has a good fight with Sabertooth he kills Sabertooth. Storm & Jean Grey compine their powers to get Wolverine to the top of the machine where he destroy's it & saves Rouge. Magneto is defeated you have Professor X tells Wolverine that there is this abandoned Military Base in Canada that might hold some secret of his past. The group find out Mystique is still alive & she is impersonating Senator Kelly. You have a great ending where you have Magneto tells Professor X that he will eventually escape & Xavier says he will be there to stop him. Now getting to the things I didn't care for they focused on Wolverine & not the entire X Men which they do a lot in all 3 movies mainly in the 1st & 3rd. I didn't like what they did with Robert Kelly seeing as his character got important in the animated series. But the rest you had a cast that clikced well humor that worked good directing by Bryan Singer. Patrick Stewart was did a great job. Ian McKellen was great. Hugh Jackman pulled the role of Wolverine off so well. James Mardsen did a pretty good job. Famke Janseen was good. Halle Berry was decent. Anna Paquin was good. Rebecca Romjin was decent. Tyler Mane was ok. There isn't much more to say if you haven't seen X Men go see it along with the much better sequel X2. The next review will be 20 years ago X2 X Men United.


Question: How is it the set?

My mom always loved the music to The Phantom of the Opera, but I wasn't officially introduced to it until I was twelve (when it first came out). My world geography teacher had seen it and loved it so much, he decided to dedicate a week of class listening to the soundtrack and going over the story. At the end of the week, he assigned extra credit to anyone who went to see it over the weekend. I was already determined to see it because I was intrigued by the storyline and mesmerized by the music.Eight years later and it still remains one of my top three favorite movies of all time. I've seen the play on Broadway since then and have read my fair share of Phantom 'fan fiction'. The movie is pretty different from seeing it live on stage, but I've found over time that the beauty of the story lies in its ability to adapt in one's interpretaton of it. Some people like a crazy Phantom, while others prefer a softer portrayal of the masked anti-hero. Sometimes Christine is dreadfully afraid of the Phantom and in other adaptations she's in love with him.I think part of why this particular story has been retold so many times throughout the years and loved by so many is that everyone has the flexibility to see what they want to see.The Phantom of the Opera is about a young chorus girl named Christie who is receiving private voice lessons from a mysterious Angel of Music. She believes the Angel is the spirit of her dead father because he promised on his deathbed he would send her the Angel for protection, comfort, and tutelage when he passed on. Little does she know, the Angel is in fact the infamous Opera Ghost who frequently terrorizes those who don't follow his commands. He contacts her from behind her dressing room mirror, reluctant to reveal his true identity for fear Christine will shun him. He is deeply obsessed with her and eagerly awaits the day he can present himself to her as a man.The story begins when the old manager of the opera house decides to retire. The new managers, Firmin and Andre, don't buy into the stories of the Opera Ghost and refuse to be ordered around by an invisible specter. In addition to new management, the Vicomte Raoul de Chagny has become the opera's new patron. Christine and Raoul instantly recognize one another as childhood sweethearts, and rekindle their relationship. Despite the Phantom's efforts to seduce Christine with his music, she and Raoul fall deeply in love. This only manages to make matters worse. Christine, Raoul, and the Phantom become tangled in a web of passion, jealousy, obsession, and darkness.First and foremost, the music is simply divine and stays with me for weeks at a time upon listening. There is something hypnotic, exhilerating, and majestic about it. It captures the essence of melodrama and Gothic romance perfectly. I love everyone's voices, indlucing Gerard Butler's. He may not be a conventional Phantom, but I really enjoyed the rich, sensual, passionate sound of his voice in contrast to Raoul's sweet, soft one. I'm not really sure how this movie didn't win more awards for costume and design because the costumes and sets are lush, sumptuous, and grand in scale.This adaptation of the musical emphasizes on the relationship between the Phantom and Christine. Instead of being overwhelmed by her fear of him, Christine is portrayed as having a deeper, more soulful connection with the Phantom. She is in love with Raoul, but there is a side of her that responds to the Phantom's advances. Even though Gerard Butler plays more of a sexy Phantom, I think he understood the role well enough to bring the power and force required to fulfill the role. He starts out as seductive and passionate, and eventually progresses to a raging, broken shell of a man with deep insecurities. I like that despite his appealing physical qualities, he managed to stay true to the Phantom's volatile emotional core.Emmy Rossum is perfect as the naive and gentle Christine who is struggling to come to terms with her father's death. Patrick Wilson is not always the most expressive actor, but he has some shining moments throughout the film and has the perfect singing voice for Raoul. Minnie Driver was entertaining as Carlotta, the spoiled and selfish Prima Donna of the Opera Populaire. Everyone else does a very good job too!This movie is definitely worth seeing for anyone interested in musicals or in the story. It's very complex, emotional, often times sad and other times triumphant, and will leave any hopeless romantic satisfied.

Answer: sets are lush

My mom always loved the music to The Phantom of the Opera, but I wasn't officially introduced to it until I was twelve (when it first came out). My world geography teacher had seen it and loved it so much, he decided to dedicate a week of class listening to the soundtrack and going over the story. At the end of the week, he assigned extra credit to anyone who went to see it over the weekend. I was already determined to see it because I was intrigued by the storyline and mesmerized by the music. Eight years later and it still remains one of my top three favorite movies of all time. I've seen the play on Broadway since then and have read my fair share of Phantom 'fan fiction'. The movie is pretty different from seeing it live on stage, but I've found over time that the beauty of the story lies in its ability to adapt in one's interpretaton of it. Some people like a crazy Phantom, while others prefer a softer portrayal of the masked anti-hero. Sometimes Christine is dreadfully afraid of the Phantom and in other adaptations she's in love with him. I think part of why this particular story has been retold so many times throughout the years and loved by so many is that everyone has the flexibility to see what they want to see. The Phantom of the Opera is about a young chorus girl named Christie who is receiving private voice lessons from a mysterious Angel of Music. She believes the Angel is the spirit of her dead father because he promised on his deathbed he would send her the Angel for protection, comfort, and tutelage when he passed on. Little does she know, the Angel is in fact the infamous Opera Ghost who frequently terrorizes those who don't follow his commands. He contacts her from behind her dressing room mirror, reluctant to reveal his true identity for fear Christine will shun him. He is deeply obsessed with her and eagerly awaits the day he can present himself to her as a man. The story begins when the old manager of the opera house decides to retire. The new managers, Firmin and Andre, don't buy into the stories of the Opera Ghost and refuse to be ordered around by an invisible specter. In addition to new management, the Vicomte Raoul de Chagny has become the opera's new patron. Christine and Raoul instantly recognize one another as childhood sweethearts, and rekindle their relationship. Despite the Phantom's efforts to seduce Christine with his music, she and Raoul fall deeply in love. This only manages to make matters worse. Christine, Raoul, and the Phantom become tangled in a web of passion, jealousy, obsession, and darkness. First and foremost, the music is simply divine and stays with me for weeks at a time upon listening. There is something hypnotic, exhilerating, and majestic about it. It captures the essence of melodrama and Gothic romance perfectly. I love everyone's voices, indlucing Gerard Butler's. He may not be a conventional Phantom, but I really enjoyed the rich, sensual, passionate sound of his voice in contrast to Raoul's sweet, soft one. <hl> I'm not really sure how this movie didn't win more awards for costume and design because the costumes and sets are lush , sumptuous, and grand in scale. <hl> This adaptation of the musical emphasizes on the relationship between the Phantom and Christine. Instead of being overwhelmed by her fear of him, Christine is portrayed as having a deeper, more soulful connection with the Phantom. She is in love with Raoul, but there is a side of her that responds to the Phantom's advances. Even though Gerard Butler plays more of a sexy Phantom, I think he understood the role well enough to bring the power and force required to fulfill the role. He starts out as seductive and passionate, and eventually progresses to a raging, broken shell of a man with deep insecurities. I like that despite his appealing physical qualities, he managed to stay true to the Phantom's volatile emotional core. Emmy Rossum is perfect as the naive and gentle Christine who is struggling to come to terms with her father's death. Patrick Wilson is not always the most expressive actor, but he has some shining moments throughout the film and has the perfect singing voice for Raoul. Minnie Driver was entertaining as Carlotta, the spoiled and selfish Prima Donna of the Opera Populaire. Everyone else does a very good job too!This movie is definitely worth seeing for anyone interested in musicals or in the story. It's very complex, emotional, often times sad and other times triumphant, and will leave any hopeless romantic satisfied.

My mom always loved the music to The Phantom of the Opera, but I wasn't officially introduced to it until I was twelve (when it first came out). My world geography teacher had seen it and loved it so much, he decided to dedicate a week of class listening to the soundtrack and going over the story. At the end of the week, he assigned extra credit to anyone who went to see it over the weekend. I was already determined to see it because I was intrigued by the storyline and mesmerized by the music.Eight years later and it still remains one of my top three favorite movies of all time. I've seen the play on Broadway since then and have read my fair share of Phantom 'fan fiction'. The movie is pretty different from seeing it live on stage, but I've found over time that the beauty of the story lies in its ability to adapt in one's interpretaton of it. Some people like a crazy Phantom, while others prefer a softer portrayal of the masked anti-hero. Sometimes Christine is dreadfully afraid of the Phantom and in other adaptations she's in love with him.I think part of why this particular story has been retold so many times throughout the years and loved by so many is that everyone has the flexibility to see what they want to see.The Phantom of the Opera is about a young chorus girl named Christie who is receiving private voice lessons from a mysterious Angel of Music. She believes the Angel is the spirit of her dead father because he promised on his deathbed he would send her the Angel for protection, comfort, and tutelage when he passed on. Little does she know, the Angel is in fact the infamous Opera Ghost who frequently terrorizes those who don't follow his commands. He contacts her from behind her dressing room mirror, reluctant to reveal his true identity for fear Christine will shun him. He is deeply obsessed with her and eagerly awaits the day he can present himself to her as a man.The story begins when the old manager of the opera house decides to retire. The new managers, Firmin and Andre, don't buy into the stories of the Opera Ghost and refuse to be ordered around by an invisible specter. In addition to new management, the Vicomte Raoul de Chagny has become the opera's new patron. Christine and Raoul instantly recognize one another as childhood sweethearts, and rekindle their relationship. Despite the Phantom's efforts to seduce Christine with his music, she and Raoul fall deeply in love. This only manages to make matters worse. Christine, Raoul, and the Phantom become tangled in a web of passion, jealousy, obsession, and darkness.First and foremost, the music is simply divine and stays with me for weeks at a time upon listening. There is something hypnotic, exhilerating, and majestic about it. It captures the essence of melodrama and Gothic romance perfectly. I love everyone's voices, indlucing Gerard Butler's. He may not be a conventional Phantom, but I really enjoyed the rich, sensual, passionate sound of his voice in contrast to Raoul's sweet, soft one. I'm not really sure how this movie didn't win more awards for costume and design because the costumes and <hl> sets are lush <hl>, sumptuous, and grand in scale.This adaptation of the musical emphasizes on the relationship between the Phantom and Christine. Instead of being overwhelmed by her fear of him, Christine is portrayed as having a deeper, more soulful connection with the Phantom. She is in love with Raoul, but there is a side of her that responds to the Phantom's advances. Even though Gerard Butler plays more of a sexy Phantom, I think he understood the role well enough to bring the power and force required to fulfill the role. He starts out as seductive and passionate, and eventually progresses to a raging, broken shell of a man with deep insecurities. I like that despite his appealing physical qualities, he managed to stay true to the Phantom's volatile emotional core.Emmy Rossum is perfect as the naive and gentle Christine who is struggling to come to terms with her father's death. Patrick Wilson is not always the most expressive actor, but he has some shining moments throughout the film and has the perfect singing voice for Raoul. Minnie Driver was entertaining as Carlotta, the spoiled and selfish Prima Donna of the Opera Populaire. Everyone else does a very good job too!This movie is definitely worth seeing for anyone interested in musicals or in the story. It's very complex, emotional, often times sad and other times triumphant, and will leave any hopeless romantic satisfied.

I'm not really sure how this movie didn't win more awards for costume and design because the costumes and <hl> sets are lush <hl> , sumptuous, and grand in scale.


Question: How is the people?

This is a terrible movie! Unbelievable, silly, immature, frustrating, moronic characters, silly plot, bad acting, and the monster is tragically ho hum.The movie does not get going until about 17 minutes after the opening. You have to sit and watch a going away party for a friend, but it's more like a teenage romance gossip festival. The cameraman "Hud" tries to pick up his crush using middle school tactics and is so annoying you are hoping the monster eats him first. The character doesn't get any better. Hud spews out what I assume are bits of comic relief at unfunny moments in the movie all while holding on to the camera and recording.The actors continue to use the camera throughout the entire ordeal. The camera survives the monster attacking, crashes, burials, other monsters and other trauma. Who makes this camera? I want to buy one if it can stand this much punishment!The monster, when revealed, looks boring, uninteresting, and not frightening. Unusual, yes, but for some reason, not particularly compelling to look at. I went ahead and looked at some of the extras and was amazed and how much effort seemed to go into creating this monster, when the results were so bland.The acting from all cast members is disappointing and unbelievable; Hud especially. I never believed any of them were in NY running from a monster; I believed all of them were in a movie. I had to laugh out loud at one of the last lines of the movie when the guy points the camera to the girl and she says that she can't think of anything to say.The plot is awful. The army seems to arrive on Manhattan with tanks, medical equipment and scores of troops in 15 minutes, even with a bridge destroyed. People are mortally injured or should be and seem to have no problem getting up and running for their lives.My wife finally asked me to stop critiquing this movie because I kept pointing out so many bad things about it. I could do more analyzing here, but I have better things to do.

Answer: to use the camera throughout the entire ordeal

This is a terrible movie! Unbelievable, silly, immature, frustrating, moronic characters, silly plot, bad acting, and the monster is tragically ho hum. The movie does not get going until about 17 minutes after the opening. You have to sit and watch a going away party for a friend, but it's more like a teenage romance gossip festival. The cameraman "Hud" tries to pick up his crush using middle school tactics and is so annoying you are hoping the monster eats him first. The character doesn't get any better. Hud spews out what I assume are bits of comic relief at unfunny moments in the movie all while holding on to the camera and recording. <hl> The actors continue to use the camera throughout the entire ordeal . <hl> The camera survives the monster attacking, crashes, burials, other monsters and other trauma. Who makes this camera? I want to buy one if it can stand this much punishment!The monster, when revealed, looks boring, uninteresting, and not frightening. Unusual, yes, but for some reason, not particularly compelling to look at. I went ahead and looked at some of the extras and was amazed and how much effort seemed to go into creating this monster, when the results were so bland. The acting from all cast members is disappointing and unbelievable; Hud especially. I never believed any of them were in NY running from a monster; I believed all of them were in a movie. I had to laugh out loud at one of the last lines of the movie when the guy points the camera to the girl and she says that she can't think of anything to say. The plot is awful. The army seems to arrive on Manhattan with tanks, medical equipment and scores of troops in 15 minutes, even with a bridge destroyed. People are mortally injured or should be and seem to have no problem getting up and running for their lives. My wife finally asked me to stop critiquing this movie because I kept pointing out so many bad things about it. I could do more analyzing here, but I have better things to do.

This is a terrible movie! Unbelievable, silly, immature, frustrating, moronic characters, silly plot, bad acting, and the monster is tragically ho hum.The movie does not get going until about 17 minutes after the opening. You have to sit and watch a going away party for a friend, but it's more like a teenage romance gossip festival. The cameraman "Hud" tries to pick up his crush using middle school tactics and is so annoying you are hoping the monster eats him first. The character doesn't get any better. Hud spews out what I assume are bits of comic relief at unfunny moments in the movie all while holding on to the camera and recording.The actors continue <hl> to use the camera throughout the entire ordeal <hl>. The camera survives the monster attacking, crashes, burials, other monsters and other trauma. Who makes this camera? I want to buy one if it can stand this much punishment!The monster, when revealed, looks boring, uninteresting, and not frightening. Unusual, yes, but for some reason, not particularly compelling to look at. I went ahead and looked at some of the extras and was amazed and how much effort seemed to go into creating this monster, when the results were so bland.The acting from all cast members is disappointing and unbelievable; Hud especially. I never believed any of them were in NY running from a monster; I believed all of them were in a movie. I had to laugh out loud at one of the last lines of the movie when the guy points the camera to the girl and she says that she can't think of anything to say.The plot is awful. The army seems to arrive on Manhattan with tanks, medical equipment and scores of troops in 15 minutes, even with a bridge destroyed. People are mortally injured or should be and seem to have no problem getting up and running for their lives.My wife finally asked me to stop critiquing this movie because I kept pointing out so many bad things about it. I could do more analyzing here, but I have better things to do.

The actors continue <hl> to use the camera throughout the entire ordeal <hl> .


Question: Why do I have an excellent series?

This show is wonderful. The outfits, hairstyles, the words they use is right on. You can see that a lot of painstaking research was done to get it right. The house is a dream. Would love to live there. It takes you back in time and you can see yourself in their shoes whether you are Lady Mary or Mrs. Patmore and you see their lives and dreams and what could be. Of course it is like a soap opera with the good and the bad. It is sad that we lost some great cast members like Lady Sybil, Matthew Crawley (cried) and O'Brien but she brought the evil side to the story. I look forward to every Sunday now that the show is back. I think people of all ages will love this show.

Answer: The outfits, hairstyles, the words they use is right on

This show is wonderful. <hl> The outfits, hairstyles, the words they use is right on . <hl> You can see that a lot of painstaking research was done to get it right. The house is a dream. Would love to live there. It takes you back in time and you can see yourself in their shoes whether you are Lady Mary or Mrs. Patmore and you see their lives and dreams and what could be. Of course it is like a soap opera with the good and the bad. It is sad that we lost some great cast members like Lady Sybil, Matthew Crawley (cried) and O'Brien but she brought the evil side to the story. I look forward to every Sunday now that the show is back. I think people of all ages will love this show.

This show is wonderful. <hl> The outfits, hairstyles, the words they use is right on <hl>. You can see that a lot of painstaking research was done to get it right. The house is a dream. Would love to live there. It takes you back in time and you can see yourself in their shoes whether you are Lady Mary or Mrs. Patmore and you see their lives and dreams and what could be. Of course it is like a soap opera with the good and the bad. It is sad that we lost some great cast members like Lady Sybil, Matthew Crawley (cried) and O'Brien but she brought the evil side to the story. I look forward to every Sunday now that the show is back. I think people of all ages will love this show.

<hl> The outfits, hairstyles, the words they use is right on <hl> .