Great music! A chance for everyone to see and hear some of the R&B icons of a generation. Silliness of the plot is overshadowed by the quality of the musical performances of Ackroyd, Gooden, and Morton (they can actually perform!). Don't look for great acting, just go with the flow and enjoy! A must see/hear for all R&B, Blues, and Soul affectionados everywhere!


I love the first film. The second - well, as we all know, we don't have John Belushi with us anymore, which is one strike right there. The filmmakers made the good choices of John Goodman and Joe Morton as backup singers. Had they stopped there, the film would have been much better.

Instead, a kid was thrown into the mix. An orphan, of course. Awwww. Elwood Blues is supposed to act as mentor for the kid (Buster), but forgets to return Buster to the orphanage, getting half the cops in the country and several mean orphanage workers on his tail.

Now, the whole point of the first Blues Brothers film is that these guys can't stay out of trouble. The character of Elwood, with or without Brother Jake, is going to get himself in it up to his eyeballs. The whole story about Elwood being chased for kidnapping is ludicrous. Elwood is going to get in trouble for one thing or another. It didn't have to be kidnapping.

Thus, we end up listening to a prepubescent kid squalling the lines of a damned good song, one that was belted out by three fine singers (Aykroyd, Goodman, and Morton), thus ruining the whole effect. It's no wonder that the Blues Brothers lost the Battle of the Bands - I'd have booed them offstage for bringing a kid into the mix.

There's an cloying, aren't-we-cute gushiness about Buster and his little Blues Brothers outfit that almost gags me. I loved the musical numbers and all the guest artists - and what an impressive group they are! - so I can't understand why the filmmakers would drag down the storyline by introducing a kid, and throwing in all the clichés associated with a small child interacting with adults. The kid is precocious. He's (supposedly, though I see no evidence of it) a good singer. He gives a pep talk at the crucial time. He's easy to bond with. It just doesn't work.

I will watch it for the music and for Elwood's highly inventive method of parallel parking, but I fast-forward through Buster's scenes.


I don't know where to start with this complete cow-pat of a movie! The plot at the beginning is credible enough, Elwood sets about reforming the band with some new additions. When they meet Queen Muset that is when things really go wrong! I;d had an inkling when those skully horses lept out of the storm cloud! Many actors from 'The Blues Brothers' (1980) made a welcome re-appearance, but even they couldn't save this from this film being a flaw! The only redeeming feature is the music but there is not enough of it to constitute watching. If you haven't seen the first one, by all means watch this but given half a chance watch the first one first, give this film a miss. Nia Peeples was the only reason I watched this (principally) But her usual classy acting was let down by her co-stars (the noticeably and unusual wooden Dan Aykroyd) plus her great figure was mostly hidden by a police uniform! Give this film a miss if you like the first and if you haven't seen the first film...give this one a miss anyway!


There are so many things wrong with this film, one cannot be sure quite where to begin. The lack of plot? The lack of enthusiasm from the actors? (Ackroyd looks as if he thinks he's in another movie) The terrible musical sequences? Don't even bother renting this dud.


The paper-thin plot of this movie is much more amusing -- or perhaps much closer to being amusing would be more accurate -- if you saw the original (also a "must-have"), but the plot is NOT the point. I was born in New Orleans in the first half of this century, and I have watched sadly as the music I came to know and love as a child has quietly died (pace, Don McLean).

From Taj Mahal's incredibly earthy, a cappella rendition of "John the Revelator" (later given a full-chorus reprise in what, for me, was the zenith of the movie) to the outrageously over-the-top closing "battle of the bands" encore, the music IS the Mississippi, from new Orleans thru Memphis to St. Louis and thence to Chicago (culturally, even if not geographically, a child of "The Father of Waters"). Whenever I feel a twinge of nostalgia, I no longer have to drive down to Memphis; I just drop in this DVD -- and smile.

It's obvious to me that the cast of this movie was "on a mission from God" to leave a legacy to those who come after and have never known the real thing. Thanks, guys, ya done good!


Contrary to popular opinion, I enjoyed the obvious rewrite from the original 'Blues Brothers'. It was a fun way to relive the 'Blues Brothers' experience - 18 years later. There are so many of the newer (and older) generation who never saw the original, much less understand the influence that the musical artists involved in the music of the 'Blues Brothers', had on the music of today. I recently watched 'Blues Brothers 2000' with some young people who didn't have a clue, and seeing things through their fresh eyes, made this movie very exciting. Immediately after, they were on the Internet looking up various musical artists from the movie so that they could get to know the music that they now loved, but had missed out on. I say, "Good job Dan!" and that is all that needs to be said.


Mighty Mack, Buster, Cab and Elwood have good chemistry. Musical talent throughout was A++. Battle of bands brought together an eclectic group of musical greats. Would have loved hours more of it.


It was great to see what happened to the old crew after they were arrested in the original, but unfortunately the entire storyline is pretty much the same this time around.

Example: In the original, Jake and Elwood go and find their old band buddies and play some gigs. In 2000, Elwood and Mack go and find Elwood's old band buddies and play some gigs...hmmm.

It was terrific that they managed to get together most of the original cast [minus John Belushi, John Candy, and Cab Callaway for obvious reasons], and it's even more incredible who else they got. The addition of Eric Clapton, BB King, Bo Didley, Johnny Lange, Paul Shaffer, Blues Traveler, and MANY MANY other big names gives the movie more life than it would have otherwise.

The main difference between the original and this one is that Elwood is taking care of an orphan for The Penguin [the nun]. He adds to the story just a little bit, giving them a good reason to be chased by the police.

And there are still monster car chases and car crashes.


If Blues Brothers is in my "top ten", this sequel in in my "last ten"!!! I found the screenplay terrible, trying to remind the scenes of the original movie... resulting in a complete defeat!!! Demential humor must be intelligent too. This seems to be a commercial operation only (like highlander 2!)... just one thing: I cannot comment the last 30 min... because I fell asleep!

my rate: 3/10


In many ways, a cheesy movie. But fun, and with fabulous music.

Rating: worth seeing often, for the music and the corny humour.


As a piece of art, the film might suck, but who cares? Plenty of the greatest names of occidental modern music didn't, why should I? Not to mention that Elwood's speech about the mission of the band is one of the best I ever saw on a movie. Gonna make a t-shirt of it. P.S.: I dress and act exactly like Elwood in real life, so remember this is a fan's opinion... :)


The Blues Brothers franchise self destructs. Why was a classic Baby Boomer goof off movie made showing its middle age trepidations ? What's next The Blues Brothers Country Club ? What has the kid to do with anything anyway ? These were some of the thoughts that seared my mind as I watched this Kluge of a movie. And like buggy software, every time you thought it was finally working, it froze up on itself. The music, which was the hit of the original flick, seems stale, even trite in this one. The car chases and crashes look like the out takes from the 1980 version. What humor there is is almost Disney like cutesy instead of funky and brash. Where was the kid's skate board and puppy ? Who were they afraid of offending ? To whom were they pandering ? Guess.

This movie was made for the advertisers who product placement seemed to be the only real concern of the moviemakers. We never expected a plot, but Gad !, would someone get a fresh set of monkeys at the dialoge typewriter, please ! All the shortcomings of the original flick were duplicated like from rote. The only message in this movie was, when you're big enough you don't have to care anymore. Just flip out some left overs, and some scraps, the adoring masses will tremble in gratitude. This movie is an unintenitional self parody, a seemingly endless grinding and rebooting of a failed concept. Its a serious downer in almost every respect. Rent the original, if you've never seen it, then staple on a hurl handbag to watch this chewy-as-gravel, poke in the eye. Be warned, next you'll see, "Blues Brothers visit the Muppet Babies on Ice." Will a Blues Brother(c) become a Furpy (c) or a Poke'mon (c) ? Does anyone care anymore? Thanks for decimating an American icon into a fast food franchise theme meal.


I went into this movie with a great dead of skepticism. After all, the original was one of the greatest movies ever and trying to recreate that atmosphere, let alone top it, would be all but impossible. However, within the first five minutes I knew that I'd been worrying about nothing.

I can understand why some people wouldn't like it, whether they are fans of the original or not, and I think they could have done a better job with some parts of the movie (especially the ending) but it was fast paced, fitfully funny, and most importantly, had great music. There is no way that anyone can deny that this movie pulls together the greatest ensemble of super-star musicians ever seen on film. With such legends as B.B. King, Eric Clapton, Stevie Winwood, and Lou Rawls you can't go wrong. ESPECIALLY when they're in the same band!! Then you have Eretha Franklin and Wilson Pickett to contend with elsewhere in the movie. And that's not to say the Blues Brothers band do a bad job themselves. With a hilariously literal version of Ghost Riders In the Sky and other greats scattered throughout, there's no way that this film can be faulted for its music.

Nor for that matter can it be faulted for its stunts, with one pile-up containing the most cars wrecked in a single scene in cinematic history and a classic crash involving a car full of members of the russian mafia, a jar of carpet tacs (or as Elwood amusing corrected, "dry wall nails"), a burning strip club, and 50m of a dark Chicago street. Scenes like these only go to prove that Director John Landis has lost none of the excellence he showed in the first blues brothers movie.

If you want mega budget demolitions scenes, a dramatic soundtrack, and award winning Oscar nominated acting, then rent titanic. But if you want great R&B music, impossible stunts, and a whole load of great laughs (aided in no small way by the deadpan acting talents of Dan Ackroyd, John Goodman, Joe Morton and newcomer J.Evan Bonifant), then you can't do too much better than Blues Brothers 2000


This movie was great. I admit that the plot leaves a little to be desired, but the music more than makes up for that. Evan Bonifant makes an excellent addition, better than John Goodman who did good. It combines humor, good music, and a family message. Definitely worth seeing several times.


The original "Blues Brothers" is one of my favorite movies, so although I didn't expect BB2000 to be as good, there is no way I expected to be so bad. The beginning was decent, and the new characters were for the most part acceptable, but the further into the movie you go, the worse it gets, until finally you get into flying characters and voodoo witches, neither of which (in my opinion) belongs in a "Blues Brothers" movie. However, the music is excellent. So instead of renting or buying the movie, opt for the soundtrack.


Nowhere near as good as the original but not all that bad. The comedy bits fall flat but the music is great.

What is disappointing though is that the film could very easily have been much better if the writers had decided to just rehash the first film. Sure it would be the complete opposite of being original but it stil would have been pretty entertaining. Instead of getting the band back together for no apparent reason, the orphanage could have been in need of financial aide again. One of the Blues Brothers could have had a homocidal ex-fiancee after him, etc. It would have made for a much better film and (seemingly, at least) much easier to write.


While no where near as good as the original this long awaited sequel still manages to be a lot of fun. With great music and some good car chases it manages to be fun. Belushi is missed but Goodman is a nice replacement.


Although this movie had GREAT music; it lacked a certain plot. This movie in my opinion was trying to go for the music, not he plot, while in the first one, it had a plot but the music wasn't as good as the second one. Overall I did indeed like this movie!


I agree that the plot is pretty weak, but there is several MILLION dollars worth of musical talent in this movie. And some decent tunes!


The people who have written here to complain about this show's plot obviously don't understand what the Blue's Brothers movies are about. They are in good company though. When the second Blue's Brothers came out the Spice Girl's movie was also in theaters. I was amazed to see how many reviewers panned the Blue's Brothers and gave half-decent reviews to the Spice Girl's dreadful exercise in film making. The Blue's Brothers is all about the Blues and I feel sad for those reviewers who can't appreciate the quality of the music and musicians showcased in this excellent and entertaining movie. There are so many goose-bump inspiring vocal and instrumental performances by some of North America's most legendary musicians. The dancing is good too. The car crash is fun. There are some great lines. I think there is a serious side to this movie though and it is summed up neatly in Elwood's inspirational speech when he reminds his rebellious band members what society will be left with if real musicians give up making music. I think that if you read a review by someone complaining about the plot you should quit reading right away because that person, who probably never ventures beyond the top 10 in his musical tastes, obviously missed the whole point of this movie.


Today, after eighteen long years, Elwood Blues has finally paid his debt to society and was being released from prison. After being escorted outside, he stood beside the road, eagerly awaiting his brother Jake to pick him up. Several hours go by and Jake had not arrived. Elwood waited until the next morning, when the warden finally came out and told him the awful news: Jake had passed away. Elwood received a ride home from Matara, a colleague of his old bandmember Willie. Once back in town, Elwood went to Malvern Gasperon's used car lot and set his sites on a classic police cruiser, similar to the one he had in the last adventure. But it was gonna cost $500, which he didn't have. Next, Elwood visits Mother Mary Stigmata at the new orphanage, since the old one had long since been demolished. Right away, Elwood learns that his old buddy Curtis had died. He also learns that Curtis had an illegitimate son. That's also when Elwood meets a young, sarcastic orphan named Buster. Mother Mary wanted Elwood to spend some time with the youngster--whether he wanted to or not.

Elwood attempted to ditch the kid, though unsuccessfully, and seek out Curtis' son. He found him at the police station. He was Commander Cabel "Cab" Chamberlain. Elwood introduced himself, then told his "sort-of brother" that he was thinking of putting the band back together and asked if he'd like to join. He also asks to borrow $500 for a car. But Cab had the goods on Elwood and his late brother Jake. He refused, and personally kicked him out of the office. Outside, Buster picked his pocket and gave the wallet to Elwood, which ironically contained $500. So, Elwood purchased the police cruiser then he and Buster go for a very slow cruise. They stop off at Willie's strip club to try and convince Willie rejoin the band. Willie was hesitant, because the Russian mafia was watching him. But, Elwood and the bartender, Mack McTeer, bound and gag two Russian mobsters and leave them in the alley. This did not sit well with their leader, who demanded vengeance against Elwood and Willie; Elwood gives Mack an opportunity to perform at the club and sees he has talent. Just then, the Russians arrive and shoot up the club, then torch it. Luckily all the strippers, patrons, Matara, Elwood, Mack, Willie and Buster escape in time. Mack and Willie join the band. Next, Elwood tracks down the other members of the band: Matt "Guitar" Murphy, Donald "Duck" Dunne, Tom "Bones" Malone, Murph, Mr. Fabulous, and "Blue Lou" Marini and, in his own crude and crass way, convinces them to rejoin. Elwood even had Mack and Buster fitted with their own Blues suits. Now, all they needed was a gig. Unbeknownst to them, the Illinois state police and the Russian mafia were after them.

Maury Sline, their old booking agent, managed to book them a gig at a county fair in Kentucky, and, an opportunity to play at Queen Mousette's Battle of the Bands at her club in Louisiana. So, Elwood, Mack and Buster in the new Bluesmobile, and the band in tow, hit the road. Always managing to stay one step ahead of a furious Cab and the entire Illinois police force. They play at the fair in Kentucky, but learned they wanted a bluegrass band, and not a blues band. So they played bluegrass, blues style. All the while Cab and the cops watched the stage, but monster trucks and a storm proved the perfect distraction; the Blues brothers and the band manage to elude the cops at a local tent revival, with the Reverend Cleophus James. When Cab arrived, something extraordinary happened. It was a miracle, some say. He had a revelation. His destiny became clear. He donned a nifty Blues outfit and joined the band. But the rest of the police force weren't buying it, so they chased the Blues Brothers band all the way to Louisiana where they competed in Queen Mousette's Battle of the Bands--and lost to the Louisiana Gator Boys. Well before long, Elwood and the gang found themselves surrounded by every cop in a thousand mile radius, as well as the Russian mafia. And worst of all, Mother Mary Stigmata! There was nothing left to do but run. Buster had a plan. While Mack and Cab created a diversion on stage, Elwood and Buster made a run for it in the Bluesmobile followed by a very long cavalcade of police cars.

Blues Brothers 2000--what can I say? It was pretty good. It started off very properly with a proper dedication to John Belushi, Cab Calloway and John Candy. Dan Aykroyd returns as Elwood Blues, everyone's favorite crafty Blues con. John Goodman is on board as Mighty Mack McTeer. Joe Morton is Cab. J. Evan Bonifant is Buster. Frank Oz returns as the warden. And the late Kathleen Freeman returns as Mary Stigmata. Familiar faces Aretha Franklin and James Brown are here too. Belushi's absence from this film is definitely noticeable, but I think it's good they made Elwood a more central character, since in the original it was obvious Jake was the central character. They gave Elwood a chance to build. But personally, this wasn't much of a sequel, but rather a rehash of the first film. But if you liked the first film and would like to see a jazzy update, then Blues Brothers 2000 is for you. I recommend it. Like they say, the Lord works in mysterious ways.


Lets start with the good, The acting by Beverly Lynne was convincing and entertaining, The lovely Ms. Lynne has really stepped up her game and is showing real talent. Michael Pare always seems to play the same type of character. Strong Willed, rebel, ala Streets of Fire and Eddie and the Cruisers. In this movie he plays a detective and he really goes through the motions but he is the best male actor in the vehicle, Charles Durning must have lost a bet as he seemed comatose throughout the movie.

The bad: The plot, made NO SENSE, Note to production company, if you are going to mention a name like Polycarp EXPLAIN WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT! I cant give any spoilers here because the movie never came me a plot. This movie is a waste of time and if not for the aforementioned Beverly Lynne this movie would have been a complete waste of time.

The Ugly: I will never get that 85 minutes of my life back, so when I am in my death bed I will regret all the things I could have done other than watch Megacrap, but at least it will make me think of the beautiful Beverly Lynne and at least that will bring a smile.

Bottom line this not a cult classic, a blockbuster nor is it worthy of B-movie status. It might be shown as a Double Feature with Battlefield Earth...


I can't believe I watched the whole thing. Polycarp aka Kinky Killers will bore your senses to death.

You know those movies that look and feel like someone took a pickup truck down to the Sunset Strip and rounded up a bunch of prostitutes and whores, gave them scripts, drugs and money, and then said: NOW ACT! Well, this is one of 'those' movies.

After about two minutes into this cheese-fest, you start feeling like you are watching a really bad porno flick. The directing, the lines, the cast, just give it away that the movie was governed end-to-end by the porn industry.

Then (since they rounded up a lot of prostitutes off of the Sunset Strip), there is that problem where too many characters look alike - white, dumb and blond. You quickly become confused as to which dumb blond is getting hacked on now, but you resign yourself to not really caring since the movie is just so bad.

The story is completely inane. The acting is so bad you can't believe God made people this stupid. There is no Good versus Evil, since everyone in the movie is evil; so does it really matter which evil wins? At the 30 minute mark you get the overwhelming feeling to just stop watching and try something else, but you decide to see it through. Next time remember to not be so heroic. At around 4/5 into the movie it actually does become a dedication to pornography, witchcraft, Satan and sex-magick. Everyone just starts having sex with whoever, I kid you not.

The ending is as bad or worse than the beginning, leaving you with the typical WTF?! puzzlement. With a title of Kinky Killers (which by the way is meaningless) I suppose you should expect something sexual in nature, but this rode right over to the pornography arena in the last 20 minutes making it unfit for children and teens to view.

A polycarp is a talking fish. A polycarp is a plastic fish. Polycarp is short for: polyester carpeting.


My friend picked this gem up for $9.00 and i must say it was definitely only worth that. It looks promising at first glance of the case, the Canadian version is called "Kinky Killers" and the woman on the cover is practically in bondage. As soon as you pop it in, the menu looks horrible. The opening credits look like they were done in windows movie maker and they take so long to get over with. Then there is the ever so needed gratuitous breast shot, that pretty much make the movie( mind that none of them are nice). The story for this film is, confusing to say the least. One minute people are dying, next there having rough intercourse. By the time you get to the middle the story goes from weird to just completely out of this world. By the time we were nearing the end i said "This title is completely irrelevant " then once you see the final scene it all makes sense. And then everything reaches a point where it's so strange its unexplainable. I think this movie is must see for bad horror movie buffs. Or if you want to see a ton of gratuitous breast shots, pick it up.


Like "Poly-crap" instead of Polycarp. It was released under the title "Kinky Killers".

Do I even want to attempt to do a synopsis? Okay, here goes? A serial killer is going around slaughtering young blonde strippers and removing key body parts, after tattooing them with things supposedly from the bible as interpreted by someone who's never read it. This film was produced by German filmmakers, who obviously think America is full of bible thumping maniacs and thuggish cops.

The hero of the movie I guess is Michael Pare, who has gotten fatter and still can't act his way out of a wet paper bag. Sadder still is the participation of Charles Durning, who really is a good actor, but does three scenes which make absolutely no sense so they can put his name on the DVD cover and trick you into thinking you are seeing a better movie.

The movie ends with the few surviving characters being captured by the cult, who mangle out some explanation about how they are trying to summon Lucifer by boiling human body parts in a vat.

There are a lot of sex scenes in this movie, some of which almost work. Characters are introduced and you don't really know who they are or what they are doing there. You can tell you are almost at the end of the movie because they run out of actors to kill off.

Utter, complete and total crap!


Sometimes you just want to watch a sleazy B movie even if you are warned that it is really low budget. You just want some serial killer sleaze to watch mindlessly.

Lots of naked bodies, aberrant sex, and gore: all combined to make a film that will never see a theater screen, but will make a good slasher film for the aficionados.

Don't look for anything more, because there isn't anything. No great acting, not even good acting. No storyline that makes any real sense. Things just seem to jump all over the place.

Charles Durning will not be adding to his long list of award nominations with his appearance in this film.


I saw KINKY KILLERS on Showtime the other night; and, I thought the title was totally lame, especially given the content. I cannot believe this was rated TV-MA; it should have been R.

The film; and, its corn-ball 70s throw-back plot, just doesn't live up to its potential. The acting is wooden, the plot is twisted, non-sensical; and, drawn out to the point of boredom. Half the cast could have been played by the same person, they look that much alike. There is so much idiocy going on that you cannot tell who is whom; and, what they are doing.

And, what no one can look up "Polycarp" on the Internet... I mean how lame is it that the word is such a mystery?

Everything about this movie is one cliché after another -- the overworked cop, the inattentive spouse, the "renegade cop," the manipulative shrink... oh, what a waste of time.


This film is so worth watching. Just as a study. It's no master piece but it's so full of potential that's not realized and actors making the best of what they got. Not all the acting rises to the occasion but this is a lesson on what to do and avoid in film-making and story telling.

I've seen so much wasted money and film in Hollywood. Pare and Mark Belasco rescue this film and any money invested in this one. The mentor relationship is the best thing in this film! They are uncomfortably good in this low budget thriller. It seems misplaced. The first 2 acts cry for a detective series with Pare and Belasco. Call FX! ... The 3rd act makes you realize they've been holding together a mess that was breaking at the seams... Good for them and Brooke Lewis who plays against her bombshell casting perfectly. She is without a doubt a a indie star on the rise and an actress to watch. Mary O'Rourke is wasted in her role. She is cute as hell. I would have loved to see her and Mark Belasco have a battle about the strain his job put on them... or she her anywhere else. Once again talent wasted.

Ken Del Vecchio and his 199 credit's should be proud to be the flaw on the Charles Durning's flawless career.

MEMBER OF THE CAUSE! PROJECT 8 FILMS


Swimmers is a lovely, poetic movie about a young girl who needs an operation and the impact of the crisis on her family which does not have health insurance. The script touches on many universal themes: family, friendship, depleted fishing grounds, health care, problem drinking. The performances are wonderful, especially Cherry Jones, Robert Knott, and Tara Devon Gallagher. I saw Swimmers at the Seattle International Film Festival and I strongly recommend it. It just won the Portugese film festival so I am hopeful it will get a distributor as it deserves to be seen by a wide audience. Swimmers is reminiscent of Tender Mercies and Robert Knott's performance reminds me of Robert Duvall's in Tender Mercies--a huge compliment as Tender Mercies is one of my favorite movies. See Swimmers if you get the chance.


This movie plays like a country song from the 70's. They didn't have a dog, but I'm sure it either ran off or died before filming started. Everything bad happens, constantly. This movie feels like it was created at a funeral home. The movie offer no hope. Even the ending feels uncomfortable. This movie is an onslaught of negative emotion. The only good thing that happens in the whole movie is the friendship forged between the little girl and the maniac. Then the maniac decides to dye the little girls hair black without the parents permission. Who does that?

The movie starts at the bottom of a hill and goes down from there. Just when you think things have to get better, they get worse. This movie is a perpetual abuse of drama. This movie is a major downer! If you are feeling sad, please don't rent this movie. If you really enjoy other peoples misery, this is the movie for you! I sat through this movie because I rented it from Netflix. What a waste of a perfect summer afternoon.


I saw this just-about-perfect film when it screened at the Maryland Film Festival in May, 2005. Set in a small town, it tells the story of a Chesapeake Bay waterman's family as they pass through a crisis. The movie is superbly cast, with both famous (Cherry Jones) and unknown actors giving fine, nuanced performances. The Chesapeake Bay currently suffers significant ecological degradation from farm runoff, industrial pollution, and other factors. This has severely impacted crab, oyster, and fish populations and hence the livelihood of traditional Bay water-men. It is against this backdrop of economic struggle that the movie's story is told. Already poor and unable to afford health insurance, the family is pushed past the breaking point when their young daughter suffers a swimming injury and needs surgery.


The kind of well-intentioned, innocuous family film that makes you wanna to tear your friggin' hair out.

Oxford, MD, is a nowhere, nothing seaside town where everybody's bored, getting drunk or fighting, and occasionally all three. Little Emma (cute Tara Devon Gallagher) needs ear surgery, so she can't swim, which is her hope and dream. Her father, who taught her to swim, is an oyster farmer who wrecks his boat, and winds up out of work, leaving the family unable to pay for the medical attention Emma needs. Merrill (Sarah Paulson) is woundup hornball headcase blowing through town, offering solace to almost everyone in town. Gag me. SWIMMERS would be totally agreeable, if completely insipid and boring and a huge waste of time, family entertainment if not for Merrill's following dialogue: "Want a bl*wjob? I won't f*ck, but I can give you a bl*wjob."

(head scratch) (yawn, stretch).


We recently saw "Swimmers" at the Waterfront Film Festival. It's a lovely take on the dysfunction that roils beneath the surface of many (if not all) families in one form or another. The story centers on a five-person family as told through the eyes of its youngest member, an 11 year-old girl. The characters and motivations of the mother, father, daughter and one of her brothers are very well-developed, as is that of an unrelated woman that comes to their small Maryland coastal town with some baggage of her own. The story plays beautifully, its underlying tensions coming to a head near the end of the film. Thought-provoking -- my husband and I were talking about it hours after we'd seen it. We hope this film gets picked up and distributed!


Sadler's "Swimmers" portrays a waterman's family in crisis as a result of his daughter's need for ear surgery. The film provides a glimpse into the Tyler family's upheaval as they search for a financial solution for the necessary surgery. The water scenes were beautifully constructed and gave the viewer a look at the beauty of the Chesapeake Bay area. The sub-plots intricately weave together to bring about the conclusion to this thoroughly enjoyable and brilliant piece of work. I loved the film and found each character well cast. Most importantly, it provides real insight into the plight of the watermen and their diminishing way of life. Highly recommended! "Swimmers" is a keeper!"


Finally, a movie that has succeeded in properly portraying the small-town working class family. For such a short film, all the major characters are amazingly complex, as they captivate the audience with powerful transitions wrought by financial and social crises. Director Doug Sadler has extracted some of the best acting out of some of Hollywood's most underutilized talent: Cherry Jones playing Julia Tyler, the strong, persevere-at-all-costs mother; Robert Knott playing Will Tyler, the cash-strapped father who loves his family, but who falls apart and seeks escape when his plans for providing for his family fail; Sarah Paulson playing Merrill, a young woman with psychological problems rooted in her childhood; and new-to-Hollywood child actress Tara Devon Gallagher playing 11-year-old Emma Tyler, whose sudden need for a medical procedure becomes the source of the crises and redemption, and through whose both simple and profound perspective the beautiful story is narrated.


We just saw the movie by accident. We went to the theater to see BI2 and saw that Swimmers was playing. We had the thrill of meeting Doug Sadler (writer & director) and Robert Knott. Since we live across the Chesapeake Bay from the Eastern Shore, where the movie is set, we are familiar with the area, the lifestyles, the economics and such. Swimmers captures the intensity of the Chesapeake Bay watermen in the declining estuary, and the rhythm and flow of the water and the people that make their living on it. I was immediately sucked into the intensity of the movie, and the innerness of the people. The acting is so good and the filming, timing, sights and sounds are so well done, that I forget I was watching a movie and felt that I was sitting next to over looking over the shoulder of the person (actor) in the scene. The subject is intense, and the plot is the personalities of the family members, their thoughts and their interactions. It's a movie that will peel back the onion of your memories and deep personal feelings. It's definitely not a feel good movie. It's much more a feel what is very real about you and people you are closest to movie.


Despite the best efforts of Hoolywood...you occasionally still see a compelling drama, and this is one. Swimmers reveals some very universal themes, familiar to most of us who have ever lost a job, had a sick child or difficult relationships (surely this is nearly everyone!) The small town setting is wonderful and the economic plight of the oysterman is painful to watch...the disappearing way of life that is so common in many rural areas.

I was stunned by the actors performances and the beauty of the setting juxtaposed with the pain in their lives. REally, a great story, with a lot to say about us.

Oh yeah....Cherry Jones (2005 Tony Award Winner!!!) was awesome in this film.....but she was NOT the best performance! This one is worth your time and effort.


Swimmers is a wonderful film. The story really pulls you in and is very touching. The audience is able to identify with many of the characters since common human strengths and faults are expressed in this film. The acting is superb; the watermen characters are right on. Emma is an endearing character and made me teary-eyed throughout the movie. The friendship between Emma and Meryl is as believable as it is sweet. Anyone from a small town will be able to identify with the story of Swimmers. Other parts of this film that I really enjoyed were the scenes of the water. The shots of the water and the boats were beautiful.


"I'm trying to hold a family together..." speaks Cherry Jones as Julia to her husband, Robert Knott, who plays the part of Will, in this compelling story of a waterman's family on Chesapeake Bay's Eastern Shore. Excellent performances from both actors, as well as from Tara Gallagher, Mike Mosley, Sarah Paulson, and Sean Hatosy in supporting roles. Financial pressures and strains from Will's drinking issues take the family to the breaking point and everyone is affected by the struggle. Doug Sadler's movie, brilliantly scripted, is a winner on all accounts and holds a mirror to reflect what is common in so many people's lives. Yes, that can be uncomfortable at times, but it is real and jarring in it's truths. Sadler manages to provide just enough levity through the film to keep us hopeful that everyone will pull through somehow. If you are looking for special effects, violence, gratuitous sex and nudity, this is not the film to see, but if you want a good story, well told and beautifully filmed, this is it and worth watching more than once.


Swimmers rocks. It's the sort of movie that stays with you for days. Swimmers is an amazing movie with many layers, some joyful and some profound. The varying themes center around personal strength, love, connections to each other, and transformation as the characters struggle to stay above water, each in an individual way. The point of view stays with a wise and sensitive little girl which creates a innocent delight and a freshness to the total ambiance of the film. The setting could be anywhere in small town America in any working class family, yet this film is about a waterman's family and what they do in a time of crisis. There are funny spots too where the audience feels pulled in again and again to this familiar yet unique world where the Tyler family lives. Gorgeous photography. Super acting too, especially by Robert Knott who plays the father.


This is a wonderful, character driven story of how the often crushing economics of life as a waterman can drive a family apart. There are so many nuances in the performances its hard to know where to start, but let's just say the women drive the action here, with a wonderful debut in Tara Gallagher as Emma, the eleven year old narrator of the tale, and Cherry Jones as her mother Julia, and Sarah Paulson as the emotionally damaged Merrill. These casting choices were excellent, and all bring an understated core to their performances that are perfectly drawn out by Director Doug Sadler working from his own screenplay. Robert Knott as Julia's down and out husband Will Tyler evokes a younger Robert Duvall or Ed Harris, and is pitch perfect in his portrayal of a man trying very hard against odds that are not breaking his way. If you are looking for an antidote to the violence and mayhem that passes for movie-making these days, you can take heart that in this fantastic film solid writing and acting, and the focused emotions of small town life in America, make for a terrific story and one that you should not miss.


Wow -- What a gem -- I wonder how Sadler (director) managed to elicit such performances from the entire cast -- I kept waiting for an awkward or flat note from one of the actors, but it never happened. Completely convincing characters, and the accents are right on. Dialect coach and director deserve accolades. I was particularly impressed with how the Merill character turned out-- she could have SO easily been the stereotypical vampy-sexy-screwed-up character, but she was so fragile and so NOT in charge of herself while still remaining appealing-- and with Cherry Jones, of course ("Sit down, Shelly"), and Sean Hatosy is heartbreakingly dear -- could he possibly be anything other than a small-town cop searching for stronger self-esteem?

I also am amazed that a movie with such seemingly humble and unglamorous themes has such a breathless pace -- no one could ever fault this sleeper/swimmer for being "slow."

I am eager to see who is smart enough to pick up this film -- this young writer/director is going places, and some fortunate and talented people are going along for the ride/swim.


Will (Robert Knott) enters a shop and doesn't have enough for his beer, so he takes it out of a jar on the counter that is there to pay for his daughter Emma's (Tara Devon Gallagher) ear operation. This is just after he screamed at his wife Julia (Cherry Jones) for putting the jars out in the first place. Next we see him getting some work, and the first place he goes is to get more beer. This time, he buys one of those plastic roses to give Julia, expecting a sexual payoff.

This is the kind of guy Will is. He is out of work leaving Julia to figure out how to pay the bills and get her daughter an operation while he gets drunk. We all know the type.

This is an interesting picture of working class families trying to make it in the face of adversity. There are and will be many more like this as we get through our current economic crisis. People start coming apart at the seams, while others find solace and strength where they can.

Emma turns to Merrill (Sarah Paulson), who has problems of her own from a childhood incident when she was Emma's age. Paulson is fantastic, and really makes this movie.

Jones is equally brilliant as she tries to hold everything together with the drinking, and philandering, and lack of money.

There isn't a pretty solution, and there is no FX, violence, or a lot of nudity to distract you. You just have to sit back and take in the problems of everyday people and hope for the best.


This film tells a compelling story. The writing and the characters are so real and portrayed so well, you can't help but care about them. Emma could be your niece. You could know a Merrill in your life. This was a movie that I was glad to see. I also felt like I really spent time in their lives and didn't just watch a story. Robert Knott, Cherry Jones, Sarah Paulson and Tara Devon Gallagher are all top rate actors. And to have them all in the same film is great. There was not a weak link in the film. The music was complementary and not overpowering. Also, things sounded like they actually do in real life, not the typical big movie sound effects and foley. A lot of care obviously went into this story.


"Swimmers" is an endearing movie. You can sympathize with the characters and understand their pain. I thought that it would be a "regional" movie but it really speaks to people everywhere. The lighting and sound are amazing. I didn't want the movie to end...I wanted to follow the family and their story. Even the dad who definitely had his faults, was a person you could relate to. I hope that this movie goes worldwide as everyone should see it and enjoy it! Doug has written a powerful story about love and anguish in a family and how they deal with their emotions. I'd like to see a sequel involving the "troubled" teen.


As a film, Fearless Freaks is too long. Fans of the band probably won't care, though, as they seem willing to venture however far off the beaten path Wayne and the boys want to go. I wouldn't recommend it to the casual viewer, as it contains way too many scenes of the band's personal lives to be interesting to the general public.

I enjoyed it a lot, because it gives lots of insider info on a band that I've loved for over fifteen years. The most interesting part, and the one that most people will cite as the film's centerpiece, concerns Steven Drozd's frank discussion about his heroin addiction. The scene is as chilling as anything you've ever seen, watching Steven cook up a rig full of smack has to be the wildest thing I've seen in a film in years.

There isn't enough concert footage here, but two recent (excellent) shows are featured, Coachella 2004 and the Stubb's show in Austin, TX. I would have enjoyed more scenes of that classic show in Austin TX, mainly because I was there, in the front, and it was the most fun I've ever had at a concert in my life. Their Coachella set (I was there, too) was way too short, mostly consisting of Wayne trying to surf the crowd in a huge bubble (which was totally cool). I think they played four songs before they were rushed off so the Cure could take forever to come on. blah.

The thing I enjoyed most about this film was the insight it gives on what it's like to be a "rock star". Wayne and his wife don't live in a mansion, and their lives seem wonderfully normal. This was refreshing, and it certainly beats the hell out of watching Metallica argue for two hours.

The Flaming Lips have arguably one of the finest albums ever made, The Soft Bulletin (if you can find the vinyl version, get it no matter how much you got to spend). While I don't think this film will open them up to a wider audience, fans of the band won't be disappointed.


'Fearless Freaks' is an excellent documentary that's sure to please longtime fans like myself as well as newer fans, and will probably win them a fair batch of new followers. As 'Watch me Jumpstart' does with Robert Pollard of Guided by Voices, it paints an intimate portrait of head Lip Wayne Coyne as a family man and member of his community. We get plenty of interesting background into Coyne's early family life and nascent artistic aspirations. Interviews with band members, family members, and friends are inter-cut with raw live footage of the group's often very visually fascinating performances. The pace is just right to keep the viewer always entertained and never bored, but not at a breakneck, highly edited MTV-ish pace. My only complaint about the movie is that details on the band's history and specific works by them are rather skimpy. I would have liked to have gotten more details such as Wayne explaining his inspirations for various songs, discussions about their creative process, studio stories, and the like.

Drummer Steven Drozd becomes the other major character in this movie when his addiction to heroin is frankly and almost shockingly discussed and portrayed on film. Without giving too much away, this subplot comes to an apparently happy ending, and the movie concludes on a high note, with The Flaming Lips on stage playing before their enthralled fans, on the verge of another artistic triumph. Here's to The Flaming Lips.


Fearless Freaks is the story of "the punks finally taking acid" featuring the alternative band, The Flaming Lips. It is a masterful explosion of bizarre rock & roll footage collaged into a documentary form. Each 'Lip' goes into detail how they became part of the group and their personal struggles throughout their years. In a way, the film is a blueprint of how to become a rock star; make music with your friends, film every show, make loud experimental music, use smoke and fire when you lack talent, find a filmmaker to follow you around, crank call record companies, tour , tour , tour and you'll finally make it big. Every Flaming Lip fan and starving rocker will appreciate this fiery saga. Freaks is filmed by their longtime director Brad Beesley(Okie Noodling). It looks deep into their origins in Oklahoma City and is culled from over 400 hours of video footage the 'Lips' had in their archives of early shows, growing up, pictures and show posters. Beesley signed on to follow the band in the early 1990's and made many of their early music videos. Produced by Minnesotans, Rick Fuller and edited by Jolynn Garnes.


The interesting thing about "The Fearless Freaks" is the difference between the style of Brad Beesley's film-making and the production process of the Lips' albums. Wayne Coyne's music is weird, yes-- even chaotic, but it is carefully put together and endlessly tweaked, elevating the raw elements of songwriting (guitar chords, sung melody) into a mesmerizing digital orchestra of sorts. Beesley's documentary, however, is satisfied with gritty, hand-held 16mm footage of (usually) Coyne pontificating. It's odd that such futuristic, unconventional music-making would make such good source material for old-school, back-to-basics film-making. The most interesting part of this documentary, rather than the heroin scene with Steven Drozd, is Wayne revisiting his old Long John Silver's and enlisting two young children to reenact a robbery which launches him into a spiel about the rather un-poetic reality of death. It, like the rest of the film, is an incredible snapshot of some true oddballs in the American music scene.


This is a wonderful film, and one can tell that it's definitely a labor of love.

I must say that I was disturbed by the drug use scene with Stephen. However, this is because I am a former addict. But I still think it was unnecessary to be so graphic; but he truly shares the perils of heroin addiction in the most real way.

I do wonder how the movie will turn out. I can't believe the amount of energy Wayne possesses toward his projects. I found him to be a great role model (I am an artist myself, and quite lazy by comparison).

Only one more complaint. Like in many documentaries, they will tease you with the beginning of a wonderful song, then speak over it, or cut away. I could have used less talk and more music, since this is what the documentary is ultimately about; well beside their lives and the creative process.

I highly recommend this film. Oh, and yes, it is a bit too long; but it only proves how engaged the filmmaker is in the project.


VH1 Behind The Music catapulted the Rock Documentary to a different level(good or bad is your opinion) However, the structure the VH1 Producers use works wonders: Rebellious teens, start band, Plucked From Obscurity and Poverty by major label. Rise Fall and Rise. Good dramatic arcs

"Fearless Freaks' follows this formula a bit but has different ambitions, and mostly I think it succeeds. But some sloppy storytelling and an excessive running time hurt the film a bit. Still there are moments of pure fascination, emotion and heartache in this one (Spoilers #1) 3 2 1 The heroin addiction scene with Steve mentioned in previous posts becomes a frightening, depressing yet fascinating side note. Even if one views this scene and has never heard the flaming lips. You will be moved. Powerful stuff. Thanks to both Steve and the filmmakers courage to let the audience be moved by this very difficult intimate scene.

However, somewhat like most of the Lips earlier records, the film lacks direction and focus and becomes very vignette like. No real connective glue. Maybe an editing issue?

(Spoiler #2) 3 2 1 Example? one part of the film mentions how band member Steve had some members of this family commit suicide but doesn't come full circle with the story telling. They just drop that fragment. You don't know who...when...where...why. Steve's girlfriend mentions it and the filmmakers just drop the whole thing. Never tie it up. Disappointing.

Example 2 (spoilers) 3 2 1 The film uses these psychedelic montages as breaking points for the story. Come on people. You could have easily come up with a better transition device (I am a video editor by trade so I think I can be critical of this flaw)

When the film doesn't drop the ball and effectively tells the stories of Flaming Lips members' families/relatives/siblings it can compete with any other human interest documentary out there. Truly moving emotional stuff.

So wrapping it up. A good not great film about a soon to be legendary Semi Cult Band. And for music freaks like myself the film features interviews of Gibby of Butthole Surfers, Johnathan Donahue from Mercury Rev, Meg & Jack White, Beck, and some others. Really cool

end kdc


When a group of alien agents from a dying planet come to Earth under the leadership of Isis (Amelia Cooke) to build a portal to connect both worlds, the warrior Rykker (Mark Dacascos) opposes and defends the earthlings. He rescues the teenager Julie (Emma Lahana), whose family was murdered by the invaders, and together they try to destroy the portal and avoid the invasion commanded by the cruel Saylon (Billy Zane).

"Alien Agent" is an unoriginal and forgettable B-movie, with a terrible screenplay that begins the story like a sequel of a pilot of a TV show. The situations are only motive for car chases, explosions, shootings and stupid fights. The story begins with a car chase when two aliens fire their machine guns against Rykker but never hit the hero; suddenly one of them wisely jumps on Rykker car to struggle against the hero in a ridiculous sequence. The rest of the story follows the low standard. My vote is three.

Title (Brazil): "A Invasão" ("The Invasion")


I bought this terrible flick suspecting it was a grade C movie, but might be good for a laugh or two.

I was surprised, it was a D movie and full of stupid remarks, forgettable characters, a plot that had an intelligent person written the screen play, might have worked.

How such worthless trashy flicks get the bucks to be produced, much less consumed by what must be children and adults with learning disabilities, I don't know.

The lack of imagination in how the invaders invade is depressing. They're all humans who have been killed, but somehow their bodies taken over by the invaders. I was unable to waste enough time to see this thing to its end.

Other commenters may help here.


In a nutshell so that you don't have to read the rest of my crap if you don't want to: Old story. Aliens are having problems in their world and so they come to ours to bug us or take over, or something. I dunno. So an alien agent is sent to stop them from their diabolical schemes.

When not chairing the "Iron Chef" Mark Dacascos. does action B-movies which are, in my opinion, usually better than most B-movies but yet always seem to fall just short of their potential. This one is no exception. All the pieces are there; just needed a little bit more intelligence in the writing and better direction. Case in point: our hero steals a police car and was asked by his companion why he did it. He replied that he wanted to hear the police reports. This was so obviously a lame excuse since the cost of attracting so much attention to himself far outweighed the benefits. Besides, he could simply have used or gotten a scanner of his own (he had a hideout full of crap). More likely the director wanted a car chase and this was his best excuse to get one. In another scene a lot of people were killed for no good reason other than to steal a truck. Why would you do that and draw unwanted attention to yourself? More likely the director needed a mass murder at this juncture and this was his best excuse for one. I wanted to like this movie, and I did "somewhat" (I liked the early scene with the alien chick on the overpass; at that point the movie looked very promising) but there were some inconsistencies that bugged me. In the first fight scene the hero fought very well; expertly. Then there was a later fight scene where he appeared to not know how to fight at all. If the director wanted the bad guy to get the better of him he could have done it without making him look like he forgot how to fight altogether (he basically stood there and took an ass whipping).

Dacascos obviously is a talented martial artist. More so than Van Damme or Seagal. And yet -as luck or fate would have it- never achieved even their level of success. Ironic that he's probably better known from a cooking show than from what he does best. Kick ass. Ahh well, life has a sense of humor. All I can say for Alien Agent is that it's better than most B-movies which may or may not be saying much. Why don't you be the judge? Love, Boloxxxi.


Good B-scifi film with an awful title. The plot has an alien race trying to build a worm hole terminal on earth so they can leave their dying planet and forcibly take over the earth. They only thing stopping them is an single alien who wants revenge. What can I say its turn your brain off time at the old homestead. The best way to describe this is a way better than average SCIFI Channel original film. Its a better than average TV movie that just works with in its limits and goes. Certainly its nothing you haven't seen before but its sense of seriousness makes it worth your time in front of the TV screen. If there is any flaw its the invulnerability the aliens have, it kind of takes the edge off the danger. Still if this had a better title people would be eating this up.


STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning ** Sunday Night * Monday Morning

I've been reviewing films on IMDb for ten years now. I've reviewed well over a thousand. I've seen and reviewed all sorts of films. Some are adaptations of great novels or cult TV shows that were destined to become great films. Some may have been true life stories that had to be made into a film. And others may have been less audacious, and simply been made to be a simple piece of escapist, B movie fun. That seems to have been the case with Alien Agent...but the result couldn't have been worse. Instead, it is a film that leaves one word wondering around in your mind: why? What was the point of it? What inspired a supposedly intelligent movie producer to think there was any chance it would be a big hit, either on the big screen or on DVD? Are there not loads of talented, up and coming young artists crying out for their big break, for whom the budget for this useless excuse for a film could have spring boarded their careers? What is the point of it?

Mark Dascascos's career reads like a whole charge sheet of direct to DVD mediocrity, with the occasional supporting appearance in a big studio film that sees the light of day at a cinema screen. I haven't seen most of them, to be honest, and maybe there are some films in that barren landscape of filmic drudgery that would make this codswallop seem like a masterpiece (shudder.) But he's the lead star here, and that ain't great marketing potential to get your film noticed much. Then there's his co star Billy Zane, who just over ten years ago spoke with an elequted British accent in Titanic, the biggest film of all time in scope of scale and budget. While Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet's careers have taken off quite grandly, fate has dealt him the unlucky hand and he gets to co star in drivel like this, where he first speaks with a weird American trucker accent before being magically transformed into a more smoothly spoken evil alien type guy.

You'll notice I've forgone the traditional plot summary, which is too apathetic to make a fuss about. Some nonsense about an alien race from another planet that have developed a portal to our world to drain our natural resources and eventually enslave our species, which Dacascos's 'alien agent' must try and sort out. I could go on about this, and the atrociously bad acting, and the unbelievably cheap looking special effects (mainly, what appear to be sparkler sprinkles coming from the slain alien invaders) the even shoddier looking sets and the complete lack of any exciting action through out...but frustratingly, this is one of those films where I could tell from the trailer it was going to be rubbish and so, I kind of feel like I only have myself to blame to be honest.

Alien Agent is one of those films that just makes you wonder why you even bother watching movies anymore. I know this is more of a rant than I should be wasting on a film of such unimportance but...I just can't figure out why anyone thought this would have appeal to anyone and, if there is, even with such an obviously low budget and B list cast, they made such a p!ss poor job of it. It's such a waste of time and, lets be honest, a waste of emerging talent. NO STARS


The appearance of Michelle Yeoh in Tomorrow Never Dies and then Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon piqued my interest in the lady's earlier films and when this one came up cheap on DVD, I jumped at the chance to acquire it. I am glad I did. It is not the greatest film I have ever seen, but it is good fun and includes some good fight stuff. Michelle Yeoh looks terrific and does some great fight scenes, and all with a great sense of fun. This is one film not to be taken seriously and the result is a great way of spending 90 minutes. If you like mindless action with a touch of humour, then you could do a lot worse than this film. Check it out.


I saw this for about the third time last night, mildly inebriated and had a wonderful time. It's essential viewing for Michelle Yeoh fans, as she gives one of her most ass kicking performances whilst looking sweet throughout. She plays a sort of female Indiana Jones type with nifty kung fu skills, and whups numerous bad folk from start to finish, ably supported by Tung Shing Yee. The plot is a standard heroic Chinese take on weaselly Japanese type affair, as our heroes seek to prevent the building of a poison gas factory in a mountain town and rescue its sympathetic leader Youda, well portrayed by Lowell Lo as a slightly weak and fuddled but basically good patriotic guy. Richard Ng provides the most obvious laughs with his swindler character, again, basically a good guy and the whole crew are an engaging lovable bunch. The Japanese are all pretty villainous and are helped out by leg fighting genius and veteran bad guy Hwang Jang Lee. The film is simply great entertainment throughout, with a fairly light tone and plenty of laughs. The choreography and stunt work is top notch, making for real thrills and the pace is fast. At times the budget seems lower than it should have been but this doesn't hurt too much, the only real problems are the final block and the underuse of Hwang Jang Lee. In the last twenty minutes or so the film goes into more of a battle mode and neglects the martial arts, which is a real shame. Criminally it does not give us a proper final fight scene and the conclusion is a tad unsatisfying. Also, Hwang Jang Lee doesn't get to do much of his trademark awesome leg work, nor is his character up to the standards of the thoroughly mean folks he has played in the past. It made me a bit sad, especially what with his roles in Drunken Master or Snake In The Eagles Shadow, to name just two. Another, more minor issue for me was that despite the copious amounts of bullets and arrows flying about, barely a drop of blood is seen in the movie. I don't expect Lone Wolf And Cub style violence in these films and I know the film was trying to be light hearted, but it definitely would have given the final third more of a punch. Still, these are small issues compared with how much joy I got out of watching this. Fans of Michelle Yeoh or Hong Kong action from the Eighties definitely need to check this one out.


"Magnificent Warriors" finds its leading star, Michelle Yeoh, in top form: her speed and dance-like grace make her fight scenes a pure pleasure to watch (she's also good with a whip....and a rope....and a spear....well, you get the idea). And as a bonus, there is another girl, the beautiful and feisty Cindy Lau, who fights as well! Richard Ng, perhaps better known for his role in the "Lucky Stars" films, provides the comic relief, and he's actually quite funny here. The action offers a good mix of martial arts and large-scale battle scenes, and the story is (after the first 30 minutes) engaging and at times even inspiring. The production is spectacular and the music score appropriately epic. If you want to see an Asian take (plus a female twist this time) on the Indiana Jones formula, this is a much better choice than Jet Li's "Dr. Wai And The Scripture With No Words". (***)


And any fans of hers will want to see this thoroughly entertaining romp. A big-budget picture that doesn't skimp on plot or its sometimes-hilarious script in showcasing Ms. Yeoh's considerable talents (including a great scene with a whip!), THE MAGNIFICENT WARRIORS delivers on all counts. Don't miss!


Magnificent Warriors is an enjoyable and entertaining movie with a lot to recommend it, especially the excellent, athletic prescence of the fantastic Michelle Yeoh. Still, it drags and feels a little limp in places. For instance, the two opening fights during the plot setup are explosive, impactful and a lot of fun, but after that nothing really happens action-wise until 20 minutes later.

The film stop-starts all the way through, making it a bit frustrating for an experienced viewer. It's no more stop-starty or inconsistent than US or European action fare like Transporter or Red Siren, but it seems patchy and messy in comparison to other Hong-Kong adrenaline-rides like Full Contact or Yeoh's later Wing Chun. Both movies keep a consistent level of action without sacrificing their story lines.

They also have strong, non-wacky story lines. Magnificent Warriors is a horrific mess in the plot department. Take Indiana Jones, substitute the Japanese for the Nazis and substitute Michelle Yeoh for Harrison Ford and you'd think it'd rock. You'd almost be right, but the director and his writers decided to try and make some political points with it and turn it into a patriotic pro-China movie...as such it gets kind of messy and biased.

Still, it's a Michelle Yeoh film. If you're a fan, which I most certainly am, you won't be disappointed with this. Yeah, OK MW blows its two best fights in the first 20 minutes, but there's a lot of good solid action going on here, and though Yeoh isn't as central as I would have liked to preceedings (given she's the only one here who can act her way out of a paper bag) she has some fantastic set pieces and humorous lines to fight/charm her way through.

If you like Michelle Yeoh, watch this, it's a good film and above all it's fun and she showcases both her fighting talent and her charm in equal measure. If you're indifferent to her and just want an OTT blast, there are much better HK actioners out there, you'd probably fare better with say Eastern Condors or Full Contact, both of which are off their rocker and full of chop-socky and gun-play.


I found the blend of action and humor in this film to be very entertaining. Michelle Yeoh does some incredible stunts, including imaginative use of rope in one sequence. Richard Ng does some pretty slick moves too. Also the actress who plays Chin-Chin does some impressive fighting. If you like Michelle Yeoh films, or even Jackie Chan films, this really should be right up your alley. Incredible stunts, and very funny dialog, this was a real treat to watch.


The XTRO-trilogy (if you can call it that) is an odd phenomenon. The three movies are totally unrelated, except for the fact that they all were directed by Harry Bromley Davenport and they all deal with extra-terrestrial encounters. The first XTRO was a peculiar little sci-fi/horror/drama-gem. A weird mixture of genres, but a good flick nonetheless. XTRO II: The Second Encounter was a shameless ALIEN rip-off, solid in creature-terror, but over-all bad. And XTRO 3: Watch The Skies unfolds more like a 90 minutes episode of THE X-FILES mixed with military stuff and ripped details from PREDATOR. So go figure.

Now, XTRO 3 is slightly better than the second one only because it actually has a bit of a plot. It has also another rather unique aspect: it's a sort of alien-revenge-flick (there aren't many of those, are there?) A group of expendable military misfits are send out to clean up a remote island, for the military has plans to build a base there. Soon they discover that there's actually an all different purpose to their visit as they encounter an alien on that island.

The actors are unknown & mediocre and the characters are all clichés. Except for Andrew"Djinn"Divoff. It's nice to see him again, but his performance is rather unnoticeable, and you get the idea that he's only any good when he can deliver witty one-liners. The camera-work is pretty bad too. The musical score is at times really cheap, but sometimes they surprisingly use the right scary sounds. But it was at those moments that I suspected they used parts from other movie's soundtracks.

As for the alien effects: they're pretty good, especially the moving facial features. There are some decent gore-effects too, but the rest of the special effects look crappy.

At times you will have to fight off boredom while watching this flick, but the occasional voice-over from the main character makes you want to know how it all will end. So, if your looking for an off-beat sci-fi quicky, XTRO 3 might be worth a watch. More demanding sci-fi fans should better ignore it.


A team of most unlikely Marines is sent to defuse any spent artillery rounds or unexploded bombs that might be left on an island that was used as a gunnery target. (Before that, it was an internment camp for Japanese citizens.) The island seems overrun by tame white rabbits. A detonation showers the team with human bones. ("It was probably a graveyard.") Some deranged old white guy shows up screaming, most likely mad. Another detonation blows the corner off a hidden cement shelter that oozes glop that seems to dissolve skin. An alien appears among them. In other words, things seem to be getting a little hairy.

But then none of this really comes as a surprise because things have been hairy from the beginning, starting with the half dozen members of the team, a bunch of wise guys goofing on their new leader, a stern Lieutenant Commander wearing the wrong cap (he's one grade below the scrambled-egg level). The Marines seem to dress any old way they want, wearing their caps backward like baseball hats. There's a woman among them. She wears only what I believe is called a singlet. In one shot a Marine takes cover carrying a bolt-action rifle. One of the team openly smokes crack. They all look like bums.

It's not so much the wardrobe or props that turn this potentially interesting, if already familiar, story into the wreck that it is. It's the clumsy writing and the indifferent direction. The gold is there but no one has separated it from the dross. I mean -- an island that has been deserted for fifty years. Scattered live ammunition. The left over camp in which human beings were forced to live during World War II. What a fascinating place to explore, all by itself. But no atmosphere is captured, no real mystery or suspense generated. They go ashore on this deserted island and everything begins to happen, one thing after another, really FAST, as if to prevent the audience from being bored because a scene lasts longer and is more revealing than a Head On commercial ("apply directly to the forehead!"). When I was a kid I explored an empty army base, Fort Hancock, NJ, and stumbled across a pile of live 20 millimeter shells abandoned in a swamp. Not knowing better, I tried juggling a few of the unstable things. Now -- in retrospect -- THAT was exciting. This isn't. It's less mystery movie than slasher.

You can do a lot with a small budget, but you have to put some care into what you're doing first.

Utter tripe, badly acted, poorly executed.


A small US military group are sent to a deserted island to dispose any live bombs. When they get there, something not quite right. As they find out that they're expendable objects who would soon encounter one vengeful alien. Through an old hermit on the island they discover that this was a place where they kept an alien species and experimented on them. Not only they have an angry ET to face, but Military intelligence who plan to use them as bait.

While, this is the third of the "Xtro" series, there's no relation between the three films. "Predator" heavily influences this tacky straight-to video Sci-fi fare. One thing definitely is that "Predator" is a definite masterpiece when compared to this cheap, hokey and pitifully vapid effort. Even the actors here, make Schwarzenegger look good! Very embarrassing execution, disastrously inept special effects and daft performances may you think "Oh no. There goes another one of my brain cells" when watching this one-of-a-kind piece of trash. The stuffy film is amateurishly put together with a clichéd narrative that's shamelessly derivative. Reckless characters act tough and spit out macho dribble with attitude. It's pretty mind numbing to listen to, especially when it goes for meaningful conversations. Streaming through is a husky voice-over and a lot white rabbits to hold your attention. Yeah, there's something engaging about those white fluffy rabbits!

Despite finding it quite an irritable and drab viewing, few things hit the mark. There are some quite nasty moments when the rubbery alien decides it's torture time with some blood squirting. The thunderous music score manages a few chilling cues. While the performances are laughably hopeless, but Robert Culp and a slightly amusing Andrew Divoff are the odd exception. While, the make-up effects of the outer space visitor are questionable, it still manages to hold up for its tiny budget.

Director Harry Bromley (who also directed the first two flicks) is really clutching at straws with this flatly handled and too practical project. Imaginative details, gripping suspense and bug-eyed visuals are long gone here. No techniques really stand out in this by the numbers exercise and what he comes up with is mostly ridiculous and ineffective.

Poorly done garbage that turns into a wearisome puddle.


This movie was not bad, it was horrible! The acting was at best equivalent to that of a high school production. The special effects were by far the worst I had ever seen. If you could not tell that the alien is a puppet, then I am sorry for you. The movie was bad even by the Scifi Channel standards. The "Bad Guy" character is pretty much your standard villain who has a shallow disposition and crummy dialog, the same goes for the rest of the "marines". If our troop really were to act as they did in this film; then we would all be doomed. One of the only redeeming scenes was the "Alein Autopsy" scenes, the black and white with grain texture was by far the biggest expense to the budget; however, this scene is also has some of the worst alien acting in the movie.


The original "Xtro" (1983) still remains a cult favorite these days, because of the gory effects and weird nightmare sequences. Certainly, it was influenced by Ridley Scott's "Alien" (1979) but it was no cheap rip-off. Unfortunateley, that was the case with "Xtro 2: The Second Encouter" (1990). It had nothing in common with the original one and was nothing more than a mix between "Alien" and "Aliens". To a certain level, it was enjoyable, but not very good. It had it's moments.

No memorable moments for the awful "Xtro 3: Watch The Skies". What the hell ? Again, totally unrelated to the previous films, so why the title ? Just another way to cash in on the cult success of the first one. But this time, it really is bad.. No idea what Andrew Divoff (Wishmaster) is doing here, the rest of the unknown cast if unconvincing. That can also be said about the creature, you can hardly see it and that may be for the best because it is bad and awful. The awful story is boring and uninspired. I use the word awful a lot but that perfectly describes this cheap mess.. avoid it at all cost....


This is a cheap and tatty generic sci-fi military paranoia paste-up job, using clichés minted in a thousand other movies.

It does the best it can on a budget of about ninepence, but that isn't very good. The special effects aren't very special (lots of ordnance expended, and the chameleon effect is interesting), and the alien is poorly executed.

The cast (with the exception of Robert Culp, adding a few bucks to the pension fund) is composed of total unknowns, and this movie is not going to change that for any of them.

And there is incessant use of the F word to no particular effect. It isn't big and it isn't clever, guys.


I like Sci-Fi movies and everything 'bout it and aliens, so i watched this flick. Nothing new, nothing special, average acting, typical H. B. Davenport' story, weak and cheesy FX's, bad ending of movie, but still the author idea is good. The marines on lost island find the truth about alien landing there and truth about past-experiments on them. They die one after one, some of them were killed by lonely alien, and others by human enemies. UFO effects, when it flees and crushes are bad,too. The voices of angry alien are funny,too. Reminds me on young monkeys. The movie is not scary, not very funny (maybe the old man, which marines find on the lost island, is the funniest freak in the movie. He's all confused and he dances all the time like old drunk). A little better sequel than XTRO 2: Second Encounter and 3-times weakest than the original movie. As I say "for the hardest fans only".


"Xtro" was a pretty good, albeit strange, little cult horror movie. "Xtro 2" had nothing to do with the original and is basically a derivative "Alien" movie, but was still reasonably fun for mindless entertainment. "Xtro 3" has nothing to do with either "Xtro" or "Xtro 2," which left itself open pretty nicely for a sequel. I wish X-3 picked up where X-2 left off. Unfortunately, "Xtro 3" is just flat-out terrible. Where to begin? It's very slow. We're about 30 minutes into the movie before there's any sign of aliens, mayhem, whatever. When you do get to the aliens, you're pretty disappointed because they are the dumbest looking aliens you'll ever see. I realize they can become invisible and also have some other powers in their little alien bag of tricks, but you take one look at them and you just feel like a group of military folks (even ones like the misfits we so clearly have here) ought to have been ransacked these aliens in and out of this secluded island in about 5 minutes. If these aliens are so advanced, how come they were stuck on this island for 40 years? And there's other ridiculousness associated with this movie. Like when Banta gets stuck in the aliens' sticky web and the guys sit around for two days debating whether to go try to rescue her, all while they can clearly see from afar that the aliens are trying to conduct experiments on her. Then, one of them finally decides to shoot at them and from long range, and hits Banta and kills her instead. (Banta was kind of hot, so that's why I'm a little more outraged about this scene.) Why not confront the aliens at close range? Anyway, I'm not sure why I feel like this movie doesn't deserve the lowest rating -- maybe it's Banta -- but I'm feeling somewhat generous so I'll give "Xtro 3" a 2 out of 10.


The basic plot has already been revealed. A bunch of gung-ho soldiers are on a mission on an island and run into some sort of alien creature. So far so good. Might make an entertaining movie.

However- all the actors really, _REALLY_ suck. They are type-cast in a way which makes it obvious from the very beginning how they will react to any situation. The next problem is that the plot is as boring and predictable as the actors. Unless you are somewhat challenged you are always at lest two steps ahead of the movie, and nothing will surprise you.

Whatever you feel like watching, just ignore this film. It is a complete waste of time.


A bunch of looser marines are sent to a remote island to diffuse it of bombs. When there they start to uncover a Government cover up that took place many years ago. It all seems that many years ago aliens landed on the island and proceeded to kill everyone on the island or something like that. The government somehow or other covered the aliens and their ship in concrete. The find out to much and are left on the island to die. Xtro 3 is a pretty dull affair that remains below average throughout. The effects on the aliens are fair until we see them jerkily moving about the place. the acting isn't to great either and most of the characters are really annoying i ended up hating all of them and looking forward to their demise. The effects of the helicopter attack on the other hand looked really good but its hardly a saving factor. The plot has been done to death the new setting of an island did nothing to help things along. The strange guy they find is kind of funny at times with is dancing and his rambling. The ending was just terrible. Pretty much a below average sci-fi film with poor effects and a done to death plot.

4/10


It puzzles me that people hates this movie so much, it's a fun and enjoyable Alien / Predator rip-off with no intentions of being a masterpiece. Look, if you want to see Predator, go and see Predator and not Xtro III. It's as stupid as renting Battle Beyond The Stars and expecting Star Wars!

Anyway, a group of marines is stranded on a remote island together with a mean and nasty 2-foot tall alien whose favourite pastime is dissecting humans. The little sneaky alien has some kind of slime that he traps unknowingly B-actors in and he gets invisible as well.

OK, it isn't much of a story but Xtro III has nice effects and is surprisingly gory at times.


This production was recently shown on Dutch TV, the TV-guide announced it as a very poor Predator ripp-off. Since the original Predator is one of my favourites, I taped Xtro for later reference. One day waiting on a cable guy I decided to view it. It was a long wait, I can tell you that. The urge of pressing the FF button every second scene was so enormous that I had to give in. This piece of junk does not even qualify as a Cult-thing by any standard. There is nothing to laugh about and script/acting/screenplay/continuity are so poor that you wonder why in the hell garbage like this makes it on video and National TV!. Don`t waste your time on this one. Go rent the original Predator, find a big screen TV, some Dolby stuff and let that cable guy stand in the rain for an hour or two....


This is a long line of Hollywood Nazi propaganda bombs that are funded by the immensely wealthy Nazi party. Again, all we get are a pitiful excuse to kill as many brunette women as possible. It has become a joke, and would be funny if it weren't for the wackos who think that this makes a film a classic. That makes it dangerous. On the surface, it is about a Roswell type affair, searching for an alien cover up by the government (try to make sense out of that? No, you can't, since the military could ask for billions of dollars more in budget if they could show evidence of aliens, so we have the most ludicrous idea since those idiots who thought Leonardo da Vinci met Jesus Christ and knew his lineage.) But the propaganda, like most Nazi propaganda, is not even subtle. How any person can not see this is beyond comprehension.

What is really horrible is that great scripts and ideas are shot down by producers and directors for crap like this.


Here we are, Xtro-3 the third in a series of almost totally unrelated films. Though this one has the same director as the second this time there's a new writer which is a very good thing. The plot is miles better than Xtro 2 but this still only ranks it as an average one. The action is okay and the setting is okay the special effects are more believable than the second and much more effective. In fact the whole film is made alot better and is quite effective. With the plot of a team of soldiers sent to check out an island for the army only to find it's home to a very angry alien. This borrows quite alot from Predator but is done quite well, as opposed to Xtro 2's ripping off of the Alien saga. An okay action film but it never rises above being average and the ending is a bit stupid. I give it 4 out of 10.


The first time I saw this film it really scared Me!The alien is very realistic and the scene where the scientist is operating on the alien's mate is disturbing but yet realistic.I don't want to go any more but I'll tell you this that if you like alien,sci-fi and horror films then check it out!


First-off, the only reason I'm writing this is because the 4.3 rating is almost impossible. I mean the direction and cinematography by itself will get this movie to a 6. No, I haven't read the book and I genuinely do not believe that the movie should be rated as per the adaptation from the book. The performances standing out are Melissa (of course) and her grandmother. The music and cinematography have a presence of their own throughout the movie. And the plot never gets boring or unrealistic, given a slightly open imagination. If you're aged anywhere between 15 and 35 I would highly recommend a viewing. The only reason I gave it an 8/10 is because we have movies like Fight Club and Animatrix.


At first glance, it was a little bit disappointment, when I saw Melissa P. I had an expectation that Melissa P. herself would have played in this movie. But Maria Valverde was really fitted in the role either with appearance or with talent. In spite of the movie has been showed with the sign 18 circle, when we look at the scenes in reality it deserves a sign 15 circle. There was an incompatibility with the books itself and the movie. Some parts had failed to hit, some parts have been drawn into the scenes fast and verbally. That makes the story snapped. Maybe because of the movie depends on a memoir not on a complete scenario. It seemed that at the end of the movie Melissa had commit a suicide. Then, she appeared on surface and visited her father's mother Nonna Elvira's grave with her mother. It was a misty scenario, not open as we understood. As if Melissa quit these kinds of sex games and correct her communication with her mother forever when she realized she was in wrong way. It is not easy to find a right way after diving too deep. In the book Melissa did not stop playing games.


I saw very little of the book in this film, this is not to say that this alone makes for a poor movie. As a matter of fact it was better that the book despite the fact that I still thought it was awful. I personally feel that the only reason any one bothered to make this book into a film was because of the shock value. Melissa's sexual exploits were for the most part disgusting and whatever was left over was disturbing. I'm not prude but that book nauseated me, and the movie wasn't much better. At least the movie had some kind of a story. The book was more or less a detailed list of all the raunchy things she had done in her past, there was no connection between her and any part of her family. No mention of the grandmother that figures quite largely into the movie's plot, not a peep. All in all if you have the choice between the movie or the book pick the movie, at least it is shorter.


I HATE censorship but this film needed it. I have nothing against the issues explored but there was unnecessary nudity of a minor in a sexual way. There was also unnecessary sexual innuendo of a minor that was not vital to the plot and that is just wrong. I think this film is a sorry excuse for child porn and questions must be raised at the director's choice of cuts and the need for some of the sexual scenes that were not vital to the plot.

Other issues: the plot was not that good and the camera work was unnecessarily shaky.

The one plus point is that I could see the actress who player Melissa doing a lot more and a lot better in the future but if she continues with this kind of film she will tarnish her reputation for future non-porn films.


This is a fantastic episode filled with top of the line quality special-effects which introduces the crew of the Enterprise-D to a being called "The Traveler" who can manipulate time and space throughout the galaxy. The Enterprise-D crew's dilemma in this episode is that there is a warp propulsion specialist by the name of Kozynski who won't admit to the crew even the simplest details in how he can make the warp engines traverse great distances across the known galaxy (Almost infinitely instantaneous and faster than warp speed!).

In this episode, Wesley Crusher is discovered to be more than just a mere prodigy who has the potential for a bright future due to his gifted abilities - according to The Traveler. This episode also shows glimpses of Tasha's violent past on Turkana IV, and even an illusion of Jean-Luc Picard's deceased mother Yvette. This episode really showed the great potential of things to come for this fantastic, marvelous show.


This episode is one of the best of a mixed first season. When the Enterprise engines undergo tests by a warp field specialist Kosinski, his assistant, a being known only as the Traveler from Tau Alpha C, is inadvertently responsible for hurtling the ship across the other side of the galaxy. when a return is attempted they are pushed even further beyond into what can only be described as another place or time beyond what we know as space. In this realm thoughts become reality and we get a tantalizing look into Tasha's troubled past on Turkana 4, a pet targ owned by Worf and even a brief glimpse at several crew members fantasies becoming reality. The budget must have been huge for this episode! We also see Picard's dead mother for a moment in a touching scene too. This was an incredibly impressive episode for such a young show! When they realize the Traveler was responsible they unite to help the Traveler through good thoughts and feelings and the Enterprise is returned home. Picard does the proper thing and gives Wesley a commission to Acting Ensign for his help with the Traveler. Interestingly, the Traveler had earlier discussed with Picard Wesley's future would be an interesting one leaving the viewer to wonder what would become of this throughout the rest of the series run...


"Where No One Has Gone Before" (Episode 5, Season 1, Air Date 10/26/87, Stardate 41263.1) engages us in a fantastic journey across the universe and beyond, plus it ponders metaphysical questions of the basis of reality and introduces a new power source -- thought power. Near the end of the episode the characters wonder whether the events were like magic or like a sleigh ride! The episode is memorable and thought provoking, but it mixes a few exotic ideas to make a unique story-brew.

The Enterprise takes on a propulsion expert, Kosinski (and his assistant), who has a record for dramatically improving efficiencies. Riker, Data, and the chief engineer believe Kosinski is a fraud (they tried his calculations in advance and found no improvement). Deanna Troi adds early mystery since she senses nothing from Kosinski's assistant as if he is like empty space. We later learn that the assistant is an alien life form, trading his knowledge for transportation on starships to observe humans. He is called the Traveler and has the ability to travel through space-time (and deeply understand propulsion, energy, and technology). We learn that Wesley Crusher could also have these capacities in time.

The Traveler finds Wesley fascinating since he sees the signs of Traveler type abilities and knowledge in him. During propulsion testing, the Traveler phases in and out of 'our' time or reality and loses control of his powers while looking at Wesley (lost in thought), setting off an accidental burst of speed. The ship hurls across the universe past warp 10 and off our scales of measurement (going 2.7 million miles to M-33).

Kosinski is extremely self confident and conceited. He assures Picard he will just do what he did before to take the Enterprise back. If he can't, then it would take them more than their lifetimes to get back to where they started. But Kosinski is mostly a sham and only his assistant can get them back home. The Traveler tries to get them home, but he is so tired he loses control again and propels the Enterprise to 'where no one has gone before', at least, where no human has gone before. The essence of the new place is thought, so some thoughts a person thinks, can become reality. Wow, what an interesting place! If I could go there, I would create elephants that fly and unicorns that shoot ectoplasm out of their horns! I like the graphics of this odd new dimension or reality (that the Traveler takes them on the second burst of speed).

I'll leave the rest of the plot alone to avoid major spoilers, but the episode includes several other ideas I enjoyed:

(1) Wesley and the Traveler discuss the possibility that space-time and thought 'aren't the separate things they appear to be'. The Traveler asserts that thought is the basis of all reality, that it acts as a propulsive energy, and that knowledge of time, propulsion, and technology gives the Traveler (or Wesley in the future) power to travel to other realities, such as the thought dimension. These are perhaps dangerous thoughts since thoughts have power and our clumsy human minds are not ready to use such power. Like Yoda, the Traveler says we must learn control first.

(2) I like the idea of needing to learn to control our thoughts. It would be interesting if the writers had applied these powers to Data. Data would have more control over his thoughts, unless his neural net is as messy as a human mind. Perhaps humans could control our thoughts better with the help of technology, but it doesn't seem likely we could control them better just by thinking really hard. We would need to evolve better mental faculties first.

(3) One other of the Traveler's ideas has philosophical parallels to panpsychism though, which is the idea that intelligence exists all through nature. David Chalmers even argues that consciousness should be considered a basic property of physics akin to space-time ('The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory'). Galen Strawson argues that panpsychism follows from scientific premises ('Consciousness and Its Place in Nature: Does Physicalism Entail Panpsychism?'). These are not popular views, but popularity doesn't entail truth.

(4) However, panpsychism doesn't usually involve the idea that our thoughts can propel us through space-time, nor magically help a genius understand propulsion and technology. In fact, most contemporary physicists tend to avoid the old Einsteinian way of doing physics with thought experiments and thinking by himself ('The Fabric of the Cosmos: Space, Time, and the Texture of Reality'). And no one has good reason to believe in a thought dimension or thought power. So this idea seems more like magic: train your mind and you will gain power over space, time, and acceleration!

(5) Is Picard's mother a projected memory or a memory embedded in reality? Or is she just Picard's version of her? Is she really 'always with him'? I thought of the movie 'Solaris' here.

(6) The Traveler uses and focuses other human thoughts to intensify his power.

(7) Humans have not been interesting enough to warrant investigation from a Traveler until recently.

(8) Wesley becomes an acting ensign to set him on the Traveler path.

(9) Excitement for scientific discovery runs high (new proto-stars are forming, new thought worlds exist right outside), but safety and getting home takes precedence.

Some later episodes bring back the Traveler ('Journey's End') and panpsychism (such as in 'Haven').

Panpsychism and thought powers aren't clearly stated in the episode and seem more like a sleigh ride as Geordi suggests. Maybe it's Star Trek's way of getting around the illegitimacy of ESP in today's scientific world. But this episode was so fantastical, and mixed enough with scientific excitement for new discoveries, that it solidly held my interest.


A very beautiful film by master Ingmar Bergman. Four women, all sisters-in-law, await their husbands in a house on an island. They converse, and soon begin to tell each other the big stories of their lives. The first tells how she had an affair with her teenage sweetheart and how her husband reacts. The second tells of how she was seduced and became pregnant. And the third tells about how she once got her husband to admit his philandering when they were stuck in an elevator. Meanwhile, in the framing episode, a younger sister of one of the women has fallen in love with the fourth brother. The first and third stories are a little cliched, especially the elevator sequence, but they're still quite great. Being trapped in an elevator is a nice, easy, and overused way for two characters to solve problems, but the dialogue between Gunnar Bjornstrand and Eva Dahlbeck is so excellent that it works out wondefully. The heart of the film is in the second story. It's so simple and well-done, so utterly beautiful in its conception and execution. It is, of course, a flashback, like the other two stories, but the story itself is also told in flashbacks. It works far better than I would have ever guessed. Secrets of Women is an underrated Bergman film, a must-see for any fan. 9/10.


I love this movie; although not amongst Bergman's best, it is very funny in parts and should not be shunned. Maybe slightly overlong - each time I watch it I wait impatiently for the lift-scene near the end of the film - but very much worthwhile. Indeed, the scene in the lift with Gunnar Bjornstrand (great actor) and Eva Dahlberg is fascinating, funny and frivolous - for the year it was made.


While this movie was not exactly earth-shaking, it was a well-made film that held my attention. It's about 4 lady friends who are waiting for their husbands to meet them at their summer retreat. While waiting, they begin to tell their innermost secrets about their marriages--particularly the details of boredom or infidelity. The most memorable one of these is the final segment with the husband and wife stuck in the elevator, though they all were well acted and interesting. Those who are great fans of the later depressing work of Bergman may find this movie a bit of a letdown, it should appeal to those in the audience who want greater depth in the plot without the hopelessness that accompanies many later Bergman films.