...but rather just a list of movies that the filmmakers wanted to parody, strung together by the weakest plot in film history and a lot of unfunny jokes.

You would think that the team responsible for the mess of a movie that was Date Movie would at least have learned something from their last film to help them avoid the same mistakes, but they didn't.

It would appear they spent more time making parodies as visually accurate as they could and spent almost no time trying to make the film entertaining. Some of the parodies seem completely out of place and don't even fit into what little plot there is.

I couldn't recommend this film to anyone, not even those I hated.


Seriously people, i wasn't expecting much from this and i didn't get much. I at least expected a few laughs from it but i never got it. I think they let five year olds write the script for this crap. Very, very cliché spoof film, you could tell what was coming the whole way through (with a few stupid exceptions). They seriously need to stop spoof movies, i thought you couldn't get any worse than Scary Movie 4 but i was wrong. Writing a spoof takes no talent what so ever, just copy everyones ideas and "try" to make them funny. Now i could go on all day about how bad this movie is but I'm afraid i must go, everyone do yourself a favour, do not see this rubbish.


Some movies are funny, some are not. This movie may be funny to you, if you liked Date Movie, since both films are pretty much the same in cast and script quality.

Epic Movie is a loosely strung together collection of slap-stick comedy sketches based on various epic movies (Pirates of the Caribbean, Nacho Libre, Chronicles of Narnia, X-Men, Superman, etc...) so it's probably helpful if you have seen a few of the epics this movie takes off at, to understand the jokes used. (If you've seen the clips during MTV video awards, you get the idea on the kind of jokes I'm referring to). Epic Movie tries to cash in on the Scary Movie, Date Movie, "Movie" Movie franchise, but doesn't measure up to the originality shown in the Scary Movie series.

It doesn't take a genius to recommend that you save your box-office ticket money, and if you're interested, wait for the DVD, since this isn't an essential big screen movie.


Alright, it wasn't that bad, but it was close. Sure the Scary Movie series as well as Date Movie were stupid and juvenile, but this is dumber than all the rest. There were a few chuckles, but overall it was mostly me groaning. Nearly every joke was tired and lame. They gave away all the "good" jokes in the trailer. Why Fred Willard and Jennifer Coolidge would be in this I have no idea. But Crispin Glover? The oddball actor who was so great in films like Back to the Future, River's Edge What's Eating Gilbert Grape and more? Yeah that's him all right, as Willy Wonka dancing around to crappy songs. So maybe my title was accurate.


Epic Movie (2007) is total crap, no beating around the bush here, it was so bad it actually angered me that i paid to view this turkey and i wanted a refund, i felt cheated, the only reason i didn't cause a fuss at the cinema was the fact that something very funny happened...... a singing chant started in the audience (of about 12 people), and it went something like this, why are we watching, why are we watching, why are we watchinggggg this piece of CRAP!!!! I didn't have a clue what was going on, the 'script' was idiotic, the actors were totally lame and annoying and the jokes were pathetic and UNFUNNY, how this ever made it to the silver screen i'll never know.

I advise anyone who's thinking of going to see this piece of JUNK, to stay well clear and save their money, thank you and GOODNIGHT! 0/10


You know those movies where if you've seen the trailer, you've seen all the good parts? I felt that way while watching this film. I don't typically expect much from crappy spoof movies, but I at least expect them to try. This came off as too much of a bad Saturday Night Live or Mad TV sketch that runs on way too long. A number of SNL's movies have felt that way, but really....

Why can't they ever pick _good_ "two of the six writers from Scary Movie"? I feel like I've seen this brand of dumb humor a million times before, albeit much better presented. I don't mind abstract references that would seemingly change the storyline (the four protagonists becoming part of Wonka's candy, but seconds later reverting to normal, for example), but these "Family Guy" style cutaways were so poorly done, it almost made me want to leave. I felt genuinely ripped off, longing for satires like Spy Hard, Last Action Hero, and Spaceballs. A friend and I debated whether this film or Scary Movie 4 was worse. We agreed it was a tie.

The first two Scary Movies were funny because they didn't let the flat parts slow them down. Scary Movie 2 contained a number of bad jokes, but it was okay because the filmmakers had a general idea of where they wanted to take the "story", and at least made a concentrated effort to tone down the absurdist humor in places where it wasn't needed.

Epic Movie temporarily halts the predictable, unfunny jokes close to the end of the film, when Kal Penn (who made two Harold and Kumar references, also falling quite flat, even amongst the largely tweenage audience) spells out the film's moral--a sappy and poorly placed monologue on the importance of family. The repetitive use of the word "Bitch" to refer to the antagonist, played by Jennifer Coolidge ("Stiffler's mother" in American Pie, a point also mentioned) got tiring. I will admit there were a few laugh-worthy moments, notably in the name of Jack Sparrow's parody, Jack Swallows. The actors were all fairly devoid of talent (especially that kid from the MySpace movie, playing Ashton Kutcher), and the directing seemed nonexistent.

Seeing the trailer is a bit of a spoiler as well, as you can tell when certain parts are coming up, effectively ruining the humor. Plus, the trailer has all the reasonably funny moments. It feels as if they directed the rest of the film as merely filler between the points showcased in the preview. I'm honestly not sure whether this review is in fact spoiling anything, because the trailer does a pretty good job of that on its own.

My recommendation: don't see it in theaters. Don't rent it. Don't even watch it on TV when nothing else is on. Forget it was even made. Trust me, you're not missing anything.


This movie was really really bad. Forgive the pun, but it was epically bad. I went to the movie to fill time between some business I was conducting in New York and my flight that was leaving at 7pm.. I had several hours to kill.

There are no good scenes in this movie. I think I laughed at one joke within the first 5 or 10 minutes. The plot (if you could actually say there was one) was so stupid that it borders on the criminal. Anyone (actor, writer, director, or producer) should be jailed for 1 year for participating in the production of this film.

I would provide spoilers for this movie, but that would mean there is something worth spoiling.

I actually felt embarrassed for the actors. I had to leave after 30 minutes. For the first 20 minutes I thought to myself.. "this just can't be.. a movie that looks like it was filmed using one camera in a decorated high school auditorium".. "there's got to be a joke somewhere".. but alas, at the 30th minute, I could no longer justify wasting my life. The movie just never happened.

I want my $11.00 back Hollywood! Stop defrauding the public!!


In fact, counting holes in the ceiling would be healthier for your brain cells than this. The ceiling's holes would show more creativity and humor than the script of this film, and they would act better than the people in it, too. I'd compare this thing to the foul smell of a rotten egg, but it's worse than that. The talentless Friedberg & Seltzer are back from their Date Movie debacle with more trashy, unfunny "spoofs". For example, a bullet bounced off of Superman's eye in his movie; now, the bullet pokes his eye out. Gee is that original and hilarious or what? Not a single joke works, and the only surprise of this movie is that these two hacks keep getting funding to produce flop after flop.

This is just so painfully bad. If you ever find a lost DVD of this movie somewhere, leave it there. It's not worth the effort to pick it up.


Save your money! Save your eyes and ears the indignity of watching or hearing this film. Any jokes they thought up were one-liners, which were promptly turned into entire scenes or musical numbers, thereby killing both ideas stone dead.

The sound cut out at the showing I saw. Strangely, this made the experience less appalling for about ten minutes as we didn't have to hear the awful dialogue - the audience were coming up with better jokes themselves.

The studio would be best advised to release a single DVD of this, and microwave it.


The endless rap jokes go on and on because the idiotic writers cant be bothered to think of anything else. They like to think that if they take a famous children's character and make him a cannibal they will get loads of laughs. Everyone just sits in the cinema trying to get up so they can walk out. It takes good writers to pull off sick humour with it being funny and not just plain rubbish, and obviously the "2 of the 6 retarded writers for scary movie" didn't have a clue. There were 2 parts that i can remember that made me smile.... and 200 that didn't. No wonder you can see it on you tube..... It hasn't been taken down yet, because no one cares about it. The main cast of it were sluts dancing around in bikinis which they thought would make them cool. Please don't pay to see this, don't let the scary movie people get their perverted hands on your money.


I wasn't expecting much when I paid for my ticket to see this film, however this was the first time I actually considered leaving the theatre in the middle of a film because it was so bad.

The main issue about this film is originality. This movie is merely a re-shoot of all the films it parodies with different actors. There is no originality in the script, the writers seemed to just bundle a whole heap of scripts of the movies they were parodying together and added childish slapstick bits here and there along with repetitive MTV references that never varied. This made the film boring.

The main parody of the film is The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe. Those who have seen the film want to see a clever parody not to see every scene in the film re-enacted by terrible actors. If the movie had been any longer than 90 minutes I swear I could have shot myself.

The film also recycles old jokes used in other terrible Friedman and Seltzerparodies. For example, Peter, Edward, Susan and Lucy are meant to be siblings and have the same parents yet are portrayed as a mix of black and white actors. This joke was used in the abysmal Date Movie, as the biological family consisted of a black father, Indian mother,and white and Chinese daughters. This joke was not funny in either of the films.

Not Only does the film recycle old jokes from previous parodies but also recycles jokes within the movie, Jayma Mays kicking the beaver wasn't funny the first time, so why do it again.

I just hope Friedman and Seltzer run out of genres to make films about.

The film does nothing but expand on the trailer, I recommend that if you want to see the film, watch the trailer and save the money you would've spent on the movie ticket.


Worst film EVER! I understand that this film is similar to Scary Movie, however Scary Movie has at least some funny parts, where as Epic Movie is just terrible. The acting is poor, no story line (...even though I knew that there was not going to be much of one), the script was shocking and the jokes, which the film all about, simply NOT FUNNY. I'm not sure if my expectations are set too high after watching "HOT FUZZ" (which is amazing by the way) but it didn't make me laugh. For the first time ever I have tried to get my money back from the cinema and believe me I have seen some bad films but this took the biscuit. Please don't waste your money on this film and encourage more.


I am a HUGE fan of spoof movies. Naked Gun series, Fatal Instinct, Wrongfully Accused, Scary Movie series, Date Movie, and Not Another Teen Movie are all movies I watch on a regular basis. According to the commercials, this was going to be another one to add to my collection.....WRONG!!!! I was so disgusted. I kept waiting for a payoff, something, anything. It was so flat, even the actors seemed embarrassed. Obviously the studio was planning on hyping the movie knowing that the first weekend is all the movie was going to have. Yes, there were a few (and I do mean a few) funny parts, but this entire movie could have been condensed into a MadTV skit that would have been just perfect. I literally fell asleep during the movie. Now, how many people do you know that fall asleep during a "comedy"? I absolutely will not be attending another movie from these guys until after the first few weekends. I know if you were like me you would have to go see it for yourself and make your own determination, but please, I beg you, do not see this movie, do not buy or rent the DVD. If we support garbage like this, they will continue to rush out these terrible movies hoping that dopes like me will rush out on opening day to see them. We need to send a message. I know they made the entire investment back the first weekend, but good god almighty.


Yes, I knew it would be stupid. But stupid CAN be funny. I won't go into depth about just how stupid and unfunny it was; i don't want to restate the obvious. The snake is eating its own tail when it comes to these spoofs. However, there are some things I expected to get from this movie other than laughs:

1. Impersonations of at least "Saturday Night Live" quality (not that that's asking too much). -Um. No. This movie even made Darrell Hammond look like an amateur (and I think he's a pretty gifted comedian). What the heck was up with 'Samuel L. Jackson'?

2. Topicality. The previews showed scenes borrowed from some pretty recent flicks. -Er... Punk'd? Scarface? 'I just saved money on my car insurance'? What, no Tom Cruise jumping on a couch?

3. Touchstone cameos by 'real' celebrities, ala Dr. Phil in Scary Movie 4. -Nope. Nada. Zilch. Unless you count Crispin Glover doing a bad Johnny Depp doing a bad Johnny De... wait, see, I told you these spoofs were eating their tails.

4. Alright, I'll admit it, I expected LAUGHS. STUPID laughs, but SOMETHING!!!! Where there ANY laughs? -I did chuckle at some of Jayma Mays' (Lucy) reactions. I'd like to see her in another movie. Any other movie. Any OTHER movie.

Okay, I've officially wasted enough of my life on this stupid, pointless, sub-Date Movie flick. I resolve never to speak of it again.


...because it saved me the price of an entrance ticket. I'm not entirely entitled posting here because I turned it of after about half an hour. Just for saving my brains of getting any more damaged. Besides that, when I look out of my window, I see a HUGE wall which was more interesting.

After I deleted this movie, I got an email from my own PC. It was something like "If you ever download sh*t like that again, I'll blow myself up"

I really want to tell something more, but the only thing is the warning that this movie is more damaging for you then smoking. Sadly, the rating does not go below 1.


Sort of funny, but mostly only if you've watched the films it takes off. Even then, the parody element isn't that strong. Rather, they're more like "cameo jokes" in which the gag is getting the movie reference. That said, some gags like those relating to harry Potter and Wonka's factory, are spot on.

Another problem with the film is the ending. Ideally, as the main characters exit Gnarnia back to the interior of Willy's factory, it would have been funnier if we'd encountered Willy once gain, with some gag related to Gnarnia. But, it was not to be.

Yes, I laughed, but a repeat viewing would probably be very flat.


The movie was very bad, it poked fun at religion, several sexual oriented and suggestive scenes. I do not recommend for any child to watch this movie the parents will be left to explain a lot to the children and the child will be exposed to a lot of suggestive, ignorant content. I do not recommend a person waste their money on this. I was expecting this movie to be hysterical and fun to see, but instead I was disappointed and bored. I only laughed at a few parts and I left the movie disappointed. The vulgar language was annoying and I heard other people who went to see the movie discuss how disappointed they were as well. I do not recommend this movie, it was a disappointment and not funny at all just boring, stupid and offensive. Fairwarning, I am going to tell you a spoiler so don't read beyond this point...

The movie is basically The Chronicles of Narnia just redone to incorporate other movies such as the x-men, Harry Potter, Pirates of the Carebbean, the Divinchi Code and more. This was not funny and a complete disappointment and focused on sex and made fun of religion.


Wow...just wow. This movie was just terrible. I walked out half way through the movie, as did a few other people in the theater. Very few parts were remotely funny, and most of them were from the freaking trailer! The best parts came from Darrel Hammond as Jack Swallows, and even those weren't amazing. Nothing saved this movie. I should have learned after to Date Movie that these were the two worst writers from Scary Movie, but I didn't. I mean, for all the people in there, kids especially(which I don't understand why) how many got the inside jokes in the movie about Harold and Kumar? I'm not that many of the people in that theater had seen that movie. I really would expect more from such actors as Crispin Glover. I mean, I remember seeing him for the first time in Back to the Future when I was little, and now this? I mean, Wilird wasn't great but it was better then this. And seriously, Kal Penn, who has a pretty decent name in Hollywood already did this? I think hes hilarious, but not in this. This in an Epic waste of time and money. I wasted ten bucks on this piece of trash! Don't do the same! Be warned, this is an Epic Disaster!


When we saw the previews to this, we thought, wow, that looks really funny! Well, guess what? All the funny stuff was in the previews!! And sadly, these previews were probably the only parts of the movie that could be shown on TV. This movie was raunchy, rude, disgusting and just plain foul. I suppose if that is your sense of humor, then it will go over very well for you. However, for me, it was all in very bad taste. I wasn't one bit surprised when the family in front of us with 3 young boys under the age of 13 left the theater about 15 minutes after the film started. This was certainly not intended to be a kid's movie. I don't even think I would let a teenager watch this one. It took one of the best kid's movies ever made and turned it into a nightmare. We felt it was so bad that we immediately had to go see another movie to get the bad taste out of our mouths and the horrible images out of our heads. Parents BEWARE! This is not an appropriate movie for anyone under the age of 21!! And even then, I wouldn't suggest it. For those of you who actually liked this movie - I feel sorry for you and your sense of humor!


right, well. I work in a cinema and we get staff screenings of films. So I thought to all who are wanting to see it ( Australians, unless it's still not released else-where) To do something constructive with the time you would spend with this film. I just got home from it and I can safely say it's one of the worst films I've EVER seen, if not THE worst.

The good. Slightly funny references to MTV & Pop culture.

The bad. It's a disgrace to the classic and or brilliant films we all enjoy. Boring Predictable, as a parody film usually is. un-original silly the humor is just pointless use of 'slap-stick' , lame sexual humor, and manipulating other films in a predictable way. A Waste of time. The Villon / 'bady' of the film's name is the white bitch of Gnarnia, originating from the white witch of Narnia. Congrats guys, you can think of words that rhyme! It's not even bad enough to laugh at. In comparison to another bad film, Snakes on a plane, was humorous as it was so poorly done. This however is just lame.

Rating 1/10 ( There was no 0 option)


It's disappointing enough to see Jennifer Coolidge and Fred Willard in this turd (I missed the Crispin Glover as Willie Wonka) but it's a severe disappointment to see Kal Penn in this, who'd recently starred in the thoughtful and, well, epic THE NAMESAKE. This is a rather extreme step down from that movie. Heck, this is a step down from HAROLD & KUMAR, which is was amusing and entertaining. IPECACE, sorry, EPIC MOVIE is just epic trash. Penn and the others named couldn't have been in this for anything more than the paycheck.

It's almost inconceivable that this was even meant to be funny. Almost as if the aim was to make a purposely unfunny movie and see who would be dumb enough to laugh. Just RELENTLESSLY unfunny.


Wow. I only have one question...should I call 'this' a movie?? No, I'm being serious. In fact, this totally counts as a pathetic attempt to a funny Scary Movie re-run which was homemade by a bunch of mindless wanna-be-director nerds. I totally agree with it's abysmal 2-star IMDb rating but I fail to understand why it's not in the Bottom 100. Everything about this movie is stupid. The gags were hideous. Not a single point in the movie that I actually found them funn...er..'funny'. But (suprisingly) I actually found one thing funny about this movie. It's the attempts for laughter. The film makers spent like a year pointlessly trying to whip up laughable script jokes to entertain the audience, when in the actual film, they ended up not delivering. How dumb?! And the film characters that they were 'trying' to mock! Narnia, Harry Potter, Pirates of the Caribbean?! I mean come on!! You're just mocking yourselves! Overall, I'll sum it up by saying the film makers wasted a year of their life trying to make this junk and every bad word in this word describes how lame this movie is. One of the worst films I've ever seen. Epic Movie? Should be called Epic Failure!


OK, I just saw this crap on German TV. I expected a mindless and moderately funny comedy, kind of perfect after a hard days work.

Unfortunately, this movie isn't even unintentionally funny. You can't even laugh about how bad it is, because the repetitive 'gags', the randomly stuck together scenes and the dialogues are just plain dull. Boring. I laughed exactly four times throughout the whole movie, which is a rather bad quote for a comedy.

The main problem is that although the imitations of the original movies are rather well executed and the famous-actor-look-alikes really look similar to their counterparts, the directors somehow confused simple references to famous movies with being funny. Their interpretation of a gag consists mainly of people/animals getting hit, preferably in the crotch. Gets pretty dull after the, erm, 20th time? In conclusion, the movie is so boring it's not even worth watching it for making fun of it. Doesn't work, just a wast of time. Really.

PS: As this movie was a box-office success (!), expect more of this crap in near future. Which probably will become another success due to a huge marketing campaign... Idiocracy coming to life?!


This film is kind of like loads of other films but in one.

They had no good idea so they decide to try and make other good films funny but failing.

I watched about 30 minutes of this film and then turned it off. Was the worst film and attempt of a comedy I've ever seen.

I don't recommend this film. A lame cast too.

It's similar to Scary Movie. Lots of films in one, but it's not as funny, not as good cast, it's pathetic and rubbish. It should be a crime for it to be called "Epic Movie" as it the opposite of the title.

If you want to waste 80 minutes of your life, you could at least find a better film. This film isn't even worth the rental.


Please make Jason Friedberg & Aaron Seltzer stop doing movies. Forever.

I've had it with them trying to ride on the "Scary Movie"'s success wave.

According to how awful their last 3 movies are, its pretty obvious that the "Scary Movie"'s films were a success thanks to the Wayans brothers, and not this pathetic duo...

Watching their movies is worst than torture.

When I've watched this movie, I had no idea how bad its going to be, right into the first 5 minutes. When it reached the 15th minute mark, its gotten so unbearable that me and my friend, who was watching it with me, just decide to stop it right there and play another one instead.


The Scary Movies weren't great...but they were okay. Date Movie was stupid. Epic Movie was the largest pile of junk I have ever seen.

I actually expected something when I saw that Kal Penn (he was in one of my favorite comedies, Harold and Kumar Go To White Castle) so I viewed it. I only laughed one time the whole film. It was not even a movie.

It had no plot-line. They just randomly spat out movie jokes that were so corny that they could not be considered jokes. This is not along the lines of the great Airplane, which actually delivered good spoofs.

This film spoofs X-Men, The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, and Harry Potter. I have seen clips of Ulli Lomell films that were better, his new films at least. Please don't watch this.


The spoof movie was started in the hilarious AIRPLANE!, the trend continued with THE NAKED GUN and TOP SECRET, those were funny movies, it has since turned itself into a horrible, money controlled scheme to take peoples hard earned cash.

EPIC MOVIE (about as epic as a kindergarten play), is and I'm going to emphasize it as hard as I possibly could a horrible, horrible, HORRRIBLE movie. I actually got a headache watching this piece of crap. It makes PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE look like POLTERGEIST, JAWS, PSYCHO and THE SHINING'S greatness combined.

None of that hasn't bee said before. But let me tell you this film is about as funny as a funeral. No worse, as funny as going to prison. The film tries to rely on it's "jokes", which are no better then fart and poop jokes. My 5-year old cousin could've wrote a better script.

so, in another words, only watch this if someone else's life in is danger.


This is another film my husband promised me was going to be fun. He's got this perverse idea that badly made movies = fun. I can tell you from experience, it's agony.

This time, he didn't have a leg to stand on. This film was bad from start to finish. It appeared to have been made for preteen boys by preteen boys. Strip a few girls down to a bikini and have them parade around. Throw in some vomit jokes. Add some fart jokes. I can't believe a major studio thought this was a great idea.

I can honestly say that I didn't laugh once during the whole movie, but neither did my husband. That was funny enough for one star.


This was the worst damn movie I've ever seen! So I gave it a 2. It was funny, not because of the dialouge, but the dinosaur. It's so awful all the way through. The film at the begining looks it could be used in a travel video. They use 1985 stock footage of helicopters and raids that have the date and time in the top corner too. The dinosaur on the otherhand is the best part. When he takes to the pot from the helicopter all you see is a big green crudley made glove come up and grab at some green stuff in a toy net. IT'S AWESOME! If you're a fan of these horribly bad movies then this a treat, but good luck finding it. I'd feel sorry for you if actually did come across it. so so so so sorry oh yea, "trog"


In high school some friends and I were cruising Blockbuster and we stumbled into the narrow "Other" section, where my eyes set on a movie called "Ganjasaurus Rex". On the spine of the box, under "Genre", some jaded employee entered "BAD". Needless to say, we rented it.

The "plot" of this "movie" involves a six-foot inflatable dinosaur that terrorizes stoned hikers for their pot. For about half the movie, the date and time are in the corner of the frame, betraying the filmmakers' use of a friggin' CAMCORDER! Funny to laugh at (not with), but the absurdity loses its appeal pretty quick.


Alright, maybe I shouldn't have expected much from a film called "Anita: Swedish Nymphet". Still, I was very disappointed by this Swedish softcore romp. The only reason why I watched it was because of Christina Lindberg. I'm a big fan of "Thriller: A Cruel Picture" (which remains the single greatest Swedish exploitation film of all time) and Mrs. Lindberg was truly revelatory in that. Shes hotter than all hell, combining a childlike face with a truly voluptuous body. In addition to being a major babe, shes a pretty decent actress as well. She can create sympathy and lend depth to her often depraved characters.

With a title like "Anita: Swedish Nymphet", I was hoping Lindberg would appear naked a lot. Unfortunately, the film seems to want to create a serious study of "nymphomania", a symptom which has largely been proved to be nonexistent. So a lot of screen time is devoted to pseudo-academic talk and character exposition. If I would any of the characters remotely interesting, this could be bearable. However, the film becomes largely dull - it should have injected some life into the proceedings, gone over the top, and become a campy softcore romp. As it is, it isn't even good for unintended laughs.

Still, the film is worth watching for Lindberg. When she does get naked, you can't take your eyes off the screen. Also, she does a good job with an uninteresting character. The film is worth watching if you were a fan of her work in "Thriller: A Cruel Picture", but don't be expecting too much. (4/10)


This is yet another entry in the DVD called "The Animation Show, Volume 3" that features a too-mean edge, an unfunny and unpleasant short film with an extremely heavy-handed agenda.

Five practical lessons for self-defense are explained by a narrator after we see mild-mannered "George" brutally attacked in an alley. George is an innocent, almost naive man who rarely makes it to the city, we learn, so was unaware that is such a dangerous play. How to help a nice man like George? Teach him how to protect himself! The five practical lessons are "Diplomacy," "Make A Plan," "God Is On Your Side," "Technology" and "Preemptive Self Defense."

Unfortunately, a fair portion of this animated short are left wing cheap shots by an obvious atheist who tells us - and graphically shows it - that "wrong + wrong + wrong + wrong + God = right." He also makes fun of people who think that God will always protect them if they are good people, intentionally misquotes Scripture, saying "Well, something like that" regarding a verse, totally twisting it, and gives us a few other of these kind remarks.

It's also sad to see how mean-spirited some of these "creative" filmmakers are, but the real agenda of this film - the bottom line - came in the last minute - it's another George Bush-bashing cartoon, as "George" is pictured as a cowboy with an itchy trigger finger now, just killing everyone in sight and enjoying it. The implication is more than obvious. Wow! Michael Moore and other left-wing extremists would love this little film!


The commenter from Walla Walla got it right. The Joe Besser stooges shorts are masterpieces by comparison to this total waste of film. It's not even remotely funny or even amusing. Instead of laughing, I was angry at someone as minimally talented (and I am being nice) as Ted Healy beating up on my stooges. Talk about a third rate comic, this guy is worse than that. I guess they had to start somewhere. Maybe they were all funny on the vaudeville stage together, but they were not in this thing. Stay the heck away from this film. It is not worth wasting 20 minutes of your life. I'm not even going to mention where I saw it to spare you the pain.


Man this movie short is so bad that even a Joe Besser short with the Three Stooges is much better than this except maybe the horrible Besser shorts, I just don't want to imagine if this was the first Three Stooges film I've ever watched, stay away unless if you're a hardcore stooge fan. 1.5/10


I'm giving this 2 stars (rather than 1) since it is so bad that it bounced off the bottom of the scale and began heading towards the entertaining end of the spectrum again. I must admit, I only caught the last 45 minutes and while I was working on my laptop but most older viewers will only need minimal conscious facility to assimilate this movie. Younger viewers should probably only view it in the company of an adult that can explain it's pure fiction originating from a time of scientific ignorance.

One of the many departures from the biblical version is that Noah Danza wants God to give him a little more time before the flood so he can attend his son's basketball match. What joy can these idiots get from competing with and beating a bunch of people they believe will soon be drowned? And surely the hypothetical God entity is scratching its heads at this point and wondering whether this smug little bunch of monkeys really needs to be saved. In the end the story is cowed by modern sensibilities and Danza gets everyone in town on board, they have a bit of a float, and God pulls the rainbow out of its infinity of posteriors.

Of course this version retains all of the scientific corruption of the original fable vis-a-vis global flooding and loading of animals two by two. Why make any concessions to conservation of biomass when you can't breed up a viable population from two individuals anyway? We are told God created the whole lot in a day to start with. Surely it can crank them all out again post-flood. Maybe it had already blown its creative budget and wouldn't be back up to full world building strength for a few millennia.

Its sad and pathetic but still rather humorous watching the film makers trying to co-opt the religion of the Jews as they cram Old Testament harshness into modern American Fairyland. The story of the Ark was gibberish to begin with but after so many transformations its just ludicrous. They may as well just stand before the camera for two hours shrieking and making faces. Production costs would be lower. Then again, as has been intimated by an earlier poster, perhaps not that much lower.


Light entertainment which might have you smiling from time to time; all so implausible, the world of make-believe. Even the actors appear not to be acting, but just playing at acting. Easy-going so as to keep children happy, but most certainly if only about 7 years old, or if you are 97 years old and want to sleep for a while. A far-fetched fantasy for over-anxious minds, perhaps, and I cannot really believe that anybody concerned with making this film could have taken anything even slightly seriously. However, if the planet keeps on warming up, and rainstorms continue getting worse, who knows whether in the next twenty years you will be building ships in your garden in Dakota? It is worth thinking about.


I'm never sure what this movie is trying to be, or what point it is trying to make. Different ideas start, but there is no finish. Why did Norman Waters have to build the ark? What did his wife's death have to do with it? What was the point of this movie? Poor writing, amateur acting. Sorry, I like Tony Danza, but this movie got a "1" rating from me.


Why are there only WASPs on this ark? Where are the African, the Asian and all the other people? It occurs to me, that this film implies a racist latency, because only white men are saved from the Flood.

Also the Special effects look like a 20 year old computer game. I wonder also, why such rubbish is dubbed, while really good movies are only subtitled in Germany.

Here you can also see, that Tony Danza slowly is going south. Perhaps he was all the time there.

So the movie is maybe something for right-winged Christians, for all the others a really embarrassing play.


(Spoilers) Strangely made movie thats so badly acted that it comes across as a movie worthy to be classified with such bad movie epics as "Plan Nine from Outer Space" and "Manos: The Hands of Fate". In fact the film actually has a piece of music thats straight out of the soundtrack of the film "Plan Nine from Outer Space" that was released a year after, in 1959, in it.

Wango, as well as Goona, were islands created by Mother Nature back some 10,000 years ago where the men of Womgo were boorish brutes and the women were gorgeous babes and in the case of the people on the island of Noona the men were Greek Gods and the women were homely wallflowers.This made dating romance and marriage among the young couples of Wongo and Goona an act of duty rather then an act of love.

This all changes when one of the young men of Goona, the son of that islands king,traveled to Wongo by canoe to get the men of both islands to united against an invasion of ape-men from another island. The women of Wongo seeing the handsome Goonaien went ape over him which lead the jealous men of Wongo plan to kill him before he left the island. This was foiled by the Wongo women when they prevented their men from murdering the handsome Noona man which had them kicked out of the island by their man-folks.

Meanwhile, out of camera range, the ape-men attack Wongo and kill and scatter the men there leaving them to wounder through the forests and waterways to Goona. Back in Noona The men are given, through trial and fire, their chance to prove their manhood by their elders by being thrown out of their village and into the jungle without their spears to protect themselves. This leaves them open to be captured by the armed Amazon-like Women of Wongo and taken as slaves back to their island, which seems to have been abandoned by the invading ape-men.

At Goona the men of Wongo, who are lost in the woods, run into the women of Goona and the both boorish and homely men and women hit it on and fall head over heels in love with each other. The story ends with both the Men of Goona and Women of Wongo falling in love with each other as the Women of Goona and Men of Wongo did earlier. They all live happily ever after with Mother Nature as usual correcting herself from the mistake she made when she at first created the incompatible, to each other, men and women of Wongo and Goona. As for the invading ape-men? they must have gotten lost in the woods and were never seen or heard from again.


I think that if Ed Wood were alive today or could make his complaints felt from beyond this mortal coil, he'd be haunting the Medved Brothers who dared not include The Wild Women Of Wongo in their list of the 50 Worst Films. Next to this Plan Nine From Outer Space plays like Citizen Kane.

This story is set on the mythical islands of Wongo and Guna and it seems as though the gene pool has played one dirty trick. The men of Wongo look like the inbreds from Deliverance and the women like playboy bunnies. On the other hand in Guna land, the men are these gorgeous beach boy surfer hunks and the women look like someone left the pound door open one night.

Both islands worship the crocodile god and the croc demands some sacrifices every so often. When one of the Wongo women actually subdues and kills the crocodile god, the theological implications are cataclysmic.

There are some hairy ape men like creatures who invade both the islands and it takes a while for them to come to a common plan of alliance.

That's about the sum and substance of this awful film which was shot in the Everglades on location. This film must have been a great after midnight third feature in the drive-ins when folks could look at the Guna men and Wongo women if they needed a little extra inspiration for the night's fun.

There's a parrot who serves as a kind of Greek chorus to all the silly goings on and when the parrot gives the best acting performance in the film, you KNOW how bad this is going to be.


I have this theory: This movie was made by... aliens. Aliens who have been observing and studying us since the dawn of mankind. And then, somewhere in the late 50's they made this movie to laugh at us and mock our mating rituals as well as our religious beliefs. This piece of drivel cannot have been made by us, humans. It's simply unthinkable. Several aspects of this movie have fed my suspicion. For one thing, the aliens clearly have their own techniques of developing pellicule. They call it "Pathecolor", as described in the movie's opening-credits. And until 1958 it was unseen by human eyes. You see, "Pathecolor" geniously messes up ALL color-patterns on the final print.

Then I"m also convinced that the aliens abducted some 50's femalien to do the voice-over for this movie (as she sounds totally spaced-out). I suspect they also used her voice to provide ALL the other actors and actresses with dubbed voices (adding some treble & bass tunes in post-production, as well as pitching her voice down a bit for male characters), as ALL cast members speak in this same monotonous type of voice.

Other forms of alien technology I seem to have spotted in this movie (And keep in mind that this movie takes place in the prehistoric age... Well, either that or in an alternate universe):

-- Automated menhirs which rotate sideways to provide hidden passages.

-- Synthetic, seemingly lifeless lizards used as an arm bracelet-like ornament.

-- An on-location set, probably build on some distant planet, featuring a prehistoric settlement on a beach, which strangely resembles a nowadays holiday resort somewhere on the Bahama's.

-- And talking parrots in the Stone-Age? That's gotta be alien technology too!

So what else do we have...? The Wongo tribe, featuring gorgeous-looking, scarcely clothed women and some dominating men. The Goona tribe, with damn ugly-looking women and gentle, respectful men. A Wongo High-Priestess/shape-shifting Goddess kinda babe. A great Godly Dragon that looks suspiciously enough like a blue (there you have it: "Pathecolor"!) crocodile made out of plastic. Suppposedly this movie also was to feature a tribe of vicious, warmongering Ape Men, but due to some strange, probably outer-space logic, we only get to see two of them, who even get ripped to shreds by some very green-looking ("Pathecolor" again) crocodile.

I also learned one or two things while watching this movie:

-- Women are foolish objects. You should treat them as such.

-- All women crave for sex. And sex back then was pretty much the same as now: First you kiss, then you do the bongo-bongo.

-- Pre-historic women wear make-up.

-- Pre-historic Ape-Men also wear make-up.

-- An angry fat woman screaming is the scariest sight to behold on the face of this earth.

The most amazing sequence of this movie is undoubtedly this one: All the women of Wongo reach ecstasy when the High-Priestess performs her pagan Dance of the Dragon-God. Then all the women join this hot and steamy dance-routine. While beholding this on-screen choreographic extravaganza, I was thinking that the director must have slipped a mixture of some LSD and amphetamines in the actresses's coffee... What else could bring them to giving such an amazing performance? And I'll be damned if it doesn't even get better after that. Afterwards all of them get completely naked and go skinny-dipping. Best way to cool off after some ecstatic dancing! But that's not all... Our blond cutie-pie leading lady even gets into some heavy underwater-wrestling with some real alive-looking, although clearly heavily drugged, alligator.

And then the ending... The final shots of the movie are simply UN-BE-LIE-VA-BLE! All the couples start winking while looking STRAIGHT into the camera! And some of them aren't even very skilled at it, as they look like if some mentally challenged person (no offense, please) would try to pull it off! Unbelievable... And then there is one more final shot of that annoying talking parrot, and the movie ends... GRRRR... Will somebody please SHOOT THAT DAMNED PARROT! He lasts throughout the whole movie, gets way too much screen time, and at the end he STILL lives!

Aliens, man... I'm telling you: Aliens made this movie...

Oh well, whatever... This truly is an AMAZING piece of film. And the 50's were just WARPED! To some this will be insufferable crap, to others perhaps a hilarious masterpiece. But be cautious when going into this one... some male persons easily susceptible to brain-damage might end up repeating the line "Me man! Me want to bongo-bongo with Wongo women!" for the rest of their days (yes, including the whole drooling-part).


When you're writing about a movie as brutally bad as The Wild Women of Wongo, going through an elaborate plot description seems somehow completely unnecessary. So, very briefly, the movie is about the tribe of Wongo where the women are beautiful, but the men aren't. They meet the Goona tribe where the men are beautiful, but he women aren't. It doesn't take a clairvoyant to see where this is headed. Throw in some of the worst acting imaginable, a sub-plot about ape men that goes nowhere, a laughably ridiculous dance sequence, and a parrot so annoying you'll want to strangle the nearest ornithologist and you've got The Wild Women of Wongo. If it all wasn't so laughably bad I would call it one of worst movies I've ever seen.

Fortunately for me, I saw the new DVD from The Film Crew. If you're not familiar with The Film Crew, it's sort of like Mystery Science Theater 3000 - eight years removed. Mike Nelson, Kevin Murphy, and Bill Corbett are back at it, riffing really bad movies. The Wild Women of Wongo is their third release as The Film Crew (Hollywood After Dark and Killers from Space being the first two) and easily the most funny. It's often as funny as some of the best stuff the guys did on MST3K. So, while I've only rated The Wild Women of Wongo a 2/10, I'll give The Film Crew commentary a 4/5 on my MST3K rating scale.


Connoisseurs of bad movies will have a field day with this one, "Wild Women of Wongo" is a veritable treat for lovers of turkey films. I know that when I first heard of the title I couldn't rest till it was part of my library. Fortunately, a company known as Mill Creek Entertainment packages various genres into collections of fifty movies on DVD, so for about fifty cents per, you can take advantage of some of the worst films ever made. This one is part of the Sci-Fi Collection.

I'm always a bit leery when the opening credits signal the use of Pathecolor, for some reason a particular range of the color spectrum will dominate. In this case, blues and greens take over, but since the action takes place on a tropical island, it generally works OK. Even the scarlet macaw looks good, complementing his role as the would be MSTK3 stand in for the length of the story. As for the King of Wongo, only his hairdresser will know for sure, but his hair sure looked bright blue to me.

The movie's opening utilizes a voice over proclaiming to be that of Mother Nature, describing an "experiment" that didn't work some ten thousand years ago. Beastly men and gorgeous babes were teamed up on one side of an island, while their opposite numbers lived at the other end. The men of Goona had no strength, while the men of Wongo are hampered by poor eyesight. When the women of Wongo save a messenger named Engor from death, their punishment is exile from Wongo until their island god tastes blood. Hey, how great is that, a free pass to Goona if only the women can figure that out.

Fortunately the young studs of Goona must earn their manhood by spending "the space of one moon" in the wilderness without weapons, something like the Boy Scouts and the Order of the Arrow. That's when they fall prey to the Wongo women and their snare traps. Those boys really put up a fight didn't they? The trek from Goona to Wongo, which takes five days, is handled in just about a minute of movie time, so I guess the trip went well.

With all the scantily clad women of Wongo dominating the action, don't tell me you haven't been thinking cat fight. Yes, that obligatory scene is presented when things get a little out of hand with Wana, she's the free thinker who wants to break ranks with leader Ooma. For sheer wackiness though, you have to check out the dragon dance performed by the High Priestess and her court. It's the scene where the girls earn their name.

For those of you who have been to Florida's Coral Castle, you'll easily recognize the coral rock formations that make up the architecture of Wongo. Not to digress, but the massive swinging stone door that's seen a number of times actually weighs a few tons, and is so precisely engineered and balanced that it will open at the push of a fingertip - I've seen it done! It's a fascinating place to visit. Other Florida attractions are credited as well, including Parrot Jungle, and Silver Springs.

Look, if you've got about an hour to kill, there's worse things you can do than "Wild Women of Wongo", and obviously some a lot better as well. But if you do watch it, you'll probably come away thinking what the scarlet macaw did just before the closing credits - "Well, how 'bout that?"


Ever see a puppy that was so ugly it was cute? That describes this dog of a movie. Gilligan's Island meets Ed Wood gone terribly wrong. Plot? It never thickens. Rather it starts out as thin as rice paper and remains just that transparent. Dialog? The dialog coach was sent out for coffee. Acting? It is to laugh. Sets? Well, none really. Special effects? Uh, there was that rubber alligator. Makeup? Think: Blue hair meant to look grey. But hey, it IS in colour. Maybe they should of thought about that before they called for makeup. Reality? This movie is a cinema dog rocket. But if you can get into Ed Wood meets Gilligan ... It IS kinda cute and good for a chuckle or two. But not much else.


This is a movie conceived and produced by juveniles for juveniles but is it ever funny. The kind of funny that kept me wondering whether everything about it, and I mean EVERYTHING, wasn't meant to be that cheesy. There's really no point in commenting on the dialogue (moronic) or acting (what acting?). I guess the scenery was OK if not for the fact we kept seeing the same scenes ad nauseam. I should say something about the characters though. The premise of the film is that there's two tribes, one of pretty women and beastly men and another of handsome men and ugly women. I guess the women were pretty enough and they were quite shapely. As for the men they all hailed from muscle beach. This was a beefcake fest with the beastly men differentiated from the handsome men primarily by the fact they were hairy. The handsome guys were shaved clean and oiled to boot. These fellas were ready for the Mr. Universe contest. So the bottom line is: could you spend an hour and 11 minutes doing something better? Absolutely, positively without a doubt. But if you do chose to see it you'll find yourself chuckling uncontrollably and that's not such a bad thing, is it?


A disembodied Mother Nature narrates a story 10,000 years in the making. The events of the great "Wongo"-"Goona"-"Monkey Men from the Sea" conflict are recounted. The manipulative Mother Nature has placed all the prettiest women with the Wongo tribe and the good looking men in the rival & nearby Goona tribe. The men of Wongo & women of Goona are suppose to be fugly. The Monkey Man threat is severely over-hyped, as is their involvement in the film.

The conflict arises when the son of the king of Goona arrives by canoe, waving the white-wing of peace, to warn Wongo of the arrival of the Monkey Men from the sea. The Wongo men, obviously jealous of his good looks, devise a plan to kill him. The Wongo women, lusting over the pretty man, decide to step in. The origins of humanity start are becoming clearer, but it just needs a few more ingredients.

Add a "Dragon God" (a.k.a. crocodile/alligator), the god's temple complete with one crazy priestess, some modern dance, leopard print & leather slips, lots of hair spray, blue hair, empty scenes of the "jungle", at least 12 cut-aways to an annoying parrot, stock footage of crocodiles/alligators, scenes of wandering through the jungle, several repetitions of previous footage, a scene of a woman trying to drown a crocodile/alligator and page upon page of horrible "savage-man" dialog (i.e. "me go", "Wongo not friend to Goona", etc.). Anyone can film a movie like this. Just go to the Florida Everglades or Keys and hire some bodies from Gold's Gym, don't forget to cater it and remember the script will figure itself out. The pain is excruciating. This is definitely the kind of movie to watch at 1.5x and not by oneself. Bring many friends and several bottles of bourbon.

-Celluloid Rehab


Jungle women exploitation, if you can call it that, with a sandy beach full of lovely girls in tailored animal skin dresses (over bikini bottoms, no less) struggling to avoid the dreadful fate of marrying the brutish men of their own tribe. The acting is awful, with primitive dialog and awkward pauses that don't help. They're pretty much all equally stiff, men and women alike, with 1950s hairstyles and a comical mix of accents. The director doesn't do them any favors, cutting in awkward reaction shots and inserts that don't match.

The women--tho pretty--don't get wild for the first half hour, and even then it's only 1958 wild, which is to say tame enough for afternoon TV. Once their own men disappear, the ladies do a little dancing, a little swimming, fight off a couple of ape men, have a quick catfight, and go off to rustle the beefcake of the Goona tribe. Despite the refreshing protofeminism motif, the Scooby Doo plotting is painful. But the film is shot in color--partly on beautiful beaches and partly at the strange Coral Castle--so it looks pretty good, depending on the print you happen to see.

As film-making, it's strictly hack work. As exploitation, it's less titillating than a stroll on the beach--even back in '58.


This film begins with a tribe of angry cave women running around with primitive weapons. However, there really only seems to be about a half dozen ladies--hardly a tribe as they put it. All the women have permed hair and look little like primordial beings, but no matter.

When they meet the men, they mostly beat the crap out of them--sex seems to be the furthest thing from their minds. Eventually, nature takes its course and you can guess the rest of the story! The men, oddly, live in a tribe of only men--which begs you to ask "how did these people get born if the tribes never interacted before this film?"--a very good question indeed.

As far as the story goes, the characters all speak in cave man talk but there is a cheerful narrator. Unfortunately, like all cave men epics, its hard to maintain any sort of pace when the people mostly fight, grunt and fight some more. There's really only about 10 minutes worth of material here and stretching it out to over an hour makes this very low-budget film tedious and sleep-inducing. At no point is the film fun or interesting--just a lot of silly ranting.


Believe me, reading the plot summaries to this film, especially the back of the DVD, make the film so much funnier because the film is nothing like what the film creators want you to think. The tribe of ape men is hilariously pitiful, almost as bad as the acting. This is a movie that completely lacks an ending, especially if you were expecting something from what you've read on the back.

I think one of the best and funny things about The Wild Women of Wongo is the fact that it wasn't intended to be the comedy that it is.

I ended up giving this a rating of three only because of its comical value - if you don't make this an interactive film, by which I mean talk about it and make fun of it as it plays, you will be bored. I must admit, though, that I got it as a present at a Christmas present, and it was a hoot at the party. I don't know if Mystery Science Theatre ever got a hold of this one, but they ought to have.


Like many others, I was disappointed with the fact that for the big screen, almost all the elements which made the tv series "Mission: Impossible" so entertaining - the team ethos, the complex con-tricks, etc - were jettisoned in favour of a huge ego boost for the one man show that is Mr. Tom Cruise. It is particularly annoying given that the "plot" chosen to replace it is so bog-standard and predictable. An honest hero is framed for something he didn't do and spends the rest of the movie trying to clear his name and out the real spy... This seems to be the plot of every third blockbuster these days - two titles released just before "M:I" using exactly the same storyline spring to mind: "Judge Dredd" and Schwarzenegger's "Eraser". It was also totally un-necessary to take the hero of the original series and make him the villain of the movie - can you imagine a film version of "The Untouchables" with the cops hot on the trail of the evil gang boss Eliot Ness? There is also the fact that the movie is deeply insecure; one feels that it would like to be a cold-war style espionage picture but does not have the courage of its convictions so tacks a cheesy and implausible action sequence onto the end. I could go on, but at the end of the day, my list of criticisms are all are all pretty subjective, and don't really point to this being a bad film, simply one that I don't like. But then suddenly it struck me. The reason I find this movie so intensely pointless, and the reason I think it's no good, is that so many scenes are so stupid, or just completely extraneous. Take for example the films most memorable moment - the break in to the CIA building to steal half of the 'NOC' list. We are told that this is the most secure room in the entire world, that it has every security system known to man. Except, it seems, a plain and simple good old CCTV camera! Sure, the scene is well directed and a fair amount of tension is wrung from it, but if you take a step back to think, it's preposterous. Besides, by my reckoning there is no reason for Hunt even to have the real NOC list if he is planning on double bluffing simply to smoke out the spy, so the scene shouldn't even be there. Why would he endanger all those agents by handing over the real list?

Nit picking? Certainly, but it sums up for me why the whole thing is a waste of time. There are plenty of movies one can enjoy by checking ones brain in at the theatre door; but when a movie cloaks itself in a supposedly complex plot and encourages the audience member to engage his or her brain, and then doesn't even stand up to scrutiny, I find the whole process deeply depressing - more so when the film takes itself as seriously as this one evidently does. I can't even be entertained anymore, because I am acutely aware of how shallow, empty, and ultimately pretentious it all is. So sorry folks, but if you ask me this is a red herring wrapped up in a Macguffin, wrapped up in a shaggy dog story with fleas, all designed for the sole purpose of making Tommy look good. It's a real shame that the supporting cast, production values, direction etc are all so high, since the film itself is so thoroughly worthless. At my most generous, I'd give it...

(4/10)


I used to watch the 80s series remake of "Mission Impossible" and feel this movie is largely "Mission Impossible" in title only.

It's really just a big star vehicle and money-making enterprise for Tom Cruise.

Sure, it's an entertaining mindless romp that will keep your brain happily in neutral for a few hours and that may be all you're after.

The revelation of who is the true villain will anger some fans such as myself.

It really wasn't anything like the 80s "Mission Impossible" I remember. What about the comraderie between characters? What about the team effort thing? These things are missing because it's Tom Cruise Vs the rest of the world.

The best thing about the film is Larry Mullen Jnr and Adam Clayton from U2 being on the soundtrack.


What could have been a great film was let down entirely by an appalling script that makes Shortland Street look Oscar worthy.

With a damn awful soundtrack (did they run out of money?), melodramatic silent screen era responses to unrealistic dialogue and a cast that looks the part but cant act to save themselves.....i struggled to make it to the end.

The saving grace of the film was the stunning NZ scenery and realistic visual atmosphere.

Unfortunately it just wasn't enough to save this incredibly disjointed film.


The opening night film of the 2006 Melbourne Queer Film Festival, this is an overlong, aimless and rambling piece of fluff.

THANKFULLY the original novel's touchy theme of emerging adolescent sexuality was tastefully handled. Larry Clark, TAKE NOTE.

- If you're a fan of the original novel, don't bother. While the characters and major plot points remain the same, the parts in between these make no sense or have had their context COMPLETELY changed.

- The young lead actors, while charming, seemed confused and crippled by the badly paced and downright bi-polar script.

- If I hear "fubbulous" and that g-damned muzak played again, my head shall explode Cronenberg-style.

CONCLUSION: Love the book, movie BITES ARSE. Two star rating: one for the film getting made, the other for the young actors giving it their best. Expected so much more from the writer/director of the ABSOLUTELY SPANKING (read: fantastic) melodrama "Desperate Remedies" (1995) Sorry Mr. Main.


This movie is a collectible for fans of classic films ,epecially German classic cinema. Since Kino on Video hasn't decide to release it in this country yet or time warner, they own the distribution rights of most of the classics of the U.F.A. library, you got to have a multi zone player and a converter that will detect all regions on your ntsc TV . This can be costly but its well worth it to play th euro version. If the American distribution is ever releases with subtitles, English, i'll be obligated to replace the German version as an American citizen. The story is changed form the original opera. Many of the songs were eliminated.It was turned into a light Viennese comedy with some music. In Germany ,in the 30's and 40', light Viennese comedies were popular on the cinema,like"The porch conscert",,1935,directed by Douglass Sirk.Well, Hitler was failing when this movie was being produce. So the expenses of the production probably and the lack of singing talent for many of the actors ,except Johanne Heesters, might of compelled the filmmakers to cut back. Now its a light Vienese comedy with some music. Whats really doesn't make any sense is that ,Marte Harrel, dyes her hair red to disguise herself to her husband , played by Heesters,. In reality your still going to recognize the same person. Why are the director of the ball living in the same place as Heesters and Harrell? Was it a duplex? Well its good any way.


Ah the sci-fi channel. How often do you disappoint me? Quite often I think, do you ever show good movies? OK you have given me the great 'Heroes' and the reasonably good 'The Lost Room' but they are series, and as for the movie well there really is nothing positive to say. Bad acting, bad directing, terrible characters and a shallow story, and that is just for starters. I checked out the director Allan A Goldstien and was not surprised to find nothing of interest in his resume (in fact I am half thinking that this is a pseudo name). The premises of four motor bikers out motto-crossing in a national park when one of them has an accident that needs a park ranger to come rescue them only for them to get caught in a forrest fire is weak and predictable that you know every beat before it happens. Leading man Bryan Genesse the park ranger is so bad it is terrible. Cast as the action hero martial arts boy in the footsteps of so many others this guy makes Seagal and Van Damme look like De Nero. The supporting cast are little better and well before the end one was left hoping the fire would engulf them all then the film crew. Avoid at all costs


That is what this movie is. Good God the special effects suck in this movie. It is difficult for anything to suck more than this movie's plot, but the special effects manage to pull it off. Let me try to explain just how bad this movie is.

First, there is the plot. There are four punk-ass teenage dirt bikers who are riding around in a forest in Duluth, MN. One of them is a dumb-ass and tries a ridiculous jump and breaks his leg. A paramedic comes to help him, but gets stranded with them when the helicopter breaks. Then all five realize that there is a forest fire, which we see is started by some guy dumping tons of gas all over the forest. All they show us is his boots, and they show scene after scene of this guys boots walking around dumping gas and starting fires. Meanwhile, the teenagers try to escape the fire, only to find that boot man has somehow managed to get ahead of them (while they were speeding through the forest on dirt bikes!), dump gas all over the area they were riding through, and start more fires. He does this several times, and the paramedic finally catches him and starts him on fire. I won't spoil the ending, but this guy's resilience will have you shouting "WHAT THE BLOODY HELL?!?!" at the screen. Anyway, they are now surrounded by fire, and their only escape is through a mine which is filled with methane gas. Yes, methane gas. I'm not even going to try to describe the ending, because it is too ridiculous, and you'll enjoy it more if you don't see it coming. Which you won't, because you can't possibly expect what happens. This is because of the second major problem with this movie: consistency.

Is some semblance of consistence too much to ask for? Apparently so. I cannot even count the number of broken limbs in this movie (they keep breaking arms and legs while crashing their bikes). I think each character breaks at least one limb, and several more than one. They then limp around until the scene ends, and then forget that they're supposed to have broken limbs. There is one scene where three of them who are supposed to have broken legs start dancing. But then their injuries suddenly return when the plot needs them to.

Finally, the CGI. If there is a hell, it consists of watching the fire in this movie. All they did for the forest fires is line the dirt paths with CGI fire. You can clearly see that the only CGI fire is along the paths, and all of the trees more than two feet from the path are left untouched. And then they zoom out and show the whole forest being engulfed in flames. It's hard to describe in words how ridiculous it looks, but I assure you that the ridiculousness is quite impressive.

This movie is one of those so-bad-its-good types. There are some occasions where it descends into the painful-bad category, but for the most part it stays above the line and is laughably inept. I can't wait to check out the other Nature Unleashed movies that came in the four-pack with this one.


**MAJOR SPOILERS** Watchable only for the action sequences not the story or acting in it "Nature Unleashed: Fire" has one of the longest and excruciating endings in modern motion picture history. We have the fearless Ranger Jake, Bryan Genesse, leading this trio of hysterical bikers to safety in of all paces an explosive fume beaching mine shaft! This during a raging forest fire! It seems that Ranger Jake with all his knowledge of the great outdoors didn't realize that a mine shaft that's leaking with dangerous and explosive methane gas is the last place to go when all the woods around it is on fire!

***SPOILERS FROM THIS POINT ON*** All this started some time ago when Ranger Jake in an effort to save the not that on the ball miner Tiny, Chris Harz aka "The Sherd", let him slip through his fingers and fall to his death at the bottom of the mine shaft, or did he! Even though we were kept in suspense to who's setting the forest fires for the first half of the movie it wasn't a surprise at all the Tiny was the culprit! As you would expect in movies like these Tiny seemed to be made of hardened steel in that nothing that ever happened to him, fires explosions as well as impaling, could stop the crazed miner.

Before Tiny's reappearance, or resurrection, Ranger Jake got involved in rescuing bikers Chris Mel Sharon & Marcus, Josh Cohen Melanie Lewis Anastasia Griffith & Ross McCall, who were trapped in the woods with fires breaking all around them. Having the usual know it all-Marcus-among the bikers things don't go as smoothly as Ranger Jake wanted them to go. Marcus not only eggs on the meek Chris to do something stupid, jump with his bike over a 10 foot pile of logs, but has the guy break his leg. This makes it almost impossible for Ranger Jake to have Chris air-lifted out before the fires consume him as well as his fellow bikers!

For the remainder of the movie Ranger Jake, who put himself in charge, makes boner after boner in his attempt to save himself and the trapped and lost in the woods bikers! All this ends with Jake's brilliant idea to hide in a dangerous and abandoned mine shaft with the rescue party just yards away from rescuing them if they only stayed put and in the open where the rescue team could find them!

Even though he was supposed to be the life of the party, or movie, Tiny for all his efforts in being another indestructible super villain came across as a man who spent too much time out in the sun. The make-up job on Tiny was so outrageous that he looked like he dumped a jar of spaghetti sauce over his head instead of having it burned to a crisp.

Ranger Jake came across as either somewhat very naive or retarded in his being so taken in by the dangerous Tiny in always trying to save the rampaging psycho who never hid his feelings about what he had in mind for the play by the rules Forest Ranger. In fact Ranger Jake actually encouraged Tiny to do both him and the bikers in by showing him how incompetent he was in trying to save them. The fact that Ranger Jake was successful wasn't because he was so smart but because Tiny , despite his indestructibility, was so brainless!


when i watched this crap, it reminded me of the the title of the movie FIRE, Which is where this garbage belongs, in a fire. I don't even know what to say the acting blew, the fire looked really fake, Andy the chicks are'nt exactly supermodels. And lastly i don't know what you people are complaining i own this damn movie, yeah happy birthday to me Well i guess it could be worse i could be watching left behind 2. And to make things worse i have the whole set on DVD fire,volcano,earthquake,avalanche. All i'm missing is the awesome tornado movie which i hear sucks balls.

Well until my next crap movie peace


A bunch of teen dirt bikers are out in the forest riding around in circles. They're having fun; little do they know nature is about to be unleashed by an emo refugee from a Deliverance or Hills Have Eyes movie. He's armed with matches and fire accellerant. And he's got an eye that's bleeding or something. Why torch a park? I dunno. Maybe he doesn't like Smokey the Bear, or something. But he wears army/navy store fatigues, if that helps.

The rangers send one single helicopter to battle the resulting blaze; that's all you ever see, except a bunch of people in a base somewhere talking a lot about the fire, but doing nothing. Some cop or ranger or militiaman or whatever he is drops from the helicopter on a defective tether.

Everybody now rides their dirt bikes like they're auditioning for motocross. They forever pop wheelies, do Evel Knievel jumps, spin around etc. They argue incessantly. Shots of the fire are as phony as a 3 dollar bill; it's the same footage from a dozen different angles, and the blaze never grows or moves. And you still never once see any fire fighting equipment.

SyFy channel movie which has about 0% science fiction attached to it. What you can expect from this: bad acting, cheap effects, and a story that goes nowhere (like the bikes and fire go nowhere). Laughable insomniac cure.


This is the worst movie I have ever seen. The story line is a joke, the effects are terrible, the cinematography doesn't fit the tone of the movie, the dialogue is cheesy, and the actors do a good job at screwing up the rest. People just don't act that way in real life situations. My question is: Who would fund such crap?

The movie starts where some miners fall down a mine shaft after a fireman fails to save them. Next we join some bikers in a forest who ride around doing stunts on their bikes. One guy falls and breaks his leg or something. The fireman arrives to help them. Meanwhile, somebody starts a fire. Some more bike stunts. Bla bla bla.

I wasted my time.

Do not watch this movie.


I cant believe there is so much positive feedback for this film... did I watch the same film as you guys? I am a HUGE fan of Peter Sellers and I think the guy is genius, but this is far from his finest hour - OK Sellers is brilliant in this film, and all the problems of this film are not his fault, I blame Blake Edwards. This was meant to be some sort of silent film farce homage, but it seemed to be 10x slower paced than your average farce. The whole thing with the drunken waiter got old VERY fast and was so overused and unfunny, it had me cringing rather than laughing. Even Sellers genius couldn't save the many dull moments in this film, which consists of dull people talking about nothing in particular, Sellers listening to them, making unfunny comments and generally having his talent wasted. There were only a few sequences that were genuinely funny, the lost shoe sequence, the birdy num num sequence and the waiting for the toilet sequence. In between that comedy gold are interminable scenes of pure boredom as I try desperately to find something to laugh at. I cant understand why so many people find this a hilarious and classic Sellers film! And I love Sellers, I found the Pink Panther movies funny and even find stuff like Frank Spencer and Mr Bean funny (Rowan Atkinson undoubtedly stole a few ideas from this film but executed them far better) so i cant understand why I simply don't get this film at all.


This has got to be one of the most boring movies ever. Even Peter Sellers' routines get embarrassingly tawdry and pitiful with the slow, difficult pace of this film. His faux-Indian accent is likewise embarrassing, somebody needs to put this film out of its misery. The jokes and funny stuff are not that funny, they may have been better suited for the early Lucy shows. This is "must miss" stuff for sure. It doesn't come anywhere close to Sellers' perfect work in other films of the period. The drunk waiter routine is likewise very filled with tedium after the 10th visit to this situation. I watched it on TCM and I can't believe this film was the prime-time attraction at 8PM on a Friday night.


Once again a supposedly pedigree-rich, topical comedy is anything but funny. This waste-of-time garbage is brought to us by director Edwards, but if "direction" is what he got handsomely paid to do on this dreck than the movie industry needs a new word for "direction." I'm not surprised he ALSO wrote this snoozer and gets his won separate "Story by" credit. What story? What script? This whole BOMB is nothing more than Sellers sheepishly sleep-walking through ninety-eight minutes in an unbelievably awful and offensive performance that is an unnecessary insult to the Indian ethnicity/nation/race.

Would it have been so hard for Edwards, Sellers and/or the co-writer(s) to research the Indian culture a little bit and write some humor into the apparent cultural differences existing between the unexpected party guest and the Hollywood denizens? That would have been inspired and very funny, but the only LAME attempt made at borderline cultural humor is when the Sellers character tells the party's host daughter that painting an elephant with slogans like "Go Naked" is "embarrassing." The tinsel-town party guests BARELY interact w/ the Sellers character and Edwards passed up on another opportunity in this humorless film to poke fun at the movie industry as a whole and the Sellers' character unique duck-out-of-water predicament vis-a-vis the industry-types at the party. This movie is the kind of awful, unmemorable dreck Jerry Lewis was putting out that same decade. What is the Longet character in this movie for? The Gavin McLeod (whom I've spoke w/ at length and is very personable) is another sadly wasted character whose sole humor is derived from the fact he wears a loose toupee. This passed for funny in 1968? I don't get it! I was able to fast forward this movie halfway through right up to the end and there was nothing missed.


"The Party" had some amusing moments in the beginning of the film but toward the end it degenerated into what Hollywood writers would call a mad-capped romp. It was a goofy, goofy ending with a sappy component. Towards the end the "young people" crash the party looking like they were dressed in fashions from Target. Most of the characters were cliches and Peter Sellers' portrayal of Hrundi V. Bakshi would be considered in todays political climate as racist. At the time he was considered funny and his character was cute. The music, dancing and ending were so goofy and portrayal of the "young people" almost insulting that it is no wonder an anti-establishment movement was flourishing at the time. The producers were clueless about what was happening around them and the portrayal of their generation in this movie was probably right on.


This is the worst film I've seen Peter Sellers in. The opening is pure budget and the overlong scene stretches till it gets boringly ridiculous. And those British "oh God how embarrassing!"-jokes just annoyed me. Overacting is not good comedy and most of the time the movie is not funny at all. Artistic value zero. A memorable two, three scenes saves this picture from a 1-rating.

3/10


Hey man , someone decides to throw a party , party now daddy-o. Oh and someone invites an Indian who looks like Peter Sellars , I just dig his Eastern philosophy man . Who else is gonna be there ? Some really square old dudes and some really happening mod kids who are into protest . And wow these kids are really far out man , they even jump into a swimming pool with their clothes on , wow that`s really gear man . And they`ve got an elephant with slogans painted on it , wow I dig that . And mind blowing scene with the pool overflowing with the soap suds . Oh wow man baby

But is any of this funny ? No not really . If you remember the sixties you weren`t there . If you laugh out loud at THE PARTY you`re probably watching another movie


Well, it was okay, I think... Sometimes it was just so funny that it was boring, if you know what i meen. But I could see it again!


without being too detailed, this has to be one of the worst movies i have ever seen in my entire life. my partner got this on her Netflix and i was still upset to see it. watching this movie was like staring at someone who looks horrible because you cannot believe that a person could be in public looking that horrible. it was like rooting for the underdog with some hope that a win was possible. not only was it impossible, it was laughably impossible. even the little things were horrible. the police looked like security guards. the chase scene was downright silly. the only positive thing about this movie is that it gave the actors and crew some employment.


Yawn.

This is yet another painfully boring movie that tries to get by on soft-core pornography and (oh so shocking!) S&M themes to keep the viewer interested. Imagine the worst episode of "Red Shoe Diaries," I mean the absolute worst, with black actors. This movie is worse. Another viewer cleverly equated this to "Eyes Wide Shut." The is much similarity, although the dismal, slow-moving EWS is FAR more interesting than this turkey.

The dialog was probably written in less time than the movie spans. Seriously.

Actual porn movies have better scripts and less wooden acting.

I gave it a "2," only because the opening sequence was pretty well done.

Avoid this one like the plague.


When a movie tries to get most of its power from a plot twist you've figured out well before halfway , there's a serious problem. You think it can't be that simple and hope for something better to come up, only to find out that yes, it is that simple. This whole production just screams nobody cared, screen writing brings images of monkeys with a typewriter to mind. Continuity is for pussies. This Tammy person talks about how she got to know Pandora's Box when she went there with Lance, then seconds later announces there's a rule that you should come alone the first time. They even tried to make this into an erotic thriller (you know, a skin flick), but the main actress is really not fun to look at. Or listen to. Or just experience in general. She gets the words out, that's all I can say. The sex scenes all just feel awkward and sleazy. And low on creativity. I mean, a bubble bath? Seriously? Is she going to order a pizza next? This is a failure on so many levels, it could have worked with a better screenplay, better director, better actors, better cinematography, and even then just barely. It's a pretty nasty movie that's not even entertaining or anything.


A simply bad movie. A better plot would have been a movie of a person being forced to watch White Noise 2: The Light. How did this travesty make theaters? This movie defines "jump" scares. Typical suspenseful music to get the audience riled up, stop the music, ghost jumps out at you. Hardly scary, more of an attack on the senses than anything substantial. Anyway just put a bunch of these types of scenes together and you've got White Noise 2.

It felt as is the movie was made for the most dense audience in the world. Phrases like THE DEVIL'S NUMBER and the use of 666 were blatant throughout. Upside-down crosses? Check. Collection of newspaper articles and diaries in order to explain the story to the audience? Check. Spoon-fed plot that leaves no room for imagination? Double check.

The only thing that was decent in this movie was Nathan Fillion's acting. However, even that was visibly stymied by the horrible script and story. Even if this movie had been cast with the greatest actors of our time it would still not be worth watching.

What's worse is that all the good comments here on IMDb had me go in hopeful for a change from the first White Noise. I was disappointed. Do not waste your money on this. This film has absolutely no redeemable qualities.


To its credit, White Noise 2 starts in a promising fashion - displaying some genuinely unsettling statistics on screen - ones which when taken out of the context of the movie are enough to make anyone stop and take note. However this good start comes to an abrupt end as soon as our protagonist has his NDE (or near death experience), I challenge you to keep a straight face at this point! Hackneyed, predictable and tied so tightly to generic conventions, White Noise 2 is barely worth the effort, let alone the admission fee.

Having seen the first film, I must admit that I didn't harbour much hope of this being a quality sequel. The first film is a decent, if laboured attempt at creating a ring-esquire horror film. Unfortunately, at times, White Noise 2 feels like plagiarism of not only 'The Ring', but also 'The Eye', even worse, it uses elements of both films to create inferior scares. White Noise 2 suffers from the same problem the first instalment. The final sequences of both films jar with what precedes - thus undermining the audiences suspension of disbelief, and in the case of the first film, ruining a perfectly decent set-up.

White Noise 2 is a largely unoriginal, by the numbers popcorn muncher. It prefers flashes of grotesque figures accompanied by loud aural jolts as opposed to suspenseful moments. Furthermore, the plot is littered with unexplained happenings. The condition and symptoms with which the protagonist is suffering are never fully diagnosed or explained. The acting is 'allright' and the characters are given enough screen time to develop, yet they can do little to save the film from its script. However, If you want an easy to digest, bland and average horror flick then give White Noise 2 a try - but like myself, expect to walk away disappointed. The film itself isn't terrible, it just has nothing at all to distinguish it from everything else in the genre. Try 'The Ring' or 'The Eye' instead.


Nathan Fillion is a good lead and he is most of the reason that you will stay watching! The plot however is really bad! At first I thought it would give a spin to the original and would dazzle us! But in stead we get nothing! There are a lot of moments that suppose to scare us. To be honest these scares did nothing to me! I expected them so I didn't jump up like I was meant to! The whole plot is uninspired and boring! To say that this sequel is better than the original is not something I agree on! The original wasn't a very good movie either but at least it contained more surprises than this one! I also think that the first movie was more creepier! The use of special effects was very minimal and more effective! "White Noise 2" has to much special effects and kills the ambiance this movie desperately needs! Compared to other similar horror movies that came out this year "White Noise 2" is a major letdown! Miss this one!


This movie is one of the worst films I have ever seen. First, It has absolutely nothing to do with white noise, so why name it white noise II? Second the acting in this movie was sup par. And the 'special' effects, as in a bunch of mentally deranged monkeys were hired to do them, were just way too ridiculous and overdone! The movie starts off with potential and then horribly crashes. There is no sense of time in the film, and it feels like everything happens in a disorganized flash of mind numbing ridiculousness. Random black and white people who are supposed to be ghosts pop out of nowhere for no reason whatsoever to harass Abe(the main character) for who knows why! Once Abe learns that the white light means that the person is going to die, he decides to save people. So the first people that he tries to save is a bum. Who is probably the stupidest bum man you've ever seen. Seriously I bet that if you let bums see the bum scene they would tell you that the bum in the film was obviously out of his mind and deserved to die too. The second person he tries to save, is the most crotchety and annoying stupid old man you've ever encountered. Seriously if your car breaks down on the road and you need to go under it to fix something you put out flairs AND YOU DON'T LAY DOWN WITH YOUR LEGS STRETCHED OUT INTO THE LANE!! If someone tries to help you, you don't call them a freaky metrosexual.

Also, why would ONE person saved from death need to then go on and KILL MANY people? It just doesn't make sense! It doesn't balance anything and its ridiculous.

EVERY transition in the film is either some random cross, upside down cross,a random Jesus painting or a fade out of the main character with a random cross, upside down cross, or a weird Jesus painting in the background. The connections to Lucifer are ridiculous, I don't even understand the point of any religious connection or the need for any religious connection to this film.

Basically if you want a very warped tripped out movie that takes ideas from white noise, poltergeist, the exorcist, pulse and blends them all together to make the most incoherent jumble of random crap with loud noises and a team of mentally deranged monkeys special effects guys this is the movie for you.

Bottom line, don't watch this movie unless you're trying to ruin your night/date/relationship with your in laws etc , because after seeing it you'll feel like you wasted your life, and the people watching it with you will wonder if you're on crack.


The first film with Michael Keaton was pretty dull and boring, I think I watched this sequel to see if it was as bad. Basically Abe Dale (Nathan Fillion) has his wife Rebecca (Kendall Cross) and son while eating lunch in a restaurant, when they were shot by a man who then shot himself. Three months later, Abe is still grieving and attempts suicide by overdosing on many pills at home, only to be rescued by his friend Marty Bloom (Adrian Holmes) and saved by doctors. His near-death experience, where he saw his family at the end of a long tunnel with bright light, has now given the ability to not only hear voices, i.e. white noise, in the static of televisions, but see people who will die. Abe passes many people who he can see lit up, and he finds out that this means they are due to die, and when he saves three of them, their light vanishes, including nurse Sherry Clarke (Katee Sackhoff). While looking back at some footage of his wife and son, Abe sees the man who who murdered them, Henry Caine (Craig Fairbrass), and when he sees him (very badly scarred) he finds out that he was seeing light on people also. Abe realises though that after saving the people he did, days later they commit an act that kills many others, so he knows that Sherry must die also, but in the end, he ends up dying himself and saves her as a spirit. Also starring Teryl Rothery as Julia Caine, William MacDonald as Dr. Karras, David Milchard as Kurt, Aaron Pearl as Stanley and Vanesa Tomasino as Laura. This sequel bears little similarity to it's predecessor, and in some ways it is an improvement, it certainly has a little bit more story to it, but as before, it is only good for the okay special effects, and it is still boring quite a lot. Adequate!


This sequel kept my attention for about the first hour before taking a sharp left turn into sheer nonsense territory. Unlike the original, "White Noise 2" has very little to do with "communicating" with the dead, instead coming off more as a "Final Destination" sequel/super hero/"Exorcist" type of combination that jumbled the entire thing into pure ineptitude. A man's family is brutally slain in an apparently random shooting in a diner. Three months after the incident, he attempts suicide and is revived just before fully ascending into the "white light". Following his near death experience, he has seemingly acquired an ability to see disfigured ghosts, hear ghosts through technology, and foresee people's untimely death through a luminescent glow. It's when the movie delves into some kind of Satanic "twist" that completely took me out of the movie. I dug a few of the jolt scenes and suspenseful "race to save a life" moments, yet the conclusion is very confusing as it attempts to come together and put the pieces in place... So my point is: the final "explanation" and multiple twists ruined the movie. Don't bother with this...


In 2005 we had White Noise where someone looked through the static on a TV-screen in a paranormal way and saw the dead and the way they tried to get out of there. In 2007 this sequel is released and it is one of these sequels that should have been released straight to DVD. It's almost a crime that films like this are being released to cinema, wasting valuable screen time.

White Noise 2 starts when a guy has a near death experience and learns that he can see which people are to die soon by simply looking at them and checking them out. As he learns of this gift he starts to save them and as expected that is where everything goes wrong.

This film fails on every single aspect: badly acted, badly predictable story, mismatched shock effects, no tension what so ever, and worst of all, a plot that blandly contradicts itself at various stages.

3 out of 10 bored dead.


I will be honest.The only reason I bought this DVD was to see more (in every sense of the word) of Laurette Luez.She first caught my attention in the 1950 film "D.O.A." when I wished she could have had a more substantial part.In "D.O.A". I was struck by Laurette's exotic looks and when I looked up her biography on IMDb.com, it did not surprise me that she was born in Honolulu, Hawaii.I have a serious weakness for beautiful 1940s film actresses with raven black hair.I have every film Jennifer Jones ever made as well as examples of Ava Gardner, Margaret Lockwood, Patricia Medina and Vivien Leigh; not that I am putting Laurette Luez on a par with those film goddesses but as said by a reviewer above she meets my need for agreeable "eye candy".

During the film I wondered what Professor Leakey (the famous British anthropologist whose family live in South Africa) would have made or said of the plot!The ladies looked like they had just come out of a Hollywood beauty salon, which indeed they had i.e. the film studio's make-up dept.Tigers are only found in India.Where were the 9 foot giant's mother & father, did they have any other giant children?The giant (I bet he was a cute baby), reminded me of a latter day Richard (Jaws) Kiel.The pterodactyl was extinct by the time man evolved onto this planet.Unfortunately film companies/producers have a stubborn obsession with evolution and insist man must do battle with prehistoric monsters as it looks good on film and is what audiences want.That's the problem with playing chess like I do, it makes you think too logically! But of course the real reason people (mainly heterosexual men) would watch films like these is to see scantily clad beautiful stone age women ministering to the capricious urges of their stone age men folk and I am including myself in that category.There was some S&M scenes in "Prehistoric Women" which will appeal to men of that disposition and persuasion.Again the logical side of my brain kicked in, with all that stone age muscle around, why did the men meekly submit themselves to be held captive by those glamorous primitive women?.Could it be that they wanted to be held by them as their prisoners? Films like this trigger prehistoric urges in all of us.I noticed when I started to pen my review that IMDb.com only rated it 2.7/10.That seemed a little harsh for the entertainment factor alone, so I scored it 4/10.


I can't believe nobody's seen this movie. Not even 5 votes registered. This is a real cult classic, guys. Dinosaurs, women running around in fur bikinis, catfights; it has it all. Not a whole lot of talent, mind you, but that's not what we're looking for in exploitation, is it? The plot? Who cares. It's simple enough to follow with the sound off. Just sit back, put some heavy tunes on, and enjoy the action.


Believe it or not, I often like to watch low-budget bad movies. They often can be unintentionally funny with their inept acting, writing and direction. However, some bad films manage to be bad but not particularly watchable--they're just dull beyond belief. This is exactly how I'd describe PREHISTORIC WOMEN. Now you'd think perhaps with a title like this that there might be some sexy cave-babes, but frankly none of the well-groomed ladies looked particularly attractive--even if they all had nicely permed hair! And as for the men, apparently these cavemen almost all have smooth shaven faces and decent hairdos as well! They looked even less like cave people than Fred or Wilma Flintstone!! As for the rest of the film, although it was filmed in color, the print I saw was very, very muddy looking and ugly. And, most of the film either was done in pantomime or was narrated--creating a film that managed to be even less interesting than either version of 1,000,000 BC--plus, unlike the 1960s version, there was no Raquel Welch as eye candy! The only positive I can see about the film is that there was only one goofy looking dinosaur (a pterodactyl) and the rest of the animals were all tigers, panthers and an elephant with mammoth-like tusks added.

Goofy grunts, strangely coiffed ladies and insipid narration, this film is a sure cure to insomnia. While not among the very worst films I have seen, it sure was among the dullest.


"Prehistoric Women" was obviously never meant to be taken seriously. It certainly doesn't seem to take *itself* seriously, which helps me overlook its dated plot, "cutesy" narrative and crypto-exploitation themes. By this I mean that this is the kind of film that leers at its scantily clad female characters even as it supposedly celebrates their spunk and grit. It's as if Ed Wood decided to make a family film for Mom and Dad to enjoy along with the kids.

But I am OK with that.

Obvious care and effort went into the sets and the special effects, at least considering the "B movie" nature of the material. The women are cute and the men are personable and virile...although I found it curious that the "hero" of the movie had less muscle mass than a 14 year old girl; that the monster who attacks the clans at the climax of the film looks like a stop-motion rubber chicken with a pteranondon crest taped on; that the men didn't figure out the part where they picked up rocks and threw them back at the women, but managed to invent fire and cooking...etc. etc.If you are looking for logic, consistency or real 'weight' in your adventure story, you won't find it here.

This was probably a lot of fun for a date movie in the local Bijou when it was released in 1950. But it's hard to imagine anyone watching "Prehistoric Women" for anything other than camp or nostalgic value these days. Still a decent effort for what it was.


I must say! I didn't realize that the hair comb was invented even before fire was?! And I certainly didn't know that the prehistoric women walked so upright, and with such grace. No wonder people started evolving. I mean such well cared for women even had men taking up the hygiene - for they're all squeaky clean. It's all so very accurate (including the giant).

OK, the movie has some naive and primitive charm, but I guess the main reason for making it was to show a bit more feminine skin then the regular movies would allow. Still not accurate. The costumes look more like sleeveless fur coats then the clothing actual prehistoric people would wear.

I'd be really surprised if the maker of this movie ever even saw a book on the prehistoric world. It's just so silly.

Still, you might get slightly entertained by this movie, trying to sell itself like a national geographic documentary (including the most appealing part - the showing of the native women), but I'd recommend you just about any other movie.