Problem: This review is like what?

Review:This is the second movie based on the life and times of ultra hung porn star, John Curtis Estes, better known as John Holmes. Boogie Nights is also roughly based on his life. Maybe someday someone is going to do a movie on the life of Tommy Byron instead.

The problem is, that the story is not very well told. There are many Law & Order episodes that have more twists and turns than Wonderland, and the director never gets the criminal case going with any kind of gusto. Val Kilmer has two problems - he is not nearly as hung as Holmes is (and no prosthesis this time around, unlike in Boogie Nights), and he is much better looking than mope Holmes.

The director does not introduce one single likable individual among the cast. The racist, immature lowlifes he hangs out with, or his wife, and the police don't get much in the way of characterization.

The best part of the movie is Eric Bogosian telling Paris Hilton to "get lost".

Having said all that, anyone interested in the sleaziest side of the porn business in the 1980s or true crime shouldn't miss it.
+++++++++
A: positive

Problem: This review is like what?

Review:This movie is just plain bad. It isn't even worth watching to make fun of it. The lunatic professor is just plain annoying. Even suspending disbelief to allow for invisibility (which I glady do for the sake of good bad movies) and allowing for exceedingly stupid victims in a horror movie, this movie asks for even more than that. If you are looking for women's locker room shower scenes, and random sexual encounters, get a porn, if you are looking for a good-bad movie, get something else. If you want to simply waste your time on an annoying bad movie, rent this.
+++++++++
A: negative

Problem: This review is like what?

Review:The appeal of ancient films like this one is that you get to see an actual moving image of life over 100 years ago. Here are a lot of people leaving a factory, all of them dead by now and none of them even remotely aware of the magnitude of the invention that they are walking before. I was shocked to read one reviewer call this film as boring as home videos today, and at least one other mistakenly identified it as the first film ever made (it was the first film made at the rate of 16 frames per second, rather than the then-normal 46 frames per second).

Sure, all you see is a lot of people filing out of a building and passing before the cinematograph on their way home from work, but this is a curiosity piece for dozens of reasons, not the least of which is that it was the first film made by the Lumiere brothers, who probably had a stronger impact on the development of the cinema than any other individual or group of individuals in history.
+++++++++
A: positive

Problem: This review is like what?

Review:I found this film the first time when I was searching for some works in witch Stephane Rideau had participate, still in an extraordinary ravishment caused by the astonishingly beautiful "Les roseaux sauvages" (in Portuguese, Juncos Silvestres), by Andre Techine. I was searching for similar movies, in the come of age line. I found then "Presque Rien", a movie where the director Sebastien Lifshitz deliciously amazes us, earning a nomination by the Cannes festival in 2000. The story is about two guys, the kind "boy next door", Mathieu (Jeremie Elkaim) and Cedric (Stephane Rideau), who meet during the summer vacations. In a land far from where he lives, Mathieu spends is days at the beach with his sister. There he meets Cedric, a local, with whom he starts this estival and revealing relationship, much by means of the sensual and seducer personality that Stephane Rideau gives his characters, (in "Les roseaux sauvages", 6 years younger, he still preserves the innocence of the sweet seducer, witch matures here in experience). Exemplar in directing, in the amorous sequence, in the intimate and confessing description that is made about a boys first facing his (still ambiguous) sexuality and great love. The first love, in its terrible progression ecstasy-despair. The best of the film is the best of France: the fervent passion, the hot and excited rationalism, the brownish beauty, the simple and natural acceptance made by the families, although not without surprise and first anger. Still, there is the beach, the luminosity, the lightness e simplicity of summer, the freshness of breeze, the surge's melody, and the expressive eyes of an introverted Elkaim (hesitant, hurt, puzzled, passionate). The sex is not avoided nor exploited, it is treated as it is, with no exhibitionist intention. In virtue of pure talent, this is a work of drama of uncommon quality, without cheap sentimentalism, showing an inevitably real image of two homosexual in their prime youth as any ordinary person, although with a social fear of rejection and shame. It is well worthy being seen, especially by those who adore French movies (although the DVD front cover is very lame, with the two actors in between tens of stars, greased with brilliantine). A movie witch, in my opinion, deserves an 8-9!
+++++++++
A:
positive