input: When childhood memory tells you this was a scary movie; it's touch and go whether you should revisit it. Anyway, I remembered a scary scene involving a homeless person and a cool villain played by Jeff Kober.

"The First Power" is not a very good movie, sad to say. It's chock full of those cop cliches and a very poor script with holes a truck could drive through (along with countless convenient "twists" that help the story run along). Lou Diamond Phillips is the over-confident bad ass cop who sends baddie serial killer Kober to the gas chamber only to find out he was a minion of Satan himself and now has the power of resurrection along with the power of possessing every weak minded person who he comes across. Through in the mix a very poorly realized psychic who helps with the case.

Ahhh, this is trash. But enjoyable as such, especially if you have fond memories of it. It scared me as a kid and that scene with the homeless person is still pretty good. As for any kind of logic here; forget it, just about every scenario is thrown in for good measure and you end up with a cross between a Steven Segal action flick and a 70's demonic flick. And who on earth thought it was a good idea to cast Lou Diamond Phillips in the lead here? Needless to say he's not convincing at all but he tries his best and I've never had the problem with the guy so many reviewers here seem to have. As for Tracy Griffith as the psychic, the less said the better. But Kober is pretty good as the killer; always liked that actor.

"The First Power" may be just what the doctor ordered after a hard day's work and a "brain switch-off" is needed. Beer will most likely enhance the viewing experience and I'll definitely have loads of it the next time I give this movie a spin. All in all; not a good flick but a somewhat guilty pleasure for nostalgic fans who were easily scared as kids. "See you around, buddy boy"!

Is the sentiment of this review positive or negative?

pos/neg ans: negative

input: I didn't really go into "Reign Over Me" knowing exactly what to expect either from the director or the story. The plot was easy enough to understand, I suppose. This guy's whole family died in 9/11, and he shuts the world out of his life. Alright. I didn't know if it was going to use the attachment of terrorism as a platform to speak on that or other issues relating to it, and it really doesn't on a very obvious level, so if you're scared to be surrounded by political opinions that may be different from yours, I wouldn't worry about it. I think the writing even made a point never to explicitly mention "September the eleventh".

Overall, I was impressed. It was a very moving picture. The movie has a sense of humor, and it is very sharp, but it is definitely a drama where it counts. I typically don't like to think that comedic actors are incapable of actually acting, but sometimes, let's be honest, they are. Adam Sandler is definitely capable of it (and though I think so, you may disagree, Jim Carrey is also very well-rounded.. sometimes). Sandler's portrayal of Charlie Fineman took a character that on the surface seems completely unreal and makes it become absolutely believable. I read many reviews that criticized the writing of Alan Johnson's (Don Cheadle in another excellent role, if not one that seems similar to a few of his more recent pictures)wife, who is played well by Jada Pinkett Smith, calling her static and dull, but that is completely untrue.

She has depth, but some of it gets hidden behind the main story, which does drift in and out of focus occasionally. (Which also brings to mind some very unusual transitions done early in the movie, with a weird "Make everything out of focus" fadeout. After about the first 40 minutes, they aren't used anymore. Maybe it's significant for the characters outlook, artistically, or maybe they just realized how irritating it was.) The film gradually begins to reveal to us the point (one of several, but definitely the most explicit) of the story, which is that sometimes people have to deal with grief in their own way. Maybe it seems unorthodox to us, maybe it seems downright unhealthy, but maybe what some people want more than anything is just to forget. To just exist. The films soundtrack was excellent, and it used music to pursue and amplify moods, rather than establish them, which gives credit to the actors and the writers.

The movie takes it's name from the song "Love, Reign O'er Me", off of The Who's rock opera, Quadrophenia. The song itself is fairly insignificant to the actual story, but it is used powerfully in the movie over the course of the climax, and at the very end. The movie is paced well, and does not feel like it's dragging anywhere in it's length, which is a little over 2 hours. If you can accept Adam Sandler's portrayal of this deeply heartbroken and broken down man, you will enjoy the movie. You will become entangled in the story, and you will genuinely feel for the characters in every minute of it. It is not the best movie of the year, and there's nothing groundbreaking or positively amazing in it, but it's a very enjoyable, watchable movie, all in all.

Is the sentiment of this review positive or negative?

pos/neg ans: positive

input: Nothing like a movie about a group of friends who not only all dislike each other to the point of loathing, but they have little to no redeeming qualities to make an *audience* like or empathize with any of the characters either. There are movies so bad they are good (a la Ed Wood or Tod Slaughter films), and there's just plain bad (like 99% of Uwe Boll's "work"). This film is barely tolerable even if you are a brilliantly talented MSTie riffer (e.g., Mystery Science Theatre 3000). Thankfully while I am rather talented in that regard (it's how my mind works All The Time), for those who are not so naturally talented in MSTie riffing, eventually into *this* film you'll just want to pull your own head off, painfully aware the movie "Taboo" robs you of about an hour and twenty minutes you'll never get back. Even my MSTie talents were barely a match for this slow paced, boring waste of time. The most puzzling aspect of this film is that *someone* green-lit and/or funded it... I rented "Taboo" solely for the normally talented Amber Benson, who clearly must have been blackmailed into doing this film. I've another lesser known film of hers in my rental queue, the reviews to which I'd better read first. Ironically the best aspect of the film was its impressive labyrinthine mansion for its interior location.

Is the sentiment of this review positive or negative?

pos/neg ans:
negative