Problem: This review is like what?

Review:Unremarkable and unmemorable remake of an old, celebrated English film. Although it may be overly maligned as a total disaster (which it is not), it never builds any tension and betrays its TV origins. Richard Burton sleepwalks through his role, and Sophia Loren's closed (in this movie) face doesn't display much passion, either. (**)
+++++++++
A: negative

Problem: This review is like what?

Review:This is the kind of movie that's so extremely bad that you cant stop watching it because you keep telling yourself that 'it cannot continue to be this crappy all the way to the end. It just cant'. You know, 'worse than Jaws 4'-kind of bad.

I honestly think I've only seen ONE movie that was worse than this, and then we're talking religious crap about how you'd end up in hell for lying or watching football.

Gore? Indeed and lots of it. Well made gore? No way.

The acting is beyond bad and all the lines are lousy cliches. Same goes for the storyline which only really consist of sex, blood and violence, like so many other gore movies.

If you're hoping for a mix between Ichi the Killer and August Underground keep looking. You wont find it in Live Feed.
+++++++++
A: negative

Problem: This review is like what?

Review:The word "1st" in the title has more ominous meaning for the viewers of this film than for its crime victims. At least they don't have to stick around and watch this interminable film reach its own demise.

1st should refer to: 1st draft of a script; 1st takes used in each performance in the final film; 1st edit in post production; etcetera, etcetera.

The movie is not cast too badly, it's just that everything about the film come off as worse than third rate, from the goofy script, to the wooden performances. And while suffering through this cobbled together film, by the 2 hour mark you want to be put out of your misery. At 160 minutes long it is readily apparent that it should have been edited to under 2 hours.

Going into details concerning the lame script and acting serves little purposes. Even in the equally awful, Lake Placid, at least the performances Bill Pullman and Bridget Fonda constructed out of an extremely weak script, were nuanced enough to make you laugh at the movie. In 1st to Die, one ends up grieving only for the time lost in waiting to see what happens after the opening scene of the preparation of the female lead's suicide.

The editing is so bad one is never introduced to one of the main characters, who I think (were never quite told) is a D.A. She just appears in one scene in the middle of a conversation. Obviously the scene where she is introduced to the viewer was dropped on the editor's floor. And no one realized that a character appearing out of nowhere was an unusual film ploy.

In a word, don't waste your time with this one. My wife and I wish we didn't. But at least we created our own diversions by commenting in various places in the film like it was Mystery Science Theater. "Meanwhile, in Cleveland . . . ." !!!!
+++++++++
A: negative

Problem: This review is like what?

Review:To quote the film, "It's better not to know. Better still to forget. Best of all to be abandoned." Oh, the irony.

A ghost story with all the technical refinements of a Hollywood horror film, but horrifyingly bad dialogue after the first quarter of the film, and you feel like you're being preached to from the start.

It's as if the writers' cumulative character dialogue can be summed up by bad cop TV and a Jerry Springer show. Fitting, maybe, for a film like The Hitcher, not a Russia-set horror film. The result is that a potentially great setting and some potentially great gore scenes go to waste and become just silly, not scary or meaningful.
+++++++++
A:
negative