Problem: negative
=++++=
Answer: Let me begin by saying I am a big fantasy fan. However, this film is not for me. Many far-fetched arguments are trying to support this film's claim that dragons possibly ever existed. The film mentions connections in different stories from different countries, but fails to investigate them more thoroughly, which could have given the film some credibility. The film uses (nice!) CGI to tell us a narrated fantasy story on a young dragon's life. This is combined with popular-TV-show-CSI-style flash-forwards to make it look like something scientific, which it is definitely not. In many cases the arguments/clues are far-fetched. In some cases, clues used to show dragons possibly existed, or flew, or spit fire are simply invalid. To see this just makes me get cramp in my toes. Even a fantasy film needs some degree of reality in it, but this one just doesn't have it. Bottom line: it's a pretentious fantasy-CSI documentary, not worth watching.

Problem: negative
=++++=
Answer: I do admit that my review is from a 2006 point of view, nearly 30 years after the making of this movie and at the time of its conception, it may have been a brilliant horror/thriller movie.

Beginning on Halloween night 1968, 6 year old Michael commits the brutal murder of his 18 year old sister. Michael is committed to a mental institution and 15 years later escapes and returns to his home town to murder again.

From this point it is clear that the movie will follow a basic and rudimentary path that is highly predictable. The beginning of every scene is easily predictable in the way it will end whilst the music for each scene containing Michael (the murderer) is exactly the same throughout the movie, thus alerting the viewer to the likely events to follow.

For the horror/thriller enthusiast, there is a severe lack of blood/gore compared to modern day films although I am not akin to the amount that is displayed in this day and age. A happier medium could have been found.

From a half hour into the movie, not one scene is unexpected. The acting for a horror/thriller film is fairly typical of the era and thus lacks any punch for the modern day enthusiast.

A positive for the film is its lingering camera shots and dark lighting which creates a frightening atmosphere. A second positive would be the character of Michael's doctor, who provides clues to the probability of where the story may lead.

However, it is clear that the star, in Jamie-Lee Curtis, is in the infancy stages of her acting career and thus fails to provide a truly frightened central victim.

It is hard for me to rate this film as it was in its day, but from other horror/thriller films of indeed the 80s and to a lesser extent, the 90s, it falls far short of a truly great horror/thriller film.

I suggest you move on and find a classic from the 80s. Cheers!

Problem: negative
=++++=
Answer:
"Proximity" tells of a convict (Lowe) who thinks the prison staff is out to kill him. This very ordinary film is an action/drama with a weak plot; stereotypical, poorly developed characters; and a one dimensional performance by Lowe. A forgettable film not worthy of further commentary.