Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here: I watched this movie as I liked the plot, a group of strangers are held captive trying to figure out how they're connected.

The setting and the premise were obviously influenced by the first (and best) Saw movie & although there wasn't much action the story moved at a relatively good pace.

There was comedy relief ion the form of the two bickering 'Alpha males' and it was a welcome surprise (for me anyway)to see Melissa Joan Hart hasn't given up on acting yet.

A few things let it down for me personally; 1. The paedophile was way over characterised making him get turned on by everything from children to dead bodies.

2. MJH's line about her cop ex 'getting her into this' when in reality, he was the least deserving person to be there, he hadn't KNOWINGLY contributed to the events leading up to their capture.

3. The ending..... what sort of movie just ends in the middle of something going on? There was no resolution, no cliff hanger, no obvious end... it just ends.

And for that alone I dropped two stars off my rating. The first 2 points I would let slide but not the end!
Problem: Write a negative (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive) movie review.

Answer: I'm not sure what HK movies the other reviewers have been watching, but Enter the Eagles is nowhere near the top of the heap in HK action. Michael "Fitz" Wong should be glad he can get acting jobs in HK, because he couldn't act his way out of a wet paper bag in English. Shannon Lee looks good and is a fantastic fighter (even better with the leg fighting than her dad), but her acting skills are also sub-par. In fact, all the English dialog (90% of the movie--even more than in Gen-Y Cops) is so bad that I switched to Mandarin audio just to spare myself the misery of the bad dialog delivery and the redundancy of the English subs. Sure, there are some decent gunfights (but nothing we haven't already seen before) and good cinematography, but the cheesy visual effects really spoil the action.

That said, it's worth the price of admission to watch Shannon and Benny "The Jet" Urquidez go at it. Spectacular, and almost worth watching the rest of the movie for.

Finally, you might notice some scenes that seem "familiar" to you, notably a shootout at an outdoor market (think Matrix) and Fitz diving out of a helicopter wearing black fatigues (think MI:2). Guess someone thought at least a few things in this flick were worth ripping off.
Problem: OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive negative
=++++=
Answer: The Revolt of the Zombies is not the worst movie I've ever seen, but it is pretty far down on the list. When an expedition is sent to Cambodia to discover the trick to making zombies after World War I, one of the members decides to use the knowledge for his own evil ambitions. And he succeeds, at least at first. A love triangle complicates the story some.

This really was a tedious movie, with horrible acting that made it difficult to tell who were zombies and who weren't. The dialog was little better and the plot was unbelievable (not the zombie part of it but parts related to the "romance"). And while I am not any student or expert on cinematography, the camera work didn't seem to help the film much either.

While I have seen a few movies that are worse, this is unlikely to please anyone. It's bad, and NOT in a so-bad-that-it-is-good kind of way.
An example of a movie review. positive (OPTIONS:
- negative
- positive).

A: If you are a Crispin Glover fan, you must see this. If you are a Sean Penn fan, you must see this. If you are a movie fan in general, you must see this. If you have no idea who Crispin Glover is and you have no idea who Sean Penn is, this film will probably still have a lot of value, but the more work you've previously seen by Crispin or Sean, the better.

This movie is so funny, but it is also pure genius. There is nothing that I know of that resembles this film. It is its own genre. I doubt that anything like it will ever be made again. I cannot say anything more about exactly why without partially spoiling it, and some of the other reviews here have already done a good job at doing that.

In response to any of the reviewers here that gave it a bad review, I ask that you view the film again. In reality, there is no point at which this film could fairly be called "boring." This is possibly the funniest, most entertaining, and least boring film ever made. And it only gets better with age and repeated viewings. A timeless classic that, unfortunately, very few will be able to claim to have seen.

Beaver Trilogy is the brilliant work of director Trent Harris, also responsible for the amazing Rubin and Ed, which Crispin Glover also stars in.

Unfortunately, copies of this film are rare and hard to find. I managed to find a VHS version after some diligent searching though, and there are a couple of ways to find it that I know of. But I really wish someone would put this onto a DVD.
Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here: This, along with "Hare Tonic," ranks as one of the best Bugs cartoons, indeed one of the best Bugs, ever. There are some comments about how Bugs in these cartoons is "basic," meaning, I guess, that he is as yet not fully developed. I actually prefer this "basic" version from the mid-40s (Chuck Jones' was the best version) who is actually more rabbit-sized and far more amusing than the eventual long-legged version who towered over Yosemite Sam and Daffy Duck. The latter-day Bugs came to be too suave and sophisticated for my liking. Also check out "Hair Raising Hare" (1946) and "Rabbit Punch" (1948) for great examples of classic Bugs and classic Chuck Jones.
Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here:
If you have ever seen a movie by Brian Avenet-Bradley and compares it to the feedbacks it gets on IMDb, you know that most of the comments and votes are faked. TRUST ME: you will be bored! People of the production team write their feedback themselves (sometimes they even admit it). But that's not enough: They also click constantly "no" whenever there is a negative comment on the movie. That's why negative critics are always placed behind the hyped ones.

The movie itself is bad, bad, bad: bad acting, bad lighting, bad script, bad ending. Believe me now! If not, you will believe me later!

Brian Avenet-Bradley might be quite a good business man. Otherwise it cannot be explained that he finds people who still finance his movies. (Okay, they are cheap, but nevertheless.) But as a creative person, he is a complete failure.