diff --git "a/data/imdb" "b/data/imdb" new file mode 100644--- /dev/null +++ "b/data/imdb" @@ -0,0 +1,1000 @@ +0 seriously , i do n't understand how justin long is becoming increasingly popular . he either has the best agent in hollywood , or recently sold his soul to satan . he is almost unbearable to watch on screen , he has little to no charisma , and terrible comedic timing . the only film that he has attempted to anchor that i 've remotely enjoyed was waiting ... and that is almost solely because i 've worked in a restaurant . but i digress . aside from it 's terrible lead , this film has loads of other debits . i understand that it 's supposed to be a cheap popcorn comedy , but that does n't mean that it has to completely insult our intelligence , and have writing so incredibly hackneyed that it borders on offensive . lewis black 's considerable talent is wasted here too , as he is at his most incendiary when he is unrestrained , which the pg-13 rating certainly wo n't allow . the film 's sole bright spot was jonah hill ( who will look almost unrecognizable to fans of the recent superbad due to the amount of weight he lost in the interim ) . his one liners were funny on occasion , but were certainly not enough to make this anywhere close to bearable . if you just want to completely turn your brain off ( or better yet , do n't have one ) then maybe you 'd enjoy this , but i ca n't recommend it at all . +0 when i voted my " 1 " for this film i noticed that 75 people voted the same out of 146 total votes . that means that half the people that voted for this film feel it 's truly terrible . i saw this not long ago at a film festival and i was really unimpressed by it 's poor execution . the cinematography is unwatchable , the sound is bad , the story is cut and pasted from many other movies , and the acting is dreadful . this movie is basically a poor rip - off of three other films . no wonder this was never released in the usa . +1 i first seen this movie in the early 80s and we used to have it on betamax . as we all know , betamax went the way of the 8-trak tape , sigh , it really had nice picture quality too . anyways , i 'm glad i found this movie again , i 've been searching for it for more than 10 years ! this movie falls into the category of movies like airplane : continuous jokes , oneliners , funny actions ( bodylanguage ) . mark blankfield is absolutely hilarious . his transformation from the shy dr. daniel jekyll into the sex - crazed partyanimal mr. hyde is unforgettable , complete with goldtooth , chesthair and goldchains . the part i loved best was when he hijacked the car from this poor guy and then drove to madam woo woo 's . totally psychedelic experience without the drugs ! if you need laugh therapy this is the movie to do it . when i first seen it , i had tears in my eyes and my belly was hurting from constantly laughing . this is a movie i could watch over and over again . i highly recommend it . +0 lame . lame . lame . ultralame . shall i go on ? there is one , i repeat * one * funny scene in this entire , drawn - out , anti - amusing amateur hour special of a film : fares fares ' fat father knocking someone over with his beer gut . that 's it . the rest of this shockingly mediocre pile of nothingness consists of the usual trademark bored - looking swedish " actors " delivering dialogue which goes into one ear and out of the other , a banal story , sloppy direction and , well , little else worth mentioning . nepotistically cast fares fares is as charismatic as a chartered accountant and his nose rivals even that of adrien brody in terms of sheer ridiculous hugeness . torkel petersson should only work with lasse spang olsen . the rest of the cast is , luckily , easily forgettable , whereas fares ' humongous , titanic nose will forever haunt me in my dreams.

josef fares helps ruin swedish cinema . do n't support him and his nonsense . jalla jalla is to comedies what arnold schwarzenegger is to character acting , kopps would have been much more respectable if it had been a no - budget youtube video , and zozo was simply the most pretentious , pseudo - touching garbage ever unleashed by a swedish director . wake up and smell the roses : swedish movies can be so much better than this , so stop pretending fares ' flicks are worth watching simply because they 're " good to be swedish " . please . +1 nazarin is some kind of saint , he wants to live in life exactly how christ taught man to do . but it 's too late : now the catholic church is between the hands of a wealthy bourgeoisie , the bishops live in luxury and do n't give a damn about the poor and the sick . that 's why our hero ca n't follow the way his hierarchy asks him to follow . so he divests himself of everything , and on his way to purity , he 's joined by some kind of mary magdelene and a woman who 's attracted by him sexually ( the scene between this girl and her fiancé is telling).in spain ( it was the late fifties),they thought nazarin was a christian movie!knowing luis bunuel , it was downright incongruous : all his work is anticlerical to a fault . comparing nazarin and his " holy women " to jesus is a nonsense . on nazarin 's way , only brambles and couch grass grow . his attempt at helping working men on the road is a failure , he 's chased out as a strike - breaker . all his words amount to nothing . at the end of the journey , he 's arrested and offered a pineapple by a woman(bunuelian sexual symbol ) . thanks to " nazarin " , bunuel was allowed to return to spain ( where the censors had not got a clue ) and to direct " viridiana " . +1 straight up , i love this film . i love everything about it . it has a great soundtrack , it has a lot of recognizable faces and it is funny as hell . there are so many plots in this film and every one of them is funny in one way or another.

where as spicolli lit up the screen two years back , drake is almost as memorable of a character . all he wants to do is have fun . he moves out of the house without his parent 's consent , he skips work whenever he feels like it , he is obsessed with sex , he loves his drugs and booze and he tries to be a good friend . it is his lacksidaisical attitude that makes him such a joy to watch . and he comes out with some great lines . and there are so many tiny observations that you do n't see coming but they make you laugh at the sheer velocity when it hits you . one particular moment is when tommy and bill are talking about bill 's ex girlfriend dating someone else now . at the end of the conversation , tommy takes his huge beer bottle and just throws it over his shoulder , casually . he then says good night and the scene ends . it is a perfect scene . tommy 's world is his own . he really lives to party and have fun . when the conversation is over , his time is over and he does n't care who he offends in the process . he has an innocence about him . " it 's casual " is his favourite saying.

another such classic scene is reggie handing bill a donut . he says something to him that me and my friends will never forget because we rewound the film ten times and watched that part over and over again and hurt ourselves laughing . it has to be seen to be appreciated.

wild life is a throw back to when teen comedies were funny , raunchy , had a good ear , entertained us and just wanted us to get lost in their world for 90 minutes . wild life does all those things perfectly . if this is a film that you have n't seen , give it a chance . it is a classic.

also check out the army store guy that jim has problems with . he is a very familiar face now and it is his first role on the big screen . +0 waters 's contribution to the world of cinema has to be searched with a telescope , and then when / if something is found ( by sheer chance and lots of luck ) it has to be analyzed with a microscope.

and after it has been analyzed it would get discarded into the lab 's " rubbish bin for totally useless things " . one single atom of that microscope is worth all of his movies combined.

cb is etremely campy , and intentionally so . the usual jw stuff : comic - strip dialogue , simplistic plot , moronically cheerful characters , chewing - gum pop , overacting etc . waters knows that he is incabaple of making a movie of quality , so he hides behind the mask of the " intentionally cheesy film - maker " - which supposedly makes him a special kind of " anti - artist " . but in the world of cinema , being an anti - talent often gets mistaken for talent , which is exactly what waters had hoped for - and eventually got . it 's a con act . charlatans infest the world of cinema and modern pop art ; it 's a plague.

perhaps we have john waters to blame for inspiring baz luhrman to make all those horrible , dumb turkeys . it 's like a virus : one waters creates five new bad directors , and then these five each create more , and so on . where will it end ? with " dancer in the dark " ? can that bomb actually be topped ? +0 this movie makes " glitter " look like " schindler 's list . " tarantino and the weinsteins really need to consider more carefully before putting their names on a product . green - lighting a p.o.s. like this , regardless of the friendships involved , is just bad business . larry bishop needs to be kept away from a movie camera at all costs . writer / director / producer / actor bishop shows that his skills are inadequate for any of those jobs . a vanity project gone south , " hell ride " allows usually good actors to chew the scenery ... at least when the camera is n't centered on bishop 's feeble attempts to steal every scene he 's in . ( which is virtually every scene ! ) my final three words on " hell ride " are stink , stank , stunk . +1 i really enjoyed this movie and i usually do n't like animated pictures . but i thought the cats were appealing and the story line was charming . there is a good song called " everybody wants to be a cat , " that is a lot of fun . it has some comic moments and is an interesting adventure . i think it helps to be an avid cat lover to enjoy this film . +0 again such kind of zero - budget digital - video cam trash . and again i fell into this trap cuz the title had " zombie " in it ( german title : zombie attack ! ) the story : on halloween some people visit the " museum of the dead " , it 's a trap , a crazy doctor wants to kill the people , everything connected to some aztec - cult . so they fight against some zombies in there.

ultra cheap scenery : some corridors with black tape on it . a few dilettantish drawings and a few skulls as you can find them in every fun - shop . no actors , just low - grade models waking around with absolutely no idea what to do . no effects . laughable make - up , your local hobby - make - up - zombie - fan will do it better , some time it looked as if they had not enough money for enough colour , otherwise they just could not do it like this , man , they have to realize the looks of their " zombies " . some laughable martial - arts fights with the zombies , slow - motion . just , when the director wants to have it scary he uses some standard digital - video - cam effect where everything is flackering . unbelievable ! 0 out of 10 ! +1 it 's a simple fact that there are many of us from the 80 's generation who grew up loving those loopy john cusack comedies made by savage steve holland , and while i prefer there other more bizarre , out - there flick , better off dead , it 's hard for me to dislike one crazy summer , a movie i grew up loving wholeheartedly as a kid into my teens . ocs was a follow - up to better off dead , returning cusack and curtis armstrong from that film . < br />
cusack is hoops , following graduation pal joel murray(george)to nantucket for the summer to each some fun on the beach . hoops finds himself embroiled in a feud with a blonde , buff punk named teddy beckersted whose lecherous father has designs on bulldozing over homes of a neighborhood to build a giant condominium . one of the homes , needing it 's mortgage repaid belongs to demi moore(cassandra ) . there 's a sailboat race which might be their only hope of saving cassandra 's grandfather 's home( .. he had recently passed ) , but it has been won by teddy over the past many years , and hoops is deathly afraid of boats over water . but , with the help and motivation of newfound nantucket friends( .. such as bobcat goldwait and tom villard as auto - mechanic twin brothers ! ) , george , and budding love - interest cassandra , perhaps hoops can come to terms with his fears and win the race to save the neighborhood . armstrong has a supporting part as the son of a kooky , manic weapons salesman , general raymond( .. sctv 's joe flaherty in an inspired bit of casting ) , ack , who uses the training from his father to assist hoops and company in their goals to win the race . < br />
memorable scenes include bobcat getting stuck in a godzilla suit(!)running rampant across an entire model of aguilla beckersted(mark metcalf , barely recognizable as teddy 's rather unhinged pops ) 's condominium , hoops being chased by deranged cub scouts wishing to perform first aid , george a victim of toxic flatulence , bruce wagner 's nutty uncle frank 's increasing insanity every time he tries to better his chances to win 1 million dollars from a radio show , and the wonderful billie bird as george 's grandma who actually bills the group after a meal ! jeremy piven as(you guessed it)a brutish jerk who associates with teddy and causes trouble for hoops and his posse , the yummy kimberly foster as cookie( .. teddy 's girl who attempts to make - out with hoops while he attends a luncheon with his father ) , and the one - and - only william hickey as old man beckersted , who will not reward his son and grandson an inheritance if they lose the sail boat race . demi moore is cute , but this is cusack 's vehicle , though bobcat and villard steal most of the scenes their in . again , some delightful animation from holland are sprinkled throughout the movie(hoops is an artist , appropriately ) . if you like his movies , i highly recommend the underrated , how i got into college . +0 someone said that webs is a lot like an episode of sliders , and i have to agree . spoilers : i never liked the actors on sliders , and rarely have seen it except when nothing better was on . webs is the kind of movie to see if you have no other choices . read a book . webs has those kind of tv has - been actors that look like they are there as part of their probation or work release program . some low budget tv movies have actors that at least look enthusiastic . the actors in webs look like they were getting paid minimum wage and were working on a time - clock . they have that desperate , " the - paycheck - better - not - bounce " look . the queen spider looks great , except it is rarely seen , and there are no other spiders ( and no webs ) . the queen spider bites people , and they become spider zombies , which means that they try to keep their eyes wide open when they are attacking the humans . the humans are all fighting among themselves over a number of different reasons , and they are not sympathetic . after meeting all the " humans " i would have recommended charm school for the characters . all that webs made me feel was apathy . i was numb to the characters , and hoped for some interesting gore and special effects . the gore was minimal , and the special effects were reserved for the ugly spider queen , who looked good . if webs had a bunch of spider creatures eating humans , it would have been more entertaining . apparently they could only budget " spider - zombies . " webs is a sad entry into the field of spider oriented movies . it may qualify as the worst spider movie ever , because eight - legged freaks had great special effects . +1 i am a 58 year old man . on a rainy afternoon my wife suggested that we go see the women . after reading the reviews i thought it might lead to an afternoon nap . wrong- this movie held my interest from start to finish . it was great to finally see meg ryan looking super again . let 's face it meg looks much better with long hair . annette benning looked different to me in every scene she was in . candice bergen is showing her age as is carrie fisher . the daughter , molly , was exceptionally acted by young india . i was able to understand the dialog which is tough in many current films due to rapid speech . cloris leachman and the woman from finland were terrific as the housekeepers who extend their regular duties . the nyc scenes were nice to see . oh , and bette midler had a short role but as usual was terrific . so i gave this chick flick a 9 . guys- go see this even just for the eye candy like eva mendes . it wo n't disappoint . +0 i really hoped for the best with this one , but it just did n't happen . financed at a very non - dutch manner and still looking great , with a style and pace that 's very much like hollywood . what i do n't understand is how - with all these great benefits- the director , writer , producer still managed to make this film a completely horrible picture to watch . filled with bad jokes , cheap nudity and actors that just ca n't really talk [ act ] in the english language . kudo 's for pulling it off , but what was this guy thinking ! +0 in a world where humans can live forever you spend the entire movie wishing they would die . first off if you insist on watching this movie do two things first put it on mute , do n't worry you miss a plot , hell they do n't even talk for the first 70 min of an 87 min movie , after putting on mute you must now hit fast forward till the main chick dies do n't worry even if your paying attention you wo n't know why or how she died . once you get to the " good part " take it of mute . oh , how will you know the good part , wait for an elevator scene with two morons in space suits with wwii weapons . these weapons wo n't seem like much till you realize that the first protagonist had a laser tag pistol and a bandoleer of co2 cartridges . the only remnants of a plot take place between a glowing ball and a semi hot chick who looks like she was attacked by wolverine . after listening to the " plot " , you will wish they went back to not talking . of the four people that are in this movie none of them can remotely act , not even a little bit , you will have better luck witnessing acting at a kindergarten theater.

to comment on the special on the special effects , let me just say " wow " , no really you will spend the entire movie saying to your self " where did this movie 's 1.8 million dollar budget go ! " seriously it will leave you in aw of the magnitude of ineptness . the best " sets " are basically windows wallpaper backgrounds . the ships are basically flying wrenches , wait some are barges that kinda look like whales . i have never heard so many made up words in my whole life . they have buttons on their wrist(large pedometers ) that can put them in " fight mode " and super runing mode ( makes them super blurry ) . this will seriously drain their power reserves but they find bits of wires to chew on to regain their strength . the explosions were less impressive than my fourth of july , i only had sparklers.

so the plot as far as i can figure goes something like this " mother " is a space ship captain and goes to the desert for a while rides a rocket dies . then her daughter 6000 years in the future ( no i am not exaggerating ) recalls her mother 's memories through some sort of capsule . anyways they jabber on for another 10 min and then the cause a big bang . yes the same " big bang " that started our solar system . it 's explained how she goes back in time or something , it does not really matter it happened i guess . roll credits seriously the whole script was mercifully on one sheet of paper , unless that actually detailed any of the dreadfully fight scenes.

after watching the credits i have now laughed more than i did the entire movie , the jobs the created like catering supervisor " galactius sarcophagus " and then the special thanks to george lucas was just the best.

i really was n't expecting that much for a movie i paid 99 cents for but seriously some body owes me for this . most frequent comment heard after the movie " i want my life back " . you have to admire that some but put time and effort in to this movie but seriously , why ? +1 a remake of the 1916 silent film , based on the 1909 novel by maurice leblanc . the detective series would be made into numerous plays , films and tv series in the uk , the us , and france over the years . this 1932 version starred the smashing barrymore brothers john ( as the duke ) and lionel ( as detective guerchard ) . they would also star together in grand hotel , dinner at eight , and several others over the next couple years . sonia ( karen morley ) shows up in the duke 's bed during a party in this pre - hayes code film ; first the lights go out in the bedroom , then they go out in the main ballroom , then the search is on for the crook and the missing jewelry , as well as other missing valuables ... you can tell talkies had n't been around too long , as they still use caption cards several times . also watch for a new kind of safe that does n't need a combination . well - thought- out plot , no big holes , but no big surprises here either . not bad for an early talkie film . clever ending . +0 i must not have seen the same movie as the one the comments refer to here . first , i think they should have serialized ghost story if they were going to film it at all . the truncated version they come up with was awful . i felt the performances were mannered and so much was left out of the story that the performances of such masters as astaire , douglas , houseman , and fairbanks seemed hammy . alice krige was superb as eva , though . craig wasson is a good actor but he was only adequate as the protagonist . the decision to cast patricia neal and to truncate her role was not a good one . imagine what anne bancroft would have done with that character ! i blame the script , which was poor . the production values were dark and the pacing was slow . a disappointing , pedestrian effort.

the book is one of the five greatest suspense / horror novels of the 20th century , imho . but the movie was disappointing , although a great introduction for krige . +0 i 'm very interested in the overwhelmingly positive reviews here . while it had some good features , for the most part i found this movie to be heavy handed , predictable , and , worst of all , not in the least bit scary . the first 30 minutes of the movie were promising , the actress did a nice job in her portrayal , and the world around her was well thought out and meaningful . unfortunately , from there , the movie entered into a downward spiral . i went into this movie with no clue as to what it would be about-- did n't know anything about the actors , directors , genre , etc . at a certain point , my wife made the comment " is this supposed to be a scary movie ? " . well i suppose so , as the boiler - plate " horror movie " score full of squeaking violins and extended vibrato could mean nothing else . there did n't seem to be a whole lot of originality in the movie , the romantic interest was painfully obvious from the first moment , and the second half of the movie descended deep into the realm of the ridiculous . a movie like this walks a dangerously narrow path , and unfortunately there comes a point where the viewer must decide whether to continue walking along that path , or to jump off and simply laugh at the ridiculousness of it all . for the final 30 minutes , i chose the latter . +1 i have to say this is one of the best movie i have seen so far for naruto . the action was a lot better then the first movie because it had a lot more fight scene and it came to u at a faster pace . it was amazing , the choreograph was excellent as well as most of the visual effects.

the story line is something new to naruto . but it is basically the same as the first movie . in the series u see them fight against other ninjas , but in the movies ( 1 + 2 ) u see them fighting against machine of mass destruction . it is nice to see them fighting something other then ninja , and that it was great to see some other power other then chakra . and how other people from other land across the ocean fight . also sakura finally killed someone that is more stronger then her . ( she have truly become strong ) it was a lot better then the fillers on the series that i 'm watching now . when u watch this movie the fast action scene will surely make your heart pound . with new jutsus and garra in the movie , u know it is good . and the music was good as well , but i find it to be lacking something . but the ending theme song was a plus . ( dind dong dang ) i think was a really good song . i totally recommend it.

all in all i give this movie a 10 , because i just love it . if u do decide to watch it , enjoy it . lol +1 i can honestly tell you that this movie is the most awesome movie ever ! ! ! if you are in the mood for a comedy , i totally recommend this movie ! so , here 's the summary . there is this girl(nikki ) who is fourteen and a half and she goes on a vacation with her father(andre ) whom she has n't seen for about two years . she expects the vacation to be totally boring , until she meets this boy(ben ) , who is much older than she is . so , to try to impress him she says that she is n't on vacation with her father , but her lover . this is a hysterical movie from beginning to end , and i highly suggest it . so rent it and enjoy ! ! ! +0 how i deserved to watch this crap ? ? ? worst ever . the acting was awful , when i read that this was a comedy i expected at least to smile , once - or twice , but .... if you are wiling to loose hour and a half of your lives , this is the right movie . i recommend just look in a wall or something , anything else but watch this " film " . yoy can even watch a documentary ( if you are a guy ) about pregnant women , i guarantee it will be more entertaining : ) the actor in this one ( i forgot his name ) is not that bad , and i am surprised how hi accepted the role . anyway " i want someone to eat cheese with " is the right film if you want to punish someone . +1 jack webb finally gives something besides his usual wooden indian performance . he played the epitome of the jarhead , brainwashed , storm the beaches , semper fi , bonehead military idiot . the corps before all else , even humanity . this great film showed the idiosy of boot camp to it 's fullest . 4 stars . +0 child death and horror movies will always remain a sensitive & controversial combination and therefore it is my personal opinion that every movie that shows the courage to revolve on this topic should receive some extra attention from horror fans . of course , like in the case of " wicked little things " , controversial themes do n't always guarantee a good film . despite the potentially interesting plot , the atmospheric setting and the involvement of video - nasty director j.s. cardone ( " the slayer " ) , this is an uninspired and cliché - ridden film that could n't offer a single fright or shock . after losing their husband and father , the remaining tunny women ( mother karen and her daughters sarah and emma ) move to a small and remote pennsylvanian mountain town where they inherited an old , ramshackle mansion . their new home is dangerously close to the old mine ruins where dozens of innocent children tragically lost their lives in 1913 . strange things start to happen , like young emma befriending an ( imaginary ? ) girl who used to live in their house , and the eerie locals seem to keep secrets from karen and her daughters . quickly turns out that the undead children still leave their mine - graves at night to seek vengeance on the descendants of the mine 's owner mr. carlton , who was responsible for their deaths . " wicked little things " is rather tame and extremely predictable . the script shamelessly serves one dreadful cliché after the other , like car wheels stuck in the mud at crucial times , malfunctioning flashlights and horridly broken dolls . there 's very little suspense , even less gore and the make - up effects are disappointingly weak . the zombified children do n't look menacing at all . actually , they all look like miniature versions of marilyn manson , with their black outfits , pale faces and dark eyes . the excitement - free finale is stupid and just as derivative as the rest of this pointless production . lori heuring is thoroughly unimpressive in her leading role as the mother , but scout taylor - compton ( currently a big star thanks to the " halloween " remake ) and young chloe moretz are adequate as the daughters . +0 i really wanted to like this movie . great cast – walter pidgeon in a role that reminds us of his iconic " forbidden planet , " barbara eden and robert sterling as young lovers , frankie avalon as a musically inclined sailor ( is a guy on a submarine a sailor ? ) , even peter lorre as a scientist with a fondness for sharks . maybe it 's a good kiddie movie but i had trouble staying awake . lorre was severely underused . i guess he was a red herring , like pidgeon – you expect him to maybe go nuts and try to throw the hero or his gal in the shark tank . no such luck . by the way , why is there a shark tank on a submarine ? it 's typical of the movie 's lack of ambition . they explain why lorre is walking the shark back and forth ( because we 're seeing it ) but just expect us to accept the fact that there 's a shark on this sub for some reason . " research ? " yeah , scientists are always doing that research stuff , who can understand them ? of course , if there was n't a shark , who would kill the evil psychologist lady ( joan fontaine ) ? i 'm sorry but even kid 's movies in the 50s are capable of being less predictable and frankly idiotic ( not to mention exploitative).

the first 10 or 15 minutes really got my hopes up . great theme song sung by frankie avalon . pidgeon leading floyd the barber ( howard mcnear actually , sorry howie loved ya in " blue hawaii " ) and joan fontaine on a guided tour , careful to skip the room with the huge " warning " sign on the door , past peter lorre with aforementioned sharks , and then we see a full screen shot of eden shaking her moneymaker to avalon 's impassioned horn playing ! the movie quickly goes downstream from there . there 's no real explanation for the firestorm threatening the earth , so there 's a distinct lack of dramatic tension and no villain to boot . instead pidgeon 's character is made into an unconvincing red herring vaguely of the ahab variety ( i guess " the caine mutiny " was still fresh in people 's minds ) , and fontaine 's character suddenly turns evil for no reason at the end . oh , i suppose the reason is that it 's a surprise for the audience . and it is kind of surprising , since the only negative thing she 's done is to talk bad about the captain 's mental health and there 's still no reason why she did the sabotage after she 's revealed to be the villain . very poorly done and unconvincing . the guy who was the pessimistic bible nut was better – at least his character made sense.

so what else could go wrong ? endless , interminable scuba - diving footage . i never understand the appeal of that kind of thing . a giant squid attacks the ship for a minute , just so there 's a monster for the theatrical trailer . maybe that fooled some people into thinking it was going to be a fantasy adventure film , instead of a half - baked suspense movie about military scientists who are never wrong . yes – perhaps worst of all , it 's barely a fantasy movie much less a science fiction movie . it never did anything for my imagination because the whole premise was nothing but another disaster / apocalypse and these characters never experience any feelings of wonder or discovery . i 'm through with irwin allen . i never liked his later movies anyway , but this one got me by pretending to be jules verne when it 's really just another formula exercise in disaster escapism . the whole movie is just waiting to see which character will improbably turn evil and die . he always hired an actor / actress with a charming and personable screen persona to play these roles and that 's the only element of " surprise " to be found since there 's no logic to these characters anyway . what a pathetic waste of time for these actors . george pal 's movies are 100 times better ( the only one that was lame was " atlantis , " which , not coincidentally , was the most allen - esquire ) , full of wonder and excitement and – think of it ! – ideas ! other than a few effects scenes and barbara eden , there 's nothing worth seeing here in my opinion . i guess it 's good fun for those who are into disaster movies , but i think they are a hollow and dull genre of films . +0 i do n't normally write reviews , but for this film i had to . i 'm shocked at the acting talent in this move going to waste ... the script was appalling ... the editing awful ... and the plot very thin . you spend the first half of the movie wondering who is talking to who and what on earth they are doing . the latter half of the movie slows down slightly , but has no depth or feeling . the only saving grace is the nice , but still limited cgi , and the location being london . i gave 3 stars for that , and the fact the actors still tried to do a good job with the drivel they were given . if you fancy losing a couple of hours of your life with mediocre popcorn disaster movie entertainment , by all means , this is the movie for you . but i would recommend doing something else with your time instead , like watching the real archive footage online ! :) http://www.weatherpaparazzi.com/flooding.asp +1 i have the good common logical sense to know that oil can not last forever and i am acutely aware of how much of my life in the suburbs revolves around petrochemical products . i 've been an avid consumer of new technology and i keep running out of space on powerboards - so i know that even the energy crunch associated with peak oil will change my life appreciably.

the end of suburbia shows , in a rational and entertaining manner , just how much my whole family 's lifestyle will have to change in my lifetime . i am particularly concerned for the future generations who will have to pick up the tab for our excesses , however the film - makers do offer a glimmer of hope in that they acknowledge human resourcefulness and determination - and the sense of community that tends to be engendered by shared hardship.

there is no point in trying to pretend that peak oil is baseless propaganda - or in treating it like the approaching radioactive cloud in " on the beach " ( i.e. with suicide pills at the ready ) . even with our best efforts , times will get harder all over , and i 'm hoping there 's enough compassion and humanity to go around . +0 i 'm sorry , but for a movie that has been so stamped as a semi classic and a scary movie , but seriously , i think when the director has me laughing unintentionally , that 's not a good thing . the characters in this film were just so over the top and unbelievable . i just could n't stop laughing at issac 's voice , it was just like a high pitched whiny girl 's british voice . not to mention malicai 's over dramatic stick up his butt character.

children of the corn is about a town where all the children have killed off the adults and worship a god that commands them to sacrifice any 20 + aged people . when a couple has a bad car accident they come to the town for help , but of course they get caught in the kid 's trap and are getting sacrificed ! but malicai has other intentions when he is sick of following issac 's orders.

children of the corn could 've been something great , but turned into a bad over the top movie that you could easily make fun of . as much as i love stephen king , i 'm sure this is not what he intended and it was a pretty lame story , or at least the actors destroyed it . like i said , for a good laugh , watch it , but i 'm warning you , it 's pretty pathetic.

3/10 +0 * possible spoilers ahead*

i'll only say what has n't already been said here ( and i 'll continue this for the rest of my wwf / wwe comments).

if you 're going to have a women 's title match , at least make it interesting , rather than just a squash to put over the current champion . i guess moolah could n't handle an intense match but they wanted to have the legend in a wrestlemania.

i thought the killer bees were wasted in wrestlemanias , especially here . i became a fan in 1989 , about a year after the b. brian blair was gone and jim brunzell became a canvas back . so i did n't realize for a while that they were a top tag team , even top contenders.

but i loved seeing bill fralic in the battle royal . he really came into his own here , creating a cocky heel character in a pre - match interview and even making an elimination in the battle royal . besides steve mcmichael and kevin greene , he is the only professional athlete from my generation with any respect for wrestling ( anyone remember dennis rodman ? ) . and what was with the hart foundation 's ridiculous green tights ? +1 iam not sure if discussing the television series is exactly where the comments should be drawn to , however it is on the television where the the lone ranger really made a name for himself . iam not even referring to the original radio broadcasts of this masked rider of the plains , iam though referring to a point where in a little boy , about 9 or 10 years old , i was to see the movie,"the lone ranger"and never forgot it . i can recall that i was on a line or we were moving toward the paramount theater - the theater was located in the theater district , if i remember correctly . it was directly across , going east to west from the building that has the ball that drops on new years eve - this is of course if anybody does n't know , new york city . high above the street on the roof tops there was a time and maybe even still today huge billboards would advertise what was being shown and so on . it was at that point in time that i looked up and was never more impressed as i was when i looked at that billboard to see the lone ranger across the roof tops - it was great - it made an impression and was never forgotten . that day we went to see the lone ranger - it was the story of how the lone ranger was born - the terrible ambush that the texas rangers rode into and the subsequent rebirth of one of its fallen heroes . it was in this film we learn that the lone ranger will not shoot to kill but to injure so as to let the law be the judge . that type of thinking is so worthwhile that we might be good to learn something from history . this is where we learn that tonto discovers the fallen ranger and upon seeing the symbol of the boyhood friendship that the lone ranger established years earlier when he as a younger person came to the aide of a injured young person in tonto - for the aide given , tonto gave to his faithful friend , a symbol of his thanks which now was part of a necklace that tonto recognized . tonto said,"you are kemosabe".the lone ranger said,"kemo - sabe , that is familiar?then tonto tells the story of this " trusty scout"(the meaning of kemosabe)i think the lone ranger is one of the true heroes of the silver screen and one of the great heroes of television . it should also be stated that these very respected individuals clayton moore and jay silverheels sought to live there lives according to the legend of the lone ranger - it may very well be that there is an inspiring story in the story of the lone ranger and his faithful companion tonto . i myself was so pleased by the ability to find and buy the dvds , that i stayed up all a saturday morning and watched the many episodes now available . long live the lone ranger and his faithful companion tonto - hi - ho silver- +0 i normally would n't waste my time criticizing a useless movie such as this . however , i 'm off of work this week , so i have plenty of time to wallow in meaningless trivialities . to start , let me say that i frequently enjoy non - commercial , non - mainstream , non - american cinema . ( feel free to click on my user profile for a supporting filmography . ) that said , there are plenty of bad movies that are released in countries outside of the u.s. trust me , i 've been tortured by hundreds of them . " lost in beijing " is one particularly bad film.

the opening half hour is an impressive , non - stop exhibition of moral degeneracy . this film provides some classic morals that belong on the same level as kim ki - duk 's " bad guy " ( 2001 ) . < br />
1 . women actually enjoy being raped ; 2 . rape should be glorified , praised , and respected ; 3 . feel free to rape any woman you like , because while your " doing " her she 'll eventually start to like it and reach orgasm ; 4 . if you 're wife gets raped , make sure you blackmail her rapist for lots of money , but if he does n't pay , just repeatedly bang his slut of a wife as compensation ; 5 . if you 're wife gets raped , be sure to screw and degrade her the next day while playing the role of the rapist , taunting her with lines like , " did he fu*k you like this ? " ; 6 . if you 're husband is a rapist , just accept it ; 7 . after you personally get raped , befriend your rapist and hang out with him whenever possible.

how can anyone in their right mind care about any of these characters ? they 're nothing more than a bunch of degenerates who not only live their lives in careless ways , but actually revel in their meaninglessness and support each other . do n't misunderstand me though . i 'm very capable of enjoying films that depict lifestyles and morals that are contradictory to my own . " ichi the killer " ( 2001 ) and " moonlight whispers " ( 1999 ) are very interesting portrayals of sado - masochism . " strange circus " ( 2005 ) is an exceedingly perverted play on child sexual abuse . " marriage is a crazy thing " ( 2002 ) is a scathing indictment on traditional marriage . even religiously - based movies like " running on karma " ( 2003 ) and " samsara " ( 2001 ) have entertained me on occasion . the difference is that those films actually have some interesting psychological content and character development to them , whereas " lost in beijing " has virtually none.

it 's known that people with unorthodox mindsets exist on this planet , but without some kind of character development or psychology behind the acts themselves , you end up with a superficial exposition of despicable behavior . why , exactly , does bing bing eventually befriend and care for her rapist ? why does the wife of a rapist accept his behavior unconditionally ? the filmmakers never bothered to tell us . even the obvious juxtaposition of rich and poor classes was ineptly conceived and in the end served as a mere situational ploy . it all feels too bland and forgettable after the filthy opening half hour subsides . < br />
other reviewers here seem to have confused moral ambiguity with complex characterization . the reason you ca n't choose which person to root for is because they were n't developed properly . do n't think that this movie has complex characters just because they 're not clearly defined . on the contrary , the reason they 're not clearly defined is because we know nothing about them or what they 're thinking . this is hardly a positive attribute of this movie . < br />
on the positive side , the camera - work and acting are quite good , but everything else just gets duller and duller as the film progresses . you can place this alongside trash like " turning gate " ( 2002 ) , " what time is it there " ( 2001 ) , " irreversible " ( 2002 ) , and the aforementioned " bad guy . " +1 the story told by the cranes are flying is not , admittedly , all that original . young lovers are separated by war ; bad things happen to both . we 've seen it many times before.

nonetheless , we have n't seen it filmed this well , with bold shots that take liberties to emphasize separation , or destruction , or hopelessness . all the more remarkable coming from the soviet union , and reason to conclude that tarkovsky is not the last word in modern - era soviet cinema.

i was reading chekhov 's " three sisters " the other day , and chanced upon what may be the meaning of the title of this film . in act 2 , masha objects to the notion that we must live our lives without meaning or understanding:

"masha : surely mankind must believe in something , or at least seek for the truth , otherwise life is just emptiness , emptiness . to live and not to know why the cranes are flying , why children are born , why there are stars in the sky . either you must know why it is you live , or everything is trivial - mere pointless nonsense." < br />
likewise , veronika has a hard time believing that the war , and her and others ' sufferings , have been pointless . better to assign a meaning , to live as if one 's life is significant , and not to give in to despair . it is perhaps this thinking that prompts her to her final act in the film.

btw as a minor correction to one other comment here -- there may be a pattern of v 's in the film , though i had n't noticed them myself . but the first letter of veronika 's name is not a further instance of this ; in the cyrillic alphabet , her name begins with a letter which looks like an english " b " . +1 it is clear this film 's value far supersedes the cost with which the format ( mini - dv ) implies . in fact , the filmmaker embraces the format and incorporates it so craftily into the storyline that i forgot the fact that i was not seeing the typical 35 millimeter film . it has the core appeal of indie movies like clerks & the work of robert rodriguez combined with a fantastic " new take " on the romantic comedy genre . " this is not a film " is an honest film with honest portrayals and , it is a superbly paced narrative . there is not one point in this film where i felt a scene could have ( or should have ) been omitted . on the contrary , the director pulls amazing performances out of truly gifted actors and does so in extremely confining circumstances . from page to screen , this film is a worthy and relevant story that hits on so many levels ( creative , technical or otherwise ) . i highly recommend it for all who enjoy cinema or those looking for a little charm in an otherwise devoid of charm medium . +1 i am trying to find somewhere to purchase a dvd / vhs copy of the movie " is n't it shocking ? " i was 7 years old when i saw this movie and i lived in the town where it was filmed . a couple of items from my family were used in the movie as props and a couple of my friend 's homes were used in a couple of the scenes . the filming pretty well took place in the town and surrounding community . i have only seen the film once originally and i would like to get a copy so now i can show my family the film . i have done extensive searches online with not luck and i was wondering if anyone would have any ideas on trying to get a copy of this movie ? +1 clouzot followed le corbeau , where no one knew who was penning the poison thus everyone was suspected , with another masterpiece , quai des orfevres four years later in which we know from the outset ( or think we do ) whodunnit . top - billed louis jouvet does n't appear for forty minutes by which time clouzot has established a rich milieu of music hall , music publishers , etc and a fine cast of colourful characters ; angela lansbury lookalike ( lansbury appeared in woman of paris that same year ) suzy delair scores as the chanteuse whose desire to improve her lot inspires the jealousy of her husband / accompanist bernard blier who follows her to the home of an elderly letch only to find he is already dead . from here things go seriously wrong , his car is stolen before he leaves the premises so his pre - arranged alibi is out the window whilst meanwhile , unknown to him , his wife confesses to the murder to the photographer neighbour , a closet lesbian in love with her , who volunteers to return to the crime scene and retrieve delair 's scarf and as long as she 's there , thoughtfully wipes her prints of the murder weapon , a champagne bottle . at this point investigator jouvet gets involved and from then on it 's a case of keeping the plates spinning in the air . clouzot 's output was relatively small but virtually all of it was , as spencer tracey said in another context , ' cherce ' , with le salaire de peur and les diaboliques still to come . in short this is a must for french cinema buffs . +0 much praise has been lavished upon farscape , but i do n't think it 's that good . it certainly has a distinctive look , but it lacks just about everything else : story , purpose , direction , excitement ; you name it . i 'm a big sci - fi fan , and i make it a point to watch all the sci - fi shows i can . i 've almost finished the four seasons of farscape , and at this point i 'm not very satisfied . the show does have a few good things - most notably claudia black ( who 's sadly missing from the first few episodes of season four ) - , but they are very few and very far between . as a whole the show is marred by a lot of very silly stuff ( such as fantasy elements rather than sf ditto ) , and many many episodes , esp . in season four , are unspeakably messy and very poorly structured . and one just feels that it is n't going anywhere . it 's mostly just non - directional adventures with thin , long - running plot lines which develop painstakingly slowly . well , sometimes it 's a little bit tighter , but it only lasts for a very few episodes at a time.

effects - wise , there are a few impressive things here and there ( esp . out in space , occasionally ) , but the show seems stuck in the same style of effects , which frankly gets old fast . outlandish and unconvincing puppet aliens mar the show a great deal , and i 've come to prefer ( by far ) the episodes where regular human - looking characters are the focus.

i think the peacekeepers are by far the most stylish and intriguing and interesting figures on the show ; they succeed in being a convincingly alien culture , despite their all - human appearance . there are a few really cool episodes with them , esp . in the first season ( iirc ) , where crichton masquerades as a peacekeeper captain , and invades and eventually destroys one of their secret bases . such episodes can reach a rating of 8 out of 10 , but i can not award the show as a whole more than a " 4 " rating.

aside from the peacekeepers ( which themselves are somewhat too single - mindedly totalitarian and militaristic to be really nuanced ) , the show simply does n't offer anything important or significant that you need to know or want to see . otoh , it does contain a few good ideas and is not a total loss.

this is just my opinion , of course , but as a seasoned sci - fi fan , i think it counts for something , and may be of help to others . there are n't a lot of good sci - fi shows out there ; but star trek ( any series ) and especially the new battlestar galactica are definitely better than farscape . but if you 're a huge fan of mediocre sci - fi shows , you may well like farscape , too.

my rating : 4 out of 10 . +1 " who will love my children " saddest movie i have ever seen . definite 10/10 . released on tv in 1983 . movie has been released on vhs . dvd release is a must , sooner rather than later . mother dying of cancer , must find homes for all her children before she dies , because her thoughts are that her husband and father of the kids is not capable of caring for them once she has died . she manages to find homes for the children except one , a young boy whom is not wanted because he suffers from epilepsy . very sad when your not wanted . in for a real good tear jerker , get your hands on this movie . i 'm a male even i cried when i watched this movie . not to be missed . +0 for those of you who do n't remember movies -- http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080120/ -- this came out in ' 79 ( i guess enough time has gone by so naturally nunzio figured he could just redo this and say he wrote it - yea , right ! ) .

the acting in this is way overboard - the " tough guys " walk around with their shoulders hunched forward to give the impression they are bigger than they really are , also the " hero ' seems to have a passion for snorting , and rolling his eyes in a bug - eyed kind of way to express angst / anger to the celluloid eye.

there is a sort of racial message here , from the sicilian perspective ( mind you this is about 3rd generation down the line ... the original " wogs " arrived in oz after the war and during my childhood - yep i 'm an aussie . so the " wogg - iness " has been diluted a lot - they even sound like true - blue aussies - not a flicker of the " dago accent " anywhere ( there , there 's another slang for ya , nun ! ) < br />
maori 's with sunnies ( sunglasses ) at 4 am - must be cool to be sun - blinded in the middle of the night and it looks like redfern ... this is at this movie 's tedious end . nunzio tried to copy the flavor of the warriors but , left too many holes in the story . how about coincidences ? < br />
the warriors had a gang of baseball guys wielding bats , with white face makeup chase the heroes to a train station and fight them - nunzios gang get chased on a railway station by a gang of stick wielding guys wearing whitish face masks . the warriors were mistakenly accused of shooting / murdering another gang - member -- nunzios gang are mistakenly accused of raping the sister of the big maori gang boss . the warriors are lured into a room by a gang of girls who attack them - nunzios crowd want to crash at a friends house , which is populated by , yep , a gang of girls -- there are almost too many copies from the warriors to keep on about here.

i am saddened that people do n't want to see other moves from oz because of this tripe - how about mad max - commander and master of the world ? not all movies are made by actors who are so bad , they have to fund their own movies . < br />
as far as the other actors in this show are concerned , they seem to have taken their cue from " the nun " as they all are as bad as each other - do n't bother with this movie ! i ca n't get my money back - so save yours ! +1 great characters , great acting , great dialogue , incredible plot twists in plain language one of the best shows i 've ever seen in my life . do yourself a favor and watch this show , you wo n't regret it . this show re - writes the book on sci - fi ! +1 until i saw this film , " life is beautiful " was my favourite film of all time . this film is everything a great film should be . great script , unsurpassed acting and direction that neither approaches the sentimentalism the subject tempts nor leaves it without the emotional impact it demands . this film contains the taste that could not come from hollywood and lacks the pretencion that would come from france . a wonderful movie even above the calibre i have come to expect when i see the handmade films logo come up . i need not go into detail as the previous posts encompass everything why this movie has to be seen by everyone on this planet . +1 if you get a chance to get a hold of this lost ( for many years ) gem , i doubt you will be disappointed . ps has an odd blend of social satire and ultra - cool blaxploitation-- even hints of slapstick , but it 's so odd that it was not only ahead of it 's time , nothing has been seen like it since.

i strongly disagree with people who say that the film is dated , especially with spike lee 's " bamboozaled " ( sp ? ) a few years back which was a misfire of trying to capture the same message . ( good filmmaking , disjointed script.)

robert downy 's direction is brilliant , allowing many of his actors to improvise , the film gets better as it goes along and the jokes swagger from hit or miss one - liners that are as forgiven as those found in a mel brooks comedy , to sheer non - pc ' i ca n't believe they just said that ' fun.

favorite parts , the commercials . the film switches from gritty black and white depictions of the ad agency to beautiful ( perhaps 16 mm ) color and gets away with it . < br />
i refuse to hint at any spoilers , but if you get the chance to see the dvd version be sure and watch the downey interview ( but leave it until after the movie . ) < br />
my vote 10/10 - - most underrated film of the late 60 's , early 70 's . thank you prince . +0 this movie was a rather odd viewing experience . the movie is obviously based on a play . now i 'm sure that everything in this movie works out just fine in a play but for in a movie it just does n't feel terribly interesting enough to watch . the movie is way too ' stagey ' and they did n't even bothered to change some of the dialog to make it more fitting for a movie . instead what is presented now is an almost literally re - filming of a stage - play , with over - the - top characters and staged dialog . because of all this the storyline really does n't work out and the movie becomes an almost complete bore- and obsolete viewing experience.

it takes a while before you figure out that this is a comedy you 're watching . at first you think its a drama you 're watching , with quirky characters in it but as the movie progresses you 'll notice that the movie is more a tragicomedy , that leans really more toward the comedy genre , rather than the drama genre.

the characters and dialog are really the things that make this movie a quirky and over - the - top one that at times really become unwatchable . sure , the actors are great ; peter o'toole and susannah york , amongst others but they do n't really uplift the movie to a level of ' watchable enough'.

the story feels totally disorientated . basicaly the story is about nothing and just mainly focuses on the brother / sister characters played by peter o'toole and susannah york . but what exactly is the story even about ? the movie feels like a pointless and obsolete one that has very little to offer . like i said before ; i 'm sure the story is good and interesting to watch on stage but as a movie it really is n't fitting and simply does n't work out.

the editing is simply dreadful and times and it becomes even laughable bad in certain sequences . < br />
more was to expect from director j. lee thompson , who has obviously done far better movies than this rather failed , stage - play translated to screen , project.

really not worth your time.

4/10 +1 if you had a mother that described you like that , you just might be looking to bump her off yourself . it 's how danny devito feels about anne ramsey , it 's just how to put the plan in action.

and his creative writing class taught by professor billy crystal gives him the idea . that and a viewing of alfred hitchcock 's classic strangers on a train which gives devito the idea to switch murders with crystal who hates his wife , kate mulgrew , who not only is cheating him out of an idea for a book he wanted to write , but is also carrying on with hunky tony ciccone.

throw momma from the train plays out kind of like strangers on a train as devito seems to have carried out his end of the murder scheme . but crystal 's having a bit of a problem putting ramsey down even with danny 's help . that woman might need killing , but she 's going to take a lot of it.

the only academy recognition that throw momma from the train got was an academy award nomination for anne ramsey for best supporting actress . ramsey lost to olympia dukakis for moonstruck , but the film turned out to be her finest hour . ramsey already had the throat cancer that would eventually kill her the following year , but look at the list of credits she managed to amass even after throw momma from the train , she worked right up to the end.

i've seen interviews with both of the stars of throw momma from the train , billy crystal and danny devito , and both have gladly conceded that anne ramsey 's performance as the mother from hell both made the film the success it was and stole it out from under them . their acknowledgment of ramsey 's talent and performance is the best possible tribute.

if marion lorne in strangers on a train had been anything like anne ramsey here , farley granger would gladly have joined robert walker in disposing of her . throw momma from a train is one of the best black comedies out there , should not be missed . +1 this movie really proves that the world is all too often an unfair place , especially the world of motion pictures . " the assignment " received barely any attention upon it 's release and not surprisingly flopped at the box - office , but when history will be written this movie will most surely receive some long lost praise.

thank god i 'm surrounded by friends who knows what 's good for me . being a movie buff like myself a pal highly recommended " the assignment " , a movie i had n't even heard about . i decided to check out what leonard maltin gave it , and not surprisingly he gave it * * 1/2 . knowing that this is the same grade he gave classics like " alien " , " the usual suspects " and " the matrix " ( i kid you not ) i knew his meaning did n't mean diddly squat jack s***. so without hesitating i went out and bought it on dvd . this was about 3 years ago and the movie is still one of my proudest belongings in my dvd collection , despite a cover design that echoes a low budget stinker with casper van dien.

"the assignment " is expertly directed , delivering some really intense moments that will hold you on the edge of your seat throughout the movie , on top of that it boasts an at times brilliant story that you know will be riddled with unexpected twists and turns . it stars aidan quinn in one of his best performances , and serves him with great support by donald sutherland and ben kingsley who are both in great form.

something like 40 out of 42 user comments like this movie , most of them ca n't seem to praise it enough . so what are you waiting for ? if you call yourself a fan of action - thrillers you should have bought it , rented it , seen it yesterday ! +1 < -----minor spoilers!----->

a woman gets pregnant , but not by her husband . she develops ' something ' inside her , or at least that s what her husband thinks . they go through a lot of hard times , while she is on the brink of a nervous breakdown . the husband contacts an ufo professor , and with his help they try to find out what is wrong with her.

<-----minor spoilers!---->

the story could have been a bit better , or at least be made less predictable , but the movie is catchy and it got me and my sister hooked through the entire movie without a problem . the acting is very good , and the filming is much better than normal , if you compare this to your normal b - alien movie . the effects are good , and something is happening every second of the movie . the characters are really likable , and apart from a stupid nurse in oné scene , they are all very convincing in their roles.

i thought it was a good movie , and can recommend it , if you like alien / monster - abduction movies!

7/10 - the story could have been a bit less predictable . +1 my reaction to this remake of " the italian job " is probably hopelessly mixed up with the events occurring in my life when i saw it ; this is the first movie i saw after i had just landed a job after 8 months of unemployment and going back to school for retraining . money was still tight , but i no longer had to choose between seeing a movie in the theaters and paying bills ( or eating lunch ) , and the sense of relief and gratitude i was feeling at the time was enormous . in consequence , my enjoyment of " italian job " was probably far out of proportion to its actual worth . < br />
still , i picked it up used on dvd a few weeks ago and watched it again , and i still enjoyed it immensely . i have never seen the original ( though i have heard it is an absolute classic ) , but its modern day counterpart is eminently watchable if you have a taste for modern day production values applied to older films plots and themes . < br />
what initially won me over to this movie was the soundtrack - imo don davis writes some of the most supple , textured and aurally pleasing soundtracks around . ij opens with a sly , witty , pulsing arrangement that combines strings , guitar harmonics , brush work and quiet moments - it won me over completely from the opening seconds . and the whole movie is like this - i have n't heard this kind of ringing , chiming , pulsing soundtrack music since stewart copeland left the police and started doing soundtracks for movies like " rumble fish " . there are at least a dozen irresistibly scored motifs in here , along with some pop song remakes that range from " all right " to " inspired " . for people to whom the soundtrack is important , this movie is a delight . < br />
on to the movie : i can take or leave mark wahlberg , but he 's okay here as the leading man , and the movie does n't ask him to do anything he ca n't do well . he 's the weakest " major " actor in the film , but that 's because the rest of supporting cast is so strong , especially donald sutherland in a bit part . mos def , jason steadham , ed norton , seth green and charlize theron all turn in solid , fat - free performances . norton seems to mostly be phoning it in ( rumor has it that he did n't really want to be in the film ) , but he 's still a natural even at 1/2 power . my one quibble with the casting and acting is with the character " wrench " , who seems to be a male model pretending to be an actor . his part seems to be shoehorned into the movie , and he has little chemistry with the rest of the cast ( although you can blame some of that on the size of the part and the " late walk on " nature of the character ) . if i were a cynical sort , i would wonder who the actor slept with to get put into this movie in such a supernumerary role ? nah , never happen ...

production values , camera work , stunts , plot ... everything cooks along quite nicely and gray and his production crew pull things together pretty seamlessly ( with the exception of the " wrench " character , see above ) . < br />
the dialog has a nice , light touch that rewards your indulgence , and there are several satisfying major and minor plot payoffs along the way . ( my favorite moment - when norton 's character tells wahlberg 's character that he 's just lost the element of surprise . wahlberg proceeds to cold cock norton with a right cross , and then asks him , " were you surprised ? ? " hmmm , maybe you had to be there ... ) < br />
of course the movie requires a certain level of " suspension of disbelief " to work , but if you just relax and go along with it ( and do n't think too hard about the mechanics of cracking a safe underwater , or the likelihood of anyone being able to successfully hack and manipulate la traffic via a laptop , etc ) , you 'll have a fun ride . < br />
"the italian job " : it 's lightweight summer fluff , but it 's very good for what it is , and it does n't try to be anything else . it is n't good enough for an " 8 " but i 'd give it a " 7.5 " . +0 this movie was really awful . it was not in the least bit frightening , or even startling . i went to see it with a bunch of friends and by the end of the night we were saying " the ruins ruined my night . " < br />
i would not recommend seeing this movie in theaters , renting it or even watching the movie on television by accident . it is an absolute waste of an hour and a half . < br />
the plot was nearly non - existent , the characters were horribly underdeveloped , and they gave no back story whatsoever for anything that was happening , and then left it completely open at the end as if preparing for a sequel . +1 finally a true horror movie . this is the first time in years that i had to cover my eyes . i am a horror buff and i recommend this movie but it is quite gory . i am not a big wrestling fan but kane really pulled the whole monster thing off . i have to admit that i did n't want to see this movie , my 17 year old dragged me to it , but am very glad i did . during and after the movie i was looking over my shoulder . i have to agree with others about the whole remake horror movies enough is enough . i think that is why this movie is getting some good reviews . it is a refreshing change and takes you back to the texas chainsaw ( first one ) , michael myers , and jason . and no cgi crap . +1 there 's hell to pay when you cross nami matsushima(meiko kaji ) , female scorpion , and a dangerous group of thugs( .. including their sadistic head pimp and his equally repellent lady ) , operating a prostitution ring with an iron fist , does just that . hell hath no fury like scorpion , and a determined detective , gondo(mikio narita ) , seeking revenge for decapitating his arm after handcuffing her , will do whatever it takes( .. and that includes intimidating anyone who might know her whereabouts)to catch nami . nami finds an ally in hooker yuki(yayoi watanabe ) , who provides her a temporary shelter . yuki has a retarded brother who suffered a brain injury during a job , and must take care of him( .. in a disturbing revelation , regarding incest , she also provides his sexual needs!) .. she , in actuality , keeps him locked up in a room while working the streets ! meanwhile , nami is targeted by a vile neighbor once she finds a place of her own( .. she works as a sewer ) , and he threatens to turn her into the authorities( .. nami was an escaped convict , who fled a subway from the cops)if she does n't supply him sexual favors . his wife dumps a tea kettle of boiling water all over his face and body , resulting in death , & the prostitution clan come looking for nami to pay the debt of losing a very important member of their organization . that 's when katsu(reisen lee ) , the pimp 's lover and confidant , realizes that the one responsible for the loss of their loyal member is a former inmate of hers , scorpion . subduing her with an injected liquid drug , placing her in a bird cage ( ! ) , katsu embellishes in her imprisonment . what ultimately fuels nami 's rage is watching a prostitute die outside her cell , a victim of a forced late - term abortion , left to bleed to death . finding a scalpel clutched in her hand( .. from the operation room ) , nami will break free from the cage and prey upon each member of the clan responsible for the hooker 's death . the series of scalpel murders provide gondo with an opportunity to catch nami , and he 'll trap her in the underground sewers below the city , but can he catch or kill her ? especially if yuki comes to her aid?

trust me when i say there was no shackles binding director shunya ito or his film - making team because female prisoner scorpion : beast stable is yet another perverse , deranged , and ultra - violent entry in the very entertaining series . equipped with fine production values and a visually stylistic talent for capturing all of the madness in imaginative ways , ito pulls you right( .. or he did me)into the twisted drama that always exists when nami matsushima is on screen . when you have a protracted opening credits sequence where your anti - heroine is fleeing through the crowded city streets with a man 's severed arm handcuffed to her , the viewer has to know what they 're in for ! the incestuous sub - plot is simply bizarre( .. and it 's shot in a soft - core way with the retarded brother humping his numb , cold sister with dead eyes staring ahead ! ) , and the entire abortion sequence is rather hard to sit through . but , the abortion angle , as disturbing as it is , provides motivation for nami 's revenge .. despite nami 's imperfect ways , and her criminal nature , you would rather see her take these cretins out than vice versa . interesting angle with detective gondo , as well . gondo is willing to break the rules , and he becomes a force - of - nature towards anyone who stands in his way of capturing his mortal enemy . his fate at the end , visiting another enemy of nami 's , in an isolated cell , while she looks on , perfectly encapsulates what makes these films so ridiculous yet so entertaining . the scalpel murders is a montage of slumping scumbags , in various places , the blades protruding from flesh , with nami leaving the crime scenes very driven to wipe the whole clan out in memory of a fallen victim of unfortunate circumstances . while the film is essentially a comic book adventure , there 's a sadness that permeates , and few characters come away without flaws . i imagine many will walk away from this scoffing at how unrealistic female prisoner scorpion : beast stable is( .. specifically how nami is able to escape capture time and time again , accomplishing her goals of revenge , paying back all those who have wronged her ) , but i looked at it as a violent action cartoon , much like the later 80 's films , and enjoyed it for what it was . as always , this film features some beautiful asian actresses and some colorful heavies . meiko kaji , almost always reserved / quiet , yet chilly staring down her enemies with violent intent , is in fine form( .. in more ways than one)and reisen lee , as her cross - eyed , repugnant adversary , runs away with the picture as a perfectly realized contemptibly abusive foe worthy of psychological torment( .. when both are in prison , nami 's ways of torturing her are sweet ) . my favorite scene has nothing to do with the plot , but is so wonderfully wrong , features a dog discovering gondo 's rotted severed arm , walking through a street eventually finding a resting place to chew on it ! +1 why could n't the end of the movie have been sean connery 's men fighting the french instead of the germans . ever since the french had occupied algeria in 1830 , the tribes from morocco and those of algeria were making raids on the french military and civilian settlements . this movie could have been a continuous of that historical aspect where the french had seize the rasuadli so his followers would not be raiding algeria , and then his followers would have attacked the french to free him.

the movie is still stereotypical of shootouts between the germans and the americans . when the americans shoot the germans , their guns ( even the pistols ) make loud noises , create large bloody bullet wounds , and their enemies are screaming after being shot . when germans shoot at the americans , their guns do n't make large sounds , do not create bloody wounds , and their enemies make little or no sound after being shot.

in real life , the american krag rifle was the worst rifle america had ever produce until the early version of the m-16 came along . the krag was hard to maintain , not reliable , and the rifle bolt was always jamming . the german mauser was one of the world 's finest rifles . we were so impress by it during spanish american war , that we made a copy of it and call it the springfield rifle.

finally , the people of morocco must had a word for artillery since the french were using them in their raids against morocco . i did n't like it when they made the rasuldai feel stupid that there was no word for artillery in the moorican vocabulary . instead , the rasuadli stated that the europeans had guns on wheels that make the ground shake . +1 wow , i just loved watching all these hot babes ! the scenery around malibu and california was off the fizzy . i could watch it again just to see all that flesh crammed into those tiny , teeny bikinis ! i recently saw pilar lastra , the steaming hot housekeeper in malibu spring break , as a center fold in my favorite mag , playboy . she is hot , hot hot ! the opening seen was bitchin . when the two main girls run out of gas and stop at this desert gas station , they drive the gas - guy nuts with their bodies and skimpy outfits ! the slow - mo lets me enjoy every inch of them ! my girlfriend liked looking at this shredded hot dude too ( now i 'd like a bod like that ) and at all the other hot dudes .... and some of the girls too ! any movie that can bring that out in my girlfriend is a 10 + for me ! +0 i 'm guessing that the movie was based on a hefty book . given the number of characters and subplots during katyn , i thought that the movie creators , perhaps the writer or director , intended to create an epic movie . but really there was n't enough time to properly spend on developing characters or story . aggravatingly , there were many unrelated side - stories that could have been edited out.

in relating the events leading up to the mass - murder of all these intellectuals and officers , i do n't think the movie explained any reasons why murder was necessary . was it political ? philosophical ? revenge ? the interesting part of historical movies are seeing personal motivations or emotions . instead , the murderers of katyn seemed like automatons , controlled entirely by stalin , who 's appears occasionally framed as a charcoal sketch . the portrayal of the russians and germans seemed entirely one - dimensional . ( are polish people just that angry at the russians ? ) besides being badly edited and biased or at least unrealistic , choices of music and cinematography felt mismatched to each other and to the movie itself . i do n't think you can really shoot an epic war film or war event on hand - held camera . ( but if the director went with a character - driven story , perhaps by focusing on a single family , maybe the handy - cam approach would have worked better . ) and if you use really dramatic music , it needs to be better balanced to the type of shots made . +1 ugh , what an embarrassing episode last night ! it was either a failed script for " abc afterschool special " , or the product of an earnest rookie writer , just out of college , making an homage to that classic pc anti - gun homily from 1974 , " the gun " . in fact hubby & were disappointed that the closing shot was n't of the gun being melted down like in the movie!

no , i 'm not some nra shill . it 's just that when the producer of an intelligent & nuanced series gets it in his head that i should be subjected to a didactic dramatization of his personal cause , i 'd appreciate it if the lecture at least was n't delivered via 2-by-4 . geez!

ok , the sociology lesson is over . the message has been delivered . the important episode has been aired . now let 's get back to some entertaining episodes that try to respect our intelligence . +0 some sciencey people go down in a cave for some reason and there 's some sort of creature that 's killing them.

i usually give a more detailed plot , but i was n't paying too much attention to this . overall , it was dull and the only time you 'll be really paying attention is during the action scenes , which the director did wonderful on.

the acting is alright , but the characters are so dull and forgettable they blend in your mind . you 'll forget who lived and who died for 2 reasons : 1 . the kills are boring 2 . the characters are boring.

the ending might have shocked me more if i knew who was who.

so you 're looking for a creatures - in - cave movie ? check out the descent instead . +0 i will not say much about this film , because there is not much to say , because there is not much there to talk about . the only good thing about this movie is that our favorite characters from " atlantis : the lost empire " are back . several of the bad things about this movie are that it has horrible characters , it has horrible comedy , horrible animation , and james arnold taylor trying to copy the wonderful , one and only michael j. fox as milo james thatch . the reasons for my criticisms are that all the characters are changed into something that they never were , and never should be , animation that has been downgraded to the lowest extent possible , and finally , why would somebody who did wonderful voice - over work for obi - wan kenobi in " clone wars " want to copy michael j. fox ? i happen to have an answer to this . because they are the same person who thought he had to copy eddie murphy from mulan in mulan ii . yes , sadly , it is true.

. +1 this , unfortunately , is a little - known film ..... i say " unfortunately " , because it ranks up there with the " classics " of the american silent screen!

it 's about a legend of a " phantom chariot " that travells all over the world , picking up the souls of those who have died . the legend says tha the last person to die on new year 's eve is condemned to drive the chariot for the next whole year.

it brings to mind the sequence of the " ghost of future yet to come " in dicken 's famous " christmas carol".

the double - exposure effects of the ghosts ( esp . when they interact with the " live " people ) are excellent ! < br />
if you love silent films , you must see this ; it will " blow you away"!

norm vogel < br />
norm 's old movie heaven http://www.nvogel.com/film/film.html +0 this movie was pure genius . john waters is brilliant . it is hilarious and i am not sick of it even after seeing it about 20 times since i bought it a few months ago . the acting is great , although ricki lake could have been better . and johnny depp is magnificent . he is such a beautiful man and a very talented actor . and seeing most of johnny 's movies , this is probably my favorite . i give it 9.5/10 . rent it today ! +0 there is something about doug mclure 's appearance in a movie that is a warranty of wretchedness . his dg initials are like a special cinema - certification , that comes somewhere before ' u ' . < br />
cushing , on the other hand , seemed to suffer from both a dilatory agent and poor judgement of his own . he did excellent work in the hammer movies as dr van helsing . i'v seen him do a very passable sherlock holmes in ' hound of the baskervilles ' . and his magnum opus was probably grand moff tarkin in the first ' star wars ' . the only man but the emperor who could tell darth vadar to ' stop bickering ' and get away with it . but - crikey ! - he 's done some turkeys . there was that lamentable ' daleks ' movie for one . and here 's another.

there 's a machine that 's been hijacked from tracy island . it 's a cylinder with a screw at the front and traction devices at the sides . i 'm surprised jerry anderson did n't sue for plagiarism . maybe he was bought - off . yet if the movie is any guide , they ca n't have paid him much.

it 's 1976 and we 're still playing about in latex romper - suits . < br />
that 's about it really . some movies have an entertainment value in the ' so bad it 's good ' category . this one does n't even manage that . it would n't even entertain kids . ' crash corrigan 's ' stuff from the 1930 's has got more going for it . +1 " mr. bug goes to town " was the last major achievement the fleischer studios produced . the quality of the superman series produced at the same time is evident in this extraordinary film.

the music and lyrics by frank loesser and hoagy carmichael ( with assistance by flieshcer veteran sammy timberg are quite good , but not as much as the scoring of the picture by leigh harline who also scored snow white for disney . harline 's " atmospheric music " is superb , and a treat for the ears.

the layout and staging of the picture was years ahead of it 's time , and once again the fleischer 's background artists outdid themselves . the techincolored beauty of the film can not be denied , and while hoppity the grasshopper is the star , the characters of swat the fly and smack the mosquito steal the picture . swat 's voicing by jack mercer ( of popeye fame ) is priceless . kenny gardner ( brother - in - law ) of guy lombardo ... and a featured vocalist in his band ... does his usual pleasant job in the role of dick dickinsen.

the movie has been criticized for all the wrong reasons . the fleischer studios were animation experts par excellence and this shows very clearly in the finished product . the movie is tuneful , the story great for all ages , and the final scenes of the bugs scrambling for their lives upon a rising skyscraper is some of the best staging and animation of any animated film past and present.

do not miss this wonderfully hand drawn film . also do n't fail to appreciate the title sequence with the most elaborate example of max fleischer 's remarkable 3-d sterioptical process which took four months to construct and employed 16,000 tiny panes of glass in the " electrified " buildings of manhattan.

do not miss mr. bug goes to town ... aka hoppity goes to town . i 'll wager you 'll be bug eyed at the results ! +1 i had seen the cure when i was a kid and i loved it then . now , years later , i got a hold of a copy almost by accident , and watched it again . being a kid , you do n't really have the ability to procure things for yourself that you want , that is usually a prerogative of your parents - but when i watched it again now i felt sorry that i did not do more to get a copy of this movie back then , and consequently almost forgot about it until today.

this really is a beautiful movie . it tells the story of the unlikely friendship between a hard - edged , misfit kid - who takes his cues from his horrible , abusive mother - and his neighbor , a slightly younger boy who has aids.

right , you say . another one of " those " . a tear jerker . a bucket movie . a morality tail . yeah , i know , i hate those too . only this one is n't . it is one of the very few movies among those many i have seen that pulls off a very rare trick : it conveys a truly sad story ( and yes , a morality tale ) but without a single moment where it feels cheesy , forced or in any other way " hollywoody " . it shows a real relationship between two real boys , who interact as real kids do . and through that interaction the good - natured , loving character of the older boy , eric , starts to shine through his " tough - guy " persona , as he takes on a kind of big - brotherly care for dexter , his hiv - positive younger neighbor . together , they embark on an adventure to find a cure - which to erik seems to be just around the corner - so that all this silly aids thing will go away and they can be friends forever.

the production is top notch . but , of course , what really carries this movie , is the performances of the two leads - brad renfro and joseph mazzello . especially mazzello , who is simply stunning - he does convey a sense of frailty needed for an ailing boy , but at the same time he manages to make dexter a truly energetic and determined character . he shines at the scene where the boys confront pony : his impulse to protect his older friend lunges him forth , drives him to say what he says - and only afterwards , the horror is depicted on his face , as he realizes that what he himself said is true : his blood is poison ... renfro also has his moments , in particular the scenes with his mother : he depicts perfectly how this macho , street - wise kid is left completely frozen and numb when faced with his abusive , storming mother , and ca n't get a word in to contradict her as she forbids his relationship with the ailing boy out of her fear and ignorance . annabella sciorra also gives a memorable performance as dexter 's mother , who ultimately becomes , in a sense , a mother figure to erik as well.

i've first seen this film when i was at school back in america , and loved it - not at all a given concerning movies of this sort . but the behavior of the kids in this movie was so real , i could easily relate to them . ironically enough , the teacher who had shown us this movie ( a wonderful woman , i 'm still in touch with her ) got in trouble for it , as some uptight parent complained about it having the scene when the two boys are looking at a playboy ... pathetic . seriously , will americans ever get over this ridiculous phobia , i do not know . there was a hardly - distinguishable shot of a playboy cover in the movie and thus it is not shown in schools ... how sad . kids need to see this movie . it is more inspiring and educational than all the " official " after - school specials put together.

oh , and one more thing . i know i 'm rambling , but nevertheless ... the score . it 's great . i am a musician , and as such i know dave grusin from his records : he is a well known jazz pianist and record producer . up until this movie i really did not know that he did movie scores as well , even though when i later checked i found out that i had unknowingly watched several movies he worked on . really , a wonderful job there.

all in all , a solid ten . i 'd recommend this movie to anyone . and i 'm definitely going to see it with my younger siblings - they can use watching a film like this among all the standard special - effect hysteria they usually see . +1 chokher bali was shown at the ( washington ) dc filmfest april 15 , 2005 . the director , rituparno ghosh , was there to give a short introduction and answer questions afterwards.

as always , i think aishwarya did a fantastic job . i can understand those who think she should be been more aggressive or more bitchy , but would that really be realistic in 1904 ? possible , maybe ; realistic , i 'm not so sure . i think her interpretation was valid , although there could certainly be other ways to do it.

i hate to use the word , but this was the most " inaccessible " of the indian movies i have seen so far . i know a fair amount of indian history , hindu religion , etc . , but the level of detail here was far beyond me . clearly you would have a much better understanding of the movie if you were intimately familiar with hinduism and its customs , esp . as they were c. 1904 . i missed a lot of things -- one of them being the fact that the mother - in - law would want binodini in the house as sort of a counter - weight to her daughter - in - law ashalata.

*spoilers * ghosh had several things to say that explained the movie much better for me . first , the original bengali version was 20 + minutes longer . so what was left out ? apparently three main things : a beginning segment where binodini ( aishwarya ) leaves e. bengal for calcutta . according to the director , different characters are speaking w. bengali vs. e. bengali -- setting up some of the political comments later . of course all of this is lost in the hindi version , and certainly to a non - indian like me , it would n't have mattered anyway -- but a set - up of the bengali situation sure would have . next , there was a segment where binodini was writing a poem -- a sign of her independence , etc . finally , some more business about the jewellery . so , although some people think it was too long , i think the original , longer version would have been clearer.

the women 's hair was apparently another sign ( ghosh again)--the mother - in - law had short hair ( short hair for hindu widows ) , her sister -- also a widow -- had longer hair ( more modern ! ) , and of course binodini / aishwarya had extremely long waist - length hair ( rejection of status of widowhood).

the ending really threw me -- all of a sudden binodini , who had never had a political thought , is writing a political manifesto ? whoa ! ghosh explained that he was in locarno , at a film festival , when the subtitles were done . the subtitles use the word " country " throughout binodini 's letter . gosh said a more appropriate word would have been ( i forget his exact word ) something like " self " or " independence "-- she was talking about her own liberation and " finding herself "-- not about bengal , india , and the british . so why does binodini just disappear the day after finding behari again ? apparently because during her stay on the ganges she realizes that she does n't need a man -- any man -- to define / complete her . she can just be herself . so she rejects behari , who she threw herself at a few months ( ? ) before , and just goes off . of course i 'm not sure how she buys her next meal , but that 's another question.

the red shawl ( ghosh again)she buys represents " revolution " as well as " passion . " i 'm not 100 % sure why she puts the shawl on the dying woman , but perhaps she is rejecting passion / revolution ? the binoculars , which binodini uses throughout the movie ( to watch mahendra and ashalata , the boat on the ganges , etc . ) . she is being a voyeur to see a life she yearns for but ca n't have . at the end ( i missed this ! ) she leaves the binoculars on the table with the letter , showing that she does n't need them any more -- she 's going off to lead her own life.

finally , the tagore quote at the beginning saying how he apologized for the ending ... apparently tagore wrote this as a serial , hooking his readers with the sexy widow bits . but at the end he sold out to conservatism and had binodini kneel down at the feet of mahendra and behari , begging their forgiveness . one of his students ( ? ) wrote to tagore taking him to task for his sell - out ending ... and tagore replied with his apology for the ending . in the movie , of course , ghosh goes in the other direction . +1 sherlock holmes ( basil rathbone ) and professor moriarty ( lionel atwill ) engage in a battle of wits for control of a switz inventor 's newest bomb - sight creation . holmes wants to safeguard it for the british while moriarty is n't above selling out to the nazis . < br />
while no doubt many fans will be disappointed to see holmes updated to the 1940s war - time setting , this particular film proves light - hearted fun which does n't wallow in wartime propaganda as it might well have done . dennis hoey 's inspector lestrade and nigel bruce 's dr. watson do tend to steal the show as their characters bumbling methods consistently provide delightful comic relief . the sparring between holmes and moriraty is colorful and well thought out to boot . atwill does well enough as moriarty even if he 's not as memorable as some others who played the role . < br />
while this provides nothing especially new or thrilling for fans of the series , it is a wonderful escape from reality , somewhat appropriate for 1942 in my opinion , that mirrors many movie serial adventures of the 1930s and 1940s but boasts a more compact , less repetitive plot . and all this is done while still remaining true to the basic spirit of sherlock holmes . +1 every great once in a while , you stumble upon a movie that exceeds even your wildest expectations . given the imdb rating of 4.0 , i was n't really expecting much with the brotherhood of satan . i hoped that at a minimum it might be cheesy fun like the devil 's rain or any of the other early 70s similarly themed satanic horror films . i could n't ' have been more wrong . what i got instead was an ambitious and intelligent film with a cast i really enjoyed . speaking in broad terms to avoid giving anything away , the film 's style and structure are much more experimental than the straightforward storytelling so prominent in the early 70s . the brotherhood of satan does n't beat you over the head with plot points and explanations . a lot is left to the viewer to fill in the blanks . as a viewer , you know something is amiss , but for the longest period you 're just not sure what it is . the unknown helps make for a far creepier atmosphere than most similar films . the ending is effective with its surreal imagery . i sat in amazement as the final credits began to roll . those wanting a big slam - bang finale will be disappointed with the ending 's simplicity . a lesser film would have tried to pull out all the stops and would , most likely , have failed miserably.

there are moments in the film where it 's easy to forget the director , bernard mceveety , had primarily worked in television before the brotherhood of satan . there are a few scenes that are so well set - up , lit , and shot that even the most accomplished of directors could learn a thing or two . for example , i 've seen enough films over the years to realize that directors can sometimes seem to have trouble shooting widescreen shots indoors . not here . the scene where the men are discussing their plan of action in the sheriff 's office is amazing . we see all five men at once – each doing their own thing as in real life . in a lesser film , we might see all the men at once , but each would be motionless , quietly waiting their turn to deliver their dialogue . it 's a small scene , but it looks so natural and is so beautifully shot that it 's one of my favorite moments of the brotherhood of satan.

finally , i mentioned the acting in my opening , so without going into a long - winded speech , i 'll just say that the brotherhood of satan features strother martin and l.q. jones . any film with these two guys is almost an automatic winner with me . +1 the kinks warned about media heroes . outside the movies , most heroes are also " ordinary people . " society demands some role playing , but what happens when that extends to the parent - child relationship ? do some parents try to improve themselves through their children rather than vice versa ? how do you provide a role - model but not a role ? a brilliant swimmer who hates to swim ; a brilliant musician who wo n't play . offbeat , funny ( despite depiction of " serious " problems ) , very good multi - dimensional acting by everyone . lots of plot twists complement the emotional tension . celluloid heroes never feel any pain . i do n't recall ever being disappointed in a sigourney weaver film ( i even liked " the village " ! ) . +1 i was surprised and touched by this emotional movie which moved me very strange . i was confused , sad and happy in the same moment . i guess that too less people will pay attention to this movie . but i hope that at least a few will see it and get something out of it . the story of two friends , linked by their suffers of bodily disability , whom ( as a team ) beat the medical well - fare system and fight for their rights . this movie shows a side which some of us would never understand , not too exaggerated but emotional presented . hopefully this movie will help us to understand some of their desires better and realize how important it is to have a friend in the world , especially when you almost unable to express that fact . +1 i really like traci lords . she may not be the greatest actress in the world but she 's rather good in this . she play the dowdy , conservative , reporter to a ' t ' . it 's a great little thriller which keeps you guessing for a good while . jeff fahey is also good as traci 's boss . i think given a decent break traci could be a top actress . she 's certainly no worse than some of today 's leading ladies . +0 this story had a good plot to it about four elderly men that share a deadly secret concerning a young woman that they met 50 years ago . after all this time , the young woman returns to seek revenge on the men . this story occasionally made me nod off during the movie in the middle of tiring elevator music and the ever so consistent thunder storms . but it is well worth the wait in the end when we find out just who the mystery woman is that keeps plaguing the old men in their dreams and interfering in a young man 's life . the most of what i liked in this film was the suspense in which the young woman appears to the men just before their deaths . the special effects were something . every time i heard her call out to them i would think " not that face again . " but it was a good movie , i just wish that the pace was not as slow or the acting not as tiresome . and what i also liked about the movie was the flashback of the 20 's , very authentic as well as the costumes being original . +0 made it through the first half an hour and deserved a medal for getting that far . lots of excuses for scantily clad women but no real plot to speak of emerged in that time . what sounded like a good idea for a movie was badly executed . +1 do n't listen to most of these people . ill give you a better review of this movie which me and my friend love ! its about jill johnson , played by camilla belle , who babysits at the mendrakis ' house and someone breaks in . if you 're wondering how he got in the house , he went through the garage most likely . so anyway , do n't listen to , " the worst acting " . it has amazing acting . with a great story . i think that there are 2 benefits that jill has . 1 . she s a fast runner and is on the track team . 2.she got out alive ! lol.

it is a cool movie and quite scary . check it out , you will be happy with this masterpiece . do n't listen to the other people on the site . its very good . trust me , i am good at reviewing movies . i 'm a future movie critic . i totally want to buy this movie . and you will too when you see it . it is amazingly awesome . +1 this episode is not incoherent like another person said . the source agreed to help because he was not going to keep his word , if you pay attention ... he says after she ( phoebe ) agrees to stay down there in hell , " get rid of her and balthazor so i don't have to worry about them in the future " ... and also , he did n't let cole warn the sisters like phoebe asked in exchange of accepting the deal , that 's why prue died , because she got hit harder than piper and on the head , and there was no phoebe to call for leo this time , and in the past leo said that she almost got herself killed . pay more attention next time ! and there is not a " to be continued ... " after this episode . it is the ending of season 3 , and on season 4 they ca n't show anything from prue because she owns the rights of it " prue " , so the producers would have to pay her for whatever they show . this is the last episode she is in ! +0 i 'm not even going to waste more time describing how bad this movie is . bottom line : it was horribly acted , had enormous plot holes and went absolutely nowhere . the only good thing about it was the description my digital cable gave for the movie : " a married man with a struggling business has a fling with his secretary . " huh ? ? wrong movie apparently , although it may have made things slightly more interesting if any of the description were true.

--shelly +0 the plot of this movie revolves around this submarine builder who 's a real bastard and he wants to launch his new sub that can travel thousands of feet deep . unfortunately , he ca n't . oh yeah , and he 's haunted by the memories of his mom and dad getting eaten by a megalodon when he was a child . the guy meets some scientist who s pretty hot , and they and this crew of about a hundred people set out on the main character 's submarine to kill the same megalodon that killed his parents.now , the shark in this movie is a really fake looking cgi shark . basically this is sorta like shark attack 3 , except more depressing . if you do n't get what i mean , listen . the film 's opening credits show " home movies " of the main character when he was a child with his parents before they got killed , and there 's really sad and depressing piano music playing in the background . you would expect to see a shark or something , and you do . a brief shadow of the cgi shark floats around every few seconds but that 's just it . also , i do n't remember one happy facial expression at all throughout the film 's entire runtime , a majority of the film takes place in the dark depths of the abyss , where the story gets even more dull , and all the characters ( the shark too ) die in the end . i was thinking sabato would manage to kill the shark and manage to save himself and the girl , but no , they all die , and the film ends with the shark , all blown up , and the submarine ( with sabato 's crushed and burned body in it ) sinking into the abyss . if you 're a happy person and you do n't enjoy being depressed , then avoid this movie . if you 're the opposite , then congratulations , you found your movie . +1 i really enjoy this movie . the first time it was on turner classic movies . all the actors did very well but brynner steals the show again like always ( he is so sexy!).this is one of the movie that you do see brynner 's emotions . actually this movie this is the first i ever seen him laugh because he plays very strong , larger - than - life and serious roles in other movies . in this movie you see both a masculine , tough and sensitive side of brynner .brynner seems to be a " ladies'man " in this movie . that is amazing how brynner eats the glass cup and speaks in his russian tongue it drives me crazy in love . i do n't understand when both brynner and kerr ( they both have very good chemistry ) stars in a movie together and then brynner always die at the end it kind of reminds you " the king and i " in a way . +1 i need help identifying an episode of king of queens . it begins with a scene where doug is talking to carrie on the phone , and he suggests that they agree to stop ending every conversation with " i love you . " however , it 's hard to do and he ends up calling her back , only to close with " i love you . " it 's a very clever moment and one i think says a lot about relationships that have lasted a long time.

i think ( but i 'm sure ) that 's it 's the same episode where doug gets some local construction guys to whistle and throw lurid comments at carrie to perk her spirits up.

i saw this episode recently , but it was probably a repeat . do n't know what network i saw it on . can anyone tell me the title and season of this episode ? +1 agree that this was one of the best episodes of this show . i remember the series well as i was in the florida keys when the show had its debut . i was looking through old vcr tapes that were " keepers " and came across two that had about eight episodes . i ended up spending part of christmas night ( and the next ) watching these shows . the singer was bankie banx - saw his name come up on the credits . he 's from anguilla and owns a beach front bar called the dune preserve . he 's a longtime friend of jimmy buffett and bankie 's classic song " still in paradise " is featured on the latest buffett cd / dvd combo called " live in anguilla " - it is track # 12 on cd 1 and # 8 on the cd . i too would like to someday see this short lived series come out on dvd . keep the faith ! +1 actually , i have more a question , than a comment . i loved z - boys , and the lords of dogtown . saw lords first , then the doc , and while i loved the story , i am curious as to why in the movie , sid was an important character , but in the documentary , he was n't part of the team , and only merely mentioned as just some kid they knew . does anyone know the story on that ? the story of these boys was amazing . i never experienced the skateboarding craze where i grew up , but my kids have enjoyed it . what i have seen in local skate parks is what these boys had invented . i never knew that . when the film showed the competition , and z - boys did their thing , they put to shame the others in competition . +1 this series has a lot going for it with beautiful footage of the some of the most impressive underwater environments on this planet . being a staggering five years in the making , one would be hard - pressed to expect any less . i did get the impression that some scenes from the first episode where repeated in the latter ones , which is naturally only a minor gripe.

david attenborough is great as a narrator and comments are informative , leaving enough room for one 's imagination , and well spaced out , so that viewers get plenty of time to reflect upon the breathtaking imagery . if you get the opportunity try not to watch a translated version of this series.

a definite must - see for anyone interested in the intricacies of our blue continents and easily the best documentary on this subject i 've ever seen . +1 i saw " heaven - ship " ( " himmelskibet " ) at the 2006 cinema muto festival in sacile , italy . what a great movie ! this danish steampunk saga is the stirring tale of the first trip to mars , in an era when wireless telegraphy has n't been perfected . the spaceship has n't got a radio , and the heroes are brought back from the landing field via horsecart . even the intertitles are delightful ... some of them written in rhymed couplets in the original danish.

the actors ' performances are laughable , largely hand - to - brow histrionics . but the sets are astonishing , easily surpassing anything done by georges melies a decade earlier ( or in " die frau i m mond " a decade later ) . of course , the plot is simplistic . the spaceship 's crew consist of seven thin guys and one fat slob . guess which one cracks . interestingly , everyone in this movie ( except the dubious professor dubius ) ardently believes in god . even the martians.

impressively , the scenarists have the sense to acknowledge that a trip to mars is no doddle : the title cards establish that it takes the scientists two years to build their spaceship ( which has an airscrew ) and six months to reach mars . during the construction sequence , there 's one extremely impressive set - up which must have been choreographed : dozens of workers all hustle through the worksite in different directions , with no hesitations and no collisions . the danish scientists christen their ship " excelsior " ( " packing materials " ? ) and set course for mars , even though the moon and venus are closer . when the ship ( which flies horizontally , not vertically ) lands on mars , it is greeted by " marsboerne " -- martians -- who turn out to be nordic blondes , all highly - developed pacifists and vegetarians . ( as a highly - developed meat - eater , i resented that part.)

conveniently enough , mars turns out to have an atmosphere just like earth 's , as well as equal gravity . in an exterior shot of the martian landscape , the sun 's apparent magnitude when seen from mars is the same as it is when viewed from earth . i also could n't help observing that all the wise elder martians are male . in fact , female elders are thin on the ground here : both the earth - born hero and the martian maiden are motherless . the martians speak a universal language , wear ankhs on their robes , and greet the earth visitors with a globe of earth ... which of course they hold with its north pole upward.

that martian maiden is marya , played by an ethereally beautiful danish actress . ( waiter , i 'll have some of that danish ! ) we see a martian dance of chastity which might have been twee or ludicrous but is actually quite touching and beautiful . also , the martian funeral scene features one shot which reminded me of a sequence in " the seventh seal " . i wonder if ingmar bergman saw this film.

"himmelskibet " has a few flaws , but its production design and its other merits very far outweigh its drawbacks . the ole olsen who is named in the credits ( and who appears in a brief prologue ) is no relation to chic johnson 's vaudeville partner from " hellzapoppin " . i would give " himmelskibet " a 12 , but the scale tops off at 10 ... so , a full 10 out of 10 for this delightful trip to mars , the blonde planet ! +0 this film is just another waste of time . the plot is ridiculous , forced usa drama . the characters were all really weak , especially the uncharismatic goya and the bad interpretation of bardem , who only was alright in his classic interpretation , when acting as french ally.

just another chance lost of have spent the money in a good film . i guess it was no a low budget film . definitely not recommended . maybe the director 's should think a bit whether the film has sense or not before wasting so that money . maybe they do not bother as they have profits before launching them in the cinema.

no more hope in cinema ... +1 i just saw this movie for the second time with my 8-year - old daughter and i remembered why we liked it the first time . all these people who say it is bad are too uptight and critical ! it is simply an entertaining little movie , it 's not supposed to change the world . i thought all the actors did a great job with their characters . ( except for jeremy jordan as guy -- he was a maggot who looked seriously in need of soap and shampoo . if he is supposed to be the hot guy in their school , then they 've got slim pickins ' . ) but i digress -- drew barrymore was delightful , as usual , and david arquette was even enjoyable , and i usually ca n't stomach him , if only because of those stupid at&t commercials ! molly shannon is always entertaining , and leelee sobieski did a great job as a tortured brain . some parts were actually painful to watch , reminding me of high school . even though i thankfully did n't get made fun of , it made my heart ache for those who do . movies like this are actually good for children to see -- my daughter made several observations about the cruelty of some of the students and how wrong it was . this movie is appropriate for anyone and a good way to while away 2 hours . if there 's ever a time you want to see a lighthearted little movie with a happy ending where you do n't have to think very much , then this is definitely a consideration . +1 from the first to the last scene , this film is made very realistically , even too realistically that sometimes we ca n't see details in night scenes(it 's dark as real night),in the desert(sunshine is so strong as in real desert ) . < br />
script and actor 's play are also very realistic . shots and episodes are edited not to show things and events " effectively " , to " explain " them , or , as many hollywood films do , to " entertain " viewers . editing here is to represent the events as if they really happened in afganistan . camera is set sometimes far from dying solders , even the moment when the main character major bandura is shot and killed.

such method reminds me of masterpieces of italian neo - realism . and the construction of the story here is based on the same principles as " paisà",or " the bicycle thief "-- chronological series of " true to life " episodes and a few pathetic moments , which at first seem to be sudden and illogical , but have inner reasons.

i think the inner reason of major bandura 's suicidal death is religious emotion -- repentance for innocent people 's death(not only his accidental killing of family in the village , but also death of solders under his command).he is not depicted as a eager believer , on the contrary he is depicted as tactful and responsible officer . exactly for this reason his last decisions(to go back to the destroyed village and to turn his back to an armed boy , whose family he killed)seem an act of repentance . < br />
the russian orthodox choral , which sounds at the end("evening sacrifice")is another context , by which all the film can be seen from this point of view . +0 hey , i 'm a fan of so - bad - so - good movies but there 's nothing so - bad - so - good about rise of the undead . it 's just so - bad and that 's it . no redeeming cheese , no unintentional humor , nothing ! - boring apocalyptic zombie ( the " undead " : a few people with hardly any make up ) nonsense with lame special effects ( if you can call those effects ) , dumb plot and annoying actors . they also have the nerve to rip off and quote from other ( better ) movies ( resident evil , dawn of the dead & night of the comet ) and managed to put me to sleep on the side . however , it was rise of my eyelids once the end credits rolled though . my advice : save your money . it 's not even worth a rental , unless you want to p*ss off and/or put some people to sleep then go ahead and give it a spin . you 've been warned ;) +0 when hollywood is trying to grasp what an " intelligent person " is like , they fail so miserably , finding it hard putting words in the mouth of the purported " genius".

right , any genius walks around trying to rub in his superiority at every instance . sure , they hang out in bars and pick fights – it 's not like they are ( generalizing wildly ) autistic nerds who never have a tan.

plus , if you are a genius you know all about math and history and politics and of course you 're constantly up to date with current events and a thorough analysis of them . coz these things , like , all go together n stuff , y'know?

plus , you walk around with a smirk all the time . you are just a smug son of a you - know - what , that 's how it is , y' all . < br />
and of course you smoke , like someone who never smoked before , but you smoke coz it 's like cool n stuff , y'know . and you 're different . that is understood.

and of course you can fight – you 're a bully . a bully who finds time to study 10.000 books whenever he does n't lift weights . and whenever he does n't smoke or drink beer because he follows a strict health regimen.

and you date a 30-something college student – minnie driver . well , i wo n't even comment matt damon . team america has hit the nail on the head already.

this movie is a daydream of a beavis & butthead type student ( in other words 95 % of them ) : " yeah , that 's what i would be like if i was a genius . " but stupid people and stupid authors in this case can not imagine the lives of geniuses . +0 this movie was terrible ... how can somebody even think that this movie was like the ones back in the " good old days " when tim thomerson was not even in it . and to make things worse , they used clips from old trancer movies . that s just terrible . no trancer movie is complete without tim thomerson . i love fullmoon films , and i have been watching them since i was 4 years old . i have been through everything they have done and this movie almost made me lose it . now i got a couple of lines to fill so i will keep going . their way of breeding new trancers is completely stupid as well as way to send jack back in time . what happened to the tcl chamber . and finally ! what happened in the end of trancers 5 where lina says and i quote " jack has given me something special " and her and some other broad looks at her stomach . i do n't know ... maybe a baby is in there . there were so many other places of going to , but fullmoon s'd the bed +0 on halloween a town is terrorized by a lunatic with a big pumpkin for a head . bad acting compromised mostly of local talent and laughable special effects makes this one baaaaad . b - movie queen linnea quigley looks embarrassed to be a part of this one and even her considerable charm which has helped so many of her other films ca n't help this one . pass this cheesy flick if you are looking for a good halloween horror film and rent " night of the demons " which also stars ms. quigley . +0 i would agree with another viewer who wrote that this movie recalls the offbeat melanie griffith / jeff daniels comedy , " something wild , " in which a rather eccentric free - spirit hooks up with a conservative and very orderly young man , and the two pose as a couple and basically , her personality gradually has an effect on him . he looses up and learns to enjoy their short - lived tryst . that is exactly what happens here , except insert convenient store - robbing eccentric , alex ( rosanna arquette ) in melanie griffith 's role , and super - cautious teen , lincoln ( the name is no coincidence , played by devon gummersall ) in jeff daniel 's part . this movie even shares the same twist and abrupt genre change where the creepy , violent boyfriend suddenly shows up in the end and things end up quite badly . only , here , instead of it being ray liotta playing a throwback to 1950s film goons , it 's peter greene.

the story is about a teenage kid who is in his own little world . he has some sort of fascination with death following his brother 's suicide , and his parents have disconnected , too , behaving quite strangely ( the mother is convinced christmas will be arriving shortly , despite it being august ) . then , on a night out with the " guys " ( one of whom is played by jason hervey of the wonder years ) trying to buy them beer , he runs into alex who decides to kidnap him and his friends car ( with his permission of course ) , and they take off for mini - adventure across the deserts of the west coast , robbing convenient stores in robin hood sort of fashion and of course , indulging in the routine self - discovery as each asks more about the other 's life . but , alex has left behind a partner in her trade of theft , and he is n't going away easily . although , we 're not consistently reminded of him or anything as in repetitive flashback or cutting over to his point of view . at least this much was done cleverly.

'do me a favor ' ( aka trading favors ) , is a mostly underdeveloped story of criminal mischief and self - discovery that lags quite a bit for the first half of the film , but delivers the goods a little to late once alex and lincoln arrive at her home out in the middle of nowhere . by the time the filmmakers give you enough stimulation , the film is unfortunately , almost over . i would recommend that if this is the sort of story you 're in the mood for , and despite rosanna arquette always giving a good performance ( even in a poorly written film ) , i would still recommend catching this in its best form , " something wild . " +1 i did n't have much faith at the beginning , but as a costa rica 's citizen i can confirm that the movie shows the reality that we live day by day , and shows a lot of things of our culture , such as our way to speak , our music , our way of standing up for our rights without any fear , without any weapons.

i'm really proud of the job they did and of how they did n't forget along the movie the message they wanted us to receive , not caring for the money , but actually working with a short budget , letting us appreciate the beautiful scenarios and the great photography.

i strongly recommend seeing this movie , you will not regret it . +1 i tend to be inclined towards movies about people who choose to cross the barriers of censorship , and express what they really want to express . eric bogosian 's character of barry is like howard stern , but much more intelligent . the character itself is very fascinating . as an oliver stone film , i guess i was expecting more . the film sags a bit during the third act . plus , it 's pretty obvious that " talk radio " is based on a play , with its long dialogue scenes . but overall , the film works . bogosian is great in the lead , and the fact that he also wrote the play from which the movie was based on probably helped him . if you want to check out one of stone 's greater films , i better suggest you check out " jfk " or " salvador . " this is not his best work , but a good movie nonetheless . +0 we found this movie nearly impossible to watch . with such a super cast , it 's a shame that the writing and direction were so awful . the excruciating pace at which the story was told was maddening . the flash - backs were clumsy . the characters were one - dimensional . the heavy - handed metaphors -- the river , the cat -- were repeated way too often . < br />
the movie nobody 's fool , based on another novel by russo , was infinitely better , probably because it was more tightly written and directed . < br />
the photography in empire falls was lovely . too bad it was n't a travelogue.

i read the novel and enjoyed the writing style but had some quibbles with the novel itself . i would give the novel 4 out of 5 stars . perhaps the screenwriters and director were so awed by the novel 's reputation they felt they had to include every darn thing in their movie . this was supposed to be a television movie , guys , not books on tape . +1 why do i give this 1974 porn movie 7 points ? because i watched it . and i found it hilarious ! aliens , their weird spaceship , their weird helmets ... my god , was that a sight . and all what these desperate alien women need is semen from the earth.

and where do they look for it ? in upper bavaria , germany . and that is where the main fun comes from : in europe ( and more so in german - speaking countries ) , bavaria is seen as a traditional and backward region . and then the actors are so helpless with the alien women . well , there have been films about people being unable to deal with women like the " american pie " series.

but what this film achieved is a true , funny weirdness . you constantly wonder how they came up with these crackpot ideas . but it was 1974 , and looking back 35 years fills one with a kind of nostalgia . you 've never seen a film like that.

and if you do n't mind seeing the casual pubic hairs and breasts , watch it once . it is a comedy essentially , not a porn flick . +0 welcome to the plan 9 from outer space of star trek movies . come on , trekkers , admit it . this movie is so bad , so staggeringly inept in every department , it 's become something of a classic.

the shat gives the worst performance ever committed to celluloid . " boones ! hi , bones " brilliant ! this is n't just ham - it 's several large pig farms in kentucky ! < br />
the " special " effects . should be done under the trade descriptions act for using such a term . the enterprise is a moving piece of cardboard in this film . really ! even the star trek tv show had better.

bones , spock and the shat sing ! yeah , spock sings row row row your boat . after struggling over the meaning of the words ! ! ! ! " capt . life is not a dream " poor leonard nimoy , he must really want to strangle shatner for this . could the shat not have given us his rendition of mr. tambourine man , or harmonised with nimoy on ballad of bilbo baggins ? sorely disappointed.

a sean connery look - a - like plays spock 's half - brother . only cos they could n't get sean connery ! uhura does a fan dance ! that would have been sexy in 1966 . in 1989 it 's like watching your drunk granny embarrass herself at a christmas party.

cat woman jumps on shatner 's back ! shat twirls her around a few times like a wwf wrestler , and chucks her off . yayy the shat ! seems connery 2.0 was a bit of a vulcan rebel . which explains why spock has n't previously mentioned him in 79 t.v episodes and 4 movies . mccoy apparently mercy - killed his dad , but afterwards they found a cure . tell me this is n't hysterically funny.

the 11 deck enterprise suddenly grows another 400 decks for an escape sequence in an elevator shaft . spock 's antigrav boots amazingly support bones and the shat as well . should also have used em on the humped - back whales in star trek iv ! shatner meets god ! or what purports to be god , but i assume is really some kind of alien being . god looks a bit like charlton heston in the 10 commandments . sean connery the 2nd calls on god to share his pain , and promptly dies . or something . god punishes the shat for questioning his identity . so spock kills god with a photon torpedo . i 'd love to know what jehovah 's witnesses made of this scene.

the shat , having killed god , promptly goes back to his sing - song with spock and bones . altogether now , row row row your boat ..... +1 this movie is based on the game series : final fantasy . this one particularly is about ff7 or final fantasy vii . i loved the game , and i was very happy to see it be transformed into a movie , i loved the cg , that was awesome . lot 's of great fight scenes , action , and characters to make the movie memorable . if your a die - hard fan of the game you will love this movie . personally , i 'm not a die - hard fan of the games , but i am starting to become one.

my favourite character out of final fantasy vii besides cloud , would have to be cid . i love cid , i think he 's cute . i was amazed how real the cg images were , it was amazing , it 's the game in 3d. i had a great time watching the movie , and by the way , i love the aeons to , especially bahamut , he 's great ! overall i gave this movie a 9 , because yes , i loved it . i thought it was a really really good movie , and yes it 's on my list of movies to get . the characters were amazing , loved the cg , story was wonderful , with lot 's of action and fight scenes . all - in - all , it 's the best movie i 've seen yet , based on a video game . +0 what movie is this ? ? ? a horrible movie with the old boring concept of infidelity which has already been achieved by the " bhatt camp " . the movie starrs emraan hashmi , udita goswami and dino morea . the movie has " no base " . it just goes like this ... dino an udita are married and living in a rich mansion . however dino does n't like udita to the heart as he wants only her wealth . he loves someone else ( tara sharma ) . so he bribes emraan to have an affair with udita so that he could catch them and finally split up with udita .. how boring ! ! however emraan falls in love with udita and vice versa . lastly when udita gets imprisonment for killing emraan , dino pretentiously tries to save her showing his false love to her . udita on the other hand does not understand this and feels that he loved her truly . so she lends all her wealth to dino . finally dino comes out of the police - station and goes with tara with all the wealth . what a fraud ! ! the songs are good and are the only thing good in the movie . now the individual ratings : ( out of 5 ) emraan : * * udita : * 1/2 dino : * 1/2 overall acting : * 1/2 direction : * * story : * music : * * * 1/2 final rating : * 1/2 poor performances and poor casting ....... music : good ... i rate the movie : 1.5 / 10 ( do nt waste your time ! ! ! ! ) +1 it is to typical of people complaining about something when they no nothing about it ... so this is about a gay man falling for a straight women . first of all ... this is a true story so you ca nt say its not believable second its written by a gay man so the whole thing about this being against the gays are just plain stupid . personally i think this was the best love story i 've ever seen . and i am very pro gay . i think this shows that real love is about personality not just looks and sex . and it has nothing against anyone who is gay , straight or bi unlike so many other shows . maybe we in europe take to it more cus most tv here are a bit deeper and make you think more then american tv ... plus we do n't fear when it comes to showing certain things.

if you want something funny with one of englands best ( lesley sharp ) and you want to see a decent believable love story without too much sap this is for you . i know i love it +1 if it was n't meant to be a comedy , the filmmakers sure goofed . if they intended for it to be a comedy , they hit the mark . our critic says homegrown is a wonderful film filled with family values and community spirit , recommends it for all audiences , and says that he really liked jamie lee curtis 's performance . it deserves a theatrical re - release . +1 since growing up in czechoslovakia i was following history of raf pilots and crews in wwii great britain , their stories and tragic ending either in the combat or in communist prisons and camps . this is without any doubt more than dark chapter in our history , although the fact that those brave men we 're able to go through all this and recover afterward is amazing . to all people who want to see great movie ... this is the one ! during recent visit of czech republic i saw this movie three times in three days ( they we 're just playing it for three days ... otherwise i will go to see it even few more times ! ! ! it 's worth of it ! ) i hope you will enjoy it , although it requires a little more thinking and knowledge of background information behind the story , pretty much same way that the movie " kolya " was . it 's not a simple movie because of it 's deep story , and the way its told will most likely make you crying ... it did to me three times in row ... zdenek sverak did as always a great script , his son jan made a great movie and the cast ? without doubt all of them did great job , i was amazed by ondrej vetchy , by great role played by oldrich kaiser and all other actors which made this movie simply great ! ! ! if this is not an oscar nomination i think that i will be on strike in holywood . +1 chi - hwa - seong ( painted fire ) recounts the life of korean painter jang seong - ub amidst the changing political landscape of late 19th century korea.

however , the themes of this film center around the process of artistic creation through the fire of desire of the artist and the expectations and demands of their audience and society.

jang seong - ub is played masterfully as a complex character who changes from the innocent excitement of youth to a hardened alcoholic tortured soul . this characterization mirrors the young eager artist that finds it more and more difficult to invoke the spirit of artistic creation within himself without letting the creative fire out via drink , erections , and desire.

although this character development proceeds overall gradually through the film , the emotional complexity of jang is still played in a constantly oscillating manner building to the films ' finale . interestingly , the montage of the film parallels this constantly changing and seemingly wild emotion or fire of the artist as scenes seamlessly transition from one time and location to another without any conventional ' cues ' to the audience that such a scene change will occur . for example , many scenes would change seemingly in mid conversation picking up at another point and location.

the visual scenery of the film is presented beautifully and also oscillates from stark ( and perhaps bleak ) black and white scenery to more colorful and alive environments that again parallel the paintings of jang either in simple black ink on white paper or with color added . rainbows of color enter the film at points as the artist observes nature and especially women that then become reflected in his paintings.

the theme of an artist 's individual desire to create versus the expectations and demands of society arises in the film through various points including class distinction , the domination of government over the artist , the accepted norms of the artistic elite , and the base desires of the common masses . instead of creating his own completely original works , jang finds himself mostly recreating masterpieces of other artists throughout east asia . the question thus arises if recreation itself deserves artistic merit.

i wish that i was more familiar with the political events of the period to firmly grasp how they tied into the story - but beyond any comparison to the current role of korean government in artistic expression and/or censorship i can not comment.

overall an extremely well acted film and the cinematography is often breathtaking . a great film to see and then ponder over . +0 once upon a time , way back in the 1940 's , there lived an actress named veronica lake . a beautiful , talented young woman who was once in high demand for many big - budget , hollywood pictures . fast forward to the late 1960 's , age , alcoholism , and all - around bad luck has tarnished everyones favorite actress . now a hasbeen , miss lake decides the time has come to follow in the foot steps of her peers ( ? ) , joan crawford , and bette davis , and fall back on good ol' reliable horror . but flesh feast ? really ? she could n't have possibly been that washed up . to put it delicately , flesh feast is a lifeless pile garbage , possibly one of the top 5 worst films i 've ever seen , and i 've seen them all . lake plays a scientist , who is plotting , with nazi 's , to bring hitler back to life , with youth restoration experiments involving maggots , that 's right , maggots . unless you 're a huge fan of heather hughes , run away and never look back ! ! < br />
i know very little about this veronica lake person , as well as 40 's flicks , but to think that such a successful career actually became that dismal , is actually pretty sad . flesh feast is almost impossible to get through , and by almost , i mean absolutely . directed by brad grinter , director of nudist camp pictures , and the man who , coincidentally brought us the greatest b - movie ever made , blood freak , just a couple years later . one has to wonder , is this what blood freak would have been like if grinter had n't co - directed with steve hawkes ? if so , then god bless steve hawkes . you would n't think that a religious , dope - blood craving , turkey monster could be that much better than experiments involving maggots and hitler , but it really , really is . so forget you ever heard of this one and go find blood freak , it 's just waiting to entertain you . fast forward a couple years later , veronica lake dies of hepititas , broke , and forgotten . the end . i hate you , flesh feast . 1/10 +0 talk about rubbish ! i ca n't think of one good thing in this movie . the screenplay was poor , the acting was terrible and the effects , well there were no effects . i ca n't believe the writer of this movie did identity , everything in this movie made me sick to start to finish.

the front cover of the video box shows a showman with shark like teeth and scary eyes . i looks like a scary villain , but like the old saying " never judge a book by it 's cover " , the whole villain looked like a cardboard cut out . one part in the film a girl gets killed by a salad tongs , terrible . the setting was bad enough , like they could of set the whole thing in lapland but no , a tropical island instead.

i took this movie as a spoof , which i think they wanted it to be but the only thing that made me laugh in a bad way was the tacky effects . you can argue that i have n't watched the first one , but seeing this i would be safe if i would n't attempted it.

the biggest joke in this movie is the effects , the snowballs looked like they were home made , and that carrot was a complete embarrassment . if i would of guess the budget of this movie would of probably be between 8 to 9 pounds fifty . the producer in a last minute panic must of grabbed the actors for the street gave them the script told them they have 6 minutes to practise these lines and shoot on a island.

lastly the acting in the film was painful , it was like the actors forgot their ordinary lines and made them up the way through.

in conclusion i give this film : 0 stars out of 5 +1 it may be a little creaky now , and it certainly can never have the impact it once had , but this is still a thrilling reminder of what michael jackson could once do . looking back on it now for the first time since its initial prominence , i was struck not by the horror trappings - quaint , but fun , and vincent price has never sounded so genuinely , un - camply ( sic ? ) menacing - than its absorption of the horror film , allowing jackson , behind genre and make - up , to give us a bravely revealing portrait of male sexuality.

because thriller is n't really about horror , in the way horror is n't really about horror : it is about that age - old theme , the sexual awakening of a young woman . the film opens in a cinema , with jackson 's girlfriend uncomfortable with the imagery , and the aggressively gendered response . of course , she is on a date , and she is less scared by the film than what she knows will be expected by her boyfriend.

the mainstream imagery of the film they watch , the group atmosphere all suggest the socially conditioned expectations . this leads her not only to think of the body in disgust - hence all the decaying ghouls ; the loss of her virginity is seen as a kind of death - but the sexual rite is not just about her boyfriend , but her peers , her society , hence its visualisation as a gang violation.

this is brilliant , disturbing stuff , the best thing director landis has ever done . jackson , the most popular artist on the planet , was still willing to show that the fixed image of a star contained multitudes , not all of them reassuring . the song itself has held up remarkably well , the creepy , insistent bass rhythms , the extraordinarily salacious lyrics , the beautiful 70s disco ecstasy tailing the chorus , shattering timelessness , revealing the milky desire behind the fear . +0 i am a fan of ed harris ' work and i really had high expectations about this film . having so good actors as harris and von sydow is always a big advantage for a director but if the script is bad what can you do ? i really think that needful things is the worst movie of harris ' filmography and that getting involved with it was a huge mistake . anyway , i 've seen much worse movies in my life but needful things was a disappointment because of the waste of acting talent . the story as an overall seems too unbelievable and fake . i do n't know if that is because of the book , 'cause i have n't read it . but if the script was so bad , i ca n't see the reason for filming it . maybe it was the commercial success of king 's books , or the need for low - quality movies for the vhs era of the 90 's . whatever the reason was , though , this movie was a very bad choice for anyone involved . +1 although i am very familiar with poet dylan thomas , i know nothing of his life . whatever his life and specifically his marriage involved , i would imagine that the edge of love ( based on the novel ) manipulates things a bit , but unless you are a historian or a poet , who cares.

the movie is less about thomas and more focused on the two most important women in his life . one is his wife kathrine , and the other is vera who was his first love . one romantic night on the beach as youths is something that both have tried to put behind them but can not , now grown up they are good friends . i forgot to mention that this is set during the war . vera becomes engaged to captain will killing who he gets her pregnant and leaves for war . while he is away , vera starts to fall for thomas again , and kathrine has fallen out of love with him . she is also carrying another man 's child . things get even more emotionally complex when capt killig returns < br />
as you can see , it is a very soap operatic plot , and it takes shape in a fairy drab slow manner , with perhaps one too many sequences of sappy dialogue . but all is not lost yet . for a non- hollywood production , i think that the edge of love is about as stylish a picture as one can get . it is certainly more dimensional and intelligent than about 90 % of contemporary romances , hollywood production or not . some of it has to do with being set during the war , which sets up emotional conflict that feels more convincing and less artificial , a bit like atonement . this one features acting and cinematography of equal talent to joe wright 's oscar nominee , but it is in far greater need for stable pacing and progression . things are okay at the start and finish , but the middle section is where your attention span may be tested , unless you are deeply and profoundly rooted in the story . < br />
i doubt if the edge of love will have that kind of an effect on the viewer , but is a good film to check . it might even make a good date night movie , considering it is so much smarter than the chick flicks that boyfriends are forced to endure today . +1 i originally seen the flash gordon serial on pbs , and thought it was fun and awesome , i overlooked the special effects of the rocket ships with sparklers , and the big dragon monster with lobster claws , who cares this is 1936 and it was a serial , so each week they would show a new chapter , buster crabbe played flash gordon 3 times , in all 3 serials.then in 1939 he played buck rogers , in 1933 he played tarzan the fearless.he was a very busy actor.beautiful jean rogers played sexy dale arden.frank shannon as professor zarkov , and charles middleton played the evil ming the merciless.he makes darth vader look like a boyscout.the serials were very close to the alex raymond comic strip.space travel was just a pipe dream at the time.not to mention ray guns and television.this one stands out as the best serial ever.the sequel flash gordon 's trip to mars is 2 chapters longer , the next flash gordon conquers the universe is only 12 chapters.and then there 's the natives of mongo .. ,hawk - men , lion - men , shark - men.the feature version leaves out the shark - men scenes . for the full effect you must see the complete serial.i heard george lucas was inspired by flash gordon when he did star wars.flash gordon was from universal studios.and the music on the soundtrack is from many universal movies like bride of frankenstein , werewolf of london , dracula 's daughter , etc;even today flash gordon continues to delight people young and old.10 out of 10 . +0 i 'm one of those gluttons for punishment when it comes to sitcoms these days - i still will check them out every once in a while . my observation is that most of them are n't very funny even the ones on major networks that are getting high ratings , i just do n't get who is finding them gut busting funny . while a few have made me crack a smile , none of them made me laugh out loud , i usually change the channel after a few minutes . now on the fox network they churn out new shows like changing your underwear , for some reason they think they can make a good sitcom , wrong dead wrong . they have beat this dead horse so much it is to the point of hiring just anyone they can find to write a crappy pilot with bad dialog and just churn them out . let 's take a brief look at the latest piece of junk that fox has churned out called " the war at home" < br />
i watched about 5 minutes of it and that was generous . in this particular episode , the daughter is mouthing off to her parents doing the i 'm an adult now rant . the dad gets fed up tells her " ok fine , go ahead and do whatever you want , if you screw up it 's your problem " to which she replies"well i guess your mad but hey at least i did n't get aids"(cue the laugh track , no way that can be a live audience unless they have been paid to applaud such garbage)-i found the crack about not having aids to be in such bad taste . well hey at least i do n't have to watch any more of this crap . take a hint fox , stop wasting your time with sitcoms . ok well you have the simpsons but it is now getting really old and tired as well . +0 ya know , i have no idea how everybody else 's teenage life was , but this does not reflect the folks i knew and hung around with let alone , myself . and just in case if you 're wondering .. no .. we were n't pristine / clean cut / pat boone type teens . ( if there was ever such a thing!!!!)

look , i 'm not saying being a teenager is easy . the better , well actually the best teen movie of this time is " fast times at ridgemont high " . now those kids i knew and were as realistic as it got back then ( and maybe now).

this was crap . this was a low rent version of fast times and even then it did n't do much for me . it had a few moments , but not enough for me to recommend this , or even claim " this is how it was for teens back in 1982 " . i could n't relate . the lead girl ( girls ) did nothing for me and please if they really wanted to keep their virginity , they would have , in which case , this film would not have been made . pure crap and a bad staple to be left behind as a time - capsule cinema for teens / young adults in the early ' 80 's . +0 if you think hannah montana or the suite life are at the bottom of tween sitcoms then you 've obviously never watched icarly . icarly is without a doubt the worst show i 've ever seen . from the lifeless acting to the low budget sets the show reeks of cheapness like last week 's chinese takeout left to simmer in your overheated car.

the show revolves around a pretty , perky , and " supposed to be " funny girl named carly , as she and her friends make a live web show called icarly . carly lives alone with her older brother who seriously needs some counseling or something , because he 's a few cells short of a brain.

the plots of the shows are highly ludicrous and unbearably annoying . but having to watch carly and her friend , sam , do their little icarly show - within - in - a - show is even worse . they basically show weird pictures and stick things up their nose as the laugh - track plays over and over . i mean seriously , every two seconds the laugh track seems to come on for no reason.

so , what 's the point of this review ? you may ask . just to ridicule icarly ? well , yeah , but i 'm also warning you to beware of this show . because seriously , if i had to choose between watching icarly and barney ? no questions about it , i 'd choose barney . +1 this film does for infantry what das boot did for submariners . if you appreciated das boot then that is all you really need to know.

this is a well done piece of cinema . on a par with das boot . basically it follows a company of elite german " stormtrooper " infantry who leave garrison duty in an idyllic italian seaside town and are immediately thrust into the chaos of the disintegrating russian front . < br />
a good war movie illuminates both the senselessness and brutality of war and at the same time gives us insight into the experiences and essential humanity of those who fight . this movie does that . the film is full of drama and action and so is entertaining on that level as well . +1 i 've seen this movie at least 8 times , and i still laugh every time . the movie is about how an intelligent and motivated man , against all odds , can cheat the entire over - self - confident system.

this movie is for all people , who like a funny movie.

the action and comedy is well mixed into a brilliant film , that i hope to see on dvd soon.

+0 after the book i became very sad when i was watching the movie . i am agree that sometimes a film should be different from the original novel but in this case it was more than acceptable . some examples:

1 ) why the ranks are different ( e.g. lt . diestl instead of sergeant etc.)

2 ) the final screen is very poor and makes diestl as a soldier who feds up himself and wants to die . but it is not true in 100 % . just read the book . he was a bull - dog in the last seconds as well . he did not want to die by wrecking his gun and walking simply towards to michael & noah . < br />
so this is some kind of a happy end which does not fit at all for this movie . +0 ... at least during its first half . if it had started out with the three buddies in the navy and concentrated on the naval action scenes , it would have been a much better and tighter film . the second half of the film is worth it , especially for the action sequences and close up shots of early 20th century ships , but it 's like a dull toothache getting there . also , do n't watch this film just because ginger rogers is in it . she has an important role , but it 's a small one.

the film starts out showing three new york city buddies working the tourist trade and also in good - natured competition for the hand of sally ( ginger rogers ) , a singing candy salesgirl along the avenue . world war i breaks out , the three buddies seem completely indifferent to the struggle , yet enlist in the navy anyways . the one of the three with the least industry as a civilian ( bill boyd as baltimore ) winds up the commanding officer to the other two ( robert armstrong as dutch and james gleason as skeets ) . to make matters more complex , sally has fallen in love with one of the three , but does n't have the chance to tell him before the three sail off to war.

the film is a little more interesting on board ship , mainly because of the close shots we have of the ship itself , and also because the chemistry among the three buddies is believable . however , james gleason at age 49 looks a bit long in the tooth to be a swabby , especially when the sign at the enlistment office said you had to be between 17 and 35 to be eligible.

one real obvious flaw in the film that made me believe that everything outside the naval scenes was slapped together with minimum care is the costume design , or , i should say , the lack of it . in the scenes in new york just prior to wwi we have everyone dressed in the fashions of 1931 and everyone driving the cars of 1931 - no effort was taken to bring this film into period.

in conclusion , if you watch the few scenes with ginger rogers in them and the last 45 minutes involving the naval suicide mission , you 've seen everything here worth seeing . the rest is padding . +0 every movie quentin tarantino has made has become progressively worse . i 'd like to believe that most people would agree with that statement , but seeing as " inglourious(sic ) basterds(sic ) " has an 8.5/10 from over 100,000 ratings , it does n't seem like the general movie - going public has any sense . even his best work , reservoir dogs , was n't a ' masterpiece . ' the trouble is that claiming that you like tarantino 's work has become trendy . as soon as that happens , you get boatloads of people ready and willing to hop on another bandwagon . they will ignore laughably terrible acting , and utterly self - indulgent writing just so they can be part of the exclusive club called " everyone . " this movie is so terrible , that i swear it must be some sort of twisted joke by tarantino to see how much torture his fans will tolerate and still praise him . like another reviewer has already said : " previous tarantino movies were from a guy in love with other movies . this one is from a guy in love with his own writing . " i could n't agree more . this movie is nothing more than self - indulgent and in - joke riddled writing paired with acting ability taken right out of a high school play . but , thanks to the general movie going public , i 'm sure it will still go down as one of the best movies ever made . bravo , tarantino . you 've pulled - off one of the best practical jokes of all time . +1 kate gulden , played by one of the most nominated actresses of the last decade of this century , and also one of the most talented actresses meryl streep(out of africa ) . she is wonderful is every part that she plays . the yale graduate is the pride and joy of the american cinema.

kate 's health is deteriorating and her husband , george , role well developed by brilliant actor and also oscar winner , william hurt ( smoke , kiss of the spider woman ) has a hard time with the deteriorating health of his one true thing , and seeks his daughter 's help . the poor daughter , ellen gulden , renée zellweger ( jerry maguire ) has way too much expected of her . no breaks ! the story takes a very realistic view on the illness of a parent . in this movie the only daughter has to put her life on hold to care for the needs of others . there is always one in every family who faces that kind of responsibility . ellen is angry the beginning of the movie , but as time passes she ends up understanding her mothers ' life time dedication to her family . she even asks her mom : how do you do his , every day , in and out and nobody notices it ? that is what women do , a lot of what i call invisible work . moreover we clean , we fix , we mend , we stretch , we celebrate , we are the best friends , we are confidants , the mistress , outreachers , disciplinarians , sensitive . some of us , like both women in this movie , have the perfect education , are the psychological pillar for the entire family and also do all that invisible work ! that is kate ellen , and many women in our society . many of us have already gone through that stage of life when our parents age and died . i have been there . they just went too young . i have given my parents my thanks , but i never understood them as well as when i had to play their roles , and had to walk in their shoes . this movie mirrors the reality of life . perhaps it is sad , but that is how life is , at times . george a professor at harvard is complicated person , who appears to think that his work is more important than everybody else , and has a very " master / servant " mentality toward the women in his life . he is not strong enough to cope . if you want to see good acting and the reality of life do not miss this movie . favorite scenes : the restaurant coming to kate , violins and all . the making of a table out of broken china . that i so symbolic ! we are all broken vessels ! favorite quotes : george : " it is only by going uphill , that you realize that you are really going downhill . " george " you have a harvard education but where is your heart ? " < br />
+0 this show , paranormal state , has an almost " blairwitch project " feel to it . as in , you 're watching a ' documentary ' that 's actually just a scripted movie , made to look and feel like a documentary.

my biggest problem with the show , is their ' go to ' outside advisers of the warren 's , who were made famous for their ' investigations ' of the amityville murders , which were shown to be completely fraudulent , just based upon the police reports of the family 's deaths ! ( such as the eldest daughter actually having been involved in the entire thing , to the point of possibly even helping with some of the deaths ! ) then there 's the way they constantly jump to blaming demons for everything . not to mention how haughty the group is about what cases they take . they do n't want to help those who need it most , they just want the weirdest cases , that will get them the most press and attention.

they're complete frauds , plain and simple . +0 this movie seems a little clunky around the edges , like not quite enough zaniness was thrown it when it should have been . but i mostly enjoyed it.

the storyline is more than a little bit preposterous , so no expectation of " something real " should be included in your viewing experience . check your brain in at the door . it will not be needed and might be an impediment otherwise.

i quite enjoyed clennon 's performance as the real dr. baird . his role was spot on for giving aykroyd 's character a protagonist . what a putz the real dr. baird was.

and matthau was quite good as the lead character 's sidekick . annoying at first , but ultimately lovable . sort of . kind of . or at least something the use of a bar of soap and a lot of water would have been more than helpful.

actually worth watching ? if you 're in the mood for a spoof on the psychiatric profession , sure , why not . +0 return to sender , a.k.a . convicted , is almost imperfect . the one good thing about this particular film was that i was never bored . that being said , the reviews that hail this movie as a low - budget success may not have watched the same movie that i saw.

rather than write a review and tell you what happens and what works and does n't work , i will simply comment that nothing works . there are plot holes in this movie that you can drive a semi through . the acting in the film is not very good , although that may be a result of a script so poorly worded that it could have been ghost written by george lucas . there was no need for exceptional sets or costumes for this particular movie and everything seemed appropriate . did i mention that there were some plot holes ? by the end of the movie , you are wondering how a blind guy can be such a good shot with a shotgun , why kelly preston trusts aidan quinn , why she would fall asleep the night before her client is supposed to be killed , how aidan quinn can drive 400 miles in such a short time with a car that keeps breaking down during the rest of the movie , why aidan quinn did n't by a fifth instead of a bunch of nips , etc.

with all that being said , this is certainly a b - movie , and a terrible one at that . the unfortunate thing is that it just is n't bad enough to be good . if you value your time , please let this serve as a public service message to stay away from this one . +1 i usually have a difficult time watching a tv movie , the extra long commercial breaks will break my concentration and i give up and find a good book . this one however made me put up with the adds and stay with it to the end . i realize the movie was based on a true story but it was not brought out why it took so long to find denny ? they had his name and i would presume his social security number . while he did move around a lot it would seem he would be found as soon as his number was entered for a job etc . the actors seemed a bit old for the part and a buried metal object when dug up had no rust . these were only technical glitches and did not take from the file . for a lifetime movie it was better than most . +0 this one kind of is like an earlier movie from 1987 " masters of the universe " based on the cartoon " he - man " . basically , you have a great old world and they for some reason have to have nearly all the action of the movie take place on modern earth . well i guess it is not so modern earth now and that it is an ancient world now of strangeness and a den of good times gone by . well i guess i can figure why they did in fact place nearly all the movie in modern times in this and that movie . to save money on costumes and sets . it is a lot easier to recreate what is going on in the present than a strange world like that of eternia in he - man or an ancient world with cults and strange pyramids , sacrifices and strange creatures that hug you to death . this movie is forgettable and not very entertaining , your first clue that it is not going to be the best movie in the world is that robert z'dar is in it . the only thing this one has going for it is the animals which are not as prevalent in this one as they were in the last . marc singer is back and it is sad to seem him in this state , the guy was a fairly good actor reduced to trying to make a sequel to a movie that really did not need one , and even if it did it came five years to late . +1 following the advice of a friend , i got myself this movie . i 'm very fond of computers in general - hence why a 1995 film about identity theft on the internet could not be left unseen . i had some bad echoes about it , but in the end , i was n't so disappointed : the story , though classical , is kind of interesting and must have been really new back in the days when it was released in theatres . i was gladly surprised when i figured out that contrary to what we usually see , computer - performed actions are somehow realistic , as they use windows 3.x and normal computers . the storytelling is median and not bothering the viewer . the end is typically american . the actors ' performance is globally ok , sandra bullock usually annoys me with her " oh my god why me " way to behave , but this time she seems to have controlled herself . i 'd recommend that movie . +1 this is an entertaining surreal road movie . it was written by joseph minion , who also wrote after hours , martin scorsese 's excellent surreal film . the film follows the adventures of a ten - year - old kid named gus , who drives a red ford mustang across some fictional states with names like tristana ( a tribute to luis buñuel 's film , perhaps ? ) , essex & south lyndon , in search of eight elusive motorama game cards from various chimera company gas stations . the film has a surreal feel to it because a lot of the things are unusual , like the money for instance , which is like blank paper with numbers on.

most of the characters are nasty to gus on his trip . they tattoo him , punch him , but this does n't stop the kid on his relentless quest . some oddball actors like david lynch incumbent jack nance , meat loaf & flea also make appearances . jack nance plays a motel owner , who when he first meets gus tells him , " if you see any squirrels , give them to me " . this is a movie where a man and his wife abandon their young children because the man owes gus $ 100 ; and a mother encourages her son to raise his voice louder while speaking rudely . if you 're a fan of twin peaks and surreal movies , you 'll like this . an odd little gem of a movie . +0 the attic starts off well . the somewhat dreary story is helped greatly by the two main actors and there 's a semblance of a character study going on here but the film goes downhill fast when carrie snodgress ' character buys a monkey . not one of those cute little monkeys . she buys a real big chimpanzee!!!

this sudden plot device basically kills the movie . it 's just not conceivable for a woman like the one snodgress plays , who has a hard time doing anything because of her domineering father , for her to , out of the blue , buy a chimpanzee . i mean , come on ! forget about it ! +0 * * * spoiler alert * * * disjointed and confusing arson drama that has to do with a sinister plan to burn down a major vacation resort before new years day . being insured for ten million dollars the man behind valley view estates in the blue mountains in australia julian fane , guy doleman , is determined to bring his own project down in flames in order to collect . this has to happen by january 1 , two weeks hence , before the insurance policy on the project runs out.

with his mind totally on his work builder and architect howard anderson , tom skerritt , has no idea that his boss , julian fane , is planning to burn down the resort he 's building and possibly set him up as the fall guy . anderson gets a bit suspicious when insurance investigator sophie mccann , wendy hughes , informs him on some very fishy goings on between fane and the insurance company proud alliance . it turns out that proud allience is actually owned , or 60 % of it , by fane himself ! this explains whey fane is having all these arson fires happen in order to collect the ten million dollars of insurance which is at least twice as much as the entire valley view estates is worth!

we later have sophie mccann murdered , in a faked swimming accident , to keep her from finding out what s happening with the suspicious fries around and in valley view estates . it 's when lloyd 's of london , who 's underwriting proud alliance , insurance investigator george engles , james mason , shows up that fane takes a powder leaving his ace arsonist on his own and out of control to blow fane 's entire plan.

meanwhile anderson has gotten wise to both fane and engles who unlike fane wants the valley view estates to go under for reasons which are never made quite clear , just watch the last few seconds of the film to realize that , by it 's writer and director . the arsonist is exposed as he 's about to do in his girlfriend with anderson coming to her rescue . we then have this wild chase scene with the arsonist getting lost in the valley view construction site only to have it set on fire , with the help of howard anderson , where he ends up burning to a crisps by the time the fire department came to hose him down.

the sudden and unexplained ending never made clear to just what happened to the big cheese in this whole scheme of things the sinister and evil minded julian fane . it 's as if fane got away scot - free and only his unstable and deranged henchman , the arsonist , who was only the instrument of fane 's crimes ended up as the only person who payed from them . +1 i watched this movie three times at different ages of my life and always did enjoy it very much indeed . this can - can is an authentic explosion of joie de vivre , like stanley donen and gene kelly musical , but in french way . and a jean renoir nice tribute to his time , his friends , lovers , music and dances . it is at same time a show business chronicle of that age , full of affection and french mood . it is too a clear tribute to the impressionism ( people who likes impressionistic painters will like this picture ) . it is particularly a tribute to toulouse - lautrec and , of course , to jean renoir father , pierre - auguste . you will find hear a trustworthy and splendid colored recreation of some renoir master work . excellent casting , scenery , sound - effects and music . even it tell us about the creation of parisian moulin rouge , obviously it is a fiction story ( and not very original by the way , as it fall down in the very well know moral that the show must go on ) . but the jean renoir production is great.

+1 i thoroughly enjoyed this made for tv movie . i was channel surfing , and came across the start of the movie . boy am i glad i stopped . this movie has a real hot cast , as well as a semi - believable plot . there 's drama , comedy , action , and best of all , the human nature aspect of this film is what makes it great . i hope it comes out on video , because i will buy a copy . rating ... 9 out of 10 stars +0 after watching this movie , i could n't help but notice the parallels between it and another film called america 3000 . both were very bad mid 1980 's post apocalypse disasters on celluloid . obviously fake sets , wooden acting and stupid monsters are found in both films . about the only difference between the two is that the lead villainess here ( played by angelika jager ) has a very thick accent . avoid this one unless you 're watching the mst3 k version . joel and the bots barely salvage this turkey . +1 oz was a fantastic show , as long as frequent male nudity does n't turn you off . there was way too much frontal male nudity in this show , more than any other show you 'd see on a porn channel . minus that , it was the best show on tv , and a previous commenter said " better than prime suspect " . prime suspect is tom and jerry vs the simpsons . no contest . if you have directv they are now re - running it from the start on channel 101 , they 're at episode # 3 now . highly recommended . the creator tom fontana also did homicide , which was an awesome show . but why all the male nudity ? we all know that stuff happens in prison , but did they really need to show it as often ? that was the only thing that turned me off the show . if i want to see naked men , guys getting raped , i 'll kill someone myself and witness first hand . otherwise i like my tv shows free of black penises every five minutes . +1 for only doing a few movies with his life the late great chris farley . farley died at the end of 1997 and will be missed mostly by his co actor in tommy boy , david spade . from the lame police academy 4 spade really has done good with his career in films . tommy boy is a classic and we will always remember chris farley when we watch it . from appearing on saturday night live to doing tommy boy , black sheep , beverley hills ninja , almost heroes , billy madison , and dirty work . i think chris farley had a short and successful career . tommy boy was his best in my case and i would watch over and over again and laugh at the same part each time . thank you chris farley . +0 this movie is awful . if you 're considering to see this movie ... two words do not . it 's tasteless , the storyline is really lame , and the jokes are even worse . the acting is really pathetic . i ca n't believe that this movie was made . rather watch american pie , going greek or road trip if you 're in the mood for a teen comedy . it 's about two girls who head for malibu on their spring break . as usual they did n't do much planning and called ( i think her names michelle ) 's uncle to crash at his malibu mansion . uncle bennie strictly forbids them of having any kind of party , and as you would of guessed , they go ahead and do it . please , i urge you , do not see this movie . +1 this series is vastly underrated . like many others , i came upon farscape after the series had been cancelled . bought season 1 and was surprised to find a smartly written drama infused with a balanced mix of suspense , romance , wit and , of course , sci - fi . right off the bat it got a 10 for being the first series or movie to satisfy us how our hero - and every alien with whom he comes in contact - speaks english ! okay , a few others have skirted the issue , but farscape did it the best . the point is , the writers pay close attention to detail to make the show as believable as possible.

with so much bad programming out there , it 's a shame that balanced , entertaining series such as farscape do n't get enough exposure and recognition to stay in production . while we enjoy the four seasons and , thankfully , the four - hour miniseries , maybe we can make enough noise to convince the producers to continue the show . +1 i liked this movie . many people refer to it as " sabrina the teenage feminist " . they do that with a lot of movies that melissa joan hart is in . still , she really surprised me in this movie because she was great in the part of mary , who fights for justice when her roommate is raped . you could tell that hart was extremely determined in this movie and it showed . i also liked lisa dean ryan as mary 's roommate . she was very effective in making me feel sorry for her character after she was raped . josh hopkins was good as the cocky and egotistical rapist . lochlyn munro convincingly played his character . the acting in this movie is better than in most tv movies , in my opinion.

the movie was pretty predictable though . also , i expected more from the ending , it was too abrupt . the delivery could have been better . but the performances and overall plot make up for these problems . +1 i thoroughly enjoyed this film when it was first released , and on each occasion i 've seen it since . the political drama is effective , if not especially new or inspired . the decades since the release of the film have demonstrated that the willingness to cut costs at the expense of public safety is definitely not just something imagined by a screenwriter.

however , i think the most impressive element of this film is jack lemmon 's performance . it is absolutely astonishing to watch him at work . he has the gift to be able to communicate so much , at times without saying a word . next time you watch this film , check out jack 's face at the times he is not saying anything . he does not need to speak ( or worse yet , to mug ) to let you know what 's going through his mind.

i am calling this a spoiler , because of the impression it made on me when i first saw the film : in lemmon 's last scene in the film , as he is lying on the floor , he feels a slight vibration . the terror in his eyes is one of the most frightening images i have seen in any film . it is perfect acting , because it conveys instantly the threat about to occur -- if jack 's character is so terrified , there is certainly something awful about to happen . and it does . +1 sexy murderess tiffany ( jennifer tilly ) still yearns for a life of wedded bliss with ex - boyfriend , crazed killer charles ' chucky ' lee ray . after getting her hands on the mutilated good guy doll that last played host to his spirit , and doing a spot of repair work , she conducts a satanic ritual that returns his life to the toy.

unfortunately for poor tiff , the reanimated maniac shows no interest in marriage , and so she traps him in a cage , with a bride doll for company . eventually , a rather angry chucky ( voiced by brad dourif ) escapes his confines , electrocutes tiffany in the bath , and traps her soul in his ' bride ' as retribution.

realising that they are now both in the same predicament , the plastic pair put their differences aside and decide to head for hackensack , new jersey , where they can lay their hands on the magical amulet that can relocate their spirits into human hosts . tricking trailer park hunk jesse ( nick stabile ) and his tasty girlfriend jade ( katherine heigl ) into taking them to their destination , the psycho dolls embark on a murderous rampage , with their unwitting companions copping the blame.

although the idea of a kid 's doll being possessed by the spirit of a mass murderer has always been rather comical , it was n't until the fourth film in the child 's play series that the makers fully embraced the sheer lunacy of the premise , opting to plays things much more for laughs than for scares ( although there is still plenty of ott splatter for us gore - hounds to enjoy).

talented hong kong director ronny yu oversees proceedings , deftly translating the witty tongue - in - cheek script into a slick and thoroughly enjoyable cinematic ride . similarly , the excellent cast handle the camp material perfectly , with stabile and heigl making a likable couple , but smoking hot tilly stealing the show as blonde , buxom , pouting , pvc - mini - skirted temptress tiffany . kevin yagher 's impressively expressive doll effects also go a long way to making the film such a success.

overall , this film is unlikely to find many fans amongst ' serious ' horror aficionados , but those who enjoy the odd spot of mindless popcorn entertainment , full of twisted , black humour , crazy death scenes , and magnificent cleavages should have a blast . +1 as good as schindler 's list was , i found this movie much more powerful as it is a documentary and based on real life . it details the story of the frank family , and anne in particular . although it is a bit slow moving at first ( detailing their family life before the war ) ; it becomes very powerful.

due to some of the footage and photos of the camps , i would not recommend it for children but for adults , it illustrates the horror of the holocaust through one young girl . highly recommended . +0 when i first saw this movie , i said to myself , " hey what the heck it sounds like a good movie , why not rent it ? " . so yeah , i rented it and went back home to see it . when i inserted it in my dvd player i was shocked.

well first of all , no one told me it was a mexican movie and was spoken in spanish , good thing it had subtitles.

second , it was nude , nude nude ! since i have no background whatsoever in mexican movies , you could see my shock when i saw it . * gasp ! covering virgin eyes , noo*

third , predictable to say the least , but actually being it predictable was no excuse to me in liking movies , because i do n't seem to care if it 's predictable , unless it 's way over the top . < br />
fourth , how heidi and kike were reunited , so cheesy . < br />
fifth , how the movie ended . it was a bad , bad ending . how mr. van der linde 's sudden approval to the mayor 's election was because her daughter , knew how to throw the party ... blah , blah . i was hoping that he was n't that easy to accept it , the director might have just rushed it . < br />
after all of this bashing of the bad stuff , the good stuff 's are here to come . the movie was actually quite hilarious at some point with maribel being clumsy in the kitchen and all , heidi 's attitude , valentina being poetic with words . what i really also like about it was the song that valentina made with her girl friend . that 's all , and for the other stuffs that i have n't mentioned they were just so - so . +1 i just saw this at the philadelphia film festival . it was the most wonderful movie - the best i 've seen in quite a while . the enticing character of isa is an open , exploring and ( as remarked in the film ) love - filled person - guilelessly portrayed by the beautiful camille natta . the accompanying music is soothing and transporting , a balm to the soul.

each character seems to be conflicted in some way - and their interactions ( w/ conflicts ) make for a great story . the tale told by a.k. hangal as the old man was most magically done - i wanted it to go on and on.

that hari seemed to remember his " place " throughout added get power to the story - a refreshing change to the bubble - headed plots of many modern writers.

all and all , an excellent film . go see . +0 ed gein : the butcher of plainfield is set in the small american town of plainfield in wisconsin during 1957 where loner ed gein ( kane hodder ) lives by himself on a farm after the death if his mother & brother . the local police have had a spate of grave robberies to deal with & when local barmaid sue layton ( ceia coley ) suspicions grow that something nasty is going on . ed is a violent sexually deviant man who kidnaps girls & murders them , will the police figure the truth out in time to save erica ( adrienne frantz ) the sheriff 's ( timothy oman ) daughter ...

written , produced & directed by michael feifer this was an attempt to base a horror film around the true events surrounding notorious serial killer ed gein & turns out to be pretty crap . the real life ed gein was only ever convicted of two murders & died in 1984 but several films have been inspired by him including the texas chainsaw massacre ( 1974 ) , deranged ( 1974 ) & ed gein ( 2000 ) with this fairly recent addition possibly being the worst gein film ever . even though ed gein was real next to nothing in this film is based on fact , gein never had an accomplice , none of his victims were related to any of the investigating officers , there was no car crash victim , although gein keeps his name other people have had name changes , the kidnapping & murder of the two women depicted here actually happened four years apart in reality but in this film it happens over the course of a couple of days & while here gein is shown as a large hulking muscular man in reality he was a scrawny , thin , old & quite short . as a factual drama ed gein : the butcher of plainfield is worthless & as pure entertainment it 's no better with a deadly dull pace & feel to it , the character 's are all boring & when he is n't killing someone gein is shown working or just walking around & it 's very dull . there 's no suspense because we know who the killer is & it 's just a tedious wait until he gets caught at the end . there is no real attempt to get into gein 's mind with the makers giving him no more motivation than him occasionally having hallucinations of his domineering mother.

there is n't much gore here , there 's a scene with a woman hanging on a meat - hook , there 's a really badly edited scene of gein cutting a leg off , there 's the usual jars of bodily organs & skulls lying around as well as a bit of blood but there 's really not much here to get excited about . the film was obviously processed to bleach a lot of the colour out of the picture as it 's not far off black and white at times , i personally think the lack of colour makes it even duller to sit through.

with a supposed budget of about $ 1,500,000 i ca n't really see where the money went in a very forgettable production . although set in wisconsin this was filmed in california . kane hodder is all wrong for the role of ed gein , just from a physical point of view hodder does n't look even remotely like gein & he gives a pretty poor performance to as he just stares at the camera a lot making silly faces.

ed gein : the butcher of plainfield is crap & it 's as simple & straightforward as that . as either a factual drama or pure exploitation entertainment this is total tripe from start to finish with nothing to recommend it . +1 let 's face it , you know what to expect when you tune into a post 1990 corey feldman film , there are probably boobs , guns and cars . saying that , there is more to this movie than just naked ladies ( i 'm sorry to say ) , cos it 's mainly people getting themselves killed in a variety of unusual , and as the name suggests , often ' mystical ' ways . i love crappy horror , and i love this film . if you do n't , you probably wo nt . but i think it 's worth most people giving it a go , it 's not so crappy that it 'll ruin your weekend or anything . all in all , if its mindless good fun , a bit of corpse loving , and an 80 's childhood superstar your in the mood for , then you 've come to the right place . its a cracker ! ! ! ! +0 i walked into blockbuster , itchin ' to watch some good old fashion action movies . so i browsed around the action section until this movie caught my attention because the cover had in big bold letter sandra bullock . an action movie with sandra bullock in it and it 's rated r ! ? yay ! although i will admit i prefer her in a comedy but if this is anything like ' speed ' then i was sold . sadly sandra really is not in this movie , her role is minor : " panicky kidnapped girlfriend " ( she is in fifth place on the actors listing for jeebus shakes ! ) apparently this was her first movie role ( and after watching this movie , i figured as much ) sandra is the only living human in this movie , everyone else might as well be a zombie in a b - horror flick . this movie deceived me saying sandra was the lead . . . i fell for it like biff from ' back to the future ' when marty yells " what 's that . . . ! ! ! " god , i wish i watched that instead of this.

sandra is the only bright side of this movie , every time she is on camera it is like she is picking up shock paddles and yelling " clear ! " to get this movies going but it flat lines no matter how hard she tries . more on sandra later . . . < br />
the movie is dull . very dull . think of the dullest moment in your life then imagine living through that moment for 110 minutes ( for me , it is this movie ) . this movie even somehow makes gun fights and bullet time effects boring , so boring that elephant tranquilizers are put to shame . and this movie 's idea of bullet time is a close up of an ak in slow motion which mocks you as the caps spitting out of it represent each second of your life as it slowly ticks away . and i knew i was watching a bad movie because i found myself fast forwarding " through - the - action ! " the plot ? . . . there was a plot ? music ? . . . even by 80s muck standards is bad but at least it 's the one thing that kept me awake . acting ? sandra bullock was good and . . . ummm . . . moving on . is it any good since it is rated r ? no , unless r stands for ridicules - snooze - fest.

and it is really 80s cliché when a movie opens with an overhead view of a city ( rocking guitar licks or power ballet ) and ends with a gun fight in a grim factory complete with steel walkways and assorted pipes . both of which this movie satisfies . at least this movie establishes what era it 's from which was unnecessary since sandra 's hair was screaming " 1980s ! ! ! ! " and a movie gets really ham fisted when you watch an assassin stripper kill a nerd in the bathroom and stuff his body in a box , which you respond to sadly saying : " that is probably the most action that poor sap ever got . " another hammy moment is at the beginning when some - secret - agent - dude caps a crowd of people and apparently this movie thinks people jump into the air and fall to the ground when they die . all that scene needed was the mario death ditty or maybe contra sound effects but nintendo might have sued.

and it is sad when the main action hero of this movie rips off other better movie icons . before the big gun scene , da hero is found standing in a boxing ring ( ' rocky ' anyone ? ) , sporting a leather fedora ( not ' indiana jones ' too ) with an ominous spotlights behind him ( terminator the 2nd before owning t-1000 ) what is really really sad is that people on youtube or dailymotion can film better quality videos ( with a crappy webcam no less ) then this movie . i 'm serious , most rant videos recorded with bad audio and blurry picture are more entertaining then this movie . i can not even call this movie by it 's given name for it 's very name bring back horrid memories of watching this cruel and unusual punishment ( a freaking violation against human rights ! ) the only bright speck in this dark abysmal abyss is sandra 's career started taking off thanks to this movie . but oh sandra . . . why did you have to be in such a nightmare ? the paycheck better been worth it . the dvd also graces you with a little back story on sandra as an extra , seen how she is the only one from this movie who end up being a house hold name . which explains why this movie uses her name as bait for unsuspecting movie buffs , crafty little critter.

i do n't have much experience with bad films but i know bad when i see it . i could bounce back from ' mazes and monsters ' with a good old campy bruce willis comedy . but not even bruce could cheer me up after this movie . i have yet to see any ed wood or uwe boll but i think i 'm amped for them now . for i ca n't even fathom a movie worse then . . . " gag " . . . ' hangmen ' . . . +1 englar alheimsins are very good movie . she happen on a mental home in iceland . ingvar e. sigurdsson is in a leading role and is good . other good actors in this movie are baltasar kormákur and bjorn jorundur . i like this movie she is very good . i voice with this movie . +0 this was without a doubt the worst movie i have ever see , yet once i started , it was just like the really bad car wreck on the side of the road - you ca n't help yourself , you just have to look . my eyes ! ! ! the acting was awful , the production was awful , the filming was awful , awful , awful , awful . i was glad the priest got chopped , would have loved to have done it myself because of his poor acting . i mean suck - ful acting to the tenth power . i would have cheered if chris had just axed the lot of them before turning it on himself . and what was with that freaking wig from hell on his head ? ! i sincerely hope no one got paid , i mean if getting paid were to be considered here , they should be paid to never attempt another film project again , everyone that was involved , never , never again . that was just a huge piece of garbage that i am embarrassed to say i just had to keep watching until the very end . do n't watch it , it 's about an hour and a half of your life you will never get back , and then you 'll have to spend time registering on this website so you can write a comment like i am doing now , which you must do as a catharsis in order to survive the aftershocks of having viewed this film ( and i use the term " film " loosely here ) . +0 a group of 7 gold prospectors head into a mine that was recently opened back up after an earthquake . of course , they do n't pay attention to local legend that something is down there and killing people . this low budget ( $ 25,000 ) horror flick has a slight cult following and i 'm not exactly sure why ( unless it is because it is so obscure ) . i 'll admit the last half hour is pretty entertaining , but the hour getting there is pure torture . lots of walking and talking and our titular strangeness does n't appear until 45 minutes in . even in the extras co - writer chris huntley admits it commits the unforgivable sin of being boring . i would forgive them if they were strict amateurs , but this group graduated from usc so i would hope they know an exploitation film should be exploitive . anyway , like i said , the last half hour is cool as three survivors battle the stop motion monster and there is a cool john carpenter - like score . i wanted to see more of the monster , but it is literally on screen for 45 seconds.

even if the movie is n't the best , code red dvd has given this great attention . you have interviews and an audio commentary by director melanie anne phillips , producer / actor mark sawicki and co - writer huntley . the tales about how the film was made are pretty fascinating and inspiring ( like a cave set being built in a backyard ) . even more interesting are sawicki and huntley 's usc student shorts , which are actually all better than the feature production . huntley was a pretty talented artist and it is a shame he did n't go on to anything else . sawicki has worked steadily in hollywood as a visual effects and camera guy . the film 's vhs is kind of legendary for how dark it was and i 'm sure this is much better . however , you still get scenes where the only image are five helmet lights bouncing around in the blackness . safe to say , the original my bloody valentine is still " horror film set in a mine " champ . +1 this movie blew me away - i have only seen two episodes of the show , never saw the first movie , but went to a pre - screening where johnny knoxville himself introduced the movie , telling us to ' turn off our sense of moral judgment for an hour and a half . ' he was right . as a movie , this would probably rate a 2 , given it has zero plot , no structure besides randomness , and very little production value . however , that is n't the point . everyone in our theatre was laughing and gasping the whole way through - not only were some of the stunts creative ( see trailer if you need to know but they hid some of the best ( or worst depending on how you want to look at it ) ) , but some of the stuff they did took us completely by surprise . these guys do some stuff that wo n't make it into your newspaper reviews ( and probably ca n't even be published here ) , involving lots of things below the belt . however , almost 3/4 of the stunts are fantastically hysterical ( even if morally condemnable , but remember knoxville 's statement ) , and if you are in the right mindset this movie is hysterical to watch . only about 20 minutes of this movie could have actually been shown on tv , so consider yourself warned of what you 're getting into - some stuff is disgusting , but instead of being repulsed by it you end up laughing at the sheer stupidity of it all . as a person who thought jackass the tv show was an over - hyped fad with only a few funny sketches and lots of unnecessary pain , the amount of fun i had at this movie has made me realize that having no boundaries is the best environment for these guys to work in . it 's a lot of fun and should be a great comedic fix until the borat movie comes out . with this movie , you may think you know what you 're getting , but these guys are a few steps ahead of you - i guarantee you 'll be surprised by the 3rd sketch . so enjoy , and do n't worry : you wo n't want to perform almost any of their stuff at home . +1 i agree with bigalc - this movie actually prepared me for a lot of the cultural differences and practices before i went to live in japan for a year in 1993 . tom selleck does a fantastic job here , as always , and the movie is greatly humorous and educational . i 'm a big fan of tom selleck 's , and he blesses this part with his usual charm and charisma to this part , bringing the film to life in a way i ca n't imagine any other actor being able to pull off . < br />
this film featured some first - rate japanese actors , and it was highly entertaining to watch them as they interacted with selleck - i can imagine the fun he had during the actual filming of the movie - japan 's an awesome place to go , whether you want to party , sight - see or just try to take everything in . +0 it is hard for a lover of the novel northanger abbey to sit through this bbc adaptation and to keep from throwing objects at the tv screen - in fact , if jane austen herself were to see this , she would be somewhat amused and possibly put out . maggie wadey 's adaptation has made northanger abbey into what it satirized , the gothic novel ( and the readers of gothic novels).

the role of catherine morland in the adaptation is portrayed fairly closely to austen 's catherine , a open - hearted , generous girl whose imagination simply runs away with her . but the henry tilney of the novel is not a snuff - taking , cane - wielding , sappy - line - making hero of a gothic novel - he is a tease , a nearly - handsome man with a messy room and a living ( that 's right , henry tilney is a clergyman , a charm that is completely dropped from the script ) . some of the best scenes from novel , when henry , completely deadpan , outrageously teases the literally - minded catherine on diction , journals , mrs. radcliffe , etc . , are not portrayed in the adaptation . a large section of henry 's personality is lost when those scenes are not adapted . besides , peter firth 's appearance is not accurate - henry tilney is supposed to be 24 or 25 , dark hair and a brown skin , not 35 or 40 and blond.

there are so many other absurdities within the adaptation that invoke surprise and disgust - who is the marchioness , and what is she doing in the story ? ! why is john thorpe less of a dunce and more of a schemer ? why is northanger abbey a castle ? catherine of the novel , with her romantic visions , expects hidden passages and dark tapestries , but is very disappointed to discover that northanger abbey is actually a comfortable , modern house - another element of satire ! why portray general tilney as a drunk ? why does catherine have those strange visions of mrs. allen threading her finger , etc . ? catherine 's imagination only runs away with her at northanger , with henry there to correct her gently . and lastly , why are so many facts concerning the tilney family and mrs. tilney 's death altered unnecessarily ? to make the story more ` horrible ? ' all of these oddities and more simply are too strange to be overlooked.

> +1 a bunch of mostly obnoxious and grossly unappealing teens go to a creepy , remote , rundown old mortuary located nearby a cemetery to attend an anything - goes all - out halloween party being hosted by freaky occult - obsessed oddball mimi kinkade and her vacuous , boy - hungry bimbette friend linnea quigley . the loutish , profane , beer - guzzling , sex - happy dipstick dimwits hold a séance as a joke ( very bad idea , 'cause the desolate old dive is naturally said to be haunted by demonic spirits ) . of course , that ill - advised séance awakens those decidedly grumpy and hostile evil spirits , who gruesomely kill and possess a majority of the kids , turning them into ugly , fanged , clawed , boil - faced murderous ghouls who wreak the usual grisly havoc throughout the duration of an especially long , dark and harrowing night of pure terror.

yep , this is essentially your umpteenth vigorously graphic and unrelenting wall - to - wall cheap shock - ridden " evil dead " rehash , replete with closed - off , there 's no easy way out claustrophobic single self - confined setting , outrageously excessive splatter set pieces , an incessantly pounding hum'n'shiver synthesizer score , a total sense of gloom'n'doom - laden grim nightmarishness , and vibrantly in - your - face manic careening cinematography ( the expected headlong rush - inducing hyperactive hand - held camera - work , smooth , sinuous tracking shots , crazily tittled camera angles , even the camera on a dolly doing a gracefully gliding 180 degree figure eight ) . fortunately , kevin s. tenney 's slick , assured , stylish direction keeps the extremely threadbare and derivative proceedings thundering along at a speedy clip ; moreover , tenny gives the film an attractive polished look and effectively creates a certain crudely energetic and enthusiastically grotesque spooky ooga - booga carnival funhouse atmosphere.

however , steve johnson 's marvelously gory and imaginative make - up effects are the true star of the show . bloodthirsty highlights include disgusting fat slob hal havins ( who played a similarly irritating obese a**hole role in the immortal " sorority babes in the slimeball bowl - a - rama " around the same time ) having his tongue bitten off , quigley shoving a whole tube of lipstick in one of her breasts ( yow ! ) and gouging a guy 's eyes out while she 's making love to him ( double yow ! ) , a libidinous teen couple getting offed while doing exactly what you think in a coffin ( the chick has her neck snapped while the dude has his arm chopped off ) , kinkade setting her hands on fire , and , in the film 's single most nasty scene , a mean old man has his throat slit from the inside out after eating an apple piece laced with razor blades . the trashy'n'thrashy rock score likewise smokes . and then there 's kinkade 's incredibly wild , sexy and uninhibited demon dance , a sizzling number accompanied by a flickering strobe light and startling jump cuts that kinkade choreographed herself . okay , so this overall does n't amount to anything more than a completely mindless and pointless , albeit quite nicely mounted and enjoyably vulgar hunk of blithely sleazy fright flick junk , but if you 're in the mood for entertainingly brain - dead lowbrow horror scuzziness this cheerfully crass and juvenile dross does the trick just fine . +0 the only reason i bought the dvd was to satisfy my curiosity about the scene when liz ( kim basinger ) strips to the music of joe cocker : you can leave your hat on ! that was the best part of the whole film . not because the scene was any good ; only the song . i am not saying it was a terribly bad film just not that good . disappointingly so!

especially when the exploration of male and female sexuality could have been expanded upon . instead of expanding on the dangerous side of lust , obsession and infatuation and where it can lead to it drags its heels obscurely from one idea to the other . for example when john ( played by rourke ) is able to leave her on the top of the big wheel , liz ( kim basinger ) is unconvincingly rattled at the bizarre experience courtesy of john 's sense of humor but less rattled at his sexual exploits involving the ever willing liz ; and like one reader mentioned , that for a woman to enjoy sex she has to experience the dangerous side is unconvincing . this " dangerous " side is not exploited enough in the film and one gets a sense of anti - climax from the view point that it all could go horribly wrong . the theme of bondage makes an appearance often but only just takes one to the brink of danger and then all goes well . is the film sending the message out that this kind of " foreplay " is fine ! if the film was making a point about the pitfalls of bondage and by extension the ugly ramifications of sad - masochism then maybe it would make a good moral point . instead the film awkwardly jumps from one " sizzling " scene of rourke feeding basinger and blindfolding her to another . in a film that could have been good it falls flat on its face because it does not expand and extend the themes the film is maybe trying to relate ; thus for me it does n't have a plot nor a theme just a mixture of ideas . +1 anyone who has ever gone on an audition can certainly relate to this one . great story of an aspiring actor and the pressures he must deal with both personally and professionally in order to make it to the big time . lou myers , as half - step wilson , provides many hilarious moments . +0 ... out of this movie.

sorry to say , this showed at the cleveland international film festival . our copy did not have subtitles , so i asked the festival crew if there was a problem with the print received . " not so ... " i was told . " the director wants it this way " . < br />
again , sorry to say , my french is barely high school elective level ( more than 3 decades ago ) . much of the initial dialog is in french , so i 'm sure i missed the nuance and many details in between my understanding of a few key words . < br />
i've rated this a " 1 " , primarily because of the irony of a director who once worked doing subtitles refusing to put subtitles into a movie to be seen by an american audience . excuse me , even if most americans would n't know where europe was on a map , not even a film festival audience should be assumed to know " the native language " of a given movie . even if a few of us do n't know finnish , i would still expect subtitles for the few " dolts " who are n't sophisticated enough to have expertise in the 37 different languages presented . i 'll put up with this ego from david lynch , not from litvack . +1 this is definitely the biggest surprise of the festival so far and without a doubt the best the festival has had to offer . i went into this film with little to no expectations after learning that the director was responsible for the awful vampire flick the forsaken . and i left pleasantly surprised . the film stars lori heuring of in crowd fame as a young mother whose husband has just passed . she moves into an old family home in the mountains with her two daughters next to a mine that is a gravesite to overworked children back in the day . unlucky for them the children return with a vengeance killing and eating everyone in their path . the film works on many levels . it 's well done , suspenseful , it has spots of good cinematography and capable performances by compton especially . the atmosphere is spooky yet slightly underwhelming , the score is decent and the makeup effects are gruesome and simplistic . the film keeps up a creepy and unsettling tone and the kids themselves with pale skin , torn up lips and hollow eyes are pretty scary and unrelenting . the film is original and inventive without being to artsy or complicated . i ca n't see this film making it into a wide release without some trimming and slight fine tuning . but they definitely have a good product on there hands and should pursue some type of theatrical distribution . however the theatre in which i saw it in was horrible . the sound was dreadfully messed up which i felt took away from the film majorly and it stopped in the middle because they could n't center it on the screen which killed the mood a bit . all in all though it was the most satisfying of horrorfests entries maybe because it had the least expectations but nonetheless was a welcome addition to genre films . +1 this film reappeared on channel 13 in the 1990s when they did a series of comedies from hollywood in the 1930s and 1940s . in fact , to the tune of " the jolly fat policeman " , they had a montage of scenes from the films to introduce the series of people laughing , including one of gary cooper chortling when watching a film in a movie house - a sequence from this film.

it all begins innocently enough when cooper , a millionaire , goes into a fancy department store in france to buy pajamas . but he only likes to sleep in the tops . the clerk ( tyler brooke ) insists that he can not sell half a pair of pajamas as cooper wants . claudette colbert hears the argument and offers to help - she only likes to sleep in pajama bottoms . what if brooke sells them each half ? brooke has never had such an offer before , so he goes to the floor walker ( rolfe sedan ) and asks him if this can be done . he is disturbed too - the request is quite unconventional . eventually they contact the store 's owner ( charles halton ) . halton is in bed , and gets out - his skinny frame supporting only a pajama top ( if a suitably long one for the sake of censorship ) . can they sell the two customers one set of pajamas ( half for each ) ? properly horrified , halton answers , " no , of course not ! that is communism ! ! " . so the sale is not allowed . apparently nobody thinks that cooper can buy the total pair and sell half to colbert.

lubitsch 's bluebeard 's eighth wife has had a reputation of falling flat , most viewers not liking it because of a misreading of colbert 's character . she is seen as quite mercenary towards cooper - selling herself to him on her terms.

actually cooper 's character is the nastier , as he is rich and figures that everything has a price . he is correct most of the time . look at the way colbert 's aristocratic pauper of a father , edward everett horton , sees his new son - in - law as a golden goose he can use . cooper 's willingness to marry colbert somehow includes an agreement that if he is hesitant or chooses to not marry her he has to pay damages . horton , when he realizes this , takes out a watch , and ( in a most reassuring voice ) says to cooper - " take your time my boy ! " , to come to a decision . later we see horton 's wardrobe has gotten more modern and fancier.

the film , script by billy wilder and charles brackett , compares well with their script for mitchell leisin 's midnight ( also with colbert , but with don ameche and john barrymore ) . there colbert is willing to sell herself for a money marriage to ( to francis lederer ) , but it is complicated by a fictitious marriage to ameche . she really loves ameche ( a taxi driver ) but she explains to him in an unexpectedly realistic moment that her parents married " for love " but poverty made them grow to hate each other . this is not found in bluebeard 's eighth wife , where colbert does not have a background like that ( she is , after all , the daughter of a marquis ) . her mercenary plotting is to teach cooper a lesson about his standards.

the film has some nice work by the supporting staff , including herman bing as a private eye who turns out to be hiding things that colbert learns about , and a young david niven , who has a set of choice moments as a stand in punching bag and as a willing ear to cooper . coop tells niven about his problems with colbert , and how she is so infuriating . niven listens respectfully . at the end , cooper is touched by his willingness to hear what he had to say . " albert , how much do i pay you ? " , cooper asks him . niven thinks and says , " thirty five francs a week sir . " . cooper looks deeply into his soul , and says ( shaking his head ) , " that 's fair ! " +1 normally , movies stay out of the realm of " domestic drama , " and for good reason : who wants to intentionally seek entertainment from a story about what they or those close to them have to deal with in real life ? divorce hurts an incredible percentage of american families of all classes and custody battles are ugly and necessary parts of it . that 's not escapism -- the number one reason the average person turns to movies -- that 's sad reality . < br />
normally , divorce or custody is simply part of a greater story and affects the way we understand it or relate to its characters . " kramer vs. kramer " focuses on it and asks us to understand why we do it and why that makes it so troubling . that 's a challenge for both this film and its audience : turn something so real into something that can capture our attention and then make us not feel spiteful as the mirror is held up to our face . writer / director robert benton definitely achieves both and in impressive fashion in adapting this novel by avery corman.

the story , as one would expect , is quite simple : big business advertising man ted kramer ( dustin hoffman ) comes home to find his wife joanna ( meryl streep ) is leaving him and their 7-year - old son billy ( justin henry ) . ted then must quickly learn to be an active father in the boys ' life and as soon as he does , joanna brings a custody suit upon him.

to make an oscar - winning drama about something so generic and particularly dialogue- heavy first takes tremendous acting talent . you do n't get much better than hoffman and streep . hoffman is in his prime in this role : his first oscar win after three other notable nominations . he creates a thorough character , one whose self - centered and quick - tempered ways clearly change as he learns to be a better father and the sole care - giver . streep wins her first oscar in only the second major role of her career as a woman who does n't get much screen time but must communicate both inner torment at her decision to leave as well as renewed sense of identity when she returns to take custody . streep does so effortlessly . the young boy , justin henry , who at his age was the youngest competitive category nominee in academy awards history , plays the embodiment of all 7-year - old children exceptionally well.

benton 's writing and direction takes these performances to the level where we see deeper into this family 's troubles than we do our own and thus reconsider our thoughts about love and raising a family . benton 's previous notable credits ( " bonnie & clyde " and " superman " ) would n't indicate a strong command of family drama , but the man can flat out write . numerous scenes give us strong visuals that show us much more than the typical family scenarios they depict . the first morning that joanna is gone and ted make 's billy french toast is a classic that perfectly demonstrates all the talent going into this movie in a scene that happens in americans ' kitchens every morning.

you'll rarely see a story as straightforward as " kramer vs. kramer " done better . there are n't any surprises at the end or twists and turns that will keep us desperately glued to the screen . the film then has to rely on its talents and they are all sure - fire , delivering a new understanding of a subject that 's so familiar . +0 hands of the ripper < br />
aspect ratio : 1.85:1

sound format : mono < br />
an edwardian doctor ( eric porter ) uses newfangled freudian analysis on a young girl ( angharad rees ) who turns out to be the daughter of jack the ripper , and just as deadly ...

unlikely hammer horror , in which a respectable society figure takes charge of a beautiful young waif without attracting so much as a whiff of scandal , even when she takes to murdering all and sundry with a variety of lethal implements ( broken mirrors , hat - pins , etc . ) ! l.w. davidson 's screenplay wanders aimlessly from one murder to another , sacrificing the material 's inherent subtext ( porter 's obvious attraction to rees ) in favor of commercial melodrama , and the tone remains subdued throughout . some of the gore scenes are surprisingly vivid , even for hammer , and these were clipped from the original us release ( despite an r rating from the mpaa ) , though the complete version is now available on home video . porter and rees give excellent performances , and the climax in st. paul 's cathedral is a definite highlight , but the rest of the film is strangely hollow and unaffecting . directed by peter sasdy . +1 this is what porn used to be , this is a true classic . i mean , it is an x - rated musical based on an actual book ! there is a real plot to it and how many x - rated movies can boast that these days ? this belongs in an exclusive short - list of true pornographic movie classics , including debby does dallas , deep throat , and behind the green door . i think the problem with " pornographic movies " these days is that it 's all about the " pornographic " and not about the " movie " . alice in wonderland has graphic depictions of sex , sure , but it is actually telling a story at the same time . not one of the typical " oh , mr. police man , do n't write me a ticket " plots , this takes it another step further and makes it a musical ! fabulous ! if you want to see an example of " good " porn , this is one of the best . +0 i 've had never been disappointed by a kurosawa film , but this is probably the first . " doppelganger " is the worst i 've seen from this director.

tartan films is advertising this as " the most frightening film yet from kiyoshi kurosawa " . what ? the most frightening film from kurosawa is definitely " kairo " . and if you think this is horror , your in for a surprise . this ca n't be classified as horror , or thriller . this is a drama , and a pretty bad one at that . a lot of scenes that were meant to be shocking have turned out being funny , and a lot of the plot is really confusing . and since it 's kurosawa , the pacing is slow . but it 's so slow that you 'll lose interest forty minutes in , and feel like doing something else . the thing that annoyed me the most was the use of cgi . now cgi , if used well , can be really cool . but if executed with little care ... it can be a disaster . i think that describes one scene here that has a very minimal use of cgi.

the only positive thing i can give " dopppelganger " is that it has really good acting . koji yakusho gives a great performance , along with the rest of the cast . but that 's pretty much it ...

please , do yourself a favor , and go watch " kairo " or " ko - rei " if you want to be scared . this is a bad , bad attempt at a smart drama . which it is intelligent , but ... well , there 's a lot missing.

3/10 for the good acting . +0 if you have ever shopped at wal - mart , then you probably know about the $ 5 dvd bin that sits by the electronics department . well , that is where i found this movie . however , i was tricked ! you see , the cover of this particular dvd had a big picture of sandy bullock on it and even listed her name as a " headliner " . i picked it up thinking , " wow , i did n't know sandra bullock did this movie ? ! ? ! " so i was pumped to go home and watch a cool sandra bullock movie . much to my surprise , ms. bullock had a small role ..... very small role . she plays the girlfriend of the son of the cia agent . talk about supporting actress . she may have had no more than 2 lines in the movie . besides being deceived of this being a bullock flick , i looked past that and i continued to watch an " action - packed " film . negative ! at one point , for special effects , a gun was taped to the camera . you got ta watch it to laugh at what horrible really is . +0 my husband wanted to watch this film because the review in the paper said that it was better than fatal attraction . well , not liking either michael douglas or glenn close , i would have to agree . not for conventional reasons though.

this is one of those films that needs to be watched late at night when you do n't want to watch something that really requires thought but do n't want to go to bed yet.

yancy butler is a really enjoyable bad - guy . she is not the best of actresses , in fact she is n't even good but she is perfect for this role in this film . everyone else in it varies from pine to oak , including the slightly disturbing boy who comes across as a warped pinocchio.

spoiler : the ending goes a step or two too far , complete with the cliché not quite dead , up with a roar , still gon na get you moment and then there 's a shot of pinocchio with his frozen wooden smirk which makes you wonder if they were going for chilling or just forgot there was botox in the make - up.

regardless , it 's a hilarious eighty odd minutes and despite being a bad film , you would have to be lacking the humour gene to not enjoy it somewhat . do n't pay for it but if you 're in that kind of apathetic telly mood then this is just right . +1 i completely disagree with the other comments ! i too saw this film at an early screening and found it quite enjoyable . robin williams is in top form . true , the tone is familiar , but it is williams of good morning vietnam : smart , funny , on point . after too many dark turns , williams is finally back to what he does best . the supporting actors give great performances , especially laura linney and chris walken . chris plays himself , as usual , but as the " agent " to the next president he was a delight each time on screen . lewis black plays only himself basically , but he is wonderfully well used here . there is also a fun turn by jeff goldblum . the movie is more than what the trailer suggests , as well . the movie is funny , but it is not a pure comedy as suggested . it has a bit of a thriller line , which everyone should seriously consider , especially if you pay attention to the newspaper . +0 all movies that contain " goofy sound effects " should be shot . if there is one thing i hate , it 's got ta be the use of a " whoop whoop whoo " when somebody gets hit one the head . the only movies i have seen to do this is ghoulies iv and hobgoblins when they are in the bar , and pixie is hitting the guy in the red suit with a beer bottle ... or rather , fanning him with a beer bottle , because she never really hits him with it . yes ghoulies iv does suck . but i have to wonder , did they mean to not make the so called " ghoulies " mouths move when they supposedly talked ? their faces are almost as static as the masks used in trolls 2 . hell , i can make a better mask out of construction paper , some rubber cement and a handful of glitter . this sucked . +0 this has got to be the worst movie i have ever seen . the part where they loose there daughter ? with the poltergeist overtone rip off ? just pushes it over the edge with stupidity . i watched it on showtime so it still had the cheese soft - core porn scenes in it . i have to say it made me laugh my ass off . the 80 's 3d effects were very out of place . included an invisible cat and a spinning vortex . wow i wonder if the people who made this actually feel accomplished in life . the actress who plays the wife looks familiar but sucks anyhow . her screaming could be used as a torture device in hell for more than retired nazis . anyways thank you showtime for the super crappy horror movie . i will always enjoy the time i watched the biggest waist of time and money i have ever seen . +1 cult - director lucio fulci is probably most famous for his gory zombie flicks from the 1980s that earned him his rightful reputation as the " godfather of gore " . fulci 's absolute greatest film , however , dates back to 1972 and , while it is definitely gritty and violent , it is not nearly as gory as many of his other films . " non si sevizia un paperino " aka . " do n't torture a duckling " of 1972 is not only by far fulci 's greatest film , this tantalizing and utterly brilliant giallo is one of the absolute highlights of the genre . the stunning atmosphere and tantalizing suspense , the great sizilian setting , the intriguing story the brilliant performances or the intense moments of sheer shock - i do n't know what to praise most about this ingenious giallo ! " do n't torture a duckling " truly delivers cinematic perfection in every aspect , which makes it an absolute masterpiece of italian horror cinema.

contrary to other gialli , it is not seductive beauty queens who are slain one by one , but little boys who fall victims to a killer on the loose . bodies of little boys are found in rural sicily . while the police are desperately searching for the killer , the little town is basically full of strange people , and the townsfolk are screaming for a culprit ...

the film is stunningly suspenseful and uncompromising from the very beginning , with a gritty , dark , and constantly tense atmosphere that has yet to find an equal . the acting performances are among the best in italian horror cinema . tomas milian ( one of my personal all - time favorite actors ) is excellent in the lead , as journalist andrea martinelli who is investigating the crimes . sexy barbara bouchet delivers both eye - candy and a brilliant performance . equally outstanding performances come from irene papas and florinda bolkan , who is utterly brilliant in her role . the great score by riz ortolani brilliantly intensifies the suspense and atmosphere , and the film is ingeniously shot in fascinating sicilian landscapes . although not as gory as many other fulci films , this film is definitely gritty and uncompromising in its violence , with a few shockingly brutal scenes.

"don't torture a duckling " has everything brilliant horror requires . this is not quite as easy to get hold of as most other fulci flicks , but i assure that searching it will pay off . any horror fan must see this personal favorite of mine , and i highly recommend any true lover of film in general not to miss this . a masterpiece ! +1 this is a very sweet coming - of - age movie , very funny , and russell crowe is amazing ! those who know him only from gladiator will be surprised to see the range of his acting abilities . arthur baskin ( his character ) is one of the best onscreen nerdy virgins i have ever seen1 watch this movie -- how can we get it re - released in ntsc format?

+0 unbelievable . " philosophy " . " depth " . " genius " . " masterpiece " . people must have seen another " oldboy " because the one i 've seen was a badly written , poorly conceived , over - the - top - acted , sordid piece of " kraapola " which , even ignoring for a moment the ludicrously violent scenes which makes it unsuitable for the eyes of a child , could barely satisfy the imagination and the thirst for plot consistency of a seven years old.

the " depth " of this sorry concoction was exhausted in one little piece of wisdom , " laugh and the whole world will laugh with you , weep and you 'll find yourself alone " , the type of boring fortune cookie saying which a great author , be him shakespeare or , more to the point of imdb , kurosawa , would have thrown in the garbage can with no second thoughts . where this movie should have landed too , if we would n't live in an era in which the cheaply shocking and the perversely disgusting are confused with what used to be named once " great art " . in short , yuck.

2 out of 100 . it 's not 1 out of 1000 only because of some occasionally expert camera - work . in no way enough to save this infantile failure from worthlessness , though . +0 the basic plot of ' marigold ' boasts of a romantic comedy wherein the film industry is kept as a backdrop . an american actress marigold , played by ali carter gets stuck in india . worse that , she is out of money . she then decides to play a small role in a bollywood musical , so that she can earn enough money to get back to her nation . here she gets to meet indian choreographer prem , played by salman khan . basically , the movie fails at the script level . just by calling a film a hollywood venture does n't guarantee quality cinema . marigold stands out as the best example . the art direction is weak and outdated . musically , marigold turns out to be a dud . shankar - ehsaan - loy 's is far from being acknowledged as a decent hear . actingwise , salman delivers of his most amateurish performances till date . ali larter is good and has immense screen presence . performance wise too , she is good.

one can also find good reviews regarding this movie at http://www.comingsoon.net/films.php?id=36310 +1 i thought that this was the most interesting film that jcvd has done in a very long time . i loved his character and the whole thing with the rabbit set a different tone for this film . imho , jcdv may really be on to something going forward . a little more light heartedness , some obvious homages to other films , mixed in with some great fights ... i would like to see more this style of film - making from him . one of the other posters thought that the bar scene was a desperado rip off . i immediately saw the r. rodriguez connection also , but thought it was very clever and made me want to see the film again to look for more subtle cues from other films . jcvd rocks!!

other stuff after reading other comments:

no music in the dungeon fight ? at first i did n't like that at first either , but then i thought it was interesting because it threw me off balance a bit by giving us something that we did n't expect . made it seem more real.

i also always get a laugh when directors cry like 2 year olds that their film was " stolen " from the studio . directors are paid to do a job . the studio is the boss and they want the product that they want . very few directors have absolute final cut on a film . in this case , jcvd is the talent and the only reason anyone is watching this film . i am sure he got a film that he was happy with . i have a relative who works at a post house who knew a little of the story . presumably , the director worked on and delivered his cut of the film . everyone who saw it said it was a disaster ... then jcvd and the studio re edited the movie . this stuff happens all the time . he also did see the final cut ( which he claims he did n't ) and his " delicate genius " ego was severely bruised because they hated his delivered cut . if this director was smart , he should have taken credit for this one as it would have been his best . +0 this is a terrible movie , that is barely recognizable from the book , although they have sort of similar plots . the time it takes to watch this movie ( which is only 1.5 hours ) would be much better spent doing anything else , including watching grass grow . the addition of poorly done fantasy scenes make catherine seem insufferably silly . the actress who plays catherine also comes across ditzy as all goodness and looks constantly surprised , even when she 's supposed to be looking lovingly into her tilney 's eyes . honestly ! ! the movie ends with a catherine fantasy - like scene where one ca n't help but wonder if it 's happened or if she 's merely delusional , and not in the good way that makes you think but in a perfectly horrible way that basically sums up the terrible movie . the only good thing about the movie is the title , which was written by ms. austen herself . i generally love the bbc 's productions but this one is horrid . +0 this film should have been much better than it was . christopher eccleston is an excellent actor but even he could n't rescue this tale of a young woman searching for the truth over her sister 's death . spoiler warning : in effect the truth is that the older sister ( played by diaz ) is just a spoilt , selfish and shallow girl who took too many drugs . not much of a twist and not that interesting either . the film is also overladen with far too many flashbacks and voice overs and lacks dramatic pacing . all in all this is definitely worth missing - not to be recommended . +0 olivier assayas ' film stars asia argento as a woman who had a relationship with michael madsen . madsen is a business man who 's in financial trouble . in desperation he is going to sell his share of a business to a company called golden eagle , a company from the far east . as madsen begins his moves away from his company asia argento returns to his life . the pair had a torrid love affair that included her doing business favors for madsen ( with said golden eagle ) . once argento enters the film the film follows her as we see the tangled web she 's woven and how the complications spin dangerously and violently out of control.

i'm not a fan . actually i was quite bored as the film seems to go from pillar to post for much of the first hour during which i kept wondering what the point was other than to provide a meaty role for argento . argento , daughter of director dario argento and a director in her own right , is a unique actress . at times stunningly good , she is more often then not going to give you a quirky off beat portrayal of a damaged human being . sometimes it works and sometimes it does n't . i do n't think it completely works here mostly because the script is too " complicated " to support it . i did n't care what was going on so her wounded girl just rubbed me the wrong way(she seemed more nut job than anything else ) . i 'm not blaming the actors but writer / director assayas who has once again constructed a complicated tale with the sort of parts actors love to tackle , but which leave audiences scratching their heads because they they do n't really work . < br />
if you must try it on cable +1 russian actress tatiana samoilova reminds me so much of the young audrey hepburn and the camera in the cranes are flying seems to love her just as much . she is the focal point of a bittersweet war romance against the background of world war ii in moscow.

the film is almost poetic in its gorgeous b&w cinematography which was the main reason for watching the film in the first place , since i had never heard of it and decided to give it a try when it aired on tcm.

it 's a very moving love story about a girl 's deep love for a man who is suddenly swept away by his role as a soldier drafted in wartime russia . she 's unable to forget the memory of her romantic attachment to him , but inexplicably marries someone else who has forced himself on her , a pianist who soon realizes that she still loves the soldier she hopes to hear from . their marriage is a troubled one because she ca n't let go of her remembrance of a happier time with her soldier sweetheart.

by the end of the story , she accepts the idea that he 's never going to return and is able to face reality and cope with the situation . there 's a very poignant final scene at a train station where arriving soldiers are greeting their loved ones and the tearful girl shares the joy of the returning soldiers by giving some flowers from her bouquet to the joyous families.

the stylish and striking camera - work is what carries the film , as well as the honestly played story.

tastefully done , but perhaps the english subtitles did n't tell the whole tale because some of the plot elements seemed a bit blurred to me as if they had been glossed over.

summing up : easy to see why it won awards at the cannes film festival . reminded me , in style , of another great russian film , ballad of a soldier . +1 many people has got a film they think of as their favourite movie . my movie will always be john carpenter 's the thing ! the main reason why this movie is a cult - film is perhaps the splatter - effects created mainly by genius rob bottin and that this is the movie that made kurt russell what he is today ( along with escape from n.y. ) in my opinion , this is not a great film because of the effects , it has to do with the story , the atmosphere , and of course , the acting . i have watched thousands and thousands of movies ( 3 - 6 every day the last 10 years ) , but none has had the impact on me as this one , not even the great " das boot".

here 's my suggestion to you who likes sci - fi and horror movies : place yourself in the good chair of your home . be sure you 're not interupted by anyone . if you ai nt got a projector , sit close to your tv and watch this miracle of a film . let it absorbe you , and you 'll see it my way!

best view time : late february between 5 and 9 in the evening . +1 as with all haneke films , make your own decision -- don't be swayed by what you read and if you are interested in someone using the medium of film for their own unique ends , see it yourself . isabelle huppert is stunning in this film -- combined with haneke , these two never pull their punches . haneke reels us in with the lure of golden boy , benoit magimel , but this is an anti - romance as much as funny games was an anti - thriller . you 'll have to force yourself to watch much of it and the catharsis is much more in the range of sustained anxiety than any kind of emotional release but it 's incredibly nervy and thought provoking ; haneke continues to hold up a mirror to how desensitised western civilization is or has become . people may turn their noses up at this but it 's only taking what solondz did in happiness a few steps further . while grounded in reality , much of what erika ( huppert ) does can be viewed as emotional metaphor . i 'm not recommending it but i would n't dissuade you either ... it definitely divides people but given it 's largely about repression -- that 's no surprise . +0 from the makers of underworld , we have , by far , the worst werewolf movie i have ever seen . it is basically a reconstructed version of underworld , yet lacking vampires ( not a big deal ) , cool effects ( a big deal ) , and generally just about everything that can possibly be done right to produce a decent film dealing with lycanthropy ( the biggest deal of them all ! ) . a twenty - something lycanthrope chocolate maker named vivian is currently residing in romania ever since her family was hunted down and executed in front of her years ago in america for being werewolves . there , she belongs to a small society ( or pack ) of werewolves and is apparently chosen to unwillingly we d the pack leader , gabriel , whose son - some toad with a british accent - takes it upon himself to hunt outside of the pack . they have apparently been discovered in other countries prior and want to remain settled in romania by avoiding negative attention , so of course , such activity is considered forbidden . vivian ends up falling in love with an american artist who is oblivious to her involvement with the group of blood - thirsty predators . when they end up discovering the secret relationship , things get messy when someone is killed and the human is forced to participate in a deadly tradition in which he is set loose in the woods and is hunted - giving the pack a chance to transform into their " wolfy " selves . all this really consists of is a big leap before they light up and land as a wolf . very cheezy effects . the entire movie is like a tamed down underworld with some drippy , romantic montages and very little action . watching this in the theater , i could not wait for it to end . a devastatingly boring disappointment . avoid ! +1 this film blew me away . i thought i knew a little about the attica prison riot . after watching this , i see i knew nothing . the story is told through the relationship between the attorney and the black inmate . both the personal story of these two men and the unfolding courtroom drama were riveting . the flashback sequences in the prison were awesome . it 's hard to believe it was n't documentary footage it was so real . it was not only a great piece of drama , it was an incredible lesson in an important chapter in american history . i 'm with ebert and roeper . i give it two thumbs up . +0 i ca n't believe i actually spent almost three hours of my life watching this . this must be one of the most unbelievable , predictable and cheesy television movies i have seen in a long time . i was hoping for some good special effects and action , instead i spent the entire time rolling my eyes and yelling " oh come on ! ! ! " , at the screen . the dialog is shallow and obvious , the acting strained at times and as the story moves along , is n't it just funny how everything happens at the same time ... not to mention the obvious and nauseating ending ... now i 've seen more than my share of disaster movies , i am a big fan actually , and think that often they can pull off completely unrealistic stuff as long as it 's done in a fun way , but this is definitely not it . this is just an insult to intelligent viewers everywhere . what were they thinking when they made this movie ? ? ? ? ? +0 the two most noteworthy things about " i wo n't play " are : it won an academy award as the best two - reel short film of 1944 ; and it was directed by silent - era leading man crane wilbur . the plot of this run - of - the - mill short is inconsequential , the dialogue lacks spark , while the acting is no better and no worse than that found in most war - themed hollywood movies of the 1940s ( in other words , it 's awful ) . admittedly , there are moments when " i wo n't play " is funny -- janis paige 's totally artificial look and line delivery are precious -- but one laughs at the picture , not with it . +1 unlike some movies which you can wonder around and do other things , this movie kept me in front of the screen for the entire two hours . i loved every minute of it.

however , i have to say that the story is not very believable . especially when the foreigner was expelled by the government , and then later on , actually sent a package to the guy who helped him . xiao liu is a very good actor , he shows his emotions , and he shows his silliness , and his love toward that girl . +1 i mean let 's face it , all you have to do in modelling is pose for photos . the judging is so over the top with it 's criticism . the show however is entertaining , especially with tyra banks , nigel barker , j alexander and the supermodel herself twiggy . i 've watched season 5 , 6 , 7 and in the middle of season 8 . it looks like american idol gone sexy but i 'm a guy and i only watch it because of the hot girls posing in their bikinis ! the show can be quite boring , when it comes to judging , tyra tends to go on and on and it 's really off - putting . anyway would i recommend it ? yes , would i recommend it to women wanting to go into the modelling business ? no . +1 mark blankfield ( from the old late night tv show " fridays")plays dr. daniel jekyll , a mild - mannered surgeon who invents a powder that turns him into a drug - crazed party animal . this was not , of course , his intent , he had higher aspirations , but he goes with the flow . this is actually a fairly stupid movie , but it 's also pretty fun . of course , once the good doctor realizes what he 's done , he 's ashamed , but he 's also not above doing it all again & running through hollywood as a crazed sex machine with frizzed out hair & gold chains . there 's a few subplots like jekyll 's fiancée , who is the daughter of the head doctor at our lady of suffering and pain , jekyll 's employer . and there 's tim thomerson as a plastic surgeon with seemingly few " real " parts and a taste for men , and a rich old man whose situation is a parody of howard hughes , and who is going to make several people rich with a complete set of organ transplants , including testicles . yeah , the humor is raunchy and silly , and overall the whole thing is fairly tasteless , but if you 're not above a quick wallow in the gutter , you 'll probably like it just fine . now available on dvd too , for the first time ! woohoo ! 7 out of 10 . +1 this must be one of the funniest danish movies ever made . ulrich thomsen and thomas bo larsen are hilarious , as they drive across sweden . i do n't know how ulrich thomsen does it , but somehow he can manage to play insane in a very sane way . but if you do n't understand danish ( i am not referring to your pastry here ) do n't waste your time on this – i do n't think it would work with subtitles . +0 .... you get this stupid excuse of a child 's play rip - off ! man , what were they thinking ? first they mess with a rumpelstiltskin horror movie then they make crap like this . fariy tale haters ! well to be honest , i 've seen this as a kid , and it scared me a bit a lot , simply because i was under aged with the assumption that pinocchio would n't do that , wah wah wah . but i 've grown and come to think of this as child 's play rip , a fairy tale bashing nonsense , and a lame tales from the crypt episode , or trying to be one at least , with a lame ending that was stupid , and it had many plot holes , and i still ca n't understand how it came to life . was it the work of an evil geppetto ? then what , after a few evil deeds , he becomes a real boy who becomes america 's most wanted ? personally , i think the concept of an evil geppetto sounds better , he builds an army of wooden killers , and starts a crime wave , funny . but this is awful , awful , awful , awful , awful ! awful ! stinky like a shoe , and awful ! it sucked it sucked ! if you want killer puppets , settle for the killer doll , specifically child 's play , instead , no strings attached . or if you want a fairy tale figure turned upside down , watch leprechaun , or if you want pinocchio , watch the animated disnet version or live version with jonathan taylor thomas and martin landau instead . > > > > > -10/10(negative 10 ) +0 i have one word : focus.

well.

imdb wants me to use at least ten lines of text . okay . let 's discuss the fine points of focus . i do n't know about the rest of you , but in my first year of film school they taught us a lot of useless crap , like ' you 'll all be famous avant - garde filmmakers someday'--but they also taught us how to do this crazy thing called focusing the lens ! it was amazing ! you give a little twist and wham ! everything is clear as a bell . the person who shot what alice found needs to learn a few things about the finer points of focus . lighting , too . this movie is not only completely out of focus , it 's also lit like the corner of someone 's basement.

don't even get me started on pacing or plot . they could have trimmed about ten seconds off the beginning and end of every single shot.

but who cares about that anyhow ? there is not enough lurid in this movie to make up for the utter lack of regard to film 's best friends -- focus , and lighting.

words to the wise . +1 inside i 'm dancing ( rory o'shea was here)is the story of two handicapped young men , rory o'shea , who is almost completely immobilized and confined to wheelchair , and michael connelly who is debilitated by ms and also confined to a wheelchair.

set in ireland , the film opens with rory arriving at a assisted living center . he eventually befriends michael but only after a few tense scenes where rory rebels against the staff and other patients in the usual " movie way " playing loud metal music , using profanity , and general obnoxiousness . his budding friendship with michael is cemented by the fact that rory seems to be the only one who understands michael , or is at least willing to try.

eventually , through some trial and tribulation the pair petition , and are granted , the right to live own their own in specially adapted apartment . the apartment is paid for by michael 's father who had essentially abandoned him do to his disability . the two also hire an attractive assistant named siobhan ( played by romola garai)to help them with their day to day living . this is essentially where the crux of the film develops as both develop feelings for her . michael is struck particularly hard . unfortunately , for both , but michael especially , siobhan does not feel the same and it results in her having to leave . as michael temporarily regresses and wants to return to the asst . living center , rory convinces him to continue to live on his own . the film ends on a sad note , that many viewers may have seen coming , but ultimately , we are left feeling that michael has truly become independent and the future is his , as rory pointed out to him towards the end of movie.

you know , i ca n't say that i 've seen a lot of " handicapped films " and i do n't know if they could be considered a specific genre . but there is a type of formula to them . one person is unwilling to live beyond his illness until some liberating force compels him / her to do so and inside i 'm dancing is really know different . what works however , is it probably is more subtle about the peaks and valleys the two men go through then what you might expect . there are no intentionally gratuitous moments and no " stand up and cheer " manipulations . the sad parts are sad and the funny parts are funny . some viewers might recoil a bit that rory is the spiky haired punk type with the earing in his nose as the too perfect " rebel " cliché , but the actor , james mcavoy , somehow makes it real . the same can be said for steven robertson , who plays michael . when michael 's heart is broken it does n't seem to be invoked by a poor script trying to get the audience worked up , but rather a young man genuinely in pain over unrequited love . the kind of pain many can relate to whatever their physical condition . again , these are the types of things that make the film work and make it poignant without being overbearing and enjoyable on many levels.

recommended . +1 for me this wonderful rollercoaster of a film bears repeated pleasurable viewings . its about the tangled lives of three very different people . holly hunter is the obsessive workaholic producer . albert brookes plays the unprepossessing but brilliant journalist . william hurt is the affable but dumb new kid on the block , news anchor.

the classical love triangle emerges with the stunningly witty and self deprecating brookes in love with hunter but she of course is attracted to hurt.

this film works on many levels . at the very least it is a brilliant comedy with the one liners flying so thick and fast that each viewing bears a new harvest of ones that you may have missed last time . its also a film about attraction and unfulfilled romance.

but perhaps most importantly the film examines the modern obsession with physical appearance and its ultimate triumph over intellect as a valued human attribute . this is personified by the meteoric career success of the hurt character in contrast to brookes relative decline.

despite being fifteen years old the film has some startingly relevant messages about modern news values and the continuing decline in journalistic standards.

this film is a classic in every sense and it is difficult to understand why it has been so neglected +0 2001 is one of those movies where , if you do n't like it , you are told that you do n't ' get it ' and need to look at the deeper meaning and symbolism . you 're told that you clearly have a slow attention span , and just want to see sex , explosions , and have the plot handed to you on a platter.

let 's break down the movie shall we ? three minutes of blackness , with something that sounds like a dying hippo in the background . then we get the opening credits . a minute of fascinating shots of the savannah . then a bunch of monkeys find a black rock and start killing things with bones . cut to the first of many 20-minute shots of ships doing things while the ' blue danube ' plays in the background . a bunch of pointless dialogue , and a group of moon scientists find another monolith.

cut to a spaceship that 's too long for the crew complement -- three sleeping people , two people named dave and frank , who have only slightly more personality than the stiffs in hibernation . and then there 's hal , the ' perfect ' supercomputer who runs the ship . predictably , he snaps and starts breaking the first law of robotics . now this is something that has potential . an evil , coldly ruthless super - mind who controls the surrounding environment and can predict your every move . and what does he do ? he lets one guy float into space and turns off the hibernation machines so the three sleeping guys die , leaving dave floating in a pod . he simply uses the airlock , puts on a spacesuit , and turns hal off -- agonizingly slowly . then , apparently , there 's some psychedelic ' evolution ' at jupiter.

here 's the movie with the pauses taken out : apes see monolith , kill things . scientists find moon monolith . hal kills people . hal dies ; dave gets a prerecorded message , and evolves at jupiter.

this is not me ' not getting it . ' this is me being bored to tears by long stretches of absolutely nothing . sure , it 's realistic , but i find i have no reason to care . no matter the message , no movie can be good without being entertaining . frankly , every character could be replaced with keanu reeves , and nothing would change . +0 i thought i d check this film out as i 'm currently making a film about a mysterious box , therefore it would be great to see how this film took and developed the idea of a mysterious and unexpected box.

before going to the cinema i had a high expectation of this film . with actresses , like cameron diaz you would expect the acting especially hers to be great . the acting was a sort of let down for the film , the characters accents changed throughout the film it made it unbelievable.

the whole idea of a weird box that can make your dreams come true but destroy others is such a brilliant story but i feel the director let it down , this film had potential it could of been a lot lot better than it was.

this film had no middle to it . it was too confusing and needed a steady storyline . nobody wants to go into the cinema and come out thinking what have i just watched ' i did n't get it at all , ' sometimes it can be exciting and make people want to watch it again , but this film made people want to never ever want to hear of the film again . throughout watching i noticed that half the audience had left before the ending . i feel every single person had been let down watching this film because of the high expectations and how slow parts of the film was.

lets put the bad points to one side ... i did like however the scene where the son is in the bathroom at the end . it was unexpected , it reminded me of a horror movie and the way it was put together made me imagine it and how devastating and scary it would of been to be in that position . the lighting and the effects made it look excellent , this scene looked slightly more 1990 's than the 1970 's that this film is supposed to be.

this film was confusing because it had so many different bits to it . parts that you would expect to be sumned up at the end where everything comes clear but it did n't , it totally went against an audiences expectations , even though leaving the film on a cliff hanger , not giving the audience a reason why things happen could work and do really well , but this one did n't , it was a creative , different unusual film i thought , it had potential could of been better , disappointed did n't enjoy it , would n't buy it on dvd to be honest . +0 anyone who has seen the piece of steaming smelly poo called congo understands my title . and i feel for you . this movie was n't just bad . it was painful . the book was stupid , the script was even dumber and the cast was terrible . dylan walsh ? rumor has it julia roberts dumped your ass cause this movie blew so bad . huge diamonds ? killer gorillas ? talking gorillas ? hmmm . sounds like a hit ! oh ! tim curry 's accent is so bad in this movie i would prefer being deaf ! i recommend this movie to bulimics looking to purge after a heavy meal or kavorkian patients who just need that one more reason to die . if this is faithful to the book , i would say lets have us a good old fashion footloose book burning and destroy every copy . if future generations look back and find this garbage , how would we explain ourselves ? listen to the others who hated this movie ! do n't watch it ! run away ! do not watch this movie ! if you think it is full of action or suspense or cool effects , you are wrong ! if you think it blows more cock than nicole ritchie , you 'd be right . so if you still are going to watch crapo .. ,.i mean congo , i say do it after you just took 50 tylenol pm . +1 no pun intended . i 'm not going to spoil anything about the story , but it 's safe to assume that you already know , what kind of character the main actor portrays . and of course being a priest while being " naughty " exaggerates all that . plus this is the most erotic movie from park chan wook yet.

if you have seen wook 's previous works / movies you know he is very visual ( in a good way ) and it shows again here . while it strays away from the vengeance theme of his prior movies on the surface , it still has quite some heat hidden underneath . and when that boils , quite a few bad things start to happen . but through all that dark , there also moments of light ( fun ) to be had too . a very stylistic and though provoking movie , that lives outside the mainstream and does a very good job ... +0 i would like to say something different about this movie . i saw comments how beautiful is russia and the views from russia have been great . hey guys this is not russia it 's bulgaria more specific the capital sofia . so this is not russia it 's my country . about the movie - well in bulgaria , maybe except the grey zone - all movies from american directors are in one word awful like this one of course . it 's a shame that patrick swayze has to play in such a low budget movies . most of the actors are bulgarians but really this movie has no plot twist has no energy what can i say - weak and boring movie a cliché not more . hey people remember it 's not russia in reality it 's bulgaria . +0 why did they have to waste money on this crap?!

warning ! contains spoilers!!!

the plot : down - to - earth - good - kind - girl meets a rich - snob - ignorant guy . her boyfriend gets jealous and with the guy , they burn down a resturant ? ( over an ugly girl ? ) guy has to stay in town to build a new resturant , perfect for the love story to begin . but , hark ! ! ! the girl is dying ! ! ! is n't that a surprise boys and girls ? but she teaches him love life , and enjoy it . he 's sad she is dying . she dies . he is sad . but has now learned to love life.

what 's the moral of the story ? when , dying , teach another person to love life.

like every other love movie ever made!!!!

aaaaah ! this movie was the crapiest thing i have ever seen ! ! ! ! did the director want to try to make this plot original ? ! aaah ! and the friggin ' girl would not die ! ! ! it took her a half hour ? ! i felt no pity for the charactors , and the love story died the first hour of the movie.

1/10

don't watch this movie , unless you want to be bored or get a head ache ! ! ! ! +0 i saw this movie in the theatre and it was a terrible movie . the way michael oliver who now turn even worse in the sequel is the biggest intolerance i can not bare . junior upset his father because he would not go to school which got his father ben madly insane . also the crazy dance ride operator is not fair to junior for not letting him go on the ride . and that lawanda dumore is as horrible as a serial killer to junior because she made threatening insults to junior which is why i can not tolerate this movie . even if the movie is re - released back into theatres in the extended version , i still would not see this movie because this movie is not something i can even tolerate . in fact , it stinks ! +1 " the merchant of venice " was one of shakespeare 's most popular plays during his own lifetime , but it has fallen on hard times during the 20th century because of its undeniably anti - semitic content . the play has also been called schizoid in its careening from comedic scenes to tragic ones , leading some to say it is two plays trying to coexist as one . bassanio ( joseph fiennes , who played william shakespeare in " shakespeare in love " ) is in love with portia ( lynn collins , superb ) , but needs to borrow a considerable sum of money to woo her . he goes to his sometime gay lover antonio ( jeremy irons ) , who has n't the funds on his person , but takes out a loan from the jewish usurer shylock ( al pacino ) . shylock is amused and offended that antonio , who insults him for his religion , now comes to him for money , but he offers it , on the condition that the penalty for defaulting on the loan will be a pound of antonio 's flesh . which is , of course , what happens . bassanio and portia offer shylock considerably more then the original loan instead of the pound of flesh , but shylock , distraught after his daughter leaves him and marries a christian , refuses to take it . portia , in a scene where the audience is never quite sure where to place its sympathies , deprives shylock of what should be legally his , and then strips him of his wealth and religion . shylock was originally essayed as a cartoonish villain , but modern actors and directors have turned him into a tragic figure , railing against the injustices of 16th century venice . al pacino does an excellent job as shylock , and jeremy irons is good as antonio , but i think that lynn collins ' work as portia is the best part of the play . portia is one of the few notable female roles in shakespeare 's canon , and collins is wonderful in the part . joseph fiennes is more than a bit dull , however ; i 've never particularly enjoyed his often overwrought acting style . i give " the merchant of venice " an 8/10 . +0 but i ca n't say how i really feel about this pile of steaming dung . where to begin . the film quality , there is n't any . i 've seen clearer pictures on america 's funniest home videos ! the acting is substandard , the gore effects is okay . the clown mask is the best part of this movie , the story is repetitive . the same thing over and over again . at least in a friday the 13th or halloween we stick with one main character for the most part . there is no main characters , just victims . man , now we come to the worst part of all . the final survivor kills the clown and finds out it was one of her friends . then when the police finally arrive , they do n't believe her and she is locked up in a rubber room . what kind of ending do you call that , crap , that 's what . in my opinion , there is no excuse for a bad ending in a horror movie , that was just sloppy writing . the excuse , " it has to ending badly , it 's a horror movie . " or " we need to end it badly to leave it open to a sequel " are just lame excuses and that is all . i must give the camp blood the thanksgiving turkey . +0 this movie was really stupid and i thought that it was n't so bad and i could tolerate a movie about a bed eating people . then the part near the end where the guy has skeleton hands ended up being the cherry on top of a bad movie . i could see the screws in the plastic skeleton hands for goodness sakes . the brother was still alive and moving when his hands were bare bones . the funny thing was that he could still move his hands that was just not right . without muscles , you really ca n't move your hands but he did . the brother should have bled to death even before he was moving his hands . the movie was n't great but it was okay until the hand scene . i was laughing so hard that i do n't really remember how it ended . it had something to do with foam or something . +0 in all , it took me three attempts to get through this movie . although not total trash , i 've found a number of things to be more useful to dedicate my time to , such as taking off my fingernails with sandpaper.

the actors involved have to feel about the same as people who star in herpes medication commercials do ; people wo n't really pay to see either , the notoriety you earn wo n't be the best for you personally , but at least the commercials get air time.

the first one was bad , but this gave the word bad a whole new definition , but it does have one good feature : if your kids bug you about letting them watch r - rated movies before you want them to , tie them down and pop this little gem in . watch the whining stop and the tears begin . ;) +0 i remember when " the love machine " was first released to theaters . i was a mere 13 years old , too young to see the much - ballyhooed motion picture release , but not too old to take my mom 's paperback copy of the jacqueline susann novel to school and pore over the ' naughty bits ' with my schoolmates.

though i 'm not sure what my problem was at such an early age , but i was very much into the book . i bought and wore an " ankh " ring just like on the paperback cover , and i remember the ads for the perfume , " xanadu " that was cross - promoted and featured clumsily in the film . despite such an interest i did n't actually see the film until several years later . i should have left things as they were.

"the love machine " is hands down the worst of the many bad films adapted from susann 's novels ... which of course makes it the most fun to watch . its faults are many : from its hopscotching script that jumps choppily from one incident to another with nary a connecting thread ; its dated , horny ( brass instruments , i mean ) music score of ersatz bacharach ; the flat , first - take performances ; the boring sexuality -i've never seen bathrobes featured so prominently in a movie before . it 's like a fetish ! whenever sex , nudity or something sleazy is called for , out pops somebody in a blue robe ! very odd , that ; and most certainly , the circus train of awful 70 's fashions that are on endless display . poor dyan cannon 's performance ( which is no great shakes anyway , but heads over the rest of the cast ) is consistently undermined by the jaw - dropping get ups she 's called upon to wear . however , the film 's chief liability is the stoic , stone - like john philip law as ( appropriately enough ) robin stone , the object of every girl 's ( and one over–the - top flaming male photographer 's ) affection.

law is just awful and performs as if he were pulled off the street , handed the pages of the script in hurry and told to give a cold reading on the spot . just lifeless ! not only that , but he appears in desperate need of a blood transfusion or something . he looks wan and sickly throughout and is several pounds smaller than most of his female costars . robin stone should be a hunk , not a hankie.

for anyone finding the film hard going ( it 's rather slow by today 's standards ) i beg you to stick around for the climactic " fight scene . " here ms. cannon ( balancing 23 pounds of teased hair ) finally abandons her heretofore starchy acting style and lets loose with that infectiously raucous laugh of hers , setting in motion a truly memorable free for all that should have become a cinema clip highlight by now . trying to rival " valley of the dolls " 's infamous wig - down - the - toilet scene , " the love machine " finally does something right.

jacqueline susann 's unique brand of trash is sorely missed . perhaps someone out there owns the rights to rona barrett 's " the lovomaniacs " and will revive the genre . +1 one can not help but admire mike judge for his hands on " i 've experienced that " approach . with " office space " , almost anyone working a job could associate with the characters . " idiocracy " has exactly the same feel to it . one can easily appreciate the 505 years later experience of our heroes , because again , the director has tried to put things on a very human level . somewhat similar to woody allen 's " sleeper " , this movie is very funny . do not miss the deleted scenes as the " museum of fart " is a classic . imaginative comedy is a rarity , and " idiocracy " is wildly imaginative , extremely funny , and a solid 8.0 movie experience . - merk +0 in my opinion , the movie was laughable -- bad dialogue . whoever wrote the script -- please keep your day job . it 's definitely no godfather or goodfellas . it 's good to be on the otherside of the table -- poor choice of words . some of the characters were clowns . but what do you expect from a low budget movie with no name actors . +1 this is one great show , that it makes me wonder why it got pulled off the air so many times . but i believe its now here to stay ! this show ca nt compare to any other , before simpsons was pretty " on the edge " and than came family guy , and they are stretching it out to go off the " edge " . the things this show gets away with is incredible . totally work the watch ! if you like the simpsons you will love family guy ! +1 william shakespeare 's merchant of venice portrays 16th century venice . al pacino plays shylock , a jewish loan shark who plots revenge on a catholic that has looked down on him . the movie is a slow moving plot in the beginning that builds up throughout the two plus hours . the film gives a very good and believe appearance to it 's characters , especially pacino . when hearing that pacino plays a jew one might think that it would not work looking at pacino 's previous mobster type movie roles . nonetheless it works very well , credit must be given to the costume designer 's and director 's of the film . the look of all the characters fits well with the time period the play takes place in . the costumes look like the renaissance appearance one might envision to be.

the film portrays a very anti - semitic vibe . from the first minute to the last it is shown how the catholic 's try to take advantage of the jews in every way they can , even to the point of keeping them locked away in " ghettos " and not allowing them to regular jobs . in comparison to the passion of the christ , another recent film that people believed to be very anti - semitic , merchant of venice makes passion look like a jewish holiday . the film shows how the jews , or at least shylock wanted revenge for the mistreatment that the jews received . the location shots also seem very timely and the scenery is at times very beautiful or very ugly depending on the scene of the film , making it just that much more realistic . showing the beautiful and the ugly can also be seen as anti - semitic because the ugly is usually shown around the jews and the beautiful around the catholics.

although the film clearly attempts to have a serious aura certain parts do add a bit of humor to the act . the oh so serious trial between shylock and antonio ( irons ) adds a bit of humor when portia ( collins ) and nerissa ( goldenhersh ) come into the trial and decide who will be the victor and the defeated . that in itself might not be funny , but seeing it that they were women dressed up in disguise as men one might find it to be pretty amusing . the whole cross dressing scene , as compelling as it was could have probably been even more memorable had the make up artists and director michael radford taken notice that the two women still look like women and could easily be recognized . the director also could have seen into the fact that the women are speaking through their regular voices instead of trying to sound like men , which in part takes away from the scene but does n't kill it entirely.

overall the film gets a 7 out of 10 +1 this is a sort of hidden gem . it has little to no promotion , no fanfare , no classic status , and it deserves all of the above ! one of the great directors of cinema , fritz lang , has created a real gem in this excellent western . a fine cast led by randolph scott ( in probably one of his greatest performances ) , the always sturdy dean jagger , robert young as a surprisingly accomplished dude plus many veteran character actors : chill wills , slim summerville , john carradine , barton maclane and others in an exciting zane grey story of the laying of the western union cable across country . it has tense drama , sprinklings of humor and great effects . it 's reminiscent of demille in ways and yet fritz lang leaves his own stamp on it . at very least this is a damned good western ! +0 i agree with the comments regarding the downward spin . the last view shows have been a little better , but surely the writers need some more direction . i think the characters are still interesting , although sometimes they spin into the " white trash " things a little too much . subtlety and nuance goes a long way on shows like " office " . i would think the target audience is somewhat similar being they are both on the same night and lineup . one would think that karma and the whole eastern religion thing is a big enough topic to bring some different and interesting shows , but they only scratch the surface of the subject . in my opinion it shows the contempt that many people have in hollywood about the level of intelligence of the masses . we can handle more heady content . it has been proved before in many other shows . +1 cool flick . enjoyable to watch . hope to see more from fred carpenter soon . i really like the location setting with all the new york references . it was interesting the way it all unfolds in the end . the suspense factor was effective and the acting , though kept simple , was also effective in portraying the characters . there are a bunch of neat little tricks incorporated into this film that make all the better . i think the supporting actress did a great job in her role . the casting and directing in this film seem to be sewn together seamlessly and the quality of the shooting is quite impressive . the movie is not without its soft moments either , which gives it a nice sense of balance . +0 now and again , a film comes around purely by accident that makes you doubt your sanity . we just finished studying the novel , " northanger abbey " , at school and decided to refresh our memory of this unexciting piece of humourless garbage with the bbc adaptation.

the funny thing about northanger abbey is that it actually makes you want to kill yourself . the film is nothing like the book , for example , the subtly evil characters seem to have been turned into transparent stereotypes . john thorpe looks like a leprechaun on acid while isabella plays the role of slut . catherine , the main character , is the most depressingly stupid and irritating actress on god 's earth ( she looks like a coffee addict , her eyes are like basketballs ) whilst mr tilney looks and acts like a retired porno stunt double . the plot goes completely off the rails at certain points of the film , i do n't know what the hell the director was thinking when for no reason at all , a 7 year old black kid who we 've never met before takes the main character out of the abbey and starts cartwheeling in front of her . yes , that 's right , cartwheeling . nonsense of this kind is occasionally interrupted by catherines " fantasies " in which she is being carried around a cathedral by an ogre.

northanger abbey is basically visual euthanasia so if you want to murder your boss or something like that , bbc have basically discovered a new way to kill someone . northanger is a barely laughably bad film . do n't watch it unless you 're in a padded cell . +1 i was rather appalled to see the low rating this movie received here , personally considering it fun family fare . it revolves around a young teenager , sandy ricks , who is sent by his mom to coral key to spend the summer with his uncle porter . while there he befriends a dolphin named flipper . lots of adventures ensue amid the predictable nephew / uncle bonding as well as a little romance for sandy with a local girl.

i'm a great crocodile dundee fan myself so absolutely loved paul hogan in his role as crusty and comical uncle porter . for starters , he keeps an endless stock of spaghetti - o 's in his house to serve as his usual meal , heated with a blowtorch ! elija wood , frodo from the lord of the rings , appeared quite competent playing the young sandy , a boy at first none too fond of his forced summer vacation locale.

of course the dolphin is magnificent and there are some wonderful underwater scenes . set in the florida keys , it was apparently filmed in the bahamas . this adaptation of flipper makes great family entertainment , a sweet , sentimental , and fun movie that is infinitely superior to many of the cinematic offerings for youngsters nowadays . +0 whoa!terrible , terrible , terrible , terrible , did i mention terrible?you can tell just by the dvd cover not to get this movie , but unfortunately that was n't the case for me . well , someone brought this home for me to watch , and when i looked at it i just wanted to strangle the person , because they used my money . i will certainly be taking it back soon , but i might as well tell you about it while i have it in memory , for i definitely want to forget it . this movie does n't deserve to even be called horrible . it 's beyond horrible . quite possibly , the worst film ever . the acting was so , so , so , so horrifically disgusting , as well as the deaths being so entirely lame and predictable . i did n't even laugh at how bad this movie was , which kind of frightens me a little . don't see this film , shame on you if you 're even looking at this movie page , and i have extreme pity for you if you 're looking at this movie page , because you think this will be decent.final word : yuck ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! +0 6 out of the 8 comments on this subject rated this film as worth watching , so let me redress the balance.

if this is the best that british independent film makers have to offer then they need to pack away their cameras right now and find jobs in another industry . unfortunately for me that was 82 minutes i 'll never see again and hopefully i 'll save some of you from wasting 82 minutes of your own . < br />
whilst the idea behind the film is interesting , it is not developed enough to keep the viewer attached . the student characters are bland and uninteresting and quite frankly you wo n't care about what happens to them . the soldiers are practically caricatures of every baddie ever seen in film , i kept waiting for captain markovic to twirl an imaginary moustache . some of the effects were quite good and showed some imagination , but these were ruined by the shockingly bad acting , poor script writing and patchy camera work . the budget may have been better spent sending the " actors " ( and i use that term loosely)to acting classes or the thomas brothers to film making school or maybe on a spell checker because the subtitles were incorrectly spelt . the fact that the mis - spellings were not picked up on and rectified speaks volumes about the immaturity of the whole production.

i can only assume that the positive comments are staged by the film makers , either that or they were watching a completely different film . i implore the thomas brothers to never give up their day jobs for if they continue in this field , they will surely starve to death . +1 what some hollywood - movies try and practically never succeed , creating somehow metaphysical connections between persons ( without becoming unrealistic ) , manages this beautiful movie perfectly well ( resembling in that way a little to the wonderful ' la double vie de veronique ' of the same director and with the same beautiful actress ) . this is a real movie , that changes perspective of life a little bit - intelligent and beautiful story , masterfully directed , excellent main actors , masterful cinematography . i 've just seen the movie the 3rd or 4th time , and i still think it 's one of the best i 've ever seen . and if you should be unhappy with the ending of ' white ' - ' red ' puts an happy end to the whole trilogy . +0 first , i am a big fan of alien and alien ii - in my opinion both of these movies created and defined the si - fi horror genre as we know it today . i noticed lifeforce was often compared to the aliens saga - after viewing this movie i would highly disagree . there are some okay special effects with the alien vampires , and the story line might have been acceptable . i just ca n't get past a naked woman space vampire throughout the whole movie , this is absolutely absurd ( although she does look good ) . add in a bunch of bad british acting and it 's pretty much over . most of the movie ends up taking place in london or somewhere in england , so after the first 20 minutes you lose the outerspace setting and any hope of some real si - fi horror action and suspense.

+1 this movie takes the voice of terror and makes it better . holmes is protecting an inventor in switzerland and is on the trail of professor moriarity , who has become a nazi . this is a better version of holmes in a wwii world . rathbone does a great job with holmes as a spy and a detective . see this if you liked the voice of terror . +0 this might sound weird , but i only got to see the first movie ( the emperor 's new groove , yaddayadda ) a week ago and only because of one episode of the tv show . i simply adore kuzco 's character , but kronk is n't that bad either . anyway , eventually i decided to watch the second film , just so i would 've seen it . hoped it would be as good as the first one , but ... i 'm sorry to tell this , but the more the humour got american , the more i yawned . i agreed with kuzco when he started crying seeing all the cheesy footage.

still , younger kids and probably veterans too will love this movie to bits ( if they like the old school moralising disney that is ) , but i just had expectations that were an eensy teensy little bit hell of a lot higher than they should 've been . kronk is a lovely character , being good hearted and dumb all at once , but it were pacha and kuzco in drag that woke me up at the end of the movie . ( i 'll ignore rudy ... for as far that 's possible).

anyway , great movie , just not my style and as they say , you always have to be true to your groove . +0 this is one of those movies that go out of print and are very expensive on ebay . this movie is a little - known , fairly amateurish flick that has the strong advantage of being the only movie that shannon doherty appears in multiple nude scenes ( looking very seductive , i might add ) . it also has the minor advantage of being popular in the fetish shannon doherty and smoking fetish arenas . it 's a fairly mediocre attempt at a horror / drama / whodunit movie . it tries a little misdirection , but you can see what 's coming a mile away . shannon does a decent job with her role , but the woman playing her sister is straight out of amateur - night , as is shannon 's husband character . avoid , unless you 're one of the groups i mention above . now , let 's hit ebay and see if we can unload this thing . 8) +1 i have found this show by accident and was surprised to find out that nobody i know has ever heard of it . this was by far one of the best shows i have seen in months if not years and i can not wait for more episodes to come out . sleeper cell portrays a psychological struggle of an undercover agent inside of a terrorist cell who has to constantly make difficult decisions in order to maintain his cover while staying true to his real cause . this is an extremely well done show . it keeps you intrigued from the first episode till the end and though progressing slowly , is fast enough for you to feel on the edge . quite realistic and humane , it touches on important topics and every episode presents an interesting question to ponder about . this show is not 24 or any of the cop shows on tv and is not trying to be anything either . it is genuine and unique . it is a show about a human being , his difficult choices and his life of struggle where a simple mistake can cost him everything.

i gave this show a 10 for great storyline , good progression , excellent cinematography , excellent music and realistic characters each with a story to tell . +0 first : i like s segal ! but in this movie , he has hit rock bottom and started to dig!

the plot what plot ? very strange and unbeliveable plot.

the actions way below segals standards!

the good parts mr segal is a pro . and shows it . that 's it.

summary i could write ( and have done so ) a better script for mr segal . in case you read this stephen , mail me , i 'll give you a better script to do a better movie ! the only realistic part is the one where ... ( see spoiler part).

spoiler part ( stop reading here if you plan to see the movie ! ) - - - gas leak ? wow . disecting a ' black - box'-recorder in a hotel room ? i work in the industry , laughable ! the bad guy ' get 's away ' , that much is true in life ! +1 a great performance by clint eastwood and particularly john malkovich in my opinion his finest one to date . malkovich had this one nailed right down to the floor it 's incredible . eastwood is agent mike horrigan , an aged and cynical secret service agent who is finishing out his career busting counterfeiters and chasing down routine assignments . but one assignment which appears to be run of the mill at first turns complicated and deadly serious . horrigan and his new partner al are sent to investigate a threat on the president by a " wacko " . as fate would have it horrigan has stumbled not upon a delusional nut but a professional lone wolf who has a big bone to pick with the white house . as horrigan dives deeper into " booth 's " world he attracts the bad guy 's unwanted attention and unbridled admiration for him . horrigan was jfk 's top agent and present in dallas , texas when he was assassinated and blames himself for what happened . now he feels it 's up to him to stop the current head of state from joining the list of dead presidents . but this killer has turned the tables on horrigan and now he 's the hunted one in a life or death cat and mouse game . who will win ? who will die ? it 's a race against time to save the pres from a chameleon - like enemy who can get to anyone . my favorite secret service movie and as good a nail biter as any . +1 i felt cheated out of knowing the whole story . while there could be a twist , this twist was so significant , that i felt betrayed . i believe it could have used a better writer who could weave all the elements of the story together better . the writer could have revealed more of the ' twists ' throughout the movie , rather than all at once at the end . that aside , i believe that the actors did very well with what they had , particularly matt damon , who actually had a little character in his character , little quirks that were n't egotistic or like a smooth criminal who always knows what he is doing . the other main characters were their own separate entities who just happened to converse with one another . the cohesiveness of the group in ocean 's eleven was gone . +0 one thing i have noticed about british horror movies from the 1970s is that they don`t hold up to repeated viewing theatre of blood is a case in point as are all those amicus anthology movies . add the beast in the cellar to the list < br />
much of the drama of this movie revolves around the build up of a plot revelation at the end . once you know what the revelation is this becomes a rather flat film . it does open with a fairly good hook but after that we`re treated to long boring sequences of two old ladies making small talk . correct me if i`m wrong but how many people watch a horror movie expecting a couple of old ladies making small talk ? the only sort of interest to be found in the beast in the cellar is the anti - smoking stance . some people have mentioned that this is an anti - war or anti - military film but watch carefully and you`ll see that everytime a squaddie lights up for a fly puff he gets killed . rather strange considering attitudes to smoking weren`t nearly so hysterical as they are nowadays +1 one of eastwood 's best movies after he had separated himself from the westerns . which in themselves were good whenever i had a chance to see any of clint 's earlier work i would sit in front of the set and watch whatever was on . +0 i gave this movie a rating of 1 because it is by far , the worst movie i 've ever seen in my life . this movie was made in 2003 and i 've seen movies made in the 60 's with better special effects . i wish i could go into detail , but words ca n't describe how crappy this movie was . i could have done better with a home video camera and $ 20 ! i pray that chuck norris never makes a movie again . now if you think i 'm downing this movie because it has a christian theme , you 're wrong . i like the fact that il ' chuck decided to make a movie that at least attempted to make god look good , but why would he make poor viewers like me suffer through such a crappy movie ? this whole film can be summed up in 3 words : re damn diculous . +0 a big waste of time is all you 'll get out of this bag . i rented this hoping for a suspenseful movie with maybe a few believable scenes , but boy was i ever dissapointed . i think the title should 've been " camping 101 " , or something to that effect . well , anyway , stay the hell away from this film . it numbs you to death . do n't be afraid of big foot , be afraid of this crap ! ! +1 a very watchable film , and one which was eagerly awaited having seen the trailer a number of times.

the whole thing looks superb , from the ludicrous efforts of the effete upper class to distance themselves from the mediocrity , to the lower class scum just trying to keep their heads above the filth , the film captures the spirit of the 18th century brilliantly.

jonny lee miller plays maclean extremely well , though the part does not exactly stretch him , and robert carlyle seems a little wasted on plunkett , miller 's highwayman colleague.

the real star of the show was undoubtedly ken stott , who plays mr chance ( a kind of 1740 's chief of police ) with an evil glee that set him out from the rest of the cast.

a great film , and anyone that enjoys the colour and style of peter greenaway 's films will love the look of this , although the thinness of the plot becomes apparent before the 2 hours are up.

well worth a viewing . +1 considering all of the comedies with a military situation that have been done in history , someone had to be the first . one could make a case that in shoulder arms , charlie chaplin invented the genre.

hard to believe that back then this was a daring move . when you consider that some of the best films involving such people as bob hope , abbott&costello , laurel&hardy involved military service and made during war time , it 's just something you accept and laugh at.

in the first world war chaplin along with fellow stars douglas fairbanks and mary pickford went out on bond tours . he was a great supporter of the allied cause , unusual for someone of his left wing views . it would seem only natural that the tramp would be drafted and unfortunately would flummox around and wreak havoc on all.

a lot of things you 'd see in the service comedies of world war ii got their start in shoulder arms . chaplin had no more imitators because within a few weeks of the film 's release , the war was over.

but a comedy art form had been established by one of comedy 's greatest geniuses . +0 i must admit , ashamed though i am , that as an impressionable young teenager this below par horror - chiller was one of my favourite all time films . nine years after first viewing stephen king 's frightening story however i have now come to my senses , and am able to assess fritz kiersch 's work more reasonably.

indeed king 's tale of a small nebraskan farming community that is turned upside down by a young demonic preacher boy and his sadistic sidekick is truly disturbing on paper , but it makes for a cheap , average horror show on celluloid . a lot of this outcome can be attributed to the fact that kiersch almost allows the beginning of the film to become a hacker - slasher show , and then turns the finale into a hocus - pocus special effects nightmare.

the cast are reasonable , but they can only portray as much credibility as this rather incredible , over the top movie will allow them , and the soundtrack by jonathan elias is spookier than the pictures.

a real shame that george goldsmith 's screenplay turned stephen king 's haunting short story into a shocking horror . isaac , malachai and all the other " children of the corn " are n't really all that scary.

sunday , august 7 , 1994 - video +1 while most movies that pit humans against horrendous extra terrestrials end up being cheap imitations of the ' aliens ' series , pitch black stands as a fine piece of sci - fi , and an excellent movie all around . perhaps my favorite aspect of the film is the lighting . this movie beautifully employs many different colors , shades and intensities of light which set the mood and lend a unique feeling to the film itself , something different than the ' normal ' movie lighting we are generally subjected to . vin diesel brings his character to life in an excellent manner , skillfully avoiding the routine portrayal of the hardened criminal . after all , the film is about riddick 's ( diesel 's character ) personal journey , so thankfully vin does n't drop the ball . the remainder of the cast ( with the exception of the talented and gorgeous claudia black ) were unknown to me but all turned in marvelous performances , animating the diverse characters with unique quirks and mannerisms . pitch black is a perfect example of making a great film with out the resources of an excessive budget . the special effects are more than adequate , but at the same time they are by no means the sole focus , as in many high budget ' blockbusters ' . it 's a great movie because it uses science fiction as a medium to tell an engaging , provoking story , rather then telling a mediocre story to use the flash of science fiction . +0 dr. krellman wants to save his son julio who 's dying of heart disease . he decides a heart transplant with an ape will cure his son ( no -- i'm not kidding ) . he does the transplant and ( somehow ) his son changes from a frail guy into a muscle - bound man with a dime store mask that ( sort of ) resembles an ape ! naturally he gets out , kills men , tears the clothes of women and wreaks havoc . this is all inter cut with the boring romance of police lt . arturo martinez and lady wrestler lucy ossorio . we also get pointless female wrestling sequences that add nothing to the plot . it all ends by copying the end of " king kong " ! this is ( obviously ) a pretty stupid movie . the plot makes little sense , there 's the gratuitous female nudity ( a staple of any exploitation film ) and very graphic gore that looks laughably fake ( except for the open heart transplant ) . still this does have merit . the whole cast takes everything dead serious and actually are n't too bad as actors . also the dubbed in dialogue was ( for a film like this ) well done and interesting with surprisingly good dubbing . also i saw an excellent dvd print with bright strong color ( which helps ) . we 're not talking a classic here but an ok exploitation movie . +0 i just watched that movie , and was pretty disappointed . i did n't expect much to begin with as the premise of the movie does n't suggest greatness anyway . sadly , it does n't even manage to deliver just as stupid entertainment . the main problem is probably the acting . while i 've seen far worse actors in far worse movies , the story would require some people to act out as violent maniacs , some others as people caught a in really stressing predicament , and they fail to deliver that . although i watched the german release i watched with the original audio , so it 's definitely not just bad voice - overs or anything like that . added to that , the german dvd release seems to be cut , the killings are all pretty much left out , meaning that except for a few semi - gory scenes closer to the end the german release does n't deliver as a movie for " gore - hounds " , either . ca n't comment on that for other releases of course . the plot has some stupid moments thrown in here and there and the beginning is just hilarious ( ever heard of a demon visiting a psychiatrist ? ) . too bad the movie takes itself far too seriously , if it was filmed as a horror - comedy and changed a bit here and there accordingly it might have worked better . the ending is just a huge disappointment.

if you 've got really nothing better to do and just ca n't stand the boredom anymore you might ( and it 's really a weak " might " ) consider this movie . if there 's anything else available to watch or do : pick that alternative . +0 this documentary was boring , and quite stupid.

i mean ... the documentary maker obviously does not even know what how darwinian evolution works ? it is a theory , and the name is just plain dumb . reading a college biology text - book could have told the documentary maker what darwinism really is . darwinism is a good theory , but evil if it is done as politics.

also there was no real evidence in this documentary just interviewing some people ... no expert testimonies , and shady leads ...

the documentary was also boring . i mean it could have been edited down to 35 minutes , and then it would have been lots better.

there are a lot better documentaries than this ... this was not worth watching ... you can get better information from wikipedia =d don't waste your money and time ! +0 there is so much not to like about this show it 's hard to know where to start . unlikeable characters , horrible plot lines , terrible writing , and terrible acting . do n't even get me started on the obnoxious theme music.

on top of all that the show is out of touch with u.s. audiences due to the heavy canadian references all throughout it . " oh say derek , will you be going to queens college in the fall ! how have you bean ? we should go oot . " < br />
granted , other shows are filmed in canada for financial reasons like stargate : atlantis , but while those shows may have suffered from some annoyances ( like rodney calling a z - p - m a " zed - p - m " ) the show did n't focus on life in canada.

mtv is running degrassi ( another show based on the experiences of the canadian teenager ) during daytime hours when no one is watching to fill time ( most teens are at school when it airs ) . i 'd wager it 's for the same reason . shows that focus on teenage life in canada do n't translate well to a u.s. audience.

this show should be canceled and the remaining masters burned in a furnace . +1 shawn michaels vs. edge-8- kind of hard to believe shawn michaels is in the opening match but still a great match by both men , edge , whether you like or not is a great performer in the ring , and shawn michaels is just ageless when it comes to his performance the undertaker vs. heidenreich . casket match-2- ok , after a good opening match , now this , what a crappy match . undertaker has given some great matches at the royal rumble , and 1998 's royal rumble against shawn michaels was the same type of match , but this is way worse then that match.

kurt angle vs. big show vs. bradshaw . triple threat wwe championship-6- it 's alright , i feel all three men could of given a better performance , this just really did n't show them at their best.

randy orton vs. triple h. world heavyweight championship-9- triple h gets a clean win , can you believe it , sure he takes out the sledgehammer but does n't use it . randy orton did great when acting like he got a concussion , but how he got the concussion is really ridiculous . i really liked this match , this was the best performance i 've seen from hhh in forever.

the royal rumble match-7- this was highly entertaining and i usually do n't score the royal rumble match this high . the winner is again , very predictable , but just this had a lot of moments that were very entertaining to watch the segments with flair and guerrero are hilarious the best segments i 've seen in a while.

overall , this is a great ppv and a must own for wrestling fans . +1 " where to begin , where to begin . . ? ( savannah in the episode " gimme shelter " ) " to disabuse : fox / viacom does not , at this point in time , have any intention of releasing the show on dvd . but be not downhearted ! that you are reading this reveals that the magic lingers fifteen years on . . . and small wonder . this was post - modern television , a valiant attempt to visualize magical realism . ' neath the blue patina , charm , and brio were scripts bursting with symbolism and metaphor , music that actually interacted with scenes ! and , ultimately , an attempt , however doomed , to recapture one 's belief in innocence , to reclaim eden , as it were . . . it 's potency is perhaps best attested to by the fact that even as we , umm , type , a book is being written about the show wherein will be found the thoughts , fancies , and reminiscences of many of the show 's actors , writers , directors , and producers . in the meanwhiles . . . anyone desirous of once again visiting the end of the world and reacquainting themselves with seamus , sheriff cody , savannah , et al . . . should not hesitate to contact me , i may be able to make you a copy . " angels in the spray , wizards in the palm trees . . . " +1 while boris(aleksey batalov)is off to fight in war against the germans for his mother russia , his beloved veronika(tatyana samojlova)marries his conniving cousin mark(aleksandr shvorin)in a moment of weakness shortly after her parents were killed in an air raid over moscow . through various trials and betrayals , veronika will await word or letter from boris no matter how long it takes , holding hope that he will return to her.

powerful piece of film - making boasts simply incredible photographic work by cinematographer sergei urusevsky . some of the many magnificently framed , moving shots include the scene where the camera follows veronika through a crowd of loved ones saying goodbye to each other as she rushes through the mob of bodies to say goodbye to boris .. and does n't quite reach him even as we watch boris looking impatiently into the swarm without luck . the sequence after the air raid where veronika walks up the standing stairs circulating up the destroyed building she once called home and the scene where mark makes his lustful move on veronika as another air raid continues just outside the building as wind rustles the curtains and flashes of light emanate inside are just two of many examples where sergei urusevsky shows his genius at framing images that will last forever on film . but , without the power and tragedy of the story regarding how war can forever shape the destiny of a couple who dearly , deeply love each other , this film could n't hold up with the beauty of the visual alone . together , however , we 're left with an amazing film .. simply a haunting masterpiece from the soviet union after stalin breathed his last breath . i feel honored just have beheld such a great film . +0 underwoods goofy story about a young man(arquette ) who convinces his friends that they should kidnap frank sinatra jr. ( nicholas ) . the film is written ridiculously , direction is odd , dialogues are out of place and scrambled , the actors did n't do it much justice either , arquette is annoying throughout , ian nicholas was nonexistent , macy was decent , but only because he s a pretty good actor and probably just tried his best not to come out of this project with a totally embarrassing performance , he was at least tolerable . this is a stupid film in my eyes , boring at times , not entertaining , just a film that i would n't recommend to anybody . imdb rating : 5.5 , my rating : 4/10 +0 critics have started calling it the oscar winner club , understandably . what after halle berry won it for monsters ball then going straight to the diabolical catwoman . hilary swank triumphs in boys do n't cry and follows it with the core . jamie foxx takes a nosedive as a pilot in the dull stealth after scooping a gong for ray . now it 's seems hollywood starlet charlize theron craps all over her " monster " oscar with this one of the worst sci - fi spectacles ever made.

the film loses its audience interest after a mere 20 minutes meaning the only thing really worth staying for is the fact that despite the film being rubbish charlize theron is still an exceptional actress who is clearly making the best of a crude and laughable premise . not only is æon flux ultimately shallow but for an action flick it 's also really very dull . it will only really appeal to comic book fans and horney teenagers who like the idea of theron running around half naked for 90 minutes . flux only really succeed in failing.

set against the 2011 virus that kills 99 % of the world 's populace , and in the last city on earth , bregna , the survivors , some four hundred years later , in the year 2415 , are continuing to live in the goodchild dynasty , the name of the scientist who developed its cure.

all is not well in this utopia and it is not what lies beyond its high walls that protects its citizens from the never ending jungle but what unspoken , unwritten taboo that holds and binds these unwritten taboo that holds and binds these unfortunates ' together that lies within these walls of paranoia , conformity and unquestionable obedience . filmed in and around berlin , ironically , this is a story set against a totalitarian state , a walled city , where its peoples are no longer capable of reproducing , and its sinister and most secret plot of how it sustains life.

æon flux is the assassin that has been assigned by the underground rebels to change the course of mankind , forever . this is the story of her fight for justice , freedom and revenge.

æon flux combined lousy narratives , ropy pacing and truly dire effects . looking more like an unrealistic video game rather than a film . the only thing that is fortunate about the failure is that no sequels are in the works , flux might just be the beginning and the end of what could have been one of the worst franchises in history , thank god for the lousy box office takings then.

my final verdict on this truly lousy feature ? there really is n't a story here just charlize theron jumping around in a black suit like a grass hopper . the acting is very wooden moronic and emotionless compared to the other cinemas that are out there today . it try 's too much to be like an adaption and does n't really take much from the cartoon which is what i was expecting , the only thing that was done half right that pays tribute to the cartoon was the fly in the eye scene . avoid at all costs . +0 the filmmakers try to paint the influence of the mondovis and robert parker as a travesty on par with the german occupation of france and the reign of fascism . but they never find a victim in this film . we hear wine makers , critics and distributors bemoan that while the wine industry grows it becomes increasingly homogeneous . but the film never makes a case that this has resulted in the loss of any good wine or exploitation of any person or culture other than naive wine spectator readers with lots of cash . if they want to pay hundreds of dollars for a dull wine , so be it.

if this were a film about the diamond trade , where the debeers corporation 's market domination results in human suffering , the muckraking style might have been appropriate . but as it is it just comes off as anti - american , anti - modernization and anti - capitalist . had the filmmakers been around in the 1870s they most likely would have protested the grafting of american vines in the effort to save french wine . +0 heard some good remarks about this film as being very gory and frightning , but it 's neither . obviously the screenwriter wanted to do a scary horror film but at the same time inject some teenage comedy for the young target audience . scares and comedy seldomly result in good films , the same goes for monster man.

not really funny , nor scary or overly enjoyable on any other level.

aproaching 39 years of age i 've seen my share of horror movies . i have seen good ones and terrible ones , but the crop of films released these days are so frighteningly mediocre it bores me to watch 'em . the acceptance these days for bad films like this is what really annoys me . let 's face it , they produced a lot of crap in the 70 's , 80 's and 90 's but they were regarded as such then as well . today they 're regarded as " good entertainment " . - bollocks ! +0 a pig - tailed linnea quigley drinks milk , strips and kills her sister and her sister 's boyfriend after they have sex . she goes to an asylum , makes a best friend out of amy ( karen russell ) and the two blackmail their way out of a mental institution by sleeping with their psychologists ( one is played by " carol burnett show " regular lyle waggoner ) . on the outside , these two man - hating mafia princesses ( ! ) stop taking their medication and invite six slimeball ex - boyfriends over to their large country home for a party where they 're systematically slaughtered in very gory ways by a gloved , leather - clad mystery killer.

the hideous david barton fx are so bloody , but so unrealistic that they take on a sort - of surrealistic quality . same goes for the movie . the dialogue is so strange and stilted , the film so ineptly paced and edited and the acting so other - worldly , you 'll start to doubt your own sanity . this film actually attempts to have a plot and three - dimensional characters , but it 's all so poorly handled it 's almost like what would happen if ed wood did a rewrite of an ingmar bergman script ! and like any good bergman film , this has a mature moral to abide by -- any good party needs a proper guy / girl " ratio , " so there will be enough chicks to " tickle your lizard . " see it for yourself ... or don't!

linnea ( the only reason i was even interested in watching this to begin with ) is very amusing in this one , has a lot more dialogue than usual and has several eye - popping nude scenes . unfortunately , she also completely disappears from the final third of this film and the movie suffers because of it.

score : 3 out of 10 +0 a box with a button provides a couple with the opportunity to be financially free , but the cost is the life of someone they 've never met . this is a very tedious film to watch . richard kelly , who wrote and directed it , decided to make a film without any payoff . you are taken on a ride of slow build ups , one after the other with minor revelations at best . at certain moments , i thought to myself , this will have major significance at the end , but nothing does . the film just leaves one thinking , " this story could have been told in 30 minutes , without all the stretched out nonsense . " i will hope you avoid this god - awful film and maintain your sanity by doing so . +1 i became a fan of the tv series ` homicide : life on the street ' late in the show 's run , but became a fan very quickly . it was a cop show unlike any other : visually different in its use of hand - held cameras , taking the viewer everywhere , with its multiethnic and mutiracial cast and their varying and fascinating personalities , and that it covered all of the good and bad of a police department , including the corruption and personality clashes that bubble up to the surface . < br />
homicide : the movie , the reunion follow - up to the series , is as good as a made - for - television film can be . after lt . giardello ( yaphet kotto ) , now a candidate for mayor of baltimore , is shot , the series ' cast members are back to help find the killer . in addition , the cast members who left the force and those who died , also manage to have their place in the film . the intensity and fire that marked the series return , and the script bristles with the same fire that marked the series . all in all , a terrific tv movie.

vote : 9 +0 bela lugosi is a real enigma . in the early 1930s , he was on top of the world after appearing in dracula . yet , again and again , he made lousy decisions regarding his career . perhaps he had a bad agent , perhaps his drinking and drug use had a part in it or maybe he was just crazy . regardless , he ruined his reputation by appearing in pretty much any film -- ranging from excellent horror films ( such as the raven ) to big - budget flicks ( like ninotchka ) to grade - z flicks for the cheapest and shoddiest of studios . interestingly enough , although he agreed to do this terrible film , he actually turned down the role that later went to boris karloff in frankenstein ! as for this movie , it is a very silly an horridly produced wwii propaganda film that featured a dumb plot and wretched editing . lugosi spends much of the movie murdering saboteurs -- not a bad thing at all . but at the end , we find out that he is himself a nazi plastic surgeon and all the american - looking men he killed were actually japanese ! ! ! ! the funniest part of this is during a flashback . you see lugosi talking to a group of japanese men before he changes them to american - like men . when the camera scans them , the men are clearly asian . but , on all the other non - close - up shots , they are all very western looking -- many with bald heads ! ! they looked absolutely nothing like japanese men . i suspect the plot must have undergone a re - write and this might account for the obvious mistake . or , it could just be shoddy production values and editing . in fact , early in the film , they show a street scene in the city and all the cars ( circa 1942 ) are old model t fords -- obviously from stock footage ! ! ! the bottom line is that the film is bad but also very dull . unlike plan 9 from outer space , it 's hard to laugh at the ineptitude -- just be put to sleep by it . +0 this is a stupid movie . like a lot of these karate movies it is badly written , awkward , and sometimes just stupid . the action really is n't all there and the movie overall leaves much to be desired . everyone here is talking jive , doing bad karate and doing a very bad job of acting . < br />
watch for scatman crothers in a small role , he is too good for this movie overall . jim kelly is good at karate , but he is a terrible actor . gloria hendry is real bad . all of them are , there are just so many parts to this film that make absolutely no sense . the supposed love / running away scene with hendry and kelly , what the hell was that ? they destroyed that man 's guitar , for no reason ! < br />
and then there was the mandatory girls on trampolines ! ! ! now what was that ? they were in the movie for five seconds , then you never heard from them again ! ! ! then there is the whole racially charged element of the movie , which is cool and all , but in this movie it goes absolutely nowhere . like i said , this is good for a laugh one time , but do n't watch it again . +0 can i just start by saying i 'm a fan of bad movies . and this is a really bad movie . it states on the front 100 passengers , 3000 snakes , but i think it 's more accurate to say 12 passengers and about 20 snakes.

the snakes do n't do anything particularly interesting , the whole movie in fact just blunders on with little happening . although there is occasionally a great gore shot of pulsating arms and green goo puke ( bad movies have to have green goo do n't they?).

but then the ending comes along and will quite literally smack you off you seat in hysteria . and for that , this movie gets a boost up to a 2 * rating.

there are certain movies about in the world that you will want to show to your friends , just so you can watch there reaction when a certain event happens in them.

for example the arrival of ' big man ' in r kelly 's ' trapped in the closet ' ' the line ' in ' shark attack 3 ' ( you 'll know it when you hear it ) the arrival of the mama shark in ' shark attack 3 ' almost every scene of ' troll 2 ' the ending of ' dracula 3000 ' ( just for utter disbelief and confusion ) and the end of this movie proudly sits in this category . it 's worth sitting through just for that . so get drunk , stoned , whatever your poison is and watch this movie with some mates.

quite simply , if you like bad movies , get this , but do n't get it confused with ' snakes on a plane ' ... there 's no relation.

and do n't pay more than a fiver for it either .... +0 ah yet another seagal movie . in no less than a few mere months arrive to populate the video store shelves . as bad as submerged?no . but that is not saying much . like perfume on a pig.

seagal is professional thief who wants to quit , but goes for one last job only to be double - crossed by his boss . he lands in prison and is befriended by a gangster who helps him to break out and seek payback.

its good to see seagal finally not playing an agent , cop , or what he usually plays . we actually get a usa location in las vegas it seems . then an eastern european territory as usual . there is no wire - fu either here . don fauntleroy does an okay job.

however most of the action and fight scenes with stevie are clearly doubles . scenes from other movies , a lack of realism and logic in even tiniest situation . seagal and treech make a so - so team inspiring(unintentional ) laughs one minute . sighs the rest.

several notable faces turn up to slum it .. sleepy kevin tighe is a long way from his emergency days . nick mancuso shows up in sleepwalking mode to take a check . no more rappers . please ? at this point the action scenes and plots are more predictable and recycled generically more than ever . its a stale scene that seagal needs to get out of or hang it up . he should have gotten out a while ago . +1 this film is a perfect example of great escapism ! i loved this film and was sucked in from the very beginning . sure it 's just an action flick , but is n't having fun what watching movies is all about ? < br />
the cast of this film are very strong with likable characters . the friendship between the boys is so realistic and appealing , it 's heart warming and hilarious to see a group of teenage boys interact - especially this group of boys ! ! sean astin makes a great rebel , successfully avoiding being a precocious teenager.

if you want fun , watch this film ! i thoroughly enjoyed it even though i was watching it on a very dirty and old vhs that was terrible quality ( go dvd 's ! ) +0 this one is a real stinker.

the story just is n't up to par with most other tz episodes . it 's pretty boring , though seeing peter falk made up as a fidel castro lookalike is kind of amusing.

whenever twilight zone would be aired at an unannounced hour in my hometown , i 'd grab a sandwich and a drink and settle in for some quality entertainment . 9 times out of 10 , it wound up being this episode ! strange thing ? this often happened to my mom ( another tz fan like me ) as well . there were so many times that one of us would say to the other , " i was all set to watch _ the twilight zone _ and guess which episode was on ? the cuban dictator episode ! " obviously some people like this episode , as it gets a 6.7 rating ... how that happened , i have no idea - but that in and of itself would make a great twilight zone plot ! +0 at least for me . i have been following the career of mr. almdovar since the beginning and i was not crazy about this film . i think penelope cruz was miscast , the type of woman she is portraying does not look that good , she makes the character unbelievable . also , the singing scene was just weird . i do not get the point and the lip - sync was awful.

as spaniard , another thing that drove me nuts are the accents . why people coming from the same place have such a different accent ? the difference between the two sisters is notable and makes no sense . and the village ? are we in 2007 or 1950 ? i found myself trying to explain to my american husband that many of the things in the movie are " old school " , things are not like that anymore.

i was expecting more but this time mr . almodovar did not deliver , at least for me . i am not saying that miss cruz does a bad job , i am saying that she does not belong there , not portraying that character . +1 it was a terrific movie ! i like to watch it again and again . the actors were awesome . the movie kept me on the edge of my seat . i would recommend this movie to anyone . i wish lifetime would put this movie on dvd . i would most definitely purchase a copy . this movie just proves that you should be very careful about who you get hooked up with . you may think you know someone , but you never know . my daughter watched the movie with me . she thought it was great . all i know is , i will watch this movie every time lifetime airs it . it 's the kind of movie that keeps you glued to the t.v . i wish lifetime would redo the movie , but use the same actors , and bring it to the big screen . +0 i watched this movie with big expectations . the blurb on the back indicated that this was going to be a nasty one . but it was pretty tame and a little unsatisfying . the violence was nothing i have n't seen a thousand times before , the gore level was only average ( mind you there was probably more than what has been seen in hollywood in the last 5 years - perhaps more ) , and at no stage was i even feeling uneasy let along frightened . again a cat 3 movie with big wraps , has not lived up to its hype.

sure hire this movie , but do n't go in with any expectations . i am so keen to get into the whole asian horror scene , but am continuously disappointed . i did love ichi , and audition , but then again , miike stands alone at the moment.

please inspire me ..... there is a large cluster of jaded genre fans who are starved of quality horror ! +1 mr. bean has shaped the face of british tv comedy . he has proved that you do not need wicked words or wit , a massive budget , a great deal of intelligence or even any intelligence to make something brilliant . and mr. bean is one of those characters who you just ca n't forget . some of these episodes had me in stitches - yes , they 're not realistic at all and they 're all pretty stupid , but to be honest , realism is one of the barriers bean has broken on its way to greatness . rowan atkinson and co. always manage to cook up interesting new ideas - and hilarious new gags - remember when mr. bean drove his green mini whilst sitting on a sofa on the roof ? mr. bean is one of those things that never gets weak - the movie was n't as good as this , but bean has introduced a distinct new sense of humour to the world , and kids and adults alike will marvel at its immense fun factor . " extras " and " little britain " can be damned - this is british comedy at its best and most original . these escapades never get old ! 10/10 +0 why bother , itv ? admittedly , mansfield park is the most difficult of the novels to " get , " and fanny is certainly the hardest to like , but ... if one is going to take it on , then have the courage to risk being true to the book and its rather complicated spirit . and for heaven 's sake , have the guts to cast fanny as she was written : a prissy , good - hearted , sweetish , whiner ! mrs. norris was n't nearly as awful as she should have been . and what the heck happened to portsmouth ? the contrast between fanny 's rather dubious family and family home and the splendors of mansfield is key to , well , so many aspects of fanny 's refusal of henry , her uncle 's rejection , henry 's near transformation to a good person , etc . , etc . again , given the complexity and challenges of the novel , why did they bother ? it 's beyond me ... +0 " opposing force [ 1986 ] " was n't as good as " dr. strangelove " and it was n't as good as " the bridge on the river kwai " . heck , it was n't even as good as " g.i. jane " , which is pretty sad.

the film revolves around a basic ethical problem : in a simulated prisoner - of - war situation , how far can you go before you start breaking the law ? what exactly is the law in such a situation ? how can you simulate the torture of someone without actually torturing someone ? can you intentionally inflict pain ? how about breaking bones ? mock executions ? sexual abuse ? severe blood loss ? real guns with bullets ? death ? somewhere between these is a really fuzzy line dividing " acceptable " from " atrocious".

now , what could you do if you found yourself in such a training program and the lines between simulation and reality begin to vanish ? what could you do ? this movie attempts to portray this dilemma.

i found it interesting to see the types of tactics used in " resistance training " . i have a brother who went through the usaf 's pow training program . according to him , it was pretty close to the mark technically.

the film has a fairly good premise , but it does n't have a particularly good story . i wondered if it might be based on some actual event , but it became pretty apparent that it was n't when the explosions started . they must have changed scriptwriters three quarters into the film , because it takes a real extreme turn and devolves into a somewhat pointless shoot - em - up with lots of distracting explosions . < br />
i found it to have a rather unsatisfying ending ; again , kind of pointless . i 'm left wondering what the point of the whole thing was - i 'm beginning to suspect there simply was n't one . it could have been much better with just a little more story to go along with the fireworks . +1 wow , what a wonderful film - making ! mr. i m has done it , again!

his last work , chunhayang ( 2000 ) was a great film , but this one is even greater . selected as an official feature film in the canne festival for the second time in a two - year row , this 66 years old director is getting better and better at what he is making of with a korean culture.

simply , chihwaseon is about a great korean painter , ' ( ohwon ) jang , seung - up ' who was considered as a prodigy in the late nineteenth century . the basic story of this film tells the life of jang , seung - up , and the historical background of his time . he was an orphan , but in his teens , he was picked up by a noble man , called , kim , byung - moon . this mr . kim becomes a mentor of jang as well as life - long friendship , and continues to support his great talent that he knew in the first place . with jang 's great effort and natural talent , his fame grows faster and faster as the strength of his country , korea falls down.

jang 's personality portrayed in the film is very complicated , and one of the best actors in korea , choi , min - sik goes deep inside of jang 's soul . suffering eyes reveal the struggle of a great artist 's life . he is very serious sometimes , but all of sudden , he changes to a wild maniac . he drinks like an alcoholic , and sleeps with courtesans anytime . even , he said in the movie , " without an alcohol and a woman , i ca n't draw . ( an alcohol and women are my only inspirations ) " in the peak of the fame , to develope his own style , he travels all around the country , and never gives up his pride as an artist for the authority or money . i do n't want to give out every details , but i think you surely did get some ideas about the film.

the most amazing thing about this film is a cinematography . it is just so breath - taking how they captured every beauty of landscapes . yes , each scene is like a work of jang 's painting . and the script is perfect , too . it mainly deals a deeper meaning of what makes a true artist . for example , kim advices to jang in the movie that ' before one holds a paintbrush , one has to set an aim in life ' . this is very moving and inspiring line , and there are many more.

go see this film if you are going to be in the canne festival.

chihwasun will be the greatest film ever made that deals with the life of a painter in film history . +1 horses on mars is an engaging animated short that takes a sometimes comical look at the process of evolution through the eyes of those yet to evolve . the story is personal , and at times sentimental , and is supported by strong digital animation and narration that involves the viewer in this science fiction story . i was fortunate enough to view this short in widescreen format at the 2002 sundance film festival , and must suppose that when transferred to the small screen , it will lose some of its ability to draw the reader into the no less thoughtful story and stunning graphics . +1 the movie has an excellent screenplay ( the situation is credible , the action has pace ) , first - class direction and acting ( especially the 3 leading actors but the others as well -including the mobster , who does not seem to be a professional actor).

i wish the movie , the director and the actors success . +1 i saw this film on september 1st , 2005 in indianapolis . i am one of the judges for the heartland film festival that screens films for their truly moving picture award . a truly moving picture " ... explores the human journey by artistically expressing hope and respect for the positive values of life . " heartland gave that award to this film.

this is a story of golf in the early part of the 20th century . at that time , it was the game of upper class and rich " gentlemen " , and working people could only participate by being caddies at country clubs . with this backdrop , this based - on - a - true - story unfolds with a young , working class boy who takes on the golf establishment and the greatest golfer in the world , harry vardon.

and the story is inspirational . against all odds , francis ouimet ( played by shia labeouf of " holes " ) gets to compete against the greatest golfers of the u.s. and great britain at the 1913 u.s. open . francis is ill - prepared , and has a child for a caddy . ( the caddy is hilarious and motivational and steals every scene he appears in . ) but despite these handicaps , francis displays courage , spirit , heroism , and humility at this world class event.

and , we learn a lot about the early years of golf ; for example , the use of small wooden clubs , the layout of the short holes , the manual scoreboard , the golfers swinging with pipes in their mouths , the terrible conditions of the greens and fairways , and the play not being canceled even in torrential rain.

this film has stunning cinematography and art direction and editing . and with no big movie stars , the story is somehow more believable.

this adds to the inventory of great sports movies in the vein of " miracle " and " remember the titans." < br />
fyi - there is a truly moving pictures web site where there is a listing of past winners going back 70 years . +1 quite a production from the director telling the story of the qin emperor 's ambitious plan to unite all kingdoms of china . some great characters , sets , costumes and scenes . however , i was not blown away by the film in terms of the actors ability ( which was good i enjoyed the marquis the most ) or its look ( although the massing of troops was extremely impressive , if it was real man that is a lot of extras!).

i have seen li gong in other movies and she is always great . good period piece i think , but not one to judge the true historical accuracy of it . good film and found the 2 1/2 + hours not a problem.

rating 7 out of 10 . +1 after going to sleep out of sheer loneliness , lestat wakes from a 100-year sleep to the sounds of a new music he wants to be a part of and the band " the vampire lestat " is born . his longing to end his loneliness and his " living in the light " attitude along with his music , anger his fellow vampires and awaken an evil that has been slumbering for thousands of years.

this film is not for those looking for a true book - to - film adaptation . those who have read the books and expect to see it on the screen are in for a huge disappointment . this film will appeal to those who really enjoyed the " interview with the vampire " film.

there are a few plot holes and incongruencies , but as a whole , this film was satisfying . stuart townsend portrays lestat with a sensuality and sexiness lacking in the previous film . the relationships portrayed in the film were very sexy and sizzling.

as a film , the story compels you and draws you in . casting is wonderful . loved this story and film . if you like simmering sensuality and sexual tension you 'll love this film ! +0 humour is a very individual thing and the audience at the sneak preview of the wog boy seemed to enjoy it more than i did . i found it an anachronistic affair , more representative of the old fashioned racial humour of the australian cinema of the 1960s and 1970s . the boy meets girl plot never takes off because of a lack of chemistry between lucy bell and nick giannopoulos while i found laughs thin on the ground . if you want to spend your money on this , wait until it 's on video . +1 bobbie phillips , who in her own right has amassed a great list of credits as a hard working hollywood actress , shines in this third installment of upn and village roadshow 's chameleon series . in this installment , the sexual innuendo has been toned down with kam showing a caring maternal side towards a recently orphaned genius teen . bobbie delivers this role to the viewers with great panache ' . the action and stunts were the best in the series . +0 there is a phrase by the experimental filmmaker nathaniel dorsky , who says some films are structured like a camera mounted on the head of a dog who goes down an alley , sniffing everything along the way.

that 's how this movie is . the structure is " kurosawa started out as a baby , then he became a kid , then a young man , then a movie director , then he started making ' masterpieces ' , then he grew old , the end . " the word ' masterpiece ' is used a lot in this film to describe kurosawa 's output , without explaining * what * makes his films so good / great . just because the off - screen narrator reading a script says that a film is a masterpiece , are we supposed to kiss his rear - end and accept that a certain movie is one of the great works of art of the 20th century ? and one more point . the voice of paul scofield is used as the voice of kurosawa , when excerpts from the director 's memoirs are being read off screen . he brings pear - shaped shakespearean tones to the text ... but why him ? ? if you were making a documentary about billie holiday , would you use dame judi densch as her voice ? ? ? ? +1 i saw the d 's new film tonight at a special advance screening , and i was so blown away by its sheer greatness that i felt i had to come onto imdb and get the word out . admittedly , i was already a huge fan of the d 's work - i loved the hbo series and listen to their music weekly ( there 's nothing better to sing along to ) , but this appreciation actually made me more apprehensive going into to tonight 's screening ( for we 've all been disappointed one time or another by something we love when it attempted to make the jump to the big screen ) . with tenacious d 's " the pick of destiny , " this is not the case.

simply put , this film rocks harder than anything i 've seen and is funnier and more majestic than anything peter jackson , pixar , and will ferrell together could produce . it tells the story of the d before we came to know them , setting up intriguing histories of kage and jables ' upbringings , their comings together , and how they were inspired to write songs about such things as lee , sasquatch , and dio . most importantly , they reveal the true inspiration to the greatest song in the world , " tribute , " and how it came to be ( which is different than the hbo series ' version ) . after you 've witnessed it you probably wo n't be able to remember it ( hence the tribute ) , but your mind forever be changes by its genius.

i do n't go out to movies very often anymore due to the high ticket price and the hassle of getting parking , paying outrageous concession prices , etc . , but i usually make exceptions when it 's starring someone i really love or concerning something of the the same variety . " the pick of destiny " was so good that i have no qualms going back to see it again when it releases nationwide , and i plan on convincing all of my friends to go , too . last week we saw " borat " and loved it , but this is honest to goodness ten times better . for anyone who truly loves rock music and comedic brilliance , see this film . these guys ' talent is so great you should have no hesitation supporting their cause . you will not be disappointed , and the rock lords will smile upon you favorably . +0 unfortunately , koontz seems doomed to die without seeing a decent adaptation of his work . whispers follows the original book very closely , seemingly until the production company ran out of money . all of the sets in the first half of the movie were meticulously recreated from the book - something which has been lacking in many other koontz films . despite its other ( numerous ) downfalls , i continued to watch in anticipation of some really great scenery . wrong . by the time the detectives show up at the crack head 's apartment ( in the book ) , the movie is out of funds , and one of the most suspenseful scenes from the book , is ruined . where the book offered grisly discovery , a search and a chase through the guys apartment , the movie offers the backseat of the guys car.

let 's face it - koontz writes without a budget in mind , because imagination is free . if a koontz novel ever gets made into a decent movie , no one will go and see it , because they have been let down so many , many , many times before . this is why dean koontz 's frankenstein is now just frankenstien - if you had seen your work butchered that many times , you 'd get out early if it looked like happening again ! +1 if family guy offends you or you simply do n't get the humor , unfortunately this show is making fun of you and the masses of overly religious , dull , and politically correct people in america . so put your morals aside and have fun with this show . fg is a hilarious mind opener on the reality of today 's society . whoever said this show is for a young immature audience is very mistaken . with all the references to old movies and politics 10 - 80 years ago , i could n't imagine any young immature kid finding this funny . family guy is definitely for a mature open - minded audience who are not afraid to criticize american society . hats off to seth and the whole crew who were able to make this show happen . +0 i recently watched this film on the sundance channel and it kept me interested from the start . however , it seems to take forever getting itself where it wants to go and in the end , i felt somewhat cheated . in a nutshell , noble willingham ( of walker , texas ranger fame ) plays a boat salesman who starts getting harassed by telephone from a man claiming to be his son . according to the mysterious caller , willingham has a dark , dirty little secret that affects the son and he ( the son ) is enjoying reminding him of it . i wo n't spoil anything for anyone but for me three things kept me from liking this movie a great deal . one , the movie has more foul language than goodfellas , scarface , casino , and glengarry glen ross combined . 99 % of it is spewed from willingham himself . it did n't take long to wear me out with constant four - letter words . two , i simply could not believe that anyone would answer the telephone that many times , especially when one knows that a crank caller is on the other end of the line . no matter where willingham is in the movie whether it be at work , home , a diner , etc . , the phone rings and he always answers it spewing venom at the " son " , and then hanging up only to answer it again when the caller calls back in about ten seconds ! how many of us would do that ? now i realize that we probably do not have a movie if he does n't keep answering , but i just could not suspend disbelief on that particular matter . three , and this is the most minor of the criticisms , why is the director so opposed to showing us the " corndog man " ( a.k.a . the caller / son ) ? most of the time he 's just a redneck sounding voice on the other end of the phone . i could have lived with that one if other things had fallen into place , but since they did n't it 's just one more to tack on . i do give the movie credit for being a somewhat original idea and for holding my attention with suspense from the beginning but that 's about it . do see it , if only one time . however , if you 're like me , you 'll be saying " triple k marine ! " in your sleep for a night or two after you finish watching it . +1 my skateboarding career ended in 1974 when my two - by - four skateboard with steel roller - skate wheels hit a rock and i tumbled , for days it seemed , down the sidewalk outside my parent 's house in boston . by the time the cast came off my arm , summer was gone.

but i have always admired the x - games types and surfers especially . i think i spent the first month after i moved to southern california on the beaches and piers watching the surfers , bemoaning that fact that i had missed my calling . it 's the sort of thing you should learn young , before the horrible senses of self - preservation and self - awareness burrow in . or else at best , you 'll be so worried about not getting hurt or laughed at , you 'll wind up looking like a trained bear.

i always admired how a good surfer seems to not care about anything but that moment , that wave , that experience . at one with the forces of nature . a good surfer makes it look like there is nothing else but that wave right there , and the way you interact with it . there 's a lot of zen in it to me.

this documentary outlines how a few young folks took the surfing concepts and extended them to skateboarding . ramps , downgrades , low sweeping curves while interacting with the cement waves beneath their feet . in their day and time , this was all new . radical . prior to the zephyr skate team the idea apparently was to go as fast as you could in a straight line on a skateboard , hence my long " evel knievel at caesers palace " like tumble down the front walk.

this film is a look back through time , to an america before everything was labeled , tagged , marketed , and jam - forced down our throats as " extreme " . ( seriously , what 's so " extreme " about an " extreme value meal " at taco bell ? other than the fact that it is an extreme hazard to your colon ... ) < br />
watch this film and watch the birth of ' extreme sports ' . before there was an x - games , before boom - boom huck - jam , before crusty demons , before the asa ... there were these young street urchins who created ' extreme sports ' without really trying . they were just doing it for the purity , the pure pleasure , of skateboarding in the sun with friends . < br />
i hope they get a cut of the ' extreme ' money out there . goodness knows they do n't get the credit they deserve . maybe this film can correct that.

excellent film with a great soundtrack , a portrait of a southern california , indeed an america , that no longer exists.

i do n't care for sean penn but he does a decent job narrating . +1 " tourist trap " is among my favorite late 70's / early 80 's horror flicks . a group of young people are heading somewhere , one pair in the car ahead , & that car has a flat , and our film opens with the young man , woody , pushing the tire along looking for a service station . he finds a seemingly abandoned place , and yet hears voices and investigates , and ends up with a piece of pipe through his stomach for his efforts . along comes the rest of the young folks ( in a vw thing ) and they pick up woody 's girlfriend , and find this very same place , slausen 's oasis , or some such thing .. and then mr. slausen happens along while the girls are enjoying a dip in the stream . of course , the vw thing has mysteriously died at that point , so odd mr. slausen ( chuck connors ) offers his help . mr. slausen has a museum , with lots of wax figures , and he lives in the museum but behind is a big house , where he says davey lives . and who is davey ? why , davey crockett , he says ... but if it were davey crockett , they 'd all probably be safer . the girls are left alone while slausen goes to help with fixing the car , but of course curiosity gets the better of one & she goes to investigate , and finds the house full of creepy mannequins and one rather animated one named ... davey . what follows is a rather creepy night of terror as one by one , they 're taken prisoner by davey , who says he 's slausen 's brother . one girl ( kidnapped earlier ) is treated to a plaster facial , which results in her death when it covers up her air supply . at any rate there 's somewhat of a twist to this and kind ( but weird ) mr. slausen is not exactly what he appears to be . a good , creepy late 70 's horror flick , and lots of mannequins make for a very creepy atmosphere . 7 out of 10 . +0 camp blood is an absolutely atrocious slasher film . we 're mixing friday the 13th with the blair witch project and adding .... a killer in a clown mask.

the budget for this film must have been very low , some of the actors played multiple parts and the camera used produced a picture equal to the colourised version of the original night of the living dead , which if anybody has watched that version will back me up that it is poor.

this film was just so bad . there is nothing in the film even worth watching . the very fact i watched this all the way through stunned me . just take my advice and do n't buy or rent this film . it is appalling . +1 shirley knight plays sara ravenna , a long island housewife who runs away from her marriage when she discovers she is pregnant . she plans to drive into america 's heartland and start anew . along the way she picks up a friendly hitchhiker ( james caan ) who calls himself ' killer . ' soon she discovers that the good natured ' killer ' is actually brain damaged , and by picking him up she has unknowingly taken on a huge responsibility . the two of them drive all the way to nebraska , where sara gets killer a job helping out at a roadside reptile farm . it is here that sara meets gordon , a local cop , and soon things go horribly wrong for everyone.

this is a powerful drama about people disconnected from society , alienated by the choices they make or by the limits imposed on them by others . even with such a low budget and a very freewheeling attitude , the film is able to capture everything that needs to be said through these clearly defined characters . shirley knight has a complex , diverging role and there are moments of some awe - inspiring acting by her . one of my favorites is when she is on the telephone calling her home to her worried husband the first time . it is such a tense scene on both ends , and in every small gesture and inflection of a word , so much about her is spoken with so little . then comes in the character of ' killer ' played by james caan . this character is unlike any i 've ever seen him play , and he performs wonderfully . it 's one of his best performances as he is very restrained and moving.

the way coppola develops the characters by using short , dream - like flashbacks is very clever , adding a fragmented kind of view onto it all . the quick flashbacks that are graphic and self - contained contrast well with the longer shots in some crucial scenes . also , because this film was shot on location all over the eastern u.s. , it offers an interesting , authentic look at america in the late 1960's.

i have n't seen many other films starring ms. knight , i 'm only familiar with her more recent work on television , usually playing a nagging mother in law or a dotty old woman . it was great seeing her so young , beautiful , and so wonderfully subtle in this movie . it 's also kind of a shame that james caan went on to be typecast as the ' tough guy ' for the rest of his career , because this film evidenced that he is capable of so much more than that . +0 just to save you the $ 3 , or whatever it costs to rent movies at your local video store , and the anguishing hour - and - however - long - this - movie - is here 's a simple plan . go over to a friend 's house , talk them into renting the pest for you , watch the first 30 seconds or so and then make up some excuse to leave . the opening sequence is really funny , definitely worth watching . unfortunately , the other 99 % of the movie is horrible . without the shower scene at the beginning this is one of the worst movies of all time . +1 ' in the line of fire ' is one of those hollywood films that shows up on tv quite a bit , but although i 've seen it a few times , i usually end up sitting through the whole thing again . why ? - it 's good ! clint eastwood is great as usual , and the character he plays is interesting and more fleshed out than usual . the character , secret service agent frank horrigan , is haunted by the fact that he was on the detail that failed to protect president kennedy in dallas , and now he 's forced to match wits with a professional assassin that is openly declaring that he will kill the president . however , the film does n't make him a depressed , brooding , and obsessed character . he 's charming and personable , and is realistic as a guy that has experienced a lot in life and is comfortable in his own skin . he 's even quite convincing when he flirts with the pretty younger agent played by rene russo . the killer , played by john malkovich at his best , is cerebral , deliberate , and enjoys playing high stakes games of life and death . he even goes by the name of another presidential assassin , john booth.

the film is consistently enjoyable , and it delivers all the goods - suspense , action , romance , and drama - all in their proper amounts . it 's a fun film that is really helped by the great actors in it ! +0 i was very willing to give rendition the benefit of the doubt when it came to all the negative press i had read concerning it . even about three - quarters of the way through , i still thought it was jumbled and a bit incoherent , but otherwise a solid tale reaching its conclusion . and then the bottom fell out . not wanting to necessarily ruin the film for anyone , but the conclusion flips everything you held to be fact about what and when things have been happening on its head—for no particular reason whatsoever except to maybe tell the world , yeah i 'm cool , and i know it . i love a good twist , i love a good ah - ha moment , but only when it is relevant to the story at hand . the complete misguidance on the part of the filmmakers serves no purpose on the overall tale , timelines did n't need to be parallel and they did n't need to be separated by a week . all the revelation did was destroy any merit i was about to give director gavin hood and screenwriter kelley sane , which may be a good thing , because looking back , it was n't really as solid a movie as i initially was going to blindly give it credit for.

it is an admirable thing to try and get the term rendition out into the film - going public 's consciousness , but it needed a story that delved deeper into the connotations and politics involved , rather than gloss over those issues for a tale of a woman in distress over her husband 's disappearance and the angst - filled rebellion of a daughter against her " interrogator " father . i understand that the bottom - line film attendee needs a human quality to grasp onto and for that reason i do n't fault it for going that route . my only qualm is that we do n't get enough of what the title says we should be getting . instead we are shown numerous plot lines , all confusingly brought to the forefront before being sent back into the nether regions of our consciousness , never to be returned to . so much is going on that you forget what you are supposed to be caring for , the wife ? the interrogator ? the cia agent ? the victim ? the senator ? the middle eastern daughter and her zealot boyfriend ? at the end i really just gave up and let the film take me where it would , which ended up being someone totally different than what it first laid out.

everything that occurs happens as the result of a bomb explosion . this bomb is at the center of every story thread and finally ends up being so innocuous that you ca n't believe how huge the waves it spread were . the old butterfly wings flapping quote is in full effect , because one boy 's mission for revenge ends up destroying the lives of so many . whether by death , destruction , physical and emotional abuse , or career suicide ; no one really escapes unscathed . however , at the end of the day , only the story about the man who has been excised to egypt for torture is really interesting . we are led to believe he is unequivocally innocent from the start , yet he is waterboarded , electrocuted , etc . in order to extract any information he might have . when those in power include a man with no compassion or reason to stop until something is spilled , ( whether true or not ) , and an observer without the guts to partake or stop it , the situation lends itself some intrigue as to how it could possibly end . the three actors involved all are the best parts of the film and prove once more that the movie should have concerned itself with them for the entirety.

i do n't want to belittle people like reese witherspoon , ( the victim 's wife ) , or her senate employed ex , played by peter sarsgaard , because they actual do a good job with what they are given . even meryl streep , her kooky accent , and alan arkin do n't detract too much . however , it is the trio of jake gyllenhaal 's cia agent , yigal naor 's interrogator , and omar metwally 's victim that truly shine . naor is brilliant as the egyptian trying to stay sharp as a razor during working hours yet compassionate and worry - filled as a father attempting to locate his daughter . this man is brutal , but he is because that is what his occupation calls for and why he is relied upon to find answers . metwally never gives a false second during the pain and suffering inflicted upon him . whether he is lying or truly knows nothing about the terrorist who has been calling his cell phone , we totally buy into his plight and desperately wait to see how the situation turns out . as for gyllenhaal , someone who seems to have one performance recycled throughout his career with varying degrees of success , he finds a part that suits him . the demons entering his soul throughout the ordeal he is forced to be a part of wear on his body and mind , causing both ambivalence and a need to intervene . the two feelings wrestle with each other until he makes a final decision , and his stoic , boyish demeanor suit that battle perfectly.

it is just too bad that the one plot line working never finds itself as the main focal point , despite being the namesake of the film . with all the clutter around the edges , we as an audience get bounced around too much , lulled into a sense of time and sequence , and then slapped in the face as it all unravels in more of a laugh on us then a , " bet you did n't see that coming . " i felt cheated and unfortunately that is the lasting effect i have taken from the movie . had it been more straightforward i might have enjoyed myself more , but as is , one can still take some positives from the severely flawed whole . +0 this film truly was poor . i went to the theatre expecting something exciting , and instead was afforded the opportunity to hone my " guess the next plot twist before it happens " skills . seriously , the plot was written with an extra thick crayon so everyone could see . nothing was truly shocking . in fact , even the gore was met with such complete suspension of belief that it really did n't add up to much.

the excessive wise cracking and cops talking shop at the crime scenes made it seem all the more phony . and the scene where lambert 's character is struggling with the clues and reaches his " investigative epiphany " goes to great lengths to indicate the level of intellect expected from the audience - little.

probably the most annoying aspect of the cinematography was the " x - files " treatment : every building in the film , whether it 's the precinct building , or a house at noon , or a hospital , was suffering from a lack of any discernible lighting ( not to mention a lack of ' patients ' in the case of the hospital ) . i do n't recall a single scene when someone flipped on a light switch . it sure would have been nice.

mr . lambert really is n't an oscar - grade actor , so i suppose you have to take this film for what it 's worth . in the end , i 've reached the conclusion that the only thing that would make this film seem more entertaining is to watch it after watching " the warriors " . otherwise , you 're left with an effort that is dull and unoriginal , and nowhere near the equal of films of the genre such as " silence of the lambs " . +0 i 'm rather surprised that anybody found this film touching or moving.

the basic premise of the film sounded to me like an excellent , if provocative , idea for a movie about a rare sort of relationship , but one ( if i can judge by the real - life examples i 've known ) is extremely deep and loving.

however , the film is cheaply scripted -- poorly scripted -- and although it has a number of very pretty - looking shots , i did n't find it to be anything special.

probably the biggest problem is that it is far too short and poorly - composed to give its audience time enough to invest , emotionally , in the characters : we do n't really care about any of them , and so their stresses and obstacles do n't really touch us.

i think a remake -- from the screenplay up -- with some character development by some really good writers -- could improve it greatly . it is instructive to compare this film with brokeback mountain , which the screen - writers took to far loftier levels than did the author of the screenplay -- screen - writers who were clearly conscious of how to write a classical tragedy , and carried out their task with care , planning , and superb craftsmanship ! however , people only seem to remake those films that do n't need it ! you 're not really missing anything if you skip this one : i found it very disappointing indeed , and it is only saved from getting a 1-star from me by virtue of the daring and gumption it took to make a film on this sensitive subject . +1 before i start my review here is a quick lesson in australian slang which may help you with viewing the movie and understanding some of the other reviews from australia and overseas.

in australian slang " thongs " are a pair of rubber sandals ( not to be confused with the same american word that pertains to butt revealing underwear ) , " stubbies " are a brand of australian short , a " stubby " is a small can sized bottle of beer , and a " stubby holder " is a foam insulator for a small bottle of beer.

if you love black comedies about smalltime criminals then you will love this movie , unfortunatley a lot of people on imdb with weak stomachs and no appreciation of dark humour have reviewed this movie which unfortunately makes this movie appear to be more mediocre than what it is . a lot of reviewers have also compared it to lock / stock and pulp fiction , while it is the same genre , it is a completely different and original style.

a lot of reviewers have also panned this movie for using heath ledger 's characters dead brother to open and guide the narrative for this movie , without watching the movie closely enough to realise that his brother was killed by the same villain that wishes to kill heaths character , this is explained midway through the movie but not clearly enough for most to understand.

this movie is also reminiscent of lock / stock and reservoir dogs in that it is the director / writers debut feature , and for a debut feature it rates as well as these two movies , as a matter of fact like lock / stock and reservoir dogs i rate this movie as a 10/10 for a director / writers debut , unfortunately unlike tarantino and ritchie jordan fails to live up to expectations in his subsequent movies like ned kelly.

this movie is one that you should definitely add to your dvd collection and is one that holds up to several viewings quite easily . +0 i tried to be patient and open - minded but found myself in a coma - like state . i wish i would have brought my duck and goose feather pillow ... i apologize to all of the great actors in this movie . maybe it takes a degree from mit to understand the importance of this movie . +0 the movie was pretty bad . it 's not so much a script problem . it 's just that the movie is really boring in terms of pacing . the movie just seems to plod along at a slow , agonizing rate . the story in san franpsycho is that there 's a serial killer on the loose who is killing morally corrupt individuals ( maybe i read too much into it , but hey , it 's my nature apparently ) after the san franpsycho kills a pair of people under the golden gate bridge we 're introduced to one of the main characters of the film : joe estevez ( brother of martin sheen ) as a curmudgeony cop named bill culp . bill is currently trying to hunt down the killer ( seriously he does n't have a name , he 's just the killer ) , and he is trying to coerce a local news reporter named rita to help him with his investigation , bill is the stereotypical hard - edged cop and he threatens rita to throw her in jail for obstruction of justice . anyway a few scenes pass by and suddenly rita finds a letter left by the psychopath ( he 's a cold blooded psychopath ! ) and she has a change of heart and tells bill and his partner joe about it and help them with the investigation.

the movie tries to be a taut murder - thriller , but sort of just fails at that . it 's much like the movie the black dahlia it tries to be tense but it just is unbelievable in terms of that . the movie tries to be serious throughout , but it has scenes like where the killer masturbates ( obviously a fan of gore porn what with lines like : " ooh blood on her " or something to that effect ) and joe estevez hitting the table going : " he 's a cold blooded murderer ! " i admit to chuckling more than once at the movie , even though i 'm sure it was intended to be a deadly serious movie.

one of the only positive points the movie has going for it is the fact that i did n't pay money to see it ( huzzah netflix ) . and it 's sad because i could see some good in their movies after watching the damned . sure the movie had its fair share of flaws , but it was enjoyable . sadly though san franpsycho has nothing going for it . granted it has an okay script it 's nothing too grand , but it could 've been interesting . instead what you get is a murder thriller that fails to thrill or have even vaguely enjoyable deaths . also the other reviews claim that the movie has " a great twist ending that 's shocking " apparently i was watching a different movie because by about the one hour mark i sort of figured out what was going to happen . the ending did n't shock me in the least bit . i would go on insulting this wreck of a movie but i do n't think i will . long story short this movie is a boring uninspired thriller ( i use that term loosely ) that fails to have the " hitchcockian thrills " that another reviewer claims to have a predictable ending , bland deaths , acting with all of the emotion of a plank of wood , and a decent soundtrack.

i'm sure others will try to defend this with the usual : it was a low budget movie , they did the best they could with such a low budget , and all that other nonsense . but when you get right down to it there was very little that they could 've really spent that budget on , there was very little special effects work , the soundtrack sounds like it might 've been recycled from hood of the living dead or the damned , and it 's the same damn crew from those two films . this movie really reminds me a lot of another low budget flick that was no good , and it was called mr. jingles , the two are about the same quality , they fail to deliver anything close to enjoyment and should fade quickly into obscurity . +1 the last of the sequels , not counting abbott and costello meet frankenstein which was more or less a spoof.this time count dracula ( john carridine)takes center stage seeking a cure for his vampirism from a kindly doc(onslow stevens).well good ole larry talbot(lon chaney jr)shows up also seeking a cure.the good doc succeeds in curing larry 's werewolfism , but dracula tricks the doc and ends up contaminating his blood and makes the good doc a crazed lunatic.oh and all this time big franky(glenn strange)lies on a table awaiting his electricity fix so he can wreak some havoc.this was kind of a short movie , around 70 minutes and some change , but the action is there , and the great actors are there as well . lionel atwill turns up as a police inspector , heres some trivia , lionel atwill appeared in son of frankenstein , ghost of frankenstein , frankenstein meets the wolf - man , and house of frankenstein . and then this one.if there was another in the series they may have added the creature from the black lagoon to the line up , i'm giving house of dracula 8 out of 10 . +1 the film tackles the here and now horror of " rendition " with a multi - cast trans - global account of all involved . no - one gets off lightly because we see the blindness of the players as they carve out their own slice of the worldwide game piling hatred and misery on their " enemies " and themselves in equal measure.

the interplay between the sympathetic senator 's aide ( played in scintillating style by peter sarsgaard ) and the real washington power - mongers is electrifying . meanwhile out in the field , new cia man ( jake gyllenhaal ) goes through a sea change in his attitude to the usa 's new found cosiness with torture . sudden though his rejection of what he initially tacitly condoned is , one has to ask why on earth would anyone who calls him or herself civilized stand and watch anyone be humiliated and abused in this way ? the film has few heroes - perhaps gyllenhaal 's flawed and vacillating cia man is the exception and a necessary indulgence to make the film offer a sliver of hope.

the sad fact of course is that this film is n't fiction at all , but a wake up call to those with a shred of decency left in them . the awful truth is that we in the uk and usa have lost the moral plot and this film shows how low we are prepared to go . all this in the name of freedom ! there 's a wonderful line in the script that says that torture is a sure way to swell the numbers of our enemies . this is already happening in real life and we should listen to the message that this film delivers and start using our might and money much more intelligently ! ! the message seems to be that any of us who claim that rendition , torture and the abuse of basic human rights are necessary to protect our way of life are as wrong - headed and stultifyingly stupid as the jihadists and suicide bombers.

all praise to the sensibilities of a talented south african director with a eye on the gross unfairness of how power is exercised , and a cast of principled mainstream actors from the us and beyond . oh , and by the way , the film has a sting in its tail with the ending a clever and thought provoking surprise ( which i wo n't give away).

i saw the film in an early london preview so it has not yet been widely written up but i 'm glad to say that the tide of less than glowing reviews seems to be turning . the bbc review has been very strongly in support and they ( and i ) suspect that much of the negative comments come from those who see the world through the simple specs of hollywood - where the good guys and the bad guys are cardboard cut - outs . hence the reason that many of the truly great films of the year are increasingly indie and/or non - us pix . +1 this is a film that every child should see before they grow and get distorted often passed down ideas from generation to generation of family . i grew up in two different places although only 20 miles apart . i went to school & had friends of every color creed & religion for the first 8 years of my life . then i moved to hillbilly country ( although not anymore ) where it was very unusual to even have one african - american kid in your class . my graduating class in high school had 2 or 3 african - amercians ( god why ca n't i just say black ? you can call me a honky or whitey or whatever ! all of this political correctness peeves me as it does most others ! ) anyway back to the film give this a try to see what happens when people get a distorted view or just what ignorance or a lack of understanding does to a culture or a country ! this is an excellent film everyone should see especially children . +1 the promise of martin donovan playing jesus was , quite honestly , enough to get me to see the film . definitely worthwhile ; clever and funny without overdoing it . the low - quality filming was probably an appropriate effect but ended up being a little too jarring , and the ending sounded more like a pbs program than hartley . still , too many memorable lines and great moments for me to judge it harshly . +1 i loved this movie from beginning to end . i am a musician and i let drugs get in the way of my some of the things i used to love(skateboarding , drawing ) but my friends were always there for me . music was like my rehab , life support , and my drug . it changed my life . i can totally relate to this movie and i wish there was more i could say . this movie left me speechless to be honest . i just saw it on the ifc channel . i usually hate having satellite but this was a perk of having satellite . the ifc channel shows some really great movies and without it i never would have found this movie . im not a big fan of the international films because i find that a lot of the do n't do a very good job on translating lines . i mean the obvious language barrier leaves you to just believe that s what they are saying but its not that big of a deal i guess . i almost never got to see this amazing movie . good thing i stayed up for it instead of going to bed .. well earlier than usual.lol.i hope you all enjoy the hell of this movie and love this movie just as much as i did . i wish i could type this all in caps but its again the rules i guess that s shouting but it would really show my excitement for the film . i give it three thumbs way up!

this movie blew me away ! +0 it 's hard to work up any enthusiasm for this awful cartoon - like epic that for some reason has become a cult classic . it certainly ca n't be because of the totally artificial look of the set designs or the limpid acting of an all - star cast . these days it 's shown much too frequently on fox movie channel or amc.

it pains me to report that veteran actors like walter pigeon and joan fontaine are even cast in this muddled science fiction travesty , none of which rings true . it 's like watching an expensive budget being spent on a saturday afternoon kiddie show full of cardboard characters and unconvincing dialog . it 's a comic book version of the jules verne novel.

the maturing fontaine was still attractive but wears a pained expression on her face , perhaps regretting that she had accepted the role of the psychiatrist before reading the script . she contributes absolutely nothing to her cardboard role but an imperial and uncomfortable presence and looks totally out of place most of the time . faring no better are robert sterling , barbara eden and -- most of all , peter lorre -- as well as frankie avalon , who gets to sing the title tune which -- it 's safe to say -- did not become anyone 's favorite title tune.

an awfully frustrating experience to sit through a film like this which wastes an attractive cast and is an insult to almost anyone 's intelligence . totally unconvincing from start to finish . the film , as well as the fantastic submarine , sinks to the bottom of the sea long before the fight with a rubber octopus brings the film to a dreary conclusion . +1 long ago and far away they knew how to make a musical and " cover girl " is no exception to the rule.

a story of a dancer in a nightclub who becomes a cover girl and famous . the old adage applies here- that happiness and fame always do n't mix.

the dance routines are marvelously choreographed . what dancing and chemistry between rita hayworth and gene kelly.

otto kruger is the older gentleman who discovers hayworth , when he sees her picture that shows a strong resemblance to the woman who left him at the aisle - hayworth 's grandmother maribel.

a jealous reaction by kelly drives rusty ( hayworth ) into the arms of broadway producer lee bowman.

the picture is basically history repeating itself at the end.

to add to the glory of this fine film , there is the always wise - cracking eve arden and the hilarious phil silvers , appropriately named genius in the film . +0 i 've just watched fingersmith , and i 'm stunned to see the 8/10 average rating for the show.

not only was the plot was difficult to follow , but it seems character development was randomly applied.

the actors were adequate , but in the process of attempting to create twists and turns , their characters are rendered entirely one dimensional . once this happens , the story really falls flat and becomes tedious.

and just in case anyone did n't see the predictable lesbian undertones from miles way , this is hammered home in the most banal terms at the end of the film.

the end scene is disappointing and phoned in , and anyone who sat back and went " ohhh , so they were carpet munchers all along ! " , must have been out for the evening.

two stars for the tonsil hockey in the earlier scene which was at least a bit raunchy , none for the rest of it ... +1 this 1955 producers ' showcase version of the musical peter pan with mary martin has the benefit of showcasing most of the original broadway cast , including kathleen nolan as wendy , who was more natural an actress than the girl they hired for the 1960 color televised play . it 's a shame that most people wo n't sit through anything black and white anymore because in many respects this earlier production - which does n't even show up in the imdb listings when you put " peter pan " into the search engine ! - is superior to the cutesier color version most people have watched . i obtained the original on disc and then did work on it to make it look and sound better digitally . now when i put the 1960 color version on it looks garish in comparison . i suspect mary martin herself no doubt preferred this original 1955 b / w producers ' showcase televised version.

as an added plus the disc i got also showed the original commercials and opening promo . how far away the 1950 's seem now - such an innocent time compared to today . i miss it . +0 " season on the brink " is one of my favorite books of all time - an insightful unflinching look at bob knight and his indiana hoosiers . and dennehy is one of my favorite supporting actors of all time . so i made a point of watching this adaptation.

it disappointed on every level . dennehy 's performance was less than inspired , and he seemed unprepared to play knight - like he had accepted the role just prior to filming . the rest of the cast is n't much better.

and it was obvious that this was espn 's first movie . it was poorly directed , poorly filmed , and the lack of budget was obvious anytime games were being simulated ( smaller gyms , empty seats , etc . ) skip this adaptation and read the book - it holds up well to this day ! +1 homegrown is one of those movies which sort of fell through the cracks , but deserves better . when i first saw it , i had a luke - warm reaction . but , over time , it 's really grown on me -- no pun intended ;-) . the more i see it , the more i appreciate it . the writing is top - notch , as is the acting . throw in a few surprising cameos and good direction , and you end up with a great little film.

it 's also good to finally see hank azaria get a chance to shine in a starring role . and thornton delivers his usual quality performance . even relative newcomer ryan phillippe delivers , playing a friendly innocent with wit and subtlety.

on a side note , homegrown is simply a " must see " if you 're a billy bob thornton fan . it appears stephen gyllenhaal was influenced by earlier thornton projects like one false move and sling blade ( though homegrown is certainly a lot more tongue - in - cheek than either ) . and thornton 's role as a character who is both sophisticated and down - to - earth is a perfect match for the actor . +0 the other is a supposed " horror " movie made during the 1970s . it is not to be confused with the similarly titled the others , which starred nicole kidman.

the plot is as follows - a woman with strange supernatural powers teaches her twin grandsons something referred to simply as " the game " . one of these twin boys - niles - is supposed to be " good " . the other one - holland - is supposed to be evil.

the idea sounds interesting enough as an abstract concept and the movie was adapted from a novel . i can only hope the novel was interesting as the movie was incredibly boring from beginning to end.

the execution of this movie is very much like a tv movie of the kind uk residents might see on channel 5 . in fact , this movie looks like it was made to be the daytime afternoon movie for this tv channel . a slight trimming to one or two scenes and this would be a u - rated movie of the kind disney produce . but even the youngest of children are more likely to be bored than scared by the other.

you do n't need to check out the director 's cv to realise horror is not his forte.

mr . mulligan relies heavily upon the characters to drive the story . this is obvious from the get - go . i have n't seen any of his other movies but to kill a mockingbird is a highly regarded crime movie on this site . unfortunately in the other , the characters are given too little to do and the plodding script ensures the movie never really takes off in the way one might expect.

the direction is as bland as you could possibly find . almost every single scene takes place in the daytime ! think about this - a scene shot in the open landscape in rural america during daytime with the camera focusing on vast area . does it sound scary or atmospheric ? believe me , it is n't . it comes across as something more akin to an episode of little house on the prairie than a horror movie . and yes , both the aforementioned tv series and the other were shot in california.

there is a noticeable absence of danger or malice that makes the whole exercise seem rather pointless.

the ending was clearly meant to be highly disturbing and perhaps influenced that of another movie from this time period . i wo n't reveal which movie but i 'll give 2 clues - a young boy was a main character and the movie is well - known . and i 'll add that the concept was used to much greater effect in the latter movie.

the acting is actually quite good and is the only reason why i have awarded 2 stars . the actors playing the twin boys , along with the actress playing the grandmother , all try hard with the poor material they are given.

diana muldaur is completely wasted in a thankless role as the mother of the twin boys . do not be fooled by her high billing on the cast list . she gets very little screen time and her presence just comes across as a ploy to cash - in on her long established tv career in order to help attract tv viewers.

i paid careful attention to the blurb on the back of the dvd cover ( of the region 2 version in the uk ) . comparisons were made to the exorcist , which i thought was a complete insult to that movie . there is no comparison . the exorcist had everything this movie should contain but does not - suspense , tension , tongue - in - cheek humour , highly disturbing content , great acting , superb characterisation and viewer involvement . ironically , the exorcist was made only a year later but in terms of style and execution seems like decades ahead of the bland drama known as the other . the other comes across as a work that would have seemed tame in the 1950s let alone the 1970s!

the 1970s was a great era for horror movies with classics such as the exorcist , the omen , the texas chainsaw massacre , the legend of hell house , salem 's lot to name just a few being produced . for this reason , the other proves an even greater disappointment.

if anyone finds the synopsis of the other interesting , they might want to read the book or do a little more research on what the book was about . i would advice everyone to skip the movie . +0 oh how awfully this movie is ! i do n't know if it is a horror film or a drama , cause the story and the both genres are not established very well ! the story is not moving , it is slow , boring , and sleepy from the beginning to end . this movie really bores me ! but i really liked the camera work , it is authentic , fresh and clear , the acting is great too , the little boy was the great performer in this movie , but it has n't made me to jump from my seat . but this movie makes me grab a pillow , lay on the bed and sleep until the credits roll ...

boring ! not worth watching ! i tell you , this movie sucked!

1/10 +1 this is an excellent tub - thumper from the war years.

john mills leads a fine cast of regular british b - movie stalwarts in a solo submarine attack upon a fictitious enemy battleship.

filmed in black and white , it 's well paced and also well placed considering that a war was going on at the time . if anything , it shows how seriously the authorities took positive propaganda.

the mission - side of the movie takes place in genuine submarines . things are cramped and claustrophobic . the actors look suitably grimy and sweaty without being too offensive to the heroic palate . other commentators have already drawn attention to the authentic little details like keeping the vessel trim and forgetting to read instruments , as well as the engine - room activities.

this probably is the first movie in which debris ( and a dead german ) is blown from the torpedo tube to fool an enemy destroyer . and it 's the only time i have seen part of the vessel exposed in a pretence of sinking - a high risk gamble if ever there was one.

i'm a little sceptical as to whether or not a submarine could punch its way through a wire - rope net . submerged speed was barely twice that of human walking speed , and the net would have had a great deal of ' give ' . also , the engineer was at the same work - station and operating the same levers both on the surface and submerged . this , too , seems implausible as either diesel or electric engines were used and they were in different sections of the ship - or so i 'm told.

there was a wee bit too much shore - side drama for my tastes . but then , this was a propaganda effort , and clearly contained a subtle message for civilians to mind their behaviour as it could adversely affect service morale and therefor the war effort.

these niggles aside , it 's a pretty entertaining little adventure . nowadays movies of such vintage tend to be screened in the afternoon , whilst far more modern and inferior movies enjoy prime - time . but then ; it 's no longer politically - correct to mention the war in the presence of our european friends ( too many of them have guilty consciences ) , or our own left - wing fascists ( non of whom have ever fought for the freedoms they now take for granted).

as a submarine movie it is eminently collectible . better than ' the enemy below ' , i think , though less demonstrative . not so authentic as ' das boot ' by any means , but not so gross either . +1 i love the premise , but it 's replay value is only for certain parts(the opening scene of course ) . some characters are a bit outrageous , but they are entertaining none the less . i think the ballping sh - t was pushing it . i know it was to show that nick and casey were living foul out in la and to show why casey quit the lifestyle , i just think that the flashback 's story could have been better . also the jamaican guy rapping on the phone is clever and entertaining , but once again i think the story was told sloppy . it really seems unbelievable . i actually believe swordfish ( the other movie woods has written ) more than some of the parts in thursday because the government keeps sh - t a secret all the time , and has organizations set up that the public will never know about.

thursday is the best quentinesque movie i 've seen . i think woods is imaginative , clever and has witt ; however , his work needs more maturation to even to get to the natural born killer script ( not stone 's movie ) level . how old is he anyway ? +1 one of the more obscure of anthony mann 's westerns , the last frontier was also his only cavalry western ( aside from one brief episode in winchester ' 73 ) , though naturally he focuses on the outsiders and internal conflicts rather than offering a fordian celebration of comradeship and shared ideals . set not in his beloved high country but in the foothills and forests , it 's a much more cynical view of life of the frontier , in many ways his fort apache without the need to preserve the legend : this outpost is made up of misfits , failures , cowards and the odd competent officer ignored by his superiors , badly led while the civil war takes priority and all the best the army has to offer.

victor mature and james whitmore are the free trappers who find civilisation creeping up on them when they are relieved of their pelts and packhorses by a local tribe aggrieved by the incursion of the cavalry into their territory . rather than blame the indians for their losses they decide it 's the army 's fault for building the fort and decide to demand compensation from them , ending up joining their ranks as scouts instead . but despite the best efforts of guy madison 's amiable and competent acting commander to bring mature into the 19th century and make him fit to wear the uniform , the arrival of robert preston 's humiliated colonel eager to revenge himself on the tribe that drove him out of his own outpost – and mature 's clumsy infatuation with the colonel 's wife ( anne bancroft , too much of a blank slate here to do much with the role of a woman who 's tired of being saved by men who think they know what 's best for her ) – soon drive matters into much darker territory . it 's not long before some of the soldiers are busily planning on killing each other , both sides trying to goad their subordinates into doing the deed for them : little wonder that at one point mature throws away the bluecoat he has long coveted in disgust , screaming " i would have died for this , but it 's nothing but a dirty filthy blue rag ! " the stallone of his day , mature was one of those actors who could surprise you with the odd excellent performance here and there when matched with the right part and the right director . this is not one of his better days despite having his most complex part , perversely enough as a simple man – well - meaning but drunk , violent , uneducated and with a unsubtle , almost childlike lust for life , the part seems designed with burt lancaster in mind , with some striking similarities to his character in the kentuckian . but robert preston 's ahab - like colonel is clearly the best role , determined to resurrect the career he destroyed in a single disastrously suicidal civil war engagement by launching another pointless suicidal campaign against the tribe that added another humiliation to the list that keeps him out of sight and out of mind of the promotion board . in his obsession to redeem his career he moves further away from any hope of moral redemption , driven as much by his sense of shame at his wife 's sympathy as by the promotion of former comrades he regards as his inferiors . he 's beyond salvation , but there 's still a recognisable human being in there and one not entirely without a sense of integrity – he genuinely admires madison 's courage in making a futile attempt to get preston 's orders countermanded by their superiors – fatally skewed though it is.

like its hero , the film is a little rough around the edges ( and boasts one of the most surreal and jaunty title songs of any western ) , but that only tends to make it more interesting , and there are plenty of mann 's typically elegant camera moves and plays on perspective , while the frontier setting is convincingly harsh and primitive . unfortunately the deficiencies of the early cinemascope lenses are very apparent in columbia 's dvd , with the image often dark ( 2.55:1 cinemascope required a huge amount of additional lighting and early scope films show a lot of trial - and - error ) and grainy . +0 blind date ( columbia pictures , 1934 ) , was a decent film , but i have a few issues with this film . first of all , i do n't fault the actors in this film at all , but more or less , i have a problem with the script . also , i understand that this film was made in the 1930 's and people were looking to escape reality , but the script made ann sothern 's character look weak . she kept going back and forth between suitors and i felt as though she should have stayed with paul kelly 's character in the end . he truly did care about her and her family and would have done anything for her and he did by giving her up in the end to fickle neil hamilton who in my opinion was only out for a good time . paul kelly 's character , although a workaholic was a man of integrity and truly loved kitty ( ann sothern ) as opposed to neil hamilton , while he did like her a lot , i did n't see the depth of love that he had for her character . the production values were great , but the script could have used a little work . +0 irvine welsh 's follow up to trainspotting hits the screen as three short stories set in edinburgh , all with a few of welsh 's trade marks , drug culture , depression , the working class and hibernian football club . uneasy to watch in places , it is no less than very well written , 2 of the stories having a darkly comic twist to them while the 2nd story a serious ( and shockingly realistic ) plot to it . will not appeal to most , including myself to a point , but will no doubt adopt a cult following . +0 as main " character " lillith silver likes to point out - " you know f**k all about vampires " . it is evident that this statement was aimed at the cast and crew , who create an exceedingly bad image of everyone 's favourite bloodsucking undead . according to the misguided director , vampires are all caked in white foundation and crammed into latex similar to a piece of meat in shrink wrap . with fangs resembling bannana 's and a bad case of asthma our main character lillith creates a slapstick caricature of the " modern day " vampire.

the plot consists of a 9 year old boys ' playstation collection jotted down on a piece of paper , then blended together to concoct this horrible tale . lillith our pale protagonist is a vampire bounty hunter who makes a living from snubbing out members of everyone 's favourite cult , the illuminati ! rather than incorporate the classic assassin methodology of stealth and precision however , lillith waltzes in through an open window and then proceeds to chomp her targets necks before shooting them point blank with a handgun ( that apparently does n't leave bullet holes thanks to the shoddy continuity ) . pc plod is then assigned to solve the murders , he comes to the grizzly , yet strikingly obvious conclusion that lillith is actually a vampire and proceeds to hunt her down armed with the usual vampire dispatching tools including a cross , garlic and a sharpened piece of wood . meanwhile , lillith , who has gotten into the habit of bonking her boss , is distraught when an old nemesis kidknaps him and demands a ransom to be delivered personally . as you may imagine , this does n't go according to plan . i 'm not going to put myself through the pain of the following scenes however , so i 'll skip to the end . lillith and her " nemesis " have a showdown , and after lillith obtains victory it is then revealed , with all the extravagance of someone being told they have cancer , that the two are century old lovers and the whole plot was some kind of twisted game . yes , that kick in the balls was the actual ending of the film . in my eyes , this joke of a conclusion is the icing on the latex clad cake , and seals this film in the " never ever watch this " vault.

as far as cinematic techniques go , the film merely does n't bother creating any style . the director tries to rescue his disasterpiece from the brink , by throwing in some close ups and a few multi - angular shots , this however is not the saving grace the film needed.

you may be screaming " but this is a b movie , its meant to be crap ! " . i however do not take pity . i have seen some cracking b movies , such as evil dead 2 , and jesus christ vampire hunter , and therefore this disgrace can not hide behind excuses . the budget was low , this is obvious by the lack of location and good actors . maybe however if the director was more creative and spent less money on paying for makeup and fake blood , he could have done something decent with this sickening attempt . the seedy sex scenes are not beneficial in any way and merely served to give me a few chuckles at the obscene acting skills throughout . half the budget must have been paid to the female cast merely for getting their tops off for lesbian romps . if i wanted to watch a vampire porno , i would have bought muffy the vampire layer.

the cast are bad , the story is worse and the effects are cripplingly fake . this film had some potential , however its seedy undertone and embarrassing portrayal of a classic horror character merely served to be its downfall.

if you want a laugh with a few friends , i recommend you watch this mockery . if you are looking for a more serious vampire action flick , try blade or underworld to sooth your raging bloodlust . +1 well what do you know , i was painting my house today and an elton john song came on the radio , which immediately took me back to this movie which i saw in 1971 . so long ago and so far away . ten years later i hitched hiked through the country side of france , and i sure would have been keen to see michelle . the film is probably not very sophisticated by todays standards , more 's the pity , but it seemed rather racy back then . a few years later a sequel was made with michelle living in a high rise in paris and paul coming back to meet her , just like life they had moved on , the film was very downbeat . still the original was fab , and if you can get a copy go rent it , just remember to give it its ' due and treat it gently . i note americans can be rather prudish , so take note , contains scenes and themes possibly upsetting to middle america . +1 an interesting pairing of stories , this little flick manages to bring together seemingly different characters and story lines all in the backdrop of wwii and succeeds in tying them together without losing the audience . i was impressed by the depth portrayed by the different characters and also by how much i really felt i understood them and their motivations , even though the time spent on the development of each character was very limited . the outstanding acting abilities of the individuals involved with this picture are easily noted . a fun , stylized movie with a slew of comic moments and a bunch more head shaking events.

7/10 +0 this movie made me laugh so much . it was a bloody joke to tell you the truth . so unbelievable and the worst plot ever . the acting as well was bad . i do n't how come so many popular bollywood actors and actresses took on to do this movie . the script must have been somewhat of a joke . the visual effects in this movie was excrutiatingly painful to watch . i believe that a kindergarten kid could have done a better job of the visual effect and a monkey could have done a better job of coming up with a plot.

the plot has numerous attempts at copying major hollywood movies like the terminator but it fails miserably . i laughed my head off seeing this movie . a total disaster in indian cinema history ! +0 after looking for this bruceploitation for months , and then accidentally buying it cheap , it was disappointing . i heard about it on a dvd - r site , and it sounded crazy.

but no , what i got was a pretty bad martial arts movie . the kung fu - ing was n't too bad , but the rest of the movie was pretty awful , and made the movie seem really , really long , much longer then it 's 85 minute runtime.

on a positive note , the ape was funny for a couple of seconds ( especially when i think they took the only close up of it 's face from another movie ) , and the black guy who pops up half way through was funny because of the one line he said , which singlehandedly made all black people look like complete simpletons.

but it was n't enough , sadly.

4/10 +0 if you 've seen atlantis 1 , then you 'd know that what made that film truly great was brilliant animation and a good script . this movie was so sloppily drawn and animated . the story is also dopey . i was so disappointed in this half - baked drivel that i could n't make it past the first hour , and man did i try ! the one thing this film had was that it expanded the " mole " character , making him both more sympathetic and three dimensional . take it from me , judge this junk from the cover on the video box . the cover is poorly drawn disney schlock , clearly grabbing for an easy buck from an unsuspecting parent . if this was a stand alone flick , it would n't be so bad , but riding on the coattails of a brilliant piece like atlantis makes it utterly inexcuseable . +0 i just get exited when the movie start(because i saw juliette lewis name on the screen).the script seemed very complicated first but as the movie continued , it became understandably clear.i concentrated well on it but the result was disappointing.because the object of sex used too much on the film unnecessarily and it seemed to me that the director ignore ones who has tendency upon opposite sex.in my opinion the well prepared script could n't be embodied.as we look at the cast , the movie promises something in the beginning or i just expected too much ... and finally the end ... the end is so so much mediocre that i would n't expect.the main character cassandra wants to give message about having baby and how a baby can change a life , in my opinion that scene is the real disaster for the film . all in all the characters are funny and acted beautifully.but only cast ca n't save a movie . +0 poor second - string feature from universal pictures about a mama 's boy movie actor doing criminal investigation work for the military , fending off the advances of the brash young woman he 's been assigned to romance . robert montgomery directed and stars in this adaptation of the short story " come be my love " , and his acting performances of this era are unrelievedly lazy . the plot is sappy , predictable stuff , and writer robert carson has given all the really funny lines ( as usual for films of this period ) to the feisty black maid . it 's always nice to see ann blyth and jane cowl in support , but they ca n't do much with this hokey material . * from * * * * +0 each year the company called nu produces couple of " action packed " , " full of suspense " movies . this little nugget , called shadowcaster iii(until i visited this site i was n't avare this is a whole trilogy ) , is a great example of the good job the company is doing . frank zagarino is as mean as always and does a great job as almost undestructable ( ? ) , schizophrenic ( ? ? ) android . i wo n't waste any more words since i do n't want to reveal the terrific plot and ruin you a couple of great laughs.

rating 2/10 ( revard for those hard working tehnicians . man , putting together this kind of rubbish must be nervewracking . ) +0 look , this film is terrible ... the " plot " involves twins who are neglected by their self - absorbed parents , and left in the care of a succession of nannies and babysitters , all of whom the children drive away by being completely obnoxious . eventually the kids engineer ex - convict beverly d'angelo to be their new nanny , do you care why ? and d'angelo watches a tv talk show about selling children and decides she will try to sell the twins ... and , well , oh , you do n't want to know . it 's all very unpleasant , and not at all funny . in fact the announcer slated this film before it came on the tv channel i was watching ! just do n't bother wasting a single moment of your life on this pile of complete trash , y'hear ? +1 very sadly , i can relate to this movie , as i 'm 17 , and have yet to be kissed , so i really feel for josie . it 's been a while since seeing this film , but to write this review i re - watched it , and remembered everything i loved about it.

drew barrymore is a great actress , and this role suited her really well at the time . the chemistry between sam and josie was really good , and michael vartan was an excellent actor in this.

i loved the storyline too - as i said up there , i could relate , and it 's rare you find a film you can completely relate to.

all over - i loved it . 7/10 +0 a party - hardy frat boy 's sister is brutally murdered by a street gang , sending the young man into a sudden psychotic rampage . he and his buddies massacre half the city to bring his sister back to life.

savage streets was released a year after this film , and was more entertaining . linnea quigley , who has a costarring role in this film as the sexy ( and briefly nude ) girlfriend of one of the guys , also starred in savage streets.

this film is subpar , though it delivers enough escapist entertainment and gratuitous nudity to please its intended audience ( me).

mpaa : rated r for strong violence , nudity , language , and some sexuality . +1 five fingers of death : although previous shaw martial arts epics had shown the influence of the american cowboy genre , none had paid such open tribute to it as this one , especially in the saloon fight scene . and though shaw bros. films had borrowed from the japanese chambara ( swordfight ) genre before , none had done so with such success as this one . i suppose some of this had to do with the fact that the director originated from korea , and thus brought a non - chinese perspective to such borrowings , which certainly raises some interesting questions about culture ; but in any event , this film presented real innovations in technology and technique in hong kong action films . for the first time in hong kong , the camera was given access to the whole of any given set , which meant shots from many different angles , such as the low - angle interior shot showing the ceiling of a room ( the original american innovation of which usually credited to john ford ) , or the high angle long shot that allowed visualization of a large ground area , or the frontal tracking shot.

it is true that this was not the first hand - to - hand combat film of real cinematic substance - that remains wang yu 's ' chinese boxer ' ; but on a commercial level , shaw bros. were right to choose ' five fingers ' as their first major release to the west because , one might say , it was the ' least chinese ' of their action films , that is , the least dependent on purely chinese theater traditions . although this made no impression on the american critics at the time ( who universally trashed the picture ) , it was n't lost on american audiences , especially among african americans , whose culture had always been - by necessity - an eclectic patchwork of borrowed elements and innovation . in ' five fingers ' they were given the opportunity to discover the core of the story , in the earnest young man forced to make the extra effort to overcome social barriers and betrayal in order to have his merit recognized . this seems to be an issue universal to modernity , but each culture has its own way of expressing and resolving it ; ' five fingers ' presented it in a way many americans could relate to as well as chinese.

so is the film now only of historical value ? certainly not . for one thing this issue has n't gone away . secondly , some of the innovations leave much of the film looking as fresh today as it did on first release . also the action is well - staged , and the performances , though a little too earnest , are crisp . the film is a might over - long , but the story does cover a lot of ground . and there are marvelous set - pieces through - out , such as the saloon confrontation , the fight on the road to the contest , the odd double finale.

definitely looks better on a theater screen , but still impressive for home viewing : recommended . +0 preposterous twaddle executed in a bewilderingly amateurish and inept way -- or perhaps several since the incredible lack of continuity , tone , realism , plausibility , suspense , and much more combine with walter pidgeon 's bovine attempts at charm to produce a cinema curiosity to rank with some of fritz lang 's other stupendous failures . ( i thought the german ambassador was actually played by lang but apparently not -- they could have been twins . ) if you can not predict the ending from several timezones away , you are not actually alive.

i was eagerly awaiting this dvd and was totally surprised and disappointed by such dire crap ( even with george sanders and john carradine -- maybe i can wash my mind out by watching viaggio in italia instead and for the umpteenth time).

anyone want a dvd used once ? ( there may be a movie to be made about the making of this atrocious film and how so many talented people could be wasted so completely . ) +1 maybe i 'm reading into this too much , but i wonder how much of a hand hongsheng had in developing the film . i mean , when a story is told casting the main character as himself , i would think he would be a heavy hand in writing , documenting , etc . and that would make it a little biased.

but ... his family and friends also may have had a hand in getting the actual details about hongsheng 's life . i think the best view would have been told from hongsheng 's family and friends ' perspectives . they saw his transformation and were n't so messed up on drugs that they remember everything.

as for hongsheng being full of himself , the consistencies of the jesus christ pose make him appear as a martyr who sacrificed his life ( metaphorically , of course , he 's obviously still alive as he was cast as himself ) for his family 's happiness . huh?

the viewer sees him at his lowest points while still maintaining a superiority complex . he lies on the grass coming down from ( during ? ) a high by himself and with his father , he contemplates life and has visions of dragons at his window , he celebrates his freedom on a bicycle all while outstretching his arms , his head cocked to the side.

it 's fabulous that he 's off of drugs now , but he 's no hero . he went from a high point in his career in acting to his most vulnerable point while on drugs to come back somewhere in the middle.

this same device is used in ted demme 's " blow " where the audience empathizes with the main character who is shown as a flawed hero.

however , " quitting " ( " zuotian " ) is a film that is recommended , mostly for its haunting soundtrack , superb acting , and landscapes . but , the best part is the feeling that one gets when what we presume to be the house of jia hongsheng is actually a stage setting for a play . it makes the viewer feel as if hongsheng 's life was merely a play told in many difficult parts . +1 you got to love this movie ! i mean , what other swedish splatter movie could be so evil , bizarre and totally cruel ... the whole movie is stuffed with some kind of weird humor , like : the old cencoreguy just blows his head off and the boss just wipes the blood off his glasses and says with a mean voice : - your fired ! ! ! wouppie ! ! ! +1 i have to say that some of the other reviews of this film i have read show very little understanding of it or the original tv series it stemmed from . dad 's army was a sitcom and therefore had humour and so is bound to have put a smile on the face of the dire situation . however the series carried very many serious messages such as the episode ' branded ' about the bigotry and ignorance that was attached to conscientious objectors . the film was faithful to the series and was simply like an extended episode . so i 'm afraid the reviewer who claimed that columbia improved the humour was quite wrong and let 's face it - the bbc sitcoms of this period beat anything that came out of america hands down . also comments referring to propaganda were also way off the mark . the homeguard were people considered unfit for frontline service who still wished to serve . they were very brave men who knew they were sentenced to death as soon as they signed up as hitler announced that anyone who did so would be executed if and when britain was invaded . thank you for allowing me the opportunity to set the record straight as it is always good to actually speak and comment on what has been seen rather making it up as you go along i find . +1 kramer vs. kramer is one film to hold on too and not forget . it is n't one of the most popular films ever made and is certainly one of the weakest best picture films , but it does not mean it still is n't important . i thought the movie was well done and made you just want to watch more and more of it . the performances were the best positive for the film and dustin hoffman played one of his best roles he 's ever done as the lonely workaholic who has to take care of his son , as his wife separates from him . billy , who is hoffman 's son , played another great performance along with meryl streep , playing the depressed mother of billy . kramer vs. kramer is not one of the greatest films and is not a perfect 10 , but it succeeds in making the film worth watching and worth caring about it . certainly , one of hoffman 's best films he 's ever done . i highly recommend it.

hedeen 's outlook : 9/10 * * * + a- +1 i love dogs , and the most interesting character in this movie is a golden retriever . he is smarter , better looking and more interesting than any of the human characters . like many other contributors i have not read the book but i doubt that having done so would change my opinion of the movie . it is predictable from the first five minutes on . no surprises . mad scientists create a monster that gets loose and a teen age boy and his wonder dog collaborate to destroy it . all in all the movie is a dog . but as i said , i love dogs and will therefore give this movie a 7/10 rating . watch it if it comes on tv , rent it if you are bored and nothing else catches your eye , but do n't buy it unless it is on special . +0 after a very scary , crude opening which gives you that creepy " chainsaw massacre "- feeling , everything falls apart.

spoiler alert : as soon as the two fbi - officers start jabbing , you know they are the real killers . anyone who have seen enough of these " fooled - ya "- movies can figure this out.

this movie is mader with one thing in mind : to depict brutal murders . why , then , is not the little girl tortured and murdered as well ? will this be next for us movie - goers ? the torture and abuse of children ? what s wrong with you people ? lynch is truly has a disgusting , ugly mind . +0 terrible . the only way i could even begin to consider it funny is if it made fun of itself . " amazing . it 's about an ass that fights crime . and he drinks / smokes ! how very funny ! it 's funny because where most people put things in their mouth , he puts them in himself ! and now he 's getting sexual service from some lady ! this show is so great ! " that is what i would have to say if i liked the show , though i 'm sure you can see the obvious sarcasm . i 've noticed some people have been comparing this show to 12 oz . mouse and squid billies . why would you even try ? there 's nothing to compare . the other two shows actually have some decent character development . in conclusion , i hate assy mcgee . i twinge at the name of it . +1 this show was a really good one in many ways , although certainly an atypical western with the hero ( ? ) riding around on a motorcycle rather than a horse , due to the 1914 setting , very " late " for a western , which tend usually to be set between 1866 and 1890 . i remember some controversy about its cancellation at the time but did n't really watch it during its time on nbc . when i came to see it and love it was a decade later when i was in the army stationed in germany and it was shown every week from the beginning on armed forces television . by then , margot kidder was famous as lois lane but i 'll also always think of her as nichols ' girlfriend . in a lot of ways , nichols was a lot like maverick ; both were much more attracted to getting rich with little effort than they were fighting . it was in the little tv magazine that they distributed at the px ( not really an authorized edition of " tv guide " but made to resemble it as closely as possible without getting into copyright trouble ) that i first learned the real story behind the cancellation . i really wonder what the next season with the more violent twin would have been like if they had really made it as planned . of course , by the time this show was made the " western era " of tv had been in decline for around a decade ; someday i hope to be able to write that the " reality era " has been in decline for that long ! while " gunsmoke " and " bonanza " were still running , they were both nearing their ends and it had been years since a new western had really caught on ; i think that this trend did a lot to hold " nichols " back , and was the main reason that nbc executives doubted that it would ever find a large audience but to me , a good western , unlike a show set in contemporary times , is somewhat timeless , as are other " period " shows ; changing fashions and the like do nothing to make them look any more " dated " than they were supposed to be , and i think that watching this show , 10 years after it was produced , is really what brought this point home to me . also , this show is an early pairing of garner and stuart margolin , who is really one of the all - time great sidekicks , and not just in westerns . +0 i had to watch this movie with my 5-year - old . he did n't laugh once during the entire movie ... and he loves dogs and will laugh at nearly anything ! this movie was horrible from all aspects : poor script ( even accounting for a children 's g - rated movie ) , poor production ( the jittery camera shots made me feel nauseous for the first ten minutes ) , poor acting ( perhaps they were " directed " to act cartoonish ) , and even poor sound quality ( there are parts where the audio level seems fine , then you ca n't hear what the next actor is saying ) . i 'm willing to put up with quite a lot when it comes to watching a child 's movie , but this was worse than having a stick in my eye . i also did n't like being battered over the head with the god - heaven - belief thing . in all , it was the biggest waste of 90 minutes in my life ... and i 've done some serious time - wasting in my day ! +1 spending an hour seeing this brilliant dan finnerty and his " dan band " perform their special on bravo is the most enjoyable hour i 've ever spent watching tv . this young man ( dan ) is such an incredible talent , as a singer , performer and even dancer . he can go from the cheesiest of ballad pop songs , all of which have only been sung by women , to hip - hop , rock , also songs written for women .. this guy can do anything . i 've seen him live at least 11 times , so i was not expecting just how well that his show would adapt to a television or film format , but all reservations went away instantly when the show started because of dan 's overwhelming star quality . do yourself a favor and watch this , or better yet , buy it . +1 pink flamingos is a movie no word can explain . it was just as good i thought . it expands films . starting with a " multiple " beginning , and ending with a shocking , but clever ending , pink flamingos is one of the best films of the year . do n't miss this opportunity to see a great film . rent it on video or see it at a late midnight showing like i did . but just see it . +0 i saw this film in the movie theater . i was taking classes at the second city chicago and of course the buzz of this movie was intense . it is a woodward film about one of second city 's native sons.

everyone knew about johns history . everyone knew how he died . some even knew that the lore did not make him out to be particularly friendly towards women in improv or comedy.

but hey . the man led his life and he was loved intensely by the people who were in his world , and lore also states that he treated all of his close friends with love and respect.

this movie . well . forget the idea of poor michael chilklis ( who is a really great actor ) being in a really astonishingly bad film , and really only relegated to doing an impersonation of the man.

forget the idea that they could not get the rights to any of belushi 's work ... and all the snl scenes never happened that they portrayed in the movie.

screw the idea that half of the historical information in the film did not even follow bob woodwards work . kinda saying " okay ... we are about to mess with belushi ... now lets go after woodward too ... " they also decided to take the premise of it 's a wonderful life and turn it into it 's a horrible life on crack.

is he a guardian angel or the devil ? is the pinball machine the devil 's assistant electronic device ... how many different endings can you tack onto to a movie ? it is one of those movies after it is over ... you look at the person you are with and in stunned disbelief go " what the hell was that ? ! " in some circles this movie has become a kinda cult classic . but for good reason.

a good cult classic you sit around the screen and make fun of ( or throw out snappy one liners ) to the screen . a cult film is never good . and most people would never watch them in any serious context.

if you want to watch some classic bad late 80 's fair stoned ? rent wired . if you want to know about john belushi ... you can get more information off of the walls of second city chicago than this movie . +0 if ever there was a film that can be considered a missed opportunity then that film is galaxina . what could possibly be wrong in basing a sci - fi film around a sexy statuesque female android ? surely such a film could never be a complete waste of time ? well , sadly this movie is pretty close to useless . there are a number of faults with this production it has to be said , however , there are two basic problems that entirely destroy the whole enterprise . firstly , this is a comedy with no funny bits at all , or at the very least a film where the potentially amusing aspects are presented in an incredibly unamusing way . secondly , the title character is woefully underused . this may be because dorothy stratten was not really an actress but if so it was a terrible decision as she is still easily the best thing about the film . i do n't think she really needed to be a great thespian to pull off the role of a sexy android to be perfectly honest . anyway , what we are left with is a whole lot of mind - numbing comedy relief , which often is made up of hopeless spoof - type gags of the big sci - fi hits of the time such as alien , star wars and 2001 . it 's badly written and not funny at all , and it does n't even really have a plot to propel things along . the story basically is about a police space - cruiser that is sent to get a rock . that 's it ! steven spielberg once said that a high - concept movie was one whose plot line could be described in one sentence . what he did n't define was what you call a movie that can be described in less than a sentence - pointless maybe?

this seemed like a sure - fire winner to me but it failed miserably . it seems to have been an attempt to spoof star wars and combine it with adult comedy situations . all it does actually achieve is to leave you cold and a little irritated that it was n't close to what it should 've been . a barbarella for the 80 's this ain't.

shortly after this film was finished dorothy stratten was murdered in an appallingly violent and horrific way . and for that reason galaxina has derived a considerable amount of it 's cult interest . i just think it 's a great shame that dorothy did n't have a better film left to immortalise her . +1 i saw heaven 's gate on its opening week nearly twenty years ago . tickets were sold in advance based on the great anticipation of seeing cimino 's long in the making follow up to his 1978 masterpiece " the deerhunter . " the reviews came in and critics trashed the film with vehemence . an influential new york film critic led the way and most critics followed suit , and the 3hr . 40-min . film was pulled from distribution . united artists had cimino shorten the film by about an hour and it was re - released many months later to equally horrible reviews and to dismal business . the film at that time cost about 40 million dollars ( now considered low budget ) making it one of the most expensive in history and cimino had free rein on the project with endless retakes despite it being only his third film . " the deerhunter " had also received a negative backlash based on a perceived political ideology , which was not popular . i mention all this to present a possible bias building up against cimino . at the time i thought the film was very good and when i saw the shorter version it was still very good only less so . the film showed up again in a museum in the early 1990 's . they were supposed to show the long version but they could not find an existing print . nevertheless , seeing the film years later i now thought heaven 's gate was a masterpiece . finally , the long version started to appear in a few select cities , i got to see it recently and it was well worth the wait . heaven 's gate begins with the graduation ceremony at harvard university . two of the graduates are kris kristofferson and john hurt and we some of the flaws in their characters early on . despite the mandate joseph cotton gives in his speech to the graduating class to use their education to enlighten and improve their country , many of the graduates behave as if they are part of an elite country club . the film flashes ahead 20 years to johnson county in wyoming . a cattle company called " the stockholders association " has hired poor people to shoot 125 poor immigrants claiming they are cattle thieves . kristofferson sides with the immigrants while john hurt is part of the association . although hurt is totally against this insane action he is too ineffectual a character to do anything about it . a massacre takes place but the immigrants do well in defending themselves . a united states cavalry comes to the rescue of the association to allegedly arrest them after most of the damage has been done when in fact they sanctioned the mass killing . kristofferson also suffers a great personal loss and the film ends with him years later as part of the elite class of his harvard days married , bored , on a yacht , living but dead on the inside.

this is a very complex film which is brilliant in every department such as it 's themes , structure , direction , cinematography , writing , music , editing , set designs , and acting . kristofferson , walken , hurt , huppert , dourif , bridges , waterston , and cotton are all excellent portraying very complex characters . some of the major complaints i read about this film state that is ugly to look at , incoherent , too long , that the characters make no sense and that the words are often unintelligible . in its defense , heaven 's gate has the look of photographs of that period just as " mccabe & mrs. miller " did . some of the scenes are smoky looking to suggest the industrial revolution or sometimes horses , wagons , people are passing by from all sides creating a sense of reality.(the critic who called it one of the ugliest movies ever made likes to use his thumbs a lot . ) but in spite of all that , the composition of each frame and the cinematography are impeccable . the film makes a great deal of sense if you pay attention to it . everything is not spelled out for the viewer and one has to observe closely to understand the motivations of the characters or its themes . as to its length , it is a beautifully structured piece , at times moving , poetic , exhilarating , or devastating with virtually one great scene following another . at times some of the words are unintelligible especially in some of the scenes bustling with activity . but one could understand such a cinematic film as this through its use of film language , the glances between characters or their actions . one day soon this film should be re - released in its full length so that people and critics could give it a second chance . do not let michael cimino become another orson welles- under appreciated in his lifetime and not able to make the kinds of great films he is capable of making . +1 from the opening sequence , filled with black and white shots reminiscent of gordan parks photos , this film draws the viewer into a feeling of artistic renaissance . the backdrop of a poetry cafe aptly named , " the sanctuary , " provides just that . the jazz that permeates the film and the cinematography will seduce you.

this story of love actually allows love to grow , to evolve , and ultimately mature , a rarity in hollywood . everyone can identify with some stage of their journey towards each other . this tale of two artist that just ca n't quite get it together sparked a debate amongst its viewers . should she have gone away ? should he have stopped her ? who knows ... ?

starring larenz tate(darius lovehall ) , and nia long(nina moseley ) with a scene stealing performance by isiah washington(savon ) and lisa nicole carson(josie nichols ) as the ultimate best friend , this film is a romantic jewel.

see this one with someone you love ( wink ) . +0 i had seen rik mayall in blackadder and the new statesman , so i thought i 'd give this film a try.

at around 4 pm i bought it , at around 8 pm i started to watch , at around 8.15pm i fast forwarded the remaining film to see if there was anything left watchable for a human being with a brain ... but there was n't . at around 8.45pm i threw the dvd into the dustbin . and that 's where this " film " belongs.

what ever happened to british humour ? the humour so fine and witty , intelligent and artful that you find in yes , minister , blackadder , vicar of dibley , fawlty towers or the fast show ? the black humour britain is so famous for ? i do n't want to insult anybody , but i presume even stupid children would n't find this funny . they deserve more intelligent fun . and rik mayall , you can do better , so please , do ! +0 this is truly a re - make that should never have gotten out of the stable . it has two casts that are acting in entirely different strata . at the top of their game are joan plowright and maximillian schell . every nuance of the franks is in plain sight . at the rock bottom are melissa gilbert and doris roberts . i can not imagine how schell and plowright manage to play so well when gilbert and roberts are working their anti - magic . gilbert ruins every scene she 's in . it 's like father knows best in the ghetto . she 's ann frank light . her run at helen keller was thin but not awful . this is sacrilege . doris roberts makes mrs. van damm merely annoying . she is a completely inappropriate choice to play the sexually hungry woman whose flirtatious , dissatisfied presence caused so much trouble in het acherhuis . this needed to be played by a woman who could convince us that she at least remembered what it was like to voluptuous . her weight is not the problem . joan plowright could have played this part beautifully . roberts was on a career high when this was made , getting lots of press and many opportunities . her performance here displays her weaknesses as an actress shamefully.

james coco and clive reville , have most of their scenes with gilbert and roberts , and , strong though they are , they are completely incapable of undoing the damage done by their partners . reville is a wily actor capable of the kind of iconic performance given by ed wynne in the original film . he gets no support from gilbert . she drain the color out of every scene . < br />
i've read with dismay the comments by those of you who grew up watching this version , filled with attachment to these performances . it 's a lesson in how the version you see first attachs to you . it makes me reconsider my attachment to some inferior products i loved in my childhood . i encourage you to watch the original . it has very few weak spots and it 's head and shoulders above this mess . +0 the book was one of stephen king 's best . the movie was pure rubbish . it was painful to remain in the theater until the ending , which was n't even the same as the book . i guess that this is the result when you try to cram 10 pages of story into every minute . there is no good reason to watch this movie . +0 that is the answer . the question is : what is the single reason to watch this movie ? i loved her in " my name is julia ross . " that is one of the best films noir of all time . noir or whatever one may call it , it 's a very unsettling movie.

she is fun in one of the worst major studio releases of all time , too . that would be " the guilt of janet ames . " this one has a spooky , promising title . it has a good cast . it has a fine director . i was expecting something dark . maybe something a little tawdry . instead , it 's an uninspired , routine espionage movie . it 's pretty much is a total bore . at least it was to me . ms. foch is captivating . and that is about it . +1 he 's not your conventional cab driver.

this guys got issues . with his wife , with his son , a priest , all his fares , his ex - partner and most of all himself . and the greatest thing is they just throw us all into it . so we have to keep watching to find out more about his past.

the idea may not be original but david morse makes it so . i think this is a great show , and i hope people catch - on before the season 's over . < br />
watch this show ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! +1 what will be prospero in the twentieth century , what is his life ? why a man would need to choose to live on an island with his daughter and girl friend ? because it is too hard to live and love in good conditions in " civilisation " . this man ( john cassavetes ) is a broken hearted giant , he can command the storm . he 's got the power , the strengh but he is human . deep love of life is the subject of this extraordenary movie . the acting is incredible , all the genius of john cassavetes , gena rowlands , vittorio gasman and shakespeare and paul mazursky of course . do n't miss it it 'll be a mistake this film is one of the most beautiful i 've ever seen.and i 've seen a lot of movies . +1 as a long - time fan of studio ghibli and especially hayao miyazaki films , i went to the film right on the opening day . when i went out of the theater i had this strange feeling that something was missing , this " magical " feeling i was experiencing in all miyazaki films before , but i could n't say why it failed this time . after i thought about the other ghibli movies , i may know the reason : this film had most of the elements of a great miyazaki anime : cute characters , wonderful key animation , a great soundtrack composed by joe hisaishi and the warm story telling giving you the feeling of watching a high quality japanese animation film . however , two elements were lacking : a deep story and dramaturgy . the purpose of this film was obviously to entertain small children with a simple story line as in case of " totoro " , so a complicated story as been told in " spirited away " or " princess mononoke " is not really necessary , but on the other hand , this story was simply too superficial . i could not connect to the main characters , because there was no character development , dramatic scenes were only limited and did not last very long . i really hate to give only 7 stars for a miyazaki film , because i would give 10 stars to all previous movies right away , but this time it was simply not this wonderful " ghibli experience " . +1 excellent story with supperb acting by all of the cast . the warmth and insight into who joad represents moved off of the screen and into the heart of this viewer . the frustration 's and tenacity of mother madalyn in her quest to do his work till her last breath was also done with excellance by barbara hershey . the intertwining of the personalities of joad and mother madalyn grew throughout the story line with a breath taking crescendo in the final scene . +1 i never thought i 'd say this about a biopic , but there is a near over - abundance of characterization ( especially concerning kenji miyazawa 's emotions ) and too little on the literal occurrences in his life -- by the end , i 'm not sure if he dies ( he 's supposed to ) , or if his sister finally dies ( she 's supposed to ) , or if the director spent a little too much time on the galactic railroad ( that 's an inside joke , in case you missed it -- miyazawa wrote a children 's book called night on the galactic railroad ) . however , this glimpse inside the mind of a writer who " sketched poetry and fairy tales from his imagination " is very intelligent , creative , entertaining , and emotionally powerful.

all this despite the fact that everyone is animated as animals ( like in many of miyazawa 's stories).

some of the visuals are truly astounding , especially considering that it was a made for tv movie . seriously , some of them ( like the sequence with birds trailing blue light ) rival parts of fantasia . however , i still ca n't stand computer animation when it is mixed with cel animation . the cgi trains are horribly obvious -- even more so than the anastasia train.

8/10 +0 i watched this basically for the sole reason that it was supposed to have third reich references in it . it turned out a pretty brainless and predictable slasher film that appeared to be made to appeal to feminists or something.

let me tell you something , if you wait an entire movie to see the attractive female lead 's breasts , the last thing you want is a " tastefully " done sex scene with annoying camera angles that do n't show anything . her busty friend did n't get hers out either , but we saw plenty of men 's butts and pubic hair and guys with their shirts off . and at the end you have our heroine magically dodging the scalpel thrusts and swings of the villain ( who turns out to be the hunk , funnily enough ) and she easily out fights him ( uh huh ) while her male love interest is tied down and waiting to be rescued . the funniest part was when she picks up a chair and " swings " it at the guy and it breaks over him . now it 'd be about as much as she could manage to lift the chair let alone smash it against a person with enough force to break it ! it looks ridiculous , she basically brushes it against him and it falls apart . if you are going to do this sort of " role reversal " rubbish ( which has already been done to death ) then you have to at least make it semi plausible.

there was one good bit though . the bad guy did get the better of her slutty friend , teaching her a lesson for being such a tramp and sleeping around . that 's not exactly something feminists would like.

pretty stupid really . not that american slasher flicks are generally much better , but you have to wonder why they bothered . it brought nothing new to the genre at all.

5/10 +0 my review is divided into questions that you really should ask yourself : < br />
1 . plants eating people have been done hundreds of times . it 's been used by nintendo in everything from mario to zelda to metroid prime . it 's been used in plenty of low - budget 50 's movies , on par with the lowest of the godzilla franchise . and this brings it to a whole another level of cheese with plants that talk . i 've known no one who walked out , but i know a lot of people who absolutely broke out in hysteric laughing during parts of this movie . i was one of them . does n't the horror genre deserve something a little better than this pile of laughable crap ? < br />
2 . the characters easily could have been copy / pasted from hostel or wrong turn or wolf creek or any other movie with collage kids with bad luck . yet it 's called " characterizing " when the movie takes hours of your time to tell you clichés that hundreds of characters before have had ? do n't you ever wish a movie had characters that were n't just forgettable pieces of meat with legs ? < br />
3 . this was not gory . a guy cuts his skin off . oh , my ! ( not . ) a guy gets his legs broken . oh my ! gasp ! ( not . ) i have shown movies like this to my mother who hates everything to do with horror because it makes her sick , and she said : " i 've seen pg movies worse than that ! why was it rated r ? " so , why was it rated r ? < br />
4 . here 's the only plot the movie / book has : collage kids drink , have sex , get naked , cruse , bleed , and eventually die . this is possibly the most typical example of a cheap , thoughtless horror movie , yet people call this " mature " ? what the . . . ? < br />
5 . i do not think i have ever seen something less original sense i watched a beautiful mind . < br />
haven't you ever sat there and wished the horror genre , easily the most diverse genre out there , would do something . . . well , diverse ? something truly original?

i just wish more horror movies would have actual horror , not just cheap collage parties put on film with a few splatters of fake blood tossed around.

1/10 +1 this movie is quite better than the first one " astérix et obelix contre césar " , but it is far away from perfection . the adaptation of the comic book is good , some of the pictures and the dialogs of the movie are the same as in the book . but there 's few things that made the movie not as interresting as the animated movie released in 1968 . for example the fighting between numerobis and amonbofis . this was n't necessary or even credible , either for the little love story of astérix . there were also some stuff missing , like the songs that are in the animated movie , and some other things ... i am deceived by the movie because they cutted in the stuff i was expecting tho see and they showed things that i did not wanted or needed to see . i know that it would have been very difficult to make the movie exactly the same than the comic book or the animated movie , but that 's what i expected . in conclusion , even if the movie is good , i still prefer the animated movie , wich is in my opinion , far better . +1 this episode introduces us to the formal dress uniforms worn here by captain picard , commander riker , and lieutenant tasha yar . the plot of this episode deals with 2 groups of separate alien delegates , the anticans and the selae who try to capture and eat each other at every turn . the 2 sides really hate each other , and it is up to riker and tasha to contain them and keep them out of trouble.

meanwhile a mysterious spacial anomaly goes around the ship injuring and killing a few of the crew members . but at the end of the episode this same spacial anomaly possesses a valuable member of the crowd . will they be able to rescue him so that they maybe able to continue on with their on going mission of space exploration ? < br />
note : this episode marks irish actor colm meaney 's second appearance on tng after " encounter at farpoint . " he portrays one of tasha 's " yellow - shirted " security guards . +0 so if a guy meets you and he says ' i want you to look at my erection ! ' do n't be alarmed , maybe he wants you to look at the film he made about how his house was to be built . yes ! that 's the only thing what happens in this movie ! it 's like the worst warholian beep i ever saw ! it 's like filming the inside of your toilet before you flush it , in fact , it 's less interesting to look at than that.

but if you do watch lennon 's erection , be warned that he put a lot of background noise in it too . i mean , really , it 's as if the building is being attacked by space mutants from hell or something ! in the meanwhile , the building in progress is growing up as an erection can do too ( in almost 20 minutes , what an accomplishment).

so if someone does ask you to watch his erection , be sure he wants to videotape it all . +1 this is a phenomenal movie . truly one of the best movies i have ever watched . i am a serious critic and it takes much to stir me , but this movie had all the right combinations for " stirring " . the passion of the actors , without the overacting , the aching for all the characters involved , the serious and subtle truths about marriage and divorce , all make this a must see movie , despite the fact that it is 1970s . this is definitely not an " old movie " , but a classic / vintage movie . i hope you engage with it as i did when you consider how volatile relationships of all kinds can be , when you also consider how deep pain associated with love can be and how the hardest decisions to make will always be the most painful , but once they are made the pain will subside , but only gradually . this movie certainly demonstrates that the most volatile relationships are not necessarily weak relationships and that leaving certainly is not synonymous with lost / lack of love . the ' crafting ' of this movie certainly emanates from a place deep within someone 's heart and mind . +1 a letter to the guys . i tried guys , i really tried ! i tried so hard not to watch this movie . i would leave the room when it was on or jump on the computer when the wife watched it . this is her second favorite movie , the godfather being first ( which i love).

i ended up catching little bits of this movie and finally after maybe a year i was actually sitting down watching it with her . i ca n't believe i am saying this , but i loved this movie . dalton plays a great rhett and has his cockiness down pat . whalley plays a delightful scarlett . full of fire and brimstone and nothing is going to stop her.

my favorite scene is when she is overseas in ( ireland ? ) and the government is going to tear down a peasant 's house because they are behind in the rent . scarlett gets all mad at this and pays the entire debt , thus making a huge name for herself around this small town.

all i 'm saying guys is you might want to try this movie ... especially if you are a fan of gone with the wind . it does take a little bit to get used to the new actors , but i think you will find them refreshing . +1 thank you the filmzone for showing this sleazy soft core sex flick at 1 a.m. i truly enjoyed it . to be honest , i expected a lot more from a sexy cast with mckayla , dru berrymore , and of course , the talented chloe nicholle ( as rebecca carter).

the production values are truly bad mainly because of the low budget but a little more effort would n't harm . for example , the cinematography makes it look like a hard core porno movie . there 's absolutely no effort in lightning . but let 's ignore that fact because let 's be honest , we watched " pleasures of sin " because of the high amounts of sex.

the sex factor is pretty good and offers steamy , explicit scenes . chole nicholle delivers the best performance of the female cast.

so my advice is , watch this movie if you are in the mood for good explicit sex or just watch it if you are a fan of mrs. nicholle.

recommended only for the sex scenes ; do n't expect anything else . +0 i just finished watching this movie and largely found it a waste of time with little or no redeeming factors . i really do n't understand where all the positive reviews came from -- the animation is clunky and unrefined , the plot makes no sense at all from an objective standpoint , and there is no sense of intrigue or suspense in that which is trying to pass itself off as an intriguing and suspenseful film . i have never read the book so i ca n't say if the movie was faithful , but as with most movie adaptations , it tries too hard to cram as much information into the shortest amount of time possible . the result is a disjointed and illogical storyline that does n't really let you understand or relate to the characters , or , actually , anything at all . overall , i felt completely detached from the characters and the plot to the point where i could n't bring myself to care about what happened to them , and the only way i can see how this animation could be considered beautiful is if your normal standard of animation is a scooby - doo cartoon . +1 so it might not be entirely historically accurate . and there is little or no real character development . but for jake ( son of ridley ) scott 's first attempt , it 's well worth the ticket price.

captain james macleane ( jonny lee miller looking as good as ever ) may be a gentleman , but he has n't got the money or the clothes to prove it . plunkett ( robert carlyle with all his clothes on ) is an apothecary - turned - outlaw . the circumstances of their strange meeting involve a dead body , a ruby , and eventually a partnership as the gentlemen highwaymen . as the tag line says , " they rob the rich ... and that 's it . " there is n't really much background , or even in - depth development , but the object seems to be to relieve the aristocracy of enough money and jewels to pay for the two highwaymen 's passage to america . one small problem : macleane falls in love . with the chief justice 's ward , rebecca ( liv tyler ) . who happens to also have caught the eye of the thief taker general.

the plot is original enough , the casting is excellent ( especially alan cumming as the drag - queenish lord rochester , carlyle and miller -- also together in " trainspotting , " they have n't lost their dynamic ) , the costuming is fantastic , the makeup is outrageous , and the music is hard - edged techno with a strangely classical undertone . jake scott has an eye for light and shadow , a good sense of balance between spectacle and plot , and he is n't squeamish about showing the more unpleasant side of 17th century london . and lucky for us , he likes close - ups of faces , especially eyes . jonny lee miller 's eyes . and liv tyler 's , too , but hey , who is this movie about ? rebecca ? no . plunkett and macleane . but there 's more to this movie than just pretty faces . at the risk of sounding cliche , it 's a fast , furious , and sometimes frustrating ride with the most noble highwaymen since robin hood . decadent , sleazy , and violent , scott 's debut film makes for an entertaining evening at the movies.

as macleane says , " i was terrific , and it was a bloody good laugh ! " +1 it 's a horror story alright . but perhaps not as you know it . the real monsters in this flick are humans . while the monsters , are human and prey . as weird as that may sound i see this as " monsters inc " for horror film fans.

sure , the effects are of a std horror film , the monsters are there as in any monster based film , the gore is there as well , there even is a slasher in the shape of dr decker ( played by david cronenberg ; i see flash of cillian murphy as dr. jonathan crane in batman begins here - or is it the other way round ? ) . and it is decker & c who are the bad guys . the monsters want mainly to mind their own business , warding off intrusive humans more or less misguided , wanting to join there society.

by the end of the film you actually grow to like the quite little monsters ( and the dog ) - not perhaps what you had expected from the first few scenes .... +0 please do not go see this . i did have several laughs throughout this movie , but they were all due to unintentional comedy.

there were only three characters in this movie , so it was amazing how bad the character development was . pacino played pacino again and was aggravating most of the time . the scenes in this movie seem like they were put together from 20 other bad movies by a really poor editor . there is no continuity and i found myself wondering why i did n't leave 15 minutes into this.

i would suggest never seeing a movie directed by d.j. caruso . this really was awful . +0 when i think about tv movies , i always think of this film , i have watched it a few times on sky movies , it was terrible.

its been a long time , since i have seen this film , was just browsing , and came across it on here : -s.

a microbiologist ( linda flemming ) , goes on holiday , with her son ( william flemming ) , at this holiday resort kinda place , they meet up with paul johnson ( taxi driver / owns a bar ? ) , and kathy johnson.

its like a weird romantic thing , william starts to fall for kathy , and paul falls for linda.

some guy passes out in a street , he has some mark on his arm , joseph ( joseph was a deep sea diver , who on some dive , saw a light , or something , and converted to religion ) , says he will take care of this person , there is a gap in my memory , then there is a wide out break of the virus , i think linda offers her help , to come up with a cure , kathy gets infected ( william notices a mark on kathy 's arm ) , with the virus , also does joseph.

paul says some lines to joseph , then joseph stumbles away , the next time you see joseph , he is cured some how , that information is used to cure the infected , then there is a beach party , the end . +1 i was very excited to see rock star because i am a big fan of mark wahlberg 's . i was surprised to have liked it more than i originally thought i would . the script did leave something to be desired , but the movie 's performances made up for it . there were a few moments when visions of spinal tap came rushing back , and i ca n't help but think this movie would have been even better as a mocumentary . but , i digress.

wahlberg continues to demonstrate his talent , as he plays with believability an ordinary guy whose biggest dream comes true . he does it with the wonder and innocence that make you not only believe him , but also make you really care about his character.

jennifer aniston , who has n't impressed me in movies up to this point , is surprisingly good as the girlfriend / manager . she shows more real emotion than i 've seen in her last few movies combined.

but above all , it 's the music in this movie that really draws you in . peppered with some 80 's tunes ( let 's face it - bon jovi would have any 80 's music fans rocking in their seat ) , the movie really rocks with the original steel dragon songs and wahlberg 's performance of them.

i plan to see this movie again , but first i 'm going to rush out and buy the soundtrack ! +0 before going any further , i have to admit that i only saw the first episode of this show . if i had the time , i might have considered watching it every week , if only to see how the season played out . however , it was very clear to me from the beginning that martha stewart 's version of " the apprentice " just does n't " fit in . " martha stewart made a career of being a happy homemaker , a domestic diva of the likes of oprah winfrey and julia child . it was only since her scandalous legal troubles and subsequent incarceration that her public image began to reflect the true roughness of her character . sure , she was compelling for a while , and this entire series poses the interesting question of what it means to be a woman in business . does she have to come off as cold and tough ? should n't she?

but the truth was , by the time stewart came out of prison , her attempts for a public comeback , though certainly warranted , were never going to seize viewers ' interest for very long . perhaps a true comeback would have worked had she returned home peacefully and waited a year or so after her often mocked ankle bracelet was removed . instead , she frantically dove into overkill with 2 series at once , the other being her syndicated daytime series martha , much like her old show , but more mainstream , with famous guests like bette midler . of course , even at her peak stewart was never mainstream , so it 's too much to ask that american audiences immediately accept her foray into reality tv . maybe america wants stewart to make a comeback on her own rather than be the basis for it.

the show was basically a tired retread of trump 's " apprentice , " which still holds my interest , depending on the tasks , the cast , and trump 's firing decisions ( often controversial - likely for that reason ) . the letter bit was certainly not cliché but obnoxious in the least . the fact that stewart never says , " you 're fired ! " - mentioned in the message board on this site - is particularly distressing . producer mark burnett should be admired for dealing with stewart 's jail time honestly while trying to make her a hero , but the truth is that anyone watching can tell that she 's basically trying to put on a show of being this nice businesswoman . again never mainstream , stewart lacks the agreeability and identifiability of oprah winfrey and the admirable , charismatic " toughness " of donald trump . yes , this can be a gender - biased assessment of her character , but i mean it to be more about the nature of her business.

it comes as no shock that stewart has been fired , but i wonder if they really always intended it to only last for one season ? +0 in order for a thriller to elicit fear , suspense or any emotion the story must be believable . there is nothing believable or realistic about this film . the protagonists have several opportunities to escape or turn the tables but manage to screw it up every time . the antagonists who supposedly plan this out and customized their shuttle specifically to trap people sure left a lot of improvisational weapons laying around . there is actually one scene where the " smart " girl has a gun to the head of the main bad guy and decides to scold him instead of pull the trigger . this was a thoroughly predictably , brainless " thriller " . every character was one dimensional . the " victims " were the usual gutless , brainless sheep that deserved to be slaughtered . is there anyone on this planet capable of writing an intelligent thriller ? +1 i too was fortunate enough to see " checking out " with peter falk at the phoenix film festival . this is an extremely sweet character driven film that leaves the audience enthralled in the applebaum 's plight in life . more than funny , each character in the family contributes priceless comic relief that not only spurs laughter but inspires a few joyful tears as well . peter falk was born to play this role . he plays a 90ish " young " father of three who brings his adult children together in what could possibly be one of the most important times in his and their lives . the 2 day journey that the applebaum family takes though the delightful backdrop of new york ( with carefully selected characters ) , not only leaves the audience wanting more , but nourishes ones own sense of family . " checking out " is a must see film , not only for all those who cherish family , but also all those who do n't ! ! ! my thanks to the director who took the chance to bring this gift to its audience . robin sly , scottsdale , arizona +0 i am finding that i get less and less excited about disney 's sequels to movies . yes , i do understand that the budget for the direct to video movies are not the same , but these movies do n't even try . some examples are hunchback ii and tarzan and jane . if anyone has seen the previews for stitch - the movie , you will see my point . but i digress , this movie reaffirms my point . the animation is sloppy , the story lines resemble saturday morning cartoons , and not all of the original voices are there . i was very disappointed not to hear michael j. fox 's voice . it was so glaringly obvious that the person doing milo 's voice was trying to sound like fox , but did n't come close to succeeding . < br />
if it says anything , my children ages 10 and 6 did n't even sit through the whole movie . +1 following is an intriguing thriller that requires constant awareness to be completely understood . the plot has many twists and uses displaced chronology . the event sequence complicates following following . if you are willing to pay attention , it is an exciting movie full of noir earmarks . with the running time at 70 minutes , there is a lot to take in , but the fast pace helps to keep the viewer enthralled.

bill is a lonely , untidy fellow who takes up shadowing people and seeing where they go - what they do . he is a bit too conspicuous , however , and eventually gets caught by a well dressed , clean - cut bloke named cobb . cobb entangles bill in a world the poor boy is not prepared to live in . cobb is a smart rogue who seems to have complete control over the other characters . by the end of the film the disjointed story is explained thoroughly . the film is an excellent first effort from the talented christoper nolan , who would go on to make memento , one of the most original movies of our time . +0 i was told jon was for awhile on spiritual experiences . i guessed the film will be interesting . in fact is n't at all . not so much profound for a such subject . " eternity " never - ending life . experiences after death and " dejavu " . the film is not as a comedy but is n't funny at all , at least not express yet . it 's so naive . charming film but naive film . a must to avoid . the middle ages sequences seems coming directly from fairy tales and it 's not the matter at all . eileen davidson is so charming and voight is doing his best . normal is a co producer and screenwriter of this movie . the film was launched straight on video so i discovered it on a video store . it 's a pity 'cause i well know voight was seriously involved with spirituality and the film is n't so much profound about it . +0 being a big fan of horror films and always manage to find something good about a picture , but this film just did not hold my interest or attention . this story revolves around a father and his daughter and a girlfriend , since his wife died a few years back . these people encounter a horrible situation in a town they stop off and visit and all the senior citizens in this town gang up against these people and almost kill them . this film reminded me of a film called " children of the corn " because it really involves children who are being presented to satan and are his instruments of terror . there is plenty of chants , mambo jumble and a toy tank that completely destroys an entire family in their station wagon as well as dolls who kill a husband and wife . +0 it 's not unusual that hollywood likes to pump out crappy films . occasionally , a handful of good films come out of them while the majority just sucks major ass . it 's also not surprising that those bad films are retreads of old tv series ' . occasionally a surprise pops up with " the fugitive " ( who saw that best picture oscar nom coming ? ) , but for every " fugitive " , there 's a mchale 's navy or some other wholly unoriginal film devoid of any plot or interest . the mod squad , in my opinion , goes into my top ten of truly lousy films , in which hollywood should get it 's sorry ass beaten for producing what could 've been a good movie . we 're shifted right dab smack in the middle of a story that just does n't seem to make sense , it wastes the talent , and the dialogue is just bad . we do n't actually know who the hell these characters are , and we could give a flying f**k about what they are . instead , you 're expected to automatically know who they are and what they 're going to do . there 's one particularly bad riff , about the " i 'm too old for this s**t " line , that 's just plain stupid . something my friend verbally noted when we were clamoring for the movie to just end . it 's just an insult to hollywood cinema . grade : f- +0 in 1984 , the karate kid had some charm to it , even if it was little more than a poor man 's rocky . alas , producer jerry weintraub failed to realize it was best to leave the story at the point where it had ended , and convinced ralph macchio and pat morita to make an extra effort to turn the film into a trilogy . part iii was the definitive low in the franchise , yet someone must have thought the series still had some potential . what other explanation could there possibly be for the existence of the next karate kid?

wait a minute . next ? yep , macchio 's gone ( at least he was smart enough to stop eventually ) , and his replacement is hilary swank ( ! ) , playing a troubled teenager ( what else ? ) named julie pierce . now , the girl has family issues . she also gets in trouble at school . said school has a sadistic gym teacher ( michael ironside ) . as it turns out , though , one of his students is actually a nice guy , and julie falls for him . this gets her in bigger trouble than before , of course . lucky for her , she is currently living with mr. miyagi ( morita ) , an old friend of her grandfather who happens to know how to get back at the bad guys.

all those factors ad up to seven clichés , and that 's just a generic plot summary - imagine what the detailed scenes must be like ! from beginning to end , the next karate kid is a tired , flat and dull marathon of idiotic lines and set - ups . swank does , thankfully , have the likes of boys do n't cry and million dollar baby to redeem this disaster , but why did morita accept to come back ? he may have received an oscar nomination for the first movie , and was quite enjoyable in the sequels , but has nothing to speak for him here - even the revival of the " wax on , wax off " gag is stillborn . as for ironside , he is slightly better than martin kove and thomas ian griffith in part iii , but that 's hardly a stretch.

so , is this picture really that awful ? not exactly . there is one sequence that manages to achieve a weird beauty , but when the best bit in the whole film involves a group of asian monks dancing as they hear pop music for the first time in their lives , it does n't qualify as a recommendation to see the rest . +1 the real life case of an innocent first nations chief(the indian ) by an winnipeg city officer(the cowboy ) is the basis of this tv movie . the actual case caused its fair share of racial tension in canada , a small scale martin luther king thing . the misjustice of first nations people is becoming a staple in the canadian cinema diet . what makes this film worth viewing is the focus on the family 's reactions . the father played by gordon tootoosis demands forgiveness and the brother played by eric schweig demands justice . the stars gordon tootoosis and adam beach(windtalkers , skinwalkers)have minor , almost cameo , appearances . soon - to - be star eric schweig makes his mark in this film with a powerful performance . an honourable mention goes to veteran actor gary chalk who has chalked up over 100 movies to his credit . his portrayal of the troubled soul inspector dowson was worthy of a gemini award(the canadian emmy)along with eric schweig . the special effects(jump cuts , dream sequences ) are occasional and not overbearing . couple this with some beautiful northern canadian scenery and recent ongoing events involving police officers and first nations people like the neil stonechild case , and you have a very rewarding and relevant viewing experience . +1 " broadcast news " is directed by james l. brooks ( terms of endearment , as good as it gets ) and has a great cast , including william hurt , albert brooks , and holly hunter . everyone gives a good performance , but they 're all too unlikable to really care about them.

some parts of the film are really brilliant , such as the prologue , and the short scenes with jack nicholson . the main reason it does n't entirely work , is it 's a film that relies on the characters being amusing rather than amusing things happening to them.

you could consider it nothing more than a drama , but it 's often too silly to be successful there as well . still , the script makes it worth a watch . certainly not for everyone.

7.0 out of 10 +0 this is a family movie set in 1950 's rural america about a boy whose uncle presses sheep killing charges against his dog drum , starting not only a family legal feud but community discord as their town begins to take sides.

this is formula film that attempts to be very touching and sweet . its biggest weakness is that the only people who could really act were scott bakula ( defense lawyer ) , ron perlman ( father / drum 's owner ) and the dog . ( john shuck and kathy garver , " sissy " from the original " family affair , " as the uncle and his wife , were okay . ) the children were not that good ( basically they looked like they were acting ) and that 's a problem when the film really revolves around them ( aaron fors , who plays the bully donny makes me think of what the actor russell crowe must have looked liked as a child , only with no talent but a lot of ham ) . < br />
favorite line ( spoken by the prosecutor after scott bakula 's defense closing trial speech ) : " we 'll be lucky if they do n't lynch us . " < br />
favorite line spoken by ron perlman ( after his son punches the bully ) : " now making him your friend , that will be the hard part." < br />
cute enough to rent / buy used . +0 i usually really like lawrence and being in australia i have n't seen much of his stand up , so when i saw this at my video shop i thought , yeah i 'll have a look . i wish i had n't seen it now . obviously lawrence had a profound experience that opened up his mind , and i guess he wants to share this with others but this was neither the time nor the place.

this whole experience seemed like a motivational speech in hell , it really did . i believe the catch phrase of the night was " ride it until the wheels fall off " which he intermingled with just plain lewd jokes revolving around sex and sexual organs.

don't get me wrong , i do n't mind crude humor , but lawrence lacks the gift of classing it up in the fashion of eddie murphy , richard prior or robin williams . lawrence was just plain lewd , the only time i laughed was when he relived his experience with the law and his recovery in the hospital . if there were minus points , i would give them .... +0 the ( dvd)movie " the tempest " , directed by jack bender , was published in 2001 . it did n't make its way to german cinemas and neither the director or an actor were able to receive an important award for this movie . the movie refers to the shakespearean play " the tempest " which was published at the end of the 16th century . the director tried to create an modern version of this play , but failed . at the beginning of the movie the plantation owner prosper gets in a conflict with his brother antonio about the treatment of their slaves . antonio sets his brother a trip and tries to kill him but with the help of a witch , prosper is able to escape and flees with his daughter and a slave called ariel to a small island nearby the mississippi river . for over twelve years he has lived isolated on this island , till a lucky chance enables him to take revenge on his brother .... if prosper will be lucky you have to find out by yourself.

in my opinion this film is really a bad try to create a modern version of the original play by william shakespeare . the story of the movie is confusing as well as the characters . prosper does n't have the same powers as in the tempest ..... end of part i +1 with some wine , some friends and some good humor , i had a really good time watching this film . i particularly enjoyed the performance of jilon ghai ( as " randy " ) , who was such a kick in the pants ! his scenes with charity rahmer ( " michelle " ) were wildly amusing . i would n't want him coming on to me , but it was great watching " randy " try to score with " michelle " and even better seeing the results ! of course , the girls in the film are lots of fun to watch too . and , a friend of mine showed me the playboy issue that had pilar lastra as the playmate of the month . she 's definitely a looker . all in all , this film totally served its purpose , which was to entertain us in a light and care - free way . +1 < br />
having read the unemployed critic 's , review , i went to a screening of " radio " not knowing what to expect . thankfully , the unemployed critic now appears , to me anyway , a frustrated film director / movie critic . his review is callous and totally uncalled for!

this is a movie that will make you laugh , it will make you cry and in the end it will give you a moment of pause!

to paraphrase a line delivered by actor ed harris in the final barbershop scene " ... and all this time that we thought we were teaching radio , truth is ... he was teaching us . he treats us all the time , like we wish we treated each other , some of the time!" < br />
yes the movie tugs at the heartstrings . yes it is emotionally manipulative and yes cuba gooding jr. ( in an oscar worthy performance ) is a little over the top at times ( see the christmas day dance scene ) but you know what ? so what ! every once in awhile the community of america needs to be reminded what tolerance can do for our great country . we need to be reminded how great we can be.

this is a solid cast . i was particularly pleased to see s. epatha merkerson , portraying radio 's mother , do something outside of law and order . i always wondered , is ms. merkerson a great actor or is it the quality of writing delivered buy a strong cast on law and order . after watching this movie , it is easy to see that she is indeed a very fine actor.

also joining the cast in small but important and powerful roles is alfre woodard as the principal , debra winger in a career - resurrecting role of coach jones 's wife and chris mulkey as protagonist , frank clay.

we can not over look ed harris 's performance as coach harold jones . after reflecting on this movie and having grown up in the deep south my self , it is hard to truly appreciate mr. harris and his contribution to this film . as coach jones , ed delivers a quiet , rock solid performance , that of a man on a mission . coach harris will not let the town or circumstances divert him from what he knows in his heart , is the right thing to do.

if you see this movie , make sure you hang around for the end credits . you will be in for a treat as the real james robert ' radio ' kennedy , now in his mid 50 's , is shown , still leading the t.l. hanna football team on to the field every friday night.

one final note . if you were a teen in the mid to late 70 's , this movie is worth the price of admission , for the sound track alone ! +0 this movie should go down in the annals of fiefdom as one of the worst of all time . i will stop short of saying it 's the worst movie ever , only because i have yet to see every movie ever made . i can not make such lofty claims until then . the story is stale , the acting is horrible , at best , the " special " effects are no more than a couple of lbs . of dry ice and a fan . somebody must have been related to someone to get this movie made . mr. busey mailed this one in ! the dog is well trained and cute , making it the only redeeming quality in this never - should - have - made - it movie . two hours and $ 3 of my life i will never get back . +1 this film just won the best film award at the cleveland international film festival . it 's american title apparently is autumn spring . the acting is superb . the story takes you into the life of an elderly man who takes what life deals him and spikes it up a little bit . abetted by his best friend ( and partner in not - so - serious crime ) he puts people on at every opportunity but still often reveals his heart of gold . his longsuffering wife has come to her wits end and makes a life - changing decision which is heartbreaking to watch . the resolution of the story is beautiful . +1 i love this movie ! it has everything ! bonnie hunt did a fantastic job co - writing , directing and co - starring in this film . david duchovny is just plain hot . and minnie driver is as cute as ever . combine all that talent with david allen grier , carol o'connor , robert loggia , joley richardson , and jim belushi you have a oscar worthy movie ! i 'm surprised they did n't get one . if you have n't seen it , go rent the dvd , watch it once then put directors commentary on ... bonnie hunt is fabulous ! +1 better than i expected from a film selling itself on the premise of nymphomania and inter - racial bondage . the music is great , and cinematography focuses greatly on turning ricci into a trailer trash betty paige and it works . samuel l. get 's to shout a lot , which he 's good at , as well as play lots of blues guitar , which he looks cool doing . even justin timberlake was decent as the mentally disturbed boyfriend . i get the feeling that this material under anyone else would have been complete s*% # , but instead managed to just barley carve out it 's own odd little transgressive pulp niche , while still being an effective drama . +1 two years after the success of ' airplane ' , jim abrahams and jerry & david zucker created this brilliant sitcom starring the great leslie nielsen as plain clothed detective ' frank drebin ' . also in the cast was alan north as ' captain ed hocken ' , ed williams as ' ted olsen ' and william duell as ' johnny the shoe shine boy ' . ' police squad ! ' featured unashamedly corny jokes and clever visual gags playing in the background . each episode would conclude with a mock freeze frame in which the characters in frame stand completely still . one of the best ' freeze frame ' sequences saw one of the characters pouring coffee into a cup while standing still , causing the cup to overflow ! guest stars were killed off in the opening titles , one included georg stanford brown being crushed by a falling safe ! despite gaining positive reviews and much critical acclaim , ' squad ! ' only lasted for six episodes before being cancelled . this did n't mean the end though , five years later the show was transferred to the big screen for the first in the trilogy of the ' naked gun ' films . +0 ok , if you like yer monster moovies sullen , stiff , starchy , and thunderously dull , but with lots of throttling , then head right for " lady frankenstein " , a stagy , costumy italian corpse - walker . joseph cotten("citizen kane")plays the crusty old baron himself , and must have really needed to make that condo payment . sexy sarah bay , who has played in cow - ntless european b - films , usually as rosabla neri , including " hercules against the moon men " , plays his ambitious daughter , a surgeon in a ruffled prom dress . cotten makes an ugly , big - headed monster ( cud it really be that much effort to make a nice one ? ? ) , who immediately throttles cotten(who took his royalty check & ran ) , and wanders around throttling everyone in sight . tania(bay ) decides to switch the brain of her lover(who is old and wrinkly ) with the brain of a younger man ( who is " beautiful " , but stooopid ) , in order to make another monster to throttle the first monster cotten made , who is wandering around throttling people . well , after much exposition , and some throttling , the 2 monsters throttle each other for a bit , tania stabs the first monster in the back , and then has sex in the flaming ruins of her mansion with the second monster - only to have him throttle her ! doh ! there is so much throttling going on that you almoost overlook the fact that the film is about as exciting as a dead carp , and mooves just as quickly . the alpha video version i saw for this review was heavily edited , and one wonders cow much nekkid people were chopped out , not that it would have improved the film much . director von theurmer previously helmed a variety of grade z euro - trash , including " jungle warriors " , " island of the dead"(as mel wells ) , and " the crucified girls of san ramon " . the moocow says avoid this corpse of a film , and find something that mooves at moore of a full ... throttle . < br />
;=8 ) +0 human traffic is purely a ` been there , done that ' experience – only this time it 's quite limp.

major themes explored are paranoia , male impotence and jealousy – but only mildly and poorly.

a lot of the movie seems to want to imitate trainspotting ( drug / ` clubbing ' culture ) – but it fails to include the low times / come - downs that trainspotting deals with ( eg : issues with death / dependence , etc ) . it even tries to come up with a similar monologue to ewan mcgreggor 's classic ` choose life ' speech – but ` the milky bars are on me ! yeah ! ' – what the fudge is that all about?!

the characters try to analyse their lifestyle but when their lifestyle is so shallow – their analysis becomes boring and repetitious.

the soundtrack ( for a movie that is trying to be cool ) is pathetic . it includes the likes of fat boy slim and cj bolland – come on people – good dance music is be better than this!

the characters become grating and annoying ( especially half way through the movie ) and the lack of care - for - the - characters soon dawns.

there are a couple of funny scenes – but they are few and far between . the mother catching the son in the bedroom was quite amusing.

but please – i 'm sick to death of the star wars analogy scenes . i thought it was much more sharper in a couple of kevin smith 's movies ( ie : clerks and chasing amy ) . according to the characters – yoda is a drug fiend hence that 's why he is short and bald – huh?!

my score – 4 out of 10 – do yourself a favour and see trainspotting or go instead ! +0 " go fish " garnered rose troche rightly or wrongly the reputation of a film maker with much promise.

its then hard to understand how she could turn out a movie made up of stereotypes that one associates with inferior sitcoms . the entire film rings hollow . i cringed the whole way through.

its supposed to be a look into nineties human sexuality . well not much more here to be learned than from " in and out " . by now most of us actually do know , that there are men who are sexually attracted to women and there men who are sexually attracted to men and there are even men sexually attracted to both sexes . < br />
seldom has this revelation been portrayed on the screen with so little wit and style.

pathetic . +0 even with the low standards of a dedicated horror fan , i found this film to be beyond awful . it was a huge disappointment since it was featured as one of the eight horrorfest films . i can only hope the other seven were better . i was actually embarrassed for the friends i was able to convince to see this , and these are the same friends i made watch the remake of the wicker man . it has every cliché in the book . in fact , it went out of its way to include them . let 's start with the characters . instead of one young damsel in distress , we get three : the single , hot mom with two daughters– a blossoming yet brainless teenager and a cute yet simultaneously creepy little girl that you just know is going to have ' special ' skills including supernatural knowledge and the ability to communicate with the dead . the little girl is the same one that was in the remake of the amityville horror . she was a little annoying but not nearly as irritating dakota fanning.

overall , these characters seemed like escapees from a lifetime movie . i thought perhaps horror movies had moved on from scenes where the female characters go to bed in full makeup and run around in the dark announcing their presence to anyone with ears , but not this one . i also find it inconceivable that none of them could be bothered to secure the front door from arbitrarily opening day and night . to give you an idea about how uninvolved i was with these characters , i spent most of my time thinking about how cold it must have been on the set because everyone was in a coat even in their houses and how white their teeth were.

despite all the formulaic plot machinations , the film does not build any suspense at all except to wonder when it will be over . there is more atmosphere at the local giant in the middle of the most mundane of weekday afternoons . as for the dialogue , i could have sampled quotes from ten other films and cobbled together better , more believable discourse . the gore level , the eye candy for a horror fan , was minimal at best . without their tiny weapons , the ' zombies ' were not menacing at all . you could probably drop kick a couple of them across the room.

what really kills it is its banality . horror films , more than any other genre , can not survive uninspired mediocrity . give me a horror movie that is comically inept or outrageously over the top with gore . i can even take the new ones with their cringe inducing torture . every once in a while i 'd appreciate a truly frightening one , anything but this . +0 poor jane austen . this dog of a production does not do her wonderful tongue in cheek novel any justice . starting at the top ... poorly adapted . the screenwriter deserves extra low marks for trying to -- come to think of it , i do n't know what she was trying for , but suffice it to say she missed the mark by light years ! ! couple that with all the over - acting and awful production values , this is one adaptation that should never have happened . it would have been far better if they just gave all the money they poured into this flop and donated it to a worthy charity . do yourself a favor , read the book . it is almost certain that you will enjoy it a thousand times more than trying to sit through this excruciating production ! +0 in my opinion , this movie is not good . i hardly find a good thing to say about it , but still i would like to explain , before i conclude it is just another bad movie.

i decided to watch it because costas mandylor is starring in it , and that was the main reason i watched it till the end . i like action movies , and i understand that such movies are built on the action rather than the story . i know they do n't go into details when it comes to the credibility of the story and the events , but even that does not explain why some scenes , just because they lack the sense of reality , look ridiculous.

at the beginning , the movie looks quite promising : a tough , good looking specialist and his not so tough but smart and funny partner must do a job , which turns out a bit different than they expected . the story takes place on a cruise ship . a disaster happens , the ship is turned over , and only a few are left alive . during their struggle to survive they have to escape a shark , a professional killer and the rising water.

furthermore , the movie is quite violent . the main weapon ( beside the disaster which already took out most of the passengers ) is the gun , which is successfully used in many cases . i personally missed a good man to man ( or woman to woman if you prefer ) fight . family fun ? i do n't think so.

all in all , i think this movie was shot in a hurry , without a real vision what it is trying to say . made of the usual action movie tricks , with a bit of something called love , and without a real meaning , it just results in a bad movie . +0 best thing i can say about this porno - horror film is : boobies boobies boobies ! < br />
beyond that , this film is made by some hindu / indian guy with some background in porn films or such .

plot : talk - show host and girlfriend are stalked by a psychopath who is angry over the plight of the homeless and takes it out on , you guessed it , beautiful real - estate agent ladies ! ( films like these are why the slasher films of the 80 's got a rep for misogyny)

this film is not really a slasher , but has the same sort of implausibilities and stereotypes : the dumb - ass cops , the villain is an old white male , and the women are busty babes . < br />
if you like porno - horror , this is your movie , otherwise stay away . ( adrienne fans will get to see her sagging breasts for a second or two ) +0 i saw this movie previewed before something else i rented a while back ... and it looked decent . i 've seen some good stuff from full moon video , and thought it was worth a shot ... unfortunately , this was not good stuff.

the story is about a possessed bed . a couple moves into a new apartment , discovers the bed , and odd things start happening . odd things like the woman discovers kinky sex . and the man discovers kinky sex . and the woman draws pictures of kinky sex . and the man photographs kinky sex . and they both start having dreams about dead people having kinky sex . you 'd think a movie with so much kinky sex would be good , right?

well .... no . the problem is that this is supposed to be a scary movie , or at least a thriller , and it just does n't deliver . there is little tension , no suspense , and no fear . aside from some troubling dreams and visions , there really is n't anything for this couple to be worried about . the whole movie is basically the two of them having these visions and playing around in bed . sure , you get a monster fight at the end ... and some bloodshed ... but nothing spectacular ... there 's only one murder , and one good scare , and that 's it.

and the kinky sex ? do n't get your hopes up ( or anything else for that matter ) . their idea of kinky sex is woman on top , fully clothed , trying to strangle her mate with a necktie . not exactly my idea of a good time . +1 there are frames in this film that could be renoir paintings with vivid colors against muted backgrounds . the humorous combination of sexual honesty and innocence is refreshing in this fifties film and makes palatable the old story line of the ingenue that becomes a star . the can - can number at the end seems realistic and exciting but not over the top as in an american dance sequence . +1 the stunts sequences ( as well as the special effects ) are brilliant , in this movie . michael scherer must be one of canadas best stunt co - ordinators of all time . the explosion in the café , is a wonderful combination of stunts , special effects and visual effects . the director had an idea , that the crew managed to create on film.

besides that ; donald sutherland makes one of his best performances in this film ....... +0 anyone who watched " alien vs predator " must 've known that the conventions of the " alien quadrilogy " were not exactly adapted for the film . amongst some of the unusual elements , the rapid growth of the aliens over seemingly a matter of minutes , aliens with extremely long tails , and so on . however the idea of the predator species providing the impetus of city and temple building to create a hunt for would be warriors sounded so appealing that i could n't resist.

i had hoped the end of the film would not be the impetus of this sequel , and unfortunately i was wrong . for those who forgot how the first film ended , the dead predator had an alien burst through his chest which carried the traits of both species'.

for this film , i 'm going to just go through a list of " good " and " bad " traits.

the good : lots of gorgeous people , especially the men . < br />
the bad : lots of gorgeous people get munched by both the mutant predator / alien , and the predator.

the good : an interesting idea of the predator planet . < br />
the bad : an inconsistent scale of a town . its a small town without many opportunities , but with a very sophisticated ( read : big city ) sewer system , and homeless . is it a small town , or a city ? the police force is one sheriff and three deputies , or so i counted.

the good : um .... < br />
the bad : why do these mutant aliens / predators grow so fast ? in a matter of five minutes , they seem to grow to their full size . i mean , c'mon ... what are these things ... chia pet aliens ? ? ? and while we 're on this subject , why is it that an alien inside a predator 's body mutates , but an alien in a human 's body does n't ? does that make sense?

the good : still thinking ... < br />
the bad : why would only one predator come ? and why does it pour acid over all the remnants of the " aliens , " but it decides to murder a cute deputy , and then skin him and hang him upside down . i mean , so much for being incognito!

the good : ah ... i'm stuck . i guess there 's lots of loud sounds ! < br />
the bad : how do these mutated alien / predators procreate ? apparently they find a pregnant woman and in a kiss type of motion , they deposit several offspring into the woman 's body . yeah , just what you 'd like to see , eh ? pregnant women having their bodies explode into mutant aliens- as if the previous way was n't gross enough!!!. i mean , there is n't even an alien queen.

the good : did i say that the guys in this movie are gorgeous ? < br />
the bad : when a nuclear device blows apart buildings , how does a helicopter manage to survive the blast ? and how tacky is it for one of the passengers to mockingly chide the pilot " i told you not to crash ! " i mean , given the nuclear fallout , when he wakes up in the morning , he 'll have no hair left!!!

i could go on and on , but i think you get the message . mutated alien / predator bursts through dead predator 's body , grows over the matter of a couple of minutes , kills all the predators and manages to get crashed on earth . more mutant alien / predators are created , while one measly predator comes to earth to destroy this new mutant species . predator kills humans . mutant alien / predators kill humans . humans kill humans . sucks to be a human in this movie , eh?

if you 're impressed by lots of bangs and bumps , you 'll love this movie.

if you liked the first , i suggest you skip this sequel . +0 this movie is about 3 stories put together revolving around 3 separate individuals . one of the worst movie that is available and even better if it is not available.

the good : 2 pretty lesbians actress 1 true and touching story about theresa chan < br />
the bad : the main story that revolves around the blind and dear woman theresa chan does not need to be told in a movie format and more appropriate in a documentary format . no linkage between the 3 story lines . minimum dialogue in the film , substituted by smss and chat programs on pc . no cultural insight by the movie and it makes you forget even before you step out of the cinema . +1 where do i begin ? i first saw this film in 1995 and had no idea of what to expect , i was actually at the time searching out films that elijah wood had starred in and this one had come highly recommended . i sat down and watched the film once and did n't know what to think . i watched it a second time a few days later and the floodgates just opened . never before in my life had i ever really cried while watching a film , and i was blubbing , every high and low the film i was riding right alongside , on an emotional roller coaster.

it struck such an emotional chord in me on many levels , the intense sadness and elation we see in the film , the wonder and innocence of childhood , the yearning for a time that once was , but is no more . more than anything , this film reminded me of my childhood ( except for the abuse ) during a time in my life when i 'd shrugged off my childhood some years before and not even really noticed , i 'd given it up and moved on to a life entirely devoid of it . the radio flyer made me wake up and suddenly realise what i 'd given up without really even noticing . from that day forward i immediately set about to change my life and myself , and i did.

this is going to sound corny but basically i rediscovered my inner child , i started down a path that has been ongoing over the past 6 years and has changed me so much , so much for the better , embracing and living that part of myself . i 've been finding out who i really am . i do n't think it was simply a case of the right film coming along at a crucial moment of my life , the radio flyer really did something very special , and i still look upon it as an incredible piece of work in all respects , an incredible film.

in closing i can not fail to mention the music . i am a great fan of hans zimmer and this is among his very finest works . the sheer breadth and depth of emotional expression he has put into the score of this film is a huge part of what makes the film what it is to me . like subtitles to a foreign language film , his soaring music is a crib sheet to the intense emotions this film will take you through . find the soundtrack at all costs , it was sadly deleted long ago , i never expected to find it but amazingly did , after chatting with someone i met on a hans zimmer fansite guest book.

watch this film , let yourself live the emotions , do n't get bogged in trivial nitpicking of the ending , be that child again +0 well , i 'm a huge fan and follower of elizabeth berkley . i bought this on dvd off of ebay for my boyfriends birthday . we sat down to watch it and it was so boring . i do n't remember laughing once . it 's only on for about an hour and half and it seemed to take forever to end . elizabeth is great in this though . maybe it 's just because i 'm a big elizabeth berkley fan though . if she was n't in it i would n't have watched it but every time she came on my face lit up . unfortunately even elizabeth could n't save this film . just the overall story and awful comedy makes this a film you 'd rather miss than waste an hour and a half of your life . it 's a very forgetful film . +0 they do ... each sequel is worst . you , who think that ghoulies 2 or 3 need a 1 , please , watch this sequel ... you 'll be wondering with the first three parts . then you 'll give a 10 to the first , 8 to the second and 5 or 6 to the other . that 's because ghoulies 4 really gets the big 1 ( from me it does ) . +1 i saw this film on tv in the uk some 25 years ago and it has resonated with me ever since . my interest has recently been rekindled by visiting hilton head - the next island over from " yamacraw " ( daufuskie actually ) , and reading pat conroy 's excellent " the water is wide " . with the benefit of knowledge i have reappraised conrack and consider it a masterpiece . jon voight captures the spirit of conroy and the atmosphere of the film brings the book to life with some accuracy - a hollywood rarity . < br />
three things still strike me about this tale : 1 . the issues of educating the poor and disenfranchised and being inclusive remain the same . 2 . education is about more than reading and writing . 3 .. these kids were my peers , i was 6 in 1969 when pat conroy spent his year on daufuskie.

why this has not made it on to dvd yet ? +0 i saw this film shortly after watching moonlight & valentino with elizabeth perkins , gwyneth platrow , whoopi goldberg and kathleen turner . there are a lot of similarities between the two films . they both have great casts and good acting . they both have stock characters of sisters who are very different , an offensive stepmother , a woman friend / confidant , an emotionally unavailable father , a dead mother and a surprise lover . both films have the characters experience life - changing realizations and both films suffer from a kind of ' love conquers all ' sentimentality . they both add a little titillation with cameron diaz in black underwear and a partial back shot of gwyneth paltrow naked.

both films seem contrived , as if the writers of the works the films are based on did market research and said , " ok , there 's a market for stories about relationships between women , so i 'm going to write about two sisters with an offensive stepmother " in other words , instead of the drama emerging from the truth of the relationship , the relationship is invented to fit the dramatic situation . it seems forced , the characters do n't seem real , the relationships are unbelievable.

the resolution of the tensions between the characters is simplistic with simple apologies completely whisking away years of acrimony leaving everyone feeling warm and fuzzy ever after . it 's just not real . romantic fantasy.

the characters in in her shoes are a little more overblown than moonlight & valentino , especially the stepmother part . sydelle feller is so evil that it is difficult to believe that the father would stay with her , or even marry her in the first place.

if you liked moonlight & valentino you will probably like in her shoes as well . enjoyable performances in both , in fact , the actors bring depth to their parts that goes way beyond the contrived sentimentality of the scripts . +0 brief marital infidelity comes back to haunt loving wife grace needham ( portrayed by the always sexy nastassja kinski).

she had left town , and her depressing husband , to embark on a trip to sunny miami , where she was pursued and ultimately seduced by julian grant , a handsomely evil and manipulative business executive , who is portrayed very well by william baldwin ( why do all of the baldwin brothers play evil people so damn well?)

the seducing of grace took place as the two drank champagne on a deserted beach they reached privately by sailboat . grace admitted she drank too much for her own good and revealed the many problems in her marriage . julian gained her confidence by claiming he would never allow those types of problems to occur , if he had a relationship with grace . julian 's manipulation continued as he described a " lost at sea " fantasy involving the now uninhibited grace , who sat near , listening to his every word and becoming more and more engaged with his romantic dream.

his manipulation paid off as a few subtle nudges led to grace 's soft kisses , paused momentarily by her pulling back as if suddenly thinking to herself ` what am i doing ? i 'm a wife . i 'm a mother . i have a real life . real responsibilities . sure , the two of us have talked about being together , lost at sea , but that is just a fantasy . look at what we 're doing here . the consequences are real . we 're really alone on a secluded beach . am i going to let this fantasy really happen?'

she succumbs to the dream , as her kisses became more passionate . the once guarded grace , who used to respond to men 's propositions by saying " i 'm married " enjoyed watching as julian unbuttoned her shirt , leading to more kisses , body caresses and her climbing onto julian 's lap ! she smiles , kisses , moans , laughs and frequently looks up at the sun throughout what unfortunately was a brief love - making scene in which everybody seemed to have most of their clothes on.

while i thoroughly enjoyed the look of illicit passion on grace 's face as the once devoted wife was being thoroughly satisfied by having sex with a man that clearly enjoys manipulating others , i will say that on the whole , the scene was undeserving of the movie 's " r " rating.

julian returned home to find her husband rejuvenated from his securing of a high paying job , and she is excited about being able to return to a normal life where she can once again be a loving wife and caring mother.

but the evil julian grant reenters the picture and is not willing to give up so easily on grace . grace has a plan to rid her life of julian , but will it work?

obviously , i do n't want to ruin the remaining story line for you . however , i will say that i always enjoy movies involving sexual pretense by a wife ( especially when she exhibits uninhibited attraction and behavior that is normally reserved for her husband ) but in actuality , is seeking revenge against the antagonist . this movie would have been much , much better if the movie had included more of that in the story line . my feelings are if the movie brings it up , then the movie should finish it . and this movie definitely brought it up . unfortunately , certain constraints in the story line prevented this from being significantly pursued . there are many other movies available that succeed with that very point , and i 'll include their titles in the " recommendations " portion of this section . i 'm also open to receiving emailed suggestions of other movies that contain a good story line involving sexual pretense on the part of a seemingly devoted wife.

overall , nastassja kinski and william baldwin are both very good . the movie is not . +0 i found this an awfully disappointing experience ! but i have appended a better option of similar style at the foot of this entry.

this " felicia 's journey " is intriguing . it has drama . but it is full of stereo - types ! < br />
so it only serves judgemental temperaments without concern for truer justice & fairness & truth , beyond black ' n ' white judgements that fit 30-second ads of " news " that dot our multimedia experiences everyday , especially news bulletins , true or misleading in such depictions ! < br />
it is so exaggerated , it reminds me of the fairytale of " little red ridinghood " ! consider the innocent young girl with no identification crossing borders questioned by a guard but freed without any evidence to venture on in search of her ' romeo ' who did n't give her an address versus the pathetically inept lack of substance in the raspy voice of the ' helping hand ' befriending her with his unlikely story fabricated by the layer ! < br />
it seems to suit the directors & management team that no - one has faith or prays to god , even in their times of desperation ! < br />
so in these early settings , it orchestrates & tells much of what is to come ! a nightmare journey that betrays the essence of substance without fairytale resolution , without truth or integrity or credibility ! ... then one twist & it 's all over . what a disappointment ! if you want to see a much superior movie that investigates similar themes with much more credibility , with much more powerful insight , watch the 1983 paul cox / norman kaye " man of flowers " movie ! ! ! < br />
unlike here , you will not be disappointed ! +1 hi , i have to say you got some wrong information about the series here . the main author was richard carpenter , he created the series . later on there were some other authors but they only did a few episodes.

the first director who did most of the series ( i think complete series 1 ) was ian sharp who created the distinct look of robin of sherwood.

clannad did indeed see some of the material and they read the scrips . i know this for sure because richard carpenter told it on a con in england last year.

i think this is a masterpiece of television - entertainment , because it has great characters and cast , good costumes and great story lines . for me still one of the best tv - series ever ! +1 when the long running ' happy ever after ' came to an end , its characters- ' terry & june fletcher ' were revived for the longer running and more popular sequel- ' terry & june ' , although their surnames were changed from fletcher to medford.

terry has received a new job and as a result , he and june move to purley where they end up in all manner of scrapes- unwanted guests dropping by to visit at an inconvenient moment , the boss inviting himself to dinner and terry trying to chance his arm at d.i.y but cocking it up each time . a fellow imdb user branded this show as ' not clever ' and ' never well written ' . fair enough , it was n't clever , but that was the whole point . as for ' never well written'- some of the episodes were pretty substandard , i will admit , but overall i found it to be extremely well written , highly amusing and very well acted.

it was warm hearted slapstick , not dissimilar to the later b.b.c sitcom ' keeping up appearances ' . eight different writers contributed to the nine series , giving the show plenty of scope . terry scott was a comic genius , as he well proved in productions such as ' hugh & i ' , the ' carry on ' films and of course , here ! june whitfield likewise was a comedy legend in her own right.

i enjoy some modern shows- i.e ' still game ' , ' the catherine tate show ' , ' legit ' and ' empty ' . i even enjoyed the ' alternative comedy'- ' naked video ' , ' the young ones ' and ' the comic strip presents ' but i am more inclined to enjoy vintage comedy , such as this . humour that you do n't need to think about is excellent for when you are feeling down and want to lift yourself up . for the record , ' terry & june ' was wonderful stuff . special note should be made of the catchy theme tune which caught the mood of the show tremendously well ! +1 peter strauss , by nature of appearing in mini - series and made - for - tv films , often gets an unfairly high proportion of bad reviews - usually from casual observers who saw ten minutes of the film , having channel - hopped into it half - way through . well , i 've just read all the other 20 reviews for this film and am delighted to see not a single bad word said about the jericho mile - that should be enough to have you blasting out to buy this film!!

peter strauss won an emmy for his role in this film and watching it even once will show you why he deserved it so much .... < br />
looking to be objective , i attempted to criticise this film . instead , i found myself arguing down every one of my possible nit - picks . this is what true , realistic film - making is about . this is not your typical hollywood sensationalism , where everything is overacted - it 's so realistic and true to life that people have thought it 's based on a real event ! ! +0 contains major spoilers , on the off chance you would actually care about the story line.

ok , we have storms that destroy a city and a computer hacker who clobbers the power grid.

predictable schlock from the start , and if that were n't enough , the 5 second action bumps between the movie and the commercials kill what little suspense there might have been . for example : will they make it to the airport in time ? things look dim as we go to a commercial and the action shot before the ad shows them bouncing around inside the plane ! well , i guess they 're gon na make it after all but then again , they had to because they 're good guys.

the acting was n't any too impressive ( exception and welcome relief : randy quaid as tornado tommy ) , the effects were kinda lame , the bad guys got it , and the good guys came through . the real disaster of this movie was the script , especially the ending . not only did they wrap things up happily as quickly as a soap opera given 24 hours notice of a cancellation , but they glorified the hacker as well - intentioned . so he caused a bazillion deaths he meant well . and , of course , an uplifting final tv report about people coming together . barf . it was everything i expected from the commercials , and i 'm glad i wasted my time watching it . it will make great conversation at the lunch table tomorrow.

is cbs insulting us by making this ? sure but we watched it , did n't we ? did you count many ads there were for home backup generators during this pig?

here 's hoping for the next plan 9 from outer space ( which gets better with each viewing ) . this is n't it.

1 star . +1 liv tyler . liv tyler . liv tyler . yeah it 's hard to keep your mind off this fetching beauty ( giving an radiantly picture - perfect performance ) , as she simply has tongues wagging . ' one night at mccool 's ' is a dementedly quirky and raunchy black comedy with old - fashion shades tied in to its familiar , but smartly crafted and chaotic narrative which has three men lusting after the one women and she 's milking it to her advantage . when you see tyler , no wonder why they are infatuated and would do anything that 's anything to see ' her ' happy and living ' her ' dreams . just like tyler , there 's something rather intoxicating about this feature in that we see the likes of matt dillon , john goodman , paul reiser ( who 's great ) and especially michael douglas ( who plays the hired assassin with cool - ease , but a questionable hairdo ) really having a good time with their roles . the consuming plot opens up with the main three characters ( dillon , goodman and reiser ) telling their story of how they came to encounter this divine presence and the eventual affects that she 's having on them to lead to an insane climax . there 's an unpredictable chain of events ( ranging from fruity to sensual ) , where everything would virtually tie in together with a certain ironic ( snowball ) twist of fate for the characters ( that see them leaving their reserved comfort zone to fulfill this girl ) . howard zwart 's direction is colorfully zippy balancing the script 's quick - fire gags and frenetically fun , if complicated situations . one of the best under - the - radar comedies in the last decade , which will have you under tyler 's thumb . +0 everything you do in this world should make at least a little bit of sense . unfortunately very little of " delusion " makes any sense . jennifer rubin is adequate in her role as the main squeeze of hit man kyle secor . secor on the other hand overacts to the point of annoyance . jim metzler , the embezzling yuppie is very unbelievable as the novice , revenge seeking , adversary . when jennifer rubin gives back the money she has carefully been concealing , all credibility flies out the window , and the guns pointing final showdown between secor and metzler is beyond ridiculous . avoid " delusion " , unless you are delusional enough to believe the misguided positive reviews here . - merk +1 ok , if you would judge the movie to now a days it would n't fit in to well . if you watched fi now the stage and everything was pretty cheese ( i agree)but were n't all the movies in the 80 's like that(gilligan , wonderwoman , aso).but too the people born in the early to mid 70 's or earlier it has a cult status . evertime the plane was on approach tattoo would run up the tower ring the bell and with his accent would yell " da plane boss da plane " and you would wonder what everybody 's wish would be . people who are born in the mid 80 's or later would n't understand the hippe because if you watched it now . it do n't have a harry potter , jurassic park computer animation fx.it was just a stage where you probably could even almost see the wire attached to a guy who 's wish was too be able to fly . but to us during that time it was a fantasy island . +0 i am pretty surprised to see that this movie earned even lukewarm reviews , i found this movie downright awful . the plot flounders around trying to decide if it is a comedy or a thriller , then realizes it can not achieve either . so it throws in the towel and continues with its absurd plot highlighted with a unintentional hilarious scene with laura linney , an injection , and spilled coffee that leaves the audience awkwardly squirming in their seats looking at one another like is this for real ? basically it is abysmal and really disappointing for robin williams fans , and it makes you think someone blackmailed laura linney into adding this piece of trash to her otherwise respectable resume . i wanted to leave after 10 minutes and wish i had , even seeing it for free i wanted someone to pay me for my wasted time . the computer glitch / twist in this movie was embarrassingly stupid , and by the end you do n't care who wins the election . i vote for straight to dvd . +0 alright lets break it down . why is this one of the worst films ever ? because there are so many answers to that question i 'm having a headache . come on ... cracker world ? mr. honkee ? the part with the arab guy ? its just awful , i did n't really care about the whole white racism crap , but when they did that thing with the arab guy , i wanted to get the names of all the writers . its really not worth watching 3 seconds of this movie . it is n't even funny - bad which was my first interpretation . i hope the person who directed this movie does n't commit suicide , but it seems likely , i do n't see any other options . don't ever watch this movie , if you watch it , u ca nt say u died with no regrets . +0 in 1990 i saw kathy ireland in person - i was at unt in denton during the filming of " necessary roughness . " strangely enough , the voice she 's using in this film is n't too far off from her real speaking voice.

anyway , the plot goes like this : kathy gets a letter telling her that her father 's fallen into a bottomless pit in africa . she goes and investigates the site of her father 's death , only to get sucked into a subterranean world that 's part dystopian nightmare , part uninspiring fantasy , and inhabited by rejects from the plasmatics . this movie really wastes the talent of linda kerridge , who , in my opinion , could have been someone had she gotten that one big role that was right for her . anyway , the main hero of the story , gus , is a very lame mark " jacko " jackson rip - off . the original is annoying enough to begin with , but this guy really is torture to watch . eventually the nebbish wanda comes out of her shell and ends up wearing a bikini top and a sarong at the end . if you 're going to have kathy ireland in a film in skimpy clothing , it 'd better be a bikini . anyway , the film was just all around bad and rightfully skewered by mst3k.

avoid this one if possible . +0 i was a hippie age 22 in 1965 , have seen the play 5 times , have 2 versions of the music , and have read the script many times . maybe taken as an separate thing , the movie is ok , but as an adoption of the play , it 's terrible.

first the good . the songs are sung well , and the production values are pretty good . the homosexual implications in black boys , white boys is cute . the claude / berger switch was interesting . hair is a fluid production , and constant changes in it are inherent provided the basic spirit of it is retained.

but the basic spirit was very much distorted . it seemed like all the producer wanted was to sing certain songs , and fit the story - line to them regardless of what that did to the original intent of the play.

claude , sheila , and hud were presented as a selfish brats who could care less about anyone outside their tribe . claude destroyed sheila 's parents party ( it 's hard to believe that she smiled while her parents were being hurt ) , and repeatedly stole cars . sheila stole the soldier 's clothes and car . then she left him in the middle of the desert where he would certainly sunburn badly , probably be busted in rank , and could likely die on that lonely nevada road . good fun . and hud found it fine to break his son 's heart while yelling at his ex . this is not what hippies were like , not what the play described , and is directly opposite to a love generation.

i've never seen a hippie beg for money . the point was to be self - sufficient outside the capitalist system , not beg from it.

after berger is thrown in jail for ruining sheila 's party and claude offers to bail some out , berger insists on being bailed instead , with no better plan for bailing the rest that hitting on sheila 's parents , and then hitting on his own mommy.

"be in " has always been a very spiritual point , but here it is wasted on silly brides floating around . even if this is part of his trip , it ruins a beautiful song . i know they 're contrasting " floating in space " with the army . but again , it totally ruins a beautiful song.

while sheila and claude are skinny dipping , berger steals their clothes , laughing " it was fun man " even after he could see both were very annoyed . then a little later , berger does one thing that no hippie ever does . he hits claude . terrible.

then they have the perfect opportunity to sing " starshine " at night in some beautiful sf spot with the stars twinkling down , maybe working into an inventive duet . instead , the whole tribe sings it in the blazing sun speeding down the road in a convertible ( stolen of course).

i was vastly disappointed with the movie in 1979 , and i like it even less now . i think it would have been possible to do a reasonably close adoption of the show , but this ai n't it . +1 latter days < br />
aspect ratio : 1.85:1

sound format : stereo < br />
trouble flares when an la party boy ( wes ramsey ) falls in love with a handsome mormon missionary ( steve sandvoss).

a huge hit on the festival circuit and on limited theatrical release , this likable movie - the feature debut of screenwriter c. jay cox ( sweet home alabama ) - is an exercise in ' opposites attract ' , in which ramsey 's shallow - minded character is changed forever after falling hard for vulnerable beauty sandvoss , who is constrained by the dictates of his religious convictions . here , the path of true love is paved with hardship , not least of which is the reaction of sandvoss ' fellow mormons to his newfound sexuality , which results in his excommunication from the church and the wrath of his indignant parents ( mary kay place has a small but devastating cameo as the boy 's outraged mother ) . but cox 's script focuses chiefly on ramsey 's path to redemption , as his hedonistic lifestyle is thrown into disarray by sandvoss ' influence , and by the responsibilities which emerge as a consequence of his developing maturity : he volunteers as an outreach participant , delivering food to aids patients living at home , leading to an unexpected friendship with former party boy erik palladino ( tv 's " er " ) , whose illness provides ramsey with a much - needed wake - up call.

cox 's script is laced with juicy one - liners and various pearls of wisdom ( on mormonism : " your church does n't like alcohol or homosexuals ? well , i 'm definitely not joining - i ca n't imagine heaven without both ! " ) , and the characters are surprisingly complex and well - drawn . ramsey has the showier , sexier role ( he 's first seen doing something rude to a willing participant ! ) , but it 's sandvoss who has become something of a gay icon , with his sensitive portrayal of a sweet - natured innocent whose journey from darkness into light leads to a startling revelation about his place in the world around him . he and ramsey are well - matched , and their inevitable sex scene ( brief but memorable ) is followed by a compelling sequence in which ramsey describes a childhood trauma which has defined his life to date.

filmed on hi - def video and transferred to 35 mm for theatrical exhibition , the movie 's meager budget places limitations on the scope and grandeur of cox 's ambitions , though the characters and situations are strong enough to survive this minor drawback . jacqueline bisset shines as a worldly - wise restaurateur at the diner where ramsey waits tables for a living , and joseph gordon - levitt ( " third rock from the sun " ) steals everyone 's thunder as sandvoss ' fellow mormon , opposed to his friend 's relationship with ramsey on religious principle ... but only on principle . though a little stilted in places , the movie aches with romantic longing , and deserves plaudits for its honesty and compassion . best seen with a crowd of like - minded viewers , preferably with a loved one by your side . +0 i am a fan of good historical fiction , and was thrilled at the thought that someone would take a well written book series and film it . writing scripts is not like writing regular fiction , but when you have a book you are adapting , it would be nice to actually follow the plot line.

the portrayals of the vespasians ( the actual emperor , and his 2 sons titus and domitian ) was horrid . they acted like a cookie cutter caligula , and were the ' bad guys ' in this adaptation . there was a scene with titus dispensing justice as if he was caligula ( from the movie of the same name . ) the way the vespasianii are portrayed in the books mostly follow the reports of historians writing in that time period - they were fair , and sane , not tainted by the imperial claudian insanity.

helena ( the love interest of marcus didius falco ) gives as her reason for divorcing pertinax ( one of the traitors referenced in the title ) was that he was a traitor , yet in the books it was because he ignored her and she felt that she would be better off marrying someone who valued her as a person.

marcus in the movie gets a slave named justus , yet in the books he could barely afford his apartment , let alone afford a slave . there was certainly no romantic interlude between the nonexistent slave justus and a female gladiator ...

on the whole , if you want good cookie cutter roman stereotypes get caligula , if you want good roman from the classical history viewpoint , get i , claudius . +0 this movie strayed too far from straub 's novel for me to enjoy . barely made it to the middle of the film . besides changing don wanderly from edwards nephew into his son , the removed most of the major scenes and a number of characters that gave the novel so much life . what was left was trash . straub 's version was far superior to this poorly executed film . i do n't think casting did all that great a job on picking the chowder society members either . hopefully someone will come along and actually remake this film correctly in my lifetime . i just hate when hollywood butchers the works of talented authors because they think their version so much better . makes me sick . +0 this soft soft - core / sci - fi b - movie is what you 'd have if you took an early fred olen ray film and took out the fun . or conversely , it 's like an uwe boll ' movie ' but without as much ineptitude . a young nubile chain - gang convict ( c.c. costigan ) agrees to pose as a space marshal in order to stop wacky kim dawson 's plans of ... having everyone have sex with everyone else apparently ( that vile fiend ) . anyone who went into this film looking for serious science fiction , well you got what you deserved for not doing any homework on the film at all . first of all when did kim dawson ever star in anything other than soft - core skinamax level crap . for that matter take a look at the resume 's for costigan and the director before you take a hissy fit saying you expected something else . do n't get me wrong , for a space / action / soft - core / titillation flick , this film is still not good , but if you expected something along the lines of " contact " , i do not pity you.

my grade : d- < br />
where i saw it : starz - on - demand ( available until december 8th , 2005 ) +0 this is by far one of the most pretentious films i have ever seen . it is a tight slap on the face of some indians who speak in english and were looking at the mirror . disgusting . the bubble gum version of the 1970s politics of the north indian plains . the message - the educated english - speaking indian tried to save the poor beggars of india in all earnestness . it ignores the fact that the poor beggars are also capable of and are saving themselves on their own.

as a love story its okay . the problem is that the love story and character development is based upon a completely fraudulent version of politics . +1 this era was not just the dawn of sound in cartoons , but of a cartoon character which would go down in history as the world 's most famous mouse . yes , mickey makes his debut here , in this cheery tale of life on board a steamboat . the animation is good for it 's time , and the plot - though a little simple - is quite jolly . a true classic , and if you ever manage to get it on video , you wo n't regret it . +0 a previous imdb reviewer has stated that ' rafter romance ' is a ' rip - off ' ( that 's the other reviewer 's term ) of a german musical called ' me by day , you by night ' . apparently that reviewer is unaware that * both * of these films have borrowed their premise from ' box and cox ' , an english play written by john maddison morton in 1847 . this play deals with two tradesmen who rent the same room from an unscrupulous landlady , each man believing himself the sole tenant . because the two men have different work schedules , the ruse is not discovered straight away . this play was once so popular in britain that ' to box and cox it ' became a common term for an arrangement in which two people willingly shared accommodations meant for only one person.

the innovation of ' rafter romance ' ( and its predecessor ) is that the two tenants are now a man and a woman , who inevitably develop a romance . as is usual in these cornball movies , the guy and the gal detest each other until they fall into each other 's arms . hoo boy.

the landlord in this film is played by george sidney , a character actor who specialised in playing jewish stereotypes that were meant to be sympathetic . george sidney was never as annoying as the odious harry green ( the jewish equivalent of stepin fetchit ) but sidney 's depictions of jewish characters are still exaggerated and embarrassing to watch.

the single most notable thing about ' rafter romance ' is that , to my knowledge , this is the earliest hollywood film to make reference to hitler and the rise of nazism . at one point in this movie , landlord eckbaum ( sidney ) discovers his teenage son julius engaged in chalking swastikas on the walls . eckbaum and his son are clearly meant to be jewish . admittedly , nobody in hollywood in 1933 had any real idea of what hitler was planning for the jews in europe ... still , it 's surprising to see a film depicting a jewish teenager who thinks that swastikas are a joke . his father is , quite properly , angered by this display of the nazi symbol.

a very shameful aspect of hollywood history is the documented fact that all of the major hollywood studios continued to do business with the third reich as late as 1939 . hollywood 's leading ladies were medically documented as ' aryan ' so that their films could be distributed in nazi germany and austria . for the same reason , hollywood 's leading men were documented as ' aryan and uncircumcised ' . except for darryl zanuck at twentieth century - fox , all the hollywood studio executives who colluded in this policy were jewish ... but clearly had no objection to doing business with hitler . i 'm surprised that ' rafter romance ' contains a scene depicting swastikas unfavourably , as this sequence would have rendered the film verboten in germany and austria . ( maybe the scene was cut out for german release : it is n't crucial to the movie 's plot . ) apart from this , the movie contains nothing notable . robert benchley does his usual unfunny befuddled characterisation : i 've never understood the appeal of this man . i 'll rate ' rafter romance ' 4 out of 10 . +0 " hoods " does n't deliver the goods . this half - baked mafia comedy boasts a stellar cast , including joe mantegna , kevin pollack , joe pantoliano , jennifer tilly , and seymour cassel , along with a number of faces familiar to those who watch crime movies , but it is truly a misfire if there ever was one . writer & director mark malone , best known for writing " dead of winter " for " bonnie & clyde " director arthur penn , has penned up a pedestrian potboiler that has an ailing but vengeful mob boss louie martinelli ( seymour cassel ) dispatching his son angelo ( joe mantegna of " house of games " ) to whack carmine dellarosa . it seems that a rival mob fire - bombed one of pop 's warehouses ( in the opening scene ) and martinelli wants payback . trouble is that nobody has a clue as to who carmine dellarosa is . in any other mob comedy , such a complication might be amusing , but here is just plain flat . angelo and a carload of wiseguys , including his best pal rudy ( kevin pollack of " deterrence " ) spend half of the time trying to find out who carmine is . neither rudy nor angelo want to perform the hit , so they track down a crazy mob hit - man charlie ( joe pantoliano of " bad boys " ) to do the dirty deed . before they can convince charlie to make the hit , they have to locate him , and charlie 's slutty wife mary ( jennifer tilly of " bound " ) reveals that he is locked up in a mental hospital . our misfit heroes cruise out to the mental hospital and break charlie out . about half of the movie is over before they discover that carmine is a kid in short pants ( vincent berry ) who is bland and harmless . indeed , carmine has the only decent line in the movie . as our brainless bunch of heroes wheel away from his house with him in the backseat to take care of business , carmine warns them that they need to get him home in time or his father will kill him . charlie tries to ice the urchin but he can not . instead , he reconnects with his feelings and wants to go back to the mental hospital so he can report the good news to his doctor . meanwhile , after charlie decides not to shoot carmine , the kid gets his paws on the pistol and pops off several aimless rounds . angelo and he struggle over the automatic . the pistol slips out of their collective hands and hits the ground , goes off , and blows a hole in rudy 's chest . now , keep in mind that rudy never wanted to shoot the kid in the first place , and angelo and he argued over the wrong - headedness of the hit . so rudy winds up on the ground with a fatal wound , while angelo struggles to stop the bleeding . talk about a dull death scene . angelo is conflicted himself because his father ordered the hit and angelo fears that dad will do him in if he does n't execute orders . there is a flashback subplot about angelo 's father teaching him how to handle a gun that provides some insight into angelo 's reluctance to pack a gun.

there is nothing remotely redeeming about this depressing comedy with a downer of an ending . things gets worse , and if you last through this 90 minute nonsense , you 'll see what i mean . the comedy is largely laugh - less . good actors wallow in sketchy roles that are n't even funny . perhaps director malone was trying to do another comedy like " the gang that could n't shoot straight . " if he was , he missed by a mile . big - breasted jennifer tilly shows cleavage and snarls through a couple of scenes with mantegna , but she does n't do much of anything else . she 's the stereotypical slut who does n't even get naked . a paycheck is the only way to explain the presence of such a talented cast , otherwise this picture is pathetic from start to finish . initially , i had hoped that this might be a " ransom of red chief " knockoff where the kid drives the wiseguys nuts , but no such luck here . of course , the biggest surprise is that they have to kill a kid , but it 's not the kind of a surprise that makes you want to watch it up to its resolution.

i actually bought this movie on a canadian dvd label—seville—and it contains only the most basic special features . if you hate previews that give away the plot , do n't watch the trailer . if you ever meet joe mantegna , one of your first questions should be why he helped to produce this yawner . it is neither hilarious nor dramatic . there are no quotable lines , and none of the characters stand out as either interesting or sympathetic . the seville dvd presents the movie in full frame with no subtitles or closed captioning . +0 i watched the first few episodes a short while back and felt i could n't take it anymore . the horrible looking fight scenes are the worst i 've ever scene in my life . about one - third of each episode is dedicated to flash gordon and his " mighty " fight moves . i know fight choreography from that era is n't exactly up to par with today 's standards , but this is ridiculous . they do n't even try to make it look realistic . flash gordon , who hardly resembles a fighter , uses his drunken slow moves and bare fist to knock out four or five guys with knives , guns , and other weapons . give me a break ! there 's also a scene where he does some similar act while in the water . basically every episode has scenes similar to that . as for the rest of the episode , there 's not much else i remember . i basically viewed it out of curiosity on what science fiction looked like 70 years ago . +0 some may go for a film like this but i most assuredly did not . a college professor , david norwell , suddenly gets a yen for adoption . he pretty much takes the first child offered , a bad choice named adam . as it turns out adam does n't have both oars in the water which , almost immediately , causes untold stress and turmoil for dr. norwell . this sob story drolly played out with one problem after another , all centered around adam 's inabilities and seizures . why norwell wanted to complicate his life with an unknown factor like an adoptive child was never explained . along the way the good doctor managed to attract a wifey to share in all the hell the little one was dishing out . personally , i think both of them were one beer short of a sixpack . bypass this yawner . +1 sure , it has its pretentious moments , it plays like art - house , live - action fantasia , but it also has moments of deep beauty and humor . omnibus films are always a problem , but i have always had a keen interest in them . i will now rate the segments individually.

nicolas roeg - " un ballo in maschera " - this segment may very well spoil the film for some people , because it is absolutely the worst of the whole bunch . it is difficult to follow , mostly because it tries to adhere to a clear plot ( a hackneyed one , at that ) . the photography is unaccomplished . the best thing about it is the bit of lesbian homoerotica that it never does enough with . this segment made me very nervous about continuing . 2/10.

charles sturridge - " la virgine degli angeli " - an unclear segment , but it hardly matters . the film has the best cinematography of the bunch , mainly because it is in a stunning black and white . the segment is dreamlike and beautiful . 7/10.

jean - luc godard - " armide " - i chose to brave this much - maligned film for the godard and altman segments . with godard , i was much more impressed than i thought i would be . i ca n't claim to have seen all that many of his films since he made so many that almost no one has seen , but , judging from what i have seen , this may be his best work since the 60s . it is the funniest segment in this film , and the most artistically accomplished . bravo , jean - luc ! 9/10.

julien temple - " rigoletto " - a very funny segment , it is also quite predictable . still , this story about a husband and wife who are cheating on each other at the same resort is wonderfully filmed with long , complex tracking shots that depend on precisely timed choreography from the actors . it also has a great self - referencing joke about omnibus films themselves . the final scene is very weak . 7/10.

bruce beresford - " die tote stadt " - this short segment involves too lovers in ( i think ) venice . it is pretty , with some nice shots of doves flying about the city . it is slight , but nice . 7/10.

robert altman - " les boréades " - not one of the better segments , unfortunately , this is more of a music video than a concept short film . it involves the occupants of an insane asylum attending a theatrical performance . the music and images work well together , so at least i can give it credit for being a good music video . 7/10

franc roddam - " liebestod " - somewhat unfortunate for beresford 's segment , this segment is very similar to it . as you might assume from my phrasing , this one struck me much more . it is about a young man and his girl going to las vegas on a fatalistic voyage . 8/10.

ken russell - " nessun dorma " - maybe the most visually striking segment , it plays in a fantasy world more than in reality . it is a beautiful tale of a fallen angel . 8/10.

derek jarman - " depuis le jour " - i have heard a lot about jarman , and this is the first piece of filmmaking i have seen from him . hopefully , i 'll see more in the future . this one is also music - videoish , but it is better than altman 's segement . it mainly concerns an old woman remembering her younger days . the editing and the use of different film stocks to represent both time and emotion are very beautiful . 8/10.

bill bryden - " i pagliacci " - the sad clown , possibly one of the most famous arias ( particularly memorable from an episode of seinfeld ) , this serves as the material separating each segement and the finale . it is simple and effective . 7/10.

overall , i give it a solid 7/10 . it is n't anywhere near as bad as you 've heard . +1 grabbed my attention on netflix instant play because it was only an hour and a half long ( it 's nearing 4 am here ) , and because it 's norwegian , which i wanted to follow up with dead snow and see what else the country is offering in international cinema right now . a droll and deliciously wry romp , this movie features a man , andreas , who gets shipped out to some purgatory of a brave new world city , where everyone is happy and bland and food has no taste , nothing smells , and even sex loses its appeal . driven to the edge by his lack of common senses , he feels nearly ready to kill himself.

after an hilarious botched attempt at latter , andreas tracks down a man with similar complaints and the two discover a tiny , vagina - shaped hole in a concrete wall from which music emanates . the two attempt to break through to see what is on the other side , tracking a tiny bit of light they can barely see . but of course , in fantasy allegory land , desire and nonconformity are not allowed and the elements of the city operate to end andreas ' attempt at freedom and sensuality.

jens lien and crew create a simple , straight - forward movement to the story , one that flows well with its themes and moves along at just enough of a pace to keep from lagging . the similarities in other similar science fiction are n't worth enumerating , but still the movie has a unique feel and balances some very funny scenes with some pretty horrifying ones . i like the limited but effective use of gore in this movie , some disembowelment and flagellation that will get your heart stammering harder than the passion of the christ simply because it is so perfectly out of place from the gray - toned mise - en - scene . trond fausa aurvaag is a dependably squirrelly actor who physically feels out of place from his surroundings , which works very well . despite the fact that the concept itself is n't anything to write home about , everyone involved makes it work and the movie fully realizes its own world.

--polarisdib +1 this was an excellent movie ! i saw this at the karlovy vary iff in the czech republic , and it won an award there . this is the first film i 've ever seen from jan ( the director ) , and i was impressed . it 's a great story about love and family . the movie has a great balance of comedy , romance , drama , and suspense all in one . i will not give away any of the plot , but this is a well - made film , and i would watch it again if i had the chance ! the cinematography / editing is great , the film simply flows , and the characters are warm , and they are the kind that one can relate to . i hope you can enjoy this film as i did . if anyone knows where i can find this in the united states , or if they plan on releasing it on dvd anytime soon , please let me know ! ! +1 i ca nt believe how many excellent actors can be on one show . it 's the realism and fine acting that makes it look real . this has got to be the best comedy ever created to this day and i love seinfeld and everyone loves ramond . it is just fabulous and it seems everyone in my family agrees . that s no isolated opinion of mine . the whole world seems to talk about different incidents and they try to reenact them . my hat off to the crew . some shows have an actor that makes the whole show . this plot comedy has a slew ( 8) of them . that 's what makes it so amazing . some people pray for health , wealth or fame . i pray that the show never ends . sicerely john . lkhubble2@talkamerica.net +1 044 : the big trail ( 1930 ) - released 10/24/1930 ; viewed 4/5/06.

births : richard harris , harold pinter , robert atkins.

doug : in hollywood , raoul walsh unveiled his latest film , the big trail , a western about the trek west across the frontier , starring up - and - coming 23-year - old actor john wayne . in 1930 , we are seeing many " firsts " but few " bests . " besides the first john wayne film , we have here the first widescreen film ( although we only watched the full - frame version ) . interestingly , the decision to film in widescreen was essentially the same reason that widescreen became popular later : to compete with television , which had n't yet appeared commercially but was still an emerging curiosity . all the same , this film was extremely good , giving us a harrowing look at the trek to oklahoma . the opening title cards let us know that this is a western of the most traditional kind , about america , about the land , who should live on it , etc . , and is an excellent demonstration of that . walsh gives us some astonishing visuals of the wagon company out in the wilderness ( when they reach a cliff , they must rope each wagon down one by one ) , and we also get a revenge subplot involving wayne pursuing the man who killed one of his friends ( i seem to recall something similar in stagecoach ) . wayne 's tough cowboy routine is at least partly there , and would surely evolve further in subsequent films . since this film is representing all of wayne 's early 30 's work for the odyssey , we will not see his face again until stagecoach , but once we do , we will keep seeing him to the end of the odyssey and beyond.

kevin : ah , our first sound western , and john wayne 's first starring role . it 's raoul walsh 's the big trail . this review will be short , since it 's been weeks since i watched it . i enjoyed this movie , but it was far from a masterpiece . the mostly predictable adventure had a few surprises , like when the brains of the bad guys , red flack ( tyrone power sr . in his last role ) is killed half way through ; i thought he would be the boss at the end , but that ended up being bill thorpe ( ian keith ) . i remember that i did n't like the way breck ( wayne ) kills thorpe and exacts revenge at the end . i understood that that 's what he was meant to do in the story , but i really did n't like his reasoning when he tells ruth why he has to do it . i think he had a far greater responsibility to the hundreds of settlers he was leading through the harsh west.

last film viewed : animal crackers ( 1930 ) . last film chronologically : soup to nuts ( 1930 ) . next film : l'age d'or ( 1930 ) . +0 there 's nothing wrong with softcore but this one is pretty clinical - lots of nudity but it 's all fake ( of course , it 's always fake - it 's a movie but you know what i mean ) . there 's no sexuality or erotica , it 's all random nudity and poor acting of " lust " and sex with each other.

part of it is of course , your personal preference . these women clearly have some body issues with their piercings , tattoos and silicon - not to mention that overly plastique & leathery look so if that 's your thing - great , you get to see all that here.

i do n't think anyone 's expectations are very high when looking at a movie title such as this but for many people , it would be pretty much like looking at cyborg fembots ... they almost seem real but it 's really more creepy . +1 this is an incredible movie that begins slowly . it leads you along in thinking of it as a typical maudlin family drama . then , in the second half , there is a plot twist that utterly transforms this into a profound tale of global scope.

if you are unaccustomed to films from india , with song and dance routines seemingly grafted on for no reason , stick with this movie . especially beginning with the second half , you will find this movie an amazing experience.

* * * * * * * * * * * minor spoiler here * * * * * * * * * * * * * i have but one complaint with the movie . the dialog at the end ( between amudha and mds ) seemed very weak and missed the opportunity to bring in the war as a force that transforms people 's lives . it was implied all along , but there should have been something about the importance of the struggle for mds . +1 hello all ! i went to this movie without any expectation though i knew maniratnam would 've given an excellent film ! i was stunned ! ! the backdrop is the struggle between the tamils settled in sri lanka and the government . the story is about how an young girl amudha who lives with her foster parents at chennai , india leaves to sri lanka in search of her real mother . the high points of the film are the performances of every actor and actress and ofcourse , the cinematography , editing and all other technical details . full marks to the cast and crew . i have to mention about the cinematography as it brings out the war in such a way that you feel yourself being there . excellent work ! though the war sequences reminded me of saving private ryan , such a work was never attempted on indian screen . overall the movie is great ! and hats off to mr . maniratnam.

mani ratnam has once again proved that he is a director who can take indian cinema to great heights ! i would love to watch this film again and again . an excellent film and a must see . +1 whenever hayao miyazaki does the " tri - fecta , " ( writes , directs , and animates a movie ) he makes a classic film for the ages . he has done it again with gake no ue no ponyo.

the story is about a girl fish who is kept on a very tight leash along with her younger sisters by her father , a bitter ex - human wizard named fujimoto . the fish escapes from her father and rides a jellyfish to shore , where she is caught up in a dredging operation and finds herself stuck in a bottle . this underwater sequence must be one of the most elaborately drawn animated scenes ever undertaken and stands on its own as a reason to search out the theatrical release . miyazaki , who shows no fear of having a busy scene , has outdone himself . there were literally hundreds of individually - drawn sea creatures of every imaginable size all in motion at the same time.

when the fish escapes the dredging operation while still trapped in the bottle , a five - year old boy named sousuke spots her in the water and is able to break the bottle , saving her . since she is the result of her father 's magic , she is capable of magic herself -- and her father actively tries to retrieve her . the boy names the fish ponyo . just when sousuke learns that ponyo can speak , her father successfully retrieves her back into captivity.

after a war of wills with her father , ponyo manages to escape again with the ability to change herself into a human . she meets up again with sousuke in a storm and the story continues from there in many interesting ways . there is a cuteness factor in this film rivaling and arguably surpassing that of tonari no totoro . joe hisaishi , once again , provided outstanding musical support.

the story itself is simple -- as are miyazaki 's films in general -- and should appeal to a broad spectrum of viewers . while i have n't viewed it enough to be sure , the film does n't seem to be one which will keep scholars in long discussions as sen to chihiro no kamikakushi did . nonetheless , this is the ultimate feel - good entertainment movie . i gave the movie a ten out of ten rating . +1 " one crazy summer " is the funniest , craziest ( not necessarily the best ) , movie i have ever seen.

just when one crazy scene is done , another emerges . it never lets you rest . just one thing after another . the soundtrack is great . the songs are the right ones for the scenes.

it is also a clean movie . little that is dirty in it.

of course , it has the story of the guys you would n't trust with your lunch money , taking up a challenge , and winning over people with more resources . who 'd want to see it if they failed ? there is a serious side , in that parents and children do not live up to each others ' dreams . one should always have an open mind , and weigh all the options . this applies both to parents and children . in " one crazy summer " , the parents are wrong . this is not always the case . +1 focus is an engaging story told in urban , wwii - era setting . william macy portrays everyman who is taken out of his personal circumstances and challenged with decisions testing his values affecting the community . laura dern , macy and david paymer give good performances , so also the good supporting ensemble . +0 there was absolutely nothing in this film that had n't been done better in a hundred other films . it was barely worth the trouble of watching through to the end . even the bad language sounded tired . tom mccamus , a very fine actor , was particularly disappointing here . +0 if you 're looking for a movie that 's fun to watch simply because you can make jokes about the not so great acting , cheesy " special " effects , and typical sci - fi plot ... then this is the movie for you ! not at the acting was bad , in fact , a few actors were actually fairly decent . the special effects were n't the greatest ( to say the least ) ; the animals looked completely computer animated . there was an annoying squawking to cover up the swearing and there was only one song played over and over again throughout the entire movie . overall , a good movie if you 're looking for something completely cheesy and fun to make fun of . not a good movie to watch if you 're looking for something serious . +0 aside from frank kress ( who played abraham gentry ) , an appearance by henny youngman and the last seconds of the movie , there really was n't anything particularly good about this film . why it is currently rated 5.3 and adored by some reviewers is beyond me -- the film is 99.44 % crap ... and exactly what i would have expected from director hershell gordon lewis . in the 1960s and 70s , lewis was known for making a string of incredibly low budget exploitation films , such as blood feast and monster a go - go . however , in recent years he 's been christened " the father of gore " and he has many , many fans -- fans who ignore the ineptitude of his work and only focus on how groundbreaking some of his films were . but apart from the liberal use of fake blood and real guts , at heart , his films are pure crap -- and do n't believe scores of 9 and 10 for his films . this would be like putting a velvet elvis painting in the louvre!!

the film is about a string of very grisly murders that happen to strippers . when i say gruesome , it 's very bloody and sick for 1972 - -though by today 's standards the special effects look amazingly lame . so , while some very deviant and cruel murders happen in the film ( i 'd rather not explain them -- they are from a pretty sick mind and show a particularly sick disregard for women ) , at least they wo n't nauseate you because they were done so poorly . it 's obvious that in many cases they are cutting apart rubber dolls and mannequins . but to have them doing some of the sick acts , even if unrealistic , is pretty nasty and shows a lot of misogyny.

the only hope in the film , as the police are all idiots , is a guy named abraham gentry -- whose mannerisms and style of speech are very close to the stock actor , david lochary , from the early john waters films . while his acting is bad , he is so flamboyant and funny that he kept my interest . he could be pretty funny and oddly this is the only film he ever made ! ! it was also odd that so many women wanted him -- especially because they just did n't seem like his type.

as for the rest of the folks in the film , they are cretins and idiots who could not act . in fact , i was kind of hoping more would be killed -- they really had it coming ! none of their acting was the least bit believable and apparently the director never re - shot a single scene -- as most of the scenes in the film were worse than any of the ones in ed wood 's masterpiece , plan 9 from outer space . in fact , for many of the women in the film , the only prerequisite for their appearing in the film is that they be willing to take off their clothes . now i know this will sound pretty mean , but most of them were incredibly unattractive and looked like drug addicts who strip to get their next fix . when these ladies take off their clothes , men in the crowd give them money to put it back on ( wow -- henny youngman should have said that in the film ) ! but , considering lewis ' budgets , these were probably the best " actresses " he could get.

overall , a sleazy bucket of bile that manages to be worse than most of the director 's other films ... and that 's saying a lot ! it 's violent ( yet dumb ) , anti - women ( treating them like meat and things to be mutilated ) and is thoroughly incompetent from start to finish . +1 never had i seen such a powerful true story movie . i discovered a city , a country , a lost revolution and even a nobel prize winner thanks to this masterpiece of cinema.

if you have n't seen this movie , you ca n't say you 've seen anything .

a great lesson of courage , humility and life.

i have n't seen anything as good since.

t.e. saturday , january 9th , 1999 +0 no . just no . that 's all that needs to be said.

summary : a random guy is in a cornfield . for some reason , i 'm not sure , but it 's his duty to run around inside . the next great thriller?

a five year old could make a better movie just filming an anthill , or even just grass growing . seriously .....

you ca n't say it has bad acting , because there is no acting . you ca n't say it has bad writing , because it has no writing . you ca n't say it has bad cinematography , because there is no cinematography . you ca n't say it 's a bad movie , because there is no movie ! if you do n't believe me , go watch it . just do n't say i never warned you ..... +0 linda lovelace was the victim of a sadistic woman hater , chuck traynor . i do n't understand how having sex with a dog ( which is animal abuse , as well ) can be found to be entertaining or funny . linda lovelace was a virtual prisoner who was coerced into making these films . i know some people will criticize this comment but i feel strongly that these types of films fuel the fire of hatred and further misogynistic feelings towards women . this society continues to portray women as sexual objects as opposed to human beings . we call ourselves " civilized " however i feel we have a long way to go before we can ever scratch the surface of being civilized . +1 real - life husband and wife paul bettany and jennifer connelly star in creation , which recounts the period of charles darwin 's life prior to the publication of " on the origin of species " in 1859 , his infamous , world changing tome on evolution and natural selection . darwin 's research created an enormous rift , a schism between the believers of his day and scientists . he was said at the time to be going to war against god , and even to have " killed god".

the film revolves around darwin 's life with his wife and four children . jennifer connelly is excellent as his extremely devout and loving wife . a revealing scene at the beginning when she leads the dinner table in prayer and charles fails to say " amen " is foreshadowing of what will follow and of the stark differences between the two . she is convinced that he will be eternally damned and bring misfortune to their family by rejecting god.

darwin is torn between his strong love for his wife , her faith and his even stronger reason . there are beautiful moments of him observing animals , dissecting their behaviors and the sequences that make up their lives , explaining phenomenons of selection to his children , the first born , annie , having a very morbid curiosity . we see him interacting with england 's first orangutan , jenny , playing with it as if it were a child , deciphering her every look and action . < br />
annie , the eldest child , later dies and charles becomes haunted by her death , having been closest to her . in my opinion this part was too long , bizarre and drawn out . i did not like the trippy scenes where he seems to be losing his mind and is pursued by the ghost of his daughter , shouting and ranting . although charles thinks that his wife blames him for her fatal sickness , she very poetically says : " the truth is , if i knew then what i know now , i would marry you tomorrow " . their bond is solid and unbreakable despite tremendous differences of belief . < br />
when charles finishes his manuscript he hands his wife the final copy , telling her she can burn it if she does not agree . she stays up reading it nights on end and finally presents him with a package , the book ready to be sent to its publisher . in the end , reason and perhaps love as well , triumph , as he makes an accomplice out of his staunchest adversary.

it is fascinating that darwin received a full christian burial at westminster abbey , proof that his ground - breaking ideas were seen as controversial of course , but were already then recognized as vital knowledge for the advancement of the human race . < br />
the movie definitely draws heavily on darwin 's family life , its joys and its troubles . i happened to like this aspect but fabio said it was like watching a documentary on , i quote , " hitler 's passion for ping - pong " . this is true in some respects and i ca n't disagree with his desire to have learned more about charles darwin 's theories from this film than we do . it remains nevertheless a well executed and flawlessy acted period drama . < br />
my rating : 7 fabio 's : 7 total score : 14 +0 this was a modest attempt at a film , though it appeared more like a tv pilot extended.

some may find this unfair , but it looks like someone saw " the brothers " and " save the last dance " , and thought " hey , i could do that too . " well , not quite.

while i personally found the movie predictable , somewhat poorly acted , and contrived ( watch for the cookies ) , carl payne shows that he can carry off a lead role , and should be back on television . the leading lady ( ca n't remember her name , sorry ) was plausible too , but you keep thinking of julia stiles ( she was the one in " save the last dance " , right ? ) because this one was really stuck in " white girl " mode . +1 this definitely the most tension filled x - files episode of the first season . this episode is what i think of when i hear " x - files " . the plot is simple but exiting . our main cast plus a few scientist go to investigate an alskan outpost in which it 's research team appears to have killed each other . it turns out a small parasite that got dug up from the ice , had infected the research team . the parasite attaches itself to the brain and causes paranoia and insanity . soon none can tell who they can trust , or who 's infected or not.

this episode was a direct tribute to john carpenters great horror film " the thing " . the thing is set in antarctica and a team of scientist find a destroyed outpost in which it 's occupant have been killed or killed themselves . an alien that had been buried in the ice for a 10000 years had been thawed out . it has the abilities to imitate any life form . therefore the main characters can no longer distinct friends from foes.

believe me the thing is one of the most exiting , and tension filled horror movies you 'll ever see . if you liked the episode ice i advice you to see it . or if you have only seen the thing i advice you to see ice.

ice is the best direct tribute / homage to john carpenter 's the thing i have ever seen , and it lives up to it 's inspiration as one of the best x - files episodes . i give it a 10/10 . +0 the cavern : 2 out of 10 : blair witch meets the cave and gives me a headache.

i have something to ask all film schools , could you please teach future directors how to hold a camera steady . flailing the camera around like aunt betty with 12 drinks is headache inducing.

also film is primarily a visual medium directors may want to point their camera 's in the general direction of the action . film also requires light to work . perhaps a light source should be employed so one can see the action on the screen . i know it is a cave movie but there is absolutely nothing frightening about watching pitch blackness for minutes at a time.

for that matter showing the film upside down does n't indicate confusion on screen it indicates confusion in the editing booth.

a last note to the director i 'm sure there was a good reason to have a horribly fake cgi campfire . i honestly ca n't for the life of me think of one.

now on to the screenwriter . try to make at least one character likable . i 'd prefer two or more but one decent person i can root for or care about might help . also if you are going to have flashbacks make them relevant to the story.

if you are going to have a surprise ending it is probably best if it does n't contradict every single thing that comes before it . and try adding some fancy spelunking terms to a cave movie . you might have wanted to start with spelunking.

the cavern is a pretty bad film , poorly shot with a confusing , improbable and anticlimactic ending . +1 this is a modest , unassuming traditional western with a formulaic plot about opposition between ranchers and crop farmers around the town of liberal , kansas .the story is essentially routine and features a number of the classic western conflicts .there is the farmer versus the cattleman;there is the clash between cultivated land and " civilizing " tendencies on the one hand and the wilderness / frontier ethos on the other and what this represents ultimately is the opposition of two value systems -democratic and community values as set against rugged individualism .

randolph scott plays legendary lawman bat masterton who rides into liberal at behest of a land agent ( robert ryan ) to help him sort out the bad guys who are the hard drinking , brawling cattlemen .the two men quarrel but reunite to tackle the troublesome elements in the town .

the script is clichéd but the action is propelled along with vigour by director ray enright and there are solid performances all round .in addition to rugged performances by the male leads there is comic relief supplied by george gabby hayes , an oily villain nicely played by steve brodie and attractive contributions from maggie meredith as a prim and proper easterner wooed by ryan and anne jeffreys as a saloon singer as long as you do not place a premium on originality this is good sturdy entertainment for western lovers +0 a ridiculous movie , a terrible editing job , worst screenplay , ridiculous acting , a story that is completely ununderstandable ...

if god was going to decide if movies should continue to be done , judging by this one , the entire world movie industry would now be dead ...

a wonderful movie to show that cinema should not be done by people who " think " they can make movies.

i am still wondering who are those two gipsy girls who show up in the movie for over half an hour , and are never introduced to us ...

+1 i was a huge fan of asterix comics when i was a kid and watched every one . i never heard about this movie when it was released but i watched it with my kids last night . i remembered the comic well enough to know that a lot was added to the story for the film . some of the changes i thought were a bit corny ( like the nephew 's ' modern ' dancing , and the viking chief 's daughter - almost everything about her ) , but i found most it amusing enough . most importantly , seeing the reactions as my kids watched it , confirmed that the film pleased its target audience . as a family film it works better than other asterix titles i 've seen . many of the names that were n't in the book i found had the same appeal as ones that were . overall , an enjoyable family film , regardless of whether you 're an asterix fan or not . +0 i was one " chosen " to see this movie in a sneak preview.

first you should know that this film is based on the video game " far cry " , a for its time really good game ( 2004 ) . second you should know that the regisseur of this flick is the great uwe boll . this is a man , who takes video games ( dungeon siege , bloodrayne , postal , etc . ) and makes movies out of them ( very horrible ones .... ).

i still remember when i saw boll 's " the king 's swords : a dungeon siege tail " . there were so horrible mistakes in this film ( like 3 scenes playing at the same time , 2 at day - time , and one somehow at night ..... )

so lets come to " far cry " . if you expect cool action , forget it . really cheap tricks and a plastic helicopter are far away from real action . if you expect a cool story , forget it . orientating by the not - so - bad story of the game , this movie is a laugh . the actors ' playing makes the movie in a lot of moments funny , but in a no - good way.

i had the chance to see this movie for free . so do not do the mistake and pay for this trash . its one of my favorised flicks for the bottom 100 . ! ! ! ! +1 i 've always liked sean connery , but as james bond i 've always favored roger moore . still it was connery who set the bond standard and while he had by 1983 established himself as something other than james bond , the money must have been irresistible for him to make one more appearance as 007 and save the world from the evil designs of spectre.

and what designs they are in never say never again . spectre with the help of a foolish young air force officer who happens to be kim bassinger 's brother stole two nuclear missiles during a war games exercise and now spectre headed by blofeld , played here by max von sydow is threatening blackmail of the world.

von sydow 's operations guy is klaus maria brandauer who is also courting bassinger and is a bit on the crazy side . and he 's got a female assassin working for him in barbara carrera who makes angelina jolie as nora croft look like mrs. butterworth.

but before sean connery can even get started he 's got to deal with a new ' m ' running things at british intelligence . edward fox thinks connery is old fashioned in his methods and costs the british taxpayers too much money with his violent ways . i really did enjoy fox 's performance , he 's like the great grandson of colonel blimp.

i also enjoyed carrera , she 's something to look at and quite resourceful in her methods . when she 's scuba diving with connery in the bahamas , note how she puts mr. shark on 007 's case.

will connery do james bond again ? he was widely quoted as saying who would they cast him as at this point , roger moore 's father ? but i think connery would still be formidable in a wheelchair . +0 this movie had a very convoluted plot and very contrived setting , that i , frankly , could not follow , which is surprising considering the acting and dialogue could have only been the product of a kindergartener 's writing . if you like kathy ireland , then maybe you 'd want to see this . the movie was probably made as a vehicle to try to get her into hollywood , but if that was its goal i would have to say that i hope she did n't invest too much money in its production . +0 from the beginning of this film , with it 's " the lost boys " rip off opening sequence , to the bad wire work and even worse dialog ending , this movie slimed along at a snail 's pace . " the covenant " came highly recommended from some of my co - workers , who i am thoroughly convinced were playing a practical joke on me . at least i hope that was the intention and their taste is n't that bad ! this movie was not much longer than an hour and a half , yet felt much much longer then that . the story was so basic that it could have been summed up in about 15 minutes , maximum . they could have at least filled the rest of the movie with some entertaining magic or fight scenes , however someone decided,(maybe the director , but i do n't know if anyone really " directed " this movie ) that it was going to be filled with some poorly executed " artsy " camera shots , and nonsensical scenes of the " boys " swimming and getting into bar fights . about half way through this film i thought that maybe bashing my head against a wall would be more entertaining , and partially to rid myself of this horrible dirty feeling i had for continuing to watch it . . so i did bash my head against a wall , and i did enjoy it more then the movie ! i watched it all the way to the bitter end , hoping it would eventually offer me more enjoyment . nope , my efforts were rewarded with " how about i make you my whee - aytch ! " i vomited , and then just felt embarrassment for the screen writer and pity for the poor actor who had to deliver this drivel . the acting really was n't as bad as other reviewers seemed to think , but even the most talented thespian could not saved this work , and work it did , on my nerves ! i give movies a chance , even bad ones because they usually offer some form of enjoyment , and this actually was n't the worst movie i have ever seen . after it was over i did feel like watching the movie " stealth " again and wow it was so much better this time around ! oh yeah case in point , do n't bother with this movie , really , do n't . watch a few episodes of " charmed " , and watch " the lost boys " after having a fair amount of alcohol , and you will be a much better person . if you do fall into the same trap that i did and watch " the covenant " , make sure to keep all sharp objects far , far away from yourself , you 'll thank me for it . +1 this movie , with all its complexity and subtlety , makes for one of the most thought - provoking short films i have ever seen . the topics it addresses are ugly , cynical , and at times , even macabre , but the film remains beautiful in its language , artful with its camera angles , and gorgeous in its style , skillfully recreating the short story of the same name written by a master of short stories , tobias wolff.

not wishing to spoil anything of the movie , i wo n't go into any details , other than to say that this movie is magnificent in and of itself . it takes pride in what it does , and does it well . it shows the most important memories of life , all of which can be topped by the single most elusive feeling : unexpected bliss . this movie , of its own volition , has created in me the same feelings the main character ( tom noonan ) felt when words transformed his very existence , and that is one impressive feat . +0 deepa has again tried to bravely bring out a subject that no one wants to talk about . the story line is ok , cinematography is outstanding , screenplay and acting are way below average . i guess the blame is to the citizens of uttar pradesh in india from where her original set was destroyed in 2000 . this resulted in a totally different cast , i just wonder what a spectacular movie it would have been if it had the original shabana azmi , nandita das and aamir khan . the current actors lisa ray ( who 's just good for squirming in bombay dyeing bedsheets ) and john abraham are pathetic , need basic lessons in acting . seema biswas , raghubir yadav and kulbushan kharbabda have saved the movie as much as they can . the kid had done an outstanding job . the editing and the flow of the movie is also not something you would have expected from deepa . great subject , sends out a strong message about a practice which is still pretty rampant in rural india but falls short of the standards deepa set for herself in fire and earth . watch it once ... when its on dvd , do n't bother paying $ 10 to see it .... well its out beats the average hindi movie any day +0 tv director uses astral projection to kill people taking the form of the blue man.

dull uninvolving horror film that kind of just sits there before your eyes and makes you wonder why you are watching it . i sat through the film to the end and i really ca n't give you more than a cursory account of what the film was about because i kept finding my attention diverted by other things.

i ca n't really recommend this . i think my feelings are best summed up by the fact that i paid a dollar for the dvd as a double feature and i feel kind of ripped off . +1 although i do n't like cricket at all and i have seen this movie 13 years ago , i still think it is one of the best coming - of - age movies .. i remember the day i returned home from my school and sat down to have my lunch , i saw the opening titles of that movie and then .... i was so immersed in it that i felt i was there , it really affected me personally . i still remember how i felt when i first saw it , i felt that the poor boy was a friend of mine , going through the same adolescent experience we were having in those days . what i really liked about that movie is the main theme of a " shy " boy fantasizing about " kissing " his dream girl , no offense but if that was an american movie , you would certainly see - at a certain point , mainly climax- the " shy " boy " making love " to his girl , and i really ca n't grasp this contradicting concepts till now ... i have a simple request , if anyone knows how to get this movie on a dvd by mail , please let me know cause i need a shot of memories .. thanks +0 the giant claw is in fierce competition with films like , ' robot monster ' and ' plan 9 from outer space ' for worst film of all time . a phony looking giant vulture attacks ' lionel trains ' in this completely unconscious film . the script is so bad that everything the characters say to one another is ridiculous . it 's no wonder that this film is a prime target in the movie , " it came from hollywood , " where this gem is hammered for the line , ' a bird as big as a battleship ' , with gleeful , endless needling . the line pops up relentlessly through the course of the film , so there 's no escaping it . there are several shots from , ' the beast from 20,000 fathoms ' and ' earth vs. the flying saucers ' among other sci - fi films from the 50 's to beef up the scraggly vulture 's attacks . at one point the big vulture is responsible for a few deaths , so the military puts the entire world under martial law and no one is allowed to go out of their homes . of course , the huge buzzard is mainly concerned with pursuing the stars of this classic , jeff morrow & mara corday , wherever they might be . yet the director is so lame that he does n't even provide for a few honey shots of pretty mara in a decent dress and black heels for a little relief from the tedium of this zero star thriller . that 's the second time this blunder has been made . in ' tarantula ' , mara corday struts around in hot dresses for the whole film , but is relegated to pants throughout , ' the giant scorpion ' . the budget for this film must have been not more than thirty or forty thousand dollars and i doubt whether morrow or corday got more than three thousand to make it . it looks like the whole thing was shot right out of somebody 's garage . +0 i 'm all about the walking dead , but my mind is still unsure of the walking , frozen dead . sadly , the chilling did n't help me make up my mind . this is really slow with nothing happening for the first 45 minutes , making me hit the " film enhancement " button several times . by the time the well designed zombies show up , it is too late and the director ( two are rumored to have filmed this ) has no idea how to shoot them . haggerty , blair and donahue all look tired / embarrassed / recovering in some fashion . i will give the film credit as it predates the t2 ending with villains being frozen by liquid nitrogen . the shriek show dvd offers an extended promo reel from back in the day that runs 8 minutes long and i would actually recommend that over watching the flick in its entirety . +1 the turner classic movie channel has spent the month of january doing the films of one of my favorite actors , robert montgomery . his films are mostly rarely watched these days , except for those that were atypical for most of his career - meaning that the roles that frequently reappear on television are they were expendable , the lady in the lake , june bride , night must fall , the saxon charm , ride the pink horse , rage in heaven , the earl of chicago ( in short the films he fought to get the roles in because they were not the usual comic fluff he usually appeared in ) . it 's ironic that nowadays when one thinks of montgomery 's career it is the films that were mostly made after 1937 that are pushed - the ones that broke the original image that mgm and louis b. mayer pushed . the pity of this is that montgomery was a gifted comedian , and saved many films from being routine.

petticoat fever is one such film . made in 1936 with picadilly jim and trouble for two it was a banner year of good performances by montgomery , and helped lead to his being able to convince the powers that be at mgm to allow him to play " danny " in night must fall the next year.

petticoat fever is set in labrador , and montgomery is a weather station operator there named dascom dinsmore . he has been living there for five years , and has not been in the company of a woman ( except for inuit women ) for most of that time . he has a girlfriend of sorts named clara ( winifred shotter ) who he sort of proposed to , but it 's been two years since he has heard from her , so that he believes she has given up on him.

dinsmore 's world is rocked when sir james felton and irene campton ( reginald owen and myrna loy ) show up . they were flying to toronto for a business meeting that felton was to address . felton is engaged to campton , but dinsmore finds her enchanting ... and gradually she finds him equally attractive . certainly the pompous , self - important , and hopelessly inept felton is no competition ( it is a measure of owen 's acting that he keeps the character entertaining even if one finds it hard to believe such a boob is a canadian captain of industry).

there is something surreal about this film - probably due to the original play . while the " labrador " scenery is quite phony looking it does serve it 's purpose for the comedy ( witness th polar bear sequence ) . but the height of the surrealism is the dinner dinsmore serves his guests , a dinner of " pemmican steaks " , which owen eats with real gusto . owen ( a minor noble as a baronet ) is dressed in normal clothing - a winter suit for the climate ) . but montgomery is dressed in his suit of evening dress ( as though attending a ball at the embassy ) . loy , seeing him dress up , likewise puts on a gown . they are being served by dinsmore 's servant - assistant , the inuit kimo ( otto yamaoka ) , who is wearing a suit of evening dress too - it turns out that it is owen 's ! owen , who earlier insisted that dinsmore change into clothing more suitable to his station , is the only person who is improperly dressed for this dinner ! ! montgomery was mgm 's most elegant actor in a tuxedo or evening dress ( franchot tone was the his closest rival ) . it is a toss - up in movie if montgomery or fred astaire was the more elegant figure in such suits . hard to decide.

the course of love does not move smoothly in comedy or drama . clara shows up ( we are tipped off too early about this at the start of the film when we see her on an icebound ship ) . will dinsmore break with clara ? will irene break with felton ? the film is funny , and loy and montgomery make a nice couple . they had appeared together in one other film , and both were in separate scenes in a second , before this movie . but this would be their last film together.

one last interesting point - at the start of the film when the credits are shown , you see illustrations of men and women in comic situations . they are based on the art work of john held jr. , the great cartoonist / illustrator of the 1920s and 1930s - who was the recorder of the flapper and " jazz age " . it 's an unusual choice - as it has absolutely nothing to do with the film 's plot or labrador . +0 i hate to admit it , but they were right to sack schrader . the opportunity is here to build an atmosphere , to draw an audience into a movie . it was n't done . the characters are weak . the story was weak . the directing was very poor . schrader was out of his depth and it shows . i 've watched it several times now in the hope that there will be at least one redeeming feature . but no , nothing . the next stage will probably be a remake of the original or hopefully it will be left well alone . anyone wanting to know what the best sequel to the exorcist was should read ' legion ' , penned by blatty it has to be the best follow up to an original piece to be committed to print . sadly , it did not translate to to screen very well and i doubt if it ever could be . as for dominion , beginning . avoid at all costs . +0 this movie has a fairly decent premise - one gruesomely featured again and again in science fiction films , most spectacularly in " alien " - and some decent " he - man " performances from the male cast . the possessed astronaut 's wife , to me , is the weak link in the ensemble - she does n't seem to know what to do with her face in a lot of her most prominent scenes , for which i blame director corman . < br />
given a decent budget for props and special effects and a more focused and coherent screen play , " blood beast " might have been pretty decent . but the inherent cheapness of the production design and the continuity errors and gaffes undermine the proceedings . for instance , every time i saw the comatose astronaut laid out on an " examination table " the width of an ironing board , i broke into giggles , probably not the the emotion the crew wanted to invoke . and the monster 's costume needed some serious work ; fern covered parrots just are n't scary or convincing.

still , the premise was strong enough that i hung on to the end just to see how the plot would resolve itself , and the alien 's motives were sufficiently ambiguous at first that i could sort of think of it as an enigma . and the scene with the shot of the murdered scientist had a bit of punch to it , along with the plot development where the alien claimed to have assimilated some of the dead man 's personality . < br />
it 's corman . it 's cheap , fast , and mildly watchable if you do n't think too hard or expect too much . what more needs to be said ? +0 i mean really , really , really high and this movie has a shot at entertainment . i do n't mean regular high , i mean the high where reading the phonebook would have you in stitches . otherwise save the time out of your life and go do something more constructive with it , like hitting your head on a brick wall and insulting your own intelligence . a complete waste of talent in some cases ( bernie mac , john c. mcginley , tom kenny , and the master of hams shatner ) and exactly the kind of crap they deserve to make ( the myriad of rappers who insist on making movies ) . not without it 's laughs ( again chemical aid is crucial ) and certainly not without offending the politically over - sensitive ( which i 'm always in favor of ) but ultimately not worth the time out of your life . +1 if it is true that sadomasochism is a two - sided coin which contains the whole in the diverse expression of its opposites , then the cinematic portrait of erika kohut has its reality . professor kohut treats her piano students with a kind of fascist sadism while longing for the same for herself . her outward expression projects her desire . that is why she can hurt without guilt or remorse.

along comes talented , charming , handsome young walter klemmer ( benoit magimel ) who is attracted to her because of her passion and her intensity . he wants to become her student so as to be close to her . she rejects him out of hand , but because of his talent the vienna conservatory votes him in . he falls in love with her . again she pushes him away , but he will not take no for an answer , and thereby begins his own descent into depravity and loss of self - respect.

the question the viewer might ask at this point is , who is in control ? the sadist or the masochist ? indeed who is the sadist and who the masochist ? it is hard to tell . is it the person who has just been greatly abused both psychologically and physically , who is actually lying wounded on the floor in grotesque triumphant and fulfillment , or is it the person who is rushing out the door , sated , giving the order that no one is to know what happened.

but erika is not just a sadomasochistic freak . she is a sex extreme freak . she wants to experience the extremes of human sexuality while maintaining the facade of respectability . actually that is n't even true . she says she does n't care what others think . she does n't care if they walk in and find her bleeding on the floor because she is in love . love , she calls it . for her sex and love are one and the same.

at one point walter tells her that love is n't everything . how ironic such a superfluity is to her . how gratuitous the comment.

the movie is beautifully cut and masterfully directed by michael haneke who spins the tale with expert camera work and carefully constructed sets in which the essence of the action is not just clear but exemplified ( as in the bathroom when walter propels himself high above the top of the stall to find erika within ) . he also employs a fine positioning of the players so that they are always where they should be with well timed cuts from one angle to another . this is particularly important in the scene in which erika , like a blood - drained corpse caught in stark white and black light , lies under her lover , rigid as stone . here for the most part we only see her face and the stark outline of her neck with its pulsating artery . we do n't need to see any more.

the part of erika kohut is perfect for isabelle huppert who is not afraid of extremes ; indeed she excels in them . i have seen her in a number of movies and what she does better than almost anyone is become the character body and soul . like the woman she plays in this movie she is unafraid of what others may think and cares little about her appearance in a decorative sense . what matters to her is the performance and the challenge . no part is too demanding . no character too depraved . it 's as if huppert wants to experience all of humanity , and wants us to watch her as she does . she is always fascinating and nearly flawless . she is not merely a leading light of the french cinema ; she is one of the great actresses of our time who has put together an amazingly diverse body of work.

i think it is highly instructive and affords us a wonderful and striking contrast to compare her performance here with her performance in the lacemaker ( la dentellière ) from 1977 when she was 22 years old . there she was apple sweet in her red hair and freckles and her pretty face and her cute little figure playing pomme , a parisian apprentice hairdresser . her character was shy about sex and modest -- just an ordinary french girl who hoped one day to be a beautician . here she is a self - destructive witch , bitter with hateful knowledge of herself , shameless and entirely depraved.

huppert is fortunate in being an actress in france where there are parts like this for women past the age of starlets . ( hollywood could never make a movie like this . ) in the american cinema , only a handful of the very best and hardest working actresses can hope to have a career after the age of about thirty . huppert greatly increases her exposure because of her ability and range , but also because she is willing to play unsympathetic roles , here and also in la cérémonie ( 1995 ) in which she plays a vile , spiteful murderess.

do see this for isabelle huppert . you wo n't forget her or the character she brings to life . +0 if i were to pitch this movie idea to some hollywood bigwigs , i 'm sure it would sound like this : < br />
me : " four boys at a private high school are good friends , and they are witches." < br />
hollywood : " that sounds like " the craft . " < br />
me : " no , no , i said four boys , not four girls . " < br />
hollywood : " that still sounds like " the craft " , just with boys instead of girls . " < br />
me : " ok , but there is this fifth unknown boy that comes into the picture and he wants more power." < br />
hollywood : " still not much difference , because one of the girls in " the craft " also wanted more power.

me : " ok , ok ... i 'll make these boys part of the " in crowd " , they 'll be rich , and the school is on the east coast.

hollywood : " now that sounds original . that is nothing like " the craft " , here 's a billion dollars . " < br />
this movie was so cliché and uninspiring . even the manufactured drama between chase and the brothers of ipswich was very blasé . a bunch of rich kids , with their biggest problem being what color bentley they want for their 18th birthday ( and 18th car ) , do n't interest me at all , even if they have powers . every single kid in this movie looked like they stepped out of a magazine , and of course there had to be the gratuitous male nudity and female 80 % nudity just to drive home how out of shape you are . i wanted to rename this movie " the witches of o.c. " . oooh , rich kids and their problems ... let me pretend to care.

this film was completely unimaginative and predictable . the final fight was lame and dragged out and the ending was very anti - climatic . this was a movie best left on the cutting room floor . +1 over 21 the film version of the ruth gordon play which detailed her experiences trying to keep the marriage together with garson kanin after he 'd gone in the service provides irene dunne with one of her better later roles on the big screen . it 's also in keeping with what was then an upbeat spirit in america about how we would not screw up the peace as we did in the first world war and sow the seeds of yet another global conflict.

the play ruth gordon wrote and starred in herself ran for 221 performances in 1944 on broadway and was confined simply to the bungalow that gordon and harvey stephens who was the male lead had on a training base . if you look on the broadway credits list it says that the production was ' staged ' by george s. kaufman as opposed to being directed by him . i 'm not sure of the distinction , but i can imagine that with a wit and will as strong as kaufman 's it must have been an interesting period putting the production together before opening night.

when columbia bought the screen rights , sidney buchman had to do some considerable script reconstruction to move the action beyond the bungalow . the film bears very little trace of its stage origins.

alexander knox plays the husband and charles coburn the employer of both dunne and knox who are writers . knox has graduated to not only editor , but featured columnist . his words and thoughts help sell the paper and coburn is in a bind . but knox feels he has to get into the war , the seminal event of his time in order to speak authoritatively on the kind of post war world he wants . this was not an uncommon theme in those years . < br />
irene dunne has some good comic moments , the kind she used to have when she was appearing opposite cary grant . in fact garson kanin directed both of them in my favorite wife a few years earlier . coburn is his usual cantankerous old water buffalo of a boss who ultimately has a good heart.

over 21 was an optimistic picture which sad to say was n't accurate about what the allies and i mean all of them could bring to the peace conferences to create a better world . still hopefully a new generation will get it right . +1 lights of new york was the first " all - taking " feature film , coming in at a brisk 57 minutes and directed by bryan foy ( of the famous vaudeville family).

the story has two dopey barbers ( cullen landis , eugene palette ) yearning for a chance at " big city life " and getting involved with gangsters and bootleg booze . one of the guys gets framed for the murder of a cop but is saved at the last minute by a gun moll ( gladys brockwell).

much of the story takes place in a night club called the night hawk , which is run by a crook named hawk ( wheeler oakman ) who has his eye on a pretty chorine ( helene costello ) who is the girl friend of landis . costello gets to do a brief dance , and we hear harry downing ( made up to resemble ted lewis ) sing " at dawning ) in his best al jolson style.

the acting ranges from good ( palette and brockwell ) to awful ( oakman ) . a couple of the actors muff their lines but then keep right on with the scene . as noted elsewhere this was intended to be a short 2-reeler and was made on a shoestring budget . yet the sound quality is surprisingly good , the voices all register clearly , and there is a neat cinematic touch in the silhouette death.

the film was a box - office smash even though it was shown as a silent film where theaters were not wired for the new sound technology . no one expected this little film to gross an amazing $ 1.3 million . it briefly made stars of costello and landis and certainly launched palette on his long career as a star character actor.

co - stars include mary carr as the mother , robert elliott as the detective , eddie kane as the street cop , and tom dugan as a thug . +0 fans of horror comedy will like this one . others might get quickly annoyed and shut it off . it 's sort of a buddy film , with over - the - top violence and gore , deliberately stereotyped characters , and a lot of craziness.

it looks to have been made on a budget of about $ 100 , by a bunch of fraternity guys after a big beer keg party . there 's a lead who 's a frustrated nerd , and his loudmouth prank - pulling friend who mocks him about 30 times per second . there 's a cool monster truck chasing them for hundreds of miles , which is the highlight of the film . whenever this thing and its gnarly - mask wearing driver appear , it 's a great scene . there 's a mysterious girl who randomly appears in their back seat , and plenty of giant guys in overalls hanging out in red neck bars . the nerd 's friend never shuts his yap , and gets them in one mess after another . their arguing got on my nerves , but other aspects of the film make up for it.

sight gags poking fun at several " psycho tormenting and trying to croak somebody " films are everywhere . take your pick which one is riffed the most : hills have eyes , saw , and jeepers creepers were some that i recognized.

it 's enjoyable insanity , if you 're in the right frame of mind . sensory - dulling brewskies with your friends can make viewing this more fun ; it 's a good bet that 's the condition of the movie makers when they put this thing together . +0 what you need in the run up to ' what you need ' , every episode since ' the lonely ' had been a winner to some extent . this episode is the first major failure since ' escape clause ' . the serling script is again based on someone else 's materiel , a short story by lewis padgett . as with ' and when the sky was opened ' , serling altered the content significantly , removing a scientist and his machine and inserting an elderly peddler.

'what you need ' works best when it is being sweet . the opening half , in which the peddler provides customers in a bar with objects they will need in the near future , has a gentle charm about it that may have worn thin throughout an entire episode but works well in the time frame it is allotted . sadly , the main plot which it sets up is full of gaping holes . the minute steve cochran 's performance as a two - bit thug becomes the main focus the episode falls apart . cochran 's part is an underwritten stereotype and his flat performance highlights this flaw . his exploitation of the old peddler is dull and predictable and the revelation that he will murder the old man is totally unconvincing , making the whole slippery shoes scene seem completely false . ernest truex is good as the peddler , bringing a magical , mysterious but warm edge to the character , but he 's not good enough to help the floundering script.

to make matters worse , the weak script is also full of inconsistencies . for instance , we learn that the peddler 's power to provide people with what they need stems from an ability to see into the future . so how exactly does this allow him to produce a pen that will magically pick winning horses . that seems like it should be a little outside his realms of power . also , for a man who can see the future , the peddler certainly acts surprised to find the thug waiting for him in his flat . there are many more holes that can be picked in ' what you need ' but it 's hardly worth it when the episode is so thin that you can see through it anyway . +1 barely three and a half years after just scraping out a month 's run ( 7 - 31 oct. 1953 ) at broadway 's coronet theatre ( on west 49th street ; since renamed the o'neill ) , mgm relied on the earlier solid london success of the play to lavish a wonderful cast and - for the most part - carefully " opened up " production on a sadly trimmed down screenplay of this slyly subversive boulevard comedy and were rewarded with a modest hit.

ava gardner is the increasingly frustrated wife of stewart granger , an internationally successful and entirely complacent " workaholic " ( before the term had been coined ) using the perpetually frustrated david niven to attempt to rekindle passion in her spouse . when the " second honeymoon " cruise gardner inveigles granger into leaves the trio ( and granger 's dog ) marooned on a south sea island ( were there other survivors ? that 's for later plot developments ) , granger continues right on managing the world around him - building a big hut for himself and his wife and a little one of the title for niven - or the unattached male.

the core of the actual plot of the play only gets going about half way through the film when niven proposes that granger and he alternate as tenants of the little hut - sharing the only female on the island as granger has been willing to share the only pair of shoes ( his).

reason ( which granger considers his strong point ) reigns and frustration reigns supreme - for a while.

david niven and ava gardner are superb in their appointed roles of suave would - be seducer and seductress , and stuart granger - usually called upon merely to be handsome and virile in action roles and the odd miscast specialty ( a crowing pretty - boy as apollodorus in shaw 's caesar and cleopatra in 1945 ) - gives one of the better acting performances of his film career as the husband who may actually be as smart as he thinks he is . 33 years later he would again show this suave urbanity opposite rex harrison in granger 's first ( and both their last ) broadway engagements in a hit revival of somerset maugham 's the circle which only ended with harrison 's death . we 'd be far richer if granger had used these skills more often.

as promising as the menage is , this is , after all , a very british boulevard comedy and hollywood in the 1950 's which is to say that ( unlike the source play ) very little sex actually goes on . to be frank , if you do n't give yourself over to the ideas driving the contrivances it does get a bit silly ( the same basic plot is far more satisfyingly developed three years later in the cary grant / deborah kerr / robert mitchum / jean simmons ( stewart granger 's actual wife ) the grass is greener , based on an even less successful play , but for some reason that superior trifle failed at the box office).

as lavishly as mgm set the piece , there were unfortunate lapses - the silliness which ends the stay on the island is cartoonishly presaged in what should have been a moment of genuine excitement - the sinking of the yacht that puts them on the island . ultimately we only get about three quarters of an hour of the real little hut , but ninety good minutes of david niven , ava gardner and stewart granger that make the film a fun diversion . not high culture , but a worthy guilty pleasure.

we even get some very nice garnish in walter chiari ( reputed to be ava 's actual lover at the time ) . as one of his better speeches goes : " boola , boola ! " +1 it 's just one of those films , you 're either love it or hate it , my girlfriend and me loved it , told my brother to rent it and he hated it , said it was too flashy and colloquial , then again he only usually goes to see big action movies , so probably not enough explosions left him disappointed . there were some great new talent ( i 'd never heard of the leads before anyway ) ? des brady ( the directors brother ? ) was especially good . playing a right dick at the start i thought he never would redeem himself but he managed to crawl out of the dark hole he had created and by the end i was really routing for him . a very surprising film with a whole lot of heart , if you can live without a body count and explosions then this one is very original . yashimo . brixton in the uk . +1 and i would have rated it higher than a 7 out of 10 if it was n't for the seriously uneven irish accent of barbara hershey in the leading role of mother madalyn . the accent came and went unfortunately which i found more than a little distracting . < br />
however , the performance of william l petersen in the role of joad was outstanding , he brought a warmth and depth to the character in spite of some periodic hokey dialogue . captivating and genuine , i found him quite astonishing in the way he captured the character . < br />
the premise of the film is fairly simple , the building of a forgotten staircase in a church . it is based , rather loosely i believe , on a true story and i had heard of this staircase prior to seeing the movie . < br />
it was a phenomenal engineering feat for its time - a floating double helix made without nails or screws . it exists to this day although it is now in private ownership.

**minor spoiler**good supporting cast and barbara does dying so well in all her movies and here she does n't disappoint . lots of special moments.

7/10 +0 first of all , this movie is gross to the point of nauseating , and my advice is to avoid it at all costs if you ever want to eat ice cream again . i tried watching it because it looked like it might be funny , but it soon became quite disturbing with the ice cream made out of body parts and surprisingly graphic effects . it opens with a boy named greg witnessing the gruesome murder of an ice cream man ( greg subsequently goes crazy and grows up to be the title character ) by what appear to be mob assassins . there is no explanation for this murder , making it the biggest wtf moment in the entire movie . other , lesser wtf moments include the surreal asylum greg goes to ( featuring evil clowns ) , a woman speaking in tongues because she has been possessed by the holy spirit ( what this has to do with anything i do n't know ) , and the fact that olivia " holy crap has her career tanked this badly " hussey is in it.

none of these are good enough reasons to watch it . the only reason is for the character tuna , who is a skinny kid with pillows stuffed under his shirt so that he looks like a fat kid . for some reason this struck me as hilarious . i stayed up far longer into the night than i should have watching this movie just to figure out if there was some reason they could n't use an actual fat kid for the role . although i fell asleep before the end , i 've gathered from other reviews that tuna ends up losing the " weight . " okay , so they did n't have the budget to pull this off realistically . suggestion to the director : how about making the character ... not overweight ? < br />
that 's it ; if the prospect of tuna has not interested you enough , there is no other reason to acknowledge this film 's existence . if disgusting horror movies about ice cream are your preferred source of entertainment , check out the far superior " the stuff " instead . +1 spoilers in this review ! despite a few highly improbable scenes , including the boys in pe measuring their penises in a contest and the few obligatory teens - trying - to - get - laid vignettes , this movie captures the painful essence of high school in ways that few teen films have ever done . it achieves this by not only showing the trio of friends , gary , dave , rick , as smoking , drinking , ever on the prowl teens , but also dwells on the nature of friendship itself as these three friends have their loyalties tested . this film is a snapshot of the time when childhood ends . for the shy romantic gary , when he sees the lovely karen for the first time he falls instantly in love . the awakening emotion in gary is writ large on the screen , and he proves his love for her by taking her in when she is jilted by her lover . this love for karen signals the end of gary 's innocence , as the bonds with his two best friends will be tested , and broken , over the course of the story . the confident ladies man , rick , is the person in high school we all secretly wish we were : handsome , cool , and always has the impossibly beautiful girls in a swoon . rick turns out to be a cad , but you have to bear in mind that his character is only 17 years old . he panics and makes a bad decision . from rick 's perspective , the story is also about finding the one girl of his dreams , a bad breakup , and then at the end reconciling . the look on rick 's face as gary walks in and sees karen kissing rick , shows that he at last understands that his best friend and he love the same woman . as in real life , you do n't bow out because your friend has an unrequited love . this is the tragedy of the film . rick is no villain , and constantly through the film he reminds gary and dave that they 're his best friends . the soulful quality of gary 's performance , however , is the heart of the story . lawrence monoson is a beautiful loser . he does everything right , his heart 's in the right place , and he 's consumed by love for karen . yet , karen , in the end , is not moved by gary 's devotion and kindness . karen represents all the people in the world who take in without giving back , who exist in a vacuum of their own ego and never stop to realize the emotional damage and trauma they inflict on others . this film is brutal in its statements on love and friendship , but that 's what makes it unique among teen films . it ceases being a comedy and becomes a hopelessly romantic film , albeit one doomed to a tragic conclusion . anyone who has ever found the girl of his dreams and did not win her , will understand . the heartrending crushes of high school are every bit as real as the emotional strains of adulthood , and this film will remind you of that in bold strokes . gary 's final reversal , as he drives away with the inscribed locket , is as poignant a moment as any in cinema . one feels , after watching this , that it 's really made of two movies . the first part is a silly teen sexploitation film , and once the story begins , it 's a strongly affecting drama . a terrific movie . it should also be noted that the soundtrack was prescient in its selection of many rising stars including the police , the cars , devo , oingo boingo , the plimsouls , the waitresses , gleaming spires , and phil seymour . +0 the operative rule in the making of this film seems to have been " never make a 1 minute scene when you can make it a 10 minute scene . " this was a principle set right from the start with an interminably long portrayal of the graduation of the harvard class of 1870 . the point of that scene , i suppose , was to introduce some of the primary figures in the story and give a bit of their background - which is somewhat effective when comparing the idealism of the harvard graduation ceremony to the realism of life in johnson county , wyoming , but it just keeps going and going , and that sets the stage for a film that features repeated stretches of mind - numbing nothingness , made even worse by the fact that i found a significant amount of the dialogue to be almost incoherent . in the end , i could n't even watch this in one sitting . i got through about half of it and had to set it aside for a couple of days before i could drag myself back to see how it turned out.

my reaction to this movie in many ways is a shame , because there are positives here . the performances are generally of a high calibre , especially from kris kristofersson as averill , christopher walken as champion and isabelle huppert as ella . the basic story - interspersed as it is around that ever - present mind - numbing nothingness - is potentially interesting , focusing on the efforts of immigrants to establish themselves in johnson county and a local cattle company 's efforts to stop them by killing a number of them in collaboration with the government and the military . there 's also some absolutely breathtaking scenery shots . having said that , the whole thing could frankly have been done in half the time - and should have been . in the end , all those potential positives are washed out by - again - the mind - numbing nothingness that the movie seems to revolve around . seriously - 2/10 . +0 a bad movie , but with one reel that is worth savoring . for most of the film , the jokes are bad , the songs are bad , even w.c. fields is bad . then there is one sequence with bob hope and his movie - ex ; the dialogue is witty and the song ( a version of " thanks for the memories " ) light , cynical and delightful . who parachuted in for this one bit ? yet it makes the whole thing worth the original 25 cents admission . +0 only if its the last thing yo do and your humour is evaporated should you ever attempt to watch this . if you do , watch it alone invite no one , they will never return to watch another movie with you . it might be an excellent tool for that very purpose , invite people you want to get rid of in your life.

apparently i need to write more about his film in order to qualify as a review . this is sweet irony for this film it really does sum it up perfectly . after wasting my time it wastes more of your time . it does have a function i take it all back.

i recommend this film , watch it , its provocative , really go ahead watch it . +0 first of all . i do not look down on americans . i know lots of people that are intelligent people from the usa . but this movie is so utterly bad , that i just had to comment on it.

first of all ... movies are mostly far from the truth . this movie is no exception . lots of scene 's are so incredibly false . for example the departure of the 2 space ships . you see them drop off the full tanks in space . just a small distance from each other . remember what caused the space shuttle to explode in the past ? just a tinsy winsy part that came off . in here it is just common to drop fuel tanks that are as big if not bigger then the whole ship . what idiot would let 2 spaceships lift up and do that at the same time ? ? ? second of it is that the russian station is a piece of ( s)crap . i hate to bring this up to you , but astronauts nowadays go to russia . since their equipment is much more reliable then nasa 's . the space shuttle is retired . and nasa uses it just to pay off the bills . and there is no better alternative for it . and the list of whoppers goes on and on . this is truly an insult to people that do take space travel serious . and i know half as much as these guys do . but the most annoying part ( read : the whole movie ) is the propaganda and patriot crap that u get choked with . my god ! ! ! ! i thought i was looking at a cnn business commercial for like an hour . the actors solve their petty problems by shooting at each other , giving the middle finger to everyone they come face to face with , start up fights , ignore the police , etc , etc ... but when it comes to their love for their country and sacrificing their lives , suddenly everyone stands in line to commit suicide for it ( bomb detonator ) ? ? maybe i lack the feeling of being a true " patriot " , that can sing the national anthem backwards in swahili . whilst riding with george bush behind the steering wheel of a golf cart , driving in circles until the battery is empty . but this movie was too much for me too handle . and when i finally got hold and pulled the flag pole and fabric of the american flag out of my hiney . i realised that i was glad this movie was finally done . i do not know why so much good actors participated in this narrow minded , stereotyping , propaganda movie . but i pity them . this represents a country where you can get away with murder if you have money or power . as long as " uncle sam " thinks you are a good patriot . where everyone is happy as long as it is another country that has been devastated , no one cares . +0 well well , at last a view of this underrated flick . but you ca n't find a good copy of it , terrible copy full with green drops , the editing is n't syncronized , the sound do has sometimes that terrible hiss and sometimes you even can hear the camera recording . overall it 's too dark , a waist of time you should say but it is n't . it 's a bit slow , the first half part of the movie it 's all talking and making love to each other . it is even still weird that the girls in movies from the 60 's never wear any bra 's . when they enter the sleeping room it 's full glory . anyway , banned in the uk since 84 and still on the video nasties list . the reason is simple , it 's gory for their time being . it really has some nasty dismemberement 's and it 's creepy in some way due the fact that it is filmed handycam way . so every shot the image is moving , things they do these days with the steadycam . the ghastly ones could have been better if the quality of the film was better but still better then other films of the time like schoolgirls in chains . +0 it opens - and for half an hour , runs - like an educational programme on the old testament , although not without humour . the movie finally begins to grow wings when the biblical ca nt gets dropped . in a scene of mixed success martin donovan ( jesus ) decides to renege on kicking off the apocalypse and the final quarter of an hour is a sort of humanist ' what 's all the fuss about ? ' play - out , gilded with optimistic conjecture against a ( retrospectively , miserably ironic ) long shot of the wtc twin towers.

apart from donovan 's authority , the acting is split . there 's the thespian melodrama of the rest of the cast : this , though formally contrived for biblical presentation , is appropriate for the modern , paranoid comedy that hartley 's aiming at . but i was also pleasantly surprised at the contribution of pj harvey ( credited thus , and in danger of existing within the film solely as the pop star entity she is , not least in a set piece scene in a record store and a perilously patchy soundtrack to which contributes ) . she remained cool - a sort of disingenuous lack of focus - in the manner of many pop icons who have taken to film ( i 'm thinking the jagger of performance here ) but nonetheless maintained a convincing integration with both cast and project.

ultimately affirmative , but this bittersweet essay is a bit too much like one and relies more on the perseverance than the imagination of its audience . 4/10 +0 after a while i realized it was just my iq slowly dropping . frostbite is one of those pathetic movies where no one , and i mean no one , is even trying . i rooted for the dorky hero to die inside that trashcan ( how did he even manage to fit in there , anyway ? ) , traci lords , the queen of b movies , was horribly unfunny and ripped me and my friends off by not showing her boobs a single time.

the " characters " , though i use that term loosely , are people so exaggerated and one - dimensional they might as well have used cardboard cutouts . the " jokes " ( i use this term loosely as well ) are simply hilarious . a guy 's fart causes an earthquake . roflcopter ! our " hero " gets a butt acupuncture by traci lords . oh god , i ca n't breathe ! the blind guy uses the f word repeatedly ! this is too much ! ! ! < br />
say what you want about the acting but i thought adam grimes did a pretty good job at playing a mentally challenged snowboarder . apart from that the sole source of entertainment value here is boobs . i think i counted three , maybe four pairs throughout the entire film , scattered over maybe five minutes of screen time . that 's five minutes worth watching out of 83 minutes of unfunny trash . do n't watch this . watch barb wire with pamela anderson - at least there was plenty of nudity and action in that trashy flick!(r#26 ) +1 i do n't know where this movie was shot , but because it was shot on location , it has the authenticity that this story deserves . it is the story of a young english woman who is taken prisoner by the japanese in southern asia at the beginning of wwii , with a group of other english women . there is no prison camp for women so they are forced to march for months from place to place , because the japanese do n't know what to do with them . the courage and resilience of the english women , and the bravery of the australian soldier who tries to help them , is the core of the movie . this movie is very long , maybe 10 hours , so you can watch it as it was shown on pbs , as a series , which actually adds to the feeling of the endless journey this woman makes from england , across this remote island , and finally australia . story , cinematography , location and actors combine to make this a movie not to miss . my only question is why this has n't been released on dvd ! +0 when i read the reviews of kahin pyaar na ho jaaye , i thought , " huh ? " . it was that confusing . to be sure , i went to watch the film and what do you know ? it 's a remake of " the wedding singer " . several scenes have been changed to suit the whole essence of indianness , but the rest of it is a direct lift from the 1998 hollywood hit . bollywood is no stranger to remakes , but this is one so poor that it pains me just to watch it . i groaned so much watching this and i realized i was n't the only one doing so ! one guy actually walked out of the theater and never came back ! salman khan should seriously stop doing comedy roles . he shrieks and whines too much . why ca n't he just take it easy ? he does n't do justice to the role originally acted out by adam sandler . he does n't have sandler 's sense of comic timing . rani is a wonderful actress and one of my favorites , but she 's no drew barrymore either . the scene where she stands in front of a mirror practicing to say her new surname ( " hi , i 'm mrs pugalia " ) does n't match up to barrymore 's version ( " hi , i 'm mrs julia gulia " ) . i felt embarrassed watching that scene , even though i had loved the original . the music is not too bad . it 's probably the only saving grace of this otherwise horrible film ! avoid this at all cost ! +1 recently finally available in dvd ( 11/11/08 ) , severo pérez ' film ... and the earth did not swallow him ( 1994 ) is based on one of the most highly regarded and discussed novels in chicano literature . tomás rivera 's ... y no se lo tragó la tierra/ ... and the earth did not devour him ( 1972 ) is still generally acknowledged by many critics and serious readers as the classic chicano novel . originally written in the spanish characteristic of south texas and also translated into english , rivera 's novel continues as an indispensable presence within the chicano literary landscape . < br />
perez ' film , originally made as a highly - rated american playhouse pbs production has taken some time to be released in dvd . one can only wonder about this matter because its high quality is not an issue . the film , and now dvd , however , remains , so far as i know , the only cinematic adaptation of any chicano novel and clearly is a tribute to earth 's incredible staying power . this cinematic version also strikes an exceptionally deep - rooted nerve that is , i maintain , both specifically ethnic , yet also generally universal . doubts about earth perhaps might have arisen because it is too " ethnic , " too alien from a basic american mainstream , too much a " foreign " art indie , too limited in economic resources . yet , perez in his version of art , in my opinion connects very effectively , artistically , and creates a sharply - etched portrayal of a chicano migrant collectivity that focuses on daily family life . as far as a production done with relatively limited economic resources , its lovely cinematographic work and haunting music go much beyond its available funding . simply viewing the film makes manifest this film 's ( or dvd ) artistic value.

briefly , .and the earth did not swallow him portrays in a neo - naturalistic way the plight , the suffering , and the despair of chicano migrant laborers as they follow the crops northward from south texas to minnesota in 1952 . the local priests bless the beat - up , overstuffed vehicles of these chicano laborers who can no longer find work in the area and must follow the agricultural trail of the migrant worker northward . this chicano collectivity , like the depression - era joads in steinbeck 's the grapes of wrath , forms an epic tide , driven by economic need , a survival instinct , and anguished despair , and ultimately a barely flickering faith . a tribute to these people of the earth , a collective hero , the dvd is centered on a focal family , and most especially emblematic is a young protagonist within the family , a boy , perhaps twelve or so . this work then , also , functions as a bildungsroman . ultimately , the viewer 's sense of identification is generated through the experiences , subjectivity , and the struggles of the protagonist . poverty , alienation , child labor , illness ( sunstroke and a pregnancy death ) , discrimination , school absenteeism ( the boy 's escapism from the bullies of discrimination is spent lying down in a lovely , peaceful cemetery ) are laid bare as matter of fact—yet , also symbolically . worse still , the problematic conflict between the youngster and his mother goes beyond socio - economics and political conflict , into deeper realms of psychology and metaphysics . in a desperate but artistically rendered struggle , the youth battles his mother , an archetypical mexican - american traditionalist , a representative of god 's will , content with prayer , resignation , consolation , and acceptance . the rebellious youth can not believe in a god that would permit such evil and suffering to be visited upon them . how can god be so cruel , he asks , since his little sister is certainly purely innocent , as to come down with serious illness in the fields ? at this point , the boy must overcome obstacles even more daunting than poverty and discrimination . the issues now include death , doubt , and despair , and lack of meaning . and he has few resources available to him—strength of character , his own will power , his intelligence , and a powerful survival instinct . in this desperate , but artistically rendered struggle , the unnamed youngster , the central figure , feels the necessity of his enduring , of his achieving a heightened sense of meaning , and , the viewer hopes , a renewed and strengthened life force that can serve as an inspiration to chicanos and others.

this stark battle makes use of a plot device just touched on by the original work to tie the episodic work together : missing immigrant laborers from mexico who leave no trace upon their death , although this dvd deals not with mexican but mexican - american migrant laborers a highly existential work : anguish and despair ; a quest ; a focus on a project ; and redemption—all under the auspices of free will in spite of the deterministic socio - economic and religious circumstances.

perez has a long list of credits basically as a documentary filmmaker . his many awards are confirmatory . the producer paul espinosa is also well - known and has been likewise honored for his work . the 1994 film , in fact , won and deserved a number of awards : first place , audience favorite at the santa barbara film festival in 1995 ; first place at the cairo film festival ; and a number of other well - deserved awards.

in my opinion this film and dvd , earth , by perez is the best chicano film that has been made . +0 i know terry gilliam is considered as a good director but claiming that this movie is good is just foolish . what was the movie about ? what is it a spoof ? fantasy ? comedy ? satire ? no answer there from gilliam 's screenplay . totally confused and pointlessly hurtling from one historical age to another . i find it amusing that some people actually call this movie magical . is it because they have to praise any movie which is vague and indecisive on what it is about ? ? 3 stars for special effects considering it is 1981 . roger ebert has it right in his review . the movie is ambiguous and looks like gilliam 's romp with money just to make a vague children 's move masquerading as a historical revue . the movie also tries to confuse the would - be viewer by giving john cleese and sean connery top billing . +0 this movie is very modern and forward . it is about 75 % in english . it is aimed at english - speaking multiplex - going young audience . basic plot is similar to ddlj . acting is below average.

unfortunately they are portraying a wrong picture and setting a bad example for the youngsters . tanisha is shown drinking from a bottle , or taking shots of tequila about 5 - 6 times in the movie . the director does not even acknowledge she is an alcoholic and has a drinking problem . all through the movie she only wears bikini tops whether she is at work , at a beach or at a wedding . the heroine of the movie doing this makes the youngsters feel this behaviour is acceptable.

the less that is said about failure of uday chopra doing shahrukh khan 's ddlj role of arrogant girl - chaser , the better . the movie is about equality of sexes . but equality should not be about making the same mistakes , instead about doing the right to do the right thing . if men have been shown as chronic casanovas in movies , does not mean women should also portray same behaviour.

even though the movie is made in light - hearted fun spirit , it promotes so many wrong social notions in the name of being forward , that " fun " part of the movie makes no impact . not even in canada women dress like this , or guys behave like they have shown in the movie . it is certainly not a reflection of indian society or even canadian society . perhaps they should have a disclaimer at the beginning stating , " all characters and events in the movie are imaginary and do not reflect the actual culture of the cities and countries mentioned in the film . " the only good thing about this movie is the length , 1.5 hrs , thank god . +0 no holds barred is a movie that should in no way ever be taken seriously . it sucks hardcore as a serious movie . look at it more in the way that you should plan 9 from outer space . they are one in the same in that they are both so bad they are funny . the funny moments in no holds barred are usually the ones that are n't supposed to be . when rip ( played by hulk hogan as only he can play them ) grabs the limo driver out of the front after his first meeting with brell ( kurt fuller ) hilarity ensues and it is one part of the movie that every person should see . it might be the funniest scene ever , i swear.

anyway , how someone thought this movie would make money i 'll never know and that person should probably be beaten into submission . i hope they at least got fired . this movie earns a 1 out of 5 on my scale and that one is just for the unintentionally funny parts . +1 i like movies about quirky people . " one flew over the cuckoo 's nest " is maybe my all time favorite , so one can imagine i had a blast with this one . it 's definitely not one to watch if you want to walk off smiling . this movie is unpredictable and intense . some scenes are downright frightening , even after multiple viewings ( because this kind of stuff really can happen ) . it will most definitely keep you on the edge of your seat for the whole ride . and after you see the ending , if you 're not deeply disturbed , you really should check yourself for a pulse.

the acting was phenomenal . marcy , with her rather extreme case of tourette 's , shifts from quirky - cute to utterly terrifying , sometimes appearing so out - of - control that she looks like the undead . seth was great , too . the focus of the movie definitely does not fall nearly as much on him as it does on marcy , though he happens to be the one that gains the most momentum as a blossoming character.

it 's a classic love story with some unconventional twists , and it 's also my favorite love story next to " true romance . " there are two bad reviews for it up here , but one of the people who gave such a review did n't have his facts straight and admitted to not seeing the whole film , while the other was just looking for some hollywood thrills without the deep characters ( and perhaps was a little thrown off by the apparent shallowness of the plot , seeing as the end goal revolves around stealing a black bobbi head from a toy store ) . the point is that this movie is not for those who want to see something " normal " or " lighthearted " . this one is messed up and indie as can be , and wo n't let you go until the heavy climax . +0 " i hate you , you hate me , barney stole your suv with a great big bunch and a kick from me to you wo nt you say you hate me too ? " " jingle bells batman smells grandma had a gun shot barney and made him pee and now there is no more barney the moron " now why the heck would come up with a idiotic show like barney ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? so what i 'm saying is barney is a retard from the underground world ? and the kids on this show are like 12 years old . if i were them i would n't believe this stupid idiot called barney . now producers why do you believe this crap that barney says ? they are always happy . that is stupid.they should be sad sometimes . am i right ? bottom line barney is so stupid who watches that ugly creature . +0 waste of 1h45 this nasty little film is one to avoid , its like a cheap badly plotted cross between saw and a few other recent films about kidnap , why the writer wrote this is obvious .. he has no soul and did it to try and me some money . the twists were obvious , when those in peril could escape they did the obvious and did n't etc .. only good thing about it is i 've discovered 1 new actress worth watching .. peyton list , do n't watch shuttle though , there are too many better nicer films to watch rather than this that will make you miserable and think less of the world . spend your time more wisely watch good films , do some exercise , cook a nice meal .. anything but waste your time on rubbish like this +0 this movie was perhaps the biggest waste of 2 hours of my life . from the opening 10 minutes , i was ready to leave . the cliches there slapping you in the face , and the plot was not only predictably stupid , but full of more holes than swiss cheese . i am considering suing for that lost 2 hours , and $ 6.25 along with the fact that i am now stupider for watching this waste of film . the t - rex 's must be flipping in their graves , so to speak . +1 one of keli mccarthy 's best . this movie is filled with sex , and nudity . it has gorgeous , sexy women and some sexy settings.

believe me , there are many spicy and steamy sex scenes but not as hot as the women . we have outside settings , a hot tub , beds of course , and some other nice places to have sex.

monique parent is great in the opening sex sequence where she behaves like a naughty girl . keli is amazing , she 's extremely sexy and performs in at least 4 hot sex scenes . my favorite is when she has sex during a picnic or something like that . she has this short dress removed and the rest you can go figure it out ! renee rea also has a sexy sex scene where again , she demonstrates that beautiful cute faces can also perform great in soft core sex movies.

the most memorable scene in my opinion comes near the ending . it 's a double sex feature that has to do with hottub sex , intense sex ! and kelli mccarthy receiving it real hard so loud that the couple in the hottub feel interrupted . the scene is long , steamy , very explicit , and fun . my favorite from 2001.

the other good scenes include keli getting it on the woods ( really kinky ) ; then dressed as a bride . < br />
renne rea , always super gorgeous , dressed like a skater girl has a steamy sex scene . nice!

please , watch this movie if you enjoy b - soft core sex . it 's among the best from the new millennium . i had a blast with it . +1 " buffalo bill , hero of the far west " director mario costa 's unsavory spaghetti western " the beast " with klaus kinski could only have been produced in europe . hollywood would never dared to have made a western about a sexual predator on the prowl as the protagonist of a movie . never mind that kinski is ideally suited to the role of ' crazy ' johnny . he plays an individual entirely without sympathy who is ironically dressed from head to toe in a white suit , pants , and hat . this low - budget oater has nothing appetizing about it . the typically breathtaking spanish scenery around almeria is nowhere in evidence . instead , costa and his director of photography luciano trasatti , who shot another kinski western " and god said to cain , " lensed this horse opera in rather mundane setting around tor caldara , lazio , italy and monte gelato falls , treja river , lazio , italy . nevertheless , " the beast " qualifies as a continental western because it deals with wholly unscrupulous characters and the action could be classified as film noir because the hero and heroine are trapped by intolerable circumstances that compel them to resort to criminal activities . predictably , their well - laid plans backfire owing largely to the kinski character . indeed , the licentious kinski character resembles a wily e. coyote type character . consistently , he struggles to have sex with several beautiful women but either lawmen or outlaws frustrate each of his efforts . ultimately , " the beast " amounts to a tragic character study brimming with irony . the stelvio cipriani orchestral score sounds as if it were lifted by the tony anthony western " the stranger returns . " the mario costa screenplay takes place on the western frontier between san diego and mexico that is being terrorized by a notorious mexican bandit called machete ( giovanni pallavicino of " we still kill the old way " ) and his gang . they prey on the stagecoach and nobody is safe from their depredations . the first time that we see ' crazy ' johnny laster he pauses to refresh himself at a stream and spots a gorgeous looking woman washing clothes . he creeps up behind her and attacks her , but a bigger man armed with a rifle intervenes and he has to flee . he shows up in a nearby town and a snuff - snorting gunslinger recruits him to help ambush a wealthy man , mr. powers , on the trail and rob him . they wind up killing him and getting no money . mr. snuff - sniffer accidentally leaves his snuff box at the scene of the crime and the sheriff arrests on suspicion of murder . ' crazy ' shoots his accomplice from his hotel room so that he does n't have to worry about being implicated in the crime.

meanwhile , a young couple in love are having trouble making their way in the world . riccardo ( steven tedd of " requiem for a bounty killer " ) lives a mexican couple on their ranch and helps them raise their real son juan . in the village , riccardo 's lovely girlfriend juanita ( gabriella giorgelli of " stranger in sacramento " ) sings and dances in the cantina . riccardo and juanita plan to marry , but the last place that juanita wants to settle down is on a dusty ranch . she dreams of living in the city , but life in the city requires more money than either riccardo or she has . they team up with a blond outlaw name glen ( paolo casella of " shoot the living and pray for the dead " ) and they plan to kidnap mr. power 's daughter nancy when she comes to get her inheritance . glen makes the fatal mistake of enlisting ' crazy ' johnny to help them because glen knows that johnny needs the money to get women.

they abduct powers ' daughter and keep her at a remote cabin with johnny standing guard over her . meantime , juanita masquerades as powers ' daughter and shows up in town to get the money from powers ' attorney gary pinkerton ( giuliano raffaelli of " blood and black lace " ) , but he grows suspicious because juanita does n't look anything like he remembered nancy . riccardo brandishes his six - gun and warns pinkerton that they have kidnapped nancy . unfortunately for riccardo and juanita , pinkerton can only lay his hands on $ 50-thousand because machete has struck such fear into the hearts of everybody that the powers ' total inheritance can not be shipped through the territory by stagecoach . meanwhile , back at the cabin , horny johnny tries to rape nancy , but she outsmarts him , knows him out with a chair on the pretense of needing to be alone while she undresses . after she knocks him unconscious , she steals a buggy and drives it back to town . johnny recovers , pursues her and murders her about the same time that glen , riccardo , juanita , and pinkerton meet him on the trail . they inform johnny about the complications created by machete 's reign of terror and give him $ 12-thousand as his cut of the money . pinkerton is aghast at the sight of nancy 's bloodstained corpse and threatens johnny . naturally , johnny guns him down in cold blood on the spot.

things really begin to deteriorate as the law in san diego sets out to capture machete . glen , riccardo , and juanita return to mexico while johnny attacks two women at a ranch and narrowly escapes getting caught . he rides to mexico , finds a cantina whore and is going down on her when a bounty shoves a revolver in his face . johnny confesses that he knows where they can find more money if they will release him . machete 's men follow up on johnny 's tip and capture juanita . the villagers join riccardo to attack machete and johnny rescues juanita but she dies later on after a big shoot - out . riccardo is left standing alone now . machete and his men retaliated against his step parents , not only killing them but also little juan . everything that riccardo and juanita dreamed up having goes up in clouds of gun smoke for an unhappy ending . ' crazy ' johnny dies and never gets to assuage his lust . if you think about costa 's uncompromising sagebrusher , " the beast " emerges as an interesting character study and an exercise in film noir in a western setting where everybody is punished . +0 sure this movie may have had its funny moments with the sat question people and i know the movie is not supposed to be totally believable the movie made it too outrageous for example a girl like that would never in a million years go out wit ha guy like that also people in movie had lackluster performances there acting was so bad . also the plot bad they could have don e a better job on the scripting at least and focused more on the comedy the comedy was also a little dry and got really boring after the first few jokes , it was like 10mins was laughter then the old when is this gon na end started to kick in the bottom line if u want a a lackluster of acting mixed in with a stupid plot and a romance go ahead and watch this movie . +1 it is a shame that this series has n't been remastered and produced on video by warner or some other professional movie house.

copies of most episodes are available , but are usually of poor quality , being copies of copies of copies.

as i understand it , 92 episodes were produced during its run , but only 15 are noted here.

some of the series writers , such as richard matheson , went on to become noted authors.

excellent series , well written , well staged and well produced.

michael weldon,

udon thani , thailand +0 ok , let me start off by saying this is n't a horrible movie by any means . it 's just not good . i recall one poster saying the acting is n't campy it 's just nuanced . no . i 've seen nuanced japanese and asian acting . i 'm sorry , you 're wrong . this is camp.

the characters are totally unsympathetic , the deaths are totally random and utterly meaningless . the writing is bad . i 'm fine with suspending disbelief , i 'm fine with not having everything handed to me in terms of plot . but this movie has no plot . one reviewer stated " this movie is set in a small town where people are going nuts over vortexes and spirals . " that 's not a blurb , that 's the entire freaking film . congratulations , i 've just saved you nearly an hour and a half . there is nothing more to it . no character development , no plot development , no explanations , no resolution . and not even the " acceptable within the realm of j - horror " lack of resolution . just nothing.

in addition , the musical score is done by someone who obviously was n't actually watching the movie at the time because it 's random enough to cause whiplash . cognitive dissonance is one thing and done well it can be brilliant ( see dark water ) , but here it just seems as if the score was designed to go with another movie all together.

the best example i can give is it 's as if the japanese remade evil dead without any of the clever bits or good acting . it just falls flat . it 's j - horror without the horror . +1 please why not put this fantastic film on dvd , i have been searching just like the previous writer for years , what s the hold up , or show it on tv . its so underestimated its one of the most romantic and beautifully written books i have ever read , and believe i have read some . i seem to think it was read on radio 4 , but i ca n't find that either . why not try and remake it even , i promise it will be top earner , people love those sorts of stories , so please either release it and take us out of our misery or remake it , although i doubt if it could be improved upon . has any one read gone to earth by the same author or seen the film with jennifer jones , this is superb , but not to the same extent may be . +1 i absolutely loved this movie . great , realistic looking combat footage for one thing and a touching , genuine story also . the calm , understated manner of the lead character , franta , makes him very likable . the human relationships in the story seemed so very typical and possible of what you could expect in war time . the bond between franta and carel shows the loyalty wartime comrades can have for each other and that is often described in books and interviews with veterans . the subtitles do not detract from the story at all and actually serve to underline the problems the czech pilots had in the raf . the postwar storyline is a great reminder that for many the suffering of ww2 did not end in 1945 , especially in russian occupied countries . the cinematography was also very good . wish i could have seen it on the big screen . +0 hollywood movie industry is the laziest one in the entire world . it only needs a single hit to flood theaters with the same old crap re - invented over and over again . take superheroes for example , for each x - man and spiderman , there are daredevil , elektra , ghost rider and hulk . japanese horror remakes are even worst . it only took the ring , which was pitch - perfect ( mostly because of mr. gore verbinsky ) , to bring a ton of look - alike creepy - woman based horrors , e.g. the ring 2 , the eye , dark water ( which was fine , but pointless ) , and the grudges.

the first grudge was n't entirely bad . it was scary most of the way , which is what one could expect from it . plus , the plot had some brains mixing narratives . grudge 2 is exactly like the previous ; this could be a good thing , but hey , what boy men in black ii ? was it a nice thing to xerox the entire screenplay and just change the villain ? for the grudge 2 , the critic goes the same way.

tired scares , bad acting ( except for amber tamblyn ) , and clichés all over the place . three stories take place , on different places and time . there is aubrey ( tamblyn ) investigating what drove her sister karen ( sarah michelle gellar ) to death ; allison ( arielle kebbel ) who is taken by colleagues to visit the house where the incident depicted in the first movie took place ; and finally , an american family that witness strange stuff happening on the apartment next door . glad to say ( and i mean it ) that everything is tied up at the end , but one must not rely on the end to make a good picture , when everything else is simply tiresome and dull.

the chills are all over there , a girl alone in the lockers , someone who should n't enter a house , others that dig too deep . meanwhile , ghosts keep killing and killing and killing , which seems even more deadlier than ten world wars or the ebola epidemic . hey , does n't that seem just like another bad japanese remake , something called pulse ? yeah , day after day it 's getting easier to hold a grudge ... against hollywood bullshits . +0 okay ... she 's on the boat with this guy , realizes he 's out to kill her , knocks him out , and then finds the reason he 's out to off her is this disk that got her coworker killed . so what would any rational person do ? maybe conk him over the head again to make sure he 's really out ? ? tie him up ? ? look , sandra honey , you 've got the chance to escape while the guy is out for only so long . until you know how long it will take you take you to escape , make sure he 's not able to come after you . i hate these stupid female victim roles . the rest of the movie was just a series of twists and turns that were completely convoluted and too unbelievable to remain interesting . +0 this cheap , grainy - filmed italian flick is about a couple of inheritors of a manor in the italian countryside who head up to the house to stay , and then find themselves getting killed off by ghosts of people killed in that house.

i was n't impressed by this . it was n't really that scary , mostly just the way a cheap italian film should be . a girl , her two cousins , and one cousin 's girlfriend , head to this huge house for some reason ( i could n't figure out why ) and are staying there , cleaning up and checking out the place . characters come in and out of the film , and it 's quite boring at points , and the majority of deaths are quite rushed . the girlfriend is hit by a car when fleeing the house after having a dream of her death , and the scene is quite good , but then things get slow again , until a confusing end , when the male cousins are killed together in some weird way , and this weirdo guy ( i could n't figure out who he was during the movie , or maybe i just do n't remember ) goes after this one girl , attacking her , until finally this other girl kills him off . hate to give away the ending , but oh well . the female cousin decides to stay at the house and watch over it , and they show scenes of her living there years later . the end . you really are n't missing anything , and anyway , you probably wo n't find this anywhere , so lucky you . +1 imagine the most depressing winter you will never experience : grey instead of white , no snow fights and certainly no wonderlands . this is the finland as portrayed by ' frozen land ' . this film follows a bunch of people whose lives are oddly linked to each others ' with results beyond anyone 's nightmares . yes , most characters are flawed in the way that only celluloid characters can - completely annoying and frustrating to watch , yet for some reason you wish for their luck to turn . < br />
with some randomly placed humour and a cast that groups together finland 's somewhat mainstream faces , frozen land offers a glimpse of the finnish mentality that despite its depressing downward spirals manages to restore some faith in humanity . more so than kaurismäki , to say the least . +0 this movie is a desperate attempt to ride the skirtales of the success of the star wars movies . the film uses recycled footage from " battle beyond the sars " which is another roger corman sci - fi turd , but atleast this one is better than " battle beyond the stars " - there is no real acting in this film ( but its a roger corman film - what did you expect)again the entire soundtrack was done on a keyboard / synthasizer , the sound effects are recycled from " battlestar galactica " - there are no special effects because they were recycled / rearranged space scenes from another movie , the costumes look like something right out of 1981 salvation army salvage . --ironicaly , the little boy in this film gives one helluva performance , and he 'd resurface again to star in the sylvester stallone movie " over the top " - i give this movie 3 stars out of 10 +1 i remember seeing this film when i was 13 years old and i fell in love with it and i was a big fan of the film and the characters i adored . my favorite character was stacey ( heidi holicker ) , because she made me laugh when she showed no interest in fred ( cameron dye ) who really liked her and i was hoping that in the end that they would get together then her boring boyfriend , ralphie ( christopher murray)because he ignored her and hung out with his friends . i love the cast and the story . i always love the part when fred try to get together with stacey , and i always remember when he chased her around the car . but it was so good . i 'll always remember cherish that in my teen years . now that i am 33 years old and i picked up my copy on dvd and will look forward seeing it . +0 i really liked this quirky movie . the characters are not the bland beautiful people that show up in so many movies and on tv . it has a realistic edge , with a captivating story line . the main title sequence alone makes this movie fun to watch . +0 one would think that anyone embarking upon a followup to the groundbreaking naked civil servant of 30-plus years ago would at the very least try to honor the original with some kind of inspired vision , but no . here we have a sort of biopic of one of the most stylish people of the late 20th century that itself boasts no style whatsoever . true , the filmmakers have assembled some outstanding actors - and handed them a chipped mug of drab gruel to work with . everything in the infrastructure of this film is wrong , starting with the script , which is another one of those tv - movie condensations of great lives wherein every other line is a " famous quote " by the subject and every other scene is an in - your - face introduction to the next pivotal character in the subject 's life . we get swoozie kurtz as a pr maven who promotes crisp as a stateside entertainer ; denis o'hare as the editor of a gay periodical who hires crisp as film reviewer , becomes somewhat alienated from him when he appears indifferent to the passions of 80 's aids activists , and then returns to the fold as a compassionate friend of the dying octogenarian ; jonathan tucker ( in a fine performance ) as a shy , insecure painter of gay - themed canvases who is befriended by crisp ; and finally cynthia nixon as performance artist and woman - about - bohemia penny arcade who , intrigued by crisp 's persona , offers him a spot in her traveling cabaret act . nixon is a persuasive and gifted performer but is given no chance by the script to embody the down - to - earth and streetwise arcade . crisp spent the last 20 years of his life in a one - room flat in an old tenement building in manhattan 's east village . he famously said that he never cleaned because " after a few years the dust does n't get any worse , " or something like that . but looking at the depiction of that flat in this film you 'd never get the flavor of that dustiness . he frequented a local coffee shop on a busy avenue and would be seen pretty much each day of the week sipping tea and watching the world go by . in this film we get a diner that looks like something on 12th avenue by the hudson river . most of the " streets of new york " scenes have a sterile , unreal look with no sense of the period . < br />
the soul of this film is the great john hurt in the title role . after nearly 35 years he can still grasp the essence of this peculiar post - edwardian englishman and put it across to third millennarians . his every line , every gesture is exquisite . in the later scenes he even modulates his vocal projection to suit that of a person whose life is winding down toward death . crisp wrote shortly before he left this realm that when one grows very , very old one 's skin takes on the character of a smelly overcoat that can not be removed and one longs for death . one senses that feeling in hurt 's performance . so , for him and him alone this film is worth a look . +0 just seen which way to the front ? on tcm ( uk ) it is a truly awful film . if i 'd paid at the pictures i 'd have walked out.

a terrible mess of a film . byers ( lewis ) and his mates prance around in cast off uniforms from an italian sci - fi movie of 1960 's . were the cnd / peace symbol badges on the uniforms meant to be ironic ? the sets were pure 1970 , i 'm sure a hollywood tv back - lot could have provided a more realistic set.

the film is riddled with racism . the film takes the mickey out of veterans . < br />
not funny how lewis every got to make another film is beyond me . +0 honestly , this is a very funny movie if you are looking for bad acting ( heather graham could never live this down ... it has three titles for a reason- to protect the guilty ! ) , beautifully bad dialog ( " do you like ... ribs ? " ) , and a plot only a mother could approve , this is your friday night entertainment ! < br />
my roommate rented this under the title " terrified " because he liked heather graham , but terrified is what we felt after the final credits . not because the movie is scary , but because somebody actually paid money to make this turd on a movie reel.

horrible movie . there are a few no - name actors that provide some unintentional comedy , but nothing worth viewing . heather graham 's dramatic climax also was one of the most pathetic and disturbing things i have ever witnessed . i award this movie no point , and may god have mercy on its soul . +0 why is it that in the ' 50s and ' 60s , italians made so of the best movies , and then during the ' 70s and ' 80s , made nothing but zombie and cannibal movies ? probably because art films did n't make any money . , the cannibal movie , unlike the zombie movie , which was created by americans and ` exploited ' by italians , is a purely italian creation , designed as a mondo exploitation showcase , and to make as much money as possible ( no artistic integrity getting in the way here ) . eaten alive came during the cannibal movie heyday . the director , umberto lenzi , had n't even hit his stride yet ; his genre classic , cannibal ferox , was still a year away.

in plotting similar to ( read : ripped off from ) ruggero deodato 's seminal cannibal classic , cannibal holocaust , a woman ( janet agren ) receives word from the police that they 've received a 8 mm film from her sister . she 's gone missing in africa , and it 's suspected that the tribal ritual depicted on the film may have something to do with it . mel ferrer , as a professor of somethingoranother , tells her that a man named jonas ( ivan rassimov ) has started a jonestown - like cult in new guinea , and that 's where the sister is . the woman hires a guide ( robert kerman ) to take her through the jungle to find the cult and her sister . and , would n't you know it , the jungle is full of cannibals . < br />
one sentence should sum it up : if you 've seen on cannibal movie , you 've seen them all , mostly because these films steal shamelessly from each other ( lenzi copied cannibal holocaust to make this film , and retooled this to make cannibal ferox ; deodato copied parts of this for hit and run ) . and because they all share the same material , they all feature the same traits : awful photography , boring scenery , terrible dubbing , overacting , and exploitation , exploitation , exploitation . genre fans will have a ball since everyone in it is a genre veteran . rassimov and kerman have a scenery eating contest . agren exists solely to be naked , raped , or in peril . plenty o ' gore for all the sickos out there . the cannibals , who do actually appear to be native cannibals , eat lunch met disguised as human flesh . and , in the grand tradition of cannibal movies , any live animal shown onscreen is usually killed shortly thereafter . overall , really not a good experience , but i 'm sure there are psychopaths out there who find this excrement entertaining . i know i did . +1 i saw this film at telluride film festival in 1997 , where one of the screenwriters , josé giovanni , was being honored . it ranks highly as a great noir - crime - drama , incredible performances by belmondo and lino ventura . the attention given to every character , and complex psychological portrayals , detailing loyalty , treachery , love , and hope , are tremendous . it is an excellent drama , an excellent thriller , and an excellent film . up there with the best of melville . ( the title in english ' class all risk , ' in french ' classe tous risques ' is word - play on ' classe touriste , ' meaning ' tourist class ' . +0 i was intrigued by the nasty boss character as i am one myself , and the actual boss 's daughter was attractive and it was interesting to see an even younger ashton kushner , but this movie is so puerile i had to turn it off . it was a waste of time to watch it . when people started peeing all over the living room , it was too much to watch . painful , awful crap movie . if they had just toned it down a little . are there really people out there that find it funny and like it ? i was relieved to know that imdb readers rated it so low . the career side to the story was intriguing as well as the young man trying to get a promotion and win the bosses favor . i liked that part . also , the opening scene with the coworkers on the train was cool as i like his coworker 's characters . if you can stomach non - sense movies or you are pretty young , then it might be one you can stomach . +1 i am new at this , so bear with me please . i am a big fan of surface . i thought the script and the computer graphics were exceptional , as good as any sci fi flick i 've seen at the theater . in february the tv guide said season finale , the announcer for the show said something to the effect of , " ... and now for the season finale of surface . " season finale , not series finale ! i could n't wait for fall to get here , to see was going to happen next . so fall gets here and it 's nowhere to be found ! if nbc is n't going to pick it up , what about sci fi or usa ? it seems to me that bay watch did n't last long on abc & then usa picked it up , and it went gang busters ! ( i bet abc was chocking ) ha ! if not a series , then at least a mini series , to give all us loyal fans closure . what happened to our guy 's trapped in the church steeple ? was the creature in the chaple nim ? did he have a grouth spert ? does the cloned guy come over to our side ? there are so many unanswered questions . thank 's for listening to me babble ! +0 it 's exactly what the title tells you ... an island inhabited by fishmen . shipwrecked doctor claudio cassinelli and crew land on the island , they 're either picked off by the fishmen or roped into working for treasure hunting lunatic richard johnson . cassinelli discovers that johnson , who believes he 's found the lost city of atlantis , has been keeping disgraced scientist joseph cotten and his daughter barbara bach hostage for 15 years so the fishmen can uncover a treasure trove beneath the sea . cotten , of course , is a complete madman . bach and cassinelli have great chemistry . this insanity was directed by sergio martino and is not , surprisingly , without merit . it 's fast paced , reasonably well acted and the fishmen look pretty convincing ( though it 's unlikely anyone could prove that these things don't look like actual fishmen ) . there 's an excellent music score by luciano michelini . +1 worth it for : if not for mick molloy 's work , then for judith lucy . she brings her usual classy style of unbridled foul - mouthery to the role , and steals the show in parts.

imho : i 'm not much of an autograph hunter , but i have collected 3 . the first is samuel l. jackson 's , the other 2 are in this movie : tony martin and mick molloy . altho martin only makes a cameo appearance , molloy not only stars but co - wrote and co - produced this flick . i 've been a fan of their for years now ( apparently i was the only one laughing during the on - set urination in the first episode of the short lived the mick molloy show ) , so i went in to this with high expectations . i 'm happy to say i was n't disappointed . with mick doing a lot of the work on this thing there 's plenty of his usual trademarks . phrases like " blow it out your arse " and " these bowls are s***house " are all over the place , aswell as plenty of winnie blues being sucked down . it 's also the sort of stupid , original story you 'd expect from someone like him . this is like one of those cliqued , american , sporting comedies where they make a baseball team out of prisoners or something . but rather than trying to make a dull american sport like baseball or gridiron interesting , this movie focuses on a sport usually left to grey army : lawn bowls . but the main difference between this and other sporting type comedies is that this is actually very , very funny . what 's even better is that even tho the subject of this movie is a young lout joining an old folks game , it 's never insulting to the elderly , and it never gets sickeningly soppy or anything . it 's just good laughs at genuine 1972 prices . mick is great in the first real acting role i 've ever seen him in , as is judith lucy and the rest of the cast , but then most of them have had a lot of practice ... this is the best australian comedy i 've seen in a long time . go see it and learn the joys of lawn bowls!

it 's a bit like : major league?

score : 8 / 10 +0 i do n't understand how some people can stand playing " half - life : counter - strike " when there are so many better first - person shooting games available.

"counter - strike " is a game that does n't use any imaginative ideas in its weaponry . all the weapons in the game are real - life weapons , but there could have been at least a cheat that allowed players to have access to a " supernatural " weapon , like the all - powerful bfg in the quake & doom games.

another problem is that the player actually has to reload the weapon manually . this can become extremely annoying , especially while in the middle of a firefight when you are so close to killing the enemy . the reloading delay also gives the feeling that the gun is slow at performing its task.

there are not many choices of characters to choose from . if i remember correctly , there are 4 types of characters each for the terrorist and counter - terrorist forces . this means that many of the characters look the same as each other , which really brings down the game 's realism.

the game is pretty sexist when it comes to character selections . in the early version of counter - strike , there was a woman available to choose ( in the terrorist force selection ) which was good for the female gamers . in the latest versions , however , the female character was deleted and replaced with another male character . i wonder if the women who played the game were disappointed at the newer versions.

finally , the maps in the game are very small . the biggest map seems to be the desert map , but it has standard detail . in fact , all the maps in the game have standard graphics . in other words , nothing new.

to sum up , i think " half - life : counter - strike " is the most un - imaginative first - person shooting game of all time . there are plenty of better & more imaginative shooting games to play , so why waste your time on this boring game ? you 're better off playing the unreal tournament , quake , and doom games . avoid this over - rated & over - hyped game.

i give the game a 1/10 . +0 ty cobb is , by far , the most interesting and belligerently insane athlete to ever live . his baseball career was unparalleled in absurd statistics , brilliant strategy , and pure unadulterated violence . every game he played in was a spectacle in human ability and cruelty . so of course , the film about him deals with none of that , instead focusing on the writing of his biography by author al stump . now this is n't such a horrible idea in theory , as cobb himself slid even further into paranoid dementia as years progressed and the stories of his crazed outbursts even as a senior are shocking even by today 's desensitized standards . but instead of focusing on these events , which i guess was simply too interesting , the film is a pseudo fictionalized road film with clichéd a clichéd plot that will cause any knowledgeable cobb fan to cry vinegar tears . < br />
tommy lee jones does quite well as a crotchety cobb , but somehow manages to overplay his cartoon supervillainy . most stories about cobb are barely believable , but to make him even crazier seems both impossible and unnecessary . robert wuhl , portraying the writer al stump , is a dark vortex of nonexistent talent . he sucks the life out of every scene , trying to make this film his own nagasaki . there is a reason we never see him as a leading man anymore ( arliss does n't count . it 's barely a show ) . even the played out , inevitable " role reversal " of cobb and stump by the end is made even worse by his pure inability to utter words that do n't sound like a poor book on tape narration voice . < br />
for all the awful writing and bland film - making on display , there is one sequence which stands out as so far superior to the rest of this failure that accepting it 's from the same film is near impossible . a hyper stylized flashback sequence displaying cobb 's overpowering psychology and brutal athleticism while actually playing the game of baseball is pure brilliance . the camera moves in bizarre fashion and the whole event seems like a dream due to the unique playing style of the monster cobb . every slide , hit , and tackle are rendered even more forceful due to enhanced sound , and tommy lee jones owns the intensity of the master player . it makes the viewer drool over the possibilities of a true biopic of cobb in his prime with the same actor . it 's worth watching the film for this incredible few minutes alone , just to see what could have been . < br />
i may be slightly unfair to this film due to my own knowledge of ty cobb and wanting it to be something it is n't , but to make such boring , neutered movie about this maniac is nonsensical . i 'm glad ron shelton 's career has slid ever since . +0 ok , lets get one thing straight , i love dinosaur movies , even the bad ones . so with this in mind lets proceed . " raptor " is a truly awful film , in fact its not even a film in its own right as it is cobbled together from bits of " carnosaur " , " carnosaur 2 " & " primal species - carnosaur 3 " . there is some new footage with eric roberts as a sheriff and his busty sidekick running around looking confused , frightened or whatever it is there trying to convey ( badly ) on the emotional scale but then how can they react to something that was filmed several years earlier . the producers ( yes roger corman i 'm talking about you ! ) even went to the lengths of hiring 2 people from " carnosaur " to play bit parts so there grisly death scenes can be reused ! so this film is the cheapest of the cheap . watch the 3 original movies , there no oscar winners but they have some meritt and entertainment value but avoid " raptor " . oh , it also has the most pointless sex scene that runs for nearly 10 minutes ! do you think they were trying to pad out the running time ? +1 excellent movie about a big media firm and the goings on both on and off camera . covering several years , the film centers on 3 upwardly mobile , young hopefuls , all striving for their place within the corporation . well written dialogue , flawless acting , and a riveting story made for 2 hours of solid entertainment . +1 i 've never seen a movie get a worse release then this . and that 's a shame , as this is the funniest film of the year ! you would think an ad with the line " from the director of " office space " " would be enough to warrant a big release ! but there are no ads , no posters , no website , i doubt the stars even knew it came out this weekend . what is 20th century fox thinking ? mike judge 's sci - fi comedy is set in 2505 but it could come true in about 10 years ( if things continue as they are . ) luke wilson and maya rudolph get frozen in a top secret army experiment and wake up in a future full of consumer zombie inbred retards . the film reminds me of woody allen 's " sleeper " , " robocop " , " planet of the apes " , " blade runner " and " network " and the late great " futurama " . try to see it before fox burns all the prints ! +0 i first watched kindred in 1987 along with another movie called devouring waves . i remember back then i hated them both and i have never really bothered to watch them again.

however i have recently started a crusade to collect as many 80 's horror titles in their original boxed form , that have been deleted for some time . i have got myself quite a proud collection with many more titles on my list!

the kindred although i have not as yet got a copy is high priority as all the old movies i did n't like back then , i now own and have now re - watched and think they are brilliant and the bits i do remember of the kindred are now driving me to want to get hold of a copy a.s.a.p.

hurray for the 80 's and long live horror ! +1 if you watched this film for the nudity ( as i did ) you wo n't be disappointed . i could have done without the bumbling crooks or the bear though . some bottomless nudity could have be shown but for what it was i think h.o.t.s. has to be the best of its genre.

it is not the sort of film that could have been made today which is a pity because it is the sort of film that is worth watching in these times.

i would take mindless nudity over pivotal plot points any day.

it is a shame that the dvd does n't have any extras but as they did n't have dvds when this was filmed that is understandable . i would have like to know more about the shooting of the film especially where they shot the football match at the end . +0 after his widower father dies in a horsing accident , young tom burlinson ( as jim craig ) is left to manage his australian " snowy river " farm , with only wizened , peg - legged prospector kirk douglas ( as spur ) to help . times are hard , so mr. burlinson goes to work for mr. douglas ' wealthy , silver - haired brother rancher " mr. harrison " ( also played by kirk douglas ) . when a big job comes up , the silver - haired ( older ? ) douglas feels burlinson is too young and inexperienced to go along ; so , burlinson stays behind , and falls in love with the boss ' daughter , sigrid thornton ( as jessica harrison).

the least satisfactory aspect of director george miller 's " the man from snowy river " is a weak storyline . observe , for example , the " jessica is lost " sequence of events . the damsel gets lost in one of those " freak " storms , while running away . her worried father rounds up a posses of drunk men to find her , after predicting bad weather . damsel " jessica " rolls herself on to the edge of a conveniently appearing cliff . father and the suddenly sober men do n't check burlinson 's farm . hero burlinson discovers the damsel . after building a fire , he decides to kiss her.

the " romance " is played too innocently for as obvious an attracted man and woman as burlinson and ms. thornton . to make matters worse , the douglas brothers have a " dark history " which is revealed before any mystery is built up regarding the matter . the main attraction , herein , is the australian scenery.

* * * * the man from snowy river ( 1982 ) george miller ~ tom burlinson , kirk douglas , sigrid thornton +1 no one would ever question that director leos carax is a genius , but what we wonder about is : is he an insane genius ? so many people hated this film ! i am normally the first person to accuse many french directors of making offensive , boring , disgusting and pretentious films ( such as the horrible recent film ' l'enfant ' and the pointless and offensive ' feux rouges ' ) . but strangely enough , i actually think that ' pola x ' is an amazing film , made with great skill and passion by a master of his craft , and containing remarkable performances . the film does carry melodrama to more extreme lengths than i believe i have ever seen on screen before . but then , carax is extreme , that we know . the film also contains what i consider way over - the - top trotskyite or anarchist fantasies and wet - dreams , what with a mysterious group of young men training to fire machine guns at the bourgeoisie in between playing scott walker 's rather fascinating music in a band which has its recording sessions in an abandoned warehouse filled with squatters and fires burning in old steel barrels . guillaume depardieu plays a rich young man in a château ( whose step - mother is catherine deneuve , and he wanders into her bathroom while she is naked in the bath , by the way ) . but he suddenly ' snaps ' completely when he discovers that his deceased father , a famous diplomat , had fathered an illegitimate daughter who had been effectively disposed of by deneuve as an inconvenience . this is because the sister suddenly turns up as a kind of romanian refugee with wild dishevelled hair , expressionless face , and little ability to speak french coherently . depardieu then transforms himself into a ' class hero ' of the far left and wants to kill or destroy his family for their hypocrisy and corruption , and lives in squalor and extreme poverty , while scorning a vast inheritance . he then commences an incestuous sexual relationship with his half - sister , which is shown in an explicit sex scene which has offended many people , though i have no objection to it , as i think people are far too hysterical about sex , especially in america , where apparently it never happens . the intensity of the acting and the filming make this unlikely scenario come off as an experience of powerful , if depressing , hyper - melodrama . the differences between carax making an extreme film like this and the numerous extreme french films which i think are pretentious and disgusting are ( 1 ) that carax is an excellent filmmaker , and ( 2 ) he is seriously attempting to explore a meaningful , if harrowing , extreme emotional condition , whereby a human being disintegrates and turns against his background . many would say that the extreme elements in this film were gratuitous , but i do n't agree . i believe carax was genuine , and was not making an exploitation picture at all . it is very difficult to defend a man who goes that far and who , for all i know , may be a complete madman , but i believe he deserves defending for this remarkable cinematic achievement . +1 oz , is one of the most mind - blowing and addictive tv experiences ever.

having caught pieces of this on sbs , i was at first skeptical , however , having finished now the 4th season , i sadly know that that this brilliant show is approaching its end , ( 6 seasons ) , and yet i still ca n't get enough of oz . < br />
want something that will push your senses and your stomach to the limit ... oz fits the bill , hands down.

this is n't kid 's stuff , folks , its violent , brutal , and not pretty . why , its a experimental unit inside a maximum security prison.

tom fontana 's oz is brilliant in all the right departments , the actors , the writing , and directing.

hbo 's oz site is also highly recommended , for newcomers , for info about this series . this was the first one - hour show , produced by hbo , and it proves what a master - work it is and that others would follow.

thank - you hbo +1 no one would ever question that director leos carax is a genius , but what we wonder about is : is he an insane genius ? so many people hated this film ! i am normally the first person to accuse many french directors of making offensive , boring , disgusting and pretentious films ( such as the horrible recent film ' l'enfant ' and the pointless and offensive ' feux rouges ' ) . but strangely enough , i actually think that ' pola x ' is an amazing film , made with great skill and passion by a master of his craft , and containing remarkable performances . the film does carry melodrama to more extreme lengths than i believe i have ever seen on screen before . but then , carax is extreme , that we know . the film also contains what i consider way over - the - top trotskyite or anarchist fantasies and wet - dreams , what with a mysterious group of young men training to fire machine guns at the bourgeoisie in between playing scott walker 's rather fascinating music in a band which has its recording sessions in an abandoned warehouse filled with squatters and fires burning in old steel barrels . guillaume depardieu plays a rich young man in a château ( whose step - mother is catherine deneuve , and he wanders into her bathroom while she is naked in the bath , by the way ) . but he suddenly ' snaps ' completely when he discovers that his deceased father , a famous diplomat , had fathered an illegitimate daughter who had been effectively disposed of by deneuve as an inconvenience . this is because the sister suddenly turns up as a kind of romanian refugee with wild dishevelled hair , expressionless face , and little ability to speak french coherently . depardieu then transforms himself into a ' class hero ' of the far left and wants to kill or destroy his family for their hypocrisy and corruption , and lives in squalor and extreme poverty , while scorning a vast inheritance . he then commences an incestuous sexual relationship with his half - sister , which is shown in an explicit sex scene which has offended many people , though i have no objection to it , as i think people are far too hysterical about sex , especially in america , where apparently it never happens . the intensity of the acting and the filming make this unlikely scenario come off as an experience of powerful , if depressing , hyper - melodrama . the differences between carax making an extreme film like this and the numerous extreme french films which i think are pretentious and disgusting are ( 1 ) that carax is an excellent filmmaker , and ( 2 ) he is seriously attempting to explore a meaningful , if harrowing , extreme emotional condition , whereby a human being disintegrates and turns against his background . many would say that the extreme elements in this film were gratuitous , but i do n't agree . i believe carax was genuine , and was not making an exploitation picture at all . it is very difficult to defend a man who goes that far and who , for all i know , may be a complete madman , but i believe he deserves defending for this remarkable cinematic achievement . +0 do n't get me wrong . i 've got a considerable soft spot for the works of charles band , both as producer and director . but you 've got to raise an eyebrow when the man who was willing to put his name to " dollman vs the demonic toys " sticks a pseudonym on anything . as a bit of bad - movie fun , " head of the family " is rather lacking , although it is better acted than you might expect . jacqueline lovell is a definite talent who deserves better than these kinds of movies . j.w. perra is also quite funny as the titular monster , though for such a superintelligent being he does get hoodwinked quite easily . y'know , i 'm nitpicking because the rest of the movie is so sharp and witty of course ....

and having a lead character called lance bogan ? nice one guys . we did n't know you americans knew that piece of slang ! +1 if i 'd only seen the poster for nurse betty , i probably would n't have touched it with a ten - foot pole . but after i heard some positive buzz , and knowing it made some noise at cannes , i decided to give it a try . what i got is a truly enjoyable movie , based on a very entertaining plot . rene zelleweger is impressive in her role as ‘nurse ' betty , a woman who is sent into a delusional psychotic episode following a traumatic experience . i also liked morgan freeman ( no surprise ) and was pleasantly surprised by foul - mouthed comedian chris rock . < br />
the film bounces continuously between comedy , drama , romance , and thriller . yet despite this apparent identity crisis , it holds up quite well . i found my eyes glued to the screen from beginning to end always waiting for the next twist in the story . the entire cast is strong , if not spectacular . < br />
my only real complaint is that director neil labute ( who made a splash a few years ago with the very impressive and dark ‘in the company of men ' ) relied much too heavily on many cliched hollywood conventions . the mood - creating musical effects he crammed down our throats during each sentimental scene were unbearable ! and he did the standard old " let 's take some of the minor characters and pair them up at the end in an illogical and unnecessary romance " trick , just to make absolutely certain everyone goes home with a smile on their face . why must directors and writers treat their audiences like idiots??

but the movie is still much too enjoyable to be dragged down very far by these annoying irritations . in a very subpar year for movies , ' nurse betty ' ranks as one of the more pleasant surprises of 2000 . 8 out of 10 . +0 i really wanted to like this film as i have admiration for italian rip - off cinema ( especially jaws rip - offs ! ) , but the simple fact of the matter is that monster shark is n't very good . all the signs of this being a great piece of trash are there ; we 've got one of the kings of trashy cult cinema , lamberto bava , in the director 's chair - one of the best ridiculous cult actors , michael sopkiw , taking the lead role , and a central creature stupid enough to give even the best that this sort of film has to offer a run for it 's money , yet somehow the film still manages to be rather stale . the fact that the ' monster shark ' does n't feature too often is probably a good thing given the creature design , but there 's never enough elsewhere to pull the film through without it . the plot focuses on a resort off the south coast of florida ( or rather , somewhere in italy ) where several local people have turned up in the water with arms and legs missing . it 's not long before the local authorities decide that this creature has never been seen before , and it 's up to a motley crew of various sea experts to catch it alive ! < br />
the main problem with this film is that it always feels very pointless , and since there is little in the way of characters or plot development , even the least demanding of viewers are likely to start getting bored before long . this sort of film is hardly famous for being brilliant , although the fun element of films such as ' the last shark ' and ' killer fish ' is unfortunately absent for most of the running time . the thing i love about lead actor michael sopkiw is that he always seems like he 's taking himself seriously no matter what film he 's in ( although he only ever made four ) . this is certainly the case here , although bava never really allows him to completely dive in , and often he feels as much like a spare wheel as the rest of the film . much of the runtime is spent watching the various characters sup american lager , and it 's not very fascinating ; although bava does manage to come good by the end with an entertaining flurry of action as the central monster finally gets to wreak havoc upon its would - be captors . overall , there really is n't much to recommend this film for . as mentioned , i really like this sort of stuff and even i found myself bored on numerous occasions . for hardcore italian horror fans only ! +1 i saw this television version of a christie mystery story when it was shown back on channel 5 in new york city in 1980 . at the time i was surprised it was not shown on channel 13 , the public television station that showed most of the masterpiece theater programs , but ( aside from some dorothy sayers " lord peter wimsey " stores , and the moonstone ) the bbc productions rarely dealt with british detective stories . another series , the rivals of sherlock holmes had dealt with stories set in the victorian and edwardian period , so a period charm was involved in getting those stories onto channel 13.

the plot of why didn't they ask evans ? dealt with a young couple stumbling upon a dying man who 's only last words are the question of the title of the story ( the novel was originally called why didn't they ask evans ? , but subsequently was retitled the boomerang clue ) . the young couple start investigating the murder , and trace the crime to a set of people who surround a questionable doctor ( eric porter ) . despite the warnings of the father of the hero ( john gielgud ) , the hero ( james warwick ) and the heroine ( francesca annis ) pursue their investigation - even as it gets murkier and more dangerous . the death of another suspect by suicide increases the apparent dangers as the killer starts looking into silencing the two amateur detectives.

it 's not a bad film , although i agree it was a bit too long for a single night 's entertainment ( if it had been done like later miss marple episodes with joan hickson , or the hercule poirot episodes , in two parts it would have been better ) . but it has it 's strengths . one is the proper use of porter as chief suspect , and a clever scene later in the film where he appears to be spying on the young couple who are investigating the mystery . if you stick to the film , you will be in for a fair surprise later on.

but it has one failing . when dealing with a christie novel the figures in the story have to be in a rigid schedule of movements so that the reader might be able to figure out what the secret of the plot is . i will only add that if you hear the dialog at one point , and how a little boy was almost killed ( but was n't ) , then you will find all the parts of the story coming together , and what the villain 's motivations were.

except for that and the lengthy time the telefilm takes to tell it 's story , it is quite a good film , and worthy as one of the best programs based on a christie story in the period when their was a sudden renaissance in films based on her novels . +1 although flawed in it 's view of homosexuals , this movie will shed light for the viewer about the myths and inaccuracies concerning aids . despite the depressing subject matter , this film depicts a warm friendship between two boys , and will make you laugh as well as cry . very well - acted by all , especially joseph mazzello and brad renfro . the language is a little strong , though appropriate , and it 's an entertaining and intelligent film for the whole family . but remember to have the kleenex ready ! +1 this bbc series is astonishingly good fun . i 'd only seen a few minutes before i knew i had to own it and watch it again with all my friends . i would n't recommend this to anyone prudish , but almost anyone else is going to enjoy it -- from the cinema snob to the entertainment - hungry masses . the lead character is a lesbian , but it 's still worth watching if that 's not your thing.

rachael stirling is incredible in a lead role that stretches her into a dazzling assortment of emotions and situations , some of a bizarre nature . no one who saw this series would ever say she ca n't act . she makes us laugh , cry , get turned on and slap our foreheads in amazement.

you ca n't really compare this story to anything else . it 's not a rehash of style or plot . it 's entirely it 's own beast—part comedy , historical drama , erotica , coming - of - age tale , musical and more.

gotta praise the bbc for making this story . i ca n't imagine anyone in the ( overly prudish and formulaic ) u.s. ever doing it . so , stop reading about it and go buy it . +0 cuore sacro combines glossy film effects with a story that leaves much to be desired . with a script that the screen - writers for " touched by an angel " might have passed up as being too impuissant , ozpetek still keeps us interested at times . in fact , i wanted to focus on the positives but i found the last act so bafflingly bizarre and awful that i think the couple who jumped to their deaths in the very beginning might have been the fortunate ones.

this movie is at heart ( pun intended ) a story built on a big twist - style ending . this kind of tenuous foundation can result in a tremendous success like tornatore 's una pura formalità or god - awful garbage like the films of m. night shyamalan . cuore sacro falls somewhat closer to the latter . i found the cinematography in general to be above average . the tracking shots of irene dutifully doing her quotidian laps in the pool were very impressive as was the atmosphere conjured by the interior of her mother 's house . for me , the grotesque parody of michelangelo 's pieta when giancarlo comes in from the rain and irene poses with him was a bit of a stretch . one big issue that i took exception to in this film was ozpetek 's method of simply turning the camera directly into the face of his protagonist and recording the emotions taking place . this worked to fantastic effect in facing windows , but when employed here it seems that bubolova is no mezzogiorno . in fact besides the ridiculous story , the main problem with this film is the milquetoast performance of it 's main character . it made the final breakdown scene even more unconscionably bad . < br />
in this movie ozpetek continues his crusade against our corporate - driven societies by urging us to be more spiritual ( not necessarily religious ) and more altruistic . and while i 'm certainly one who is very sympathetic to this view , i felt as if the audience was being hit over the head with a blunt object . could the characters have been anymore two - dimensional ? i tended to find this movie very enervating and soulless . was the " evil " aunt eleonora anything more than a caricature ? it goes for the people on the side of " right " too , like the " good " aunt maria clara and the elderly doorman aurelio . and just in case we might have missed ozpetek 's point , he decided to clothe his opposing forces in their own liveries . < br />
this brings me to an interesting point about the director 's use of color . he clothes the opening couple who briefly take flight in all black , as well as irene ( when we first meet her and after her life - conversion ) , the evil aunt eleonora , and of course the good but confused padre carras . black is a color that suggests a definite course , the wearer 's mind is set and emotionless . it is the color of choice for that indispensable item of modern day armor , the business suit . it is also the color of mourning , such as the funerary finery sported by the suicidal duo . finally , black is the color of piety , such as the simple robes of priests and nuns that irene emulates in the second half of the film . < br />
the other main color , and a very appropriate choice for a movie about the sacred heart , is red . it is a color that has an extreme inherent emotional component . the character who wears red is bold , emotional , receptive to new ideas , and indulgent . red is a risky color in modern times ; it challenges our perceptions of the wearer and at the same time makes the wearer vulnerable . yet red carries an enormous weight of history and mysticism , as the earliest members of cro - magnon man buried their dead in red ochre and indeed the first man named in the torah , adam , is named after the hebrew word for red . red also has an anachronistic flavor , looking back on the past where red ( and by association a less self - driven attitude towards life ) was more accepted . so when we encounter the red - filled room ( the mysterious frieze covered walls complete with a red accented menorah and a red painting of a whirling dervish ! ) of irene 's mother , " good " characters maria clara and aurelio wearing resplendent outfits of red , and finally the painting of irene 's mother in a formal red gown we can see where ozpetek 's sympathies lie.

a word or two about the soundtrack , i found the original musical themes to be excellently suited to the story . the quasi - baroque theme that signified irene was great for it 's monotony and feeling of restive malaise ( the absolute best use of a constantly repeated baroque theme such a this would have to be in kubrick 's barry lyndon , with it 's masterful repetitions of an 8-bar sarabande attributed to handel ) . one absolutely inspired choice was a couple of seconds of an opera aria we hear as the power is flickering while irene is chasing benny through the house . it is of the famous aria " ebben ? ... ne andrò lontano " from catalani 's opera " la wally " . the aria is sung by the lead soprano who is leaving home forever . as irene 's mother was a dramatic soprano , we can guess that this is a recording of her singing and that she is saying a poignant farewell to her daughter , as in the movie irene is soon destined to never again see benny alive . i just have one minor question of the soundtrack , why include the famous tango yo soy maria ? i love the song and personally could hear it all the time , but it did n't really fit here . +0 * * * spoilers * * * * * * spoilers * * * some bunch of afrikkaner - hillbilly types are out in the desert looking for diamonds when they find a hard mound in the middle of a sandy desert area . spoilers : the dumbest one starts hitting the mound with a pick , and cracks it open . then he looks into the hole and sticks his head in and surprise ! something eats him . the other two dimwits are not seen alive again . scott bairstow looks like a pizza delivery boy but he plays some kind of expert scientist with a medical degree ( which means he should be about 35 years old , minimum ) . bairstow is supposed to join camp c and help them find diamonds . the truck that picks up bairstow to take him to camp c has a handful of the kind of weirdoes that usually populate movies like " pitch black " " the thing " etc . the truck happens to drive across the first truck and they decide to investigate ( how come that truck did not see the other truck when they were driving to pick up bairstow , since they were travelling the same road ? ? ) . so they find the eaten bodies , and there are some decent special effects relating to bones with little bits of flesh on them . the main lunatic in the group , karl , decides that they must find the killer . so the truck drives around in the desert following some tracks , and eventually it has an electrical short and the crew is stuck in the desert . the dumbest guy in this group had picked up a bunch of bones using his jacket to carry them around . when he takes a nap ( wearing the same jacket ) the creatures eat him alive , and another guy runs over and sticks his arm into the goo and that dummy loses his arm too . sounds exciting so far , except that a few minutes later , dr. bairstow realizes that the creature is really hundreds of thousands of ants who are using the bones to hold each other together so they can travel to a new hive ( because the miners cracked open the old hive ) . now , last time i checked , ants could move around on their own , without having to kill people in order to use the bones for structure . if all they need was something hard , they could have put a bunch of sticks together and used those to create a form . the whole story is really , really dumb , and the ant explanation is the only one given . the rest of the movie is just about the group getting killed off until they find the new ant - nest , and kill the ant - brain ( sort - of ) , and the hundreds of thousands of ants then walk away on their own itty - bitty feet . there is a spare ant - brain found ( off - camera ) and sent back for analysis thus creating a reason for a sequel . +0 if you like really shocking movies this is for you . the acting is the worst i 've ever seen and the story line goes no - where . if you come across this film in your video shop do n't even consider borrowing it . the chick on the front cover is n't even the one in the movie . i gave this movie 1/10 only because i could n't vote 0 . avoid it at all costs . +0 i am shocked to see that this movie has been given more than two stars by some people . they must either be kidding or be totally blind for the art of acting , directing and other flaws of the movie.

i must admit that i just could not force myself to sit through the whole movie , it was just too bad.

the three first characters , not including the " digger " were just awful actors , and i mean awful ! maybe the director did n't care , or may be he is a worse director . it was like watching a bad school play . the movie was of course filmed with a video camera ( lowbudget - not real film ) , and the light settings were not very good either . in addition , the sound man ( if they had one ) must either have been a newbie or a drunk as the sound were amateurish . even in one of the first scenes from the kitchen ( awful acting btw ) the sound from the dialog was pretty bad . for example , when the woman moved her head while speaking , you could hear her voice disappear and come back . it sounded like they had tried to correct that in post - production by turning up the volume a bit when she turns her head . in addition , you had the ongoing irritating buzzing sound from either camera equipment or other sources in the kitchen . < br />
all these squeakers in the first 5 minutes or so . need i say more?

a good school project or fun project for friends to watch , but should never have been released for a real audience , especially not for a paying audience . this was a rip off unless you have a very low standard regarding movies , or just bad taste . you are warned ! sb . +0 piece of junk , would 've given it a 0 if i could have . animation is good , but not quite good enough . storyline is absolutely the most ridiculous i 've ever come across , and that 's saying a lot ! this ' movie ' tried so hard to be interesting , but failed miserably . it 's almost as if the writer started one story , then got another idea , and attempted to mesh the two together . do n't waste your time on this ; believe me , you 'll be as ticked off with yourself as i was . the only actor of any note in this was james woods , and his part was peripheral at best . i 'm all for doing stuff that is edgy , that pushes the envelopes , but this simply did n't cut it . +1 yes , 2:37 is in some ways a rip off from gus van sants elephant . it 's about some students who are dealing with their problems leading to the suicide of one of them . yes , it 's full of clichés , but that 's life . you just ca n't deny that creepy nerds , disabled persons or popular students who , despite their popularity , do have problems are existing in the real world.

but that 's not , what this film is all about . it 's not about life in highschool . it 's not about the misery of life itself.

if you look beneath the surface , beneath the soap - like social relationships that are shown , you will find some gripping , thought - provoking criticism of our society.

why are people committing suicide ? do we really understand their motives ? or are we just trying to understand , after its already too late ? and why is it always someone , you would never have expected it to be?

this movie does n't answer this question , but it raises it . and it does so in a very intense way . all the way it keeps you guessing , whose blood it might be , that you see at the very beginning . you are following the paths of some students , all of them having a more or less good reason to end their lives , just to be forced to watch the gruesome act in the finale.

did you know who it would be ? or were you caught by surprise , like in real life?

the message is verbalized by one of the surviving kids in the end . we are always so fixed on our own problems , we forget to see those of others . there might be someone , a colleague , a friend , who does not want to live anymore . but , if you do n't open your eyes , you 'll never know until its too late.

this movie delivers well . it might have some flaws , but they do n't matter anymore , when its over . either you see a reflection of society , or you are blind for reality . +0 shot in my former home town by a couple of college kids , this movie centers around some freak named " luther " . luther , recently paroled ( revealed to us by an arguing parole board in one of the most laughably scenes of all time ) , runs amuck at the local kroger grocery by eating an old woman 's neck with his metal teeth.

luther runs to farm where he eats a guy , steals a car , ties up an old woman , and gets chased , and gets killed . oh , and the chick from the superboy tv show gets naked . +1 lauren himmel 's debut movie is well directed with a nice polished feel to it . there 's a strong storyline going on with a meaningful point to it all even if at the end nothing is resolved hence the name treading water . the storyline revolves around a lesbian couple and their battle with ones mother for acceptance . 7.5/10 +0 awful , awful , awful ...

i loved the original film . it was funny , charming , and had heart ... this piece of junk has none of those things.

reused jokes from the original film , stupid plots , bad animation , different voices ( with the exception of kronk and yzma ) that sound nothing like the ones in the original ( especially pacha ... * shudder*).

the characters are off model , the animation is flat and boring , it 's just a bad job all around.

and why is kuzco a jerk again ? i thought he had reformed ... but since when are these tv spin offs loyal to the original * rolls eyes*.

i'm sorry , but there is nothing redeemable about this ... at all.

avoid at all costs . +0 in need of work , straight man bud abbott ( as jack ) and comic partner lou costello ( as dinkel ) get the latter a job babysitting self - described " problem child " david stollery ( as donald ) . young stollery winds up reading mr. costello 's favorite novel ( see if you can guess the title ) , which puts costello to sleep , dreaming he and mr. abbott are reliving the story of " jack and the beanstalk " ( you guessed it).

the sepia - tone switches to color for the bulk of the production . apparently , this was an attempt at something different for the duo , a colorful children 's fantasy . it fails , but this is where you get to see abbott & costello in color , silent film superstar william farnum ( as the king ) make his last performance a bit part , boxer max baer 's brother buddy , and stollery before disney 's " spin and marty".

* * jack and the beanstalk ( 4/4/52 ) jean yarbrough ~ lou costello , bud abbott , buddy baer , william farnum +0 how unfortunate , yet also fortunate , that two films about pot - holing -the cave and the descent - should arrive at much the same time . sadly for the descent its release in the uk on 7th of july coincided with the very day of the london underground tube / metro terrorist atrocity that killed almost 60 and injured hundreds - not a particularly good night / weekend to pop out to the cinema , especially to see a scary - as - sheesh film about likable women being trapped in a deep , dark , claustrophobic underground caving system . the two movies have virtually the same elements - a half dozen or so characters , lost in a previously unexplored caving system , with no - one outside aware they are trapped down there . lots of water , caverns , danger ... then ultimately some vicious human - like or human - derived creatures determined to prey upon them . where the two are so different is that the cave is unreal , entirely unbelievable , more alien - esquire sci - fi fantasy adventure than horror , or drama . the comparatively minuscule - budgeted british film ( filmed in southern england though set in the appalachians ) is five - pair - of - pants terrifying , a heart - stopping shocker so stomach turning that people walk out of screenings early in shock . it knocks off the girls in any old order - you genuinely have no idea what to expect next - surely not her ! the descent is also lit in naturalistic manner , making it all the more scary , unlike the laughably lit cave which resembles a giant magical christmas santa 's grotto , with cathedral - sized room after room dazzling in gloriously blue light from ... who knows where , while the cavers torches are employed exclusively in artistically lighting up the granite - jawed heroes ( each more puppet - like than any team america / gerry anderson / thunderbirds creation ) . fantastic amounts of equipment are carried too , yet despite this the impossibly deep - voiced actors clearly forgot to pack any sense of impending danger , drama , or anything worthy of a horror film - it 's strictly pg rated . and in this instance the actors peg out in exactly the order that everyone expects them to - i quickly wrote a list after being introduced to each character , only getting piper perabo out of sequence . the cave script is entirely by - numbers , unlike shakespeare a room full of chimpanzees would eventually write it in under a week ... take a typical exchange between the ' good buddy ' white and black leads that goes ; " how many times have we been in this situation before bud ? " - " too many " ( replies morris chesnut ) . i swear , you could hear my suburban london audience gasp at the obviousness . the scariest thing about the cave is that at the end there 's a clear opening for ' the sequel ' - ' the cave 2 : overground ' or whatever . be afraid , be very afraid ... or instead catch the descent and be truly afraid , very very very afraid . rr +1 one of my all - time favourite movies . nothing can beat watching this movie for the first time . if i could go back in time and erase my memory or suffer from momentary amnesia i would so i could enjoy this movie as much as i did that very first time . it 's still enjoyable second and third times round but i found myself appreciating the humour more as the shocks and thrills were n't unexpected . if you want a see a film that you truly wo n't be able to predict the ending of then i highly recommend this film . its chilling , shocking , full of suspense and there 's also loads of humour to help you through it too . if you watch this film and do n't love it i truly question your sanity ! +1 undoubtedly one of the best episodes ever , balance of terror is 45 minutes of well executed suspense , with intelligent real - world parallels ( the title refers to a situation very similar to what was going on between the us and the soviet union during the cold war ) , spot - on characterizations and the introduction of star trek 's second most important hostile alien race after the klingons : the romulans . < br />
after receiving a distress call from a federation outpost , the enterprise is dangerously close to the neutral zone which , if crossed , would lead to open conflict with the romulans , although no one has ever actually seen them in the flesh . soon enough , a romulan vessel appears , carrying a new weapon and a cloaking device which makes it nearly impossible to defeat . facing the threat of imminent annihilation , kirk must engage in a battle of wits with the romulan commander ( mark lenard ) to ensure the survival of his crew . unfortunately , the task is made more difficult when one of the men accuses spock of being in league with the enemy , due to the physical resemblance between romulans and vulcans , two races that are , in fact , distantly related ( a fact that is quite ironic with hindsight , given lenard went on to play spock 's father sarek starting with season 2).

always very critical when it came to the subject of war , star trek enjoys one of its finest hours with its most gripping and tense take on the topic . although the romulans are n't actually based on the soviets ( the name is actually taken from romulus , the founder of rome ) , the scenario is quite obviously inspired by the very vivid fear american and russian citizens had at the time that either nation might be able to destroy the other with nuclear weapons ( that fear gave birth to the titular concept of " balance of terror " ) . but even without the subtext , this remains an essential episode , due for the most part to the intellectual battle between the two adversaries , which translates into a thesping duel between shatner and lenard . no need to say who wins ... +1 this is the forty minute film that introduces us to the character of the butcher , who will later be examined more thoroughly in the feature seul contre tous . in this film , it follows the early period of his life from 1965 - 1979 , but focusing on the late seventies . the first images are of a slaughter of a horse , then the birth of a baby , the butcher 's daughter , who we quickly see growing up each year . the butcher ( played by philippe nahon in both films ) is a man bitter with the world . he hates many things . his anger comes to a head when a man assaults his autistic daughter . the butcher then maims the wrong man , and finds himself in prison.

this film follows the butcher 's life to just after his release from prison , then seul contre tous takes over from there . i watched the films the wrong way about , seul contre tous first . try and watch this little film first if you can . +1 story involves ancient demon being released upon a small town on halloween night . in all my life i have never seen such a cheesy film , but it is so d**m entertaining you can forgive its bad acting , effects , direction , and script . this is the best movie created for the halloween season since the original halloween . and when they introduce linnea quigley 's character for the first time , she is butt naked in the shower for like 5 mins . goodness they just do n't get any better than this . rush and buy this tape right away . 5/10 +1 i was 9 when i first saw this on tv . on a friday night . i remember the full page ad in the tv guide with the picture of the rex . amazing how some things stick in your mind after 30 years . anyway if your a kid who likes monster movies this one is entertaining enough especially with boone and keats raging at each other . special effects are no harryhausen but its worth the hour and a half if you find it somewhere on late night tv . have n't seen it in a few years for some reason these classics fade from cable tv . if you do catch it on late night do n't be too critical just grab some snacks and enjoy it . it might be cheesy but i thought it was a lot better than the kong remake that came out in the theaters a year before . +1 i was pleasantly surprised by how good the movie was . whether you 're a gore fan or a suspense fan ; you 'll love this . i used to dislike horror movies , considered them stupid . but , anyway , it happens i make exceptions . i find something really extraordinary in this film . rarely have i ever seen a film that has scared the crap out of me but i tell you the truth this film gave me shivers down my neck . unlike most horror films this one cares about the development of the characters . i highly recommend this film and i 'm glad that asylum are finally bringing out good horror movies these days < br />
i recommend ! enjoy ! +1 ray is one of those movies that makes you pause . you actually think about what you heard or think about what you read about this man and it does n't even come close . during my first viewing of ray i forgot i was watching a movie i felt like a peeping tom watching this man 's life thru a window . this movie is so compelling it drags you in and it involves your every emotion you go thru a emotional roller - coaster ride and when it 's over you do n't want to do it again so soon because it has that kind of emotional punch that other movies are lacking . jamie foxx deserved his oscar and quite rightfully so his performance is spectacular and it should be held up as the standard for anybody wanting to do a bio pic anytime soon . this movie is as good as it 's subject both deserved the titles classic and legend . +1 a boy who adores maurice richard of the montreal canadiens receives , much to his horror , a toronto maple leafs sweater in the mail . i recently watched this in a class in which few of the students were interested in hockey , but nearly everyone knew about maurice richard and the toronto / montreal rivalry . highly entertaining , amusing , and accurate . +0 when i first saw this movie i was literally rolling around on the floor laughing ( especially when they were getting chased by the water , and when the guy drove through peoples gardens , i mean would it hurt to drive around the washing line ? ) the special effects ! this movie clearly did n't have a big budget . either that or the guy left his toddler in charge of the controls . the water coming out of the damn looked like a close up of a can of beer that had fizzed up . what were the actors thinking ? did they actually believe that it was a good movie ? or did they just really need the money ? not that they would 've earned a lot . when i first saw this , i was like ' god , how old is this ? ' when i looked on the info about it and saw that it was made in 2003 , i thought my tv was broken.

this really is a disaster movie , in more ways than one . +1 * * 1/2 elisha cuthbert , chad michael murray , brian van holt , paris hilton and jon abrahams . directed by jaume collet - serra.

yet another classic horror film remade with dunder - headed teenage acting despite grizzly and creative deaths . based on the 1953 vincent price film house of wax where a maniac kills unsuspecting teenage hooligans and turns them into priceless wax figures . still with the fantastic set design to make the whole house into wax the movie is a typical classic horror remake like tobe hooper 's 1974 classic texas chainsaw massacre later remade , despite creativity and so - so acting the movie was still just a gore picture . director serra showed mild enthusiasm with his directing but still worth watching . my final rating 7/10 . +1 i have to admit that i approached this movie with a sense of expectation and dread . louis de berniere 's bestselling novel is one of my favourites and anyone who has read it will realise that there is no way in hell that any screen adaptation can be 100 % faithful . < br />
all the way through i found myself convincing myself that the movie was unsuccessful , and had stripped the book 's plot back so far as to render it redundant . the ending , however , is much better than that in the novel , and i could not stop thinking about the movie afterwards . still , the plusses ( john toll 's magnificent cinematography , stephen warbeck 's great score , etc ) i felt did not outweigh my initial negatives ( cage 's miscasting , a heavily diluted script).

but , two days later , i was queuing again to see corelli , and although not perfect , i have to admit now that the movie is the best anyone could have expected . cage is actually brilliant in a role that even de berniere was concerned was not a fully rounded character : his carefree spirit which gives way to shattered remorse is spot on , and complements the superb double act of penelope cruz and john hurt perfectly . david morrissey is quietly effective as weber , the nazi officer trying to reconcile his feelings for his newfound italian friends and his inbred superiority complex to those around him . and the fine greco - italian supporting cast bring de berniere 's sundrenched world of cepholonia dazzlingly alive.

on leaving the cinema second time around , i finally let go my passion for the novel which prevented me from fully appreciating the story of ww2 cepholonia in cinematic terms . my hat goes off to john madden who , despite the almost expected critical drubbing he is receiving from the british critics ( any director who has had a major success like shakespeare in love behind them is always a target for these moaning ninnies!),has managed to transfer a terrifically difficult book to the big screen with such heart , verve and humanity ( the core virtues of the novel , in fact ) that he has created another classic love story that will probably only be fully appreciated when the dust has settled a few years from now.

if you are a fan of the book , like me , it 's hard , but try not to make the same mistake on your initial viewing . try to erase the book from your mind for two hours , bathe yourself in the glorious mediterranean atmosphere , and discover corelli , pelagia , mandras , dr iannis , as if for the first time ( pretend you 're watching something made from an original screenplay ) , and i guarantee you wo n't be disappointed . < br />
in fact , you 'll be eagerly waiting to own your own copy of this delightful movie on video or dvd.

8/10 +1 hbo created this show for purposes of making us see the most realistic view of prison possible and they did a hell of a job . oz was created by the creators of homicide who wanted to show a raw version of prison . this show is what launched the idea of every other hbo original program such as the sopranos , sex and the city , the wire , arliss , deadwood , and six feet under amongst others . oz is the nickname for the oswald state penetentiary , a fictional prison in some us state which is never stated ( though with the accents , crime scenes , and racial distribution ny is assumed ) . the main prison unit looked at on the show is emerald city , a seemingly ideal prison unit with more privlages than others thought out by a liberal unit manager named tim mcmanus . overall this show shows us what it is really like if one wishes to survive in prison.

there are about 10 gangs shown on oz . first we have the muslims , a group of blacks who wish to destroy the injustices of the criminal justice system and help improve living conditions for blacks everywhere . they are led by kareem said a black militant minister who wishes to destroy everything racist about the judicial system . as a group they are not so much anti - white but rather anti - injustice . our second group of blacks is the homeboys who are essentially the street blacks who wish to keep all the bad ghetto behaviors up and run the drug trade . their leadership varies mainly because they are always losing members due to violence . in this group , one character who is acted terrifically is simon adebisi . adebisi is an african inmate who is essentially the most frighteningly evil character alive . this gang as a whole gets side help from the irish at times and is always in conflict with the latinos and sicilians for drug distribution purposes . being that oz is mostly black , the homeboys have the most soldiers of any gang inside.

the latinos and sicilians , like the homeboys have varying leadership due to violent deaths that occur throughout the show . the sicilians pretty much have the most substantial say in how any illegal activity gets conducted in oz . the latinos make their presence known so that they can at least be coasting well if they are not in control . unlike the homeboys however , these gangs do not have as much internal battle for power and are usually more stable when it comes to drug usage . the irish who are mentioned above are a smaller gang led by a manipulative and snakelike ryan o'reily . o'reily always manages to stay in good graces with all the drug powers and manages to manipulate things in his way whenever he wants . they are in no illegal control but they are at least on good terms with all those who are.

amongst the whiter inmates , we have the bikers and aryans . the bikers are merely a bunch of tattooed drug users who help the aryans out most of the time . the aryans are the most hated and hateful gang to most any viewer of oz . they are led by vern schillinger who is amongst the most racist , sickest , and sadistic characters one will ever see . both gangs control nothing illegal , they just merely let the darker skinned inmates see that they are a substantial threat to anyone who thinks all white inmates are soft . we also have the others . the others is a gang of outsider prisoners who are not necessarily a problem to any other inmate . in this group we see tobias beecher , a lawyer who accidentally killed a young girl whose life is forever altered by prison . we also see augustus hill , a black man bound to a wheelchair for killing a police officer who narrates the show and introduces the audience to every inmate . the character 's crimes are shown as they are introduced and augustus lets us know how long they will be in prison . finally amongst gangs , there are the christians and gays . the christians merely stay religious to keep from going mental and the gays are a bunch of cross - dressers who are often raped by other inmates.

this show gets in depth on a lot of issues dealing with the criminal justice system and is more explicit than any movie about prison . since language is unedited , we here more racial epithets and cuss words than we would on any other tv show . augustus hill 's commentary provides a good way for us to truly understand each and every issue involved with oz . this show as good as it is is not at all for the light to medium hearted . it explicitly shows drug use and distribution by any means possible , prison rape , murders , fatal stabbings , and general gore than anything anyone else has seen . in my opinion it is the most influential and greatest show ever created but i can see at the same time why other people would be disturbed by this show . if you are at all interested by shows and movies about prison , oz is a must see . +1 i first heard of this one while searching the ' net for reviews of another italian giallo / horror effort , the contemporaneous the perfume of the lady in black ( 1974 ; whose r2 se dvd from raro video , by the way , i recently acquired ) – where it 's referenced as being in a similar vein but also just as good . having watched footsteps for myself now , i can see where that reviewer was coming from – in that both films deal with the psychological meltdown of their female protagonist . stylistically , however , this one owes far more to art - house cinema than anything else – in particular , the work of alain resnais and michelangelo antonioni ( and , specifically , last year in marienbad [ 1961 ] and the passenger [ 1975 ] respectively ) ; accordingly , some have accused it of being " deadly boring " – an epithet often attached to such ' pretentious ' ( read : cerebral ) fare ! < br />
anyway , the film involves the quest of a woman ( florinda bolkan ) to determine her movements in the preceding three days – of which she seems to have no recollection . following a series of cryptic clues , she travels to the ' mythical ' land of garma ( nearby locations , then , bear the equally fictitious names of muda and rheember ) – where she encounters several people ( including lila kedrova as an aristocratic regular of the resort ) who ostensibly recall the heroine staying there during her ' blackout ' ! most prominent , though , are a young man ( peter mcenery ) and a little girl ( nicoletta elmi , from mario bava 's baron blood [ 1972 ] ) – the former always seems to happen on the scene at propitious moments , while the latter apparently confuses bolkan with another woman ( sporting long red hair and a mean streak!).

while essentially a mood piece , this is nonetheless a gripping puzzle : inevitably , vague events transpire at a deliberate pace – and where much of the film 's power derives from the remarkable central performance ( which can be seen as an extension of bolkan 's role in the fine lucio fulci giallo a lizard in a woman 's skin [ 1971 ] ) . however , there 's no denying the contribution of cinematographer vittorio storaro ( who provides any number of sweeping camera moves and an effective color scheme – adopting orange / red / blue filters to create atmosphere and coming up with a saturated look for the disorientating , bizarre finale ) and nicola piovani 's fitting melancholy score ( the composer is best - known nowadays for his oscar - winning work on roberto benigni 's holocaust - themed tragi - comedy life is beautiful [ 1997]).

with this in mind , it 's worth discussing how footsteps was presented in the version i watched : well , being apparently hard - to - get in its original form ( i ca n't be sure whether it 's uncut here or not , except to say that the film ran for 89 minutes while the imdb – lists it at 96 ) , this edition is culled from a fairly battered english - language vhs ( the dubbing is surprisingly good , given the international cast ) with burnt - in swedish subtitles to boot ( besides , the divx copy froze for a few seconds at a crucial point in the story around the 82-minute mark ) ! still , we do get a welcome bonus i.e. a 9-minute ' highlights from the soundtrack ' in mp3 format.

i realize i have n't yet mentioned the moon mission subplot , to which klaus kinski 's presence is restricted : incidentally , around this same time , he had a similarly brief but pivotal role in another good arty thriller with sci - fi leanings ( and also set in a distinctive location ) – namely , lifespan ( 1974 ) . as i lay watching the film , i could n't fathom what possible connection this had with the central plot except that bolkan mentioned a recurring dream about a movie she had once seen , though not through to the end , called " footsteps on the moon " ( a somewhat misleading alternate title for the film itself ) – amusingly , she at first recalls the picture as being called blood on the moon ( which , of course , is a classic 1948 western noir with robert mitchum and directed by robert wise ! ) . that said , i took this ' diversion ' in stride as merely one more outlandish touch to the film ( given also bolkan 's former employment as a translator at a conference discussing earth 's future ) – and certainly did n't expect the astronauts to turn up on garma 's beach at the very end to pursue the female lead , where the sand then turns ominously into the moon 's surface ! < br />
the film 's plot will probably make more sense on a second viewing – though , to be honest , this is best approached as a visual / aural experience and one should n't really expect it to deliver a narrative that 's in any way clear - cut and easily rationalized ! for the record , the only other bazzoni effort i 'd managed to catch prior to this one was the middling straight giallo the fifth cord ( 1971 ) , starring franco nero ( which i had recorded off late - night italian tv ) ; some time ago , i did get hold of his spaghetti western rendition of " carmen " titled man , pride and vengeance ( 1968 ) – also with nero and kinski – as a divx ( after i 'd already missed a matinée broadcast of it ) but the conversion had somehow proved faulty and , consequently , the disc would n't play properly ! +0 i just saw this movie and all i can say is , where are the drive in 's these days . this seems like it would have been a great 2nd feature at a drive in in 1977 ( maybe playing with one of those joan collins movies ) , but it 's only worth watching now if you 're feeling nostalgic for the 70 's . silly plot that is full of holes , but it does remind one of the era it was made in . interesting to see melanie griffith so young and anne lockhart is quite attractive , though not much of an actress . in fact , there is not much acting going on in this movie at all . it 's sort of a dukes of hazzard adventure without a twang or a 1969 dodge charger jumping over stuff in the woods . but there is a mecrury comet jumping over a garbage dump in this one ! +1 it starts off with a view of earth and jupiter aligned.

where do we come from , and where we are headed.

the story starts with " the dawn of man " , a documentary - like view of the pre - historic grass - eater ape that was facing its extinction due to no physical ability that would let him hunt to eat , and the lack of grass and water in the austral africa . the monkeys had n't survived if it was n't for the " god - like " intervention of an alien artifact , that somehow transformed the apes that touched it , and gave them the ability to use tools , that were first used as weapons that allowed them to kill pigs to eat for super and to kill other monkeys in fights for water . that ape was man . an enigmatic start for an enigmatic film.

after the fast - forward that leaves the movie at the present days , we see a magnificent dance of spaceships at the sound of strauss . the rest of the movie is about how tools got control of man . the strange artifact appears once again to evolve man to his final stage : the starchild.

at 1968 , the year this movie was released , only astronauts had idea of what was out there in space . after this movie , that changed . it 's futurism took 7 years to be explored . the special effects are incredible . they are completely realistic , even today.

the directing , along with excellent taste in music , good acting , and the fantastic filmography , makes it an epic.

the plot , with its vision of the year 2001 and the evolution of man tools , with an ai psycokiller , with the psycotropical hypnotising end , makes it the trip our lives.

if you have never seen this movie , see it . do n't be scared with the lack of dialog , sit back and enjoy . it 's a symphony of evolution . it 's terrific . +1 spanish director luis buñuel career spanned almost 50 years , from 1929 to 1977 . arguably , his best films were those he made during his exile in mexico - from the late forties to the early 60s . there he had to deal with very cheap budgets , and work in an industry interested mainly in churning commercial movies to unsophisticated audiences , yet he somehow managed to make interesting , thought provoking movies that have stand the test of time . this movie is based on a novel by spanish author benito perez galdos - and the adaptation is quite faithful , even if the setting is now early 20th century mexico instead of early 20th century spain . the protagonist , nazarin , is a priest who tries to live a life that is as faithful as it can be to the one prescribed by christ . the question many would ask is whether such endeavor would be possible , without incurring in the hostility , incomprehension and mockery of your fellow human beings . as it happens , he suffers a lot of indignities , yet he remains stubborn ( until the controversial final shot ) to this objective . i think buñuel wanted to show nazarin as a somewhat ridiculous figure , but perhaps inadvertently , his stubbornness ( at least to this viewer ) comes out as admirable . in any case , a great film . +0 alfred hitchcock invented any kind of thriller you could think of : he set the standards so high that any director who makes a suspense movie will be fatally compared to him.

the main subject of this bullock vehicle , all the ideas , almost everything was already in hitchcock 's classic " rope" : the two students who commit a gratuitous crime , nietsche 's philosophy , and the clues that the boys disseminate , the master was the first to transfer them to the screen . and with an eighty - minute movie which was a technical riveting tour de force.

"murder by numbers " does not take place in a single room , like " the rope " , mind you . and , what a supreme originality , it pits two cops against the evil youngsters;and , you would never guess it , these two cops are very different : actually , bullock plays the part of woman living like a man , and her partner ( chaplin ) is as shy as a clueless girlie . the two boys ' performances are not really mind - boggling , not as good , as , say , that of edward norton in " primal fear " .

well , you know , " rope " was so good .... +0 probably one of the worst movies ever made , i 'm still trying to figure if it was meant to be fun , but for sure i had no fun at all . maybe the movie lost something during the english - italian translation , dunno , for sure i miss the guts to watch it again in original version.

my rate for it 2/10 , and i feel like i 'm being pretty generous ( let 's say 1 point is for liv cause she 's a nice babe , and the other point is for those decent actors that got trapped into a worthless , useless and pathetic movie)

take care < br />
alex +0 an american boy goes to paris after his mother commits suicide , becomes and artist and then discovers himself and returns to the states so he can make things right with his former friends.

i have to think that the people who are rating this movie so highly are all x - files fans , even though there are no aliens or serial killers in it . do n't be fooled , this movie blows chunks.

the story is incoherent , with little or no explanation of what people are doing or why . when you do get an explanation , it does n't fit the story that went before it . what it does is bore you . for all the acting talent in the film , it just is n't interesting . i spent the whole movie wondering when sex - addict duchovny was going to bang someone . maybe he was doing it behind the scenes ; they should have filmed that instead.

what comes across is a story of a self - obsessed artist worrying about minor incidents in his life and wanting to make them right somehow - even though they did n't seem that wrong to begin with . there are n't any particularly interesting or shocking revelations , despite the mention of a big secret in the first few minutes . it 's just a guy thinking that his life is as interesting to you as it is to him . it 's not.

i saw in the trivia that duchovny claims he wrote the script in a week , that 's entirely believable . the guy can act , there 's no doubt , but writing and directing are obviously beyond his talents.

why hollywood keeps greenlighting these self - discovery stories is beyond me . i discover myself in the shower every morning but i do n't bother making a movie about it . mine would probably be better than this one , though ; at least there would be some nudity . +0 this film was sheer boredom from beginning to end . ok , so i salute boorman for raising the worldwide recognition of events in burma , but that is all he achieves . about 10 minutes into the film i thought " oh no , here we go again " , and i could have told you exactly what was going to occur in the next 80 minutes or so . patricia arquette was out of her depth in such a role , and her acting was wooden and unconvincing . mind you , being saddled with such an awfully conventional script , maybe boredom set in , and was such reflected on the screen . a lot of the film was just plain laughable . at one stage , arquette 's elderly companion is shot , and he is prostrate on the ground . in the next scene , he is sprinting through the forest , obviously attempting to break the world 100 meters record ! - or maybe he 's just trying to run away from boorman!!. if you find it hard to sleep one night then play beyond rangoon on your vcr and you 'll be snoring in no time . i very rarely critisize a film as heavily as this , but in this case it is completely justified . +1 it is a surprising movie that gets you in your chair waiting for the last minute of the film , leaving on your leaps a sweet taste of : ... i want more ! there are very good actors , portuguese actors that have a lot of experience in the world of theater and films . it is not a million euros budget film , but still we can see the destruction of a car in an excellent perspective that gets you in the movie . if you have the opportunity of getting your hands on this excellent film , do n't wait for another minute : just see the film ! i think that portuguese film are increasing the quality . watch out spanish producers ... the portuguese are getting a high quality standards . i saw the film and i 'm waiting for more ... +0 the film has no connection with the real life in bosnia in those days . should be more realistic and shows the viewer real traumas that were happening to common people during the war . please see some films of yugoslav authors ( emir kusturica , ljubisa samardzic, ... e.g . bure baruta ( a barrel of powder ) , tito i ja ( tito and me ) , lepa sela lepo gore ( beautiful villages burn beautiful ) , etc ... just this is the real way to know about so called bosnian problem . hollywood is definitive not th right address to make films about the balcan peninsula . maybe vietnam , ww ii , ... but not of the slavs living in former yugoslavia . +1 this was truly a heart warming movie . it is filled with so many messages . loyalty , friendship , sickness , death , and the paranoia society has concerning anything they do n't understand . i have shed a few tears during certain movies , but this movie kept the tears flowing . +0 if you like bad movies ( and you must to watch this one ) here 's a good one . not quite as funny as the first , but much lower quality . a must - see for fans of jack frost as well as anyone up for a good laugh at the writing . +1 first i have to admit that i have had some doubts about the director . he has done some movies ( with jarkovsky ) about the recent " czech = east " history or more precisely about families ( individuals ) how did they survive some historical moments . but it was always like the chines food sour - sweet . this movie was totally different . it was pure , it shows the bones of life , it shows the variations of human natures . this film is an excellent piece of art ( story , acting , picture , music ) but it shows you the life around you in much brighter light that we do n't want to see . by the way i have saw it on a dvd ( with english subtitles ) but i am afraid that in the usa i wo nt be able to get it . +1 onstage john osborne 's adaptation of " picture of dorian gray " is a fine tribute to oscar wilde 's talents as both novelist and playwright . on screen with some editing it becomes a bit sloppy due to the cutting of 3 crucial scenes from the play ( one being an important scene between basil and henry showing that time has passed.)the acting however is brilliant . sir john gielgud return 's to his wilde roots as lord henry , and although about a decade too old for the role , he totally becomes the enigmatic , life loving cad and cynic that wilde brought to life so meticulously in his novella . jeremy brett is also strong , offering a touching portrait of the anguished artist basil hallward . peter firth , while not originally my vision of dorian , handles the role with style and grace ... and later with a convincing strain of cruelty . the supporting cast is equally fine , gielgud 's former ' importance of being earnest " co - star gwen francon - davies plays his philanthropic aunt agatha with dignity and judi bowker makes a touching sybil vane . the wit , pathos and tension of wilde 's work have been remarkably transferred to the screen . my only other qualm is with the hair styles . many of them seemed out of place , looking more like 1970 's versions of victorian hairdos rather than the actual style . overall however , the acting and writing elevates this production to a high level of small screen excellence . +1 all i can say is that , i was expecting a wick movie and " blurred " surprised me on the positive way . very nice teenager movie . all this kinds of situations are normal on school life so all i can say is that all this reminded me my school times and sometimes it 's good to watch this kind of movies , because entertain us and travel us back to those golden years , when we were young . as well , lead us to think better in the way we must understand our children , because in the past we were just like they want to be in the present time . try this movie and you will be very pleased . at the same time you will have the guarantee that your time have not been wasted . +0 my daughter liked it but i was aghast , that a character in this movie smokes . as if it is n't awful enough to see " product placement " actors like bruce willis who smoke in their movies - at least children movies should be more considerate ! i wonder : was that intentional ? did big tobacco " sponsor " the film ? what does it take to ban smoking from films ? at least films intended for children and adolescents . my daughter liked it but i was aghast , that a character in this movie smokes . as if it is n't awful enough to see " product placement " actors like bruce willis who smoke in their movies - at least children movies should be more considerate ! i wonder : was that intentional ? did big tobacco " sponsor " the film ? what does it take to ban smoking from films ? at least films intended for children and adolescents . +0 on top of the fact that skylar is a complete douche bag and his cons are unimaginative , his schemes require way to much preparation to make any of his scams worth while . without giving away any spoilers ( as if it matters with this piece of crap ) his cons are such a sham because it takes the effort of days and days of planning , and the use of multiple accomplices and an entire camera crew etc . just to scam someone into a service that would cost less than a hundred bucks ..... in addition if you read in the credits they re - stage some of the phone calls etc . because they do n't pan out ... the whole concept of this show is bunk because all of his cons have the cost in both the crew and the effort of ten times the actual cost of the service he is trying to get for free ... what is the con ? +1 i really love this movie . it has a very real feel to it . i believe it was never popular because of the subject matter , however , because of the subject matter , it makes the movie all that much more important.

this is an " a " movie and i recommend it highly . if you liked " 1984 " book or movie , i think you will like this one as well.

this is harsh , to say the least , including mental and physical acts of torture , some pretty vile . not for the week at heart or stomach . no gore , but his movie is so great at projecting the mental anticipation it does n't need blood and guts.

if you are not a realist or a pestimistic person i do n't think you will enjoy it . it leaves you with an uneasy feeling about humans , what they 're capable of , and the very real possibility that our government(s)does not necessarily have our personal best interest in it 's heart . +1 like all of the very earliest films , this " movie " is very , very short -- lasting about one minute ! so , because of its brevity , it 's not really possible to compare it to more modern films . but , for its time , it 's actually a very remarkable film . much of this is because the prints were hand painted -- making annabelle appear red and other colors as she does her amazing dance . i 've actually seen two different versions -- one where she is red and another where she changes color throughout . i think the red one depicted on the dvd " the great train robbery and other primary works " is the best of them . the dance itself is very hypnotic and much like a piece of amazing performance art . and , unlike other one minute ( or less ) films of the day , this one is one i could see repeatedly -- it 's just that visually compelling and odd.

if you want to see it online , there is a 36 second version on google video ( type in " serpentine dance " ) . +1 there are many familiar hitchcock elements ( of previous and later films ) and this time they mix to a jolly , but hardly suspenseful piece of entertainment . you can tell that dorothy parker had a hand in the script , the most memorable scenes are the dialogues of hero cummings with the blind man and his encounter with a rather bizarre group of circus people . the famous climax on the statue of liberty seems a bit heavy - handed - judged by today´s standards , but also compared to other hitch monument finals ( e.g. blackmail , north by northwest ) . +0 this film is just as bad as " the birdman of alcatraz " . i do not refer to the acting but rather the premise of both films , which try to portray psychopathic criminals as heroic figures . moreover it disturbs me when well respected , revered actors like alan alda ( and burt lancaster ) play such roles , because their status tends to lend credibility to the director 's intent to elevate the film 's subject , a societal outcast.

i was in junior high school during the last years of caryl chessman 's life and his death penalty appeals and books were very much in the news . i remember the groundswell of opinion that the death penalty was wrong and chessman was the victim.

get a grip people . read the history . chessman was a criminal and sexual predator . he drove around the la streets at night with a stolen police light in his vehicle . he stopped cars with attractive women inside under the ruse of making a traffic arrest ; then abducted and raped the women . rape is the worst trauma a woman can experience and many victims say they would prefer death to its horror and humiliation.

chessman got exactly what he deserved , it just took a decade too long . no sympathy for the devil here . +1 when the italians and miles o'keeffe work together nothing can go wrong ! as ever , miles is great as the almost as great ator ; the most lovable barbarian of all times . totally lives up to the first movie . +1 sacha baron cohen is a genius . and this movie is good ! although the film does n't nearly reach the quality of the tv - show , it 's still very funny and has some seriously wicked moments ! i 've liked ali g since the first time i saw the material from the show . i think he 's one of the best comedy characters of all time .. up there with say , peter dragon ( " action " ) and the blues brothers . biggest surprise with this film was that they 've actually got some serious actors to do it ( dance and gambon ) . after this i will absolutely respect them even more , for having the good sense to take this chance . i have nothing really bad to say about this film , it 's very funny . very juvenile , but hey , so what ? ! < br />
one more thing to mr . g : sequel , please!

* * * * / * * * * * +1 ok , maybe it does n't deserve an oscar . or a golden globe . or any award , for that matter . the acting is n't outstanding , there 's no reason to give credits to the directing , and its really just another semi - gory 21st century slasher flick that most people will consider just decent . or maybe even dreadful . but in my opinion , all of this does n't matter a bit . and that s because i had a great time watching this movie.

sure , the first 40 minutes are pretty slow , but as the movie progresses , something in it you will like , if you are like i was , and anybody else should be when watching this movie . and that is : looking for 2 hours of fun , mindless violence . ( and a kick - ass ending , which i wo n't spoil . ) yes , there are many flaws in this movie , but do n't let the cast list on the front cover fool you . hilton delivers a decent performance that nobody saw coming . even her greatest haters like me and my friends had to agree that she surprised us greatly with her barely believable acting skills and a strip - tease that was n't as nasty as anything an online pop - up would promise of her , but still not so unbearable as to fast - forward or turn off the dvd.

the violence in this surprised me ; nobody at school or on the horror board was talking about it like they were about " these new movies called ' saw ' and ' hostel ' " but i could safely say that " wax " was more graphic than saw , and some death scenes were actually quite disturbing.

in conclusion , i 'm not surprised house of wax did n't make a place on the imdb top 250 , but it is definitely worth a look . +1 if you keep rigid historical perspective out of it , this film is actually quite entertaining . it 's got action , adventure and romance , and one of the premiere casting match - ups of the era with errol flynn and olivia de havilland in the lead roles . as evident on this board , the picture does n't pass muster with purists who look for one hundred percent accuracy in their story telling . to get beyond that , one need only put aside the history book , and enjoy the story as if it were a work of fiction . i know , i know , that 's hard to do when you consider custer 's last stand at the little big horn and it 's prominence in the history of post civil war america . so i guess there 's an unresolved quandary with the picture , no matter how you look at it.

there 's a lot to take in here though for the picture 's two hour plus run time . custer 's arrival at west point is probably the first head scratcher , riding up as he does in full military regalia . the practical joke by sharp ( arthur kennedy ) putting him up in the major 's headquarters probably should have gotten them both in trouble.

ironically , a lot of scenes in this military film play for comedy , as in custer 's first meeting with libby bacon , and subsequent encounters that include tea reader callie ( hattie mcdaniel ) . i had n't noticed it before in other films , but mcdaniel reminded me an awful lot of another favorite character actor of mine from the forties , mantan moreland . so much so that in one scene it looked like it might have been moreland hamming it up in a dress . with that in mind , the owl scene was a hoot too.

as for flynn , it 's interesting to note that a year earlier , he portrayed j.e.b. stuart opposite ronald reagan 's depiction of general custer in " santa fe trail " , both vying for the attention of none other than olivia de havilland . in that film , reagan put none of the arrogance and flamboyance into the character of custer that history remembers , while in flynn 's portrayal here it 's more than evident . but it does n't come close to that of richard mulligan 's take on the military hero in 1970 's " little big man " . let 's just say that one was a bit over the top.

the better take away the picture had for me was the manner in which custer persevered to maintain his good name and not gamble it away on a risky business venture . that and his loyalty to the men he led in battle along with the discipline he developed over the course of the story . most poignant was that final confrontation with arch rival sharp just before riding into the little big horn , in which he declared that hell or glory was entirely dependent on one 's point of view . earlier , a similar remark might have given us the best insight of all into custer 's character , when he stated - " you take glory with you when it 's your time to go " . +1 margaret colin stars as the principal figure in this story ; as i watched it , i remembered her bit part in adrian lynes 's " ünfaithful " as diane lane 's neighbor in a tony ny neighborhood.

this movie was surprisingly good , and diane stillman deserves credit for an accurate portrayal of class , crimes , and misdemeanors , which actually occur in upscale neighborhoods ( perish the thought!!!).it is real but not over - dramatized ; the audience lives through her accident , the pain it has caused;denial ; and the ultimate resolution.

it is more than just a question of " what is a good person " as colin speaks to her husband .... is a person 's character defined by one single act ; and should they be condemned forever because of their action ? ? the questions are pertinent ; it is also amusing to see several cinematic references to martha stewart ( i.e. the fussy , bothersome mother);colin is reputed by her sometime friends to be a " perfect hostess , with perfect genes" .... (gag ) ; and a scene wherein colin is confronted by police;(the " friends " also betray her , later) ....

the denial and facades of american society are addressed ; ( oh , murder does n't occur here ; similar to the theme in " ä season in purgatory " , by author dominick dunne , about the true murder of martha moxley ; in greenwich , connecticut ) ; colin is aware of her crime ; but consciously finds herself perpetuating the facade , until she finally breaks down;rent or buy this film ; she is an underrated actress who does quite well in these roles . +1 absolute grabber of a movie , and given its age , years ahead of its time . i first saw this the week my dad came home with a neighbor 's tv , that the guy had thrown on the scrap heap . a tinkerer with all things electrical , dad had it working inside two days . this was july 1955 ... and then probably only the third house in the street to have television ! pretty much the first thing we ever saw on that grainy and flickering old 12-inch screen was this film . " it 's pretty old dear , " i recall my mom telling me!

almost 50 years on , and it does n't seem any older - rather like world war i in that respect ! terrific little fantasy about a london omnibus carrying thirteen passengers , that crashes , killing one of their number . then , in flashback we pick up on the lives of these people and what brought them to being on this bus that very day.

returning to the crash at the end of the film , the victim 's identity is revealed , perhaps the inspiration behind the 1960 movie the list of adrian messenger.

if ever you come across this little gem , i suggest you watch it ! +1 in this 4th child 's play film , chucky gets lucky . it 's very funny and there are some enjoyable parts . very good direction . not as bad as it could be . the best one in the series since the first . three stars out of four . +0 italians movie - makers love to rip off american movies . all of our movies , and as often as possible . < br />
i'm not stating that as a slur against italy as a whole , but i would like to further observe that the italian film industry does itself great harm by allowing travesties like this to go overseas to be seen by the world at large . that 's all i 'm saying.

and no more grave injury do the italian people subject themselves to than by not sticking a harsh penalty upon those who made the world watch " shark rosso nell'oceano " - which is , admittedly , a ripoff of the far - superior " jaws " ( as if you did n't know).

let 's dive into the plot ( get it ? haw - haw ... ) : this huge monstrous swimming thing that looks like a cross between an octopus , a shark and steven tyler attacks many innocent americans ( ie : italians ) off the coast of florida ( ie : italy ) and the intrepid , beer - swilling peter ( sopkiw ) sails out with his anorexic , beer - swilling girlfriend and other beer - swilling people whose main purposes are to be eaten by the creature , killed by mysterious forces who want the creature left alone or just stand around and be otherwise useless ( and swill beer) ... or be the doctor in this film who defibrilates dying patients repeatedly ( 20 , maybe 30 times in a row ) without waiting for his paddles to recharge ( must be one heck of a good battery there , doc).

then there 's the monster ... brother , if you thought the " jaws " shark was fake , look herein and have your mind changed immediately.

this is a movie that was directed as an afterthought ( by a bava ! ) , edited with an onion chopper , acted by ambulatory ( beer - swilling ) pieces of driftwood and written by ( presumably beer - swilling ) people who should never ever ever ever be let near a typewriter , movie studio or major city in the world ever again . if this is how the people who made this film think real people act in such a situation , they 've obviously made one too many of them zombie movies . or swilled too much beer.

need i say this movie is bad ? it is : bad like green cottage cheese ; bad like a hawaiian shirt at a formal wedding ; bad like the " bad theatre " skits dan aykroyd used to host on " saturday night live " ; bad like calista flockhart weight gain tablets - get it ? good.

mike and the sol gang slap this beer - drunk beauty upside the head repeatedly and reveal this " horror " film as what it is : horrible . though , with a certain european charm : it 's charming , when watched by a european - preferably a beer - swilling one.

no stars for the waterlogged , dead fish known as " shark rosso nell'oceano " ; six stars for the mst3 k version . ... and now , anyone for a beer?

+0 okay , so it was never going to change the world , and it bombed at the box office , but honky tonk freeway is one of those films i fell in love with as a child ( the bbc showed it a few times during the 1980s and i happened to have a high quality vhs tape in the machine - lucky , that ! ) and watched endlessly . i watched the dvd last night and sadly , time has not been kind to this would - be blockbuster . either that or i 've just grown out of this kind of broad , dopey humour . come on , when schlesinger is so desperate for laughs he gives us close - ups of novelty underpants with ' amusing ' slogans , what can you say about the cast or screenplay?

certainly , it 's ambitious , interesting , unusual and sprawling , but it 's never once laugh - out - loud funny . i 'd describe it as a children 's film with some ' adult ' overtones - you can safely let your youngsters watch this , despite the 15 certificate . they wo n't get the drug references , so do n't worry about it . i had a pleasant surprise when i realized i 'd forgotten just how catchy both the title song and the song - writing truck driver 's ' everybody 's going faster , faster ' song were , not to mention the town of ticlaw 's patriotic anthem . the whole cast give commendable performances , the photography is crisp and captures the mood of the various locations perfectly , and there 's a real time capsule feeling about the fashions , the cars , the gadgets ( especially the dashboard - mounted drum machine ) , the interiors and the pop - culture references - i was more than a little surprised to hear the nutty bum in the bank loudly telling everyone " i 'm oj simpson ! " , particularly now simpson 's legal tangles have overshadowed his sporting achievements . the snag is , there 's almost no plot to speak of , it 's way too obvious to be witty and not funny enough to elicit many genuine laughs . i wish i 'd left this one as a pleasant memory . +1 i own this movie . i 've seen it over 20 times and every time i still get weepy . its a great love story , surprises , and you can definately feel chemistry between klein and sobiesky . i definately give this movie a perfect 10 . i recommend this to anyone . +1 this film is the most traumatising and painful horror film i have ever seen in my life . to know that this film is based on a true story and watching jeffrey dahmer(carl crew ) brutally murder his victims is enough to bring a tear to my eye . i admit this was a low budget film with not the best dialogue , however it explained why jeffrey dahmer was a psycotic maniac . as he was so selfishly / inwardly emotional his emotions and selfishness went so far deep into his brain that it resulted into him becoming a murderer . every person that he lured back to his apartment , he was attracted to and had feelings for , and the reasons why he murdered them was n't only for the thrill of killing them but because he could n't cope with the fact of them leaving him . in the scene when he killed his first victim by bashing an object at the back of the guys head from what i noticed was n't because he wanted to kill him but because he was devastated with the idea of the guy leaving him . it was from thereafter that he got use to the homicidal behaviour and made killing his hobby - for both evil and emotional reasons.

the scene when he was talking while crying on the phone with his mother and telling her how much he loved her and the love he showed to his grandmother and how he did n't want to move out of her house did show that he did have love in his heart . one scene that i found quite spooky and strange was when a priest overheard jeffrey in a pub inviting a guy back to his apartment and then phoned jeffrey up in a phone booth within the pub so that the guy would lose patience and change his mind on going home with jeffrey . when the guy left the pub , the priest then hung up the phone and was was laughing at jeffrey . i also found that carl crew played a remarkable acting performance as the role of jeffrey dahmer . his evil and cold blooded facial expressions before he massacred his victims were so real , i was shivering in my seat . his facial expressions reminded me of the way vincent d'onofrio ( private pyle / leonard ) in the film ' full metal jacket ' looked just before he gunned - down the general in the toilet barracks.

if your an emotional person i would n't recommend you to watch this film but if your not , than go ahead and watch it . +0 i have seen many - possibly too many straight - to - video , no budget slasher films and have developed a taste for the " good ones " , or the ones that are less sucky , as ridiculous as that sounds , hahaha . dr . chopper , is what i kindly like to refer to as ... absolute crap . nothing about it is enjoyable - the acting sucks , the characters suck , the killer sucks , the gore is minimal ... and sucks . it is about a group of college friends who drive out to a newly discovered family cabin , owned by the parents of one of the kids . it is meant to be a relaxing retreat , but little do they know that a deathly ill former plastic surgeon - gone bad , along with his two female assistants , search for usable tissue to save the doctor . his name is dr. chopper since he rides around on a motorcycle and of course , chops . this is just a terrible movie , not worthy of anyone 's time . enough said . +1 they just do n't make cartoons like they used to . this one had wit , great characters , and the greatest ensemble of voice over artists ever assembled for a daytime cartoon show . this still remains as one of the highest rated daytime cartoon shows , and one of the most honored , winning several emmy awards . +0 the bbc and the arts & entertainment network should be ashamed of themselves for foisting this unfortunate production onto the world . the acting is , with the exception of robert hardy as general tilney , amateurish at best and excruciatingly painful at worst . the costumes are over - the - top and feature some truly ghoulish excesses -- was the costume designer obsessed with feathers for women 's hats ? surely every woman in bath did n't have feathers in her headpiece in the early 19th century . the production values are poor and the pacing of the film makes one feel it was hastily and clumsily edited at the last minute . altogether an agonizing film that i had to force myself to watch to the end . it 's a shame , as the producers obviously spent a lot of money on costumes and location shooting . compared to emma thompson 's sublime " sense and sensibility " or the extraordinary 1995 production of " pride and prejudice " or the subtle intensity of 1995 's " persuasion " , this production of ` northanger abbey ' surely has jane austen turning in her grave . +0 i just ca n't imagine any possible reasons why madsen and hopper wanted to be in this movie after reading the script . they got blackmailed maybe ? or are they that badly out of money ? the main problem with the movie is that it 's boring . the conversations between madsen 's and hopper 's character are pointless , just like the bored chatting between two buddies while drinking beer on a saturday night . you never feel for any of the characters ( although madsen 's psycho killer is very likeable , comparing to the other characters ) . hopper always was a good actor , and madsen does a fine job as the serial killer , otherwise the acting is almost laughable . there are about three scenes in the whole movie where something is actually happening , each of them last about three minutes . although the " talking and thinking about murder and the nature of murderers " scenes would have been interesting , if they were scenes in a book . the whole concept would 've been interesting for a novel , but a movie just ca n't bare with a story with that much inner thinking and so little action . +1 screening as part of a series of funny shorts at the sydney gay and lesbian mardi gras film festival , this film was definitely a highlight . the script is great and the direction and acting was terrific . as another posting said , the actors ' comedic timing really made this film . lots of fun . +0 oh boy ! oh boy ! on the cover of worn out vhs has a picture of sandra bullock and her name written on top . i think only reason they had chance to sell the movie in nineties , was because of sandra bullock 's name . bullock 's fans do n't have to disappoint . sandra is only thing to watch in this movie and her performance is the only you can call acting . rest of the movie it 's fun to watch in first fifteen minutes because it 's bad but after that it 's going worse . much worse . directing is awful . acting is awful . script is awful . dialog is awful . action is awful . music is quite good actually . typical score for eighties action movies . this movie is so bad that it goes close to anything andy sidaris has ever produced . it 's so bad that there is n't proper word to describe this poor attempt to be a movie . but still , there was sandra bullock . and super cool ( sarcasm ) jake lamotta who tried to be marlon brando . < br />
i think they can now bring the film out on dvd . it could be cool ! and they should write on the cover : academy award winner sandra bullock in hangmen < br />
1 out of 10 +0 i went to see this movie at the theater and paid money thinking it would be at least mildly entertaining . the only thing i enjoyed about it was when robin williams crashes into the car at the bottom of the hill , and the end , when he seems to get killed . glenn close was obnoxious , and she obviously did not seem old enough to be garp 's mother . a mother like garp 's would have had her kids taken away by the department of children and families . < br />
robin williams and his glazed donut look of benign goodness is just too sweet and smarmy for me . he has two roles he can play : funny person or sad , tragic , good - hearted victim . see the fisher king , good morning vietnam , and all of his so - called " dramatic " roles . it is always the same performance . put them all together into one long mini - series . glenn close is always a cold fish . remember fatal attraction ? would you have an affair with her even on your worst day and if you were single ? did you feel any sparks between her and michael douglas ? ? have you ever seen glenn close warm up any screen ? ? john lithgow had the only interesting role . this was back in the day when he used to play serial killers and bad guys , so seeing him as a transsexual was at least funny . garp is made for all those people who love to see movies about sick , abnormal , dysfunctional people and then claim it is beautiful and profound . +0 dennis quaid is tryin ' hard to prove us that jerry lee lewis was a dumb guy . and he 's doing too much to prove it . tv sequences are very good , like a photocopy of old black and white footages . music is fine too , because mr. lewis himself is singing . but the rest is just hollywood b - movie style , with the fifties happy days complex . i think the only good thing in this movie is to see young winona ryder . +0 i hope the people who made this movies read these comments . the choreography was horrid , the plot was nill , and the actors where so low budget power rangers appears 5 star to this junk.

the fight scenes where so slow you could actually see the actors waiting for each other to perform the next move . camera cut - aways and poor lighting could not cover up the cheap effects . the lightning was just plain stupid . the weapons looked like something out of a final fantasy game , and the dual bow and arrow was just dull as anything i have ever seen.

next movie you decide to make try investing in some wireless mics , better script and try actually spending some time on your stunts.

honestly there are shows on t.v . that play ever night and are thrown together in a few hours that look better than this one.

stick to martial arts ( unless its as poor as your acting ) then take up quilting . +1 i have spent many years studying all the great directors , like kurosawa , lean , fulci , lenzi , deodato , peckinpah , kubrick and admire them greatly . my favourite film is once upon a time in america.

i have only recently become a fan of d'amato , and while he was no horror master , his films were extreme whether it be soft core , hardcore or extreme.

porno holocaust is now one of my favourite films , the way its shot is brilliant and the music is catchy.

joe d'amato , was n't a horror master , he 's no fulci or bava , but however he was a master of erotica , no other director could shoot erotic films like him , he also never tried making any films outside of these genre 's either.

long live joe d'aamto - master of porn and erotica ! +0 caddyshack ii is nothing compared to the original caddyshack . but , there are legitimate reasons for it . ( 1 ) rodney dangerfield was supposed to be the ace of this film but he did n't like the script , wanted to change it , his request was denied , so he did n't do the film . ( 2 ) it was low budget , bill murray had grown to superstar status . ted knight passed away in 1986 , and chevy chase the " so called ace " of the first movie ( although it was rodney all the way)couldn't't be on more than 5 minutes , because it would cost too much to pay him . but you had dan aykroyd , robert stack , randy quaid and jackie mason , all serviceable substitutes , who none had their best performances . +0 the first shiloh film was enjoyable by adults as well as children . this one starts with about an hour of filler where not much happens , with stilted dialogue ; only in the last act is there any significant action that really moves the plot along . the dog is still cute , though , and young kids may enjoy it . +0 the one line summary is actually the punch line of a very old joke that begins " what is a jewish porno film?" < br />
while this film had its interesting moments , it was far too slow moving and did not do enough to explain to those of us in the audience unfamiliar with orthodox jewish custom , exactly what was going on and why ? how many people who came across this film would know that the bathtub the female characters were washing in is in reality called a " mikveh " which is a ritual bath used to cleanse spiritual uncleanliness ? the same question might be asked of why the bride was walked around the groom a dizzying number of times while her face was covered just prior to the marriage vows being performed . these two examples are but two of a large number of such moments that remained completely unexplained to the uninitiated audience.

this film does have its touching moments along with expressions of great love and emotions . the characters are presented very authentically right down to the number of garments an ultra orthodox jewish male must wear as well as the religious rituals he must engage in upon awakening in the morning to begin his day . the attitudes orthodox judaism has towards women in general and wives in particular is both intriguing and at times maddening . this is another reason why more explanation is needed if this story is to be understood in context.

i recommend this film to people who are familiar with orthodox jewish tradition and ritual as well as those who might be interested in getting a brief peek at what the lives of people who practice this way of life is like.

the story itself about two sisters who in their own ways rebel against " the system " is of moderate interest at best . +1 i read the book written by bill carter on which this movie is based many years ago . the book is certainly stronger than the movie . it provides more detail than a movie can possibly provide , the end result being that i thought the movie seemed a wee bit sketchy on a handful of items . all things considered , though , and given the limitations of the medium , the movie provides a wholly entertaining and informative account of the battle between jay leno and david letterman in the early 90 's to host " the tonight show " after the retirement of johnny carson.

the highlight is clearly the performances . i can think of no more difficult performance for an actor than to play a character who is still alive and well - known and on tv on a regular basis . john michael higgins nailed the part of letterman perfectly . watching him really was like watching letterman . daniel roebuck tried valiantly to be jay leno , but somehow did n't pull it off as effectively . his whole " look " seemed fake , and he just did n't seem natural in the role . in a less central role , rich little not surprisingly nailed the voice of carson , although the look was a bit off . in the book , the most interesting of the central figures was probably leno 's agent , helen kushnick . in the movie , kathy bates was perfect in the role , although not quite as out of control as carter 's portrayal of the woman in writing.

in the end , this is light and entertaining viewing . the subject matter is n't especially important in the overall scheme of things , but it 's a fun behind the scenes look at a memorable time in the entertainment industry . 7/10 +1 having watched this film years ago , it never faded from my memory . i always thought this was the finest performance by michelle pfeiffer that i 've seen . but , i am astounded by the number of negative reviews that this film has received . after seeing it once more today , i still think it is powerful , moving and could n't care less if it is " based loosely on king lear".

i now realize that this is the greatest performance by jessica lange that i 've ever seen - and she has had accolades for much shallower efforts.

a thousand acres is complex , human , vibrant and immensely moving , but surely does n't present either of the primary female leads with any touch of glamour or " sexiness " . i do n't think this is well received in these times.

perhaps one reason for this film 's underwhelming response lies in the fact that the writer ( jane smiley ( , screenplay ( laura jones ) , and director ( jocelhyn moorehouse ) are all women . i know that , in my younger days , i would n't have read a book written by a woman . i did n't focus on this fact until years later.

if you have n't seen this movie or gave it a chance in the past , try watching it anew . maybe you are ready for it . +1 if you like movies that will make you think , this is absolutely one of the good ones . i always liked david lynch and cronenberg . they have always made high - quality movies.

iain softley has directed k - pax brilliantly . the movie tears in feelings and philosophy of the mind and world . kevin spacey and jeff bridges both delivers superb acting skills . it caught me , i did not take my eyes away from the screen during the movie . on the other hand , if you are hoping for a special effect sci - fi movie , this is not for you . the story is being dragged a bit , which can be a bit boring , but also works as a way of building up the theme of the movie.

enjoy this film , i did .. +0 i was disappointed with the third film in the " death wish " series and would n't recommend this unless you are really into bronson . he is his usual self in this one , maybe a bit lighter hearted than in the others ; the rest of the cast is good if your watching a movie of the week on t.v. - the whole film has the production value of a bad episode of the a - team and i like the escapism fun of a show like the a - team but not on the big screen , even if it is an action movie that does n't claim to be anything to sophisticated . the film takes a while to get going and then when it finally does , it gets out of control to the point of ridiculousness . the plot is something out of an episode of " highway to heaven " and bronson seems like a fish out of water with the majority senior citizen cast and the gun play is so out of control you do n't even get any satisfaction from bronson 's revenge against the bad guys . skip this and go on to the 4th installment which i highly recommend . +0 the film is a gross misrepresentation of orthodox lifestyle and practice . never will a jewish court enforce a divorce between childless couples . although the concept exists in jewish law , the conditions are too numerous for it to actually ever take place . childless couples do find it difficult to cope with their childlessness in a community where children are a very important part of life , but nowhere are they " rejected " by their community as depicted in the film . they are treated with extreme sensitivity . in fact , many great rabbis have lived their entire lives without children and never considered divorce.

the depiction of yosef , a horrible human being , is meant to - perhaps subconsciously - show the behavior of a typical orthodox male . in reality , it is as typical as a violent drunkard rapist is typical of secular society . both exist in their own worlds and both are despicable.

it is surprising that so many people form their opinions about a society based on a movie ( by someone who is personally biased against a community ) . i have always thought that it is only the orthodox , because of their narrow - mindedness and insular lifestyle , who judge all secular people based on the violence and immoral conduct they read about in newspapers or see in the movies . +1 this comic classic of english school girl antics is and was one of the great art house classics . then the art house disappeared with the arrival of videos . and so did the audience for this movie . the loss is not to the art houses or to this great film . the loss is to those who will never have a real opportunity to view this memorable laugh filled cinematic masterpiece . but i am preaching to the converted are n't i. who else would search for this flick ? +0 i would have liked to put 0.5 but unfortunately i ca n't . who can write so bad scripts ( i saw the movie five seconds and knew the " bad boy " would be sutherland - needed to pay his taxes , when you see how good he was in redford 's movie , " ordinary people " and others ! -).

though i do n't like it , but i had no choice , i saw the movie in french , but i know that hearing the real voices of sheen , sutherland and hamilton would have not change things , except maybe making it more pitiful.

what makes me sick is that people earn their living making this bad stuff ( i forgot to speak about mr waterson , far away from the woody allen 's movies he once used to play in).

we had another movie on another french channel : a silly james bond with brosnan ( i am not talking about the real bonds with connery(please it 's the end of holidays , wake up ! ) . +0 last fall ( of 2001 ) , i took a film class that was taught by the director of this movie ( mark hoeger ) . his vast knowledge of filmmaking , his ability to dissect any scene of a film , and his winning of an academy award in some obscure category seemed to give him more credibility than your average independent film director . when he mentioned during one of his classes that he had just finished directing a film called " full ride " and was in the post - production stages , my interest was piqued . however , that would be the last i would ever hear of that film project . until last week ...

last week , i saw in a tv listing that " full ride " was going to be showing on the wb network . this immediately raised a red flag , as i ca n't help but associate wb with teensploitation shows such as dawson 's creek , charmed , etc . plus , the fact that full ride was going to be released straight to tv was n't too flattering in itself . but , nevertheless , i set aside that time and sat down to watch my former film teacher 's creation.

after two hours passed and the end credits began to roll , i thought long and hard about what i had just seen . what i had just seen was a typical wb - quality show stretched out to the length of two hours . in fact , it almost seemed as if this movie was made with the sole intent of only showing on the wb network . critiquing this movie will basically be like critiquing a typical wb show.

where to begin ? the characters are shallow , the story is cliche in every sense of the word , the scenes are completely contrived , and the character development is forced and unbelievable . this movie just screams ` unoriginal.'

the main character , matt sabo , is some hot shot from the wrong side of the tracks ( literally ) who plays solid high school football as a fullback , but then fizzles off into a life of crime . he is then offered a chance at a full ride scholarship instead of going to jail . obviously , without much of a choice , he agrees to play football with an all - star football team , but is not excepted among his peers because of his poor team spirit and bad attitude.

then comes the love interest . of course ! where would this predictable fanfare be without a love interest ? she comes in the form of amy lear ( played by the beautiful meredith monroe ) . she is actually a likable character , as opposed to the ever - so - abrasive matt sabo , so we almost applaud her when she rejects him at first . but , of course , the inevitable comes to pass . she falls for him , changes his attitude towards everything , and all seems good and happy . but now it 's time for conflict!

earlier in the movie , amy makes it clear to matt that she does n't want to score with him , because it would be ` shameful ' to her and her mother . this is much to matt 's dismay , and his football buddies ( yes , they eventually warm up to him ) who bet him he would n't get any . but , of course , matt eventually comes to accept these terms and decides he 's not all about the nookie . here 's where the exciting plot thickens . if you do n't want me to ruin this surprise , then skip ahead.

[begin spoiler]

matt finds out from some local guys that apparently amy lear always tries to score with a guy each year from the all - star team so that she can try to use him to escape her small town life of working in a cafeteria ( which is baffling in the first place ) and make it to the big city . suddenly realizing he 's been used and that his love was a sham , matt it tempted to turn back to a life of crime and leave the football camp before ` the big game . ' amy tries to reassure him that she was really in love this time , but he 's too hot - headed to buy it . so what will matt do ? will he take her back ? or will he go back to robbing gas stations and being an all - round jerk ? i wo n't ruin the super - ultra - surprising ending for you.

[end spoiler]

so , if i somehow got you pumped up for this movie , please realize that that was my sarcasm and not genuine enthusiasm . this movie is an uninspired version of ` varsity blues ' or ` summer catch . ' and that 's not saying much . there 's hardly any comedy to save it and the characters are too shallow to care about . so what do you have left ? not a whole lot.

what i most disliked about the movie was how much of an unflattering picture hoeger painted of nebraska through this film . it seems like he was trying to capture the essence of rural nebraska and teenage life in the small towns , but his approach is all too stereotypical and shallow . the characters ' high hopes for making in ` the big city ' and the actions they take to do so are greatly exaggerated , and it only further cements the stereotype of nebraskans being a bunch of hicks living in farm communities . i am unsure of whether or not hoeger 's intentions were good in trying to put his home state in the spotlight , but i think he ended up with a very shameful product . if hoeger wanted to portray nebraska in a favorable light , he should have taken a note or two from alexander payne . while payne simply chooses to use nebraska as a backdrop for his films , hoeger integrates it into the plot of full ride and becomes so entangled in his awareness of where he 's shooting , that he ends up churning out superficial garbage that would seem to come from an outsider . if hoeger actually lived here , you 'd think he 'd know better than that.

all in all , i am completely disappointed in hoeger 's first big film , and i hope that next time he can combine his knowledge with a little bit of originality to create something different and thought - provoking . +1 my son , an avid skateboarder , sat me down and made me watch this with him . as i love documentaries , it did n't take a whole lot of pressure on his part . the whole amazing story of it all - a bunch of dirt - poor kids drift together and end up creating something revolutionary out of thin air - well , more out of some wood , wheels and lack of waves to surf - it just floored me . it still does . i did n't think i would enjoy it the way i did , nor did i think i would tear up watching stacey peralta tear up over the fate of jay adams . and just watching jay adams himself ..... the sheer genius of the kid skating and the shrug of the adult remembering . i watched it again last night for what has to be the 10th time and i still get goosebumps watching him fly down the hill with jimi hendrix 's " freedom " playing in the background . and i teared up , again . not too many movies have the same impact with me after several viewings . brilliant . +0 the most disturbing thing about this film is not that it 's a load of hogwash ( the cpusa was never really as much an espionage threat as the movie makes out ) . the troubling aspect is the way that it whitewashes the wholly unsavory tactics of the fbi and the unamerican activities committee . secret informants , gossip turned into accusations , warrantless searches - these are the kind of things secret police thugs like the kgb did , and presumably , what the good patriotic americans were fighting . yet the fbi did them and did n't bat an eye . that 's the only realistic part of this movie , and they present it with no sense of shame at all . add to this undermining the constitution itself by having only communists invoke the bill of rights . the film also makes thinly veiled accusations that the black civil rights movement was communist - inspired , another pack of lies . it 's extremely difficult in this day to excuse such outrageous propaganda , even understanding the paranoia of the times , when one realizes how damaging it was to real people then . +1 " tempest " is a somewhat self - indulgent , uneven , discursive movie . but as lord byron , another visitor to greece , protested to his friend john murray about his similarly self - indulgent and discursive " don juan , " " it may be profligate but is it not life , is it not the thing?" < br />
the connections to shakespeare 's " tempest " may seem , as another commentator here claims , a bit tenuous . but watch the film again after re - reading " the tempest , " and they 'll seem far closer . what makes this film flawed is its uneasy mixture of straightforward normal narrative and sudden jarring apparent improvisation , particularly between cassavetes and rowland . but to be honest , these scenes are the most remarkable and gripping in the film , if the hardest to watch.

the music of this film , composed by stomu yamashta , is also overlooked . particularly fine is the perfect little piece played to accompany the afternoon siesta , as people , animals , and seemingly the entire island collapse to sleep away the hottest part of the afternoon . it 's a sublime moment , and representative of the best aspect of this movie and the one thing that keeps it somewhat unified , the fact that ( aside from extensive flashbacks and the very end ) it is the story of one day on an island , from awakening to night . < br />
overall , i 'd rather watch this film a hundred times than see some bombastic hollywood piece of crap once . and in fact , i probably have watched it several dozen times . most times , i see something i missed before.

(confession : i 'm biased . this was the second movie i took my greek - american goddess wife to see.)

trivia notes on this flick : < br />
- it was molly ringwald 's first movie , as well as sam robards';

- it was actually not filmed on an island , but in gytheion , the southern tip of the remote mani peninsula of the peloponnesus of greece;

- the ( by today 's standards ) primitive special effects were done by bran ferren , who later became head of disney imagineering , and still later was an adviser to the us intelligence community;

- paul mazursky , the director , chose the title of his recent autobiography , " show me the magic , " from the script of " tempest . " +0 ok , this simply is the worst movie ever made . period . horrible acting , sets and music . ok , everything sucks in this movie . i almost forgot ! the special effects are " great " also . so if you like bad movies , watch this , it can surely make you laugh ! ! +0 a romp across a disbelieving outback , this outragous adventure enchants through it 's downright brazeness . comedy from the clashing confrontation of cultural assumptions - as drama from crisis . perhaps a little too queenie for some - i would love to have watched in a cinema audience in the outback . shockingly good +0 billed as a romantic comedy set against the early years of wwii it fails to deliver . the problem is that while beautifully photographed it has no consistent story line or narrative . starting as a murder mystery it offers no hope to its actors as it meanders through recent history . depardieu is wasted in a trivial role he obviously is not comfortable with playing . adjani can not carry the picture . the hero is not ; obviously an imitation of a hitchcock " wrongly accused " role it lacks balance . neither heroic , comic nor suspenseful.

this could have been a good film . i am reminded of " the lady vanishes " which did combine suspense , romance and comedy in a serious film dealing with fascism . +0 i saw this cartoon accidentally on television one night when i could n't get to sleep . it did n't help in the slightest . i found myself staring up at the ceiling , trying to forget that face . i could quite happily never see this cartoon again , simply because of that face.

now , do n't get me wrong - i love fairy tales and nursery rhymes as much as anyone . but this twisted and terrifying rendition simply is disturbing . it is mainly the cruel laughter , and the exaggerated features that terrify me , and i still have nightmares because of it . please , i urge you not to allow your children to see this . it is far , far too scary . please , i pray you , keep it away . +0 the box ( 2009 ) * cameron diaz , james marsden , frank langella , james rebhorn , holmes osborne , sam oz stone , celia weston . truly disappointing adaptation of genre legend richard matheson 's sci - fi chiller " button , button " by on the wane wunderkind filmmaker richard kelly who truly stretches a small , well - crafted piece into a grab - bag ' wtf'-a - thon ! mysterious ( and ridiculously maimed ! ) man , langella , posits a million dollar offer to ' struggling ' couple diaz and marsden ( both surprisingly vanilla bland to the hilt ! ) : a box with a red - button , that when pushed , will kill some stranger in the world ( ! ) sure strings are attached but does that really matter here ? what does is why in the name of god does kelly trowel on so much oddness ( i.e. nose - bleeds ; watery transport systems – that 's right – watery . transport . systems ) when the tension should be strung as tautly as possible ( oh the possibilities ) . if this sounds like a bad twilight zone episode you are half right ( the ' 80s tv re - boot actually did a decent small - screen adaptation ; in fact rent that instead ! ) one of the year 's worst films . +0 fred williamson , one of the two or three top blaxploitation stars . cynthia rothrock , one of the two or three top american female action stars . imagine a film with these two together for the first time ! now imagine the worst film that could possibly be made with these two together for the first time . welcome to " night vision " . of course , this movie was made in 1997 and they were both past their prime , but that does n't mean they did n't have what it takes anymore - they just needed the help of good writing and direction . they got neither here . rothrock does get to throw a couple of kicks near the end , but this film is so atrocious that you probably wo n't be awake to see them . ( * ) +1 when i was 10 ( currently 14 ) , i vowed to never see a movie that i knew would not have a happy ending . and until a few weeks ago i had done pretty well , except for shakespere for english class ... etc ... i was still only watching things that ended happy . but then i saw ramola garai in havanah nights , which was cute , not good but entertaining enough to watch . after seeing this a few times over the two or so years since i first saw it , i grew to like it , especially the music . so i did a search on her and found imdb ... i saw " inside i 'm dancing " and assumed she had done another dancing movie , and over looked it . it was later on an image search(of rory , looking for gilmore girls poster for locker ) i picked up an image from this movie ... i then searched for a trailer , i found the trailer and when i saw the hospital and heard rory say " you 've got the future " i remembered my vow and realized this would not be a good movie for me . but it just stayed in the back of my mind until we were at the video store and there it was for $ 5 used , so i went ahead and bought it . after seeing it i just wanted it out of my head because it was so sad . i still would n't go near it until i had cerebral palsy as a vocab word . then i just had to see it again and this time all i did was laugh , even at the saddest parts i no longer felt depressed because i realized that over all this movie was happy and uplifting ... i love it and it is now one of my favorites , i;m sure this is the worst comment you have ever read . but watch the movie it 's worth it . +0 a feminist tract in which if you the viewer believe that : i ) wild animals are seldom tamed by singing but instead attack , kill and eat ( the line that grizzlies never attack unless provoked was a hoot - unless " provoked " means that it sees flesh ) ; ii ) homosexuality is both immoral per se -- and its acceptance almost always associated throughout history with signs of a society 's dissolution and decay iii ) few women are bisexual ( in this one , virtually every woman is presented as having no preference for men or women ) iv ) divorce is far worse than infidelity v ) land is there for human beings to use , develop and enjoy vi ) it is as incumbent upon a mother of an adult son to keep in touch as it is upon the son vii ) a mother raising her son alone is an unfortunate and real tragedy for the child viii ) the idolization of a parent for worthwhile ideals is a good and healthy thing ix ) adults continue to bear a responsibility for their sexual behavior , no matter their age , and the duty to engage in this most intimate and giving of acts only within the most intimate and openly sacrificial of relationships : marriage -- believe me , you are not going to like this film ! essentially it 's a howard stern sort of fellow who is brought down by a jane fonda sort of woman ( think the electric horseman ) . it 's ugly stuff because the values , the ideals , of the screenplay are all so harmful.

i share the other objections about the odd things in the writing : a ) why would this man lose every girlfriend he has -- because he refuses to reveal that his mother 's death and funeral caused him to be unable to keep dates with them ? it 's a mystery why he just keeps saying " it was personal " when faced with angry and disappointed women . huh ? < br />
b ) there 's an enormous inconsistency ( i.e. , the screenwriter wants to have it both ways ) by telling us that the protagonist 's mother loved the father with everything she had - and then later we 're told that there was only one great love in her life - her lesbian girlfriend.

c ) the underlying legal assumptions are nonsense . we 're never told that the executor has any right to live at the property - merely that she shall determine the timing of the sole heir 's title and right to occupy the property . yet somehow the film makes it appear that the executor is the rightful occupant - which is crazy . ( try to think of any executor of any will who uses the decedent 's property before the will 's bequests are fulfilled - it does n't happen).

d ) the assumption throughout this film is that women are equally drawn to men and women - it 's just absurd . thus , we 're told : i ) that penelope ann miller 's character is dating other men near the end of the film - after having been with the decedent for five years - and before that in a fulfilling relationship with the protagonist , ii ) that the protagonist 's housekeeper after being devoted throughout her adult life to her kind husband - is now dating another woman iii ) that one girlfriend upset with the protagonist would now therefore " like to try a woman".

iv ) that a male transsexual is eager to date the protagonist v ) that mary kay place 's character naturally looked at other women in college ( " and they looked back " she says with an idiotic triumphal flip of the head).

this is all just ridiculous.

i agree with others about the sound of the dvd ( i had to keep it at maximum volume and repeatedly rewind to understand names , phrases).

this is a film by someone who really despises traditional heroics by any man , hates the notion that a man is needed to raise a child , loathes the idea that there is any necessary connection between marriage and sex . the film is out to preach - and that kind of propaganda of false messages does n't sit well . +0 after his career as a romantic leading man ended in the late 1960s , rock hudson starred in lots of different projects , including tv shows and lesser films . however , i believe that " embryo " is his only turn as a mad scientist , and that 's probably a good thing . i guess he needed the work.

driving along one dark and stormy night , brilliant dr. paul holliston ( hudson ) hits and injures a doberman , which he brings back to his lab ( that looks somewhat like a dank midwestern basement ) . he then manages to raise the dog 's unborn puppy outside the womb , so naturally he decides to do the same thing with a human being . he raises victoria ( the beautiful barbara carrera ) from a fetus the same way . victoria grows at an astonishing pace , and soon blossoms into a gorgeous young woman.

predictably , things go very wrong . after a halcyon beginning , holliston 's sister - in - law martha ( diane ladd ) begins to wonder where the young woman came from , and victoria herself begins to show signs of instability and violence . the final sequence is one long car chase straight out of " smokey and the bandit " , after which victoria—who has shockingly aged in just a few minutes—is assaulted by a frantic holliston , who tries in vain to destroy his malformed creation along with its unborn child . all of this is accompanied by screeching tires , roaring engines , a car fire , and lots of sirens . the limp ending—a bunch of paramedics frantically working on victoria while holliston writhes in regret—is more labored than creepy.

although just made in 1976 , this movie is very dated . the only difference between this and the many 1940s mad scientist movies is that hudson plays the lead role rather than boris karloff . the sets are pretty cheap and very antiquated to today 's audiences , to the extent that hudson 's reel - to - reel tape recorder is about the size of a refrigerator . much of the action takes place in a poorly lighted laboratory . hudson sleepwalks through his sordid role , giving the impression that he 's truly a washed - up movie star , while ladd and carrera are much more believable . surprisingly , roddy mcdowall pops up briefly as a chess player.

the passport video transfer is very substandard , looking as though it had been made from a poor vhs copy using home equipment . if you 're nostalgic for 1976 , watch this once just to say you did . otherwise , watch a football game or soap opera instead . +1 i 've been looking forward to seeing this film ever since i first caught the trailer , and i 'm so glad now that i have . it 's truly a wonderful film . the actors are superb , the writing is fresh and real , the whole thing was just spot - on . i love james mcavoy in this , and i ca n't wait to see him in " the lion , the witch , and the wardrobe " movie this december . romola garai is wonderful too . be sure to check her out in " i capture the castle " or " nicholas nickleby , " two of my favorite films . overall , i think i liked this movie because it did n't chicken out . it 's a difficult subject matter to tell a story about , in that you 're very likely to offend a lot of people or mess up and make it into some overly - sentimental - sugary - sweet love fest . but they avoided doing that completely , and instead made a film that 's real , honest , and touching , yes , but never over - the - top . very well done . amazingly well done . go out and see it , and you 'll know exactly what i mean . +0 to put it simply , this was a pompous piece of canine poopie . overly stagey and everyone being the total melodramatic drama queen at every single moment . after a while , i was starting to wish that every character in the movie was n't such a stuffed - up anal retentive.

and , this movie has another one of those truly annoying things that has recently come into vogue and should n't have : all the scenes are in a sort of washed - out , blue - steel - greyishness . hmmm , the last time i checked , candles and torches are quite capable of putting a fairly wide spectrum of colors . in fact , the light they put out tends to be more in the warmish , yellowish - orange range of the spectrum . so where 's all the blue - steel - grey light coming from?

this movie has fancy sets and glitzy cgi fx , but it 's still dreck . it 's pathetic junk put out for today 's movie - goers who are easily placated by pathetic junk.

i very much enjoy vampires and werewolves as movie plot devices , but this was a total hack job.

universal studios ' 1941 " the wolfman " is infinitely superior to this even though its fx is pretty primitive compared to what could be done nowadays.

i'm done with this franchise . the first movie was reasonably decent . the second still somewhat entertaining . but this one i could n't even finish all the way to the end because it was so boring . +0 " black vengeance " is an alternate title for " ying hung ho hon " aka " tragic hero " ( 1987 ) . i have just seen this on vhs , together with the first part of the story , " gong woo ching " ( " rich and famous " ) , also 1987 . ( the poster and 2 stills featured on the page are for a 4-dvd set of movies starring rod perry ( the black gestapo ) , fred williamson ( black cobra 2 ) , richard lawson ( black fist ) . the fourth movie is called " the black six " ) . strangely , while the characters retain their original names in " rich and famous " , in " black vengeance " chow yun - fat 's character is named eddie shaw , alex man ( man tze leung ) is harry , and andy lau is called johnny . also confusing is the fact that 1994 is given as the copyright dates on both films . perhaps that was the year they were american - dubbed . according to the release dates given on imdb " tragic hero " was released before " rich and famous " . was there any reason for releasing the sequel first ? despite some users ' comments , i enjoyed these films , although they are n't among cyf 's best such as " the killer " and " hard - boiled " which are truly astonishing . however , if one day i come across a 2-dvd set of " rich and famous " and " tragic hero " i wo n't hesitate to buy it . hopefully , these comments about " black vengeance " clear up , which was also for me , a mystery as to where it belonged in chow yun - fat 's filmography . +1 i liked this movie . i was n't really sure what it was about before i started watching it , but enjoyed it nonetheless . it was about a girl ( meredith monroe ) whose mom did n't want her to turn out like she did . she meets and falls in love with a boy ( riley smith ) who is town for a charity football game . it 's a good movie . i just hope it will be on again or comes out on video . +0 this film has been lauded to the point of the ridiculous . " american movie " is a boring documentary about a boring person so ordinary you 'll find equivalents on just about every corner in america . it takes a long , hard look at a guy who 's failed at just about everything in the interest of making an independent movie .. or two . were his failures for other than his own selfish pursuits or were they in the name of real art , the movie might have had a chance . america has an abundance of better stories to be told . this one should be flushed and many critics have good reason to be ashamed . two thumbs up indeed ! +1 its my favourite film because there 's so much going on that you do n't see at first and so many things that make you wonder " did kieslowski mean that or is it in my head ? " for instance - is the judge meant to be god or some supreme being ? < br />
also irene jacob as in the double life of veronique is outstanding , there may be a few superficially prettier actresses but none who manage to convey beauty of spirit with physical beauty the way she does.

tritingnant also is magnificent without really saying much and the things he does say are excellent such as his answer to valentine . . . " be " . +0 now out of all the shark movies i 've seen , this one takes the cake ! the plot of the movie was good , but the excitement factor sort of took a nosedive afterwards . antonio sobato , jr. does an excellent role as a son who seeks the shark who killed his father . a megaldon is one of the biggest sharks of all and the most dangerous one as well . the view of the shark was indeed scary in some angles , but the effects were a blur , and the scenes were a little weak in some places . with the mini - sub 's weapons there , that would take out a whole school of sharks there . it was great that the son would get the exact revenge on that monstrosity , although it would indeed cost him his life as well . like they say revenge has it 's price , but was it worth it ? that answer could go on and on , and this movie was a major letdown . the beginning was fine , and at the end , it went like the titanic . 1 out of 5 stars ! +0 think of this film as fan service , a wet dream for the slasher genre admirer . we start off with a gory prologue which is pretty much unrelated to the rest of the film . flash forward nine months and the real meat of the plot begins : the virginal mandy lane is coveted by every jock and nerd in her school , and gets invited to spend a weekend at a ranch by three guys who think they can get lucky , and two bimbos obsessed with their weight and boob size . so .. you have a bunch of young students in a house in the middle of nowhere on a dark night , who want to do nothing but have sex , do drugs and drink booze . the only other company is a hunky ranch - hand who may or may not be suffering from gulf war syndrome . hmm ... potential future suspect maybe?

so as you 're probably ascertained by now , all the house - guests end up being slaughtered in a variety of bloody ways , and for a change the black man isn't the first to die . there are some conventions that still hold up though , like the scantily clad babe being chased by a car in a field . or the lights going out mysteriously in the evening as our ' heroes ' unwisely separate to tackle the problem . even down to the so - called shocking twist at the end , the movie is like an old 80 's horror updated for the noughties , and on this score it succeeds.

unfortunately , it also inherits a lot of the problems of the films of that era too , namely the paper - thin characters and the predictability of the whole enterprise . people get cut up , shot , bludgeoned etc but because of their innate hatefulness to the audience and stupidity in getting themselves in these situations , it 's hard to care as the bodies stack up . someone gets murdered , one of their friends goes out to look for them alone , bang they 're brown bread . rinse , then repeat . maybe one day we 'll get a screenplay with plausible , intelligent , likable characters who make rational decisions but still end up being outwitted by a genius killer . until then , we have to tolerate teenagers with the i.q of pond - life being picked off by a deranged hoodie . oh well .. 4/10 +1 this show was a pleasant surprise after watching mad tv on a saturday night . spike is an excellent host that you can tell is still getting used to it but he is doing great adjusting to his new job . i can imagine it being a difficult transition from writer(seinfeld ) to host however , unlike a lot of new talk show hosts he does not let airtime ride while trying to figure out what to do next . he is quick - minded and each segment and section rolls into one another smoothly . it also does n't hurt that he 's kinda sexy in a nerdy type of way so he 's not hard on the eyes like leno or letterman . i ca n't remember the exact episode date that was my favorite but i especially loved the idiot paparazzi skit with a fake j - lo and katie holmes . great new show ! ! +1 i just watched the movie tonight and i found it brilliant . it does n't have special effects that blow your mind , and it 's not violent or bloody , no terrorist or aliens but it 's brilliant . it 's just plain nice , sweet and it brought me to a whole different time , a much simpler time , where people could take their time to walk down the street and look out at the ocean . i think it was beautiful and i for one recommend it . nick was a great character and his friendship with harry was one of the highlights of the movie . everyone is entitled to their opinion , but i believe everyone should watch this , mostly when they feel down , or when they want to share something nice with their friends . +0 i saw this movie and i thought this is a stupid movie . what is even more stupid is that who had thought an idea that there should be a volcano in los angeles ? the fact is that there are no volcanoes in los angeles . this movie should not be filmed in los angeles , it should be filmed in honolulu hawaii . hawaii has volcanoes which is a real fact that this movie should be made in hawaii 's state capital . this movie should be filmed in hawaii because this is the real idea and not in los angeles . there are earthquakes in los angeles , but there are no volcanoes . to be honest with you , this is unbelievable nonsense and very foolish . in conclusion , i will not bother with this movie because a volcano in los angeles is nothing but nonsense . +1 who said it had to be believable ? do yourself a favor and turn off your ration before you sit down to view this film . you 'll enjoy the experience much more . you 'll find yourself forgiving some of the movie 's more outlandish plot set - ups , and simply accepting it for what it is -- a great family film . i appreciated not having to be concerned about " questionable elements " in a children 's film for once . that , to me , is worth the price of the ticket . and it manages to maintain its wholesomeness without being obvious about it -- older chidlren will enjoy this film . enough good humor to keep adults interested . very good film . +1 this is yet another gem from the pen of daniele thompson - in fact that same year ( 1999 ) she wrote and directed la buche , the first of three writer / director credits so far . belle maman is first of all ' french ' whatever that means which is , of course , different things to different folks . the premise is simple : at the altar where he is marrying mathilde seigner , the groom , vincent lindon , gets his first glimpse of her mother , catherine deneuve , and suffers what the french call a coup de foudre which we know as love at first sight . in theory the story is either 1 ) over right then and there assuming he called the wedding off or else 2)just the beginning as he goes through with the wedding and thus lives a lie until it is resolved one way or the other . thompson veers towards # 2 but not without hitting us with the odd subplot along the way like , for example , deneuve 's cigar - smoking lesbian mother line renaud ( in real life , if anyone cares , renaud is in a long - term relationship with stephane audran , who co - stars here ) and throws in a brilliant set - piece in a luxuriously appointed men 's room at the wedding reception , which takes the form of a hilarious song - and - dance . consummate writer that she is thompson also leavens the comedy with drama like the brilliant climactic scene where vincent finally spews out his feelings for deneuve at a family gathering whilst simultaneously wrecking the joint . this is one to savour . again and again . +1 for the sake of propaganda during world war ii , sherlock holmes was moved into the then - present . one of the results is " sherlock holmes and the secret weapon , " starring a top holmes , basil rathbone , along with nigel bruce , lionel atwill , dennis hoey and kaaren verne . it is holmes ' assignment to deliver a scientist , dr. franz tobel ( william post jr. ) and his weapon design to the british government before the germans can get him . once the man reaches england , however , his troubles are just beginning . can holmes decode the message dr. tobel left before falling into the hands of the vicious moriarity , save the weapon and possibly the scientist too ? this is an effective holmes story , set in the atmosphere of switzerland and blackout england . the series worked just fine in the present day . it was not without its problems , but those problems had nothing to do with the time period . whose idea was it to make watson an idiot ? nigel bruce 's characterization - aided and abetted by the scripts - has always been the false note . i much prefer the characterization of edward hardwicke in the jeremy brett sherlock holmes series - there , he 's attractive , intelligent and a believable companion for holmes . in the rathbone series , holmes is often condescending and treats watson like the bumbling fool that he is . however , in this particular film , watson has a chance to be quite helpful in several parts.

i admit to being a complete sap for rathbone 's recitation from richard ii - " ... this blessed plot , this earth , this england " - i ca n't imagine how much it meant to the brits watching the film in 1942 . sherlock holmes really served his purpose . +0 the man with bogart 's face sets it self up to mine the viewers nostalgia for the late 30's - late 40 's film era . it fails miserably for several reasons . first , sacchi , while looking reasonably like bogart and even speaking like him on occassion and using his mannerisms , completely lacks any of bogart 's charisma or acting ability . this is really apparent whenever sacchi is not clearly imitating a scene from one of bogart 's films . second , the film does not have the first rate character actors bogart was able to work with . there are no peter lorre 's or sydney greenstreet 's in this one , folks . sure we are treated to performances by victor buaeno , olivia hussey and george raft amongst others , but they just are n't of the same caliber ( or are n't given enough screen time or are miscast ) . third , the attempts at " modern " humor all fall through . all of the underwear jokes , having marlowe almost * never * remove that damn hat and trench coat ( even though bogart would have ) , etc . just are n't funny and really pull down this film . fourth , i 've never heard a goofier theme song this side of mitchell . finally , the film 's false reverence for bogart ( and other classic actors work ) is truly irritating . bogart almost * never * played a straight hero , on those occasions he was a hero . he played complicated characters . this movie makes bogart out to be a trigger - happy , moralistic do - gooder . while this may have been true about some film characters , bogart 's characters rarely fit that bill . it 's movies like this that make people unexposed to the cinema of the past think that all of it is hokey , " good guy beats the bad guys and gets the girl " crap with low production values . +1 i saw this film last night at a " pre - code " film festival , and i have to tell you that when gary cooper turned his head for his introductory close - up , the entire audience gasped . he was just that beautiful.

cooper 's looks aside , this film displays rouben mamoulian 's directorial artistry to perfection . wonderful scene - fades , creative camera angles , symbolic allusions -- mamoulian just keeps exploring the directorial medium and coming up with innovation.

this was sylvia sidney 's first role in hollywood , after her success on the new york stage , and she is just as lovely as a gary cooper leading lady ought to be . it 's nice to see her in a role with a harder edge than many she was given -- so often she looks like she 's afraid she 's about to be hit by someone.

there are lots of familiar faces in this film , including the wonderful wynne gibson . most striking is guy kibbee , best known for playing fatuous rich men , as a grinning and mendacious hit - man.

there are n't nearly enough of these pre - code films available on vhs or dvd , so if you ca n't find a pre - code festival near you , try campaigning turner classic movies for a broadcast ! as for the reviewer who believes gary cooper was too stupid to have dialogue more complex than " yep " or " nope , " he should perhaps consider coop 's performance in films such as " mr deeds goes to town " or " meet john doe . " although heaven knows anyone who looked that good should n't have to be smart as well . +0 overrated , poorly written , badly acted . did the academy even watch this ? i guess not . the political content guaranteed it an oscar nomination -- indo -pak border -- a little boy , terrorism . anything with the word " terrorist " gets attention in < br />
this post 9 - 11 world . its like holocaust movies that are guaranteed an oscar nomination irrespective of their merits . < br />
and please cinematography does not mean shooting landscapes which are pretty in the first place . you have to be a rotten shooter to screw up making the desert pretty . at least this did n't win the oscar . they got that right at least . would have been a travesty . +1 greta garbo stars in ' anna christie ' , a very early 1930 mgm ' talkie ' , the first time ' garbo talks ' . ' anna christie ' is a powerful movie but not for everyone . the movie is filmed like a stage play , short on sets and cinematography , long on dialogue and dramatic characterizations . eugene o'neil who wrote the play ' anna christie ' is known for his dark work and garbo 's character anna christie is a bleak figure with a tortured past.

the sound quality on the dvd was mediocre . not helping matters is that george f. marion who plays anna 's estranged dad , chris christofferson , is verbally hard to understand . marion gives a good performance as the old drunken seamen who ’s teetering on insanity with his fixation of the evil ' devil sea ' . but his dialogue is written with a very heavy swedish accent , this is true to o'neils original play . marie dressler 's dialogue as marthy owens is equally hard to understand . dressler believably portrays a broken down old drunken women , a ' wharf rat ' . her dialogue also is true to o'neils original play as is charles bickford as the irish seamen , matt burke who pursues anna in a troubled relationship . garbo is actually the easiest to understand.

the films strong point is greta garbo . she delivers a gut wrenching performance as the victim of neglect and abuse , leading to a life of prostitution . garbo was a huge star at the time and considered one of the most beautiful women in hollywood . here her look is n't glamorous , it 's tortured . her body posture nearly doubles over in agony . she scrunches her face to become a pathetic creature on the screen . garbo conveys these angst - ridden feelings to the viewer to convince us of her misery.

this is dark subject matter and garbo brings it to life . it ’s not light fare , not fun , not for everyone . ‘ anna christie’ is strong emotions dredged up from the depths for examination , this is one helluva ride . +1 hey all you jive hustlers , you stone foxes , you mean dudes . watch out cause slaughter is back in town ! if you are looking for a bad - ass , funky film to watch some night , this is just right . ' slaughter ' is back and trying to take it easy n ' relax after his adventures down in mexico . but if you are a narrow - minded gangster like ' duncan ' , you are bound to seek revenge . why , i do n't know . was ' hoffo ' in the first one his brother or what ? any who . the movie starts off with the old " assassination from a plane " routine . we all know that that is the most effective way for taking out one guy in a picnic , full of people . needless to say slaughter survives the ordeal , but cmndt . eric lassard , sorry george gaynes i mean is n't that lucky . smack ! ! also slaughters best friend pratt is killed . this is the start of a grand adventure , filled with the hippest , funkiest music james brown himself has to offer . that 's right ' the godfather of soul ' has put his trademark up on this bad - boy . in addition to jim brown in the lead part , this movie is filled with some of the biggest names the blaxploitation scene has to offer . how about scatman crothers , dick anthony williams , gloria hendry and brock peters . in other parts we see none other than judith m. brown and last but definitely least the fantastic don stroud as the evil henchman . +1 this movie is about viola ( amanda bynes ) and her quest to beat her school cornwell boys team after they kicked the girls team out . so she goes to the rival school illaria and joins the boys team , in doing so she falls for duke ( channing tatum ) who thinks she s a guy and likes olivia ( laura ramsey ) who likes viola as a her brother . < br />
i was in a version of the 12th night play and the beginning was very modern . so i knew the play well . i was very exited about seeing this movie and when i saw it it exceeded my expectations . it kept a lot of my favorite lines and i could see big connections to the play . though it was like the play it was not as complicated . it was also more of a chick flick than i expected but it was good . it was very funny . it pulls you into a whole bunch of crazy love stories and lies . you saw how viola ( amanda bynes ) thought wrongly about what guys thought and her complications in living in a guys world . you also see her room - mate , duke's(channing tatum ) , impression of this . i really liked seeing the characters being portrayed in a modern way . it also tells the modern theme " follow your dreams " but this time it has a twist . i think this movie was a great movie about a girl who loved soccer and stuck up for herself and her family and her dreams . i think this movie will be the big break for many raising stars . +0 vicente aranda has made a terrible historical movie . it shows the poor resources of the spanish cinema . in the movie , an irreal script shows juana just as a ninphomaniac , faced to felipe , worried only for sex ... but sex with others not with her . the technical mistakes begin with the wedding ring that shows isabel of castilla -nobody noticed that?- . then , the voice in off seems as a documentary , actors and actress in the movie sometimes laughs -take a look to the sequence when juana arrives to the council which want to keep her isolated- ; the castles are almost broken when in the age of the movie they have been recently built , crowds are just " four " people , lights are bad placed ... compared with amelie poulain , the french movie for the oscars ... it has no sense to speak about a bad movie like juana la loca . +0 only adding to the chorus of people who deemed this to be ' unredeemable ' i will state the following without repeating the obvious flaws plainly stated by some of the other commentators : the " film " is shot on video ( what type of camera i do n't know ) but the cameraman had it on autofocus ( ! ) all the time , so that any slight movement makes it go in and out of focus . in many of the scenes the actors themselves go out of focus for their scenes . this alone screams " amateur".

i also noticed that out in the ' middle of the cornfield ' , you can hear the sound of the gasoline generator that is powering the lights ... loudly.

also what is with that single lighting source that follows ( and many times ' leads ' the actors ) when they walk around . it looks like a newscaster with that ' on camera light ' that follows the people around like a spotlight . there was no ' credit ' for lighting design / dp and i know why . the ' filmmakers ' saw no need to have someone who actually knew what they were doing lighting this picture ( note i did n't say " film " ) . so be prepared for a single glaring spotlight as the sole source of ' cinematic lighting ' for most of the movie . ughhh!!!

this is probably the most technically inept production i 've ever seen commercially released . i " bought " this title because i like bad cinema . usually it 's so bad that you can laugh at it . this is just so bad that it 's unwatchable . plan nine from outer space is " citizen kane " in comparison to this title . +0 this was an attempt toward a romantic comedy , and one which did not work . although the film was cast in an interesting manner , the dismal script betrayed the best efforts of all . the director 's fey mannerisms may have succeeded if he had adopted a point of view . it was embarrassing to watch william baldwin and , in particular , armin muller - stahl . +1 it seems a lot of europeans and americans see indian movies for the wrong reason ; i see some people are complaining that this movie did not have any dance sequence ! a class apart from their hindi counterparts , bengali movies tend to be more realistic . rituparno ghosh is one of the best young directors in india , being widely known for his choice of subjects for the movies and the strength of his scripts . ' chokher bali ' is a perfect example . a faithful adaptation of the nobel laureate tagore 's novel dealing with the pursuit of sexual pleasure of a bengali widow , the director gives a new dimension to the much acclaimed and controversial work . +1 note the wide release date of aug 8 , 1945 - about a week before japan surrendered in wwii , so there will probably be a message for us in " over 21 " . irene dunne ( it happened one night , the 1939 version of love affair ) is paula wharton , who goes to live on an army base while her newspaper editor husband is in training school . alexander knox ( the longest day ) is her hubby max . look for charles coburn ( monkey business , gentlemen prefer blondes ) as the stuffy , commanding , newspaper boss . also look for cora witherspoon as mrs. gates , from the women , bank dick , libeled lady . war story written for the wives ' point of view , which was n't too common in those days . fun commentary on the shabby condition of the " married housing " ; irene 's wardrobe in this film certainly was n't at all shabby .. since they never had to leave their little cottage , it appears the whole movie budget was spent on her always - exquisite dresses and hats . +1 ( mild spoilers ) frankie machine had been dealt a bad hand in life . a card dealer at an illegal gambling den in his chicago neighborhood he was busted when the joint was raided by the cops and given six months in jail . < br />
while behind bars frankie was treated for his heroin addiction at the prisons hospital and learned how to play the drums as part of his rehabilitation program . now out of prison and back in his old neighborhood frankie is trying to put his life back together by getting a union card in the musicians union and then a job as a drummer in a band and put his old life behind him but instead it catches up with frankie in no time at all in " the man with the golden arm " . < br />
otto preminger 's ground - breaking 1955 film about heroin addiction with frank sinatra giving the performance of his life as the drug addicted card sharp frankie machine , the man with the golden arm . frankie tries to getaway from the life that he lead but has this monkey or , better yet , gorilla on his back that just wo n't let him . soild performances by the entire supporting cast starting with frankie 's friend sparrow , arnold stang . sparrows attempt to get frankie back on his feet by shoplifting a suit of clothes for him ends up putting him and frankie in the slammer , and almost back to prison , until his former boss at the gambling den schwiefka bailed him out . < br />
there 's frankie 's psychically as well as emotionally crippled wife zosch , eleanor parker , who sees that her hold on frankie is slipping and is slowly driven to madness murder and suicide . there 's frankie 's drug dealer louie , with darren mcgavin in one of his first acting roles , who 's hold on frankie is only good as long as he stays addicted and louie goes out of his way to make sure that he does . < br />
there 's the owner of the gambling joint that frankie works at as it 's top card dealer schwiefka , robert strauss , who like louie goes out of his way to get frankie back to work for him even though if he 's arrested again frankie 's hopes for a new and better life will go down the drain . and then there 's frankie 's next - door neighbor and friend molly , kim novak , who goes to almost impossible lengths to get him over his addiction by locking him up in her apartment . it 's there that he goes " cold turkey " and almost ends up dying trying to kick the habit in one of the most harrowing sequence ever put on film.

a no holds barred movie with explosive performances by everyone involved makes " the man with the golden arm " one of the great classics of realism in motion pictures coming out of the 1950 's . +1 after i 've seen this movie i find it hard to understand why so many people seem to hate this movie . i 'm not saying it belongs in the top 250 of all times , but in it 's genre it is a great movie . i know , not many people find it amusing to see how a legendary story like ' robin hood ' is turned into a comedy . many people still seem to believe that some things should n't be laughed with ... they are wrong . < br />
mel brooks has done an excellent job with robin hood : men in tights . i have seen the original robin hood movies as well , but i never had such a good time when watching them as i had with this one . it 's just one continuation of hilarious moments and parodies on famous people and movies ( winston churchil , the godfather ... ).

i recommend everyone who wants to have a good laugh to watch this movie . to those who think robin hood should n't be messed with , you 're wrong , but you better do n't watch it because you 'll probably be offended by it . i give this movie an 8/10 . +1 i saw two hands back in sydney a few years ago and it instantly became one of my all - time favourite films . it 's got action , adventure , comedy and romance all rolled up into one ( and a bit of zen thrown in for good measure ) . like much australian film , the plot is easy to follow yet wonderfully engaging , and jordan should justly feel proud of his work.

anyway , it was on tv just now on channel 4 in london , and my two favourite comedy scenes of not just this movie , but indeed any movie , had been cut out ! so if you watch this movie , make sure it 's the original version . +0 i consider myself to have a decent sense of humor , but this " movie " left me stunned in my chair.

it 's so bad that it could just not have been any worse . not once did i laugh at the sadly attempted jokes in this movie . i have watched and enjoyed several parodies of big movies , but unfortunately this one will allways be the one i remember best - in my nightmares.

the only reason anyone should want to watch this , is if they want to enter a coma for a brief period of time.

this is the worst movie ever . +1 i am a christian , and thought this movie was pretty good ! :) while the acting was n't academy award caliber , i thought it was good , considering the cast has had limited acting experience at the time this movie was made.

the gospel message and the transforming power of jesus christ was explained wonderfully . the message that the director was trying to get across ( which is the important thing , not how the characters dressed ! ) definitely got through . the theme of having the main characters involved in illegal drag racing was a good idea , too ( cool muscle cars , btw ) . i think this movie will definitely reach out to a lot of young people.

i would definitely recommend this movie , it is a great witnessing tool ! :) +1 out of all the mafia movies i have ever seen this is one of the best for many reasons . the acting from pesci , cortese and vincent . the story is one of the best ever ( in the mafia genre ) , as it realistic . the characters are people that lots of other people can relate to . this movie is also great as it 's dialogue is good . it also has very realistic fights and action scenes . this movie also launched the careers of pesci and vincent . if it were n't for the success of this film , casino and goodfellas might not have been as good as they were . < br />
story 10/10 acting 9/10 realism 10/10

overall 10/10

my fave mafia movies are < br />
1 : goodfellas 2 : casino 3 : the godfather trilogy 4 : family enforcer ( the death collector ) 5 : the sopranos ( i know it is n't a movie ) +1 sony pictures classics , i 'm looking at you ! sony 's got the rights to harry records -- you need to distribute the film and you 'll get radically increased sales of his back catalog ! anyhow , this is a great study of a fascinating musician , woefully underknown , full of great stories , greater music , and it could have been 3 hours longer and i 'd have loved it even more . saw it at the american cinemateque mods & rockers festival at the aero theatre in santa monica , where it played to a packed house . they were turning people away at the door ! i went to many of the mods & rockers festival films , and let me assure you that no other film came even close to selling out , let alone turning people away . see it in the theatre , buy the dvd , and make sure some slow - on - the - uptake company [ * cough sony cough * ] picks it up asap ! +1 in 1968 when , " symbiopsychotaxiplasm : take one " , was released , it came from out of nowhere , and struck like a psychedelic thunder bolt . afro - american actor and film maker , william greaves , aimed to forever alter the ' news - reel ' style of documentary film - making , and to this day , there has never been anything quite like it . the movie is a film about ' the making of a film ' , and intentionally written and directed so as to create as much controversy and contradiction as possible . set in new york 's central park , the action and scant dialog concern a couple who fight and bicker about homosexuality and abortion . the woman wants out of the relationship , and the man wants an explanation . near the end of this interaction , a drunk homeless man interrupts the proceedings and offers his commentary , and personal back - story . then , after the principle footage has been shot , the film crew add their own views of the film - maker and what they feel is his inept handling of the movie . and during the entire film , multiple cameras are employed to record the action within the scene , and extraneous commentary by cast , crew , and onlookers . i would certainly recommend this film to anyone who has an interest in avant garde film makers such as andy warhol , john cassavetes , or jim jarmusch . william greaves attempts to show that a thing can not be truly observed and understood because the viewing itself would alter the reality . " symbiopsychotaxiplasm : take one " can be seen as a cinematic representation or application of the uncertainty principle . this is only one possible explanation , and greave 's true intent is certainly open for speculation . above all else , this film seeks to confound , confront . and stimulate , and without a doubt , succeeds admirably . +0 i was forced to watch ' changi ' last year in year 10 australian history . looking around the class room , both classes , all 40 students were nearly asleep , all 40 heads on the table whispering to the person next to them . i refuse to believe that because i am only 16 , that my opinion does n't count , having studied world war two , i not only felt embarrassed and ashamed watching this australian piece of trash television . i was out of my mind at the appalling effort this mini series applied in the usage of film elements . the acting was poor , the screenplay was very inaccurate and the score was dreadful . please , do not watch this film , it is bias and very racists ( to the japans ) . +0 whoever filled this stupid idea of acting and producing a movie in himesh 's head , which is always hidden under a cap , covering almost half of his face all the time ? only hope this is first and the last as well , for god 's sake ! from assalam valekum to gayatri mantra , himesh has tried every thing , to create an aura of his so - called singing talent , which is nothing but atrocious pronunciations of words like tanhaiyya , which completely kill the beauty of the terms , so commonly used for love songs . why does himesh not smile ? simple , because he does not use close up toothpaste ! now there this friend of his , tailing him around every where , and this number one lawyer in the town , who has to herself sexily wiggle and try to seduce himesh , of all the handsome german people she might have met earlier , perhaps the male lawyers on this part of the world might be cursing their fate , for destined to deal with the stiff , unattractive lot , every day ! the action scenes are so funnily shot , like the event planner attacked by the thief , autos riding over the cars , so on and so forth . the father of the bride seems to be in a great hurry to get rid of his daughter by marrying her off , that he flies to and fro around . most hypocrite , he praises hr for distributing love among people of the world , as if they were sweets , and on his back , coolly gives a lecture to his daughter on these show business men . when himesh is proved innocent , he again unceremoniously dumps the other guy , as if it 's a game of musical chair ! i did n't get to se the poor guy 's face even , did you ? hansika in the role of ria , looks as if she is in need of an eye check up , for strain in her eyes ! the fellow in the role of a friend is good , who has acted quite naturally , and should be in better movies , like sharman joshi , for example . child artist in trishu 's brief appearance is sweet , but wasted . it seems today 's young generation has gone nuts , since they prefer this kind of mockery of lyrics and musical scores , and associate gossip with it , for example , if you sing ek bar aaja , the ghost would come . this is a weird taste in music , and rather funny . i am surprised , how such classic lyricists like gulzar , have opted for himesh of all the people , to give music . there is story in panchtantra , that a crow attachés so many feathers of a peacock , to look beautiful , and appeal to the birds ; but the feathers fall off ultimately , and the real dark crow is revealed ! hope himesh takes a hint , and refrains from manufacturing such meaningless stuff , and wasting precious money , which he has earned by taxing his short nose so much ! his friend does tell him , if your nose is cut , how will you sing ? thanks for showing us germany , himesh , at a reasonable cost of renting the dvd ! and correct those spelling mistakes , will you ? an extra e in movie , and no e in love ! there is also a famous number from the old film sholey , mehbooba , on which mallika sherawat wiggles , once again , but this time with himesh , winking at her , and conveniently , ria , his so - called real love , and his new bride is not around ! now that was very clever , himesh ! at least one thing in this movie which you have done smartly , to justify sherawat 's presence . but does n't she look a bit washed down ? +1 k - pax is exactly what a heart warming film should be . the story is about a mysterious mental patient prot , played by kevin spacey , and his unbelieving psychiatrist dr. powel , played by jeff bridges . the two have a very friendly bond , and as their relationship grows dr. powel ca n't help but wonder whether or not there is more to his mysterious patient , who insists he is from another planet called k - pax . this film is very funny , and kevin spacey pulls of well placed one liners as if it was his second nature . k - pax is a smart film , and i was n't expecting it to go where it did . in the end , i found myself thinking about the small things in life , and the wonder and magic of the every day life we so often take for granted . i left the theater with a warm fuzzy feeling inside , and for families and couples on a date , k - pax is a splendid film , that will not disappoint . i highly recommend this film to anyone interested in something more than the monotonous releases of glossy , action packed , gore fests . +0 unlike some of the reviews written here , i did n't hate this movie . it is a movie that could have been much better than it was . not oscar material , true , but much better than it was.

i thought the plot had a good hook and through line . granted , this movie was badly written . and terribly directed and produced . i mean , how many irrelevant flashbacks can you have ? why were we there ? what exactly is the point of the opening sequence ? it seems like the producer(s ) watched american beauty a few too many times and thought ' i 'll use that in an action movie ! ' i thought the movie was n't that badly acted . wesley snipes did a credible job , he just ran afoul of some bad direction . and once this movie hit the production room , things just got worse . the main actress , i think , had the same problems . some of the other acting was suspect , yes , but it was a low - budget flick . again , i would say it is the director 's job to pick that up and correct it.

as an overall recommendation , i would agree with the first review i read that this movie is not worth seeing . or maybe it is worth seeing , if you are a film student and want to see what not to do.

3/10 , and that 's giving it praise . +1 aparna sen 's 15 park avenue is a film about nature of reality . < br />
a young delusional girl , prone to imagining things and hearing voices , possibly out of sheer boredom , is taken to be schizophrenic by her educated father and control - freak educated elder step - sister . controlled , pitied and treated like an invalid ( even if out of love and affection ) , she has ghost of a chance to develop as a normal person . when a boy offers to marry her , her father and step - sister passionately try to convince him against taking such a step . a traumatic experience , caused primarily due to her sheltered existence , finally takes her across the line of no return , and she lives full time in a delusional world of her own . < br />
the family and society around her are intolerant of her delusions , and want to suppress them with medicines , electric shock therapy , anything , even though they all have delusions of one kind or other of their own . < br />
her mother does n't see the irony in allowing a ghost - buster to treat her of the delusions . her step - sister is a professor of physics , teaching among other things quantum mechanics , a subject in which a stream of experts accept parallel multi - universes and many more dimensions in space than the 3 we see . a friend recounts with admiration an experience with a holy person claiming to hear hallucinatory voices . far away , george w bush has real or fake delusions of saddam 's weapons of mass destruction , and is allowed to invade iraq . < br />
as some viewers have already pointed out , aparna sen shied away from attacking the mother of all delusions -mainstream religions , which is a pity . < br />
in other words , accepted reality is what a majority or an influential minority believe in . that 's been the case since the beginning , and lot more powerful people than mithali in the film , among them bruno and galileo , have suffered as a consequence . < br />
the film 's controversial and difficult ending was necessary to show it 's a film about nature of reality , and not the case study of a schizophrenic girl . < br />
all the cast have given great performances , but shabana azmi and konkona sen sharma have excelled . aparna sen has produced an outstanding philosophical film . +1 i remember reading the original balzac story in college french.

i remember ken nordine of wgn - tv in chicago reading it as one of his late night shows.

always loved the story but never believe they could or would make a movie of it . to my surprise they did and did it very well.

few of any balzac stories lend themselves to dramatization , which is unfortunate , and -cat lover that i am , i was always hoping it would be filmed without a lot of hollywood sexing up . this is as close to perfect conversion as could be done.

the theater of the mind is always better than what the eye can see , but this is as close as i think it can come to letting the imagination of reading meet the reality of seeing . +0 admittedly , the only reason i watched this film -- since it 's been about a decade since it was released -- was because of ian holm ; i was intrigued to see his portrayal of my second - favorite character in this play . at any rate , this film is as gritty as anything the old zeff has produced since " jesus of nazareth . " but some of the best parts of the play have been left out . i understand the directing / editing choices , but i do n't think that it really does justice to the play . perhaps i 'm too much a purist . i would have to direct people ( who have read this far ) toward branagh 's version , if it were n't that i despise his tendency toward over - dramatization . all the same , he plays a better hamlet than gibson . but then , were n't we all waiting for gibson to prove himself as an actor ? now , all he 's done is to prove that he wants to make films in extinct languages.

... perhaps the only shakespearean - worthy acting here is scofield as the ghost . +1 here we have a miniseries , which revels in in its flaws , and does n't make us cringe because of them ... it is excellent story - telling , which fuses black comedy , mateship ( in a positive way ) , the pathetic waste of war , without the sheer unadulterated manipulation of a con - job like life is beautiful ... it is an entertainment , not the meaning of life ... and showcases the talents of actors both young and old ... give it a go and tell us what you think ... +1 the cure is one of the few movies i rated 10 out of 10 . i mean , everything is flawless for me in this motion picture . i saw it almost a year ago , and yet i remember many of the scenes , especially the final touching scene that comes with the credits.

the two boy actors clearly gave everything they could and this greatly contributes the excellent storyline , making the film perfect.

the message is clear - friendship , and it 's displayed throughout the whole thing.

i have nothing more to say here . simplicity is one of the things i love so much about this film . and of course , it 's fun and moving at the same time , suiting people of any age.

10/10 , nicely done ! +0 i read a lot of high hopes from readers of the book that this would be a faithful adaptation of nora roberts ' story . not having read the book , i do n't know if this adaptation was faithful but i do know it was n't good . actually , the screenplay was the best part of the movie so kudos to nora roberts.

i planned ahead and watched carolina moon because of claire forlani . i 've never been sure if she 's a good actress . she 's been decent in some movies , average in others and really bad in this one . but , forlani was n't alone . the performances were all over the place . oliver hudson was wooden and boring . josie davis was hammy . then , amidst all this b - rate acting , there 's jacqueline bisset ! she did n't have a lot to do other than portray bitterness but , even sleepwalking through that , she was miles ahead of the others.

still , forlani remains one of the most breathtaking women in movies and i was not disappointed in that capacity here . i believe forlani can be more than eye - candy but , until she turns in a good performance in a good movie , she continues to excel at that . and , i 'll continue to faithfully watch everything she participates in . fandom is fun that way.

this movie though , carolina moon , was pretty bad . in addition to the bad acting ( fake southern accents are really distracting ) the direction was pedestrian . it was n't horrible . it was just the boring made - for - tv caliber you 're used to seeing on lifetime.

if you 're a fan of any of the stars you can probably enjoy carolina moon for that reason , as i did . if you 're a fan of the book you might enjoy seeing the story on the screen , albeit in a lackluster form . otherwise , this movie is unremarkable . +1 absolutely fantastic ! whatever i say would n't do this underrated movie the justice it deserves . watch it now ! fantastic ! +1 i saw this movie in the theater when i was 14 and it changed my life . i immediately cut off my hair and began buying all of the records of the bands in the movie . these were some of the seminal bands of l.a. punk rock caught on film at the peak of their powers . bands like black flag ( pre - rollins ) , circle jerks , fear , x , and the germs have few equals in the history of punk music . i ca n't believe this film has never been put out on video or dvd . great movie for fans of punk rock . +0 without a doubt , the biggest waste of film of the year . this movie is poorly structured , sadistic , cruel and filled with unlikable characters . on top of that , and maybe the worst crime , it 's uninteresting and vastly predictable . as soon as bill pullman 's character doodled on the photo changing the word from " evidence " to " violence , " i had the entire plot figured out . there are no surprises and there is no compelling reason to watch this trash . the only redeeming feature for me is that i saw this thing for free on my hdnet cable and did n't waste any money . i would truly be angry if i had paid to see it in a theatre.

anyone that labels this thing a thriller really needs to get out more . an awful , awful film in every way that matters . +0 watching this film made me wonder , just why was universal putting out films like this ? they had a wonderful string of films with all the classic horror films . the dawning of the atomic age brought on an onslaught of giant creature films . spiders , ants , praying mantis ' . with the deadly mantis , we have a giant praying mantis flying around the arctic , scaring eskimos , and being hounded by the armed forces . the bug reaches a tunnel in new york where the soldiers eventually destroy it . of course , this is all made much more watchable by viewing it on mst . who thought it was a good idea to start the film out by showing a giant map ? +1 i saw this movie with my mother , and i loved it ! it was such a sweet story , ( not to mention funny because of the supporting cast ! ) they never make movies like this ... ever ! my favorite part is when grace(minnie driver ) finds out about her boyfriend 's wife 's death , and that she has the deceased wife 's heart and she screams , " what was god thinking ? " i do believe everyone(no matter who you believe in ) has thoughts like that once in awhile . but while it 's very sappy , it just might make you believe in true love and destiny for once and for all.(sigh)

the comedic timing between bonnie hunt and jim belushi will just make you crack up(especially in the aforementioned scene , it 's terrible , and yet so funny ! ) . they make a good pair , and i hope to see them again in something soon . 10/10 stars +1 the whole world is falling prey to a lethal disease , and rain never stops pouring down : nevertheless , in this atmosphere of nightmare , a man and a woman discover that they are neighbors , thanks to a hole in the floor of the man 's apartment . they fall in love : at least , all would not have been lost . although this wonderful film expresses the loneliness and the weakness of human being , there is also some room for hope , in the shiny singing scenes . +1 every episode i saw when i was an innocent child was stupid . there were some funny looking puppets called " the mitts " who would always discuss childhood things . they would play this song before " the mitts " part of the show that goes like this " let 's join the mitts ... " there was a groucho marx puppet that told jokes . before the session , this man would sing " hot fudge ! right on ! " there was a green puppet with teeth that was called seymore . we would always see more seymore . he would crack jokes and sing every episode . there was always a moral in every episode . one episode , a man sang " liars are losers ! " another episode he was singing about sharing and caring . seymore said tell me about those two little girls " sharon and karen . " the hot fudge holey moley part has this man doing weird stuff and they played weird music . +1 i loved this movie the first time i saw it . it gives such detail of what executives involved in the news industry will do just to get a story on the air : notably jane craig rushing kenny to finish editing the piece to get it off , and then joan cusack struggling to get it in , and william hurt , who according to jane commits an incredible breach of ethics , fakes his tears during his date rape interview , a flaw that is pointed out by aaron . another high point is when tom uses jane for his own benefits , and then turns around and sleeps with jennifer . the script is brilliant , and the directing is almost as good . all three main actors were great in the portrayals of their characters , especially holly hunter , and albert brooks , whom is the funniest in the film . william hurt is also very good . this deserved at least three oscars , best actress(holly hunter ) , best supporting actor ( albert brooks ) , and best picture . i liked the last parts of the film where it shows them reuniting 7 years later.

8/10 +0 sometimes , things should just not be made . and while the set - up seemed good enough , it proceeds to only make the audience gasp in horror . but the problem is , its not another saw film . its just so bad you wish you were receiving punishment from jason voorhees.

i lost track of how many sports movies and spoofs it incorporated into the film . and generally , it flopped in its attempts . true , telling his team they should fail every subject to be true players was somewhat funny at first , but that grew tiring to watch . that and the joke about " radio " and " ipod".

overall , i ca n't stand to watch this film again . even trantasia is worth more than this . " d- " +1 the man with a golden arm was one of a trio of great films around that same time that dealt with drug addiction . the other two were monkey on my back and a hatful of rain . but i think of the three this one is the best.

maybe if otto preminger had shot the thing in the real chicago instead of those obvious studio sets the film might have been better yet . who knows , maybe preminger could n't get enough money to pay for the location . it 's the only flaw i find in the film.

frank sinatra is a heroin addicted card dealer who was busted for covering for his boss robert strauss when the game was raided . he took the cure while in jail and wants a new life as a jazz drummer . but a whole lot of people are conspiring against him.

first bob strauss who wants him back dealing , especially because a couple of heavyweight gamblers are in town . he uses a few underhanded methods to get sinatra 's services back . secondly darren mcgavin is the local dope dealer who wants sinatra good and hooked as a customer again . and finally eleanor parker his clinging wife who 's working a con game to beat all , just to keep him around.

frank sinatra got a nomination for best actor for this film , but lost to ernest borgnine in marty . sinatra might have won for this one if he had n't won for from here to eternity in the supporting actor category a few years back and that marty was such an acclaimed film in that year . his scenes going through withdrawal locked up in kim novak 's apartment will leave you shaken.

eleanor parker does not get enough credit for her role . she 's really something as the crazy scheming wife who wants sinatra tied to her no matter what the cost . if she had not been nominated that same year for interrupted melody , she might have been nominated for this . 1955 marked the high point of her career . < br />
darren mcgavin got his first real notice as the very serpentine drug peddler . his performance is guaranteed to make your flesh crawl.

elmer bernstein contributed a great jazz score to accentuate the general dinginess of the bleak chicago neighborhood the characters live in . not a place you 'd want to bring up your family . +0 i am a big fan of deepa mehta 's work , especially fire and earth 1947 . unfortunately , this movie of hers lacks _ all _ that is needed for a good film.

the movie attempts to showcase the plight of the widows in india in the early 20th century and the new wave of ideas of their rehabilitation around the same time . shown with a child widow as a central character , although the plot too banal from an indian standpoint , it could still have been a very powerful movie . alas ! the movie lacked both the sensitivity of fire and the intensity of emotion in earth 1947.

even if one assumes that the story is a given , although there are hundreds of things i would have liked different in that as well , the movie making is especially unfortunate . everything is said . everything is shown straight . absence of sensitive implied sentences . absence of things left unsaid . i just could n't believe that this was a deepa mehta film.

there were some very standard hindi movie characters - like an old widow with her own vested interests , or a father who has double standards of the highest quality . can one not write a script without having these old - style standard indian movie characters?

many people acclaimed deepa for making a movie and proving a point against hindu fundamentalists . well , i agree that she took a bold step , but should one not worry about the quality of movie , or is it being a controversial one an end in itself ? its obvious , that if you start with a story as in water , you will end up feeling the pain of the widows in consideration --- it does n't take an accomplished director to achieve that . and the movie had nothing more than that ! ! so where is deepa 's contribution to the film?

and talk about acting etc . - pathetic ! ! ! lisa ray has a pretty face , an extremely pretty face - but that s where it ends . she ca n't speak hindi ; she ca n't emote . john abraham is no better . most widows seem unnatural . the saving grace are seema biswas and the young girl . they are fabulous.

and this was a period film - but the hindi dialogues suck big time . even there utterance is also as unnatural as it gets . no rustic accents ! ! ! no local slangs . no nothing . the only thing right was probably the shooting locales . i thought that the set of the vidhwa - ashram was reasonably real . the overall blue tinge in the whole movie is also apt.

but all and all , do n't watch this movie . you _ wo n't _ get anything . there is nothing in the story , or direction . if you have to watch it watch it for the little girl 's acting . +1 i saw this on television more years ago than i can remember , but never forgot the performance of sammy davis , jr. i just by chance thought to look for it on video . this rendition of porgy and bess is a treasure . i would love to see it again and introduce my son to it as well . i just ca n't imagine why it is not heralded as one of the greatest performances sammy davis , jr. every gave . whoever is responsible for not bringing this to audiences should be ashamed of his / her ignorance . i will continue to look for it though . maybe the execs responsible for such things will come to realize the forgotten work of so many african american actors . +1 it is always difficult to bring a 450 pages book down to a three hours film . i read the book before , and i found the bbc production dealing with this difficulty in the best way possible . the qualities of the book have n't been lost : the dense and lively depiction of a fingersmith patchwork family in london in the 1860s , the cold and obscene cruelty in which maud is brought up , the characterization of different social groups by different ways of speaking , the unexpected and surprising twists of the story , the way the film makes the spectators look different at the same scenes when they are told first from sue 's point of view then from maud 's one . the main actors do very good , and especially the growing love between the two women is convincingly developed , with a first culmination in a very tender love scene between the two and finally forgiving all the evil they were ready to do and did to each other , because they still love each other.

for each of her books the author , sarah waters , has thoroughly investigated what life was like in british 19th century . while in tipping the velvet it was the world of the vaudeville theaters and the beginning of social movements , in affinity the dreadful reality of women penitentiaries and the fashionable evocation of spirits , in fingersmith she depicts the public ceremony of hanging people in london and the inhuman treatment of persons supposed or declared disturbed in asylums based on the reading of sources and scientific research . this is very well transferred to the film so that the corresponding scenes show a high grade of historic truth . i highly recommend this film production because it offers three hours of colorful victorian atmosphere , vivid emotions , and suspense . +0 i could n't even sit through the whole thing ! this movie was a piece of crap ! i had more fun watching " do nt ' tell mom the babysitter 's dead " ! it was just too painful to watch . say , besides " austin powers " , has tom arnold ever been in a hit movie ? +1 just went on youtube and finally watched this oscar - nominated animated short directed by richard condie . i had previously watched his funny getting started there . in this one , a couple are playing scrabble . the wife keeps shaking her eyes while her husband has nothing but e 's on his side . the wife leaves for a while to vacuum her bed and bathtub ( ! ) before catching her husband looking at her side . briefly before this , the husband catches a tv show called " sawing for teens " with the stars sawing something and the husband getting his own saw . that program gets interrupted by a special report of a nuclear war happening ( the newsman is a skeleton here ) as everyone panics outside though the husband fell asleep during this time and thinks a parade is going on as he and his wife continue arguing about the game ... there 's plenty of other bizarre things going on before the touching ending comes on . quite hilarious and well worth seeing for any animation buff out there . ca n't wait to see any more animated shorts from mr. condie ... +1 i really enjoyed this film , it definitely keeps you on the edge of your seat . it was very well directed . i think it was important that they showed the other couple 's life as well as terry and bobbys and show them as people with emotions . as this film needed to show bobby as a cold and vindictive person.

i agree with another review it was sick love , not true love . he did n't need to go to great lengths as murder to give his wife a baby . he should have been honest with her and told her that he was sterile and decide to adopt a baby together . some reviews say that she was naive , i think she was when it came to the adoption , however best actors all round . great movie to watch ! ! +1 where to begin , i like the scary snow - monster named jack frost . the whole concept works well for me , we thought he 'd be back and he was . changing the local to a tropical resort works . seeing old friends and meeting new characters . scott macdonald does a great job as jack frost , you can tell when an actor has fun playing a villain , you can see it or in this case hear it in the performance . yup , jack frost 2 is a welcomed sequel that is better then the first . i do have one complaint , the little jacks or the jacklings as i call them . they looked like hand puppets . i think they could have done a better job with the jacklings , the mouth could have opened wider , but the cgi was good and as a whole the whole movie is worth watching over and over again . if you liked jack frost , then you will like this sequel . no questions or debate , 9 big stars . +1 this movie was very funny with just a bit of gore . it is about two grave robber that are going about business as usual when they discover that there is a different clientèle they can serve . this changes the direction of the corpses they collect . the movie is told by the younger of the two as he is explaining the business to a priest before he is sent to be beheaded . his partner had already been beheaded . the priest is required to take down the last confession and it takes the form of a story . there is some animation thrown in which gives it a tales from the crypt feel . in the story we meet another group of grave robbers that everyone fears , but at one point , the younger of the two up for execution is offered a job , so this calms some of the animosity between the groups . when a woman joins the two men , she oversteps her boundaries and gets them in trouble with the feared grave robbers . the story leads up to the meeting of the two groups , which led to the arrest of the man that is confessing and the man that has already lost his head . +0 usually when i do n't see a show on an original run , i find it later on cable and realize it 's a gem . the " gimore girls " is one of those rare exceptions . i 'm glad i missed it.

i truly despise shows that fill every minute of the actors space with rambling , stupid , boring banter . this is one hour of just that . the mother , lorelei , made me wonder if she is bipolar and off her lithium . she never stopped talking ; every minute , every second , talking to every person she interacted with . worse yet , her speech is childish and soooo , like , valley girl . she talked about guys , her hair , her mother , her clothes . like , what 's the sitch ? ? ( for situation ) . i 've watched this show three times and still do n't get the point of this series . it 's not a comedy , it 's not a drama , it has no point except to make three generations of females in one family look like the " girls " from planet mars . the males by comparison are smart and make the show somewhat watchable . if lorelei ever existed and attempted to latch onto me with conversation , i 'd have to mace her to get rid of her . she obviously does n't know how to take a subtle hint to stop talking and start listening to someone else . she also does n't know how to really notice the existence of others.

in one show lorelei comes home from a date close to 10 pm . she got the date after pursuing a guy she met at an auction . she goes into her daughter 's room where the daughter asks how it went . she dithers on about how boring the guy was . her date somehow got a few words in edgewise . lorelei complained about how the man did n't stop talking ( choke ) . hopefully the date learned how fortunate he was.

one other person here commented on how the mother acts like a teen and the daughter is the adult personality . lorelei even dresses like her kid . this obviously 40-something mom dresses and looks like she hit the mall with her high school pals in tow.

i thought that this show should have been followed by " just shoot me , " because that 's exactly how i felt . +1 it was libby talking to desmond in the flashback , and if anyone is confused about her past ( like how did she end up in the same hospital hurley was in ) then you should know that despited libby dying in season 2 , the character will be explored more in season 3 and we will get answers to questions surrounding her.

btw , great episode . it had a really great cliffhanger and some interesting questions ... like what happened to eko and lock and what about the four toe statue?

i can not wait till season 3 , lost just rules ! ! ! i hope all the unanswered questions will be answered . i loved how they explained why the plane actually crashed . desmond did it when he did not manage to type in the numbers in time . 4 8 15 16 23 42 +0 a couple of men are ship - wrecked on a remote island . they are then captured by an insane count who lives there with a small group of servants ; while in the castle dungeon lives the count 's unfortunate leper wife.

the dungeon of harrow is pretty much a hack job of a movie . the amateur actors all sleepwalk through the film while an annoyingly insistent score continually plays in the background . the various bits of action are all filmed in an incredibly unenergetic way ; in fact the film in general is completely lethargic . it just seems to drag on and on . and even though the ending is n't too bad you will be hard - pressed to care by that point . as an example of 60 's gothic horror , this is strictly a bargain basement example . i sadly ca n't recommend this one really . +1 putney swope is the story of a token black man on the board of directors of a large advertising firm who is accidentally voted chairman of the board when the owner of the firm keels over while trying to stutter out an idea that he was apparently quite excited about . putney , of course , takes his new role to heart and fires most everyone in the agency , hires a new crew ( all black except for a token white guy ) and proceeds to crank out the most offensive and non - pc commercials one could ever ask for . now it 's a rather motley crew he has and despite that they somehow manage to be successful while raking in the cash . i rather like the scene where potential advertisers are being relieved of bags of cash and then told to " get out " . and their commercials will follow later , like them or not . the story is good but of course the highlight here is the nasty commercials themselves , especially the one for " face off " acne cream . this is rather dated , but still a fun movie , and full of hilarious moments . robert downey sr . was working for an ad agency doing experimental ads at the time and i guess this was his middle finger to madison avenue agencies . very good and pretty damned funny . 8 out of 10 . +1 i ca n't imagine why it has n't been theatrically released yet . it 's got a great ensemble cast , with sutherland , lane , and especially chris evans doing spectacular work . wake up , studio execs!

the story is based upon the experiences of the author / screenwriter , growing up as the " poor kid " in an extremely affluent community , where class is everything , and makes a difference in every aspect of life , from clothing to justice.

during the film 's q&a , the author was asked about his experiences , and particularly what we do n't know about the ultra - rich . he said they are n't stupid , they 're very smart ( as opposed to how they may portray themselves ) , they 've got plans , and they are a threat!

in many ways , this film is extremely timely . +0 pretty.

pretty actresses and actors . pretty bad script . pretty frequent " let 's strip to our undies " scenes . pretty fair f / x. pretty jarring location decisions ( the college dorm room looks like a high - end hotel room - probably because it was shot at a hotel ) . pretty bland storyline . pretty awful dialog . pretty locations . pretty annoying editing , unless you like the music video flash - cut style.

this one is n't a guilty pleasure - this is more an embarrassing one . if you must watch this , pick a good dance / techno album and turn the sound off on the movie - you 'll see the pretty people in their pretty black undies , and probably follow the story just fine.

the cast may be able to act - i doubt that anyone could look skilled given the lines / plot that they had to deal with . +1 everyone who worked on this film did an amazing job . this is honestly one of the best lesbian films i 've seen in a long time . the acting , writing , cinematography , music , visuals , everything was top notch . as an avid fan of the genre ( both lesbian films and gymnastics ) , i was so unbelievably pleased by this film . it truly gave me so much more than i expected across the board . hearing the q&a with the cast and crew was great , the lead actress has so much positive energy and is so humble and gracious , it 's a pleasure to see people who can be talented and not lose sight of what 's really important . and the writer did a hell of a job , as well as directing and the editing was awesome . thanks so much for making a great film ! thanks also for the line about ' if you 're going to slap a label on yourself , it would be bisexual ' . i 'm so tired of movies where characters who have a relationship with both sexes get passed off as gay or straight , it 's wonderful to see bisexuals getting recognition for existing and being part of the gay community , and it was nice that labels were n't even necessary at all in this film . what an ending ! just when i thought it could n't give me more , it did . beautiful work and my applauds to all . i will spread the word , this is definitely a film not to be missed ! +0 what an atrocity . i am not one to demand total verisimilitude from a movie , but the plot and screenplay of " killing zoe " are so artless that i found myself wincing through the entire ( mercifully short ) ninety minutes of the film.

readers of these reviews will by now have figured out the plot : zoe , a call girl who falls in love with american safecracker zed , is also an employee at the bank that zed will help rob in a high - stakes bastille day heist.

the film strains one 's credibility from the get - go . zed and zoe 's night of magic is highly prosaic , and zoe 's claims to have experienced the orgasm of a lifetime would seem to reflect the screenwriter 's lingering teenage fantasies more than any actual on - screen chemistry . zed 's complete indifference when his friend eric throws zoe out of the hotel room hardly sets the stage for their later strong attachment.

in act two , eric 's band of bohemians -- drug - addled losers leading a marginal life of petty crime -- prepare for their big heist with a night on the town . here roger avary 's main goal seems to be to prove that he knows something about drugs . a secondary thread involves convincing us ( by endless repetition ) that eric is really , really glad to see his old friend zed again . really glad . eric 's devil - may - care , over - the - top flamboyance and affection for zed is n't even remotely believable -- check out , for example , his phony bemusement at discovering a dead cat in his apartment building . development of the characters who will accompany us through the rest of the film is an afterthought.

the heist is a disaster -- understandable , since the plan is laughable and the criminals are complete amateurs . this is where avary continues to pay tribute to his idol quentin tarantino by showing that he can be more violent than violent . in reality , though , he 's just more boring than boring . to build up the excitement , there is an extra security guard hidden inside the main safe . this was boring in video games , and it 's boring now.

zoe is taken hostage during the heist but despite our expectation that she 'll play a pivotal role , she just sits pretty . or more precisely , avary fails to do anything with her . in literally the last five minutes she springs to life , breaks the hostage situation and saves the grateful , but still dazed zed from suffering any consequences of his crime . why she does n't mind his involvement in the crime -- or why she gives a damn about him at all -- is impossible to tell . after all , she 's had no chance to see that he 's any more decent than the rest of the gang.

throughout , the dialogue is stilted and phony . much of it is in french . as a native speaker , i can certify that it does n't ring even remotely true . eric 's sugary - sweet discourse , rapidly alternating with tough - guy boasting , is meant to be at turns charming and scary , but is instead just grating . meanwhile his scaredy - cat accomplices are more scooby - doo than thomas crown . when eric is gunned down in a ludicrous example of excessive force , we can all breathe a sigh of relief : like the bank hostages , we will soon be freed from this miserable ordeal . +1 first i got ta say that this film is way less pretentious than the da vinci code . sure , you have the religion vs science problem but it does n't try to make a big statement about it . its basically an action thriller that moves from one scene to another very well . one scene particularly ( that involves fire ) i found extremely well done . < br />
second , the changes from book to film . although when i was following the development of the film i complained about the change of some characters and the complete removal of others , i got ta admit i was wrong . it was refreshing that the film did n't follow the book in exactly the same way like it was done in da vinci . if you are a purist of the book some of them may upset you though . however the big twist is still there so do n't worry about that . finally i 'm glad they removed some silly sub - plots and did n't even try to hint at the possibility of langdon and vittoria getting together . < br />
the performances are really good , but nothing out of the ordinary . that 's okay for a film like this . < br />
i'd give it a 9/10 , mainly because it delivers what it promises , entertainment , pure entertainment +1 in all this dogma fuzz , please note that this is the danish masterpiece of the 20th century . the humour , the fate , the sorrow is so clean - so simple - so touching.

this movie is a masterpiece . go see it . there 's nothing more to say . +0 cybrog 2:glass shadow stars elias koteas as colton hicks ( rhymes with kicks ! ) a karate instructor who helps a cash ( jolie ) escape from pinwheel , her creators who look to detonate her and destroy a rival company . along the way billy drago and karen shepherd show up to displace the duo , while jack palance is there to deliver guidance to the duo on the run . one of the things that is quite shocking about the cyborg franchise , is how the series has managed to have quite prolific and off beat actors in the cast . the original had jean - claude van damme and dayle haddon ( do n't know her ? well she was in a bunch of 70 's pornos ) this one has jack palance , elias koteas , billy drago and angelina jolie . the third one has william katt , zach galligan and malcom mcdowell . ( okay so , cyborg 3 's cast is n't that impressive . ) i 've never seen cyborg 3 , but i did see this on sci - fi channel and must admit i was n't impressed . actually strike that , cyborg 2 is an often lovely looking movie , it 's shot with excellent style and the visual detail make this easy on the eye . however cyborg 1 was the same way , indeed the movie was directed with a certain amount of style , slow motion and music that made it all easy on the eye . unfortunately like the first , this one does n't have any new ideas or anything resembling a plot or texture . most of the ideas are taken from blade runner and max headroom , so for various reasons the movie does n't have much to offer beyond it 's look . another aspect is the terrible acting . karen shepherd and billy drago are absolutely terrible and angelina jolie is n't much better . elias koteas and jack palance come off fine but seriously palance is playing a cyborg warrior and koteas is a karate instructor . i guess on the positive side you ca n't accuse michael schroeder of not being ambitious with casting . still the movie is dull and i for one lost interest in the story fifteen minutes in . also why did they tie it in with cyborg anyway ? it has nothing to do with it 's predecessor , which this manages to be worse than.

* out of 4-(bad ) +1 faqrscape is truly one of those shows that just has it all , great acting , great cast , great writing , sets , chemistry , muppets ... it 's got it all and then some , except a home . this fantastic series it 's seem has it all except and ending . tptb seem to think this is a series that is consecutive single set shows , when anyone who watches know this is an ongoing , one epic , love story , that has an end that must been seen . if you have never watched farscape do youself a favor and check it out on dvd when the season 1 will be released in october .... and season 2 is the best there is ! watch the reruns on the scifi channel to catch up and then the new season starts in january through march when most shows are going in to hiatis and be sure to watch . if all goes well we will get our ending ! +0 makes " invasion usa " look like " apocalypse now " . this one can only be recommended to us skinheads , john birch supporters or militia members . the message is very simple : let 's shoot them all - gooks , commies , latinos , everything that is n't american.

besides , this is badly acted , badly scripted , badly interpreted , incredibly stupid but no fun at all . this movie could be used as a toorture device by cia torturers . oops , sorry , there ca n't be any us torturers because they are the good +1 " l'auberge espagnole " collected the audience wherever it was shown . it gathered audience awards on many film festivals all over the world . and it is not strange . we have the ability to watch a cheerful and an astonishing piece of art . and it is wise by the way . " l'auberge espagnole " is a very funny comedy about youth and growing up . but most of all it is about the lights and shadows of living in the european union.

the main character of the film is a french student of economy xavier . for his future carrier his is sent for one year of studying to barcelona . in spain it turns out that the lectures are being given in catalonian language . that probably does n't help the increasement of knowledge . but it helps in tightening the relationships inside the group of foreign exchange students . especially if they rent a big flat together . there are 3 girls : english , belgian and spanish , as well as three boys : german , danish and italian . our french guy will also get there . a year is a very long time . long enough to get close and make friends . and get to know some european stereotypes while trying to break them apart.

klapisch treats this special case of a process of uniting europe with humor and without pecky didactism . he comes out of the idea that young people are everywhere just the same . they like jokes . they like to make irresponsible relationships . but they do n't neglect their aspirations . the most interesting is the sum of experience of this little community . they live together in the fire of everyday tasks fighting with the surrounding reality . they are full of unusual ideas for life . young europeans come back to their countries to take up a life of an adult on their own . they are europe 's hope to fight the many problems of the union . for example , the terrifying administration system . in the end they proof that not only can they communicate and make friends despite the many differences . but they also now how to live the full of life . and they wo n't allow taking that full of life away from them . +0 this is a documentary about homeless women . it was interesting in the sense that this focused on women who are engaged socially - having jobs and lasting friendships - but are in situations where they can not afford housing.

i found some of the women covered to be interesting , but there was little focus or progression in the story . the direction and editing failed to maintain my attention . there were differences in the stories of these women , of course , but the message was essentially the same and could have been told by focusing on any one of them in more depth.

i made it to the end of the movie , but it was a rather boring journey . +1 " love is a many - splendored thing " is set in hong kong in 1949 - 50 , and tells the story of the relationship between mark elliott , a white american journalist , and han suyin , a half - chinese half - european doctor . this story of a mixed - race love affair was quite a daring theme for the fifties , and , as it often did , hollywood tried to soften the blow by casting a white actress as the supposedly non - caucasian woman who falls in love with a white man , something that would be regarded as politically incorrect today but was quite acceptable then .. ( think , for example , of the casting of ava gardner in " show boat " or natalie wood in " west side story " ) the setting of the story in a british colony was also perhaps a way of exploring racial issues in a way that would cause less controversy in america . suyin loses her job in a hong kong hospital because her british superiors take exception to the fact that she is dating a white man , whom she is unable to marry because his estranged wife will not grant him a divorce . as was sometimes the case , european colonialism was made the whipping - boy for some of america 's own failings . imagine the furore that would have been unleashed had a similar film been made about a black or mixed - race woman doctor in a hospital in alabama.

besides racial issues , the film also raises questions of international politics , referring to both the communist seizure of power in china and the outbreak of the korean war . han suyin was a real person and a well - known author of the period ; in reality she tended to support mao 's communist regime , but here she is shown as firmly anti - communist . this is not , however , primarily an " issue " movie about either racialism or politics , but rather a romance , a good example of what would have been known at the time as a " woman 's picture " . such films , although mostly made by male directors , were mostly aimed at female audiences . they dealt with love and romance- often unhappy romance- from the woman 's point of view , and had a strong female character in the leading role . the genre often provided roles for actresses older than the heroines of standard romances . earlier examples were normally in monochrome , but by the fifties they generally , as here , used lush , sumptuous colour.

although a chinese or eurasian actress would have been more convincing in the role , jennifer jones , does a very good job as suyin . i found william holden , as mark , rather uncharismatic , but this does not matter much as suyin is very much the dominant figure . she is screen much more than mark , and the film examines her family and professional life much more than it does his . although jennifer was still strikingly beautiful , she was in her mid - thirties , rather older than most romantic heroines of films of this period . holden was about the same age , unusually for the fifties when " boy - meets - girl " often meant " older man meets girl".

the film is not particularly profound , but is well - made with some attractive photography , particularly of hong kong itself , reflecting the growing trend in the fifties for shooting on location rather than on studio sets . seldom can hong kong have looked so beautiful ; the view from a hill overlooking the city takes on a special meaning , as this is where suyin and mark go for their romantic assignments . the overall mood is one of poignant , doomed romance , a mood heightened by the atmospheric photography and the musical score , including one of the most memorable movie themes ever written . 7/10 +1 this was the best movie ever has seen on " germen 's cine club " ( buenos aires ) this movie is a realistic critic of the society of the past and the next century . it cause a very good impression to all the partners of " germen 's cine club " . i recommend this movie to all the fans of troma and to all the people who like the good movies , not the commercial movies . +1 on many levels it 's very good . in fact , considering that this was a low - budget british indie by a first time feature - director with a largely neophyte cast , it 's a magnificent achievement . i do n't know how much it cost . the figure of £ 8,000 was bandied about in publicity but you never know how reliable a figure like that is . the point is that this film looks like it cost a couple of million quid and it clearly cost a tiny fraction of that great special effects , terrific production design , effective props and costumes , excellent photography , good acting and direction , an impressive score and an absolutely stunning sound mix . even having said that , much of the script was great . the characters were clearly identified and all had something to do . this is a movie about ten men all dressed roughly the same in one location and it would be easy for them to be nameless , faceless blanks but these were ten characters - mostly that was done through the dialogue and the way they reacted to things . throughout the middle act , when the plot was developing , the script told the story well and showed how it affected the characters . if the whole film was like the second act , it would be stunning.

before the ship blows up , twelve people make it to individual escape pods or ' e - pods ' which blast away from the ship . they 're not much more than automatic metal coffins and the poor sods inside are trapped , cramped and have no real idea where they 're going - but that makes sense . i like the e - pods - they 're an excellent idea done very well and make more sense than a nice , roomy escape capsule . i also like the way that we are specifically told , later , that they are designed for ship - to - ship escape but can just about make planetfall in an emergency - because , let 's face it , these guys were bloody lucky that their ship was blown up so close to a planet . that said , it does n't look to me like there are 116 unused e - pods still on the freighter and you have to wonder how the prisoner is able to get into an e - pod - but in he gets . ( and it has just occurred to me : should n't the captain have gone down with his ship rather than being the first guy out of there ? ) anyway , the e - pods all land on a barren planet with nothing but sand and sparse vegetation - or at least on a sandy , sparsely vegetated part of the planet which may have icy wastes and lush jungles elsewhere . nah , it 's a planet in a sci - fi movie - it will be exactly the same all over . we have to accept that all the e - pods come down within a few miles of each other so that the ten survivors are able to meet up , firing flares into the sky to locate each other.

the captain , a muscular mountain of a man who could have a pretty good career in action flicks if he gets the right agent , decides that they should try and contact ' captain behan ' with whom they were intending to rendezvous . but they can not do this from the planet , they need to get into orbit . the engineer says that if they combine the power units from two e - pods they can probably give one of them enough juice to lift itself on anti - grav doodads high enough to blast above the atmosphere . it can all be done on automatic but it will need a ' pilot ' to send the signal . the captain valiantly volunteers for this but in a commendably sensible move the engineer points out that putting the heaviest man into the somewhat dodgily repaired e - pod is ridiculous and that it needs to be the lightest member of the team . that 's kid . i really liked the way that he now points out that his name is david and the captain starts using it , treating him with dignity and respect . that was good storytelling and good characterisation . +1 this short has all the elements of a great movie . every time i show it to friends ( on dvr ) they love it too . the dialog is so , ' real ' . the acting is superb . while the effects / props were n't as convincing by themselves , taken with everything else in the shot , they are expertly placed / used . the music is so haunting , perfect for this kind of ' moment ' film . people who hold dear their beliefs and thoughts are shaken to their core about what they see in this movie . most go ' that 's it ? ' , but in the end they blossom with new understanding , and leave the movie with one word to describe it:

'beautiful ' . the beauty of the film is also skin deep . i love the fact that there are n't any conflicting views , no other voices , and the voices that you do hear , are agreeing with each other . no conflict , but at the same time there is one . and the ending made me love it more ! harsh reality sometimes is more film worthy than any plot device , or twist . < br />
(wasn't joshua leonard the guy in blair witch project ? ) :) movie by a fictitious dead guy .. great ! +0 this movie was definitely on the boring side . the acting was decent and the film looks pretty nice , the soundtrack is definitely for fans of kenny g and michael bolton . speaking of the soundtrack , i found it very ironic that a film about telling the truth and not stealing decided to use a song in it 's titles that was a blatant ripoff of paul simon 's " you can call me al " - except that they do n't acknowledge it at all . is n't there something a little hypocritical there ? the scene that the main kid was in where he was mimicking a game show host was my favorite . 10 lines ? i have to write ten lines about this movie to be included ? what a ripoff , i do n't think it 's too fair to force people to write more than they would just to get it included ! +0 if there was justice in the cinematic universe , director lewis schoenbrun would never be allowed to set foot on a movie set again . it would seem inconceivable that anyone who spent two full decades in an editing room , where ls started his movie career , could be so utterly devoid of any sense of pacing or dramatic staging , but this film is damning evidence.

as bad as it is , it is fascinatingly so . from the opening scene , where a nurse is clad in a costume appropriate only for a porno film or a skit on a mexican variety show , the viewer is compelled to see just how low it can go . the answer is n't far away , as in the next scene we move to a funeral parlor , where the next stunning fashion statement comes in a sexy off - the - shoulders black dress worn by one of the mourners.

aggressively inappropriate costuming is n't the film 's only flaw . the dialog is a treat for connoisseurs of bad writing . " you turn my tears into wine , " is a sample gem . the actor deserves an oscar for delivering that one with a straight face.

the director reinforces every cheeseball scene with what is possibly the schmaltziest soundtrack score ever recorded , which veers from embarrassingly maudlin in the dialog scenes to cheesy groovebox wannabe rocknroll in transitional scenes.

the script introduces characters with no rhyme or reason and story beats are doled out as if with a broken ladle.

let 's not forget this is a " horror " film , though . our characters find themselves in a forest wherein lurks dr. chopper and his two " scary " henchwomen , who are supposed to be some kind of frankencreatures but look exactly like valley girls with fake blood dabbed beneath their supercut shags . i 've honestly seen scarier make - up on eight - year - olds out trick - or - treating on halloween.

and again we get a whiff of the costume designer 's malodorous handiwork , as valley ghoul one prances around in a pseudo - victorian polyblend smock while her buddy wears a nondescript ensemble that might have been almost fashionable in less hip corners of the 1980s.

dr . chopper makes the big fashion statement though , looking like a crisco cowboy who got lost in the woods on his big black harley , clad from head to toe in zippered black s&m leather.

if this sounds intriguing , by all means check it out . there is plenty of side - splitting and belabored dialog ( like the precious " elephant 's graveyard " scene or the " intellectual " discourse on ginsburg).

to be fair , the cinematography is good , considering what was put before the camera , and the actors strive ( with wildly extreme results ) to make something from a scrap heap of clichés and inanities . you do have to wonder if they were really really stupid or just blindly desperate , not to walk off the set after catching one glimpse of the ridiculous - looking villains with their 99 cent store weapons . +0 generally speaking , i 'm a an admirer of jess franco 's film - making but , for some of this movies , i really have difficulties understanding the motivation behind them or even their reason of existence . like this sick puppy , for example . " sadomania " has absolutely no cinematic value , it 's poorly made without any sort of plot and featuring some of the most ill - natured sleaze footage ever captured on film . this is another filthy women - in - prison film where rape , lesbian - action and violent torture games are daily routine . the guards are crazier than the prisoners and the institution is protected by an impotent governor who only gets sexually aroused when he spots a girl having sex with a dog ( ! ) . the girls are all very beautiful and naked throughout the entire film , yet you ca n't really enjoy this sight with all the perversion going on . the dubious highlights include a barbaric hunting game ( you can guess what he prey is ) , a duel - to - death between a guard and a prisoner and the image of a poor girl having a needle injected all the way through her nipple . auch ! avoid this sick mess and you 'll save yourself the trouble of taking two baths in order to wash the filth off . +1 i can understand why others reacted rather unpleasantly towards the climax yielding a twist that really is hard to take seriously . i think , though , that the build - up to it works rather well . the music , quite menacing and spine - tingling , really provides a spooky aura matching the unforgiving sound of a constant ringing telephone that is driving struggling english actress , joan matlin(jean marsh)bonkers . she 's borrowing a pal 's nice apartment while attempting to jump - start her career in new york city( .. the city buildings outside the window look about as realistic as david letterman's)and is unceremoniously welcome by a noisy telephone which rings quite a bit , followed by loud slams against the wall . searching for answers regarding the one responsible for such disregard towards her sanity , joan discovers that no one rents that room , and that a former tenant had in fact strangled herself . without help from the manager , joan will decide to find out for herself who is causing her such anguish . joan discovers the room empty and the phone with a particular female voice which will haunt her.

the episode , i think , is a tour - de - force for jean marsh who is a one woman show . she 's the only actress visible and we follow her through the crisis which slowly erodes her , the phone and the banging from that other room causing her much distress which grows into fear . instead of leaving , joan remains , so shaken by the noise and to the breaking point where she just wishes for the phone( .. or whoever is ringing)to stop . the episode provides a possible answer as to who is plaguing joan and why . a character named beth comes into the story rather late as joan struggles to find out whose female voice it was across the other line who knew her name on that dreaded phone she discovers in the room across from hers . the fate of beth might just tell the viewer why joan is being traumatized . i think this episode is an exercise in spooks instead of credibility;some did n't particularly like it , but i certainly did . i will admit that the phone , as a physical menace " crawling " towards joan is hard to take seriously , not to mention it 's attack on her , but i thought the intense opening twenty minutes before this were suitably chilling enough to make up for it . +1 this is a film by oshima , the director of the notorious " in the realm of the senses " , a film so sexually brazed and unabashedly controversial it was banned for a while . this film takes place initially in 1895 in japan and stars the very pretty keziko yoshiyuki as seki , the wife of a rickshaw driver who falls for a much younger man who woos her in kind . that man , toyoji , comes to her as she was sleeping and seduces her , though she soon is rather willing to be seduced . soon they are having an affair and plot to kill seki 's husband , to be together forever . they do , and throw him down a well . however , they did n't count on the ghost of the dead husband haunting seki and others in the village ! this film is visually very stunning , the use of shadows highlighting this tale of murder for passion . ms. yoshiyuki ( who is still active as an actress ) is especially very good in her role . its sexual at times , but not like " in the realm of the senses " . some of what ensues is up to our imagination . i found this film to have a consistency of mood that makes it very watchable . a little creepy but that goes with the territory . i 'd recommend this . +1 i got a chance to see this movie at an early screening in brea and i have been crazy for it ever since . the film is based on shakespeare 's twelfth night which i have read and loved and seen on stage a few times so i certainly liked the references . but whether you like shakespeare or not it wo n't matter - the movie stands on it 's on . it is super funny , witty and charming . amanda bynes is hilarious and so was david cross . actually the whole cast is great - i just happen to be a huge david cross fanatic . the cast is hot and the soundtrack kicks lots of cool bands and a few i had n't heard before but i know they have a cd coming out so i will definitely buy it . everyone in our audience laughed from start to finish - all age groups . ! ! ! ! +1 29 sept 1990 marked a small but important milestone in my appreciation of horror flicks . this was the date that bbc1 broadcast ( for the only time i 'm aware of ) jeff lieberman 's super - creepy 1981 shocker just before dawn , and it made a huge impression on me . nearly twenty years later , i 'm delighted to report that i 've finally got my hands on the two - disc shriek show / media blasters special edition , and it 's just as eerie and unsettling as i remember it , if not more so.

the plot , as is usual for genre flicks ( and this was lieberman 's first film as a ' director for hire ' , though he did at least remove all the religious cult snake - handling mumbo - jumbo from the screenplay ) , is a bit thin - five likable twenty - somethings ( including chris lemmon , son of jack , in a pair of uncomfortably tight white strides ) venture into the dense oregon woodlands to do a spot of camping and to check out a patch of land that 's been bequeathed to one of their number . but just before dawn stands out from a crowd of imitators because lieberman wastes no time in showing us just how deranged things are on this particular patch of mountain , with a complete innocent skewered and a drunk preacher 's truck shoved down a hill and engulfed in flames within minutes of the film beginning . the youngsters come rolling into the picture in a snappy winnebago , blondie 's ' heart of glass ' pounding on the soundtrack , and before you can say " texas chainsaw massacre ! " they 've clobbered an innocent deer with the front bumper and had their first taste of aggro from the heavy - set maniac responsible for the opening catastrophes . forest ranger roy ( george kennedy ) warns them that things are likely to go awry if they go any further , but they go ahead with the trip anyway , refusing to give the sozzled preacher a ride even though he 's understandably scared witless and finally pitching camp miles from anywhere . needless to say , things go downhill from here.

although this film 's not short on bloody horror and well - handled action scenes , the standout moments for me are those where lieberman lets his camera zoom out , long and slow , from apparently innocuous shots of the fun - loving kids larking around in the wilderness , or just lets it settle for a while on the dense , imposing , people - dwarfing woodlands . he makes the oregon exteriors as threatening and as ominous as kubrick made the overlook hotel 's spacious interiors in the shining , and brad fiedel 's score ( discounting the horribly distorted racket that runs over the titles ) stays the right side of intrusive , underscoring the slowly escalating menace with subtlety and flair . there are plenty of surprises along the way , nods to deliverance with the discovery of a backwoods babe and her freaky , disturbing family , and a truly bizarre kill technique deployed shortly before the film 's end . i wo n't spoil it for you . i 've said enough.

quite why this undervalued horror gem fell through the cracks and became a cult item instead of a breakout hit is hard to ascertain , but hopefully it will be rediscovered and appreciated for years to come - it deserves to be . +0 whoever likened this one to raiders of the lost ark certainly knew whereof he spoke . he might , as well , have likened it to some of the adventures of the pulp heroes that followed . " kay hoog " reminds one more than a little of both lamont cranston ( the shadow ) and clark savage ( doc savage ) . ( the shadow , quintessential man of mystery- and the very first " dark knight"- was also thought to be one kent allard . if one were to take savage 's first name first and add to it the kent , you end up with- voila- clark kent . funny , innit ? ) like indiana jones , hoog is n't above pilfering the artifacts of an ancient civilization ( though his thefts are often more blatant and less " charmingly roguish " than jones 's ) . unfortunately , this two - parter is a far cry from subsequent serials ( from any era ) in terms of overall quality . one of the first indications that something is amiss vis a vis the cinematic storytelling is a scene where desperados on horseback , quite literally breathing down his neck , simply watch as hoog escapes their clutches in a hot air balloon . why they do n't bother to shoot down the balloon is just one of the many movie - making mysteries that plague these two films.

the second half of this two - parter is even worse than the first . granted , this was one of the first ever serials and , as such , should be cut a bit of slack- but there are limits , even , to tolerance . ( at one point , the capture of the hero is effected not on screen , but in the narration itself ! talk about cutting corners ... ) fritz lang happens to be one of the greatest filmmakers to ever make films ; unfortunately for those of us who admire most of what he did , the spiders is a bitter pill indeed to swallow ... +1 this film is the most romantic in years . david duchovny is superb . he´ll make you cry , smile and dream . minnie driver and james belushi are very good too . but , david is astonish . don´t miss the opportunity to see this little film and fall in love with bob and grace . run , don´t walk ! +1 this bravo special is one of the most purely entertaining things i 've ever seen on tv . unlike me first & the gimme gimmes ( the worlds foremost punk - supergroup / cover - band ) , the dan band really must be seen to be appreciated.

on paper , the dan band is just a one - joke act- guy sings girly songs and inserts gratuitous profanity into the lyrics . if you listen to their " dan band live " cd , that 's all you 'll get , and it 'll get old quick . ( i only bought it because it had some songs that were n't on the tv special . ) but what 's made dan finnerty a hollywood cult hero is his amazing stage presence . this guy owns his audience for every second he 's onstage . and the backup singers are a large part of the visual punchline as well . as for the actual band- they stay out of sight for the most part , but are certainly much more energetic and enthusiastic than your typical lounge - act backing band . hopefully , a dvd version will be released soon- there were almost certainly some songs cut and although the heavy censoring adds a bit of unintentional humor , it also removes the intentional humor.

if there is any sense in the world , the vegas casino owners will soon be fighting over who can build dan his own showroom faster.

"re-------member my name ... fame ! " +0 acolytes presents an interesting mix of original concepts in " screaming teen " cliché horror with a more thriller - like pacing . in some ways acolytes is very successful , but in many other ways the film fails miserably.

overall acolytes avoided the typical archetypes of the naivety and innocence of youth of endless horror films in the like of cabin fever , texas chainsaw massacre , and countless other films where unsuspecting and relatively naive and innocent teenagers , have sex , run around screaming and one - by - one are plucked off by some sort of monster . instead this innocence is replaced with pride , retaliation , and arrogance . the characters had several opportunities to save themselves from immanent death and despair , but failed to do so due to their own personal demons . in the end you were left with the feeling that there were no ( and perhaps are no ) innocent victims.

as the name implies , the film also touches greatly on following a leader or authority . this was used in a direct sense of if the main character would become like the serial killer and was also used less directly throughout the film . following a central figure is a reoccurring theme throughout the film.

through all this , the film makers also incorporated a lot of cliché , which i suspect was intentional and gave the film a unique mixture of depth as well as shallowness which i found intriguing . this , perhaps inadvertently , plays well with the characters who are , at first appearance very shallow but as the story unfolds it becomes obvious that they are , at least the two main male characters , quite complex.

technically the film has a lot of problems however . the cinematography , which is typically regarded highly , i find rather sophomoric and over - stylized , utilizing formulaic 2/3 approaches far too rigidly . many transitions i felt were also over - stylized . the use of symbolism was not only vague , but also greatly over used.

the plot was poorly planned and relied exclusively on misinformation in order to achieve a rather hokey twist ending , which was poorly resolved and leaves viewers confused . methods used to resolve the climax are cheap and ill - prepared , motivations are routinely unclear , and major plot points remain untied in the end.

overall , the film 's relative originality , themes and thesis are lost in a maze of poor technical execution , over - stylized imagery , unclear motives , obtuse and unnecessary symbolism and cheap twists maintained only by a lack of or entirely incorrect information.

if the film were better executed , it would have been excellent . however , acolytes receives only two stars in my opinion . +1 i just re - watched this thriller , one i had previously believed to be one of hitch 's lesser efforts . how wrong can you be ! maybe because i 'm older , or maybe because the film gets better with every viewing , but now i think it 's amazing . every bit of suspense is wrung out of the tiniest detail , and that final scene on the merry - go - round is just breath - taking ! perfect in every way , highly recommended . +1 set in hungary in november 1956 , this is the story of a group of foreign nationals who were trying to leave the country at the time of the uprising.

once the airport is closed , the titular journey begins on a bus taking them to austria . as would be obvious , they are stopped on their way which is where they come up against the almost faultless yul brynner whose military power as a red army major was marked with loneliness , his internal struggle between right and wrong , his search for the truth and his need to feel emotions for other human beings . he was saddened by the fact that his job had alienated him from his friends and enemies alike and he yearned for social contact.

robert morley plays the quintessential stiff upper - lipped englishman who , no matter how serious the role , manages to maintain an almost light - hearted logical outlook on life while jason robards has a stunning movie debut which enforces the reason why he had so many roles throughout his career . deborah kerr , as the leading lady , exhibits the grace and femininity we have come to associate with her yet manages to bring over the strength and resolve required for her character.

the film deals with a very tempestuous time in european history but it never ceases to remind us that there is good in all of us and you can never completely judge a book by the cover . fabulous scriptwriting ensures that for all the seriousness of the subject there can still be great one - liners and comedic instances that add to , rather than detract from the movie . the chemistry in the cat and mouse game between kerr and brynner makes you understand why they appeared in more than the one film together.

all in all , a thoroughly engrossing movie which i would definitely watch again . 8/10 +1 opera ( the u.s. title is terror at the opera ) is somewhat of a letdown after some of dario 's other movies like phenomena , tenebre , and suspiria . ( i still ca n't find inferno anywhere . ) it 's one of those movies that has a great first half but midway through it 's like someone started slowly letting the air out of the screenplay and logic.

the basic plot involves a beautiful opera singer who is being stalked by a deranged obsessed fan . this killer begins killing people close to her in a most unique fashion . he binds and gags her and tape tiny sharp pins under her eyelids so if she tries to close her eyes she 'll gouge out her eyes . this forces her to watch while the killer murders her acquaintances in typically brutal and gory argento fashion.

unfortunately , about midway through the film becomes sluggish and illogical . ( this is especially directed towards the killer 's motivations . i still have n't completely figured out why he 's such a nut . ) the ending especially come out of left field in the worst possible sense.

but , for about the first hour or so this is some of dario 's best filmmaking and the camera work is breathtaking . too bad it could n't maintain it through to the end.

rating:7 +0 i watched this film when i was a kid , and i thought it was terrible then . now that i 'm older , i found it just as terrible . universal could have done better than this . they merely decided to make the most money they could out of using all their monsters at once . to me , that was a cheap shot . these characters were capable of holding their own in their own movies , and the choice of actors was deplorable . dracula needed to be bela lugosi , frankenstein 's , monster needed to be karloff.

in my mind , it was the disney squalid sequel sequence done decades ago , and it was not appreciated . umiversal started out with something great and original , and then thought they could pander to the masses with the schlock which is extremely evident in this film . +0 this movie is nothing more than christian propaganda . it started off like a good sci - fi movie and then works a syrupy sweet christian theme into the story which is totally unrelated . i had to turn it off half way through because i felt tricked into renting it . the catholic church has officially announced that aliens do not contradict belief in god.

the movie is slightly entertaining despite this but the dialog is unbelievable , writing and acting is mostly rubbish and all in all , this movie is mostly a stinker to be avoided.

there was obviously some research done into the phenomenon by the filmmakers , but then you quickly realize that it is only for the purpose to debunk and inject their own paranoid religious views into a valid interesting subject . if you are a zealous religious fanatic who believes in demons and angels , you will love this movie . +0 there are no spoilers for this film as nothing could be written that could make it any worse ! the dictionary definition of " puerile " should now read : " sex lives of the potato men " ! unless , that is , you like dog poo and mucous ; in which case - this is the film to see ! johnny vegas et all - what were you thinking ! +1 compared to battle of britain , this is a real film , with real characters and a real plot . battle of britain is basically a documentary with the occasional lawrence olivier and michael caine , but the real protagonists are the spits , the hurricanes , etc . here , on the other hand , you have two well - wrought characters ( actually three ) and a real plot . i strongly recommend it to anybody , even to those who are not particularly fond of war movies . it 's well filmed , and i wonder what the director might do if he had the big capitals behind him . and i do not think that it 's over - sentimental . it 's only that in the fighters you have real people , with real feelings and a real life -- as real as any fictional life in any great film . +0 the emperor 's new groove cast returns for disney pictures follow up , but this time the spotlight is on kronk(voiced by patrick warburton ) , who is no longer yzma's(eartha kitt)henchman . kronk has started a new life and is very happy with his role as chef of his own restaurant . things go merrily along until kronk gets word that his papi(john mahoney)is coming for a visit . kronk is worried , because he knows that his life wo n't impress his papi . one thing that he has always wanted and never received is a " thumbs up " from his dad . a flurry of blunders and a gigantic cheese explosion in the restaurant leaves our likable hero very deep in trouble and anxiety . to save the day , a little help from his friends.

other voices : tracey ullman , david spade , john goodman , wendie malick , april winchell and gatlin green . +1 even though i saw this film when i was very young , i already knew the story of wild the thief - taker and shepherd who famously escaped from newgate prison.

apart from the liberty taken right at the end , the film more or less faithfully follows the true story . the temptation to bend the facts which is the hallmark of so many so - called historical films is resisted in this film and the film makers must be praised for that.

of the performances , there is scarcely a poor performance , and tommy steele is ideally cast . also good is stanley baker as the thief - taker and alan badel is good as always.

because the film sticks to the facts , it makes it suitable to be watched by all the family . +1 i live up here in croc territory and remember well the true events that inspired this movie . our guts fall out each time we hear of a croc attack . black water is , quite simply , the best croc movie i have ever seen . while i loved rogue last year for all its effects and splashy scenes , it was the local scenes that captured our audience . we laughed in rogue more than anything . black water , however , really resonated with the eeriness and fear that you can experience when you are alone in the mangroves ( you guys call them swamps or bayous - but they 're mangroves ) . every tourist should see this film before heading to the northern territory . the ending was a bit of a letdown after the rest of the film , but i 'll be adding this one to my dvd collection when it becomes available . +1 a huge cast gathered for this remake which sadly was a box office failure notwithstanding a great sound track . i ca n't say it was riveting entertainment , nor a cure for insomnia . nevertheless i enjoyed the film - it provided the escape i was after one afternoon . a good look for those of us looking for the ideal life , albeit a fantasy . expect some corny moments , few thrills , and an occasional laugh . +0 boring , horrible piece of italian euro - trash about a scientist who seems to spend most of his time guzzling beer(this is what makes him american , right ? our scientists spend most of their academic life soused out of their minds , sure . that 's where all the really great theories come from ) , who 's studying something(dolphin calls , fish migration patterns , who knows ) . he hears a weird sound through his headphones , proving that his radio is picking up a station in jamaica . at the same time , a jack skellington girl with one of the worst , most bleached manes of bad 80 's hair that it has ever been my pleasure to witness is trying to calm down the dolphins in the seaquarium she works at , as they 're apparently upset about the amount of fish she 's been doling out lately . the beginning of the film was a really badly colored storyline about two annoying , very italian people who 's boat is attacked by something unseen under the water . the whiny woman is never seen again(best part of the story ) , and the guys ' corpse is found with no legs . the dim , alcoholic scientist(who has an inexplicable , english- american- italian accent ) and the stick girl with the hay hair begin to theorize that there 's some kind of giant monster lurking under the seas off the coast of italy ... err .. florida.

they enlist the help of an electrician to set up an underwater mike , so that the monster can sing karaoke . this guy has a beautiful girlfriend , who 's only drawback is that she pronounces peter " pey - tah " , but for some reason he 's sexually drawn to the anatomical skeleton with the frizzly hair , a situation that leaves one blinking.

the dubbing is awful , the editor a spaz , and the storyline generally a yawn . there 's a bit about how this weird scientific corporation genetically engineered this monster giant shark - squid - barracuda thing for some reason that makes no sense , and a really unpleasant greasy haired guy goes around killing women , again for no apparent reason . a stupid sheriff and his bulked up deputy are along for the ride , along with a female scientist(who we know is smart because she wears huge glasses ) . at one time the woman scientist takes on the huge , terrible monster(yeah , right , ed wood 's giant octopus was more believable ) with only a small handaxe , and she wins the contest . hooray for skinny little women , who obviously make the best monster hunters!

the solution to the problem of the giant thing is to blow up half of the everglades , leaving a dead zone for several miles in every direction . to hell with ecology and the environment , right ? we have to kill this giant monster ! at the end , the electrician and his broomstick love ride off into the sunset on her vespa , which is o.k . since she 's gotten over her colleagues ' death and he 's not very upset that his girlfriend got whacked by the crazy guy with the greasy hair . hooray for true love ! wait a minute , is n't there something fishy about all this ... +1 so the wwe has done it . they have poured over into film;their first one being see no evil , starring their very own kane . i caught this movie and went in not expecting it to be a great film ... it just seemed to cliché and looked like nothing new . to my surprise it actually was n't half bad . a viewer stated above that it is good b - horror movie fun , and honestly that s the best way to describe it . now the question i was asking myself was how was kane going to hold up ... well let 's just say he made an absolute bad ass out of the ' jacob goodnight ' character . he sold the role really well , and really did look menacing . but what can you expect from someone who is almost 7 feet tall and weighs around 320 in solid muscle . the acting was decent , and the story was nothing new of course , but we all know that . the directing as well as the cinematography was done very well and the hotel backdrop really looked dilapidated and well done . considering this was directed by a porn movie director , i was quite surprised . i 'd recommend this movie if you 're looking for mindless gore and killing and just some overall fun . think of this movie as a modern day latter friday the 13th film . and save room for the ending too , cuz it 's a good one . and stick around after the credits too ... +0 i seemed to find the trailers better than the movie . they did their job and made me interested in watching unknown . the interest waned early . a simple premise laking in scenery . five men wake up in a chemical warehouse not knowing why they are there ; let alone know how in the hell they got there . confusion and paranoia brings with it fear and distrust . the men learn that a kidnapper is on his way with plans to kill his hostages . now the men size each other up trying to distinguish if all are victims and who may actually be one of the kidnappers . the cast includes : jim caviezel , greg kinnear , joe pantoliano , bridget moynahan , barry peppper , david selby and adam rodriguez . +1 i would like to start by saying i can only hope that the makers of this movie and it 's sister film the intruder ( directed by the great unheralded stylist auteur that is jopi burnama ) know in their hearts just how much pleasure they have brought to me and my friends in the sleepy north eastern town of jarrow.

from the opening pre credit sequence which manages to drag ever so slightly despite containing a man crashing through a window on a motorbike , the pitiless destruction of a silence lab , the introduction of one of the most simultaneously annoying and anaemic bad guys in movie history and costume design that jean paul gautier would find ott and garish . make no mistake ; this is a truly unique experience . early highlight - an explosion ( get used to it , plenty more where that came from ! ) followed by a close up of our chubby heroine and the most hilarious line reading of the word " dad " in living memory . and then ... the theme song ...

yeah , this deserves its own paragraph . sung by aj , written by people who really should wish to remain anonymous , it makes the songs written for the rocky films sound like schubert . this is crap 80 's hero motivation narcissism at an all time high , with choice lyrics such as " its only me and you , its come down to the wire " and much talk of having to " cross the line " ( it 'll make sense in time - our hero cares little for the boundaries of bona fida police work ) abounding . not to mention the indonesian supremes cooing the film 's title seductively . at this point anyone wishing to switch off officially has no pulse.

our hero is semitic cop peter goldson ( essayed brilliantly by intruder star peter o'brien ) , the " stabilizer " of the title . the man 's bull in a china shop approach to crime fighting and particularly his less than inconspicuous undercover work truly leaves much to be desired , but he is without question an entertaining guide through the mean streets of downtown jakarta , with local sleaze ball connection captain johnny in tow , as well as peter 's own waste of space partner in fashion crime sylvia nash , who does little . so many highlights , so little time - the " slide please " arrogance of peter 's not all too convincingly argued case against chief baddie greg rainmaker ( intruder fans will know hirsute slimy bastard craig gavin as the monstrous john white - helluva name eh ? no ! oh well ... ) , the x marks the spot location map stupidity , our hero taking horrible advantage of heroine tina probost during a moment of weakness on her behalf , the latter turning up at a sting operation dressed like a member of a particularly flamboyant dancing troop . and believe me that barely covers it.

there was n't even time to go into the plot revolving around the hunt for a drug detection system and a kidnapped professor with an alarming but commendable amount of national pride . or our hero turning up at a funeral dressed as if an extra on boogie nights . or the absolutely hysterical craic between captain johnny and goldson - two guys have never made more heavy weather of buddy buddy shtick than these clowns . the trowel was possibly too subtle me thinks.

ah it tails off people , and you never thought scenes of wanton destruction and general mayhem could be so unbelievably boring , but the character interaction is stupendous , the dialogue truly priceless and the incompetence on show somehow endearing . oh and the shoes people - watch out for the shoes ! +0 this is about as stupid as it gets.

a classic case of two - dimensional characters who always act exactly contrary as to what a sane person would do in the same situation . it reminds me of a scene in " scary movie " where carmen electra flees from the killer . there are two signs , one marked " to safety " , the other one " to sure death " ( i am reciting from memory).

and just like in scary movie , the characters always run into the direction marked " sure death " . < br />
why oh why did the girl start the fire in the teller booth and hold the door shut ? ? ? did she prefer to die in the fire instead being killed by the guy ? why oh why , after cutting and overpowering the driver did they sit him in the seat and have him being watched by the wounded guy instead of plain shooting him or at the very least knocking him out ? he was running over their friend and killing him a minute before , yet they have scruples ? ? why oh why a hundred things more ... < br />
if this movie were a road , you could not drive a single yard because of the holes . everything is so far - fetched , it 's starting to physically hurt at times.

add mercilessly overplaying " actors " and a small budget to that and here 's what you get . looking at the rating and the comments , i get the feeling those people have been watching an entirely different movie.

the one thing missing really , is the infamous red toolbox from " while she was out " - a movie that is about similar in unrealistic plot and stupid behavior of the characters . +0 soultaker was written by and starred vivian schilling . it also starred joe estevez , gregg thomsen , and robert d'zar as the angel of death.

the story begins with introduction to soultaker , played by joe estevez . we quickly learn what soultaker 's role will be in this movie.

next the college aged young people are getting ready for a summer festival , aptly named " summerfest " . in this film , the battle of the classes is omni - present throughout the film . the girls come from a wealthy class , and the guys come from roughly middle or lower class . the class roles seem to play a role in the film for some reason which is n't really clear or pertinent to the story.

at summerfest we learn more about the apparent class struggles of why zach is n't encouraged to date natalie . soultaker makes an appearance as well , with apparently his boss the angel of death . here d'zar 's character points out who is to die and who 's souls are to be taken . it 's revealed as well , that soultaker will have a character conflict regarding natalie , and how he deals with her because of someone in his past.

meanwhile natalie is ditched by her ride to summerfest , and zach convinces her to ride home with them . during the ride home , soultaker takes an active role causing them to wreck horribly at high speeds.

the rest of the story surrounds the soultaker collecting the souls of the dead passengers , and zach and natalie trying to outwit him to return to their bodies so they can continue to live . the class and character conflicts lay in the story , but are really never brought to the forefront or resolved.

there 's an attempt towards the end to drag out some of the drama , there 's a lot of chasing and running which does tend to be really boring . it 's not really acceptable , and it would 've been nice had this been dealt with differently , somehow to maybe increase the drama but not bore the audience.

the story and acting are decent . the soundtrack is ok , and even the production values are good.

robert d'zar in his brief on screen appearances does a nice job as the angel of death . joe estevez does ok , however sometimes his role acting a bit flat . vivian is pretty and does a decent job as natalie , although perhaps over acting a bit in a few scenes.

this may sound odd , but this movie definitely could 've benefited from some pointless nudity . vivian teases us a bit but that was n't enough.

in my opinion this was a pretty serious attempt at making a movie . the results , it 's worth watching . just do n't expect a perfect production.

3/10 +1 it 's not really about wine . no , nossiter 's real targets are those who would streamline and assimilate the peculiarities of local ( wine ) production for business purposes . to this end he has made an excellent , objective film . spirited , bumptious , emotional and flawed independent wine producers are juxtaposed with media - finessed , anodynesprech amercians and auld - europeans : the art of wine - making against market - driven , laboratorised product manufacture . it 's an open show that does n't lead conclusion.

nossiter 's film is occasionally infuriating to watch - cameras are neither concealed , nor steadicam , by any means . there are also plenty of captions as well as subtitles to wade through , often too short a time on screen.

however it does outdo michael moore at the game moore ca n't play anyway . the characters speak for - and therefore condemn - themselves . well worth a viewing 7/10 +0 amidst all the many problems that make this a dire piece of celluloid is the stupidest plot device in recent cinema history . richard gere determines who the jackal 's real target is through some form of revelation . he does not work anything out , it just comes to him . when in doubt " he 's going after the first lady ! " . this film blows chunks . +0 this film is a nightmare ! the sensation you feel when you wake up from a nightmare is the same i got when i finished watching this movie : " uff ok , it ended , what a relief ! " i felt pain watching this movie , so bad it was ! it 's a b - series low cost movie , that 's for sure , but i think it not an excuse to be so bad ! i 've watched brilliant low cost movies , with nice plots , nice production , nice acting , and most of all , some substance ! this one got nothing of it ! the plot is hilarious , it almost seems like an " american guide about how to transform ancient chinese mythology into a ridiculous teenage movie , with some kids playing with the occult " i do n't know if the chinese tale present in this movie is real or not , but if it is , the " damage " is even worse ! the production is just horrible , a plain zero ( what " special effects " are those ? ) . there 's no suspense . the supposed " tension scenes " are a complete failure . the acting is not better ; and what about the dialogs ? oh my god ! a movie which has for several times dialogs just like : " i will pass there later , ok ? is that alright ? – ok , alright . - ok ? – ok , alright , bye then " i 'm sure it does n't deserve more than a 1/10 score!

too bad to be true ! +0 i ca n't believe that someone actually paid to have this film made . stupid , unrealistic , and stereotypical . right from the take off of the massive 747 the pilot pulled the throttles back to increase speed . then you have 5 armed persons with semi to fully automatic weapons firing without so much as one bullet breaching the walls of the pressurized cabin at 38,000 feet . then once below in the belly of the plane a stray bullet hits a fuel line and we see the fuel leaking from the side of the plane . the acting was just horrid and forced . there just did n't seem to be any direction . i have seen some pretty horrid b movies in my lifetime but with the names that were in this film i was extremely disappointed . +0 i watched this movie last night , and let me say , it 's the absolute worst thing i have ever seen . the entire film is a train wreck , and it 's not the actors . it is the horrible script.

* * spoilers * * alright , eddie loses his job to a monkey . his nerdy son is disappointed . the bathroom goes crazy.

he gets a free vacation . he goes along with uncle nick and the original audry . their boats crashes . they stay on an island . they are stupid and do n't even bother to look at the nearby hotel.

ok , so that 's that . what makes this movie pathetic is the humor . it is so horrid , hillybillyish , and stupid , you ca n't even laugh . and it 's not stupid funny humor either . i could n't laugh the entire thing . +0 i was hoping to like this movie , to settle in for an evening of goofy fun . i like judy davis and juliette lewis , and the premise seemed off the wall enough to be entertaining.

unfortunately , i found myself dozing over and over again . judy davis gave a fine performance , but had very little to work with . juliette lewis was fabulous as expected , but had very little to do . the plot was full of " twists " that were just plain silly , and as so often happens in movies of this type , nobody acted the way a real human being would act . and , personally , i thought marcia gay harden was totally miscast.

the movie also seemed to shift about midway from a black comedy with touches of farce to a total farce with touches of black comedy . one reviewer here notes that other reviews seem to want this movie to be something different , and therefore decried it . all i can say is that i would have settled for the movie being * something * and sticking with it . this one feels like the director had some grandiose ideas but was n't able to pull them all off . i give it a 4 out of 10 . +0 i feel very generous giving this movie a 2 out of 10 . okay , noted that the special effects are , ' okay ' and renny harlin did make one my favorite genetically - altered - sharks - attack - a - research - station movie , that of which you may know as deep blue sea . also , the opening credits are done fairly well with a remix of whitezombie 's " more human then human ' and it does go fairly well with what is in the context of this ' movie ' . but enough praise , lets get to the reason why this movie sucks so much.

not since uwe boll 's alone in the dark did i ever feel that the special effects in a movie were totally wasted . okay , our story starts with four guys who are descendants of four different families , each of which possess a never fully explained power from a never fully explained family background that did a never fully explained art of witch craft . oh and for some reason , these descendants are all 17 , all go to the same school , are all on the swim team and all , for some reason or another , sit in bed with their shirts off , sweating and talking to each other on the phone . i have nothing against gays , gothic or thirteen year old 's , but that is what this movie is aimed at ... 13 year old goth who question their sexuality . yeah there 's girls in it who sit on their beds in their panties or whatever , but how come they do n't take their shirts off ? hey its only fair.

anyways , the characters in this movie are told that when they turn 18 , they will ascend and be granted new profound , almost god - like powers . but before i go any further , i forgot to mention that when they use their powers , they age slowly and they grow more addicted to it . that explains why they got people in their late 20 's to play 17 year old 's . oh and if something needs explaining , do n't worry , someone will explain it all in one large piece of dialog . god this movie sucks ... where was i ? oh yeah , the ascension part.

okay , apparently there was a super - secret - alpha - one family that the others forgot about or some s#*t like that , i do n't know , i was dozing off at this point . but they were written out some how and the new kid at school who is befriending the group is ' secretly ' one of these descendants from the fifth family . and i say ' secretly ' because anyone who has seen any of the previews of this movie knows that this new guy is the bad guy . he has greater power then the others because he 's older i think . anyways , bob loblaw ( say it out loud ) things happen and we get to the final fight in the movie.

to be honest , i was all game for a witch battle . you know like saurmon vs. gandalf or anything along the lines with magic battle , because you know , this is about witches and stuff . now , when these two witches throw down , its more of like ... how can i put it ... a very , very crappy version of a dragonball z type battle . they throw stuff at each other , talk , throw stuff , talk , throw stuff , talk etc . when i say ' throw stuff ' i only say that because i have no clue what the f#%k their throwing at each other . it looks like big gobs of slimy water . god this movie sucks , anyways , when our main witch ' ascends ' he does n't get very powerful at all . he just throws bigger gobs of slimy water . things happen and it ends in a way that you as the viewer know its gon na end . the good witch wins bad witch loses.

you know how shitty a movie is when the bad guy says something so incredibly stupid as , ' i 'm gon na make you my wiotch ' that s where i wanted to punch myself in the face for sitting through this whole ... thing.

yes , i admit , the thought of witches doing battle , using powers in the modern day does sound kinda cool , but when the execution is this bad , i really wished they did n't make this movie . maybe if it was r - rated , had tit 's and threw in more deaths with a dash of gore , it might have worked ... might have worked.

if your interested in watching this , do n't buy it or even rent it . wait for it to come on tv or borrow it from your sucker of a friend who bought it . just do n't waste your time with this hack of a movie . if you spend any money on it , there 's a good chance your putting an effort towards a sequel to be made by uwe boll called , the covenant 2 : alone in the dark with the house of the dead . +1 one word for it . hilarious . i have n't watched at movie like this in a long time . at points in the movie , i totally forgot it was a movie , i just felt like i was back watching viva la bam , or even watching say , my own friend going through something like this . it was realistic and i liked how bam , ryan , raab , rake , and brandon and the rest of the guys did n't try to hard too actually act . they , to me , were just acting like their famous idiot selves . there were a few scenes that i adored more than others , like raab in the shower , holy , i laughed so hard . he honestly was probably my favourite character besides bam 's . he really , in my opinion , made the movie just a bit more hilarious . it 's basically a must see for any fans of the cky crew : ] +0 the film successfully gives a graphic portrayal of the suffering of forced sex labour , but nothing more . the leftest agenda behind this movie could be seen a mile away and leaves viewer so embarrassed while watching if you know that feeling . so , the women are kidnapped and sent to ex yugoslavian territory to work as sex slaves because ( take a deep breath ) the american military institution is corrupt and looks away while their private security contractors are selling people abroad . you do n't need half a brain to see the relevance to iraq war and black water company.

what a load of leftest excrement ! looks like i have been fooled all my life into thinking that this problem and many others were a direct result of communism 's grip on this region for 45 years . but no , it was the american war on iraq , which is also responsible for earthquakes , tropical storms , and the constipation i had last week.

the film ignores the fact that 95 % of the sex trade is women willing to sell their bodies for money and entry to the western block . you also see scenes that are so stupid you want to pull your hair . we have someone chasing down a woman in the streets of london in broad daylight , beat her up , then somehow drags her unconscious body half a mile back to the apartment where he rapes her . no one sees this or calls the police , and the running woman does not care to scream during the chase . even better , we later see 4 - 5 women lined up in the centre of london in -again- broad daylight to be sold , one of them has a smashed face , and people are shopping in the background as if nothing was happening . you ca n't make this stupidity up.

i used to think that such trash was exclusive to hollywood , but apparently i was mistaken . +1 if there 's one theme of this film , it 's that people can cope with hardship by having a good imagination . this family is poor , their father works graveyard , and their mother works double - shifts , and peter is constantly picked on for a variety of reasons , and becomes increasingly frustrated that he is often mistaken for a girl . he is just starting to approach that age of 10 or 11 where your perceptions start to change , and thinks like your appearance start to matter . the backdrop of this story is the 1967 world 's fair and the centennial of canada . the film 's greatest moments come during the various fantasy sequences where we see just how they cope . watch the flim , and if you 've ever had a childhood friend that you dreamt with , and then for some reason , lost , you 'll really like this film . perhaps kids will like this film , but only adults will truly appreciate it , including its references to bolshevik 's and what parent 's will do for their children . +0 the man who gave us splash , cocoon and parenthood gave us this incoherent muddle of cliched characters , poor plotting , you've - got - to - be - kidding dialogue and melodramatic acting ? i guess everybody has a bad day at the office now and then . he 's allowed . +0 fear and desire is of interest mainly to kubrick obsessives , who can plumb this pretentious clap trap for signs of his still - to - come greatness . kubrick was right in seeking to ensure that the film was not screened or available on legitimate video . he considered it embarrassing and amateurish , and he was correct in his evaluation . this is a weak and tedious film -- at 68 minutes it still seems longer than " barry lyndon"!--it nevertheless is of historical interest , and has its genuine absorbing moments . it 's a difficult film to find ( only " unofficial " copies are in circulation ) , though perhaps this may change if kubrick 's estate relents and has it released on video . recommended only for kubrick enthusiasts . +0 tom selleck plays an absentee son to senile " pop " don ameche and weary mom anne jackson , making up for his indiscretions ( one presumes ) and taking them in after ameche has burned down his mobile home ; meanwhile , selleck 's job is vanquished by the f.b.i. , his assets are frozen , his wife and kids leave him and his obnoxious sister and her brats have come to stay . brightly - painted comedy - of - ills is as out of touch with reality as ameche 's doddering old coot . perhaps a serious first draft ( with scenes such as ameche walking out into traffic with two toddlers ) was incorporated into a sillier second or third version ( with selleck getting poked , bumped , prodded , and eventually losing a toe and a testicle ! ) . either way , it 's a painful experience , and selleck 's sudden dedication to his father makes little sense ; he hobbles around and howls in pain , but retains his heart of mush . this movie is mush . * from * * * * +1 i thought this movie was great , if you did n't take it too seriously . just sit back and enjoy hilary swank in all her greatness and laugh when the monks go to boston , ma . i also think this movie has a great message about self control and inner strength . plus mr. myagi was so sweet , i wish he 'd teach me karate ! +1 i have mixed emotions about this film , especially as it compares to its forerunner,

"an american werewolf in london . " that film had it 's funny moments , it was still more of horror tale than anything else . this updated version , now set in paris , does not have that " edge " at all and simply is n't in the same class .... but it does have some good things going for it that the first film did not have and overall it 's still fun to watch . < br />
so , " werewolf purists " aside , most of whom think this film is pure garbage compared to the london version , i 'll still give it decent marks since i do n't care what others think . i liked it even though i agree " london " is better and i prefer that version , too . < br />
the first 30 - 40 minutes of this movie is strictly played for laughs including a hysterical scene with a " balloon " in a restaurant . it also introduces the lead female character , played by julie delpy . i do n't see enough of this actress . she does n't seem to make that many films , or least ones i hear about over here in america . this french actress has a face that is classic beauty , so the film got points for having her in it , and she looks great.

when the horror starts , it can get scary and the special effects are good . i also liked the lack of profanity in this film , unlike the first one : no f - words and no lord 's name in vain - amazing!

however , there are plenty of sexual remarks and there is one scene with a guy running out of bar tied to a cross which was blasphemous to me . the soundtrack is heavy metal which is n't appealing to a middle - aged guy like me , either . this film is geared a lot more toward 20-somethings , if that helps anyone.

it 's entertaining ..... just do n't expect it to live up to the first film . +0 oh boy ! i really trashed manhunt in space . i think this flopper deservedly rates worse than manhunt . it goes nowhere and fungi growth was more exciting than this tripe.

poor cleolanta . she 's so misunderstood . smug rocky struts around and thankfully , there 's no mention from winky about his " gay nightlife " . there 's a lot more talking , a really awful ( to watch ) space marriage on the rocks , and crappy space effects cut - outs . then , there 's bobby . you decide who 's more annoying : bobby or the winkster ? personally , i 'd jettison them out of an airlock into a black hole not before first subjecting them to killer flesh eating alien mutants.

at least there 's vena . she 's just a cosmic girl ! +0 i would hate to have anyone watch this " inspired by a true story " movie and draw any conclusions about the true event . few things they did get right were overshadowed by the things that were just not true . ed gein never dragged anyone behind a car , never met up with anyone at the graveyard and killed them , no proof he returned body parts to the graveyard . the things he did were awful enough , why try to make it worse ? < br />
this movie ranks among my 10 worst wastes of eye strain . " in the light of the moon " is a much better film on the subject , it is more factual and the acting is superior in contrast to this one . +1 captain corelli 's mandolin is a beautiful film with a lovely cast including the wonderful nicolas cage , who as always is brilliant in the movie . the music in the film is really nice too . i 'd advise anyone to go and see it . brilliant ! 10/10 +1 i have seen this show when i was younger . it is a really good show to watch . it is very educational for children 1 to 8 years old . barney is definitely super de duper . b.j. is pretty funny . babie bop is very cute . the kids are very cool too . this show is about learning about numbers kinda like sesame street but different type of show and characters like barney the purple dinosaur , b.j. the yellow dinosaur with a baseball hat on his head , and baby bop the cute green dinosaur with a pink bow . the first one that started was very old barney and friends show . but then the second one was different to be new episodes . also the last one in the 2000 was new scene of barney 's park . they also have a show of barney at universal studios in florida where you see barney , b.j. , and baby bop and then when the show is done you get to go play , shop and meet barney . it 's a very good show watch this show when you learn about many things you will like it the movie , and the live show at universal studios florida . +1 regarded as another one of the recent over - the - top drama 's brought upon us by hollywood , this movie excels where others have totally failed(especially considering the most underrated performance in recent dramatic character portrayal by that of natalie portman ) , this film is almost unanimously driven by the chemistry that both susan and natalie share . they seem to be so natural during the movie that you would mistake them for a real family . they go through so many mother - daughter conflicts in the story its kind of hard not to pick up on their acting abilities . i feel that these two actress ' talented performances picked up where the story was lacking and almost too familiar ( full of cliche 's ) and really saved the suffering plot . i would recommend this movie mainly to those who like either of the two actresses or such over - the - top drama 's . +1 a real surprise . not exactly family entertainment from " disney " . some violence , lots of tense moments , and a great story , based on fact . the theme of " night crossing " is , determination wins . never losing sight of their objective , two east german families risk it all , in their daring balloon escape to freedom . the story is both harrowing and heartwarming . time is not on their side . the east german police are closing in and the outcome far from certain , until the very end . if you are looking for a good evenings entertainment , that contains no nudity , and limited violence , then i highly recommend " night crossing " . it is pure entertainment . - merk +0 boring , ridicules and stupid " submerged " is a waste of time . the shootouts were a joke , real people do not just stand out in the open with out any cover , hoping to get shot first ! so many things wrong or bad , not worth the effort to list , except one major flaw . at 500 mph for 20 minutes = about 166 miles west of l.a. and the water is 100 ft deep ? ? ? even at that , none of the people would have survived the decompression from being subjected to 100 ft of water pressure for more then 20 hours when they were brought up . just a awful . +0 oh my god , why , did i waste my precious time on this film ? it is pathetic , waaaay ott and unrealistic , and one of the worst films i have ever seen in my life . yes , my life . i am embarrassed for yash raj films , the poor guys have to live with the horrible news that yes , they produced this terrible film.

this is by far , the most , trashy , sexual , eyebrow - raising movie i have ever seen by yash raj films . i cringe for them , i really do . along with the terrible acting ( or no acting , for that matter ) by uday chopra , combined with the lack of talent of the " look at my boobs " tanisha , neal ' n ' nikki has not one good thing about it at all . even the music is not upto the standard left by yrf . the director , arjun sablok , did an embarrassingly bad job here.

honestly , i expected more . much , much more . +1 adapting his own novel " cabal " for the screen , author / screenwriter / director clive barker fashioned this marvelous story of outré horror and fantasy . craig sheffer plays boone , a young man who becomes suspected of being a serial killer . the cops gun him down in front of midian , on the surface a cemetery but which is actually a haven for monsters that have been shunned by society . when they lay claim to boone and make him one of their own , this causes repercussions for everybody , including boone 's sweet girlfriend ( the very cute anne bobby ) and dubious psychiatrist ( a most enjoyable david cronenberg).

"nightbreed " displays the kind of wild and twisted imagination that i do n't see in movies all that often . for one thing , ralph mcquarrie , an old hand at conceptual art having worked on such films as the initial three " star wars " entries , helps barker to create excellent visuals for " nightbreed " , starting right away with the opening credit sequence . the visual and makeup effects are elaborate , and production design and cinematography quite impressive . barker and crew do a wonderful job at creating this whole other world with compelling characters . it 's colorful and flamboyant entertainment and is a pleasure to take in . and of course there 's the strong sense of social commentary regarding intolerance and bigotry , not to mention the heavy consequences that can result from a person 's actions.

great supporting performances add to the fun . cronenberg oozes lots of malevolent intent and is a real gas as the bad doctor , while charles haid is a fine love - to - hate - him type of antagonist , a rather nasty police captain . doug " pinhead " bradley once again gets buried under heavy makeup as the weary lylesberg , and is solid as a rock . hugh ross is great fun as narcisse , as is catherine chevalier as rachel ( as an added bonus , she bares her breasts in one sequence ) . simon bamford , who played the " butterball cenobite " in the first two " hellraiser " pictures , turns up here as well . there 's even a cool cameo by 50 's and 60 's sci - fi star john agar.

danny elfman supplies another of his fantastic scores , and barker leads us steadily through the intriguing story towards a terrific apocalyptic showdown.

"nightbreed " is an excellent genre film worth checking out for anybody who has n't seen it . i give it a hearty recommendation.

9/10 +0 i just finished watching dog watch . i thought parts of the movie were hokey with more than a few implausibilities . the acting was n't too bad and the plot was n't bad . but , as the saying goes , the devil was in the details.

some examples:

1 ) the bleed - through on charlie falon 's ( sam elliott ) bandage was shown to be coming from the back of his hand while it was his knuckles that were bleeding.

2 ) would a detective dispose of his murder victim from a very well - lighted area ? this seemed very silly to me.

i am not unusually picky about a movie but , in my humble opinion , this one is definitely not recommended by me . +1 most people will consider that yul brynner 's greatest performance was as the ruler of siam in the king and i. certainly it gave him a wide variety of moods to test his abilities in , from comic , to tragic , from eager to learn to dominating to hateful . it also showed him to advantage as a " talk singer " and a dancer . finally , as it was also his tony award winning performance from broadway , the film allowed us to capture something of the great broadway performance as well.

but he did other movies that showed his talents as well as the king and i. his comic turn in once more with feeling was quite nice . so was his performance as general bunin in anastasia , or his ramses in the ten commandments . yet he came terribly close to being a 1950s successor to eric von stroheim as " the man you love to hate . " a certain vulnerability in his acting and roles endeared him to the movie public , even after his best years as a star were behind him - and he retreated more and more to repeating the king of siam on television and the stage.

to me , his finest performance is in this 1959 drama with deborah kerr , jason robards jr. , robert morley , e. g. marshall , anne jackson , and ronnie howard . the film is set in pretty modern times - the powder - keg that was hungary in 1956 , when briefly it looked like the iron curtain was about to collapse there under the reforms of hungarian patriot imre nagy and his supporters . but the hungarian revolution collapsed due to bad timing . the russians and their polish and east german allies sent tanks in to crush the revolt ( and arrested and executed nagy and other reformers ) . the west stood by and let this happen : england and france had gotten caught in the suez crisis , and the u.s. had berated them and israel for attacking egypt . due to the actions of three close allies of the u.s. , the west found it hard to condemn the overkill of the soviet union . it was an unfortunate situation , and the hungarians have never forgotten how they were abandoned in it.

in the film brynner is major surov , a russian intelligence officer who is watching for some of the leaders of the hungarian revolt , one of whom is paul kedes ( jason robards ) . kedes may be getting assistance from some westerners on a bus tour through hungary , led by robert morley ( including marshall , jackson , and howard , and kerr ) . the latter are being kept in a hotel while their bus is being repaired , and brynner mingles with them , hoping for a lead to the whereabouts of robards . but brynner is human - he tries to be ingratiating with these people ( all of whom see him as a monster ) , and in sequence , when he has drunk a little too much , he confronts them with the questions that has bothered historians since 1945 : how is it ( even if one notes that russia had stalin in charge ) that relations between russia and the west collapsed so quickly ? the allies , on the whole , had worked well together from 1941 to 1945 , but after yalta and potsdam all types of mutual suspicions just erupted . did they have to ? surov is a good officer , but he is torn in half by loyalty to the communist regimes in the soviet union and in hungary that he supports , and his growing fondness towards kerr , who is hiding robards but is also willing to note the more human side of the russian major . and as the film reaches it 's tragic climax , we watch as surov has to decide if he will follow his sense of duty , or take pity on kerr , robards , and the other westerners who want to leave . it becomes a true struggle for him - and one that he may win far too late . it was a great film about a tragedy of post war europe , and possibly the most thoughtful role yul brynner ever portrayed . +0 there are movies that are so bad , they 're good . then there 's movies like rest stop that should just never have been made because they are just plain dreadful.

bad acting , unlikable characters , predictable plot and a supposedly supernatural twist that adds nothing to the story are all key failures . some half decent special effects are about the only thing worthy of note . < br />
i ca n't even bring myself to write a plot outline because all i really want to do here is warn you not to waste your time and money on this movie . do yourself a favour and do n't even bother with this film at all . it 's 1.5 hours of your life that you will never get back . < br />
1/10 +0 worse than mediocre thriller about an abused wife who goes on the lam after she is linked circumstantially to the death of her husband and sister . determined to prove that her husband is alive she follows leads across the state , her peril increasing at each stop . chasing after her are the traditional ' good - cop ' and ' bad - cop ' pair of partners . one is convinced of her innocence the other more interested in closing the case and getting home . this pair is often able to corner their suspect but never quite to capture her . all the main players meet up in a remote town in the desert and the truth begins to unfold with deadly consequences for some.

wow ! this was a bad movie . the lead acted as if she was tranquilized , the cops could n't find a suspect if he or she is in the police station ( this happens twice ) and everyone else is as one - dimensional as can be . avoid this one at all costs.

+0 well , the episode i just watched had the older " gastineau girl " whining about why people keep mentioning her husband ( mr gastineau , a famous american football player apparently ) . she seems unwilling to accept that he 's the only reason she is n't flipping burgers , she married someone famous and that 's why she has cameras pointed at her.

when challenged by an interviewer to explain what she actually does , she gave a wonderfully circular reason for why people should pay attention to her : " i work really hard on my reality tv show " . then she said " i 'm not a celebrity ... i 'm a personality." < br />
i'm not quite sure who this series is meant to appeal to , except people who 've had all their intelligence removed . it 's certainly no role model to anyone except gold - diggers as the two stars do nothing but spend money , and all it tells you about rich people is that they have no money problems . +1 what can i say about this movie that has not been said by all the other comments here , they pretty much sum up everything , the people who love it cherish it , the people who hate it ... well , they loathe it . this is the movie equivalent of marmite.

i personally have committed every second of it to memory , it is cyclical , claustrophobic , introspective , magical and stands as being one of the most unique films ever made . despite what many have stated , i believe this truly is a cult movie , it is a diamond in the rough just waiting to be discovered , once unearthed it 's fantastical psychedelic visuals and incredible soundtrack will be unforgettable , which is an achievement in itself . one of my friends who watched it likened it more to a musical , and in many respects to those who do not fully appreciate the context in which this film is made , would probably get more out of it to view head as such.

i was always fond of the monkees , especially the t.v. show back when it was repeated during the 80 's . my mum had recorded head for me when it was shown on t.v. late night , as she knew i liked them , i watched it a day later and it lodged in my memory until i was able to find a copy on dvd about 2 decades later , what i would love now is a special edition , it would be fascinating to get a greater insight into the making of this masterpiece . we can only hope . +1 let 's not beat about the bush here , taylor hackford 's undoubtedly slick movie has little to make it stand out from the biopic genre other than jamie foxx 's exceptional , career - making performance . remember the year they handed the special effects oscar to the terminator 2 boffins , uncontested ? they should do the same with this year 's best actor gong.

that ray charles ' story is worthy of filming is not in dispute . indeed , the many flashbacks to his traumatic childhood are well - handled and judiciously used . but for a life so unique , the film seems incredibly formulaic and familiar . it follows the ' history of a flawed genius ' template almost to the letter : hardship and exploitation , women and drugs , recording wrangles , band squabbles , rehab , yeah yeah yeah . and surely there was more humour in his life than we 're treated to here?

i appreciate charles ' music yet where neatly - cut medleys would have kept the story rolling , hackford indulges himself with near - full - length renditions of too many songs - in gin joints , in the recording studio , in concert halls , infinitum . narratively , and for non - devotees , they begin to act like a cinematic brake . this may seem like harsh judgement on a music biopic but with a catalogue as extensive as ray 's , we need a taste not the whole dish . otherwise , we 'd buy the albums.

intrigued as i was , i glanced at my watch more than once . so for all foxx 's brilliance , maybe ray would have been better served as an hbo two - parter ? +0 " terror in the aisles " might look like the ultimate treat for horror fans but it has , in fact , very few to offer . granted , it presents a decent and versatile ( too versatile ? ) selection of horror / thriller fragments that are considered classic but ... what 's the point ? this documentary primarily aims for the horror - loving public so we 've pretty much seen all these clips already , have n't we ? the only thing really praiseworthy about this project is the editing . if you 're into scream - queens , chases by vile murderers and that sort of things , " terror in the aisles " has some neat compilations of the most famous sequences . all these different scenes hang together by a lame wraparound story starring donald pleasance and nancy allen sitting in a movie theater . in between two sequences , the address the viewer and " explain " why we love horror so much . those speeches naturally are soporific and rather obvious ( it 's in our nature to be afraid ... bla bla bla ) and i fail to understand why many people love the concept . this is worth a peek in case you 're a loyal horror fan but it certainly is n't essential viewing . on the contrary : in case you still have to see a classic genre title , beware that bits and pieces of it here do n't spoil your future viewing . the main reason why i overall disliked it is because it shamelessly ignores a lot of lesser known , but fundamental ( foreign ) titles endlessly focusing on " halloween " . this does result in a cool inside joke , however , when donald pleasance screams to the screen at his own character . +1 the late director john frankenheimer directed his first feature film , the young stranger , after starting out directing live television dramas in new york city . this film came on the heels of the success of rebel without a cause in 1955 . james macarthur made his feature film debut as a troubled teen with a movie producer father , played by james daly , who does n't establish enough of a relationship with his son . kim hunter plays the mother , who tries to bridge the gap between her husband and her son . the film uses the popular juvenile delinquent angle of the time to tell its story . macarthur gets in trouble at a movie theater with an overzealous theater manager played by whit bissell . macarthur , in turn , has to deal with a police sergeant , james gregory , bent on teaching him a lesson . the material could easily have turned exploitative , laughable , and sensational , like any number of others of the period did . however , under the sure - handed direction of frankenheimer , the film is a sensitive portrayal of teenage and parental dynamics . the dialog is realistic and most of the scenes hold up surprisingly well . some of the scenes with bissell , as the theater manager , and gregory , as the police sergeant , are a bit heavy - handed and dated . the performances are uniformly good though , which is necessary for a film of this nature and about this topic to succeed . this is an impressive feature film debut both for macarthur and frankenheimer . * * * of 4 stars . +1 i saw this movie five times and never get tired of it . this features traces of the " giallo " genre , but also with a vivid italian countryside setting , where ignorance and superstition are deadlier than any serial killer . featuring excellent location ( reminiscent sometimes of fellini , sometimes of the taviani brothers ) , good characterisation and some of the finest genre actors ( including the great tomas milian and ida lupino in an unforgettable role ) , this is not euro - trash , just a masterpiece that should be discovered generation after generation ( it recently recieved great acclaim at the paris cinematheque at a double - feature tribute to lucio fulci ) +1 the efficacy of this picture was best proven on the intended target audience , namely teens . my 14-year - old son became so engrossed in this film that i rate it considerably higher than its imitator " mad city . " it sparked debate in our household on issues such as peer pressure and loyalty vs. doing the right thing . for that alone , i rate this film a 10 ! parents should watch it with their teens and discuss it afterwards.

i very much liked the smart dialogue and consistent acting . i thought that james remar was adequate in his role , but the teenage cast really carried this picture . other imdb users have praised corey feldman 's performance , which truly is inspired . all in all , i give this picture my highest recommendation . go get this one ! +1 the net is an excellent movie ! it 's about angela bennett(in a great performance of sandra bullock ) who is a computer expert who works for the cathedral company , cleaning virus and testing games for the clients . angela is a typical nerd who does n't have friends outside of the cyberspace , almost does n't take vacations and go out , and stays almost all the time connected . one day her friend dale hessman(ray mckinnon ) asks her to help him , sending angela a disk with a strange program that has many confidential informations . at the same night , when dale was going to meet her , he is suddenly killed in a plane crash . going to mexico in her vacation , angela meets a beautiful guy called jack devlin ( jeremy northam)who shows to be a cold blood killer bastard and one of the guys behind all the secret of the diskette.

her life then turns into a nightmare : all her records are erased and she is given the new identity of ruth marx , a woman with serious problems with the police.

this movie is great because it shows how we , humans , depend a lot of the computers and machines(sometimes more that we should ) and how vulnerable we are if someday , someone decides to control and change our personal records , without letting us the chance to prove the error . +1 randolph scott and glenn ford were once outlaw pals together , but now scott 's a sheriff and young ford is still hiring his gun out . he gets hired to pull a bank job , but is delayed getting to town and those that hired him get someone else . that leads to all kinds of complications , a lot for a film that 's not even 90 minutes long.

randy and glenn both got girls here . claire trevor plays her usual good time gal with a heart of gold . and evelyn keyes is the daughter of edgar buchanan who falls for ford big time without realizing who he is or why he came to the town that scott is the sheriff in.

it 's b western , but unusual for the time and for columbia pictures it was given the full technicolor treatment . the desperadoes marked glenn ford 's first film in technicolor , a process reserved only for some of the more expensive films from bigger studios . harry cohn was certainly not one to shell out for it . and definitely not during war time.

the plot gets a bit convoluted as both ford and scott are put to the test of friendship versus expediency / duty . the plot also involves some high class hypocritical skunks in randy 's town who are the real outlaws as far as the film is concerned.

the four leads do a fine job and the best supporting performance is guinn williams as ford 's lovable explosive lunkhead of a sidekick . the climax involves a cattle stampede and a shootout in the town saloon and is one of the best ever done in a western film.

fans of the four leads and westerns in general will enjoy this one . +0 this movie was n't good . i thought it 'd be a cute disney movie just like the original . wrong . it was awkward for christina ricci , whom i expect so much more than this , you could just tell by watching . i think doug e. doug did the best he could . sit 5 year olds in front of the this , any older , and they might start to fall asleep . +0 i 've heard people compare this movie to sideways . how this comparison was made , i 'll never guess because this movie was in no way comparable to sideways.

these 2 films were as different as star wars and the thornbirds . the only thing they had in common at all was they both had wine as a subject.

though the interviews in this documentary were semi - interesting , they were ruined by the absolute worst camera work ever ... attempted . i 've never seen worse camera work in my life and i 'm comparing it to home videos accidentally taken by 5 year olds.

i give this two stars , only for the interesting interviews with french wine types and for showing how pushy and corrupt the american wine companies are ( are n't all companies pushy and corrupt ? ) i 'd give it -10 stars ( yes , that 's negative 10 ) for the deplorable , terrible , horrible , awful , vertigo - inducing , 5-year - old - could - do - better camera mess . +0 " tart " is a pathetic attempt at film making which wanders around and among a bunch of manhattan teens exploring all the usual teen preppie stuff ... sex , drugs , and classical music almost completely without story , focus , or purpose . griffith is in the film for about 2 minutes while swain dutifully works her way through another in her long list of dog flicks . nothing in this films works and wayne should consider getting a real job . not recommended for anyone . pu ! ugh ! ( d ) +0 master plan : have the winning team in a deadly tournament . one of several martial arts action pictures that attempted to capture the flavor of the famous " enter the dragon " from ' 73 , this one is an effort from south africa . the villain 's stronghold is a bit different , appearing as a white castle - like fortress in the middle of the desert from a distance . the villain himself , a baron or general , is a slightly more perverse version of the " dr . no " or han mold of master villainy , having strange flashbacks to the glory days of nazi germany . he does wear the full regalia nazi uniform at some points . his main ambition in life is to hold an illegal martial arts competition / tournament against his japanese rival , an extension of their complicity in the 2nd world war ( my army is better than your army ) . it sounds silly and it is , though the suggestion of madness and crazed machismo almost works . the central hero , steve chase ( ryan ) , resembles a white ' bruce lee ' character , having a similarly lean , lithe physique , though obviously not on the same level of martial arts expertise . i thought he would be some secret government agent here but apparently not . he and his girlfriend have joined the baron 's team of fighters , but decide to quit ( what did they think they were getting into ? ) . of course , it 's not that easy . there 's an odd sequence of them escaping through the desert using a wrecked car with a rigged sail - those desert winds can do wonders for travel , it seems.

the plot kind of meanders in the 2nd half , as the hero joins the team of the villain 's competitor and the girlfriend is held hostage by the villain in a cell , under threat of rape by the hero 's rival . the most interesting character turns out to be chico , a dwarf who is the villain 's assistant ; he 's loyal to the baron but is sympathetic to the plight of the hero . much of the fighting utilizes the ballet - like capabilities of the hero , with a lot of leaping and slow motion . the sound fx are also amped up and exaggerated in an attempt to add more impact to the blows . there are a few good fights during the tournament towards the climax , but none really stand out . if one had to pick , i suppose the best involves the brutish muscle man - henchman of the baron , introduced late in the story ( he lifts the back of a car at one point ) . you wonder how the hero will take him out at the end , since the brute seems to shrug off most of the punches . the acting is very mediocre , descending into camp as far as the girlfriend , who tends to laugh for no reason , as if she 's high on grass , though she is very cute . some of the training scenes are also campy , especially all those guys running over or rolling down the desert sands . and , with such a title , there 's surprisingly few actual killings . ryan , as steve chase , returned as a traditional agent in the sequel " kill and kill again . " hero:4 villain:4 femme fatales:4 henchmen:6 fights:6 stunts / chases:4 gadgets:2 auto:3 locations:5 pace:5 overall:4 + +1 finally ! other people who have actually seen this show ! it is the funniest anime i have ever seen , but most people have even heard about it . it is just hilarious . ' and so kintaro will continue to ride his trusty bike and maybe one day , he will save the world .... or maybe not ' . tare just some classic bits in it ' and so he will ride onto the next city ... because he has no choice since his brakes are broken ( study study study ) ' and some of the lessons that he writes down in his little notebook , ' today i had a very educational experience . i tried to look backwards , but unfortunately i was already looking that way . it hurt . todays lesson , the human head can not turn 360 degrees . ' +1 a charming movie enhanced by the musical and vocal background , especially during the competition . my understanding is that there was never a soundtrack but could you , through your sources , advise me where i might get information on the singer and the likelihood of getting a copy of the song he sang . your help would be appreciated . the song really touched me and my wife and we would like to secure a copy wherever possible so that we might play it as background music when we have our family and friends over for our " italian nights " . if you are able to get this information to us we would be eternally grateful . even if you can advise of the studio contact so that we might go direct.

regards,

john payling +0 with the dialogue in the dubbed version of this film , i do n't think that shakespeare is in any great danger . this is the story of an ancient aztec mummy who has been disenfranchised . his stuff has been taken and this really ticks him off . he seems to know who 's doing this even though he 's a gyrating , raving entity . i loved the two dull men who tell the story of how the mummy was found and the doctor who is determined to destroy the creature . there are all these scenes in this ridiculous graveyard , full of cheap crosses and other junk . there 's a mausoleum where the mummy is kept . i ca n't begin to reproduce the idiocy of this , including a snake pit where the good doctor is thrown ( there is a door next to it so he can crawl out ) to the robot , a mass of metal cans with a guy inside . the dialogue is awful . there are long pauses between speeches as if someone offstage is feeding them their lines . i love the scene where the two little kids accuse their mother of going out at night ( she goes into this zombie state or something ) . nonetheless , if your looking for a film that you can laugh at and never takes itself seriously , watch this . have a couple beers first . like a direct line from the mummy 's tomb , " watch this and your eyes will bleed and your breath will stink . " what more can i say ? +1 and what is its genre ? the backstage expose story ; what theatrical life is really like behind those broadway ( and other ) curtains . it certainly has a lot of competition : singin ' in the rain both i and ii ( 1929 and 1952 ) , 42nd street , golddiggers of ( you name the year . ) ; dames of 1934 ; noises off ( 1992 ) from the farcical side and a star is born i and ii from the 1930s and the 1950s from the tragical side : not to mention summer stock of 1950 : the list keeps rollin ' along . so what makes this movie so special ? and why are there so few comments about this stunningly great movie ? have so few people actually seen it ? how amazing to see a younger frank langella pre - dracula and pre - frost - nixon by 30 years ! how amazing to see the fresh and talented tom hulce so pre - amadeus ! and yet another superb stiller ! what a wonderful line - up of talented people at their very best from so long ago ! and such a script ! who was this david shaber ? so full of realistic disillusion and pathos compared to the usual sentimentality and feel - good comedy ! as especially exemplified by the star - is - born - like episode where the heroine achieves broadway while the langella character has to content himself with still another provincial tour.

langella 's subsequent hysterical and sadistic blowup against the star - struck latin teacher and his granddaughter in which he vents his fury and frustration is just one of many fantastic and psychologically real moments in the film . ( the latin teacher and his love affair with backstage life certainly echo marlene dietrich and her seduced professor in the blue angel of 1929 . ) another in the series of mercenary and cold - hearted agents like kevin mccarthy who was preceded by burt lancaster in the sweet smell of success ( 1957 ) and succeeded by alan alda in clubland ( 2001 ) in movie history . the sexual liberation of the hulce character recalls similar incidents in o'neill 's great comedy ah , wilderness.

and what a tribute to the vanished operettas of long ago : the red mill of victor herbert ; rose marie and the vagabond king of rudolf friml ; the desert song of sigmund romberg etc . what satirical insertions of bits from the great plays like romeo and juliet . tributes to the theater itself as expostulated by the star langella . the richness and depth of this movie are simply endless . and to be saddled by such a title ! who could have an inkling of what this great movie is about from such a ridiculous and unsuggestive title ? but on the other hand , what title could one have applied to such a magnificent drama which might have lived up to its stirring , emotional content?

ps : i just saw ( 2009 ) frank langella in his latest acting spectacular : as richard nixon in frost - nixon . how this great actor after 30 years simply goes from triumph to triumph ! +1 nicely done evil little comedy pitting the fbi against organized crime with a nice lady caught in the middle . the actress who played the jealous wife of the mob boss ' tony the tiger ' almost stole the show with her raging tantrums . 3 stars +0 yes , i admire the independent spirit of it all , but it 's like road trip with a bad cast and no budget.

i chuckle when i watch american comedies , i do n't laugh . this movie made me laugh , but only because of the abundantly obvious attempts to simulate high - budget american high school / pot - flicks.

if you want good independent american comedy with pot - references , go watch kevin smith or richard linklater flicks or something . do n't waste your time on this piece of sh't movie.

i mean , how can you take these comments seriously when most people are complaining about the characters not smoking pot!

and by the way : in norway it 's called " dude , where 's my pot " ! +0 a stunningly beautiful charlotte lewis stars as a woman who is terrorized by a ghosts who torment her on the phone . driven to the edge in terror charlotte is forced to confront this chilling mystery in order to save her sanity and her life . i ca n't believe that ruggero deodato , the director behind " ultimo mondo cannibale","cannibal holocaust " and " house on the edge of the park " directed this absurd piece of trash . admittedly the music by goblin front man claudio simonetti is pretty good , but the story is painfully stupid . the script by franco ferrini is ridiculous and it makes no sense , the acting is bad and there is absolutely no suspense . the scene in which a prospective rapist of charlotte lewis is killed by coins ejected from a subway telephone is more than laughable . don't waste your time with this piece of crap . there are far better italian horror movies out there ! +0 i am a fan of slasher movies , especially of scream 1 - 3 , but this one is just one killing after another . to my astonishment : part ii is far better and you get the whole story of part one summarized ! so do n't waste time on this one and move right on to part ii , you wo n't regret it cause part 2 actually has a plot and is quite self - ironical . first part : 1 out of 10 second part : 4 out of 10 +1 a great movie . the movie was even better then the commercials put on . and believe it or not it was very very inspirational . i really think anyone who walks out of the movie at the end will be inspired one way or another.

it was kinda corny at the very beginning , but quickly picks up . i laughed . i laughed very hard on some parts . the acting is basically above average , nothing special , but better then average . i can safely say it was the second funniest movie to come out this summer ( 1st funniest being clerks ii ) . so after all of that i give it a 7/10 ( a high seven , but not quite an eight ) . +1 pity the poor reviewer who disliked / did n't understand this wonderful film . what a sad life he must lead!

this movie has more to say about life and relationships than most i 've ever seen , yet it 's not dark or preachy like the " ordinary people " type of film . it is mostly humorous , though not technically a comedy.

the whole thing feels a little like a fantasy , perhaps shakespear 's " midsummer nights ' dream . " beautiful , intelligent women abound , with wonderful cinematography and a non - insulting screenplay that does n't miss a beat.

i look forward to seeing it every time this film is re - run on cable . it 's like re - reading a favorite , treasured book . +0 this movie is a waste of time . though it has actors who have the potential to do something decent , the acting in the movie is sub - par , and has a cliché point . " you never know what 's going to happen tomorrow , so live your life to the fullest and do what makes you happy . " that sentence saves you from wasting hours of your life on this movie . people who like this movie are the same people who would enjoy sitting for two hours before finding that the entire movie was a dream sequence . if the most important part of the movie is n't even going to happen , at least make it enjoyable to watch and captivating . there 's a reason this project did n't make a theatrical release , and though indy films can turn out very good , this one does not even come close . +0 i 'm sorry , but i can not understand what people were smoking when they wrote how great they thought " ethan mao " was . i have seen better acting , character and plot development in pornos ! warning : i am going to give away a key element to the " plot " . after holding his family hostage overnight , ethan lets his vile , evil , hated step - mom go to the bank - alone ! ! ! - to retrieve the piece of his late mom 's jewellery which he so desperately wants . guess what ? she calls the cops ! wow ... what a twist ! i could n't see that coming at all.

the only good thing about this movie was that it was less than 90 minutes.

pure , unadulterated rubbish ! +1 there are too many people on this board who have obviously missed the subtle wit of this series . < br />
this show is great because it 's a hilarious parody of itself . guys who are self - proclaimed studs are given a fair chance to convince us of their seduction abilities until they " hit the field " just to expose their complete lack of " game " on national tv – it 's absolutely hilarious and the guys who are actually skilled are extremely compelling to watch as they effortlessly seduce the pretentious women that frequent these trendy nightclubs ! < br />
it celebrates unique charisma when deserved and mocks delusional douchebags when deserved . either way , it 's always entertaining because , unlike other dating shows , it perfectly captures the authentic awkwardness and excitement of a " pickup " . i highly recommend this show to anyone with a sense of humor . +0 i watched this after seeing " death tunnel " ( this being , without question , the worst movie i 've ever seen in my life ) so you can understand i went in rolling my eyes a little at seeing the directors and producers of that cinematic gem being in charge of this one . first of all , i thought the director and producer were the same guy . they both are kid rock meets dawg the bounty hunter . i watched the taps investigation , and i am not a skeptic- i think taps is the closest one will ever get to a scientific method in the field . that was cool and believable- i do believe they are haunted.

but this , like the reviewer above mentioned , like taking a tour . okay a tour , fine , but the " investigators " and " group leaders " seemed to make a pretty penny and have a financial investment into whether its haunted or not , so when they have fantabulous stories , i have to take it with a heaping teaspoon of salt.

as someone else mentioned , i could make out whatever they wanted me to see in the picture about 50 % of the time . the rest of the time , i could n't make out anything . also without any context to the photos- time of day , type of camera , moisture in the room , dust particles ( which 75 % are what the orbs are ) , weather and a ga - gillion other factors , i ca nt accept them . i also ca nt help thinking that some might be doctored.

why would that band keep the numbers from the door ? vandalism ? also during the taps investigation , they tried to dig up the death certificates of those nurses- and they only found one which was ruled " accidental " ( people did n't want to officially proclaim suicide ) . yet when one of the guides was mentioning this , he said " yep , and its marked suicide . " it really felt like the guides to the haunted houses here in october.

i did however like the interviews with the patients and staff from the old hospital(s ) , that really gave it a lot of perspective and a personal touch . i 'm also glad that they mentioned that the staff had the best of intentions , and were n't some ghoulish - wardens . they were n't the best methods , but its all they had . they were desperate to stop the disease . +0 eghads , what a bad movie . tart is perhaps the very worst movie i 've seen all year , and i 've run across some doozies . there is nothing redeeming about this trash , from the characterization to the direction to the plot . even the usually brilliant dominique swain could n't save this movie . none of the characters are in the least bit sympathetic , with the possible exception of eloise ( wonderfully portrayed by lacey chabert , the only bright spot in this dismal failure).

*******possible spoilers********

the main problem with tart is that it rambles on without saying anything . it staggers about drunkenly instead of leading us along the path of the story . it also introduces numerous potentially tantalizing details ( the hypochondriac brother , the mother 's possessions constantly being repossessed , the anti - semitic classmate , the other classmate 's murderous father ) without successfully exploring a single one of them . and just when i finally thought that there might be some sort of resolution for the characters , the movie crashes to an unexpectedly violent end.

i left the movie feeling that it was trying to tell me something , but with the strong impression that the message was forgotten before it could be communicated . this is an obvious first film from a writer / director who really needs to spend much more time working under more established film makers before foisting any more of her work on an unsuspecting public.

i gave this film 1 out of 10 , and i 'm usually very generous , even with bad films . +0 i respect mike hodges , and liked get carter immensely for it 's bleak outlook , but the croupier just seems like a particularly dull itv drama.

the reserved , cold acting is n't just the preserve of the lead character , it 's spread to the entire cast , meaning there is nothing to contrast owen 's character with.

none of the characters evoke any kind of feelings at all , except boredom . the ending of the film is also untidy at best.

the camera work etc is fairly good , but if you want to see hodges best watch get carter , do n't bother with this uninteresting , unimaginative trawl through emotions he covered better 20 + years ago +1 this is a totally awesome movie ! if you have n't seen it yet , you damn well should . sure , the plot is slow to develop , the special effects are laughable , the acting is ridiculous and the action is badly choreographed , but as wrestler ddp would say ; that 's not a bad thing .... that 's a good thing ! everything about this movie is hilarious , especially if you get the dubbed version , which has even worse actors . it 's countless laughs until you get to the end , yearning for the sequel , where the mummy fights wrestling women . thus , i give it ten stars . unless you 're one of those ' discriminating ' and ' intelligent ' people with good taste , who likes only ' high quality ' films of the highest calibre , i recommend this utterly monkeydellic movie ! +1 what a great movie this was . is it heaven ? hell ? or something in between ? i disagree with many reviews of this movie saying that this is a depiction of hell . it is not even clear if the opening scene starts the movie or is a flashback from the end . further , it is not clear that the main character goes to hell , but perhaps someplace in between . the review i read on imdb says this is hell , but i disagree whole - heartedly . take into consideration that perhaps good people who commit suicide may not be condemned to hell ... this only one religious belief . this is indeed a thinker , and i have / would recommend it to anyone who likes that type of movie . definitely worth it ! +1 a vg brit rom - com , one to watch if you can get your hands on a copy . quirky and often surprising , this is not the best of brady 's films ( kiss kiss bang bang is by far the funniest ) , though it does have a unique charm . well written the story veers off into a few dead ends but mostly surfaces with a new plot high . you know from the start how it 's going to end , but when it comes it is honest and very open ended , a realistic and credible ending , the end seemed like a beginning , enjoyable and left me wanting more . +1 one of the best war films i have ever seen , if not the best . it is very hard to talk about such films as it is very difficult to point at any film mistake made . the " problem " is as it looks too real and by that drags you in to the ruins of stalingrad and make you suffer for both sides . this is for the reason that this film unlike the most of hollywood films does n't glorify the war or the heroism of the main characters . instead of that , the film makes them heroes only for being human and by that is anti - war as much as the reason can offer . extremely convincing war scenes and so impressive acting , most of the scenes look like isolated theater pieces . also , german army is played by germans which is so convincing as well . the film is produced and realized by germans where you can see their love for details to perfection . this is the reason why " stalingrad " is one of the films i can watch million times and never feel dull . i watched the film with my father who fought in wwii and the first thing he said was : " this is like real , this is how the war against germans looked like " . this is the place you can see how did it look to be a soldier in the worst nightmare of warfare in human history and turning point of wwii : stalingrad . +0 i just attended a preview screening of this film . a masterpiece of documentary film - making it was not . totally absorbed with its subject , the film becomes incapable of leveling any sort of critical commentary with regard to ms. faye . cloying and sappy , the only redeeming quality of the film was its use of puppets in an attempt ( albeit a failed one ) to structure some kind of narrative . but the creepiest experience occurred as the closing credits rolled . the audience rose and applauded . like moths to flame , americans in the 21st century are still drawn to freakshows . the narrative of the misunderstood monster is getting rather tired . +1 before i review this film , i must make a confession that is rather a bold statement to make as a film reviewer . anyone who has already read any of my previous reviews may know that i 've always been controversial in a low - key sense , giving high marks for flops such as " captain america " and 1985 's " creature " and panning such film classics as alistar sim 's " a christmas carol " and " shakespeare in love . " with that in mind , this confession might not come as a surprise:

the simple fact is , christopher lambert is probably one of my favorite actors . woah , now , do n't start getting crazy on me just yet . let me explain myself : i by no means think he 's the greatest actor in the world . i clearly confess that he is not . he is certainly no morgan freeman or anthony hopkins , but i would say that his acting ability is probably somewhere up there with at least bruce willis . what i admire about him , however , are the human qualities that he brings into his action heroes . he is just an average guy who laughs and cries and bleeds , who is a hero because he has to be , not necessarily because he wants to be . it takes a lot , in my opinion , to be able to bring out those qualities in a character ( especially in the movies he 's worked in ) , and lambert 's heroes are a far cry from schwartzennegger 's or stallone 's . quite frankly , lambert 's characters are easier for me to relate to . hence , he 's not the greatest actor in the world .... he 's just a personal favorite.

i ca n't say that same , however , for his films . however much i appretiate his acting , it would be foolish not to confess that his choice of films leave something to be desired . most of them are , quite frankly , terrible , and any ridicule that he 's gotten over the years from me is n't due to his acting , but rather his bad choice in scripts.

with that in mind , i can say that his debut film , " tarzan , " is one of his best films and probably his greatest performance . as i mentioned , it is effective becasue of the humaness he brings to the role , and for how seriously the director , writers and actors handle the material . this is a far leap from the b - movie action adventures with johnny weismeller from the 1940 's . in fact , i would hesitate to call it an action movie . instead , it is a serious drama that takes all of e.r. burrough 's material seriously , showing tarzan 's quest to discover his real family in scotland after realizing that he does n't fit in as a " white ape . " he is torn in between his old family and his new one , which includes a wonderful sir ralph richardson in his final role . in an attempt to adapt to humans , his ape instincts also kick in , and he ca n't decide what he loves more : his real family , or the one that he 's always known . all in all , it is a wonderful commentary on society , and a wonderful character study.

if nothing else , it launched lambert into international stardom , which continued will into the 1980 's with films like " highlander " and " he sicilian . " unfortunately , it did n't last . but just wait a while .... his latest career moves such as " gideon " and " resurrection " have proven that though he still have a long way to go , he 's a competent enough actor to be able to perhaps make a ... ahem .... comeback if he 'll just pick his roles better.

for now , however , here 's the verdict on his first film:

* * * out of * * * * +0 surely this deserves to be in the bottom 10 films of all time , pity it 's just a tv movie . rubbish that only we british can produce ! it perhaps has some merit in the so awful it 's good scale . watch out for scene where they start dancing ! +0 it is unsettling seeing so many people giving outrageously high ratings to this film . some of the praise uses such twisted reasoning ( and transparent agendas that betray a simple love of anything that is in any way critical of the u.s. ) that it approaches hysteria.

heaven 's gate is a bad movie , it is fundamentally awful . endless scenes using elaborate shots that serve no purpose , muddy dialogue , murky narative , no sense of any theme aside from excess ...

the high rating of this disaster is a product of revisionist history and temporary shifts in perception.

for some perspective watch lawrence of arabia before watching heaven 's gate . you will see just how aimless and lost this film truly is . the " issues " it may have been trying to deal with are lost in a miasma.

i have no problem with films that are critical of the u.s. per se , but when a terrible film gets such undeserved praise purely because of that element ... that 's worth challenging.

the film is worth seeing for two reasons ; curiosity , and as a cautionary tale for young filmmakers.

i saw this at home for free , imagine the torture of being in a theater and sitting through it ... for 4 meandering hours ! +0 macbeth is one of the most frequently told stories in cinema and has been translated many times in numerous theater and celluloid settings . originally written by william shakespeare in the early 1600 's , macbeth tells the story of betrayal among royalty and one man 's quest for power . director geoffrey wright ( romper stomper ) tries his hand at updating macbeth by setting it in the contemporary melbourne underworld . a film where the characters substitute swords for guns ( ala baz luhrman 's romeo and juliet ) and royal vassals for gangsters , macbeth is a gritty , violent , but critically flawed film.

macbeth ( sam worthington)works for king duncan ( gary sweet ) . after being elevated to the thane of glamis by the king ( as was prophesied to macbeth by three witches ) , macbeth starts setting his eyes on the throne . one night the king comes to stay at macbeth 's house and lady macbeth ( victoria hill ) talks him into killing the king to assume power . macbeth kills his master and then assumes his crown . but success has it 's downside , as macbeth soon finds out , when he has to go to hideous lengths to protect his murderous secret . < br />
ok , first things first . the film 's major fault is sam worthington . his portrayal of macbeth is in a word ... boring . i honestly did n't care about macbeth while watching the film . i had more sympathy for victoria hill 's lady macbeth because she bothered to act at least . worthington sits sullen and wood faced throughout the entire film . i felt like he was doing his best impression of johnny deep 's george jung character from blow ... but without the charisma . i have never seen worthington in a film before so i 'm not sure if it was his or the director 's fault , but either way the glue that should have tied everything together into one cohesive unit is weak.

the dialog is good , but when matched up to the geoffrey wright 's australian gangster motif seems a bit out of place . frentically paced action sequences mixed with long shaksperian musings creates pacing conflict within the film . i understand that this is macbeth and that the director wanted to use the original dialog intact . but hard , fast action scenes following a three minute soliloquy tends to get annoying if not a bit pretentious . < br />
the camera - work is highly stylized , and for the most part , it works well . one thing that i found annoying was how the camera would slowly jostle back and forth , almost constantly . i do n't mind shots like that it 's just overdone . it 's passes beyond the realm of being cool and stylish and instead becomes irritating . other than that , the art direction and cinematography is fairly well - done . < br />
for all of the good qualities macbeth possesses ; stylish direction , shakespearian dialog , a strong soundtrack , supernatural nude witches(the weird sisters ) , and good helpings of brutal , bloody violence . all of these strengths are forgotten when one considers sam worthington 's uninspired portrayal of macbeth . the role of macbeth was essential for tying everything together and in this respect geoffrey wright and sam worthington failed miserably , making macbeth a forgettable foray into shakespeare . +0 horrible waste of talent . not even worth watching when there is absolutely nothing else to do . my hope against hope is that the actors at least got paid well . anyway , if you 're a fan of heather 's or luke 's , you 'll be really disappointed by this big budget student film . +0 movies like these do not need sequels . part of the advantage of don bluth moving away from disney is that he did n't need to suffer their endless tirade of straight - to - video , poorly animated cash - in sequels . but apparently it was someone 's brilliant idea to make a sequel to " all dogs go to heaven , " so we get this.

charlie sheen replaces burt and he 's not really as good . most of the film is just a poor excuse for a sequel and it is n't nearly as dark , different or entertaining as the original.

i feel sorry for future generations who are going to have to suffer endless sequels like this without ever knowing what it was like to have a time when hollywood did n't totally rely on successful films as a crutch to release banal crap.

please , no more sequels to kids films that do n't need 'em . +1 valley girl is the definitive 1980 's movie with catch phrases filtered throughout this wonderfully acted movie . the characters are so convincing that you forget it is a movie and not a video of an actual " day - in - the - life " of any high school , usa . this flick is to the 1980 's what the brady bunch tv series is to the 1970 's . if you do n't like it , well then " gag me with a spoon . " +0 i like kevin bacon and cathy moriarty , and i love mary stuart masterson , but the movie was n't good at all . there was n't a likable character in the picture , and the plot was nearly non - existent.

ms . masterson is a great actress , but she just did n't pull off the " tough girl " character . ( she had similar problems with her character in the second day of christmas . ) perhaps she should avoid these characters , especially those with an obnoxious female child to play off of.

evan rachel wood was unimpressive . her character was a brat , plain and simple , and no young actress could have given harriet any positive feelings.

in the interest of full disclosure , i could n't even finish watching this picture . forty - five minutes of my time is enough to waste . +0 it is said that there are some people out there who actually admire monogram 's movies . well -- and why not ? monogram studios lived on a kind of cost plus basis ; cost , plus enough to pay the rent and buy a pizza and a bottle of robust muscatel every once in a while . sure , they 're cheap . but let 's face it : they 're coarse , fast , philistine , vulgar , but exhilarating . they have no pretensions at all . they 're designed to divert the audience for an hour or so at the bottom of a double bill . so what if john wayne gallops through the wild west along a road lined with telephone poles ? this is n't art , it 's entertainment.

take this movie , " flight to mars . " at the beginning , when we 're first meeting the characters , a man might introduce his female companion abruptly , avoiding any tedious subtlety : " professor , this is my fiancée and assistant , who is a rocket scientist and a beautiful woman . she loves me but is growing impatient with me because i 'm always wrapped up in my scientific work . perhaps you could steal her from me , marry her , give her the babies and the picket - fenced home she yearns for . if necessary i will die on this journey to see her dreams realized . also , she likes it a little rough . " it saves a lot of writing and shooting time , does n't it ? that 's what people mean when they say a narrative is " fast " . ( this one was shot in five days . ) why should we have to hint about these things ? i mean , what the hell is this , a cheap sci fi movie or henry james ? actually this is a particularly well - funded example of a monogram movie . it 's in color , for one thing . " cinecolor " to be exact . ( you can tell it 's not any other " color " you 'd recognize . ) and look at the cast . the female lead is dismissible , as is usual with monogram , but the male leads are definitely up there on the b list . cameron mitchell as the reporter , yet to hit his stride as a male lead , which , come to think of it , he never really did . and arthur franz as the pipe - smoking head scientist , the pride of perth amboy , new jersey . and -- for science fiction fans -- how about this pair of aces : both morris ankrum and john litel ! there 's not really much point in describing the plot in detail . the five crew members crash land on mars where they find an underground civilization inhabited by organisms whose evolution was isomorphic with ours , right down to their having five digits and willowy babes in short skirts . and they picked up english from listening to our broadcasts . american broadcasts , that is , judging from their speech . they 're led by a sinister cabal who try to hijack the space ship , build many imitations of it , and colonize earth . they do not succeed.

the special effects are n't very special . the men walk around a couple of spare sets , wearing black costumes with stylized lightning bolts emblazoned on their chests and scarlet capes billowing behind them . their names consist exclusively of english phonemes -- alzar , terris , ikron . the lissome martian who falls for arthur franz is named alita , with an indo - european diminutive appendage , and she already knows what kissing is.

overall , i found it as snappy as it was intended to be , but dull too . the story is that of any buck rogers 1930s serial . once the earthlings and the martians meet and it 's established that they have a common language , and that the martians have a sinister agenda , that 's it . in two hours , even an indifferent screenwriter could turn this into a story of nazi spies in world war ii . the plot is done by the numbers , the dialog has no sparkle , the acting is pedestrian.

however , dedicated aficionados of monogram productions should enjoy it . after all , jean - luc goddard , the contrarian french egghead , dedicated " a bout de soufflé " to monogram , so they ca n't have been all that bad . +0 robin williams is excellent in this movie and it is a pity the material is not enough of a match for him . this may work if you buy into the " u - s - a ! number one ! " mentality but story wise nothing much happens . quite a shame really since the movie is really trying to say something , and says it sincerely . it just does n't pack enough emotional punch . +0 this movie is at times a wild 80s college sex comedy , others a sweet romantic one ... then it has moments of serious drama and then sprinkles in dashes of science fiction ... it is so uneven its almost ridiculous.

but i would hardly rank it as one of the worst films i 've ever seen except of course for the fact that they casted peter o'toole.

there is absolutely nothing for him to work with here . poor dialog , poor performances to work off of , poor everything ... and yet he 's fantastic ... there is not one good thing about his part and yet he makes it work if only on pure charm alone.

the fact that he was so able to achieve so much with so little shines a spotlight on how greatly everyone else in this film failed , making it seem even worse than i suppose it actually is ...

if any other actor was in o'toole 's role , i would have forgotten this movie as crap and never thought of it again , but a fine performance by peter o'toole despite all odds ensures that i 'll remember this film for a long time to come ... if only as a film that , maybe , could have been good if anyone involved in it was nearly half as good as peter o'toole . +1 where the heck is andreas(trond fausa aurvaag ) , exactly ? heaven ? hell ? a parallel universe ? when the bothersome man steps off the subway platform and meets an onrushing train , his next conscious moment occurs on a bus ; riding solo , the newest arrival , in a dead netherworld where all the suicides go . dressed as he was at the time of his sudden departure from the corporeal biosphere , andreas is greeted by an official man , who processes and transports the bothersome man from the barren flatlands to a city , if the eyeballs work , is a dead ringer for the sort of urban landscapes that he once inhabited , if memory serves him right . andreas retains the look of a sleepwalker in a trance , a man estranged from people and objects , struggling to find his bearings ; at home , or rather , his assigned apartment ; or at work , where the bothersome man is randomly designated as an accountant for an independent contractor . havard(johannes joner ) , his boss , tells him , " you 'll get used to it , " which covers more than just crunching numbers , we suspect , in this world , same as the old world.

if life is meaningless , like french existentialist philosopher jean - paul satre said , the same can be said for death , as well . the subculture of office life might be heaven for one man , but it looks like hell to us , under the context that " den brysomme mannen " operates on . to work in the afterlife , in essence , is to work for the rest of your life . the social intercourse among andreas ' office mates may pass as normal in the physical world , but death is a variable that creates estrangement in the viewer , as he / she now recognizes the drudgery of white - collar labor performed by white - collar laborers , who kill the hours with their inconsequential small - talk and designated jobs they perform during the course of a day like automotons , each and every day , seem irrational in its self - evident absurdity . to see daily life replicated in a speculative light , " den brysomme mannen " makes normal human interaction look like deadpan comedy , as quotidian life becomes a performance , which transforms karl marx 's meaning of the word " alienation " , because here , the men and women in the office , " do " identify with their labor , like actors in a play who conspire to make their fictionalized selves appear real . but the bothersome man never fully participates in the facade . he 's always aware of the cracks.

from a wooden bench , andreas witnesses the aftermath of a jumper , who impales himself on an iron fence while people on their lunch breaks walk on by , indifferent to his escaping intestines that create red splatters on the clean sidewalk . andreas faces the same impassivity from his own co - workers after he purposely cuts off his own finger , with the hope that he 'll feel the pain , on a paper slicer . he does n't . it 's just another sensation , in addition to being able to taste and smell that 's lost to the bothersome man . this inability of being able to take solace in the simple pleasures , amplifies the bothersome man 's need for love , where simple pleasures compensated for his loneliness in the physical world . at a dinner party , hosted by his boss , andreas meets anne britt(petonella barker ) . they hit it off . he walks her home . she invites him in . they become a couple . he moves in . when they have sex , however , it 's good for neither andreas , nor anne , who seems to get more pleasure out of interior design . love is an abstract concept , another sensation that 's unattainable in this world , but love matters to the bothersome man , so he tries again with ingeborg(birgette lagen ) , a girl from work . " den brysomme mannen " deconstructs love by presenting its foundation as a series of gestures that require performances from both the man and woman . when ingeborg does n't elicit the same tender feelings for andreas after his hyper - romantic gesture of leaving anne britt for her , this norwegian film reveals its secrets about the prosaic , but odd city , with an open - endedness that 's solvable , and offer up multiple interpretations.

wounded by ingeborg 's apathy towards his avowal of love for her , the bothersome man wanders into the same subway station , stands at the same platform , leers at the same couple aggressively making out , and jumps . this time , he ca n't die . how can you die when you 're already dead ? hit repeatedly by train after train , andreas ' face turns into ground beef ; his body contorts in angles previously seen only seen in art . when the bothersome man realizes that love and death are out of his grasp , he seeks out the man from the club , who was willing to say what goes unsaid in this city of the walking dead . which is : death , not life , has no meaning.

getting to the bottom of the mystery behind andreas ' whereabouts drives the narrative , and to the filmmaker 's credit , this enigma is satisfactorily addressed , in a scene that recalls spike jonze 's " being john malkovich " , when andreas crawls through a tunnel in order to cross over into another world , like a newborn baby , which resembles the portal to malkovich 's brain that craig schwartz charges people to crawl through . andreas ' attempt to traverse the great divide presents a beguiling paradox . since heaven and earth are literally separated by a wall , this vulnerable boundary acts as a perfect encapsulation of the atheistic belief that " heaven is a place on earth " . but at the same time , heaven is proved by the reality of a hell ; the place that andreas is sent to after being banished from the city of his destination . +0 this is a film that really makes me cringe . in 1951 , mgm and looney toons were making some of their very best cartoons -- with amazing animation , exceptional backgrounds and great stories . then , in the late 40s , a new style of animation began to appear ( such as the " crusader rabbit " series on tv)--animation with extremely simplistic artwork in order to save money . unfortunately , columbia picture 's cynical ploy worked ! ! instead of the public hating the toons ( as they should have ) , many accepted them and the oscar people ( ampas ) actually gave this film the award for best animated short -- giving legitimacy for an inferior product . unfortunately , in the dollars and sense world of hollywood , this soon began to creep into the products of legitimate studios -- resulting in rather crappy cartoons . later , it got even worse as in addition to lousy animation and backgrounds , the stories themselves became almost unbearable for adults to watch . the cleverness and style of the classic cartoons were gone . and for this tragedy , i blame , in part , gerald mcboing - boing -- one of the granddaddies of cheap cartoons . the story is n't that bad but the animation is a horror and listening to the kid saying " boing - boing " incessantly is a pain . +1 a wealthy young man , raised as a son of the gods , must confront his chinese heritage while living in a white world.

although the premise upon which this film is based is almost certainly a biological impossibility and the secret of the plot when revealed at the movie 's conclusion makes all which has preceded it faintly ludicrous , the story still serves up some decent entertainment and good acting.

richard barthelmess has the title role as the sweet - natured oriental whose life is terribly complicated because he looks caucasian . barthelmess keeps the tone of his performance serious throughout , gazing intently into the middle distance ( a mannerism he developed during silent days ) whenever his character is indecently misused . he makes no attempt to replicate his classic performance in d. w. griffith 's broken blossoms ( 1919 ) and this is to his credit . beautiful constance bennett is the millionaire 's daughter who makes barthelmess miserable . she is gorgeous as always , but her behavior does not endear her to the viewer and her terrible illness in the final reel is kept mercifully off screen.

multi - talented frank albertson has a small role as barthelmess ' improvident buddy . serene e. alyn warren and blustery anders randolf play the leading stars ' very different fathers , while claude king distinguishes his brief appearance as the english author who befriends barthelmess.

movie mavens will recognize little dickie moore , uncredited , playing barthelmess as a tiny child.

the original technicolor of the flashback sequence has faded with time to a ruddy tint . the shot purporting to be the south of france instead looks suspiciously like avalon on santa catalina island , off the coast of southern california . +0 surprisingly kieslowski 's this movie is disappointing to me because of the sometimes weird and sometimes cliché script that also seems a work of a poor observation sometimes . there is an isolated young boy . he lives with one of his relatives , but he is lonely and every night watches a woman who lives across their building . it seems ! that he wants her . he is one of the youths who are not good at communication with the opposite sex . however , he likes that woman , when the woman comes to his house with a man , tomek gets pain . then , we understand that kieslowski tells us a story about an isolated young boy who needs a female to flirt or who falls in love with a mature woman . he does not do something else , because may be he knows that it is his salvation . one day , he stops that woman , suddenly , he seems a shy boy , but proves that he is not , so he explains her almost everything . she lectures and refuses him . everything is so realistic like the other kieslowski films , no problem . the problems start when tomek visits her , the story of a lonely young boy who falls in love with a mature woman ( but an unrequited love ) turns into the story of a lonely young boy falls in love with a mature woman , at the beginnings the woman refuses , but after a short time , she starts to change her mind . this u - turn makes the movie cliché firstly . the personality of tomek is weird ? or a result of a poor observation ? i disappointed with this character , this is my opinion and i will try to tell why . when he goes to her house , magda treats him very friendly . she asks what do you want from me ? to kiss me ? to make love with me ? to go out with me ? at this point , i remember the people who say she is a femme fatale . see ? returning to the scene , tomek rejects all the proposals . why ? because he is shy ? i do n't think so , but his communication is blunt , ok . after the leg scene at home , some events make the movie misses its aim . i think that the aim of the movie is ( should have been according to the story ) to show us there are some people who suffer from lack of endearment and to save from this situation is not easy owing to lack of communication and being aloof especially for men . i mean that at this point , what does the movie say ? it is blurred and disappointing . it is seen that he is not hunger for love or a female or sex . then , what ? and the suicide attempt scene support this weakness . so that he touches her legs , he wants to kill himself ! by the way , as i mentioned before , some say magda is a femme fatale . totally not . she endeavors in order to make tomek happy . does she avoid having contact with him ? no . does she insult him ? no . does she amuse him ? no . and does she deceive him ? no . she has some troubles with her ( ex ) lover , so she is not o.k. however , she does not take revenge for it from tomek . she is not an angel , but not a femme fatale also . +0 i thought maybe a film which boasted a cast including peter o'toole , susannah york , michael craig & harry andrews might be worth watching . alas , i was wrong . utter pretentious nonsense from beginning to end with both o'toole and york overacting wildly . i watched it twice and still have no idea what is was about . i 've a feeling o'toole plays the laird of a scottish castle who has a drink problem and likes reliving childhood games with his sister ( york ) . he is also barking mad . but apart from that , your guess is as good as mine.

the film has no redeeming feature whatsoever . i can only assume the cast and director were blackmailed into making this dreary , unimaginative , stagy piffle . clearly a waste of the time of a talented cast and director . risible . +1 once upon a time , troma , the company that brought us cinema classics such as : the toxic avenger , rabid grannies , poultrygeist , redneck zombies and surf nazis must die , decided long ago to adapt shakespeare 's famous play , ' romeo and juliet . ' this adaptation decided to spice up the story by adding kinky sex , extreme violence , genital monsters , body piercing and incest and it succeeded in creating a bizarre yet hilarious film . anyone going into a troma production should know what to expect , and that is irreverent and perverse comedy with plenty of political incorrectness . expect plenty of nods to other troma films and plenty of re - used gags ( flipping cars and head squashing ) . many may think it sounds like utter crap that only morons would find funny ... they may be right , but at the same time they may need to lighten up and enjoy the insanity and mind - numbingness that is tromeo and juliet.

with a great cast , a funny script ( by james gunn and lloyd kaufman ) , a fitting soundtrack and plenty of great visual gags , kaufman has yet again succeeded in turning what is right upside down and grossing the hell out of everyone . get some popcorn , grab a beer , invite your friends over and enjoy tromeo and juliet for what it is , a shakespeare adaptation with plenty of balls . the end.

4/5 +0 i knew full well when i rented this dvd that it could very well be one of the worst movies i 've seen in my life . but to say that it was one of the worst movies i 've ever viewed would be putting it lightly . i 'm wondering if there is n't some legal action that can be taken against the individuals that allowed this film to produced . i mean , the financing had to come from somewhere , someone had to put up money for this to be produced!!??

i'd pinpoint several production values that led to the failure of this film , but this film violated every production standard in the universe . i could n't make it thru the entire movie , as i started getting dizzy the from horrendous filming techniques . i also ca n't tell you how many scenes i just ended zoning off during because of the inexplicably horrific dialog.

i feel like i 've been permanently scarred for life . if you viewed this movie before getting this warning , you should think about starting a support group with me for the poor people who did view this monstrosity . +0 i have just written a comment to " aces high " ( 1976 ) and that remind me of this film which i watched as kid when it was released ; since then i have watched it only once and that was more than enough . as kevin well says " it is a complete waste of time " . apart from the dog - fights which are nicely done the rest is a sequence of badly patched scenes with actors struggling with a lousy script and equally lousy direction . i do not remember the silly german accents mentioned by kevin in his comment , but that is another pathetic mistake ; if corman tried to make more convincing the characterization of the german pilots why did n't he use german actors or have those parts dubbed ? on the other hand is good example of the appalling hollywood - style of film - making with their " villains " so clearly identifiable , not only by their cruel actions but also by their grotesque accents.

talking about " cruel actions " the ridiculous scene were lieutenant hermann goering murders english nurses during an attack on an airbase is an absolutely disgusting piece of propaganda done with " historical hindsight " . if you want to a see a factual , moving , very well acted and directed film about the air war during wwi watch " aces high " ( 1976 ) or that wonderful classic " the dawn patrol " ( 1938 ) you shall not be disappointed . +1 karim hussain 's masterpiece of art / gore -- this cat is definitely a talent to look out for . we have in this several longer vignettes interspliced with some shorter segues . this is all in all a very powerful film that relies on its intense graphic imagery and symbolism and it is not for all viewers.

the film kicks off with a short called ovarian eyeball . very short segment that has a nude woman placed on a table naked . an unseen woman 's hand covers the supine woman 's face with a red cloth and makes an incision in her abdomen out of which an eyeball stalk is extracted . i 've got nothing too much to comment on this one due to its brevity.

human larvae is one of the films lynchpins and it is a totally unflinching portrayal of a perverse act committed by a disturbed man who has an incestuous love for his pregnant sister . this is one of those " must be seen to be believed " type things . i will say that this film has some of the best effects i 've seen in an indie horror film but the subject matter will make this an undeniably unpleasant experience for most ( not me though -- i live for this!).

rebirth could have been cut out of this film all together . this is the film 's weakest segment and it has a bunch of nude people f!cking bloody holes in a field and whatnot . very short but this one kind of blows the film 's momentum.

right brain / martyrdom is one of the most profane representations of religious imagery that i have ever seen and it totally kicks ass . think " p iss christ " or menstrual blood paintings of the virgin mary . very hard sexual / sexually violent / gory imagery is presented in this piece and it is definitely not for anyone who will be offended by sacrilege.

subconscious cruelty is one of the best films i 've seen under the banner of extreme horror it will be a very divisive film amongst horror fans and the filmgoing public in general . some will call it trash , some will call it brilliant . i do n't see much middle ground . i thought this film was pretty damn original and i will recommend it to anyone who is adventurous enough to try it . 9/10 . +1 lloyd hamilton was one of the most imaginative ( and among the funniest ) of all the silent - film comedians . why is he utterly forgotten ? unfortunately , the original negatives for a large percentage of his films were lost when the fox warehouse burnt in the early 1930s . hamilton was not handsome or graceful like chaplin , keaton and lloyd ; nor was he dapper , like raymond griffith . and unlike harry langdon and ( again ) chaplin , hamilton did not try for audience sympathy.

however , his films were hugely popular at the time of their original release , and they remain hilarious today . oscar levant once claimed that he asked chaplin if there was any other comedian whom he 'd ever envied , and chaplin instantly named lloyd hamilton . the character most frequently portrayed by hamilton on screen -- a flat - capped naff , with fastidious hand gestures and a duck - like walk -- was later adapted by vaudeville comedian eddie garr ( teri garr 's father ) , and further adapted by jackie gleason as his 1950s tv character ' the poor soul'.

'the movies ' , directed pseudonymously by roscoe arbuckle , is one of hamilton 's most innovative shorts , and it 's hilarious . we first see him as a country boy , bidding farewell to his family outside their homespun cottage , on his way to the big city . then he steps away from the cottage , and we see that it 's in the big city , with traffic booming all round him!

eventually , our hero ends up at a restaurant ( uncredited , but it 's the montmartre cafe in downtown l.a. ) where all the movie actors eat between takes . there 's an amusing gag when hamilton 's bumpkin character meets three actors in costume and makeup as presidents washington , lincoln and roosevelt : this gag would have been funnier if the impostors looked more like the originals . finally , our lad seats himself at a table , hoping to meet a celebrity . sure enough , entering the restaurant and sitting at the very next table is a big movie star ... none other than lloyd hamilton ! there 's a very well - made double - exposure shot -- the join is nearly invisible -- when lloyd hamilton as himself greets lloyd hamilton as the country boy.

sadly , hamilton 's peak period of creativity was very brief . he began his film career in crude slapstick films as one half of a double act ( ham and bud , opposite bud duncan ) , and had a brief and blazing period of stardom in shorts during the late silent period . sound movies were not kind to hamilton , and he was quickly shoved down the cast list in some crude early talkies . then he died young . fortunately , ' the movies ' is quite funny , and a splendid introduction to this unique comedians ' style . i 'll rate it 7 out of 10 . +1 footprints is a very interesting movie that is somewhat difficult to categorize . " psychological thriller " is the most appropriate description i can think of . the female protagonist , alice cespi , discovers that she does n't remember anything of the last three days . the only clue she has is a torn photo of a hotel . she is also haunted by a recurring , very vivid , dream about a science fiction movie that she believes she saw many years ago . in her pursuit of the truth behind her amnesia she does n't trust anyone , but little by little it becomes obvious that she has visited the town where the hotel is located before . this is an exciting flick whose main virtue is that it is virtually impossible to predict how the events will unfold , and particularly , how it will end . the unusual loneliness of the main character and the unreliability of everyone else ensure that the good old paranoid feeling is present throughout the film , whereas beautiful colors and some spectacularly filmed sequences make this a visually attractive movie as well . the important part of the one and only nicoletta elmi , everyone 's all time favorite redheaded obnoxious child star of italian horror , is an extra bonus . +1 i loved complete savages ! why did they cancel it anyway ? they should have made a second season and so on ... god ! they always cancel the good shows ... and leave all the boring stuff . nothing interesting at tv since complete savages is gone . this show was a great idea . a single firefighter father with five crazy sons and a lazy dog ... each and every one of them has his own madness in that house . tj is always the kid ... always the smaller one ... kyle rocks ! he breaks everything he touches ! he 's always on detention , he 's always doing the wrong stuff ... but still , he 's so funny by all the things that he does . sam is the smart one . he 's always shy and stupid when it comes to girls ... finally he ends up by dating angela . chris is the sports guy who does n't have much to do with school , studying , and stuff like that . he 's always funny . and finally ... jack ! the rock of the show . the oldest of all , the macho guy , " the rock star " ... but still , as crazy as everybody else . nick is ... helpless with these guys . oh ! and i almost forgot ! uncle jimmy ... he 's the man ! he 's like a 30 year old kid . he 's like doing the same stupid things that the boys are doing . i always wondered how did he end up by being a firefighter ... and the dog is the image of all the savage family . the thing is ... this show had everything to become something really big . it had everything , man ! but , of course ... they canceled it ... +0 the detonator is set in bucharest where some sort of ex cia government agent named sonni griffith ( wesley snipes ) has tracked down a arms dealer named dimitru ( matthew leitch ) , things go wrong though & dimitru finds out that sonni is working for the us government . after a big shoot - out most of dimitru 's men have been killed by sonni which the local romanian police force are unhappy about , top man flint ( michael brandon ) decides to send sonni back to the us & at the same time protect a woman named nadia cominski ( silvia colloca ) who is also being sent back to the us . however it turns out that nadia is wanted by dimitru & his football club owning boss jozef ( tim dutton ) who need her in order to complete a deal for a nerve gas bomb which they intend to set off in washington killing millions of people ...

this american & romanian co - production was directed by po - chih leong & the detonator confirms beyond any shadow of a doubt that wesely snipes has joined the washed up action film stars club who are relegated to making generic action films in eastern european locations , yep snipes has joined such luminaries as jean - claude van damme , steven seagal , dolph lundgren , rutger hauer & chuck norris . i give snipes a bit of credit since he held on a little longer than the rest with the excellent blade : trinity ( 2004 ) still fresh in a lot of cinema goers minds ( every film he has made since has gone straight - to - dvd ) but it had to happen sooner or later , like a lot of the names i 've mentioned snipes has lived off the reputation of a few great films & if you look at his career he 's been in more bad films that good ones . like the recent films of jcvd & seagal the detonator is pretty awful . the script by martin wheeler is as predictable , boring & by - the - numbers as anything out there . the detonator is the sort of film you expect to see on an obscure cable tv channel playing at 2 o'clock in the morning . the detonator is chock full of clichés , snipes is forced into a situation where he has to protect a woman & at first they dislike each other but by the end they are in love , his closest friend at the cia turns out to be a traitor while the obnoxious by the book boss no - one likes actually turns out to be a pretty decent guy , snipes character is allowed to run around bucharest shooting , killing & blowing people up like it does n't matter & he never gets arrested , the action is dull & forgettable , the bad guy own a football club so there are lots of annoying football terminology & there are n't even any funny one - liners.

director leong does n't do anything anything to liven things up , the detonator looks cheap with a car chase in which the two cars never seem to get over the 30 mph mark . ok the action scenes are relatively well staged but they are few & far between & utterly forgettable in a ' bad guy shoots at snipes & misses , in return snipes shoots at bad guy & kills him ' sort of way . there 's a half decent car crash & explosion but very little else . it seems some of the detonator was shot in a romanian football stadium , i think i 'd rather have watched the game for 90 minutes rather than this film.

with a supposed budget of about $ 15,000,000 the detonator is reasonably well made but not that much really happens . set & filmed in bucharest in romania . the acting is n't that great , snipes just does n't seem interested & feels like he is just there for the money which i do n't blame him for at all.

the detonator is yet another poor clichéd action film starring a has been actor & set in eastern europe . why do sony keep making these things ? not recommend , there are much better action fare out there . +1 i first saw robin hood : men in tights back in 1994 in the cinema . i went to see it because i always liked robin hood and i saw the trailer of this movie and thought it was hilarious . after i saw the movie i must say it was even better than i thought . not only is it very funny , it 's also a very well made movie with beautiful sets and costumes and a very beautiful score by hummie mann . the acting in the movie is also good , cary elwes is funny as robin hood and also tracey ullman , richard lewis , mark blankfield , david chapelle , amy yasbeck , megan cavanagh , eric allan kramer , matthew porretta and mel brooks himself are funny . but the best part in the movie is played by roger rees as the evil sheriff of rottingham . he has the best scenes in the movie and also the best dialogue ( " king illegal forest to pig wild kill in it a is " , which stands for " it is illegal to kill a wild pig in the king 's forest").he somehow mixes up all the words and speaks out a sentence that nobody understands . robin hood : men in tights is in my book one of the best mel brooks films to date and i ca n't say that i have laughed as much about a film as this one . it 's just non - stop laughing . +1 hammer house of horror : witching time is set in rural england on woodstock farm where stressed musician david winter ( jon finch ) lives with his actress wife mary ( prunella gee ) & is currently composing the music for a horror film . one night while looking for his dog billy david finds a mysterious woman in his barn , calling herself lucinda jessop ( patricia quinn ) she claims to be a witch who has transported herself from 300 years in the past to now . obviously rather sceptical david has a hard time believing her so he locks her in a room in his farmhouse & calls his doctor charles ( ian mcculloch ) to come examine her , however once he arrives & they enter the room lucinda has disappeared . charles puts it down to david drinking too much but over the next few day strange & disturbing things begin to happen to david & mary ...

witching time was episode 1 from the short lived british anthology horror series produced by hammer studios for tv & originally aired here in the uk during september 1980 , the first of two hammer house of horror episodes to be directed by don leaver ( episode 13 the mark of satan being the other ) i actually rather liked this . as a series hammer house of horror dealt with various different themes & were all unconnected to each other except in name & unsurprisingly watching time is a sinister & effective little tale about a witch , the script by anthony read benefits from it 's slight 50 odd minute duration & moves along at a nice pace . the character 's are pretty good as is the dialogue , there are some nice scenes here & i liked the way it never quite reveals whether david & mary are going crazy or not . i think it 's a well structured , entertaining & reasonably creepy horror themed tv show that i enjoyed more than i thought i would.

being made for british tv meant the boys at hammer had a lower budget than usual , if that was even possible , & as such there is no gorgeous period settings here as in their most well know frankenstein & dracula films although the contemporary english setting does give it a certain atmosphere that you can relate to a bit more . another tv based restriction is that the exploitation levels are lower than you might hope for , there 's some nudity & gore but not much although i did n't mind too much as the story here is pretty good . it 's well made for what it is & hammer 's experience on their feature films probably helped make these look pretty good , the acting is good as well with genre favourite ian mcculloch making a bit - part appearance.

witching time is a good start to the hammer house of horror series , as a 50 minute piece of british tv it 's pretty damned good , now why do n't they make show 's like this over here anymore ? +0 i 'm not sure if this is a comedy or not , but i found it pretty comical . isobel is possessed by the devil . somehow a perverted priest and the gardener are gon na ' fix that . part exorcism and part soap opera , you 'll at least get some laughs . there 's the paranoid jealous dad , satanic sister , valley of the dolls mother , and then the cowboy boyfriend ; all there to help the skirt chasing priest fight the demons from dear isobel . it sometimes felt like a jerry springer episode , but i actually paid to see this . instead of the cool head - twisting , sailor cursing , and crucifix humping that regan did in the exorcist ; you get a lot of isobel bouncing on her bed like it 's a trampoline , hiding in her closet , and jumping from a hay - loft . yeah , it 's chuck e. cheese gone wild . so , if you want to watch a quote unquote horror film that is worth a few laughs while you wait for the predictable ending ... this is your movie . +0 take your video camera , turn out all the lights in your house and film people running around with flashlights for an hour and a half and you 've got the basic idea of what this film looks like . it is very irritating to watch this kind of movie . to be fair , there are scenes of daylight at the very beginning and very end of the movie . i like scary movies and creature features but this one just did n't do a thing for me . so sorry . i really tried to like it . there did n't seem to be much of a plot other than we 've got to find a way out of here . did n't learn too much about any of the characters so it did n't matter if we lost one or two along the way . this is n't the worst movie in the world . " open water " holds that title for now . +0 ( mild spoilers)

this movie was filthy and stupid . it could have done well without the constant humping and nude sex . it was also very profane . i think that they had a good story developing , but they messed up the whole thing by overdoing it . +0 i had a different experience with this movie - it never got charming , or delightful , or funny for me . one big clue that this was not your typical movie was that the label gave no indication of the ianguage(s ) spoken in the film . another was the lack of choices re subtitles.

i found the lack of dialogue annoying , especially when accompanied by exaggerated facial expressions as it almost always was . the wildly inconsistent development of the feeble plot was puzzling . were there characters , or only vague gestures ? was there even a plot?

on a separate matter , i 'm getting prompted to correct the spelling of " dialogue " , with the suggested substitute of " dialogue " . maybe this movie in its entirety , including the imdb portion , is designed to puzzle , or amaze , but i 'm getting more irked than amused . +1 i tend to get furious when hearing about lucio fulci 's reputation as a director . too often he 's categorized as a no - talented filmmaker , only out to shock and disgust entire audiences with images of pure gore . true , his films contain more explicit filth and sickness as your average mainstream american production , but his films always are of wide range and the plots are gruesomely morbid . do n't torture a duckling is yet another story ! this film is a pure gem of the italian shock cinema ! i easily dare to call this film a masterpiece it 's an old - fashioned giallo that includes all brilliant aspects of genuine horror . the film shows the search for a inhuman serial murderer in a small italian mountain - town . the bodies of 3 young boys are found , horribly mutilated . there are quite a lot of pseudo - madmen in the town but every trail leads to nowhere . among the suspects are a greedy bum and a scary woman , obsessed by witchery and voodoo . like a true mastermind , fulci knows to find the right creepy tone for his film . he portrays the small town as a claustrophobic and inescapable setting of macabre happenings , supported by a giddy soundtrack . fulci also develops himself as a genius storyteller here . the script always is one step ahead of you and the complex plot will mislead you more than once . in other words , this is a unique giallo ( horror slash murder mystery ) . the gore is n't presented as grotesque and explicit as in lucio 's later milestones ( among them are the legendary zombie 2 , the beyond and the new york ripper ) , although there still are a few nauseating and hard - to - watch shock - sequences shown . < br />
don't torture a duckling is the most compelling and effective achievement lucio fulci ever brought forward and it easily ranks among the greatest italian horror movies ever made . right next to the masterpieces made by mario bava and dario argento . the film is fascinating from start to finish , some plot aspects are alarmingly realistic and the tension is adrenalin - rushing at all times ! a must see for horror fans and an absolute priority for italian shock - lovers ! +0 after receiving a dvd of this with a sunday newspaper , i hoped that it was not the usual duff films that are given away because no one would ever buy them . i was wrong . sheens acting is on par with that of a ten year old in a school pantomime production and the same goes for the majority of the cast . neill is satisfactory , but plays a russian and is n't helped by his hybrid northern irish / new zealand accent , and nor are the rest of the kgb characters , all of whom sound like they 're in a cambridge footlights reunion . in fact , the only people with genuine accents are extras who supply an odd word here and there , helpfully letting us know at least where the hell everything is going on in what is otherwise a complete mash . the " espionage " factor is unimpressive for the most part and primarily consists of sheen faffing about in various ridiculous disguises whilst trying to blend into the background , quickly becoming not only boring but laughable . the plot has potential but is completely murdered by the rest of the confusing production elements . this could have been so much better . +1 this movie from what i remember was such a great movie ! i watched it on television when i was 11 , and could n't remember the title of it . if i remember correctly , i do believe that it was a christmas television movie special . one of my friends at work and i were discussing it several years back , but neither one of us could remember the title . but we did remember almost the entire movie . no one else at work remembered ever seeing it ! thank goodness someone at a tv movie website answered my post ! now i have the fun job of locating a copy of it ! it 's amazing what you can remember as a child , but this movie definitely remains vividly playing in my head ... even after 28 years . and i do believe i only watched it once . maybe it was because i am the oldest sister in my family , or maybe because i babysat and worked in day care centers , that it stuck with me that long . regardless of the real reason , it has remained one of the movies that i have been really wanting to watch lately ! ! ! if anyone knows where to watch it online , or has a copy , please let me know . i would so love to see it again ! ! ! ! thanks so much ! seriously , i tried to post this and it says my comment is n't long enough . so , apparently i have to type more , did you know that melissa michaelsen is the sister of peter billingsley who starred in a christmas story ? i know i 'm not the only fan of this movie , so if anyone has any idea on where to find this i would greatly appreciate it . +0 from the dire special effects onwards i was absolutely gob smacked at how bad anyone can make a film . lets put it this way , i have absolutely no directing experience whatsoever and for the first time ever when watching a film i thought ' i can do better than that ! whilst sat watching this pap . the acting in this film was terrible , i suppose the best actor was the guy from lawnmower man but the french guy from aliens3 was so wooden i wondered how he got the former job in the first place . the storyline was mediocre and i suppose , like most films , if the rest had been done well it would have stood up . i do n't usually write reviews here but after seeing a couple of people gave this film a good rating ( must be cast / crew ) i felt i had to say my piece to save anyone from accidentally hiring it or wasting their money on buying this cack . +0 " the patriot " staring steven segal is a late 90 's thriller / action movie that is not really a thriller and not really an action movie ; rather it is steven segal playing steven segal by another name , but this time he is a native american country doctor who kicks butt every now an again . baring the obvious plot line holes , the movie itself is absolutely amazing in terms of the blatant disregard for character devolvement . < br />
from a marketing standpoint , i was left asking myself , " who in the world were they aiming at ? " the bio - thriller plot - line is way off the mark for the middle america crowd and segal as silk cowboy would never sell to anyone even if you deep fried him and put him between a kripsy - cream donut . the whole movie is just way out there , even for segal fans , because it simply does not deliver on any level . +0 writer & director jay andrews , a.k.a . jim wynorski , serves up more of his characteristic shlock with a decent cast menaced by grade - z computer generated reptiles in " komodo vs . cobra , " as generic a rip - off of " mysterious island " meets " jurassic park " as you can imagine . the chief problem with this predictable yarn about monsters dining on mankind is the incredibly phony special effects . the cobra and the komodo are hilariously awful . however , the graphics people do an okay job of integrating the monsters with their victims , not that any of this is in the least believable . clearly , " komodo vs . cobra " had a budget that so low that virtually everything non - human in its looks as fake as all get out . this cheesy monster epic takes place on a remote island where the u.s. military conducts top - secret dna testing on animals . the result is that gigantic komodos and cobra thrive in this tropical island paradise . as the action opens , the primary scientist is gobbled up by a cobra that likes to swim . after , we are introduced to a group of ' greenpeace ' like environmental protesters and a journalist . planet one organizer jerry ryan ( ryan mctavish of " hellbent " ) pays charter boat skipper jim stoddard ( michael pare of cbs - tv 's " houston knights " ) five grand with the promise of another five grand if he will take them to this forbidden island . meanwhile , the u.s. military suspect that something is amiss on the island so they send their own team of men who give eaten by the supersized predators . our heroes run into the last remaining scientist on the island , dr. susan richardson ( michelle borth of " wonderland " ) , the daughter of the scientist responsible for this insane science project , who tells them that the military is going to target the island for destruction . the title match between the two overgrown predators occurs in the last quarter hour after our heroes , who have been consistently whittled down by the monsters , find a helicopter and take off in time before the military pulverizes the island . there 's no tension , suspense , or anything worthwhile in this substandard creature feature . the best thing about this yawner is composer chuck cirino 's orchestral soundtrack ; it gives " komodo vs . cobra " an epic feel . usually , jay andrews writes and directs tolerable drivel , but this ranks far below his low standards . the sexy women fare better at survival than the guys . in one scene , our heroic group fords a river and we do n't get to see any wet t - shirts . drat ! there 's nothing in the way of memorable dialogue or relationships in this dreck . i think that the military guys do far too much saluting when they get their heads together to conspire . let 's hope that michael pare got a good payday out of this garbage . the ending as one of the scientists takes on the characteristics of a lizard comes strictly as an afterthought . it 's not so bad it 's good , it 's just bad . +0 the movie is n't too bad , up until ...

the main problem is with the ending , so it 's a pretty major spoiler ...

for the time it was made , it 's a beautiful movie , and does get a lot of it right.

however ...

in the book , sam succeeds and lives his dream , whereas in the movie , he gives up and goes back to the city , completely destroying the " you can do what you put your mind to " theme of the book.

this movie is a desecration , and instead of remaking classics that do n't need redone , the hollywood types who have n't any better ideas should do this one , right this time . +1 preston sturgis ' the power and the glory was unseen by the public for nearly twenty or thirty years until the late 1990s when it resurfaced and even showed up on television . in the meantime it had gained in notoriety because pauline kael 's the citizen kane book had suggested that the herman mankiewicz - orson welles screenplay for kane was based on sturgis ' screenplay here . as is mentioned in the beginning of this thread for the film on the imdb web site , kael overstated her case.

there are about six narrators who take turns dealing with the life of charles foster kane : the newsreel ( representing ralston - the henry luce clone ) , thatcher 's memoirs , bernstein , jed leland , susan alexander kane , and raymond the butler . each has his or her different slant on kane , reflecting their faith or disappointment or hatred of the man . and of course each also reveals his or her own failings when they are telling their version of kane 's story . this method also leads to frequent overlapping re - tellings of the same incident.

this is not the situation in the power and the glory . yes , like kane it is about a legendary business leader - here it is tom garner ( spencer tracy ) , a man who rose from the bottom to being head of the most successful railroad system in the country . but there are only two narrators - they are garner 's right hand man henry ( ralph morgan ) and his wife ( sarah padden ) . this restricts the nearly three dimensional view we get at times of kane in garner . henry , when he narrates , is talking about his boss and friend , whom he respected and loved . his wife is like the voice of the skeptical public - she sees only the flaws in henry.

typical example : although he worked his way up , tom becomes more and more anti - labor in his later years . unions are troublemakers , and he does not care to be slowed down by their shenanigans . henry describes tom 's confrontation with the union in a major walk - out , and how it preoccupied him to the detriment of his home life . but henry 's wife reminds him how tom used scabs and violence to end the strike ( apparently blowing up the union 's headquarters - killing many people ) . so we have two views of the man but one is pure white and one is pure black.

i'm not really knocking the power and the glory for not duplicating kane 's success ( few films do - including all of orson welles ' other films ) , but i am aware that the story is presented well enough to hold one 's interest to the end . and thanks to the performances of tracy and colleen moore as his wife sally , the tragedy of the worldly success of the pair is fully brought home.

when they marry , tom wants to do well ( in part ) to give his wife and their family the benefits he never had . but in america great business success comes at a cost . tom gets deeply involved with running the railroad empire ( he expands it and improves it constantly ) . but it takes him away from home too much , and he loses touch with sally . and he also notices eve ( helen vinson ) , the younger woman who becomes his mistress . when sally learns of his unfaithful behavior it destroys her.

similarly tom too gets a full shock ( which makes him a martyr in the eyes of henry ) . eve marries tom , and presents him with a son - but it turns out to be eve 's son by tom 's son tom jr. ( philip trent ) . the discovery of this incestuous cuckolding causes tom to shoot himself.

the film is not a total success - the action jumps at times unconvincingly . yet it does make the business seem real ( note the scene when tom tells his board of directors about his plans to purchase a small rival train line , and he discusses the use of debentures for financing the plans ) . sturgis came from a wealthy background , so he could bring in this type of detail . so on the whole it is a first rate film . no citizen kane perhaps , but of interest to movie lovers as an attempt at business realism with social commentary in depression america . +1 i m a huge m lillard fan that 's why i ended up watching this movie . honestly i doubt that if he was n't in the movie i would of enjoyed it as much or even watched it but once i did watch it realize the story was pretty decent . a bad ending i must say but i did see it coming . it 's a low budget movie and some of the actors were n't really good but all in all i rated this movie 7/10.

the suspense of wondering what lillard was actually up to was what really keeped me interested in this movie.

its a good rental!

7/10 +0 hollywood has made a lot of strange movies over the years , but none stranger than this . why this movie got made i will never know , nor how paramount could have thought it would sell any tickets in 1947 . it is the strangest mix of genres i have seen in a long time , a movie that truly does not know whether it is trying to be a serious war drama or a viennese operetta comedy.

it tells the story of a british spy trying to get a poison gas formula out of germany in the days just before ww ii began . ray milland , a fine actor , is stuck playing the part like an escapee from monty python , all very exaggerated english prep - school dialogue . in germany he meets a gypsy , marlene dietrich , who helps him to travel under cover as , of course , another gypsy . she plays her part like the typical viennese operetta gypsy caricature , as do the other " gypsies " in the movie . but there are also nazis , who are not funny at all . and then milland finds he is starting to think like a gypsy , and that is not treated as a joke . sometimes the music is for a light comedy , sometimes for a drama . every time the nazis show up , the film score plays wagner , which is funny by itself.

this movie could have been a comedy , or it could have taken the plight of the gypsies seriously and done a serious job of showing how the nazis treated them . both are hinted at in this movie , but neither pursued . what we are left with is a truly strange mish - mash of genres that must have embarrassed everyone ( except the director ) involved.

bizarre . +1 i do n't understand why it is so underrated on imdb .. this movie is just the perfection .. the better adaptation of all times of the myth of tarzan ! as a french , i can say that this is the better role of christophe lambert , ridiculous in a lots of movies , but here absolutely wonderful , charismatic , incredible ! the plot is great , well told , the story magnificent , the direction , the atmosphere , the music , every things are perfect ! how believe these sequences with the elgar music , just simply perfect ..

greystoke is truly an unbelievable movie , underrated here , i do n't really know why , but really appreciated +0 i thought sleeper cell was interesting , and exciting to watch , up until the last episode , when nothing happens , its f * * * * * * bs , you americans portray muslims as terrorists , and the americans as hero 's , its the other way around , i hate it when every american tv show ends up predictable , i was hoping the bombs would go off in that stadium , but i knew it would'nt , it takes the joy out of watching it when you know that the good guys are going to save the day , yet again , americans are the biggest terrorists , g bush the leader of them all , he is to blame for 9/11 , and i 'm p * * * * * off that you keep throwing these shows at us , which are all the f * * * * * * same ! i 've a good show about terrorism , its called " the whitehorse " and bush himself the cell leader , its the same with 24 , how ever 24 was good , sleeper cell is a mock and should never make a season 2 , its f * * * * * joke ! and so are you american producers . +1 the notion of marital fidelity portrayed in the film seems outdated today , but it is exactly the main characters ' adherence to that notion which makes the entire story so touchingly tragic . it is this notion that ennobles them and allows them to stand out , to , as they refer to their respective spouses , " not be like them".

as tony leung said in the film , love just happens . there does n't need to be a rational explanation as to how it happens , it simply does . despite their not wanting to stoop to their respective spouses ' level , it happened . fidelity , social mores , and timing all conspired against this relationship coming into fruition . simply being in love is far from enough.

i had the misfortune of sitting beside a young couple ( still in university from the snippets of conversation they kindly shared with me throughout the entire film , and uninitiated to the pains of lost love and missed opportunities ) . their gross inability to digest the subtleness and the deeper emotions evoked made me realize just how much a film such as this , as well as other wong kar wei 's work , is wasted on the local audience . +0 i thought there might be some level of worth to this movie , and sat through the whole thing . i can summarize by saying it left a bad taste in my mouth.

the movie started out ok , i think the initial characterization of herc was true to the myths . both as a child and a young adult he started out pretty strong but not the brightest bulb . but later on he somehow transforms into a charismatic speaker beloved by all . huh ? < br />
other problem : terrible cgi . the satyr looked ok , but the rest of the critters just looked terrible , especially the hart , the phoniest looking beast in the movie . and how come leelee sobieski 's skin was sometimes golden , sometimes normal ? the worst part for me -- and everyone should cringe at this -- was the twelve labors of hercules . because the producers obviously did n't want to cover all of them ; maybe they thought us primitive screw - heads watching this garbage could n't count that high . instead of the twelve labors of hercules , we got the five labors of hercules . yes , the five labors ! wtf ? ! ? he did't even finish the last one , so it was really the 4 1/2 labors ! just terrible . i 'll take hercules : the legendary journeys over this piece of crap any day of the week . +1 when i first saw this show , i was 9 , and it caught my attention right away when stewie was trying to call lois on the phone in the hotel . i laughed and kept on watching . when the episode was finished , i wrote down the name of the cartoon and watched it regularly . this separates itself from the simpsons and other shows on say , cartoon network because the jokes are more mature , not too much , but it 's tv-14 for a reason . the quick film cuts after each punch line and cute , funny movements and behavior of the characters make it special . talented seth macfarlene is the creator and the voice of quite a lot of characters in the show . a good theme song , and a crazy family that there 's always something funny , makes this my favorite cartoon along sealab 2021 and aqua teen hunger force . check it out it 's funny stuff . +0 why ca n't a movie be rated a zero ? or even a negative number ? some movies such as " plan nine from outer space " are so bad they 're fun to watch . this is not one . " the dungeon of horror " might be the worst movie i 've ever seen ( some of anyway . i had to fast forward through a lot of it ! ) . fortunately for the indiscretions of my youth and senility of my advancing age , there may be worse movies i 've seen , but thankfully , i ca n't remember them . the sets appeared to be made with cardboard and finished with cans of spray paint . the special effects looked like a fifth grader 's c+ diorama set in a shoebox . the movie contained unforgivable gaffs such as when the marquis shoots and kills his servant . he then immediately gets into a scuffle with his escaping victim , who takes his flintlock and shoots him with it , without the gun having been reloaded ! this movie was so bad my dvd copy only had name credits . i guess no company or studio wanted to be incriminated . though i guess when you film in your garage and make sets out of cardboard boxes a studio is n't needed . this movie definitely ranks in my cellar of all time worst movies with such horrible sacrileges as " the manipulator " , the worst movie i have ever seen with an actual ( one time ) hollywood leading man - mickey rooney . the only time i would recommend watching " the dungeon of harrow " ( or " the manipulator " for that matter ) would be if someone were to pay you . ( i 'm kind of cheap ) i 'd have to have $ 7 or $ 8 bucks for " dungeon " and at least ten for " manipulator " . phil - the never out of the can cinematographer +1 although this was a film of only less than forty minutes , it is one of best directed and acted stories i have ever seen . it accomplishes in less than 45 minutes what most films can not in more than 90.

it is the story of two brothers , one 18 and the other 10 . they come from a poor farm family in mississippi . both are caught up in war and the conflict of duty verses love of family.

it brought tears to my eyes especially because the entire film is so well acted and directed , plus it tells the story of so many wars where one serves and the other left behind.

i can fully recommend this film as beyond superb ! +0 i was thrilled by the fresh ( pun intended ) synopsis of this film and looking forward to watch it . the first few shots introduce some of the characters as well as the main location where the stories take place ; the gardening allotments . the movie looks fantastic . colorful yet simple . magical yet genuine . unfortunately , it only takes a few minutes to figure out where the movie will go . we quickly figure out this will be a manipulative , sappy tale illustrating a bunch of jaded people set in their ways confronted by " nice victimized " refugees and that it will have a happy ending where the jaded people realize the error of their ways and accept these people . < br />
the characters , particularly the prejudiced ones , are very " comic - booky " in nature . the story focuses mainly on two refugee families . one of them is headed by a single mom played atrociously by diveen henry . i am saddened to say that any emotion that might have been felt toward her struggles were defused by what was memorably bad acting.

the other story is much more interesting and focuses on a father and his two children . all are scarred by their journey to this country by way of containers , where the wife and mother died but it is the husband who suffers the most . benedict wong gives a mind - blowing performance here . at first , his emotions are very subdued but as the story develops , he subtly makes us aware of the inner - struggles of his character . < br />
unfortunately , the rest of the movie is just extremely boring . there were so many possibilities with this movie . there are several characters to keep track of , many of which might have potential but none of it is realized . even worse , despite this movie being very much not hollywoodian , some of the main plot threads are solved cheaply in a hollywood b - grade way . example:

character a likes character b character b rejects his advances no problem ! let 's have character c declare her love for character a so we can all have a happy ending . yawn . < br />
i liked very much the plot thread of the asian family . that was well done . unfortunately , the whole allotment business , the communal aspect of it , the dynamic involving a large cast are all under exploited.

what you 're left with is a movie that has very little worth . +1 a three stooges short , this one featuring shemp . of all those involving shemp i 've seen , this is my favorite performance by him in a stooges short . the basic plot is that shemp must get married by 6 o'clock that very evening if he 's to inherit the half a million dollars a rich uncle left him in his will . so shemp sets out to get himself a bride but finds it a tougher road than expected , that is until they learn of his inheritance money . best bits here involve shemp shaving , shemp and moe in a telephone booth and larry on piano as accompaniment to shemp 's voice - training session . also the sequence where shemp is mistaken as cousin basil and its outcome proves hilarious . +0 i was n't so impressed with this film , finding it quite tiresome and plain . the plot line was interesting , a kid creating his own college and enrolling hundreds of kids , but the laughs were few and far between . the jokes were n't really funny and i did n't bust a gut at any of the scenes . the characters were n't intriguing and i did n't feel for any of them , even the dawky , fat kid with glasses who tried to enter the frat group . it was a good first watch , but it did n't blow me away and its not one that i would recommend . comparing it to other films in the same genre , ie , american pie is just cruel , because there is a film which was laugh - a - plenty . this accepted failed to raise a smile ! +1 okay , i know that 's cliché . taken on its surface , this is a bad film- perhaps in a league with " plan 9 from outer space " . the dialog is suspect ( but the singlish is quite enjoyable ... ) , the plot is not quite believable , gavin 's character overacts excessively . while watching the movie , somethings happen that truly make you wonder ... handsome and kim making out on a tank , gwen eating a banana in a bath , just about everything gavin says and does ( " psssssssssssssssycho ! ! " ) . these things taken separately are perhaps flaws . taken together , however , they are merely quirks . watching this movie with an open - mind ( especially if you 're not familiar with singaporean culture ) , and with an open - minded group of friends is guaranteed to deliver a lot of laughs and a memorable time . you ca n't go into this movie expecting a masterpiece , or even expecting to take anything serious at all . if you can take this film for what it is - an underdog film about underdogs , filled to the brim with its own quirks - then you should have a good time watching this one ! i 've already seen it three times and i would n't hesitate to watch it three more times ! ! +1 john wayne is one of the few players in film history to have failed at his first big break and then succeed on the second time around . of course everyone knows the second time was the classic stagecoach with john ford directing.

but we 're here to talk about the big trail . john ford 's fellow director raoul walsh spotted this tall kid on the set of one of ford 's films and thought he had potential . he wanted to make him the lead in a big budget western that fox was planning to do . the film as planned would be an homage to the famous classic silent western the covered wagon.

in watching the big trail i was struck by how similar wayne 's character of breck coleman here is to the ringo kid in stagecoach . both characters were likable young cowpokes , but both were also on a mission of vengeance . and of course both films were done on location and show the expense in making them . no studio product here with a backlot western set . < br />
i also do n't think that it was an accident that wayne got this break at the beginning of the sound era . raoul walsh , i 'm guessing looked around hollywood and probably did n't think a whole lot of movie cowboys would have staying power in sound . that 's something else walsh spotted in wayne.

according to what i 've read the big trail flopped because after spending all that money to make the film in an early wide screen process , some genius at fox realized that their theaters were n't equipped with the wide screen to show it . and when the great depression hit there would be no money to widen those screens at fox movie houses . so the big trail got a limited release , even in what we would call a formatted version , and lost money big for fox films.

marguerite churchill is fine as the crinoline heroine who duke wins , loses and wins again from ian keith . keith , charles stevens and f. tyrone power are the trio of villains wayne has to deal with.

f. tyrone power is the father of the famous movie legend tyrone power . he was a big burly man with a grand background in classic roles on screen and on stage . i would n't be surprised if his son who would have been 15 at the time might not have been hanging around the set.

also look for ward bond though you might have trouble spotting him under a big bushy beard.

watching the big trail now it is interesting to speculate where john wayne 's career might have gone if the big trail had been a big hit . +1 only connery could bring that particular style with a line like that fatima crashes into bond 's arms when she water - skis up to the super agent in nassau and apologizes , ' oh , how reckless of me . i made you all wet . ' the super agent replies , ' yes , but my martini is still dry.'

barbara carrera makes a great villain , stealing the show as spectre executioner fatima blush fatima is number 12 in the spectre chain of command , and is a gorgeous assassin who takes intense sensations of pleasure in killing < br />
fatima assumes all the deadly characteristics of fiona , proving to be one of bond 's toughest adversaries she is a victim of her vanity she 's good at what she does , and wants the world to know it but her vanity is her downfall using every possible approach to eliminate 007 , fatima is a wild and cunning woman who makes love to the man she is about to kill < br />
austrian actor klaus - maría brandauer ( largo ) does not make a very formidable opponent for 007 referred to as number one in the spectre chain of command , largo resides in the bahamas , and travels aboard his super yacht , the flying saucer < br />
max von sydow becomes the fourth actor to appear as spectre chief ernst stavro blofeld , once more plotting to put the world at ransom < br />
kim basinger takes the part once owned by the lovely french actress claudine auger she is domino , the mistress of largo , who soon falls deeply in love with her rescuer < br />
black actor bernie casey becomes the sixth actor to play cia agent felix leiter after jack lord , cec linder , rik van nutter , norman burton , and david hedison ...

edward fox portrays the new , unsympathetic ' m. ' pamela salem is the third actress to play miss moneypenny . lois maxwell was the first and barbara bouchet was the second.

valerie leon is the sexy lady in the bahamas who fished 007 out of the blue water and saved his life by making love to him in her own room valerie was the sardinian hotel receptionist in ' the spy who loved me ' when bond and anya arrive seeking stromberg < br />
prunella gee is shrublands physical therapist patricia saskia cohen tanugi is nicole , bond 's secret service contact in the south of france < br />
gavan o'herlihy is jack petachi , the u.s. air force communications officer who duplicates the president of the united states ' ' eye print ' and arms two cruise missiles with nuclear warheads < br />
rowan atkinson is the bumbling foreign officer nigel small - fawcett ; and alec mccowen is algernon , the armorer who provides 007 some formidable items < br />
if you like to see connery playing a tense battle of wills , disguised as a masseur , attacked by robot - controlled sharks , giving away a considerable amount of money for a tango dance , thrown into a medieval dungeon , do n't miss this second of only two " unofficial " james bond films +0 tom stern and jeremy slate are swing bachelor 's planning to hijack a casino , ala " ocean 's 11 " , and pin it on the hell 's angels . bad move . for a film with the words hell 's angels and the number 69 and featuring actual hell 's angels , this movie is surprisingly tame . the hell 's angels truly deserve a better film to be centered around them . not this snoorefest . luckily this is one of the dvds that features commentary by joe bob briggs so the pain of having to sit through it is greatly alleviated . if you watch it any other way , let me recommend something to you . don't ! ! < br />
my grade : d < br />
dvd extras : joe bob brigg 's commentary ; conny van dyke 's message to her fans ( she has more than one ? ) ; photo gallery ; theatrical trailer ; and trailers for " blood shack " , " hell high " , " samurai cop " , and " the hollywood strangler " +0 this was just an awful movie . i 've watched it once when i was roughly 12 , i am now 19 and i do n't think i will ever forget this movie.

i still feel sick whenever i think about it , it was just everything horrible that could possibly fit in one movie . i really do n't understand what kind of person would enjoy this utter rubbish . it 's not enough to simply turn off your mind to enjoy this movie , i can enjoy the dumbest made - for - tv disney movies as much as the next person , but this is something else completely.

usually i do n't like to judge a movie until i have seen it myself , but believe me i am doing you a favour . do not watch this movie . +1 i 'm not a massive disney fan , but my 7 year old son is starting to get into them , so we 've built up quite a collection , and this is one of my favourites . we first saw this a couple of weeks ago and we must have see it half a dozen times since ! ok , as others have pointed out , not the most complex or inventive of plots , but there 's more to a film than that.

great characters , phil harris stealing the show as thomas o'malley , but edgar the butler not far behind . the music is superb - my disabled son always insists that i lift him up and dance with him to " everybody wants to be cat " this says it all . and " thomas o'malley " is just as enjoyable.

i'm not sure why some people have such a downer on this film other than a dislike of cats ! and yes , it does take a few of its cues from " 101 dalmations " , and maybe " the lady and the tramp " ( it 's been a long time since i 've seen that , so i 'm not going to compare them ) , and while " 101 dalmations " is better in some ways , for me " the aristocats " is far more enjoyable . is n't that what these films are about ? < br />
apart from " peter pan " ( now that is a 10/10 film ) , this is my favourite disney film . my 7 year - old son loves it , his grumpy 41 year old dad loves it , so you ca n't ask much more of a family film.

superb ! +1 exceptional movie that handles a theme of great proportions with a very well - balanced direction . dmytrik was a very good director , at least from what i can tell from this movie and murder my sweet but he was seriously affected by the huac as other movie directors and actors . it is in a way ironic that crossfire received no oscars , because it is exquisite example of how to make a great film on low budget . everything about this movie is exceptional : a well - written script that makes use of extensive flashbacks , a great cast , superb lighting that seems to tell the story more than the actions proper . what more can you expect from a top - notch movie ? might i add that noir is here used for its stylishness , and i might add financial advantages . but this proves once more that what was originally deemed a b - movie can have more impact today that most of the heavy - handed a - movies that lost their audience with the passage of time.

this film is not a noir movie per se and this rises serious questions about what noir actually is . the style is definitely noir , in terms of sets and especially lights but the theme surpasses the recipe of the " noir genre " . you can see things from the opposite perspective and claim that anti - semitism is only a pretext for the criminal investigation , the puzzle around the murder being the actual focus . this would have been the case had it not been for robert ryan in an outstanding performance . either way , the movie has a lot to offer and it is truly a pity that the director had to suffer so much iniquity for his former beliefs in a really " noir " period of america +1 i remember seeing this 1978 comedy at one of the bargain matinees i took in when i was looking for a study break from my college courses . walter matthau and glenda jackson do some effective tracy - hepburn - style thrusting - and - parrying in this featherweight romp directed by the reliable howard zieff ( he did " private benjamin " ) about a newly widowed doctor 's aggressive re - entry into the dating game . it all breezes by quickly primarily thanks to the clever script by veteran screenwriter julius j. epstein ( " casablanca " ) along with alan mandel , max shulman and future director charles shyer.

dr . charley nichols has just come back from hawaii after his wife 's death . upon his return , he becomes aware that he is instant catnip to any and all the single women in la . he works in a hospital run by an increasingly senile chief - of - staff , amos willoughby , whom charley has to pacify to keep his residency . enter ann atkinson , a transplanted englishwoman who bakes cheesecakes for a living and has certain concrete opinions about the medical profession , which she expresses freely on a pbs talk show . of course , charley is on the show 's discussion panel , and sparks , as they say , fly . this leads to the standard complications about how serious charley is willing to become about ann . at the same time , the hospital has to deal with a potential wrongful death lawsuit from the widow of a rich baseball team owner who died at the hospital under willoughby 's careless supervision.

it 's just refreshing to see such a mature yet bracing love story between two characters inhabited by actors who deliver lines with the scalpel - wielding skill of surgeons . matthau is his usual 1970 's curmudgeonly swinger and quite a sight waddling with his gangly arms held akimbo in his power walk . away from her heavy , award - winning elizabethan roles , jackson is crisply sardonic and charmingly vulnerable as the feisty ann , who thinks all doctors should aspire to be albert schweitzer . art carney plays willoughby with predictable bluster , while richard benjamin provides amiable support as charley 's colleague , dr. solomon . it 's all very compact with a few nice jabs at the greed within the medical profession . there are no extras on the 2005 dvd . +0 this movie starts out with kids telling each other urban legends such as the poodle in the microwave and getting something extra at a chicken place . unfortunately , it then turns to your basic anthology movie . the first being about a janitor with a bit of a secret . this one is okay at best . then it gets worse as the next story about this kid obsessed with dead flies is on and it goes on and on and on . it is way to long and not all that interesting to begin with . after that you get the typical shock scene and it ends . you need more than this in an anthology movie . you need at least three stories and one should n't be so long it becomes dreadfully uninteresting especially considering you can see how it is going to end a mile away . +0 spoiler alert!!!!

i do n't go into ' high tech ' movies expecting them to be 100 % accurate on all things computer related . but somehow , even the average ' i have a computer ' user is supposed to believe that:

1 ) a computer professional with a top secret , special data < br />
2 ) is going to keep the primary copy of said data on a 1.44 floppy < br />
3 ) and make absolutely no backup of this special secret data < br />
even high school students back up their homework for goodness sake.

also this is the worst represntation of a computer nerd ever . even though she is super cute we are supposed to believe that she has no friends , neighbors , extended family , or coworkers who can identify her . even the unabomber had a family that could turn him in.

end spoiler < br />
these are n't just minor mistakes that had no bearing on the movie - these are the major plot points that fueled the storyline . the characterization was awful , the plot wholly unbeleivable , and if you have n't seen this , do n't bother . +0 so bad , it 's entertaining , especially during cocktail hour , and believe me , you 'll need a beer , a drink , or whatever to get through this turkey . where do they get the financial backing for such paint - by - the - numbers " horror " flicks ? the fun in this movie is predicting which characters will get eaten and in what order , and trashing the so - called " uniforms " the " military " jokers wear . the raptors , by the way , are not the same raptors we met in " jurassic park , " but a cousin species . ( sorry , no spoilers here . you 'll have to watch it to find out for yourself ) do n't expect the plot to make sense , simple as it is , just go along for the ride . you could make it a game ... take another drink each time you hear a certain sound ... or better yet , every time someone gets crunched by a " raptor . " with a little luck , you wo n't even remember having seen this " c - grade " made - for - tv movie ! +0 this movie is recommended only for insomniacs : it will relieve them by putting them to sleep . five - year - olds might also enjoy it . but for anyone else ( including fans of the genre ) , what a bore ! the " ancient " plot is reminiscent of " return of the dragon " , and this film is just as inept , but nero is no bruce lee , so " enter the ninja " is an even worse film . until now , this is the second ( the offensive " comedy " " bachelor party " was the first ) film i gave 1/10 to . +1 i remember going to drive inn with my parent and sister . i was in grade 5 , and still a kid , and the drive closed down 4 years later , but the film still lingers in my memory . an adult movie , which a kid finds entertaining . that is a mark of excellence . hoffman is one of hollywoods better actors , and this film proves it . i like the billy put down the ice cream scene , and i remember the sctv version in there film i factory myself . remember joe flairty crying . please email me if you like the sctv skit . not a bad film at all , it is a story about a father , and his son . touching and intertaining , i love the part where hoffman talks about killroy , and how the streets change . worth a second watch . 7/10 +1 this film is wonderful example of the quality dramas that channel 4 and the bbc have produced over the years . ted danson delivers a powerful performance of a man tormented by memories noone will accept , and a society that believes he is insane . it is a remarkable performance by a man most known for his role in cheers , a tv comedy sitcom . the supporting cast are all very well chosen , not least mary steenbergen , danson 's wife , who acts the part of gulliver 's wife in the film . but above all it is the seamless and very delicate shifts between our world and gulliver 's world that make this film . the difference in perspective between giants and midgets , all acted by real actors is beautifully captured . a rare treat of cinematography and direction . +0 what is it about drug addiction that so draws first - time filmmakers to offer their own take on the subject ? this subject has been done to death . drug abuse is bad . we get it . drug addiction is painful to watch . we get that too . but the bleak subject matter does n't give the filmmaker license to make a sloppy film . every film need not be hitchcockian masterpiece of cinematic excellence , or use orson wellesian deep focus , but it 's still a narrative movie . verite does not mean pseudo - documentary . even consumer mini - dv cameras are capable of producing white whites and black blacks , and this filmmaker is just being lazy by shooting no contrast scenes with existing lighting : the subject is bleak enough without artificially forcing it with sloppy cinematography . and even documentary films have a sound mix . vera farmiga is very talented , given the right material , but the director obviously over - directed her and sucked all the life out of her performance . addicts may live in a fog , but they still have emotions , but none of these characters seem to exist off - screen . the supporting players merely delivered their lines without creating real people . sorry to be so harsh , debra , but some things are true whether want to believe them or not . i 'm sure your next film will be better -- but please , not another drug movie . :) +0 i 'm new to argento 's work , and if this and suspiria are any indication , then argento is much more a filmmaker of experience than story . in his films , characters are placed in grueling and mesmerizing horror contexts that literally saturate the logic of the world around them . the camera literally flows gracefully through sets as the characters run , stumble , and choke their way to an eventual horrifying conclusion . it worked , really well , in suspiria . for some reason it did n't work here.

the problem i see with this movie is that even though the protagonist " gets help " by way of contacting the police and asking for help from her friends , it still feels as if she refuses to " get help " in terms of actually trying to find a solution to her problem . the entrapment in this film is that she 's trapped in the killer 's little game , one that she could easily get out of by ... not setting herself up so easily ? in a weird way it seems like the character wants the torture the killer gives her , which in a way is the point and could have worked except that the whole psychology of it is thrown about mostly due to whatever argento feels like doing.

as a loving homage to " the phantom of the opera " , it 's certainly an interesting and unique take . for all his worth , argento delights in operatic movements as well , which well highlights the action . it just does n't make much sense , especially as it delves further into a completely useless ending ( yes , i know it 's a reference to harris ' novel " red dragon " . no , it did n't work ) . why the character should go from one horrifying experience of entrapment to a willing one with the director is beyond me . it felt almost self - serving on argento 's part.

overall , a fun experience , and between this and suspiria i 'm more than willing to follow up on more argento productions . but this is not a movie i 'd want to return to or remember.

--polarisdib +0 early 1950s sci - fi directed by lesley selander . special effects of course are very primitive , but pretty good in comparison to what else was out there then . drive - in movie double feature fare ; still interesting enough to watch . two leading men , arthur franz the brilliant young scientist dr. jim barker and straight talking and earthy newspaper reporter steve abbot(cameron mitchell)are joined on a manned flight to mars by carol stafford(virgina huston)another scientist and two other space experts(richard gaines and john litel ) . upon landing on the red planet , the space travelers encounter inhabitants that appear friendly and mentally advanced . in actuality , the martians are led by ikron(morris ankrum ) , who has the idea of conquering earth to vitalize their civilization . there is a beautiful martian(maruerite chapman)that dr. barker intends to take back on the return trip . she is the movie 's redeemable element . +0 this film was basically set up for failure by the studio . one , anne rice ( author of the book ) offered to write the screen play but was refused by the studio . two , they tried to stuff 2 in depth novels in to a 2hour movie.

i maintain the only way for these two books -vampire lestat and queen of the damned- to work in a live action form would be through a mini - series . first off the the vampire lestat alone takes place from the 1700 's to the 1980 's and has a plethora of character vital to the plot understanding of the main character , lestat . the entire book vampire lestat sets up the events of the second part queen of the damned . without that full understanding the premise of a movie is destroyed.

lestat was not cruel and vicious to all , he was not wanting to go along with akasha 's plans , marius did not make lestat , lestat did not love jesse or make her , lestat could not go remain unscathed by the light , marius was not after david nor the other way around , every character was completely represented wrong , basically same names different story.

if they wanted to make a vampire movie , fine . even if you wanted to be inspired by these novels , fine . but do n't piggie back into the theaters off the success of rice 's great novels and characters just to destroy what her loyal readers have come to love.

if you have n't read the books you wo n't understand the film really , if you have read the books you will be insulted . that being said , i am such a huge fan i had to see the movie knowing full well this was going to be the case and still went for it . catch 22 , must see it , will hate it . +0 yah . i know . it has the name " sinatra " in the title , so how bad can it be ? well , it 's bad , trust me ! i rented this thinking it was some movie i missed in the theaters . it 's not . it 's some garbage " movie " made by the folks at showtime ( cable station ) . geez , these cable stations make a few bucks they think they can make whatever garbage movies they want ! it 's not good . i am as big a sinatra fan as any sane man , but this movie was just dumb . boring . dull . unfunny . uninteresting . the only redeeming quality is that ( assuming they did stick to the facts ) you do learn about what happened to the captors of frank jr. otherwise it 's just a stupid film . +1 < br />
***************************mild spoilers ahead**************************

we dive at dawn is an english made movie with john mills in the lead role . the second time i watched the dvd version was on a big screen tv and i must say the movie is better than i thought the first time i saw it on the samll screen . may be it was the big screen viewing that helped?

i still say the first few segments of the movie are muddled , but once the submarine leaves the dock and begins its mission , the movie takes off too ! the search for the german battleship named the brandenburg and the adventures which went along with it were absorbing and the detail shown in the movie are interesting!

i'm increasing my rating to 7/10 . if you enjoy ww ii films , i think you 'll find this one interesting once the submarine gets underway . some of the men on the sub have quite a sense of humor , too ! +1 first , i rated this movie 10/10 . to me , it 's simply one of the best i saw since i was born ( i 'm 23 , but i saw numerous films ) . the story is cruel , but reality is , too , not ? it went deep into me and stirred my bowels . i saw it about 5 or 6 years ago and it still shakes me - and i still remember it ! < br />
second , there is no ' national preference ' ( this expression is a direct translation from the french ) for this movie . i mean it 's not because it is a french movie that i put it so high : it has really caught me when i saw it . furthermore , i do n't know well marcel carne 's filmography , so i do n't know if it is or not his best movie , but i know it is not his most famous : hotel du nord , quai des brumes and les enfants du paradis are the most famous.

third , the movie 's in b&w , but it deals with inter - temporal problems of youth ( not acne ) like love , friends and studies in a modern way . it could even be remade frame - by - frame with actual young actors , a dolby(tm ) sound and special effects ( a car crash ) , it would still be a great film ! < br />
problem : maybe is it a film to be seen by young adults ( from 16 to 25 years old ) - and above , of course - for its message to be well understood ... did i say it was a great movie ? +1 i´ve been able to see this great movie at the fantasyfilmfest in berlin and when i went out of the cinema i felt like being drugged down * g * ! i´ve really seen lots of movies and there are just a few i´d call perfect like fight club or koyaanisqatsi ! subconscious cruelty is now one of them ! half of the people watching it in berlin went out of the room and i can understand this absolutely because it can be a real shock for someone living in his / her perfect world day by day dreaming his / her dreams not thinking bout the horror on our planet - in our life ! i don´t think i have to describe the story of the film for you because of the people having already written on this page ! it´s a movie that shows everything and more ! ! ! gets 10 points + from 10 ! ! ! it´d be cool if you people who have also seen it loving it would write me an e - mail!so far i haven´t met anyone as impressed and pleased by it as i am ! ! ! finally sorry for my bad english - i´m not a studied person ( und das ist auch gut so ! ! ! : - ) ) ) ) ) ) +0 oh dear , oh dear ! what were they thinking of ? terrible script , terrible acting . i do n't even feel sorry for the actors ... they took their cheques to the bank and smiled happily.

since when did an air shaft from charing cross pop out at bank ? why are vehicles crossing tower bridge going in towards the city when the surge hit ? why is tower bridge not crowded when the city is being evacuated ? how does carlyle dive into a raging torrent .... and survive ? i could go on ... and on.

there is no real sense of urgency in the command room . they might just as well be waiting for the england eleven to come back onto the pitch after the tea interval at lords.

it says something when i await the adsbreaks to learn more about diarrahoea treatment with eager anticipation.

totally abominable trash ! +0 i 'm not bothered by the sleazy hosts , nor am i bothered by the cynical , self - righteous stance the makers of this crap take.

what i am bothered about is that the vast majority of the episodes are fake . i would n't even be surprised if all of the episodes were staged . hence this is n't a reality show but something far worse even than oprah : garbage television with zero comma zero appeal . like daily tv soap opera but with more action and fighting and less plot.

the premise would have turned out great - if only it had been executed without cheating the viewer . if only this idea were free of all the legal complications / trappings that would most certainly ensue due to what would happen with real people , and what is eventually aired . hence the only way to create this " " " reality show " " " was to get some rather desperate actors and make them improvise ( and what pitiful and unconvincing improvisation it is most of the time ! ) . should n't this be obvious to anyone who finished grade school ? most reviews i read here do n't even mention that any of this is fake , let alone that all of it might be . wishful thinking or just boundless naivety ? < br />
the actors hired in this pathetic show are the kind of bottom - of - the - barrel unemployed actors who are miserably waiting on tables , waiting eagerly for a call from a talk show ( or this crap ) , which is when they finally get a chance to make several hundred bucks . i even recognized one actress ( in the role of " cheater " ) that i saw years earlier in " the jerry springer show " . and i only saw 6 - 7 episodes of " cheaters " . how many more of these loser actors are there that appeared in springer and " cheaters " that i do n't even know about?

however , to compare " cheaters " with springer is n't fair to the latter . the springer show is not all fake ; a bulk of the episodes are unstaged - hence often highly entertaining . there is no value to be found in " cheaters " , unless you 're a struggling actor and want to get tips on how not to act in front of the camera.

the producers use various ( very cheap , transparent ) tricks to create the illusion of realness , to give their footage that elusive documentary feel . but it 's all in vein . in the end , the more intelligent train - wreck - seeking viewer is left with absolutely squat . " professional wrestling " has more credibility than this . +0 i see that the majority of the comments so far have been if not overly positive , then at least positive . i can not understand that . the only explanation i can find is that the people who commented had something to do with the film , because this is one of the worst movies i 've ever seen . it makes " boggy creek ii " and " mutant " look like masterpieces of horror . the acting is shaky at best , and awful for the most part . the entire movie is almost pitch black , probably so they could shoot it all in the same location . the monster looks like something from one of roger corman 's worst films . and the plot ... well , the less said about it the better.

one to avoid at all costs . +0 this movie was awful ! ashley rose orr , while a talented tap dancer , and singer ( actually a little better than temple was in terms of the latter ) , is a terrible actress . she plays the character as the shirley that we saw on screen in her movies whether she 's playing her onscreen or offscreen persona . so what we get is an overly cutesy , and wholly unrealistic ( not to mention uninteresting ) portrait . if one wants to see that side of her , one can just rent one of her movies . the only bright light here is connie britton 's portrayal of gertrude temple . i do n't think it was terribly realistic , but at least it was well acted . save yourself the trouble and rent the poor little rich girl . +0 usually , i start my reviews with an explanation of how and why i watched the film i 'm reviewing . with this , i simply can not explain . i needed to be awake early for work the next day so the last thing i wanted to do was watch a film that i did n't know anything about . but something kept me glued to my comfy futon as i watched this heather graham vehicle . oh , that 's right . boredom.

graham plays joline , a bohemian nut - case who seems more obsessed with her marriage vows than the guy she married ( played by luke wilson ) . when her hubby decides to set off in search of better things ( work , women and scripts , presumably ) , joline begins a fanatical quest to find her husband and free him from his " spiritual wheelchair " . it sounds like i 'm making this up but sadly , i 'm not . in reality , this is little more than an acting exercise for graham as she gamely gives this phoebe - from - friends role a work - out . oh and goran " er " visnjic is in there as well , for some reason.

the tv schedules had this down as a comedy but i failed to find a single laugh anywhere . it struck me that this was a personal journey for lisa krueger ( the director and writer ) , in the same mould as " girl , interrupted " but even that had more laughs than this . graham 's character is simply too self - centred for the audience to care about and i felt sorry for the hen - pecked husband as he bravely fought for his freedom from his clearly mental wife . very little of this film made sense as characters simply appeared in the story as though they were standing around , waiting for graham to turn up like the extras in " the truman show " . in fact , the only positive note i can produce from my scribblings was " heather graham - nice baps " . and that was n't because i was too tired to enjoy the film.

in truth , it 's very difficult to think of anybody to recommend this film to . graham purists ( a very small number of overall movie - goers , i think you 'll agree ) will have to be committed to watch this dross and possibly hippy students who collect american indian dream - catchers will take something from this . i was amazed that the average rating ( at time of writing ) was 5.0 - that would make this film as good as " die another day " and " gothika " in my book and that simply ai n't right . " committed " is a quirky oddball mess of a movie that neither entertains or enlightens . it 's complicated , pointless and simply too boring for my tastes and probably yours too . do n't even think about watching this . +1 " two hands " is a hilarious australian gangster movie set in really sultry sydney . i bet tourists never envisage sydney and bondi to look like it did in this film : all sweaty bodies , oppressive nighttime and gangsters in nylon shorts and jandals . heath ledger plays an amateur boxer with an eye on becoming part of the local king 's cross boss 's gang . he looked rather magnificent in his green wife beater and blue patterned budgie smuggler . a sweaty tattooed bod does become him . i always had him down as a " home & away " boy , and he has been in that soap , which is a little sweatier than the weetbix - insipid " neighbours " . the film is really worth watching for its combination of sardonic humour and nasty violence - the drowning scene is expected to give me nightmares soon . totty awards : country girl love interest city brother and tattooed streetkid . +0 in the mid 1800s , irishman dennis hopper ( as daniel morgan ) emigrates to australia , seeking a share of the continent 's gold . instead , mr. hopper finds himself branded , and thrown in a torturous prison ; there , he is gang - raped . upon release , hopper hooks up with aborigine david gulpilil ( as billy ) , with whom he seeks revenge upon sadistic bill hunter ( as sergeant smith ) , jack thompson ( as detective mainwaring ) , and others . eventually , vengeance becomes heroism ; hopper is admired and assisted by the common people , and hunted by corrupt and powerful authorities . hopper 's " scarcely human " performance certainly fits the disjointed feel of the film . mr. gulpilil heads up a strong supporting cast . the personnel involved in " mad dog morgan " make it not only worth a look , but also a huge disappointment . < br />
* * * mad dog morgan ( 1976 ) philippe mora ~ dennis hopper , david gulpilil , bill hunter +1 a great film . every moment masterfully conducted by toyoda and his crew . the actors give credible performances all around . the visuals are haunting , beautiful and sometimes hauntingly beautiful shots of the japanese country and city landscapes . the sounds , courtesy of japanese band ' dig ' , are never overly edgy as one would expect from band - made soundtracks . it 's strangely atmospheric and well suited to the scenes they 're on . < br />
all in all , they worked everything out perfectly .... well , if they were to give any justice to the story , perfection is the only thing anyone could have accepted . < br />
the real greatness of 9 souls is the compelling story . the prison break movie maybe something of a lost genre these days , and road trip movie losing it 's appeal due to the way the world is getting smaller . but this story easily mixes something fresh to those two genres.

9 convicts are given freedom and possibly the opportunity to regain their places in society . will society accept them ? will they be truly free of their dark pasts ? and can they stick together long enough to stay alive and find out ? < br />
each convict has an interesting history . their crimes are as varied as their apparent fates . a sense of brotherhood among them keeps the story high on drama and supplies it with hilariously comedic situations . and due to the nature of their backgrounds , violence is always something waiting to happen.

after all that , all i can say is go give it a watch . +1 i was 13 when this mini - series ( and its sequel north and south , book ii ) first aired . i had already been captivated by the personal interest stories in / around our american civil war , which is what interested me in watching this made - for - tv program.

i loved it . and now i 'm 29 years old and i only love it more . it is full of history , beautiful costuming , real - life characters woven in and out of the lives of fictional characters , all of whom you come to care deeply about . there is intrigue , love , loyalty , betrayal , family , extended family , lust , battles , victory , defeat and reconstruction.

even though i had the full set of episodes on tapes i recorded back when it originally aired , i purchased the full set of both n&s and n&s ii from columbia house some years ago when they became available . once every few years i 'll take a whole weekend and watch all the installments back to back - and am sad when the last episode rolls to an end , because i find myself wanting to continue watching the story of the lives of these characters.

i can not recommend this mini - series more highly . +0 i am sure i 'm in the minority ( i know i am among my friends ) , but i found this movie long , boring and gratuitous . the fact that the role played by denis leary is the most likable character ( the only other time i liked him at all was in " a bug 's life " ! ) speaks volumes . rene russo 's character was irritating beyond belief and thomas crowne himself was flat and stereotypical . to say he was two - dimensional may be a little generous . ( no , the scenes with his psychiatrist did not help make him real.)

with the exception of two wonderful scenes ( both involving the museum caper and not involving rene russo ) , this movie made me wish i were at home watching televised golf . +1 i am a big fan of this film and found the tv mini series " children of the dust " , the version fans should look for . at least 20 minutes or more are cut on the dvd version of this film.

i would also suggest viewers who enjoyed this film to check out the book there is a more rounded storyline with corby / whitewolf and rachel , more on black history and buffalo solders . there were two many storylines for the series or this film.

sidney poitier only shows he gets better with age , the talent just keeps growing the chemistry between his character of gypsy smith and regina taylor were wonderful viewing . i also enjoyed the billy wirth / joanna going storyline , they seems to play off each other well.

billy wirth is of course the " model of indian vision " . the look , the attitude , the dream of every woman who was wanted to be carried off in one of those romance novels by a native hero . worked for me also.

much more could have been done with this storyline but it did give the viewer a brief glimpse of racial problems back in the 1880 's , white take over of native schooling , lack of black pioneers to setup towns in the west . michael moriarty ( maxwell ) as always a great actor comes across as a very caring and confused teacher , not sure if the " whites " should be interfering with native culture.

for anyone who enjoys characters and watching them change this film is for you . i thought the chemistry between poitier 's character and that of the orphan whitewolf very moving and thought wirth and poitier worked very well together . billy wirth did some of his best scenes when working with poitier.

going got on my nerves sometimes when you want to just stop and shake her or give her a " wake - up and grown - up " call . but on the whole it was a great evening of entertainment.

look for the two tape version of this mini series if you are a fan you will really see the difference . +0 like most everyone who views this movie , i did it for the stars michael madsen and dennis hopper . the two are extremely underrated and sadly , because of that , have to headline a lot of crap . in this film , hopper plays a guy who accidentally kills a blackmailer and is offered help from the mysterious madsen.

the film actually is n't as terrible as it could have been . i 've seen both in much worse , both independently and working together ( lapd , horrible film ) . the direction was pretty poor and the script needed a few re - writes , but both give the best performance possible with the material offered . also the ending is pretty strong , so you can tell the story had potential . but when a glowing review of a film is , " it could have been much worse " , it does n't say much for the film itself.

all in all , this is one that can easily be skipped if neither of these actors draw you in . but if you 're a fan of either or both , give it a watch . they both give strong performances that outshine the obvious flaws of the film . trust me , there are much worse options out there . +0 i thought " puppets making crank phone calls " was pretty low , but i do n't believe that carlos mencia 's show even qualifies as comedy . his main objective is to make the audience incredibly uncomfortable while using the word " beaner " as many times as he possible can . i have never felt compelled to write a review declaring the awfulness of anything on imdb before , but i really do hope this show is never renewed or rerun.

mencia is trying to be the next dave chapelle , and perhaps he was only hired by the network because they hoped he would fill those shoes . it is obvious right down to the rip of chapelle 's intro ( blues guys vs. mariachi band ) . however , mencia has absolutely * no * attitude , and does not delve into popular views of the hispanic culture enough to come up with a creative poke at it each time . instead he sticks to a small number of hardly - shocking nicknames for his fellow latinos and makes " jokes " about immigration . every once in a while , he 'll take advantage of the slight darkness of his skin to make fun of someone else , like middle eastern cultures . these jokes mainly consist of reiterating every joke or stereotype made against the culture , and perhaps some incredibly old topics ( such as 9/11 ) , in a watered down , stand - up style , while he laughs at himself to cover up the audience 's style . i think he 's too afraid of really offending anyone , so it just makes the viewer feel awkward . he also beats jokes to death . if you 've ever seen " why the f * * * is this news ? " you 'll know what i 'm talking about . it 's funny at first , but he just rambles on and on and becomes captain obvious at some point . < br />
it 's a trainwreck that is purely painful to watch . +1 i managed to see the mtv premiere of this movie last night and i needed to tell everyone that this movie brought the thunder . obviously this movie will be most enjoyed by fans of the d as it has plenty of in - jokes for those that have seen the hbo series and has more than enough d for newer fans and the mass of soon - to - be converts . the music really shines with the new songs " kickapoo " ( which is much better than it sounds ) , " master exploder " ( possibly the 3rd best song in the world ) and " dude ( i totally miss you ) " . there are a load of excellent scenes ( the car chase , the rock - off , the meeting ) and cameos ( including dave grohl as satan ! ) . i really could go on for hours but i do n't want to give the movie away . go see it . you wo n't be disappointed . +1 this movie is just great ... it starts out real slow and boring but as the movie progresses ..... well the fun keeps on coming . the power of the movie is perhaps in it 's subtle references to a lot ( and i mean a lot ) of other movies . for me the best part was perhaps the bruce lee / crouching tiger , hidden dragon scene . how the two actors switches from french to chinese or whatever asian language it was , it was awesome . then the jokes with the names , they are hilarious but perhaps you wo n't understand all of them when your an american ( no offense ) . overall a great movie +0 although charlie chaplin made some great short comedies in the late 1910 's , others do n't quite make it . examples like his new job and shanghaied come to mind , and i would also the floorwalker in this category.

charlie gets mistaken for a manager of a department store ( and vice versa ) . this manager tries to steal money from the cash register and make a run for it , and charlie is just an honest costumer but getting blamed for some missing objects , stolen by other costumers.

there are n't many laughs in it , except for the last couple of minutes or so with some great scenes on the escalator . for the rest , quite disappointing.

4/10 . +1 h.o.t.s. is a fun film for a trip back to when skin flicks had a more positive fun - filled agenda . they were made simply to titillate and have a few laughs . everything seems less cynical and jaded . the girls all have natural figures and some are playboy playmates . the simple plot deals with a group of young women who open a non - sanctioned sorority house to get back at the snooty sorority girls who spurned and insulted them . instead of the mean spirited tricks of today , most of the hijinks are simply innocent fun . the women are decent actresses for this genre and are mostly very attractive . to keep our attention between the topless scenes , we have mafia henchmen , a stolen bear , a hot air balloon , a funky house mother , and the cheapest robot ever seen . there 's even danny bonnaducci of the partridge family . if you have a sense of humor then let yourself go and enjoy some light entertainment . +0 this is a typical college comedy and its very average . the story is ok but not very entertaining . its about a unlucky guy named reno who looses his job , gets his car ripped off and then his uncle dies in a stripbar . his got a girlfriend though ( a nice one btw . :-) . anyway this uncle gives him his mansion in la and mercedes as heritage and soon reno and his girlfriend moves to la to this new house . the problem is that they would need some roommates in order to pay the high rent for this house and so the film unfolds ... < br />
the movie starts ok and has a few funny jokes here and there , but the suddenly the movie takes a turn straight down to hell ... the ending is bad . really bad . it destroys everything about the movie . you will know what i 'm talking about when you see the movie ...

2/10 +0 this film fails on many many levels . the script is the first failing , and as i understand it , if the script stinks , there 's nothing that can fix that . the plot is boring , after the first 45 minutes , i 'm looking at the counter on the dvd saying to myself , " how much longer ? " the cinematography is pretty awful . i 'm not sure how bad the transfer was to dvd , but it looked like a vhs copy . also , the sound was bad . i realize this is n't going to get remixed for 5.1 , but yikes , it did n't even sound like it was in dolby stereo which had been around for almost a decade when they cut this film.

slipstream was far too similar to both mad max and blade runner for comfort . because of the lack of decent special effects and high quality dialog , it is extremely disappointing . if i recall , the pointer scene took place during the last 20 minutes , usually it should take place in the first 20 . most people will be totally confused as to what the heck is going on until the final 20 minutes.

the film 's music was excellent in parts , and then completely inappropriate in others . elmer bernstien did the scoring , but it sounds like someone else had a hand in sticking in ' other ' stuff elsewhere as it does n't match the overall good orchestral score ( with some synthesizer music.)

there were great actors cast , bob peck , mark hamill , ben kingsley , bill paxton . and they did a great job breathing the little available life into their characters . ( well , paxton 's character was pretty stupid , and the whole movie was centered on him . i 'm not sure a heroic stooge is a good choice for the main character who carries the film . ) again , a major flaw with the script.

thank goodness i watched this from a mail order dvd service , and not the theater . overall a major disappointment for sci - fi fans , or fans of paxton , or hamill . 90 minutes of your life , you 'll never get back . +0 was this supposed to be funny ? this is one of those films that just does n't work . the first one , bruce almighty with jim carey , had some very funny moments . this one had none.

steve carrell , who was brilliant in bruce almighty , fails to deliver here . his performance is very ordinary and he ca n't carry it off like carey did.

the one good thing about this is i only paid $ 1.95 to rent it . it 's a movie for children ... very young children who have only seen about 4 films or so in their short lives.

it 's interesting to note that where jim carey stars in a film and they make a sequel without him that it 's usually a huge turkey . anyone remember son of mask ? ( imdb worst 100 films of all time ) avoid this one movie lovers . +0 the first two movies of this series excelled for their footage of the natural world and ordinary people stuck in the midst of society . this movie does n't have any of that natural footage , which i understand is part of the point , but it really makes the entire video component of the film seem like random images stuck together-- ones and zeroes flying around , computer models of human skeletons , and so forth . occasionally the stock footage is put to good effect ( the nationalism / finance segment around 35:00 ) , but usually it makes the video appear to lack any meaningful content , and demands you accept the context of the stock photographers rather than the context of the director . it 's no better than the video displayed on a karaoke machine . three stars added for the philip glass soundtrack . +1 this is the last film of krzysztof kieslowski - one of the greatest directors in the history of cinema . he intended to retire after this film , so in a way it is his artistic testament . he died a couple of years after making the film , and though it is said that he intended to return to directing , destiny decided that this was indeed his last . and what a film!

'rouge ' the last film in the three colors french trilogy is actually a very swiss film . set in geneva , one of the two main characters is a swiss retired judge , and durenmatt immediately comes to mind . but there is more switzerland in the cool atmosphere , in the lack of communication of the characters , in the politeness that envelops cruelty of life . several characters who start with little relationship will come together at the end in a moving and human final , which only a great artist could have staged.

little else can be said that was not said and written hundred of times . yes , the film starts slowly , and the fans of the american style of action movies or melodramas will get discouraged first and will get lost as viewers . they deserve it . the film gets quality as it advances , and one of the not so hidden messages is that real life and real humans are more interesting than the hollywood cartoon and plastic action and characters . cinema quality is very original , the image being a ' study in red ' , as the title shows . acting is fabulous , with irene jacob and jean - louis trintignant - the later in what will remain probable the best role of his old age . < br />
a great film . seeing it again probably adds , and i am happy to have it recorded on tape . 9/10 on my personal scale . +1 boogie nights is one of the best films to come out of the 90 's and i 'd go so far as to say it should be in the imdb top 250 . i can actually understand why many would dislike it , due to the subject matter . i personally feel however as many do , judging from the aclaim this film 's received by viewers and critics that it 's topnotch film making.

the direction and acting in this film surpass good and reach the level of brilliance . there is not one scene in this movie that is n't amazing . the individual characters reach out and touch you . given that this is a movie about the porn industry , one would n't imagine the sex scenes could be handled with such sensitivity but they are . the direction is among the best i 've ever seen - and i 've seen a lot of films.

the film is n't about one particular personal individual 's story , it 's about many . it 's a character study about people who have many layers to them and who maybe in an industry most would find alien but who still dream the same dreams and have both bad and good to them . boogie nights draws you into their story from the beginning , and though the film is long(i believe almost 3 hours ) you honestly do n't even notice . and when it ends you kind of do n't want it to ....

i'm not easy to impress , meaning there are n't many movies i 'd give a 10 of 10 rating to but this is one . beyond the multiple character study , is the use of music in the film . i have never , in all my years of seeing movies seen music tell a story as well as in this movie . there was such flawlessness to it , you know it 's not something your gon na see everyday.

burt reynold 's performance was perhaps the best i 've ever seen him do , and mark wahlberg is incredible(i'm astounded there are still people saying he does n't act well . i do n't know how anyone viewing this could possibly think that)but the person who really surprised me was heather grahem(rollergirl ) who is absolutely fantastic in her role , in particular the one memorable scene with burt reynolds in the limo , towards the end.

again , i 'll echo other imdb reviewers in saying this movie is not for everybody . but i still think this was topnotch.10 of 10 . +1 stupidly beautiful . this movie epitomizes the ' so bad it 's good ' genre of films . < br />
the only two talents in it are richard boone and joan van ark , and only boone is any good . it 's kind of sad that the man who rose to fame as paladin should wind up in this ugly pile of celluloid . while he turns in a fantastic performance , i could n't help but feel that he so outclassed all his fellow actors in this piece that he should n't even have been there.

the effects in this film are laughable , but fun . the idea of a dinosaur being buried in the wall of a cave and suddenly coming to life is b - movie gold . when the ' triceratops ' gets killed , watch how it falls . it 's clear that the stunt performer in the front of the costume knows the timing best . he falls to the ground , well before the back half of the dinosaur follows suit.

speaking of ' suits ' , there is nothing good to say about the purple tyrannosaur , in this flick . it seems to have some kind of stealth technology , since bunta ( reputed to be the best tracker in the world ) twice fails to notice it until it 's within biting range of him . i do n't know how all the prints are , but in the version i own , the tyranno 's roar contains godzilla 's trademark bellow.

this is loads of fun , to watch , if you like bad movies . i love them , and especially bad monster movies , so i consider this the gem of my collection . if bad movies are your thing , definitely get this one . +1 duck_of_death needs to watch this film again , as his major criticism is completely baseless . the film never once forgot about the time delay , and it was mentioned explicitly in a couple of places . the crew were never shown having conversations with mission control that did n't obey the time delay rules.

one thing i did think was a bit far - fetched was the amount of risk involved - would a crew land on a planet on which pressure suits would only last two hours ? i doubt it . would a manned space ship go into a star 's corona ? i doubt it . would humans land on a moon that was being bombarded with huge amounts of radiation ? i doubt it . also , the ship seemed overly sturdy . would a ship designed like that risk atmospheric flight to slow it down ? i doubt it . would it survive being hit by comet debris ? i doubt it . i think in both cases the stresses on the structure would be too much . but all - in - all , the unlikely scenarios were compensated by some nicely done special effects , good editing and production , and some good acting , especially by the actors portraying the ship 's commander and the russian cosmonaut . +1 king of queens is comic genius . kevin james , whom plays ips deliveryman doug heffernan is extremely funny , leah remini who plays doug 's wife carrie is incredibly hot ( # 19 on stuff magazine 's hottest 102 woman list ) , and very funny . the true magic of the show however is the scenes with jerry stiller , they are the funniest in the show . jerry , a comic genius , plays carrie 's father , arthur spooner , whom lives in doug and carrie 's always cold basement . i must admit that i never watched this show until this year , 2006 . whenever i had flipped by it previously it never seemed funny , but with the cancellation of friends , still standing , and yes dear , i needed some new comedy . actually giving the king of queens a chance i discovered that it was absolutely fantastic . so funny in fact that i downloaded the first 7 seasons and watched each season in 8 hour blocks . i strongly urge anyone whom has not seen this treasure to check it out . you will not be disappointed . +1 i do n't cry easily over movies , but i have to admit , this one brought me to tears . although i am not a ms. streep fan , her performance was excellent . the title defines in a sentence what a mother 's love is . for the first hour i did n't like any of the characters , but that changed as the movie went on . the movie also explained why certain marriages last even though there are obstacles . a must see film . +0 so i give it one star for true quality , but i 'd give it an eight and a half for sheer enjoyability . an incredibly strange hybrid of sex comedy and vigilante thriller , " young warriors " is just the sort of bad movie you usually hope to find when poking around the video fringe , yet so rarely do . it starts off with about half an hour of wacky hi - jinx , sex jokes , and juvenile shenanigans ( including an olive in the martini joke that has to be seen not to be believed ) . then the main character 's younger sister gets gang raped by a bunch of swarthy bikers ( an objectionable scene that keeps me from giving this a 10 for entertainment value - rape is not entertainment ! ) , and the main character gets the rest of his sex crazed frat brothers to help him in a quest to clean up the city , find the responsible bikers , and kill anybody slightly criminal they run into along the way.

it 's hilarious , non - stop fun , apart from the very unpleasant rape scene , and is essential viewing to any serious bad movie fan . trust me - i 've put my time in on these things , and this is one of the best . highlights include a wonderful visit to the library , a great flickering slo - mo shootout in a sleazy bar ( with a shot of a guy blowing his own foot off that 's pretty impressive ) , a couple of decent slumming actors ( richard roundtree , ernest borgnine ) , a couple of semi - famous recognizable faces ( lynda day george , scream queen linnea quigley ) , and a couple of relatives of famous people ( chuck norris ' brother mike , van patten clan member james ) . it even has one of those great " what have we become ? " type morality lesson endings , although the turning point comes when the vigilante fratboys gun down a couple of kids robbing a store with a toy gun . i 've always wondered why that was the catalyst that got the hero thinking ; after all , whether they were kids and not hardened criminals , and whether they had a real gun or not , they were in fact still robbing a store , so as far as i can tell , it was just another job well done for our vigilante frat boys , right ? wonderful stuff . highly recommended , just do n't blame me when you enjoy it despite yourself . +1 " thriller " is brilliant . it is a long video , but simply brilliant nonetheless . the song itself is ... excellent ... add michael jackson dancing and you have a golden phenomenon . out of all the videos i have ever seen , this is the best . if you have not seen the video yet , then i urge you ...

the special effects are amazing for it 's time ... everything from the wearwolf transformation to the idea of these creepy zombies slowly raising from their graves is grand ... spookishly grand that is . vicent price has his segment of bone - shivering lines ... known simply as " the rap " ola ray does good as michael 's girl , and michael jackson himself ... the dancing , and singing ( although not during the video itself ) is unmatched ...

10/10 . +0 in spite of many positive reviews this is a very slow film with three essentially good actors improvising the most banal dialog you will ever hear . this is another road movie that really goes no where . the camera frequently goes out of focus and the constant panning in some of the over long scenes is annoying.

the three characters are attractive but note likable . the cast also sets what must be an intergalactic record for the use of the tired word " dude " . ( even howard stern has abandoned this tired pesudo pronoun).

the three primary actors and one supporting actor show great promise . they are clearly comfortable and bravely allow themselves to be depicted as shallow and even goofy . the character actors all seem as they are plucky amateurs who generously volunteered to speak a few lines .. indeed they all physically fit their roles well.

all in all a dull 90 minutes that seems more like an eternity . this is among my ten worst films of all time . +1 i was shocked at how good this german version of films such as scream was . surpassing all the modern american efforts at slasher films.

it as what all those films do n't . likable characters , genuine mystery , suspense , graphic murders and a brilliant soundtrack.

this stylish horror film is one of the best of its kind to come out in years . german cinema is going from strength to strength just lately . its a shame more people wo nt go to see such films because they are missing out . it is easily available on dvd so even if you hate subtitles i think you should see it . it will be one of the best horror films you will see all year . +0 actually i 'm still in doubt if there 's anything about this movie i like . as for the story : unrealistic and very exaggerated . the acting was too bad in my opinion . not very likely that antonie kamerling will get a rutger hauer status . some folks will expect it anyway . first let him work on his english pronunciation . if you watch the ' trip ' to paris of these actors ( dvd - extra ) you will most likely want to trow up . advice to beau dorens : stop your acting career , you 'll never get there ... to the 2 main ' actors ' : grow up , please . being generous , i 'd give it 4 out of 10.

+0 a little while ago , i stumbled upon this dvd while browsing netflix , and with such an impressive cast , decided to give it a go.

never before have i seen a movie try to be a new version of an existing great movie ( scarface ) and failing so spectacularly.

the main issue seems to be a complete misunderstanding of what the story should be . in scarface , tony montana was the self - proclaimed " bad guy . " his spectacular rise and eventual downfall was n't sad , it was a great ( and the only logical ending ) to someone who lived such a life.

damian chapa , as director , writer , and lead actor , sees kilo as some sort of hero , or at least a complicated guy . however he does n't want to do the grunt work of creating a realistic , sympathetic character . he was raised by a white mother , except for the six months of his childhood where his father , a gangster himself , showed him his life . for reasons never fully explained or even really mentioned , he decides he wants to be a drug dealer , and actually drives to the bad part of town , approaches two dealers and says , " hey , i 'd like to buy some drugs . " he drops his father 's name , and in apparently no time they are not only rich , the two guys who are supplying him are acting subserviently to him for reasons , again , never explained.

chapa wants you to feel bad when his character is sentenced to prison when a police informant lies about him . however , since he 's dealt large quantities of drugs before , why should one feel sympathy for him going to jail for it this time ? the most obvious case of chapa wanting to be the good guy is in his prison execution of a white supremacist / rapist played by gary busey . in scarface , tony montana kills someone in prison because he pretty much has to in order to elevate himself , it 's done , he moves on . but in this case they ham - handedly have to make busey not only a rapist / pedophile but also a white supremacist . a little overkill , do n't you think ? i wo n't go into detail in this regard too much more , but their desperate message of " please like me ! i'm a complicated gangster ! " fails on every level . try as they might , i did n't feel bad , conflicted , or sympathetic when his buddies are killed ( following a shootout ) , his wife is also killed ( shortly after she called him out on being a lousy father , and during an attempted escape when he decided it 'd be ok to ride right next to a car filled with gunmen while his wife is in the car ) , and his eventual demise.

suffice it to say his acting can be fairly summed up as lousy , his only achievement bringing the term " wooden " to starry new heights . busey should be credited for actually putting effort into his ridiculous role . tiny lister did well . stacy keach is playing his warden from prison break role . robert wagner is coasting for a paycheck . faye dunaway , while a touch dramatic , still turns in a performance better than this movie deserved . brad dourif is in the film for about two minutes and does what he can . and to give the film credit , it does one - up scarface in one way - jennifer tilly now holds the title of " most ridiculous attempt at a hispanic accent . " ( sorry robert loggia . ) in short , this movie had an interesting premise , but a poor story arc , unsympathetic characters , and hit - or - miss performances . i 'd advise mr. chapa to ease up on the forced sympathy next time - really , we do n't need to like your character , we just need to be interested . better luck next time . +0 the tv ads for this movie showed the warlocks hitting a truck head - on , then getting smashed to bits and reforming on the other side of the truck . i thought the special effects were good , but the general style of the movie was wimpy . this is the " charmed " tv series with three boys instead of three girls.

the big surprise for the three teens who are about to become adults is that there is an unknown fourth member of the clan who is out to get them and consolidate all their power . besides driving into trucks , these kids can fly up the sides of houses , climb out of windows , push each other into stacks of garbage , and make the veins in their necks pop out . but if they use their powers too often , they become prematurely old and feeble . the father of one of the boys is evidence of this , as he sits in an attic made up to look like a mummy but he is only 45 years old.

the three good warlocks are each filthy rich in his own right , completely spoiled , obnoxious , and annoying . in any public school , these kids would be beaten up every day . their glares and facial ticks would not cut any mustard with the boys from the hood . unfortunately for all good people , these charmed boys were sent to hogwart 's reform school for the warlocks that could n't get into harry potter 's class.

so what was the movie all about ? three teenagers acting out with each other and their girlfriends . one other teenager who envies their power and money and happens to be a lost relative . after a few scenes where the charmed boys show off their powers and have sex with their girlfriends ; the movie gets around to the unknown warlock teen 's revenge plot . the predictable stuff happens . the bad warlock ambushes various friends of the other warlocks , and eventually starts attacking them too . the final confrontation happens , and that is about it.

the special effects are not bad , but nothing special . if you like to see fireballs , spiders , and blue veins , then this is a good movie to watch . +0 this is not the worst movie i 've ever seen . i did not feel like i wanted to remove my eyeballs forcibly after watching galaxina . it just is not good . the jokes are almost funny , but fall short . all of them . the few gags that come close are beat back down by repeating them over and over . the production values are , well , non - existent . the sound is bad , the lighting is bad , ... it just seems cheaply made ; overly so . the dialog ... well , often it is missing - many awkward silences ; they are all just standing around , and it seems like someone should be saying something . the film even seems ambivalent about what it wants to be - it is not always clear that it was intended as a comedy - like maybe that developed after shooting started . it feels like someone 's film project that they threw together the night before it was due , and if they had put two weeks into it , it could have been good.

and i 'm easy to please . i thought " mom and dad save the world " was a hoot . i like " pluto nash " . " mystery men " is one of my favorite movies . " spaced invaders " is well nigh unto a classic . this turkey just does n't do it . " space truckers " was more believable.

avery schreiber , who can be very funny , tries too hard . his part calls for a straightman , and he plays it leaning toward sitcom . dorothy stratten is ok in her role , but not particularly noteworthy.

oh , yeah , the " my watch is always slow . " line was funny . i 'll give this movie all the kudos it can get , it needs it.

the space vehicle models are not bad , but they are few and are not used effectively . the space scenes are vague . no sweeping passes , no close up detailed fly - bys , not even appropriate action scenes when they dock . ( the infinity does crash land very oddly at one point . ) the flight dynamics are terrible ; worse than anything you 've seen , they 're jerky , not smooth . the initial battle is stilted and static ; even though the two ships have just shown that they can maneuver in their jerky fashion , they trade ( slow ) shots at close range in a manner that is more reminiscent of a 16th century sea battle , except not as exciting.

the aliens - imagine if all of star wars was the cantina scene . that many rubber masks could get dull rather rapidly , no ? a few are used as sight gags that work ok the first time , but not the fifth.

mercifully , if you attempt to watch galaxina , you are likely to fall asleep . ( i got busy doing something else and missed the last ten minutes , and did not feel like it was worth replaying it . if that does n't say " it sucked " , i do n't know what does . ) sadly , there is a lot of potential , and this could easily have been a good movie . it would be easy to remake this and have a decent film.

madkaugh +1 although i am not a michael jackson fan , i like some of his early songs and some from jackson 5 too . ' thriller ' is one of his great songs and it comes from the best - selling album ever with the same title . as for the video , it is awesome , one of michael 's best , but also very eccentric and weird.

there is a story behind this video , but it 's so complex that even i ca n't fully understand it . it 's freaky . the freakiest things are jackson 's transformation into a werewolf , his evil red eyes at the end ( like a werewolf ) and those dead people dancing.

the video is very dark , thrilling , chilly and original . there are great sceneries and settings . the music itself is full of life and rhythm , characteristic from the good old pop from the 80's.

i like vincent price 's soliloquy . he does a great narration with his distinctive and unique voice and his evil laughter at the end is awesome ! my favorite videos of the ' king of pop ' are " billie jean " and " do n't stop ' til you get enough " ( both among his best songs ) . +1 just like all of mel brooks ' other comedies , men in tights is hilarious . but in seeing this as an outrageous comedy , i think many fail to realize that the reason the movie is so funny is that the characters themselves are acted so well . elwes is the well - spoken former british noble , lewis is an eternally annoyed king ( i hope it 's worth all the nooooooiiiise ! ) , deluise is a fantastic godfather , roger rees is a worried and cynical sheriff .... the actors and actresses are so loyal to their parts that the jokes flow forth with ease . yes , we 've seen this kind of comedy before , but the only comedy to achieve better character development , in my opinion , is the big lebowski . very very funny . +1 this is a quirky heist / caper film , one that seems predictable at first then keeps surprising until the last scene . the protagonist is a grifter who goes to work in a little carnival , where he 's paid to kill the manager 's belly dancer wife divana then ends up falling for her himself . she 's alluring , tricky and deadly and she keeps disappearing and popping up again like some sort of magician 's trick . the film 's other props include her duplicitous husband / employer ( played by the talented armand assante ) , some nasty dominican mobsters and most important to the plot , a suitcase full of money . just like the old " shell game , " the one where you have to guess which one the pea 's under , you 'll be guessing who 's got the money , and like the victims of the hucksters who run such games , you 'll probably guess wrong . dagma dominczyk , as lovely divana , is a talented performer and an eyeful , whether she 's dancing with the huge snake around her shoulders or working her grift on all the unfortunate men in her orbit . norman reedus is fine as the young con who is flummoxed by the elusive beauty he was paid to kill . do n't count him out , however , for he turns out to be smarter than anyone gave him credit for . this oddball film is worth a look . +1 everyone is entitled to an opinion . the only critic who counts is yourself . i think this is a great movie . much better than the original.

in " caddyshack " , rodney dangerfield is funny , but obnoxious . he was asked to do the sequel , but things got in the way . jackie mason shows the saying that " less is more " . he is funny , but a man with real family issues , a more rounded person . it 's no drama , but a movie that makes you feel . actually in some points , you feel sorry for jackie mason , especially when his daughter walks out on him.

it has a good soundtrack , and overall , a good sorry . a good end to the series.

in the tv show " alf " , alf says that he cried in " terms of endearment " . the wife , kate tanner , played by anne schedeen , also says he cried at " caddyshack 2 " . +1 if this film had been made in the 50 's or 60 's , critics and fans alike would have praised it . i myself , enjoyed the film from beginning to end . it 's not a timeless piece , and has not aged well over the years , but it is enjoyable to watch , nonetheless . as for mrs. ritchie 's acting in the film ? not the best on the planet -- but it adds to the film 's unique slapstick comedy - aspirations , and showcases madonna 's ( often underrated ) sense of comedic timing . madonna plays nikki finn , an ex - convict who was framed for a crime she did n't commit . griffin dunne plays the hapless future groom / puppet who is sent to escort her from prison to the bus station , where a series of unfortunate events occurs , thus creating the plot . ( and there * is * one , folks ! ) give the film a shot . you might be pleasantly surprised at how funny it really is . +1 best robot romantic comedy ever , using the robots as the romantic characters , which leaves short circuit out of this category . this was andy kaufman 's best effort . bernadette peters shows her versatility here with an amazing performance . while not a great movie in many areas , i 'll award it a 9 on guts and quirkiness . +1 affable aspiring cartoonist hoops mccann ( a wonderfully engaging performance by john cusack ) and his best buddy george ( the deliciously deadpan joel murray ) go to nantucket for the summer following graduation from high school . hoops , george , and several newfound pals come to the aid of cassandra ( demi moore at her most charming ) , a singer who 's family house is being threatened with demolition by the greedy beckersted clan . writer / director savage steve holland offers an often hilariously wacky and zesty nonstop barrage of admittedly broad and dumb , but still very funny jokes . the constant madcap lunacy has a real giddy , good - natured and infectiously inane vitality to it that 's impossible to either dislike or resist . moreover , the lively and enthusiastic acting from a fine game cast adds immensely to the zany merriment : bobcat goldthwait as the spastic egg stork , tom villard as his goofy brother clay , curtis armstrong as the sweet ack ack raymond , mark metcalf as evil rich jerk aquilla beckersted , matt mulhern as the mean teddy , kimberly foster as the fetching cookie , joe flaherty as the gung - ho general raymond , william hickey as cranky old man beckersted , jeremy piven as smug preppy bully ty , and john matuszak as hulking biker stan . isidore mankofsky 's slick cinematography , the hip thrashy soundtrack , cory lerios ' cool rockin ' score , and the funky animation are all uniformly excellent . single funniest scene : egg in a godzilla suit terrorizing a posh dinner party . an absolute hoot . +1 enigma is a computer part which scrambles russian messages , so that america ca n't understand them . they can only be read by the intended recipient . the americans know that the russians are going to transmit a message revealing the plans of five political assassinations they want to carry out.

so they send in former defector holbeck ( martin sheen ) to grab the scrambler and substitute a false part , so they 'll be able to decode the message , and block the assassination attempts.

however , as we listen in on the americans heads of the spy organisation , we find that they already have the scrambler , and they want holbeck to try to steal enigma , only to convince the russians that they do n't already have it . they do n't expect holbeck to succeed . that way the russians , who had stopped transmitting with enigma , just in case , will begin transmitting again.

enigma is in the computer in the office of dimitri vasilikov . somehow holbeck must gain access , and in order to do that , he must find out when vasilikov will be out . he sends in his former girlfriend karen ( brigitte fossey ) to seduce vasilikov , so that she can look through his papers and find out his scheduled movements . karen is glad to do it , as they tortured her father , a university professor , to death.

because we know that it 's better for the americans if holbeck fails , the movie becomes even more intense as a spy thriller . we find ourselves hoping he can survive against the odds , especially as he uses ingenious methods to beat the russians at every turn.

but what 's this ? are karen and vasilikov falling in love ? will holbeck win karen back , or will she actually end up with vasilikov ? the romantic twist lifts this spy thriller , already worthy of a ten , even higher , for its originality . the writing , the direction , and the acting all combine to make this new and fascinating twist a compellingly realistic one.

you find yourself at the edge of your seat , gripping your armchair , not only for the excitement of the spy story but for the intensely beautiful romantic love story as well . the two themes are interwoven perfectly , right up to the end . you really want both sides to win . so who does win , in the end ? you 'll have to see the movie and find out , wo n't you ! +0 christopher lambert attracted me to this movie . what a waste ! the plot has more holes than my string vest the special effects were not very good , it did not take much to figure out who the creature 's mother was and the creature owed more than a little debt to predator . anti - climatical this movie could have been done a whole lot better . it does raise one interesting point however . when is hollywood going to discover the rich vein of european folklore out there just waiting to be mined ? +1 john has made two one man shows . spic o rama and freaks , and neither one has shown up on dvd ... john ! ! ! why do you this to me john ? ? put it on dvd john , so the people can see , they need to see john ! ! :d ... just in case anyones keeping a watchful aye ! ! +1 i watched the movie yesterday and for me it was a stunning combination of movies like pulp fiction and reservoir dogs . the best of the best . it was never any dull and always moving , every hour there 's another character bothering ( trying to kill ) him . you never know what 's next . in one word terrific ! ! ! +0 i live in mexico city , so i have to suffer throug the trailers for every piece of trash that comes out from all these stupid mexican filmmakers . you want to admire a mexican guy for making great films ? take a look at something by guillermo del toro ( specially the devil 's backbone ) , or maybe alfonso cuarón ( though i really do n't like his films , but i respect them).

mexican filmmakers often produce some of the most terrible utter trash ever ( por la libre , el segundo aire , american visa ) , but this is one of the lowest points in mexican films ever . if you respect your brain , please avoid this piece of * * * * at all costs . it would be more intelligent to watch some video of a wedding or to watch britney 's reality show . that 's got more iq than everyone in this ' film ' . +0 a waste of time , talent and shelf space , this is a truly abysmal film . what are big leaguers like keanu reeves , cameron diaz and dan aykroyd wasting their time being in such rubbish ? . petty criminal reeves turns up to his brothers ( vincent d'onofrio ) wedding and ends up leaving with the bride . a comedy ? , thriller ? , romance ? i honestly do not know ! reeves is wooden in the lead and casting dan aykroyd as a cop is so dreadful it has to be seen to be believed!. only bright spot from a dark dark tunnel is diaz and even she is n't that good . rent out something else . everyone involved with this mess should hold there heads in utter shame and prey that it gets lost in oblivion in the years to come . +1 a talented high school graduating senior with a bad attitude is forced to play in the state all - star high school football game . when he meets and falls for an attractive local girl she helps him realize he has a shot at a ' full ride ' scholarship if he plays well.

all too often , these dramas fall into formulaic traps and tell the same old story of a troubled and confused teen . full ride 's matt sabo certainly fits this profile , but below the surface is a much more unique individual than we usually see in this genre . matt is the center of the action and he is a realistic teenager , both over - confident and vulnerable , optimistic and cynical by turns . influenced by amy , matt grows into a man of character and heart . he , in turn , forms friendships with his teammates , which influences his growth as an athlete and as a team player.

full ride has all the elements we love to see in a movie -- great acting , admirable characters , exciting sports scenes , poignant drama , and a love story . still , while one may have seen these elements in other films , full ride is assisted by performances that are sincere and occasionally , even moving . perhaps what 's most impressive about full ride is its sense of reality . although the author of the previous comment would seem to disagree , ( clearly a disgruntled student who , for quite obvious reasons , received a poor grade in his film class ) director mark hoeger grounds the film in a believable situation and location and does a great job of getting down to the grit of what life is like in a small town . these characters are real people rooted in realistic situations , which often create the most compelling entertainment . on one level it is a love story , on another it is a character study , and yet another it is a simple football film . all of these ideas come together to form a cohesive vehicle . +1 this show has to be my favorite out of all the 80 's horror tv shows . like tales from the darkside , also from the same creators , this show is a rare gem . if you agree with me , please sign this petition i started , to get the word out for monsters and get it out on dvd . here is the petition address : www.petitiononline.com/19784444/petition.html some of my favorite episodes would have to be glim glim , and rain dance . i also loved the opening intro with the monster family . that used to creep me out ! one of the things i would have to ask the dvd creators to include would be the organ sound heard right before where the commercial break would be . i do n't know if any of you remember that part but that 's one of the main things that brings back memories to me . i mean , come on ! war of the worlds the tv series already has been released on dvd , so i say monsters , and also tales from the darkside , and friday the 13th the series should be released too ! we the fans need to speak our minds ! we need this awesome show on dvd so please spread the word ! ! ! +0 the only reason this show did not get a 0 is because one is not available . this show has gone from informative news to sensationalized claptrap . i tried to support this show in its decline , because i like human interest stories and primetime used to have some very good ones . unfortunately , april 21st has forever changed my mind about this show and the unethical newscasters that participate in it . abc actually recorded a brutal case of child abuse and then refused to show it until the statute of limitations had run out and the parents could not be arrested on the charges they should have faced . what made it worse was how abc swept the whole incident under the rug ; instead of taking charge and seeking true professional help for these disturbed individuals , they had some pop psychologists send stern warnings to the audience about how they should n't judge these poor angels too harshly . i was truly sickened . i hope this review stops one person from watching this investigative trash in the future . if it does , i will be happy . these days , all you can expect from diane sawyer and the good folks from primetime live are butt - kissing sessions with a - list celebrities and criminal acts covered up and praised to the stars . do n't waste the hour of your life ; you 'd be better off watching an old sitcom on nick at nite . +1 i ca n't disagree with a previous comment that " driving lessons " is more than a little twee , but one man 's indictment is another 's endorsement , i suppose . in my book this film succeeds on pure charm , no small feat in itself.

i ca n't help but wish the story was a little less conventional given the amount of acting talent in it , but by the end the plot seems more like a backdrop for the character interactions anyway . julie walters ' dame evie is a gloriously over the top and over the hill actress . though evie has n't had steady work in years , it 's unclear the last time she visited reality , if ever ( think edina from " abfab " at 65 , at one point she is even forced to come to grips with her kitsch - factor ) . some may find her annoying , but i think that 's the point , to emphasize just how much she pushes the reserved ben 's ( rupert grint ) buttons to force him out of his shell . ben is equally isolated from reality , living his whole life under the thumb of his overly dependent mother , who laura linney manages to breath some life into , despite being a fairly one - dimensional character ( ye olde overbearing religious mom ) . i was rather impressed with rupert grint who i found to give a very honest and believable performance ( not to mention sweet as all get - out ) , i ca n't think of many teen actors today for whom i can say that.

the heart of the movie is what happens when ben and evie 's worlds collide . at first ben is understandably tentative , but also intrigued , as evie is essentially the exact opposite of everything he 's ever known . with the combination of evie 's persistence and ben 's helpful nature a genuine sweetness develops between them , culminating in an unlikely road trip that gives ben his first real taste of independence.

the tone is consistently light even through a few brief melodramatic bits , but there was still a surprising amount of emotional resonance , a credit to the main actors . all in all i 'd say that if you 're willing to sit back and let yourself be charmed by some lovely performances , " driving lessons " should n't disappoint . however , if " cute " is not in your movie vocabulary , best to stay away.

one other minor note , the soundtrack features the music of sufjan stevens prominently , a nice touch . +0 i 'm shocked that all the " hated it " ratings are sixes and sevens , still above average . to me , this seems a case of " the emperor has no clothes " . i understand this film was produced on a very low budget in the early 70's ... regardless , it became a struggle to sit through and watch . the dvd i saw did have some subtitles , but about 75 % of the speech is not subtitled . some of it is hard to understand . the jamaican patois was cool to hear , but you struggle not to ' tune out ' after awhile . some of the shots were nice , and the realism was there , even if some of the performances were not great.(jimmy cliff did a good job ) the plot is not bad , but quite predictable . in the 1:43 film , the highlights are jimmy cliff(ivan ) singing for a scene , and a couple of shoot - outs and a fight . probably 15 minutes or so . the rest is pretty boring . btw , near the beginning of the film , there are some weird cuts with the ivan character that seem like a editing mistake , which made me laugh for a bit . one reviewer said this film has been cut so many times , that there are few copies of the original 1972 theatrical version out there . the ending was kind of interesting , showing how the media from a young age influences people , it could also be a general comment on the white man's / colonialism 's influence on jamaica . other main themes are poverty , corruption , church , ambition ... in closing , the soundtrack is definitely worthwhile , the film much less . +1 this wonderful film has never failed to move me . the colour , convincing cast , and stunning scenery all make big contributions . this production , unlike the later remake by carlton , is more impressionistic , and presented more from the children 's own perspective . it focusses on certain episodes from e. nesbit 's charming story rather than trying to make a somewhat more documentary " warts - and - all " style that carlton adopts . above all , the superb musical score of the late johnny douglas underpins the story throughout , adding extra emotional depth . the net result is a truly formidable combination of sensory experiences that cumulatively present the poignant story of " the railway children".

one uncomfortable factor for the viewer to ponder throughout this film is how things have changed since those times - and in many ways , for the worse ! yes , maybe many of us no longer have to use outside toilets and travel in horse - drawn carts , but what about the quality of life in general ? consider the foul - mouthed celebrities who now " grace " our tv screens . their language is now apparently considered perfectly acceptable . consider , too , the fragile " here today , gone tomorrow " aspects of so many of today 's " partnerships " plus all the single mothers - whatever happened to that institution called " marriage " , when people accepted each others ' flaws but still remained together , loving their children ? these details add extra piquancy when watching this marvellous film.

i hope that , as generations pass , children will still be able to enjoy this film . not to mention certain adults ! +1 < br />
since cats have nine lives , i 'll give you nine reasons to see this movie:

* the kittens berlioz and toulouse playing the piano together ( so unbelievably cute ! ) * the car - chasing dogs napoleon and lafayette * toulouse jumping like electrified every time he wants to be like a tough alley cat * marie sighing romantically while alley cat o'malley seduces her mom * scat cat and his jazz band , singing " ev'rybody wants to be a cat " * stupid but proper and nice english geese amelia and abigail who make the cats walk like geese * o'malley obtaining the " magic carpet " which puts the cheshire cat to shame * roquefort the brave mouse 's journey to ask help from alley cats * edgar the butler chase scenes and transition from a nice guy to an insane cat hater due to cat riddance plan gone bad +0 from kreestos : < br />
the dialog is terrible , awful , drivel . acting poor . many plot flaws . i do n't recommend this at all.

from wikipedia:

artistic licenses the working manuscript of the score is attributed to two copyists [ 1 ] , both of whom were male , not female as depicted in the film.

the copyists neither contributed to nor altered the score . in fact , they were berated by beethoven for any deviation that occurred from the original score.

the movie is set in 1824 during the composition of beethoven 's ninth symphony . throughout the movie beethoven is shown to be hard of hearing but quite capable of understanding people who speak loudly . in reality , beethoven had lost much of his hearing seven years earlier ( 1817 ) . beethoven never experienced permanent deafness ; his condition fluctuated between total silence and terrible tinnitus . the ninth symphony was composed at a time when beethoven 's hearing had deteriorated severely . at this point in his life , most of beethoven 's conversations were facilitated by the use of notebooks . it can be argued , however , that he was also able to read people 's lips , evidenced by his insistence that people face him when they spoke to him.

in the film , beethoven makes an allusion to the moonlight sonata . this is an anachronism as the sonata no . 14 " quasi una fantasia " was not named " moonlight " until several years after his death . +0 i survived the first hour of this and came back for the last ten minutes , just to say i saw the end . if you want * real * mythology , flawlessly executed , look for armand assante 's " the odyssey . " great storytelling does n't need to be tweaked - the stories are fantastic on their own . i only hope sean astin needed the money . and sophocles and ovid must be whirling in their graves - wherever those may be.

at least with sorbo 's version , the tongue was poked relentlessly in cheek - we knew it was mostly balderdash , but perhaps enough interest was generated in the backstory to send someone to the library . i'm surprised halmi could turn out something so amusing ( the tv series ) , and follow it with something so devoid of quality . +0 this film is a disaster from beginning to end . 75 percent of the movie is made from scenes taken from hercules & the haunted world and hercules & the captive women badly edited together with original scenes that do not add up to anything but a complete rip - off . i 'm a big fan of those two movies and seeing scenes taken from them , re - edited and re - dubbed with nonsensical dialogue made my head spin . these kind of cheap producers tactics to make more money by duping unsuspecting audiences basically killed the sword & sandal genre back in the 1960s.

there is one memorable scene in the new footage and it 's the one when hercules fights with the bad hercules . the fight is albeit cool and giovanni cianfriglia , who plays antaius , definitely stands out . he makes a memorable nemesis to herc . but the rest is borderline embarrassing that was probably shot in a day.

avoid at all cost ! +0 a very mediocre film based on a superb series of stories and novels . i hope somebody , someday will be able to film it the right way . in the meantime , look for the books ( by a. sapkowski ) , a very inteligent , postmodern fantasy . by now there should be a translation in english , there translations in german for sure . +0 when underdog the cartoon debuted in 1964 , at the age of 7 i was hooked immediately . he was top dog ( pun intended ) in my book-(that is , until batman premiered on abc a year or so later ) . even when it was clear that disney was going to make a live - action version of the once popular saturday morning cartoon , it was equally clear to me that it was going to be a piece of crap . even reading the reviews in the papers seemed to confirm this . however , i made it a point to : a ) never attempt to write a review unless i have seen the movie from start to finish ; and b ) never to spend one red cent on a movie that i 'm almost certain i will hate.

thanks to youtube i : a ) am fully qualified to write this review ; and b ) it only cost me 84 minutes of my hard earned time.

it also proves my point , namely , that this movie is not merely a piece of crap . it 's a steaming pile of dog droppings . it resembles the tv series in name only , even though they almost got it right with simon and cad.

all in all , underdog is a huge waste of time- and money , which thankfully , i did n't have to spend.

rating : 1/2 * out of * * * * * +1 a man is wrongfully accused of killing his friend in an aircraft plant fire , and must travel cross - country to avoid the police and discover the true sinister nature of the situation at hand . a plot line that was later used to fuel hitchcock 's classic north by northwest , saboteur benefits from some very good performances as well as some masterful suspense sequences from the master himself.

for any hitchcock fan , the plot is a bit too familiar , but he was always able to infuse the story with its own memorable supporting characters and charades . here , the likable and charming robert cummings is the lead and soon finds himself visiting many strange and quirky characters , not withstanding a troupe of circus performers , a rich businessman with hidden motives , and a blind loner who shows him the best way to judge someone.

in terms of sheer originality and quality , this does lack in some areas , particularly the motive of the antagonists . however , there is some nice chemistry between cummings and his lead lady , the much under - appreciated priscilla lane as well as a truly moving performance as the blind man by vaughn glaser . the best part is the final sequence , which perfectly mirrors what hitchcock would use later in north by northwest , only this time the climax is atop a statue in new york . certainly not his best , but the master of suspense gives us some great moments to wait for . +0 once in a while i like a good horror movie , so i thought this would be a splatter and gore movie . but it was a boring boring movie , maybe because i have seen a cut version , because there where only two things that where a little splatter , one time where some ones cuts someone arm of and where some one shots an arm of , but that where the only things . wismaster for example had more cool senes then evil ed , its more a boring ed than a evil ed . and some actors where lousy to.o +1 i remember a time when the only thing that did exist where clubs , drugs pubs and parties . this movie came out a couple of years after i started going clubbing . if i had never discovered the ravier side of things this movie may not have made sense to me . that night when i watched it for the 1st time , with some mates , i was completely blown away . i had never watched a movie that hit so close to the reality of where i was in my life at that time . almost everything i could relate to in some way . there was never 1 character i could fully relate to but more a combination of all of them in one way or another . my mates where no different and i remember us all saying that they where us or we where them . we had all been out that weekend together doing exactly what the crew do in ht . we where coming down while we watched and when the movie " came down " i remember actually coming down a bit further . it was actually quite depressing in our room during those " low points " . that s what 's so good about human traffic . it really taps the whole situation.

its a unique movie in the way its not plot driven , but then its not completely character driven although the characters are important . it always seemed to be based on the situations . situations as a group and as individuals . each character is lost in life , for their own reasons . yet each of them responds to the lostness in the same way . work any job to make money to pay for the weekend and escape it all . for them its their holiday . but the reality is you ca nt truly escape . another situation they all have to face.

me and my mates where no different from these guys . we all had our own stuff going on . human traffic helped explain to us what we did n't understand about our selves . it does it in a way that does n't talk down to you . it made us feel like we were n't the only ones out there like us and that the lessons learned where ones many others , from all over the world , had gone thru . it was n't until my lifestyle changed from party popper to career driven that i would fully understand this movie . these days i watch ht , every now and then(as i just have ) , and reminisce the old days . no other movie can do this . i was peter popper , i was jip travolta , i went to never never land with my chosen family . i 'd have $ 200 in my back burner and i wax the lot ! no worries ! +0 this movie is watchable , but nothing special . four girls on a road trip to vegas foolishly decide to pick up a hitchhiker ( because he is cute ) . they all end up staying the night at a motel in the middle of nowhere , and the hitchhiker 's psychotic issues with women become apparent.

the characters are clichés -- there is a married , responsible woman ; a slutty party girl ; an unsure bride - to - be ; and a man - hater who just got dumped . the hitchhiker is genuinely nice until he goes crazy.

there 's not nearly enough gore , and way too much rape . i enjoy slasher horror / thrillers a lot , and this one did nothing for me . the ending was just as lame as the rest of the movie.

on the positive side , the actors did a great job with that they had to work with . the dialogue is n't awful , and overall i was impressed with the cast , having never seen or heard of any of them before . and the plot was n't out of the realm of possibility ( although i really doubt any woman in this day and age would pick up a hitchhiker -- no matter how attractive he is ) , so i was n't groaning that things did n't make sense.

overall , " the hitchhiker " was well - acted and made sense , but was n't very interesting . there are a lot of better movies in the same genre that i would recommend over this one ( " rest stop , " " the devil 's rejects , " " texas chainsaw massacre , " even " the hitcher " remake ) . do yourself a favor and skip it unless you do n't have any other options . +0 people , please do n't bother to watch this movie ! this movie is bad ! it 's totally waste of time . i do n't see any point here . it 's a stupid film with lousy plot and the acting is poor . i rather get myself beaten than watch this movie ever again . +0 i appear to be in the minority on this one , but i found one true thing to be schmaltzy , contrived and generally unpleasant . not that the acting was all that bad , but the characters seemed little more than archetypes ( the bad father , oh , but wait , maybe he 's not unredeemably bad ; maybe there can be a resolution at the end . . . ) . admittedly , the woman i was with loved the movie , so maybe you 'll like it . but i did n't . +0 wow , what a cheesy movie this is ! it starts off looking like it 's gon na be a backwoods slasher , with the camera following dogs running through the woods . it then gets a bit boring and follows the story of some girls moving into some house haunted by indian spirits . we then get plenty of shots of one partially clad girl and another naked girl in the bath . it suddenly gets really cheesy when the " zombie indians " arise from the earth and start terrorising the girls . we even get a samurai indian . < br />
this movie starts off pretty boring although i did find the story of the four indians who buried themselves alive quite interesting . once the indian zombies ( or whatever you want to call them for they are n't technically zombies ) start terrorising the girls is when all the fun begins . this is not a special flick and ca n't be taken seriously , it 's just something fun to watch when you 're bored or when you 're drinking with friends . i ca n't help thinking though that it would have worked better as a short story because the first half is tediously boring . +0 i am a big fan of sci - fi movies . so , when i saw this movie in the epg , i thought i was in for a pleasant evening . what a disappointment ! such a poor display of " special " effects i could not imagine in 1980 , but in 2005 ? come on , why would you do special effects of an helicopter flying in the desert when you can film a real one for a much lower price ( i guess ) ? and those killer " muppets " ... well , i could do better than that in a couple of hours in the garage . you can expect to have a low budget on a movie , but i do n't think it 's reasonable to have a low movie for any budget . as for the " star " of the movie ( i use a lot of quotes tonight ... ) , lou diamond philips , the guy is not even remotely an actor . maybe he should have stayed to the martial arts movies . all in all , an awful movie . maybe i am in a bad mood tonight . then again , maybe not . a sincere 1 out of 10 . +1 ok , most of us agree that this is a weak attempt at a remake , but at the same time it 's also a different movie in its own right . do n't get me wrong , ' american werewolf in london ' is a superior film , but ' american remake in paris ' is a decent movie as well.

first off , the only real similarities are the title , 2 american backpackers , and werewolves . other than those 3 things , ' american remake in paris ' stands apart fairly well on its own with its special blend of humor , action / adventure , and horror . most of the people who say this film is better than the original are the youth of today 's generation that think any movie made before 1990 is total crap . while those of us who grew up in the 80 's can appreciate older films and what they have added to the horror films of today . what a lot of people fail to realize is that without the old classic films , including the b&w ones , horror would n't be what it is today . now i 'm getting a little off the beaten path ...

an american werewolf in paris is a good attempt at re - creating a classic , but it will never surpass the original , ever . with that said , this is still a very entertaining film to watch and i do recommend it . i 'm giving it a 7 out of 10 . maybe that 's being a little generous , but i 've seen much worse attempts at trying to re - create a classic . +1 despite its many faults , hallmark 's 1995 version of gulliver 's travels is still the finest adaptation of jonathan swift 's satirical classic - largely because it not only includes all of gulliver 's many travels but also includes the satire that 's often overlooked . unfortunately the twin problems of the book 's highly episodic structure and a television budget ( even a fairly lavish one ) remain . the book is a somewhat rambling collection of traveller 's tales moving simply from one surreal landscape to another , but simon moore 's adaptation tries to impose some order on the chaos by providing a parallel plot that sees gulliver returned to england clearly deeply traumatised and trying to prove his way out of the insane asylum where the rival for his wife 's affections has had him committed . the england scenes at once mirror and comment on the travels , elements of which occasionally spill over into the real world . the trouble is that for the first hour or so it acts more as a distraction , constantly pulling you away from the story just as it starts to get interesting . the lilliput scenes suffer worse here , with the feeling that the home scenes are too often designed to save them from filming the more expensive setpieces - this has to be the only version where we do n't see gulliver pulling the blefescu fleet behind him.

yet once gulliver makes his escape , the tone becomes more consistent as he finds his situation reversed and himself the pet of the giants of the utopians of brobdingnag , a guest of the wise men of the floating island of laputa who are so engrossed in science that they have no common sense left , the guest / prisoner of a historian who leans history directly from the source , offered immortality with all it 's terrible consequences before finally finding a world he wants to belong if only he can convince the sublime talking horses the houynhnhms that he 's not an uncivilized yahoo , each new destination convincing him of what an absurd and petty species humanity is . for the most part it 's a darker set of travels than expected , with only gulliver 's curiosity and commonsense and disappointment keeping it from plunging into irretrievable bleakness - and even this is offset by the scenes in the asylum where it becomes more obvious that even if he is telling the truth it may well have driven him genuinely insane . it 's in these latter scenes that ted danson 's gulliver really shines , never more so than in an extraordinary speech where he turns his trial into a disappointed judgment on the whole human race.

being made for television , the yahoos are rather less literally scatological here than on the page , but for the most part this is a more adult treatment than you might expect with no real dumbing down . the star cast is certainly impressive , and for the most part well - used ( if somewhat briefly in a few cases ) - mary steenburgen , james fox , peter o'toole , edward woodward , omar sharif , shashi kapoor , edward fox , ned beatty , alfre woodard , kristin scott thomas and isabelle huppert among them . it 's hard to imagine the upcoming jack black version even coming close to being a fraction as impressive as this . +1 david lynch 's ninth full length feature film , mulholland drive is a deeply touching story about betrayal and jealousy . if anything , it brutally contrasts our ambitions and hopes to the often bitter truth . every frame of this movie has importance and links to other parts and to themselves at the same time . nothing is what it first appears to be and you 're left with a real puzzle as you end up trying to put the pieces together . it is a movie that does not compromise , nor does it fail to fully handle the challenging form and camera language , as might have been the case earlier with lost highway.

although one clearly recognizes classic lynchian motifs and devices , the movie remains highly original , even in the light of it being a lynch movie . lost highway marked a new way of telling a story ; bred an unconventional mean of setting emotions on to the screen . with mulholland drive , lynch not only managed to control this technique , but takes it to new levels in making it much more complex and multi dimensional . in doing this , he creates a framework of different layers in time and of the human mind . in a press conference on the cannes film festival 2001 , david lynch said that striving for perfection at best could give a result where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts . talking about synergies like this becomes highly relevant to mulholland dr. where the different sequences and many details contribute to the total ; dreamscapes and parallels intertwine to create the story . in some art , the beauty of it lies in its simpleness . this is not the case with mulholland drive , and has never been with lynch . it is the complexity that colors and builds the worlds lynch creates , the same complexity that characterizes the real world.

it never gets forced like , in my opinion , for example memento does , using an original way of communicating with the viewers . further comparing mulholland drive to other movies , i think it proves david lynch as a master of what he does and bridges art and film making in a way that no one has ever done . compared to for example alejandro jodorowsky or contemporary matthew barney , i do believe that lynch more clearly manages not letting the artist dominate the film maker or , more likely , david lynch better understands and executes film making as an art form.

understanding the plot is no small feat , but lynch 's way of working with sound , perspective , chronology and form paints a work of art so dark and frightening that it sometimes feels more realistic than real life . the lynchian cinema is often , and most definitely in mulholland drive , a surge of human emotions . working with emotions is a delicate craft that demands understanding and depth . as lynch puts it : " a little bit too much , and the emotion goes away . a little bit too little , and it does n't happen . " in mulholland drive , david lynch has no problem making this balance . lynch 's portraits span all kinds of dimensions and take different directions , creating incredibly realistic characters and situations . watching mulholland drive is a journey through the subconscious . it is a truthful and naked movie with indisputable artistic value . that is why i love mulholland drive and what 's taken it to the pinnacle of cinema history . the ultimate movie . +0 spoilers throughout:

not good . the movie differed completely from the book(not that the book was exactly a classic but it really was very good.)

i guess demi moore was ok . actually , i do n't really remember to much about her performance one way or the other . however the big disappointment was n't with ms. moore.

why did whoever did the rewrite decide to suddenly make the millionaire have a heart ? ( i 'm referring to him as " the millionaire " because he also had a different name in the movie then the book version - just another change.)

people who did n't read the book obviously wo n't know anything 's different but in the book version this guy is much more ruthless as well as complex overall . he is also fascinating . the fact that such a big change was made in the movie alters the whole plot . it was almost like seeing a completely different movie.

i know many movies vary widely from the books . but i also thought redford 's character was a bit of a wimp . this isn't redford 's fault(he 's a great actor and could have played ruthless well ) but without those qualities he becomes just another dazzled man in love hence the story becomes just another cliché love story involving 1 woman and 2 men . that was n't really the point of the book.

this could have been a lot better . even if i had n't read the book version i would n't have liked this all that much , but changing so much around definitely takes it , for me , a few points down . +0 if this film was just outrageously poor would be fine , the problem is many take it seriously . to make it short , a few points : < br />
- there is no story , no focus , no lead whatsoever and all the questions raised fail to find an answer . overall , the film is extremely repetitive and boring ( i have been in war - torn african countries several times and found all the lingering on local misery and hopelessness very painful to watch but still having no sense).

- questions raised are pure manipulation and the truth is that they are no questions but statements.

- i am no doc filmmaker , but what 's the point in raising , for example , the question of weapon smuggling , if the only element brought to the audience is a local reporter 's statement ? the director does n't even bother showing us at least a sequence where he would be waiting near the airport trying to spot heavily loaded trucks leaving the area right after a plane landed.

- the story of the fish takes up less than 5 mn , and is only supported by a sequence where the director films a documentary shown during a local conference . did this guy do any work at all ? ? ? ? < br />
- abject poverty is shown all the time in endless sequences but where 's the point ? one can go almost anywhere in africa with a hand cam and shoot the same images unfortunately . where 's the big news ? < br />
- filming the prostitutes watching and crying over images of their assassinated friend and fellow prostitute is worth the worst emotional manipulations one can see these days on thrash and real tv.

- the parallel drawn between the famine devastating the country with over two million starving and the exportation of fish is absolutely pointless , dishonest and makes no sense but to manipulate viewers in typically anti - globalization and anti - western feelings.

there is an interesting debate in france after an academic published a very detailed comment on the film , which brought number of journalists working in africa for decades to investigate a bit further about several details . it turns out that : < br />
- the fish waste shown drying in the sun and collected by some local people is not at all meant to be eaten by human beings but is collected to be exported for reasonably good money for animal - feeding purposes . i think i am not the only one having had the impression that the director suggested the exact opposite.

- arm smuggling is a reality ( but there again , where 's the big news ? ? ) , but not the way this film explains the issue . if the empty planes landing in mwanza do participate in smuggling , they actually unload their shipment in a different location in africa , then go to mwanza to pick up fish in order not to make the trip back empty ( meaning that they do actually land empty in mwanza ... ).

- people do eat fish locally , contrary to what the film suggest ( around 40 - 60 % of what is taken out of the lake ) and thousands of people make their living with it . good for them ! it 's private business of that kind that will one day take african countries out of poverty and not western moaning and endless foreign assistance.

i can not tell how shocked i am seeing the success of this film ! +1 this two disc set is incredible ! if you 're like me and never had the opportunity to actually see the band live , then this is the next best thing . jimmy page , who in my opinion is the second best guitarist ever to walk the face of the earth ( second only to slowfingers himself ) , he puts on an amazing show in every piece of footage in this film . john paul jones , although not as up front as page , puts on one hell of a show . although in the live atmosphere , his rythmic bass lines are n't as defined as they are on studio recordings , except of course in songs like dazed and confused , or what is and what should never be ) , but his wide array of instumental talent is well displayed in these dvd 's . john bonham is john bonham , what can i say ? there is no comparison , his beats stand out like no other , and this dvd is proof . last , but not least , robert plant wails like no other can wail . if you 've ever read hammer of the gods , you 'll be wondering the same thing as page was when he first met robert plant , why the hell is n't this guy already famous ? and so concludes my review , sorry about and spelling or grammar mistakes , zeppelin rocks . +0 i checked this out at the vancouver international film festival and was not impressed.

the only area of the film i enjoyed was the commentary on film - making . for the most part , this film seemed random and somewhat fantastical ( i do n't say that in a complimentary way , however ) and just silly . it was as if he was mixing fantasy with everyday life , which may sounds intriguing in some films , but the fantasy merely seemed needlessly perverse.

my criticism of this film is not upon the actors , rather the story itself . i found it boring and narcissistic . i wanted my money back , but considering it was a film festival , that was n't about to happen . +1 blade is a fantastic action / thriller that keeps you captured for the whole duration and wesley snipes delivers what i would say to be his best performance yet.

this film has everything that you would ask for in an action / thriller , it has plenty of blood , guts and gore , a twisted , disturbed bad buy , moments of humour but most importantly a very good story line with plenty of twists.

their is constant action throughout the film with breathtaking stunts and effects , wesley snipes fighting movement is fantastic.

this film is in my opinion a must see , wesley snipes cool , solid appearance makes this film and i ca n't wait for the sequel ' blade 2 ' being released next year.

my imdb rating - 9 out of 10 +0 okay , enough . every time i think i 've seen a film that is so misbegotten , so bad in every way that i think that no one could possibly find something to praise , i just come to the imdb where i 'm greeted with the usual inane " undiscovered masterpiece " " great film " - i mean , honestly , what movie are you people watching , because it 's certainly not the mess i just watched on the new fox / mgm / ua dvd . there are about three amusing lines , and a plot that gives incoherence a new meaning . and then , after ninety - three interminable minutes , it just stops and the end credits begin . then there 's another scene . the dvd is fairly wretched , which suits the film . the source material is almost completely faded to an ugly brown . it 's hard to imagine this film followed get carter . the critics and the public got this one right back then - it was lambasted and a box - office disaster , and rightfully so . but you pundits keep on trying . and i 'll keep on trying to find a movie that doesn't have someone who raves about it . +1 oz , was the first original television show that hbo put onto its channel ( in the 1 hour forma ) and it remains to this day the very best ... the story is simple ... oz is a surreal look into the lives of high maximum security prisoners at oswald , primarily focusing on " em city . " now there are many things to compliment this show on from the writing ( which in my opinion was the best on television when this show aired ) , directing ( top notch ) , acting ( best of the best ) , and the characters ... this show just literally blew my socks off ... this show was a critically acclaimed gem until the sopranos bowed , after that critics were salivating over that epic tale of trust and family to notice this compelling drama ... oz to me is a better show than sopranos overall and it 's a shame that i never won any major emmy 's ... = /

kudos to all who were involved in this magnificent , gut - wrenching , show ...

kudos +0 maybe it was the excessive weight gain seagal had put on . or maybe it was the horrible acting of wayans in an action flick . or was it the total lack of chemistry between the two leading characters ? these and other considerations lead me to conclude that seagal should have never made this acting nightmare . true , the story line was good . yet , as an avid follower of seagal 's career and background , his physical appearance was inconsistent with his genre of clean , pure , healthy zen buddhist living , notably in his on screen discussions with wayans . ( then again his real life affair with the " nanny " was inconsistent also!)

if seagal wants to become a more diversified actor , then he should do what a fellow action figure did in " kindergarten cop" ... put humorous material or situations in the script where the actor has no choice but to react in a comical way . otherwise , leave the wise - cracks and the futile attempts at humor out of it while chasing a serial killer . seagal is not a natural humor type of guy . it did not work.

+0 if i could give this excuse for a film a 0 or negative rating i would . i was stupid enough to pick this dvd up in the shop , read the blurb and think , that sounds quite good , i 'll spend £ 10 and buy it . all i got at the end of it was a £ 10 coaster . absolutely awful , i do n't even know where to begin . i have no idea why anyone has given this more than 2 stars because i ca n't think of one good thing to say about it . < br />
the plot is basically , 7 people go into an unexplored cave , one of them is a reporter . no - one else knows they are there . when they get in the cave , they ca n't get out and they get killed off one by one by a monster . there turns out to be no reason for the reporter . one of the characters has some past demons where his ex girlfriend drowns in a cave 2 years ago ... there seems to be no relevance or reason for that either , just a rubbish attempt at character building i assume ? anyway , the monster turns out to be a guy that wandered into the cave as a normal little kid and has lived in there all his life . this for no reason makes him superhuman , able to glow , see in the dark , take bullets , breathe underwater , be in 2 places at once and have insane strength ( able to move boulders , carry grown men as dead weight , etc ) . < br />
in the end scene there are 2 women left alive , they wake up naked , just covered in some bit of rug or something . they then find a picture of a kid . the monster then bursts in the door , wrapped in a carpet with some sort of animal skull over his head ( says in the directors commentary it was a crow 's skull , if so that would be the frekin biggest crow i have seen in my life ) and quite literally goes " raaahhh " like a kiddie on halloween . i was watching it with my boyfriend and at that point he literally burst out laughing . the guy then sees a picture of himself as a kid and has a flashback to him sitting under a tree with his face all burnt and then getting up and wandering into the cave . that is the extent of the back story to why he mutilates people and it leaves you feeling a bit cheated for a story . the monster then kills one of the women and brutally rapes the other one , cut to end credits . i know the rape scene was designed to be shocking , but as a woman it just made me feel quite ill and was the thing that affected me the most in the whole film . he could have killed her and cut her into pieces and ate her and it would have been less horrific than the rape scene.

there are so many things that are left unanswered at the end . aside from all this , the scenes where there was minutes at a time of just black and nothing else was annoying and the constant nauseating camera angles where it 's all upside down and you ca n't see what 's going on wound me up so much at one point i almost turned it off . an absolutely terrible film . you might as well get the money you were going to spend on it and set fire to it , it would be money better spent , as like some clever person posting above me said , once you 've watched it , you ca n't un watch it . +0 this movie was so poorly acted . what was with jeff bridges accent , horrible and unbelievable . was it supposed to be french , scandinavian?the script was lame . to have the heroine trip over the grave of her boyfriend while running from the jeff bridges character ... are you kidding me ? how convenient that jeff brings his dirty shovel in the house after he disposes of bodies in his lawn . do these people just not believe in calling the cops ? okay ... i'll get into the car with you , why not ? duh ! why was bridge 's daughter obsessed with making her dad have an affair , is her mother that evil or just plain dull ? i did not see the original , it would be hard to make myself after seeing this movie . +0 tart is the worst movie i 've seen this year , and that includes both the affleck / j.lo bomb gigli and the rob zombie borefest house of 1000 corpses . i do n't know if that 's a fair comparison seeing that tart was made two years earlier and probably has a budget half that of even the low - budget 1000 corpses . regardless , all three movies suffer from the same shortcomings : horrible script , horrible acting , horrible direction.

* * * spoilers * * * ( although i honestly do n't think there 's anything to spoil)

tart is about a group of super - spoiled private school kids . most of them reside in super - sized apartments along new york 's hyper - expensive park avenue , thanks to the finances of their neglectful parents . the film showcases the aimless life of one of the students ( cat ) as she discards her only true friend ( as frivolous a person as she was ) in the pursuit of the " good life " with the in - crowd . that , of course , leads to sex , drugs , and music that is substantially worse than rock & roll . everything is overly dramaticized in the way that truly bad movies usually are . cat 's first sexual experience leads to her being branded a tramp and ostracized by her newly acquired circle of friends ; her first encounter with drugs leads to her nearly being dumped down a garbage chute after her cohorts believe her to be dead from an overdose . no heavy - handed messages there , he said sarcastically.

that 's mainly what the " seen it before 100 times " plot entails . other minor , and even less interesting , plot details include one friend who steals jewelry and trinkets from all the others , a wild child who lives life on the edge ( and finally falls off of it one night in the east hamptons ) , an anti - semitic british chick who ends her close friendship with cat the moment she finds out cat has a jewish father , and cat 's strained relationship with her single mother who tries unsuccessfully to get cat to appreciate the privileged life she has . the thief turns out to be an irredeemable lowlife . the " wild child " is played as a toned down version of one of the hilton sisters . the british girl disappears from the film after the break - up . the mother / daughter relationship is seen as totally inconsequential until the film 's final schmaltzy scene , where she and her beleaguered mother have a reconciliation of sorts . * yawn*

* * * end spoilers * * * < br />
about the cast and crew .... dominique swain came on the scene strong with her role as the underaged seductress in 1997 's highly watchable lolita and face / off . her performances were strong enough to land her on quite a few " ones - to - watch " lists at the time . she was 17 at the time and i hope that they will not be the best roles of her career . if she takes a few more roles like the one she takes in tart , it very well may be.

i've only seen bijou phillips in one other film ( bully ) and i swear her performance in that one was nearly identical to the one she gave here . i 'm not sure if she 's incapable of giving varied performances or if it was just a coincidence her roles in the two were so very similar . my guess is that the former is true . i sense this woman possesses very little talent as far as acting is concerned . here , she is the actress tapped to portray the watered - down hilton sister . that she gives such a weak performance is amazing considering that she grew up with , and remains friends with , the real - life hilton sisters . she 's essentially playing a version of herself in this film , and doing a damn poor job of it.

as for writer / director christina wayne ... i know nothing of her other than tart was her first , and only , film project to date . with a first effort like this it is no wonder her career in show business was short - lived . +0 i suppose that in 1997 hollywood was n't quite at the point of openly celebrating homosexuality , so one might want to give some credit to those who put this movie together for having shown a little bit of courage . one simply wishes that credit could be given them for having put together a really good movie , and in my opinion " in & out " does n't qualify on that count . it 's the story of howard brackett ( kevin kline ) - a small town high school english teacher who on the eve of his wedding is outed by a former student who happens to win an oscar and who then has to go through what can only be described as a period of self - discovery as he comes to terms with being homosexual . to me , that was the first problem with this movie . howard did n't really have to turn out to be gay . the movie would have been funnier ( and perhaps even more thought provoking ) had brackett remained defiantly straight in spite of the stereotypically gay aspects to his life and the town 's belief after the oscar speech that he was gay . ( in fact , i thought that identifying him as gay given the presence of those stereotypes might actually have been rather insulting to the gay community , as well as to straight men who like poetry and believe in dressing neatly ! ) < br />
kline was decent enough in the role , and largely carried the film . aside from him , most of the other cast members ( although fine actors ) were people not really noted for their success on the big screen . folks like tom selleck and wilford brimley and bob newhart are good actors but not big movie stars . i actually thought that the funniest ( if very small ) role in the movie was that of the super model sonya , played by an actress named shalom harlow ( speaking of stereotypes , i loved her oh - so stereotypical model line " i promised to do that photo shoot this afternoon . i have to shower and vomit ! " ) in the end , what really turned me off about this movie was the ridiculous ending , starting with the graduation ceremony ( and , to be honest , even if someone decided that the graduation was really necessary , the movie should have ended there , rather than proceeding on with the totally unnecessary nuptials at the end . ) < br />
basically , i got a few chuckles out of this but nothing more . 3/10 +1 when i first saw this film on video in a department store ... it intrigued me . considering the fact that i thought i was in love and i was the same age as the youths in this film at the time ( although i realize they are now old enough to be my parents ) , plus the soundtrack being written by elton john & bernie taupin just before they " made it big " here in north america ... i figured i had nothing to lose in buying it . i was not disappointed.

so far , i have shown it to many guys i have dated since , and to my current boyfriend ... obviously , they did n't find it as lovely as i do ... preferring to call it a " chick " movie ... but i still laugh and cry . this film was vastly overlooked . it 's good to see it 's available to rent at one of the local video stores around here so that other people can share the magic . < br />
so maybe it 's a bit far fetched ... but it gives you a lighthearted sense of innocence ... and a renewed faith in love . +0 this movie is absurd . absolutely terrible . michael keaton and andy garcia must really have needed the work to do this movie . the plot is totally not believable ! michael keaton agrees to donate bone marrow to the dying son of a detective , but then escapes . he manages to elude the police throughout the hospital - not believable that he would have so much knowledge of the hospital . he takes an extremely convoluted route to get out of the hospital , blowing up the power generators and a pedestrial bridge ( why ? ) . and to top that andy garcia ( father of the dying boy ) and a doctor help the criminal so as to get the bone marrow . the plot is such baloney ! maybe the worse movie i have ever see . +1 i 'm glad i read the sarah waters novel first , since i had my own pictures of the characters in my head at the time . the ones cast for this production , however , were not at all disappointing - in fact , after i got used to rachael stirling as nan , i think nina gold did a damn fine job in the casting department . ( can keeley hawes be more delicious?!)

the bbc has done it again : this is a wonderful production of a very good book , and they have done it up in style . if you can get your hands on this ( vhs , dvd ) be sure to get the 181-minute version ( the uncensored one . ) it is a marvelous journey , albeit a bit rocky at times , that you wo n't regret taking . +0 well ........ how and where do i start to describe this utter nonsense ? imagine the morals of a cheesy hollywood western , throw in a lavish helping of the most trite soap opera storyline , and try to dupe the kids into thinking its cool by dressing it up to be about something ' contemporary ' . this film is all package and absolutely no substance.

it starts with promise ...... young men dreaming of becoming rockstars and engaging in the kind of excessive hero - worship everyone can laugh at . after that , it all goes downhill ..... quicker than a bobsleigh with no brakes . the scene involving the first gig with steel dragon is one of the most pathetic pieces of ' cine kitsch ' i have seen in a long time . the singer appears on stage for his debut and falls down some stairs ..... will he get up and sing??? ...... or will he stay there on the floor and not sing ...... who cares by now ? ? it gets worse , but i do n't want to bore myself by having to remember it in all its excruciating detail . if you watch it after this review , its your own fault ! +0 my qualifications for this review ? i own all the alien and predator movies & i have and have read almost all the books i can find that are related to this series.

i can safely say , this movie is a stinker . save your money & do n't waste your time . if you like mindless action , mindless gore , no plot to speak of & like being taken by hollywood , see the movie.

if you are a serious alien series fan , send a message to the over stuffed , over paid suits in hollywood & 20th century fox & do n't give them a penny.

this movie has so many plot holes in it you could sieve pasta through it . read the other negative reviews to get the big picture , it has all be said accurately , so i do n't have to repeat them.

the characters in this movie are cardboard . you want them all dead . and , the movie does n't disappoint , almost all of them die . even the hot , bubble headed blond . do you feel sorry for her ? nope . no plot , no character development .... who cares . the predators are now idiots too . they scan everything but their own dead warrior . they are suppose to be a high technology society , right ? in the predator movie , they scanned the soldiers and the girl to determine who was armed . trophy kills . in avp , they scanned charles weyland and let him go because he had cancer . major plot hole!

also , the r rating is because they have kids in the movie that get a face hugger , lots of gore and violence and there is one hospital scene where a very large pregnant women is injected with chest bursters . she is implanted by the hybrid alien with 4 or 5 eggs in a mouth - to - mouth love scene - orgy and they all hatch in , say , 30 seconds . sensational gore a plenty , nothing more . these scenes are laughable , not serious . it is almost like the violence happens and the alien looks at the camera and waits for applause , a thumbs up or a nod of some sort.

the aliens in this movie are all on performance enhancing drugs . they develop fast and spread quickly all over the town , tons of them , everywhere in record spawn time . pathetic because it does not stick to the series story line and adds nothing to the aliens , aliens predator continuity.

i have noticed the positive reviews are written by people who love the gore . laughable . as a movie , as a continuation of the aliens franchise and the development of the aliens vs predator franchise , this movie is a cheesecake cliché at best . if you have faithfully followed this series , all the rules are broken and the aliens and predators are reduced to comic book characters.

there is not one fantastic , memorable action scene . there are almost no special effects worth remembering . there are no brand name actors . the plot is as thin as onion paper that ultimately ends with a , " we have two choices to get out of this mess ... the hospital or the center of town ! " . i just about wet myself . the center of town means everyone is going to get nuked by big brother who somehow knows the town has been infested because they have an awac in the air that can see the infestation on a radar screen in special effects red spots . i just about fell out of my chair . special effects red spot alien radar on an awac over middle america . i am splitting my gut laughing.

having to get to the helicopter pad made me choke on my popcorn . has anyone played a game called zombies ! ? you have to get your playing pieces to the helicopter pad to win . i almost wet myself laughing.

the ending is enough to make you shake your head in wonderment . who did 20th century fox hire to write this script ! ? oh , oh , ask me .... a grade 5 student . there really ca n't be any other answer . oh , yes there can be another answer ... low budget cheesecake sci - fi.

the ending ? " col . stevens takes the predator pulse rifle to ms. yutani ( francoise yip ) . she tells him that the earth is not ready for the technology it represents . col . stevens knows yutani does n't want the technology to use on earth . " you are kidding me , right ? ms. yutani ? who is ms yutani ? ( forshadow : weyland - yutani : the corporation ) she is in the movie exactly 2 seconds and yet , in her infinite far east wisdom , she says the world is not ready for the technology . seriously ? ? ! ! the brothers dweebs ( strause ) as directors ? who is responsible for this hemorrhage - abortion of a movie ? they are the doug and bob mckenzie of directors and yet fox entrusted the flailing alien franchise to them . they are touted as special effects experts and yet the movie is all low budget special effects . hmmm , i see a pattern . laughable.

this movie is only made to empty your wallet . it serves no other purpose . it has no plot . it has no main characters worth mentioning . it is disjointed . it does not adhere to any of the character principles established in previous movies . it does nothing to advance the franchise . the special effects are lame , minimal and low budget . and , it has no ending to speak of . it is low budget and strictly designed to take your hard earned money . nothing more.

save your money . either watch it on tv where it will very quickly end up . buy a bootleg or miss this bleeding ulcer altogether . there is a reason why fox did not preview this movie to the critics . the critics would have eaten this mess alive and no one would have gone to the theaters to see it . jr giger , the original creator , is at this very moment , leaning over a toilet spilling his lunch.

20th century fox , this movie is a stinker . it is as bad or worse than alien 3 . you insult us . < br />
flush now ... +1 its a feel - good movie that made me feel good . some in this genre can be sickly sweet , but this script is restrained . the movie is funny and fun . the acting is great.

if this were a musical , i would have left the theater humming the tunes . +1 there was once someone in my family ( not saying who it is because of personal reasons ) who thinks that mr bean is always so silly in whatever he does on the comedy series . imagine how i felt at that time . shocked instantly.

there are more reasons than one why i love watching mr bean . being one of those earliest shows on the local television here in my country where i first grew up watching , it 's just one of those things which had stuck into my head . there was even once my friends and i talked about few of the selected episodes and we just laughed together.

it 's always silly , funny and hilarious in whatever antics rowan atkinson as mr bean will do in each episode . though lately at times it may show some of the repeats here , it never failed to bring back those childhood memories of mine . in fact , i can dare say this is the very first show which introduces me about the kind of shows which come out of the uk as i was growing up.

the comedy series ... definitely really wicked , as what the brits may be saying . +1 this movie is brilliant.

i do n't remember this movie even being in theaters , so thinking it was a " straight to dvd " i have fairly low expectations , even though i am a big fan of mike judge . it has some of the same kind of comic future satire as " brazil " and " demolition man " , but taken to the next level.

then i saw the cast ; luke wilson , maya rudolph and dax shepard , who were all brilliant in their roles.

needless to say , this movie won me over in the first 5 minutes , where it shows above - average people having fewer children and the poorest , stupidest , trashiest people having lots of ignorant children , and how this is leading to a kind of reverse evolution . it takes that concept , and then shows where we are headed with this pollution of the gene pool.

sadly , i do n't think it will take the 500 years as depicted , but probably only about 50 . i already see the shocking rise of " mild retardation " in the general populace , media and culture . people who like classical music and art are ridiculed instead of respected . the lowest common denominator seems to rule , especially in hollywood and on tv ( eg , " jackass the movie " and any reality show where they make you eat something disgusting or humiliate yourself for money).

all of the political / social satire aside , this movie is also just laugh out loud funny ! and i do n't say that lightly ; few movies make me actually " lol " , but this one did.

a lot of the best jokes are word / sight gags in the background , so you really have to pay attention to get some of them . i even had to pause and zoom in for a few of them ( like when joe got his government id and for " hair " it said " yes " and for " eyes " it also said " yes " ) . also , the prison has engraved on the front " house for particular individuals " , since the cops in the movie ( much like real life cops ) call everyone " individuals " instead of people , etc . again , this was on the screen for just a moment ... this is one of those movies you can watch again and again and dissect it to get through the layers of funny.

also , i normally watch movies with the subtitles on , and that clued me in to some jokes that might pass by your ears in the dialog mix , for instance , the police constantly talk about people " excaping " instead of " escaping " , and there are many other mis - pronunciations that just cracked me up . but again , i might not have picked up on them just by the dialog mixed with music / sound effects ; it is very subtle but still hilarious.

additionally , the special effects were really good for a sci - fi / social satire.

i could go on and on , but overall , i think this is one of those movies that if you don't think it 's funny , it 's probably making fun of you ! i plan on recommending this to many , many people ! +1 one of the best ! as being a fan of the civil war , i was very pleased with the first installment of the north and south trilogy . patrick swayze gives and extraordinary performance , as well as james reed and leslie ann down . in watching this fabulous story unfold into a time never forgotten , the subjects of love , passion , grief , shame , harmony , and cruelty come to life . i was first introduced to this series when i was in the eighth grade . being a young boy , you would think that i would n't have been interested in this civil war soap . to be honest , this story stole the hearts of every one in my class , and this is just the first book . i bought the novel and studied the likes and differences and it was awesome . i am 17 now and still enjoy the story , characters , subject , and remember the times of the civil war . as a movie director of the future , i will always enjoy north and south : book one . +0 i had already heard of ali g in madonna 's music video " music " . i always think he 's funny . ( in fact , he really is . ) just last year i always thought of buying a vcd of " ali g indahouse " . that 's why some months later , i bought it cheap and i started watching it.

but the movie surprised me . my older brother and i were expecting it to be a great laugh - out comedy . it turns out that " indahouse " is just a stupid piece of garbage . it was really really bad . it also contains explicit sexuality content and very crude humor . it also did n't made me laugh , even just a big smile . we definitely hate that movie . oh by the way , i have plans to sell it.

ali g was really different in his movie compared to his tv shows-- in such a negative way . maybe he was n't really well - focused and enough serious to make this flick . just because there 's some sex scenes in it does n't mean it 's freaking hilarious ( because sometimes , too much is n't that laughable anymore ) . for the first time ever , i was disappointed at him . that really made me sad rather and happy.

i gave this movie 1 over 10 . actually , i really want to give it a 0 rating . it 's one of the worst movies i 've seen in my entire life . i would n't recommend to anyone who wanna watch good comedies that are n't too explicit or horrible . +1 and i do . peter falk has created a role that will live on forever in tv land ! and i 'm grateful for that . this is n't one of his finest hours , though . columbo goes to college and basically teaches how he solves a crime , and yet there are bad guys who go ahead and think they 're smarter than he is . what all us fans know is that columbo needs a worthy opponent . without a great enemy , how can he be the hero in the wrinkled coat ? still , it 's better than no columbo , and i 'll wait and watch the next one as well . +1 dan dailey gives a sincere and colorful performance as the great dizzy dean . his handling of the character is very true to life and captures the flavor of dean 's background and limited education . the film of course centers around dizzy deans rise to fame and his sudden trip to the sidelines with an injury he chose to ignore , much to his regret . his wife is splendidly portrayed by joanna dru who gives a very down to earth quality to the woman who loved and supported the ballplayer who rose to a " dizzying height " so quickly . the portrayal of dizzy 's later career as a sportscaster is honest and unflinching , reflecting his troubles which stemmed from his poor education and his colorful language both on and off the air . dizzy was quite a character and daily has breathed life into his story with admirable skill . if you enjoyed this film , i recommend the comedy " kid from left field " ( 1953 ) wherein daily plays a down and out has - been ballplayer idolized by his young son ( billy chapin ) . daily again fleshes out a ballplayer in a completely satisfying manner . i heartily recommend pride of st. louis to baseball fans everywhere . +1 this cartoon documents the second encounter between wile e. coyote and the roadrunner , and is definitely better than their first meeting in fast and furry - ous ( 1949).

if measured by aesthetic value , then this cartoon would not rank among the top 5 or 6 of the year 1952 . regardless , this is a very funny short . coyote ( carnivorous vulgaris ) chases the roadrunner ( accelerati incredibilus ) along the road and gets completely tired out . the ingenious scientific " latin " names of the characters are very original , and has been mimicked before in other un - related cartoons . the coyote collapses and puts on a wonderful expression of- i do n't know -boredom . such jonesesque expressions make this cartoon provide more than its fare share of laughs in seven minutes . then he has an idea , and another laughable expression is worn . the slapstick jokes are all hilarious , and mask the fact that it is truly evil to inflict such pain on a poor , helpless , genius coyote . everyone knows , but who cares?

the old rocket gag is present , too . coyote straps himself to a rocket , which should produce enough oomph for him to catch up with roadrunner and grab him . instead , the rocket shoots up into the air and becomes a firework in the distance : eat at joe 's . this classical gag originates from this cartoon ; though obvious , it still makes people laugh.

the highlight truly is the chase through the mineshaft . the two wear helmet - lights , and we see the tunnel through which the two are going , with only the lights visible . here , the comedy reaches a peak . a must - see sequence , maybe even the best sequence in the early days of roadrunner . the final touch is provided by the writing of michael maltese , as coyote 's light goes out and he unknowingly lights a match in a room full of explosives , the surface is shown where a bunch of cactus jump and spell out the letters " yipe ! " after the blast . such small things make you laugh all through a mere seven minutes , and as soon as it starts the fun 's all over . the rocket skates are another good idea , as is the free drink of water and the anvil on the tight - rope ( a sequence that appears in space jam [ 1996 ] ) . to give the results of those away would be useless . the free drink proves to be a problem for wile e. at the end of the second - last sequence : namely the rocket skates.

this classical cartoon is littered with fine animation , except for the characters . though they are animated very well , the two characters are very primitive ; which might be an understatement . though at first it may seem weird , the humor of the ensuing sequences makes one forget.

if you like vintage jones , watch this . if you love roadrunner , get this on video . excellent entertainment ( rating : 8/10 ) . +1 i got this movie out a week after the death of ichikawa kon - i suppose if there is one way to mark the passing of a great director , its to raise a glass of wine to him while watching one of his greatest movies . ichikawa had one of the finest careers in japanese film , but as he never had a distinctive style or theme he often seems to be overlooked compared to his near contemporaries such as ozu and kurosawa ( he was a little younger than them , but not by much ) . he is one of those directors who defies auteur theories - its likely that his wife ( who wrote the screenplay for this and many other of his movies ) was as much responsible for the quality of the movies as he was . but at his best , he was as good as any japanese film maker at the time . in particular , he had great technical skills , allowing him to tell complex stories in an accessible manner . but in terms of theme , this movie could hardly be simpler - war is hell . no really , its seriously hell.

fire on the plain does n't follow the normal war genre rules . there is no real beginning - we start as the wretched tamura , who is a regular private ( although it is implied he is more thoughtful and educated than most of the others - at one stage it is shown he understands english , but he clams up when the others ask him how he knows it ) is ordered to hospital , as his unit is already in an appalling state . the soldiers are defeated and starving to death . they are no longer an army , just a rag bag group of refugees - hunted by the locals , and pretty much ignored by the americans , who have bigger fish to fry . hunger and despair is driving the soldiers to the edge and beyond of madness.

in typical ichikawa style , its not all just grim - its oddly funny in parts ( a very black humour of course).

the high points of this movie to me are the outstanding performances from the leads and the vivid photography . the characters , in all their humanity , but also their complete loss of humanity , are all too believable . this is that rare film - one which will refuse to erase itself from your head , even if you want to forget it . +0 by far this has to be one of the worst movies i 've ever seen in my life . i watch practically every movie that is on at night ( either showtime , hbo , cinemax , etc ) . " three " aka " survivor island " keeps you in as much suspense as watching paint dry only to let you down even more miserably . if you want to feel like you just wasted what seems like an eternity on the worst film ever created then by all means watch this movie . i must have screamed at a minimum 900 times from the idiotic twists . if i had 4 hands i 'd give this movie 4 thumbs down.

in my personal opinion , i believe the only people who would like this movie are those with terrible morals . +1 wtf ! ! do any of his books / movies end in a happy ending ? ? the notebook was good ... but sheesh , enough with the depressing endings already . i 'm told that he writes about realistic situations that people deal with in real life . understandable ... but sometimes it 's nice to see people who have sacrificed their whole lives to only get to a mediocre unhappy time in their lives - to finally find the true meaning of happiness and are able to live it out for the rest of their days . do n't we already know what really happens in real life ? ca n't we - for one moment ( an hour and a half ) live vicariously through a movie that ends on a happy note - that gives us hope for our own futures ? ? ? < br />
yeah - wah . i know . but for real , i think we need to preface movies that end like this one with a warning . " beware : no happy ending . " +1 the first time i saw " alice in wonderland – an x - rated musical comedy " , was in the early ' 80 in a movie - theater in n.y. city with some friends . i remember we actually enjoyed it very much , although we were left wondering why all the " goodies " were covered by in various forms shaped colored patches and why the movie was suddenly jumping from one scene to the next one , leaving us guessing ... what we just missed . obviously it was the soft - core edited ( chopped ) version , which left me with the desire to watch it again soon , but in its original integral version . well , more then 20 years went by , during which i forgot all about this movie and , only a few days ago , by sheer chance , i stumbled upon a heavily used vhs copy ( which had seen better times : a bit washed - out colors , scratchy sound and a few flaws ) , but guess what ? it 's the original uncut version and , this time , i really had a ball ! humor , musical and porn may sound an awkward combination but , in this case , it really works and , unlikely the big majority of boring porn - flicks nowadays invading our screens , this is a really amusing and entertaining sex fantasy , which will not disappoint you . the direction is clever , the swift editing makes the movie fly like a bird , all the familiar characters are lovable or just plain funny , all the actors seem having a good time , the songs are catchy ( worth mentioning the one about " growing up " sung by alice at the beginning of the movie and the hilarious " what 's a nice girl like you doing on a knight like this " ) , the dance numbers are well choreographed and staged ( amazingly energetic terry hall proves that she can " also " dance and dances enthusiastically her guts away ... don't worry , she also does what she was best known for ... ) , the acting , the singing , the set , the costumes are of quality level and then ... there is kristine " blue eyes " debell , in the first starring role of her career and ( oh boy ! ) she indeed has a few h.c. sequences ! personally i think they are absolutely not distasteful , on the contrary , they are spontaneous and quite arousing . she is young and ( ohhh ! ) so very pretty ; with the help of her new friends in wonderland , she discovers her body and her sexuality so , she sings , she dances and ... what do you expect ? she is also experimenting sex ! the closing sequence , when she finally makes love to her boy - friend , is exceptionally well photographed and directed and is the highlight of the movie . i think her " physique du role " ( the innocent blue eyes and captivating smile ) and her acting ability , make those explicit sequences more then acceptable and actually highly enjoyable . there is plenty of sex going on in ( this ) wonderland and everybody seems eager to " get busy " with the first available boy(s ) or girl(s ) , which means lot of hard - core action to be seen . on the other hand , some close - up shots , clearly " spliced in " , just to make the " porn - hounds " really happy , are a bit redundant for my personal taste . in general , however , the sex - action is not offensive since handled with a great deal of humor and it blends almost seamlessly with the music , the dances and the comedy . if you think you and your partner can handle graphic sex , watch it together . take my word , you will have an hour and a half of very good time ( perhaps also an after - show extra action ... ) this is " adult entertainment " so be careful , do n't leave this video around or among other kid 's videos . if your 10 years old can put his hands on it , he might amuse himself , but you will be forced to provide embarrassing explanations about the reasons why " this " alice behaves quite differently from the one he red about in lewis carroll novel or he watched on the disney 's video . i bet , you will not forget this " one - of - a - kind " very soon . it 's a real shame that they do n't mak'em like that anymore ... ! i give it a 9 out of 10 . +0 spoilers follow - and i have n't even seen it.

let me guess ... the murder is related to the evil property developer wanting to develop the riverside , and dickens was murdered because he was trying to uncover a similar dastardly plot . if anybody who 's seen it could let me know if i 'm half right , you 'll have saved me the time it might take to watch something worthwhile and the rest of us will know to steer clear of both this film and its enthusiastic reviewers . on the other hand , it * sounds * intriguing ; but if it was any good would it * really * be given away with a sunday rag ? and what sort of track record does foley have anyway?

... so , as a public service , i managed to sit through it . it 's worse than ' swept away ' . really . i 've read stories by eight - year - olds with more drama than this . truly awful . and i was half right . +0 i 've just seen this film in a lovely air - conditioned cinema here in bangkok . and since the temperature outside is hovering somewhere around 37c with very high humidity , my 100bt was not wasted.

failing that , i have n't seen such a piece of extremely well - made junk in a long time . this is the kind of film that provides a test of taste , as it were . anyone who claims to like or love it goes immediately onto the same list of tasteless phonies who still go around talking about the superiority of british television . at least the gormless old broad in the wheelchair was good for a few guffaws.

pseudo - profundity and fat lips , while characteristic of much french cinema , really do not a good movie make . i 'd rather watch independence day 10 times in a row than sit through this stinker one more time . +1 an under - appreciated , unseen gem . estevez does a remarkable job of illustrating in poignant , heartbreaking fashion , the tension that arises between a son who 's been to hell and back , and his parents , who ca n't begin to understand the emotional scarring left behind . it 's not unlike born on the fourth of july , in that it deals with a soldiers ' emotional and mental breakdown after serving in vietnam , but while that one focused more on the politics of post - vietnam ( anti - war speeches , etc . ) , this one deals with a much more personal topic : family . one man 's struggle to return to normalcy after a life - altering experience , and his parents ' failure to see the change that has occurred.

estevez delivers a smoldering performance as jeremy collier . you can sense the pain and frustration bubbling beneath surface . there to match him inch for inch is his real - life father , martin sheen . it 's a trip watching these two act off of each other , as you get the sense that they 're constantly trying to one - up one another . it 's like the presence of each other inspired the pair to do their best , and their performances triumph because of it.

recommended to anyone who appreciates solid acting , writing and directing . and to any vietnam war buff . < br />
****/ * * * * * ( 8/10 ) +1 i 've seen the previews everywhere before deciding to watch it . and what do you know , i actually liked it ! it has a new twist of the 18th century england . although the music in the dance scene were obviously modernized and also the colors of liv tyler 's clothers ( although it is pretty ! ) , it fit quite perfectly.

if you just want a good time , you should check this out . very different from other 18th century detailed films . +1 this movie is wonderful ! i can watch it again and again . robin hood is perfectly cast , and marian is beautiful . i personally think marian 's german man is the funniest character , along with latrine and the sheriff ! while space balls got boring and stupid after a while , this one always keeps your interest ! w o n d e r f u l this was a great film , and never gets boring . a great cast is in the roles , and it is spoofed perfectly , and makes so much sense , and can be watched again and again ! you will love this film if you 'll only watch it , except if you hate comedy , or does not think robin hood should be tampered with . but this old story gets boring , and this movie gives it a great new flavor ! +1 this was a fantastically written screenplay when it comes to perceiving things from another perspective . the comedy was timely and not overdone , the acting was generally terrific , and the plot line served a greater purpose of generating misconception when we think about people solely based on their external appearance . the plot twists as the brother / sister character of amanda bynes tries to play soccer on the boys team finding instead a new love interest along the way . tatum channing is where the real misperception lies and he does a fine job of acting disinterested at first , later coming to realize the most important thing in life is friendship , not attitude . +1 i was blown away by this film . i 'm one of those people who just takes a risk with movies that do n't especially appeal to me sometimes , and i 've got to say this one paid off . i mean , wow ! even my young boys enjoyed the film ( 5 and 6 at the time ) , though i 'm quite certain this was not geared to their age groups.

this movie was clean , too , which is a great plus . it is so great to sit down to a movie you thoroughly enjoy without profanity , violence ( except one very brief scene ) or anything else one is likely to find morally objectionable.

this movie brought you along on a journey you are so ready to believe because of the great acting . you feel the vast range of emotions portrayed along with the characters.

i never thought a golf movie would have me at the edge of my seat , but i could n't help being intensely interested in how this one would turn out . i have nothing to compare it to since i have neither watched golf in reality or on film before , but everyone did a great job in keeping the pace and emotions captivating here . the score also did wonders ; excellent , excellent score.

even if you do n't think this would be your kind of film , watch it . you may be pleasantly surprised . i certainly was . +0 all grown up is basically a spin off and not much else of the original nickalodeon rugrats cartoon that featured the babies tommy pickles , chucky finster , lil and phil deville , angelica , susie and ( later ) kimi ( chuckies sister ) and dill ( tommy 's brother ) . i grew up with rugrats and thought it was a great cartoon . it had excellent humor , nice stories and the show 's creators , klasky & csupo , were obviously very original and creative with the concept of the adventures of babies . the new show all grown up tries to recapture the magic of the original cartoon . i was disappointed when i saw it . i found the " all - grown - up " chuckie just annoying and the whole " pre - teen - acting - mature / trying - to - be - popular " that applied to ( unfortunately ) * all * of the characters dull and washed out . there still are some funny scenes and jokes in the new series and it was interesting how the artists would make the whole baby gang of rugrats look ten years from their age in the original show . overall , this show is ' fair ' and only watchable if a ) you 're a die - hard fan of the rugrats , b ) have never seen the original show , c ) you 're a pre - teen that has nothing to do , or d ) your so bored that your somehow forced to see this show . this show is not that good . it does n't compare to the older rugrats episodes in quality , humor , and everything else . +1 i think that gost'ya iz buduschego is one of the best russians minis for teens . i think i were near 6 - 8 parts of the movie . " one boy form 6th grade found a time machine in the old house where nobody lived . and he goes to the 21st century , just 100 years in future . in future he meat pirates , they tried to steal a " milafon " - machine to read minds and a story started ... " soundtrack for that movie was very popular in soviet union . everybody loved that movie which was on tv every year . +1 this production was quite a surprise for me . i absolutely love obscure early 30s movies , but i was n't prepared for the last 25 minutes of this story . if , by any chance , you 're not convinced in the first half , hang in there for the finale . of course , you must look at the blatant racism as being purely topical . a fascinating viewing experience , but i think the cat 's paw is not available on video / dvd yet . watch your pbs listings ! +1 unbelievably close to real life feelings and emotions captured by joseph mazzello as a hemophiliac child affected by aids and his new young neighbor , a wanna - be tough redneck played to perfection by brad renfro . although the story may seem slightly farfetched ( the two boys attempt to river - raft several hundred miles to find a doctor who claims to have the cure to aids ) , the emotion , actions and interactions of all characters involved are tragically close to real life . being a " big brother " to a boy in a similar situation who died a few years after this film was released , i strongly recommend this picture to anyone who has ever wondered what really happens in the life of a child with aids . superb direction by peter horton creates the perfect mood and setting for each scene and draws the viewer into the various emotions affected by friendship , illness , prejudice and the final parting of two friends who fought hard to overcome adversity . +0 i had seen rik mayall in blackadder and the new statesman , so i thought i 'd give this film a try.

at around 4 pm i bought it , at around 8 pm i started to watch , at around 8.15pm i fast forwarded the remaining film to see if there was anything left watchable for a human being with a brain ... but there was n't . at around 8.45pm i threw the dvd into the dustbin . and that 's where this " film " belongs.

what ever happened to british humour ? the humour so fine and witty , intelligent and artful that you find in yes , minister , blackadder , vicar of dibley , fawlty towers or the fast show ? the black humour britain is so famous for ? i do n't want to insult anybody , but i presume even stupid children would n't find this funny . they deserve more intelligent fun . and rik mayall , you can do better , so please , do ! +0 originally i wrote what was a sarcastic , scathing review of this pathetic piece of dung , but every time i submitted the review i got " this contains a very long word which is not allowed " , also words that were not misspelled were judged incorrect . < br />
now the word that was judged too long was never identified . after numerous attempts at eliminating words eventually i got the sneaking suspicion that the imdb site is politically sensitive and set to reject certain words automatically . nothing i wrote was obscene or racist in itself . but after eliminating all of the longest words the same message was repeated again and again , also words that were n't judged misspelled were all the sudden considered misspelled!

the pc police are everywhere . +1 i first saw this film in the late 60 's , and try to see it every time it comes on tv , which , unfortunately , is n't often . now that i have tcm and fmc , i hope it will be on at least once a year . like louis gossett jr. in an officer and a gentleman , jack webb delivers an unbelievably great performance as a parris island drill sergeant with the classic screw - up recruit , and the story line in this one , though dated , is touching and very well acted . and having real jar - heads in the cast certainly helped in the realism of the film as well . it 's a great film with top - notch acting and a superb story . see it if you have the chance - it 's well worth the time ! +0 i really enjoyed bg seasons 1 - 3 and really could n't understand those who did n't like it . but i ca n't defend this nonsense . spoilers follow.

the first problem is that the characters are now doing inexplicably stupid things on a regular basis : < br />
so if starbuck thinks she knows where earth is why not send her out in a raptor ? would the admiral accept the resignation of his third most experienced officer ? would the quorum elect their newest member , the non - elected adama junior ? he has about three weeks political experience under his belt , and is the son of a man they distrust . would adama send gaeta and halo along with starbuck leaving himself short of senior officers ? would adama put a man into having sex with cylon prisoners in charge of the fleet?

i just do n't buy any of this.

secondly , while i accept there have been miracles and references to god up to the end of season 3 , it 's now all totally over the top . i started watching bg because i thought it was sci fi , not some biblical epic . i expected the characters to continue to behave reasonably intelligently , and wanted some satisfying explanations regarding some of the odder developments in the series . < br />
baltar was the best character in the show , but he now seems to be totally insane . not illogical considering what he 's been through , but very unsatisfying.

all the characters appear to be just puppets dancing to an unknown third party 's behest ( some godlike entity ) . this is n't good drama , it 's annoying and a writing cop out . < br />
ok , so what are the good points ? nice battle at the start of 4.1 . some good dramatic scenes ( well acted ) when viewed in isolation . a good final scene , a nice cliffhanging curve ball of a development.

but this is n't sci fi , it 's turned into fantasy . i ca n't imagine how the writers can recover this one . +1 i played sam ( the porter , lou 's sidekick ) in the film " dead rail " which later aired as " alien express . " and , i have to say that for my part i thoroughly enjoyed watching this film . as a struggling actor this was a chance for me to work with fantastic people , it gave me great scenes to include on my reel , and it allowed me to work on a dream job for a month and a half ( no waiting tables ! ) turi(the director ) and steve and scott ( the producers ) were very kind by giving me this opportunity to participate in the production . i made many friends ( lou , todd , steven ) and i consider myself very fortunate to have been able to work with these incredibly talented people . there was not a day that went by that i did not laugh my butt off . the real tragedy is n't so much the special effects , it 's that every single person who watched this film did n't get to see what happened behind the scenes and all the talent that truly went into it . craftsmen building the set , prop masters , gaffers , wardrobe , makeup artists , script supervisors , the cinematographer , production assistants , extras , craft services , producers , director , and actors . it 's a given that sci fi did n't spend a terrible amount of money on the film ( 2 million ) but there was a lot of time , energy , and man power that was instilled into it . i look on the film now as a production that brought a lot of talented people together for a fun project that was shot without complications in less than two months . it was a magnificent cast and crew and i 'm just so glad to be apart of it ! on a further note to those of you who do n't know lou diamond phillips , todd bridges , and steven brand . they are fantastic people who are incredibly funny . lou i still am working on my deniro impression and ca n't thank you enough for introducing me to " midnight run . " todd , every time i hear an elvis song i ca n't forget the story you told me about hanging out with him at his house for dinner . " can you please pass me the pa tators ? " ( im a huge elvis fan ! ) steven , " mr. brand ! " you are a true gent and all the advice and encouragement i received from you will always be appreciated . i miss you guys and hope you are well . thanks for the good memories , stories , jokes , and friendship . oh and miss utah says hello ! wink wink.

joe- +1 i was -unlike most of the reviewers- not born in the 80 's . i was born on may 14th 1994 . despite this , my life was very much in the style of the 80 's . when other kids had playstations , i was playing zelda on my nes etc . now , this movie holds a special place in my heart already despite me being only 15 years old at the time of writing this review . i , because of my 80 's style early childhood , watched many tv shows and saw many movies that other kids did n't see , and this movie was one of those , and one of the greatest too.

it starts off in the los angeles home of alvin seville , simon seville , theodore seville and david seville . david , the chipmunk 's adoptive father , is in a rush to get to the airport as he is going on a business trip around europe . his taxi is almost there and the chipmunks help him pack . while they are talking , alvin expresses his will to come with dave and to see the world ( even though , technically dave is only going to europe , so to alvin , apparently only america and europe qualify as ' ' the world '' ) . david is leaving the chipmunks in the care of miss miller , much to the displeasure of the boys . soon dave is off to the airport and the chipmunks are left at home with miss miller . later , at a local café the chipmunks are playing a game of ' ' around the world in 30 days '' against the chipettes(brittany , jeanette and eleanore ) . after losing the game to brittany after having his hot air balloon eaten out of the sky by a crocodile , alvin get 's in an argument with brittany about who would really win a race around the world . two diamond smugglers sitting at a nearby table , klaus and claudia furschtien overhear their argument and , needing a safe way of transporting their diamonds over the world , decide to fool the children into delivering them for them . they set up a race around the world , where each team will have to deposit a doll in their own likeness ( secretely filled with diamonds ) at drop offs around the world and receive a doll in the opposing team 's likeness ( secretely filled with the payment for the diamonds ) to ' ' varify that they were there '' . the winning team would then receive a 100.000 dollar reward . they do this because they believe that jamal ( an interpol agent who has been hot on their heels for some times now ) would never suspect them because they are just kids ( however , this seems to be redundant , because on their travels , the kids do not have to go through any security checks and are never even questioned about the dolls , i suspect that neither would klaus or claudia if they had taken the diamonds there personally . ) and so begins a great adventure . this film is a classic and i see no reason why anyone would not like it . it features great animation and top - notch voice acting , not to mention the kick - ass music ( pardon my french : p ) . my favorite song is without a shred of doubt ' ' the girls and boys of rock and roll '' an amazing rock song that can not be topped . it 's also my favorite moment in the film . other notable songs include ' ' getting lucky''(kind of suggestive for a kid 's film eh ? ) and ' ' my mother '' as well as ' ' wooly bully '' and ' ' off to see the world '' not to mention the main theme of the movie heard during the opening credits performed by the royal london philharmonic orchestra . the scene with ' ' my mother '' still brings a tear to my eye . in relation to the song ' ' getting lucky '' i first did n't think anything of it , but when i grew older and learned about life , it became clear that that song was a little bit suggestive . that song , along with the fact that the animators insist on the audience knowing the color of the chipettes panties . this is especially apparent in the scene in egypt when the chipettes are being chased by the arabian prince 's men , when eleanor leans over the side of the hot air balloon basket and her skirt defies gravity completely . while this does nothing to draw from the overall quality of the film , it 's one of those unexplained things like why nobody in the world seems to mind that there are 4-feet tall chipmunks walking around and speaking in incredibly high - pitched voices and treat them just like they would any human child . anyway , a bit after that scene , the chipettes discover the diamonds in the dolls and decide to go find the chipmunks and get home . the direction of janice karman perfects this movie as she and her husband , ross bagdasarian jr. know the characters better than anyone . they even do the voices of the chipmunks and the chipettes . ross doing the voices for alvin and simon ( as well as dave ) and janice doing the voices for all the chipettes and theodore . speaking of male characters that are voiced by female voice actresses , nancy cartwright ( the voice of bart simpson ) makes an appearance in this movie . she plays the part of the arabian prince , a very small , but important role . the ending is of course , a happy one . the crooks have been caught , the loose ends tied and the film ends when the children , dave and miss miller are driving into the sunset , alvin complaining about not having gotten his 100.000 dollar reward for winning the race , which annoys dave until he finally yells ' ' alvin ! '' and the screen fades to black < br />
classic ending , by the way . i hope you found my review of this movie useful , and if you have n't seen this flick , give it a watch , it 's worth the money . this nostalgic classic from the 80 's gets a solid 10 out of 10 . < br />
''headin ' for the top , do n't you know ! we never stop believing now '' +1 ok , so this is a complete rip off of the first karate kid . however , i think there can never be too many movies like the first karate kid . there 's something about this type of story that particularly seems to apply to people like me . you get a overall sense of being able to overcome adversity by finding out new things about yourself . in this movie , hillary swank is a particular gem as the next karate kid . you can really tell that she has a bright future ahead of her.

not to say this movie is not without it 's problems . unlike the first one , mr miyagi appears to be a little to eager to get julie to learn martial arts and get her involved in fighting . it almost seems like he forgot what his values were from the first movie . also , one must have a suspended disbelief when examining the monks . the movie makes the monks appear to have a way too simplistic view of life , and does n't really explain why they do what they do in the plot - line . the villains are also a bit questionable , even though truly hateable bad guys . i also have a suspicion about martial arts movies that end on prom night.

so maybe this is n't a perfect movie . so maybe this would n't be the greatest movie to rent on a friday night . however , in more ways than one , it 's a guilty pleasure . hillary swank is just so loveable , and the story , even though unoriginal , works . in a genre of movies that seems to be based around nothing other than action and violence , this is a breath of fresh air . unlike all those steven seagal and jean claude van - damme , this is a movie about the spirit and the heart . there are some people that need movies like this , and we 'll take whatever we can get . my rating : 8/10 +1 i love aaron carter but even i expected pop star to be predictable , but i was so wrong ! aaron carter was really funny in it and a great actor ! also the actress who played jane was a brilliant actress ! every one who i no who watched it loved it!

the music in it was also really good!

the my favourite lines from the film is " you ca nt send me to a public school mom ! i m a celebridee ! ! " and " take your time , it'l come to you!" < br />
although the endings kind of cheesy , all the good chick flicks do ! this film is great , and a proper good chick flick , that i can watch over and over again ! +1 a gem of a british caper - comedy . poor american schlub pinky green ( richard jordan , playing another bad guy but this time an adorable one ) gets out of a british jail and tries to go straight , but his maintenance man job in a bank is too attractive for his never - reformed criminal friends , headed up by a really nasty ivan ( david niven in one of his last roles ) . pinky resists , but the lure of all that money is just too much for him . things unravel and reravel and it 's all joyous to watch . jordan must have played 20 bad guys in his career , but he never played the same one twice - this one is just too lovable to hate . niven never played a slicker bad guy , oil all over . two fine actors we 've lost that i wish we had back . +0 i get the feeling a lot of people liked this movie ( not all people , but a lot of them ) because they do n't want to admit they do n't understand it . people of middling intelligence , if you will , who pretend to be ever so avant garde and trendy who think lynch is a genius.

lynch , to me , is like tarantino . they 're both great , but neither one is the messiah as so many fanboys want to believe . no director can change the world , so chill out . and both make sucky flicks sometimes , it just happens . everyone has a bad day . and clearly , since this movie was actually designed as a pilot first and then hack - jobbed into a feature film , it was n't made with all the passion and forethought one should put into a movie . face it , much of the movie is gibbering unintelligibility which can not be understood . we can all make up meanings , lynch may have his own view , but none of that matters . it was strewn about the screen incoherently . admittedly , the first portion had the semblance of an intentionally convoluted passingly interesting story , but then it falters.

the cowboy , the mysterious organization of men with their phonecalls , the lawyers ... come on . i can almost picture david lynch yelling cut , forcing the crew to gather around him and explaining to them all " look how crazy and weird i am ! is n't it great ? ? it 's so weird and crazy ! " weird and crazy works if it 's a by - product of your style . however , it 's pretentious and tired when you go out of your way to do nothing but that . it 's like all those half assed pulp fiction throw backs that came out after pulp fiction . it 's just not cool . +0 spoiler wolfcreek meets texas chainsaw massacre .... if you 've seen those , do n't waste your time with this one . typical slasher movie , nothing new here except for the spoiler " visions " which just add fluff to an already weak plot . i would recommend this movie if you have absolutely nothing to watch and it 's either see this movie or stare at a bare wall for 1.5 hrs . the only semi - interesting part spoiler is when the chick starts drinking in the empty sheriff 's office , i say it 's interesting because at least she made good use of that liquor instead of stereotypically using it to start a fire to kill the bad guy , although she did go that route towards the end . all in all , lame , bad , and not worth effort . +1 naruse is typically considered one of the 3 master founders of japanese film , the other two being ozu and mizoguchi . this is an interesting and honest film on the lives of retired geishas . whatever happens , when such a woman ages , and loses her charm and mystique ? well , for those who are interested , watch this film . one : okin , is successful as a money - lender , but the other two have to borrow from her and are resentful . okin does n't have any children , but the other do . okin finds out that her old love is coming to visit her , and is excited . naruse is a master in subtle studies of his female protagonists ' characters . bangiku ultimately draws the viewer into the study of the questions of ones happiness , and one 's life - worth . very good film indeed . +1 i 've been strangely attracted to this film since i saw it on showtime sometime in the early 80 's . i say strangely because it is rather a ludicrous bit of soft - core fluff , a genre i 'm not particularly interested in . the dialogue is pompously and nonsensically philosophical ( making sense , no doubt , only to it 's franco - italian producers)and the plot completely extraneous . what it does achieve is a wonderfully hypnotic and thoroughly pleasant mood . the scenery ( the beautiful philippines ) , soft - focus nudity and wonderful score all contribute to a strange and extremely watchable exercise in a sort of film making seldom seen today . it is truly one of my great " guilty pleasures " . i was fortunate enough to find it on an old laserdisc and have watched it more times than i think is healthy . a worthwhile moodpiece . +0 he seems to be a control freak . i have heard him comment on " losing control of the show " and tell another guest who brought live animals that he had one rule-"no snakes . " he needs to hire a comedy writer because his jokes are lame . the only reason i watch him is because he some some great guests and bands . < br />
i watched the craig ferguson show for a while but his show is even worse . he likes to bull sh * * to burn time . i do n't think either man has much of a future in late night talk shows.

daily also has the annoying habit of sticking his tongue out to lick his lips . he must do this at least 10 times a show . i do like the joe firstman band . carson daily needs to lighten up before it is too late . +1 i first saw the movie a couple of years ago and was totally and utterly impressed but its sensuality . it is one of the most touching films i have ever seen , though it might appear a little bit pretentious and artificial - too much beautiful , if you will . anyway , one thing is for sure - the camera man has done a great job - each picture deserves to be cut off the film and displayed as a separate peace of art , comparable to the chirico 's or bernard buffet 's paintings.

the music forms a perfect background for the story , especially u2 's one played between the first and the second novels at the beach scene . as for the casting - i can not be objective since i like sophie marceau and jean renaue very much and can not add more to the praising comments of others.

however , the very fact that many people ( critics and those sophisticated in cinema ) criticized the movie made me watch it with a more critical eye for the second time . no doubt , the setting is splendid and the casting is gorgeous . but this is somehow not enough to make a comprehensive and cohesive film . the second novel ( when sophie marceau tells her story to malcovic is somehow superficial and does not tell much about the motivations of the people involved - was it only about shooting a beautiful and sensual love scene with the naked marceau or what ? ) . apparently , it does not add anything to the idea of the movie and even the husky voice of malcovic is being unable to link it to the main plot.

other stories are more justified and are really beautifully shot , which indulges many of the logic fallacies within them . the scene when jean reneau is overlooking the city through the huge window of his apartment on the top of the high building is absolutely incredible . the feeling of moist air and fine haze , which is being spread by the first " ferrera " scene can literally be sensed through the screen . no doubt , antonioni is a great master of shades and semi - shades . my favorite novel is the last one - the most romantic , deep and meaningful - i guess that it the most antonioni - like one in the whole movie - almost a parable . probably , the overall positive impression from the movie is mainly due to the last one shot somewhere in a small ghotic italian town , with its winding narrow streets and crooked pavements , fountains with the l'eau potable and monumental cathedrals ... it was laconic but really touching.

i hope that my impressions and comments on the movie , however chaotic they are would motivate somebody to spend an evening watching it ( it works better with the home theater , having somebody caring by your side , than in the movie theater ) . enjoy.

i beg your pardon for the imperfect english and any possible misspellings +1 " the dresser " is a small but absolutely wonderful film , brilliantly acted by albert finney and tom courtenay . how in the world this tiny film attracted enough attention to garner five major academy award nominations back in 1983 is a mystery to me , but it 's nice to know the academy can be guilty of a display of good taste every once in a while ( of course , they gave the award that year to " terms of endearment"-- after all , they do n't want to be accused of showing too much taste).

albert finney is a drunken shakespearean actor in a production of " king lear " ; tom courtenay is the man who works double time behind the scenes to keep this actor in front of the footlights . it 's both hilarious and piteous to see courtenay 's character showering finney 's with attention and affection , only to see his efforts utterly unappreciated and dismissed , even up to the very bitter end . finney and courtenay work wonders together , and though finney gets the showiest moments ( he does get to recite shakespeare after all ) , courtenay is the heart and soul of the film.

grade : a +0 ok , if you are a fan of mystery science theater 3000 and love to mock movies , then you will have a lot of fun with this . otherwise , it may really be too painful to see.

plot : obsessed cryptozoologist sneaks a huge crate containing a chupacabra onto a cruise ship ( apparently not having to declare it at customs , or even mention that he 's bringing aboard a live animal -"no really , it 's research equipment , the air holes are just an accident " ) . some dipsticks he hired to lade it open the crate , figuring he paid bunches of money , maybe there 's something to steal . once the wood crate is open , the chupacabra breaks through the steel bars inside and goes on a killing rampage.

yeah , whatever.

by a stroke of sheer coincidence , a marshall ( i assume a u.s. marshall , since he was in the gulf war , not just some guy named marshall ) is on board , investigating some money that went missing from the ship 's safe . he 's posing as an insurance salesman ( " lady , i 'm the best insurance you 've got ... " ) . other scintillating characters include the captain ( john rhys - davies , and sadly his dignity is the first victim of the film ) , his tae - bo instructor daughter ( snicker - tae - bo ) , an annoying old stuck - up lady with a tiny dog which should be fed to a cat ( guess what eats it ... ? ) and an incredibly unpleasant gigolo who might have been believable in a movie made in 1964 , not in anything more recent . much of the acting was really bad , and the characters were just there so that you can laugh hysterically when they died.

overall - screamingly bad . bad on many levels . bad bad bad . what ? ? ? bullets do n't even make chupacabra flinch , but the tae - bo bimbo can punch him and scare him away ? ? ? ? hey sci - fi channel , you desperate for scripts or what ? +1 this is a movie that deserves another look -- if you have n't seen it for a while , or a first look -- if you were too young when it came out ( 1983 ) . based on a play by the same name , it is the story of an older actor who heads a touring shakespearean repertory company in england during world war ii . it deals with his stress of trying to perform a shakespeare each night while facing problems such as bombed theaters and a company made up of older or physically handicapped actors -- the young , able bodied ones being taken for military service . it also deals with his relationship with various members of his company , especially with his dresser . so far it all sounds rather dull but nothing could be further from the truth . while tragic overall , the story is told with a lot of humor and emotions run high throughout . the two male leads both received oscar nominations for best actor and deservedly so . i strongly recommend this movie to anyone who enjoys human drama , theater -- especially shakespeare , or who has ever worked backstage in any capacity . the backstage goings - on make up another facet of the movie that will be fascinating to most viewers . +1 ( spoilers?)

i've heard some gripe about the special effects . but that should detract from the movie . the movie is a suspense film . and it 's very good at that . so from that stand point , this movie rocks . franke rocks . enjoy to one 's plastic hearts content . so no complaints for this movie . unless you watch the english dub , which is a total farce . it creates the illusion it 's a b movie . < br />
one complaint i do have is the music video on the dvd . it does n't say who sings it . i 'd love to know . < br />
8/10

quality : 10/10 entertainment : 10/10 replayable : 5/10 +0 i saw this when it came out in theaters back in 1996 . i remember i was already familiar with elijah wood 's work ( that 's right , he made stuff before " lord of the rings " ! ) and the merchandising tie - ins to the film were pretty abundant ( " flipper " water guns were even circulating).

adults were reminded of the old movies and tv show and for nostalgia 's sake took their kids to see it , who were excited because it was a movie about a dolphin and a stupid boy.

unfortunately it was n't what anyone expected and flopped severely . you know a movie 's in trouble when a boy swims away from a hammerhead shark in the middle of the ocean , and a pack of dolphins scare the shark away , and the kid -- instead of getting out of the water into a boat -- floats in the water for five minutes thanking his dolphin for saving him ... apparently he has n't taken into mind that the shark is still out there , perhaps even below him.

another problem is paul hogan . he looks old , crusty and tired of recycling his croc dundee shtick . by now , no one even remembered " crocodile dundee " much less hogan , and i half expected him to suddenly start pretending he did n't know what a hair dryer was for the sake of fish - out - of - water / social - satire laughs.

all in all this is a really poor " family " movie that is amateurish and almost hard to watch at times . i hated it when i saw it in theaters back in ' 96 and i hate it more now . +1 peter o'toole is a treat to watch in roles where the lines he speaks are good and offer a chance for him to swagger in drunken stupor . the lovely susannah york provides a good foil for o'toole 's dramatic presence.

the film alludes to incest -- without a single explicit scene -- but it is able to entertain the viewer in its raucous social commentary . though this is not major film by any reckoning , it will be remembered for its entertaining performances . < br />
even york , signing the papers at the end , is a treat to watch , exuding tragedy silently . the possible weakness here is thompson 's laid - back direction . but the film floats because of the actors and the script.

i saw the film twice over a period of 20 years -- on both occasions with the name " brotherly love " . " country dance " is a rather farcical and inappropriate title for this movie , wherever it was released as such . +1 when i saw this film at a festival years ago i was very impressed and i started to looking for it . nothing to do , not in the cinemas , nor on dvd neither on blue ray . absolutely nothing ! ! ! how it 's possible this could really happen ? ? ? the direction is impeccable , the story is intriguing and has been filmed in a very original way the music it 's perfect and james franco is hot as hell!!!

please release this master piece and allow it to have it 's proper life ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! this is really a very great movie that people should see and it deserve another chance ! ! ! ! ! ! < br />
edvard +1 i do n't play video games at all but my children do.

i got a big kick out of this . would like to see more of this type of film . " very cool " as my youngest would say.

interesting characters and the overall story line was interesting . like i said i do n't play video games but i think that my children would enjoyed this . it was not full of bad language and that is a pleasant change . this visual concept was different which caught my eye . plus the sound track was pretty good . i might even try out some of the games my sons plays to see because of this film . who knows maybe i 'll be a gamer someday . +0 another try , another miss . france may be doomed for not being able to produce a good horror movie . i mean ... the least they could do was to shoot the movie in the forest of brocéliande , but even the forest is fake ! it was shot near paris ! the subject is useless , the actors are really insignificant and the text makes you wish you were deaf . nothing could save it.

bad ... to the bone . i was n't warned . i want my money back . +0 star trek v definitely earns the dubious distinction of being the weakest film in the star trek series . despite the good acting efforts by the actors , it suffered from a general lack of funding from paramount pictures . paramount pictures was not enthusiastic about this film at its very onset.

the movie begins with the enterprise crew enjoying their extended shore leave as a reword for saving the earth from total ecological disaster . their shore leave is cut short when a disturbance occurs on nimbus iii , the planet of intergalactic peace . captain kirk and the enterprise arrive at nimbus iii only to have their ship hijacked by sybok , spock 's half - brother . sybok brainwashes the crew of the enterprise and sets it on a suicide mission to rendezvous with " god " just past the great barrier at the center of our galaxy . captain kirk must then figure out a way to regain control of his ship and to fend off the enterprise 's klignon pursuers.

the only bright spot in the film is the acting and directing . william shatner , leonard nimoy , deforest kelley , laurence luckinbill , and the rest of the cast all give good performances . william shatner also does a pretty good job directing this film.

however , the film suffered from a general lack of enthusiasm and funding . first , the part of sybok was initially offered to sean connery , but he refused . so , laurence luckinbill got the part . second , many of the special effects were severely cut back ... reducing the movies entertaining potential . third , the scene that depicts the arrival at the great barrier left much to be desired . finally , the romance between scotty and uhura in this film did not make much sense at all ... considering that no such romance ever occurred prior to this point in the star trek universe and it was never explained how such a romance could suddenly materialize between star treks iv and v.

overall , this is a very weak film . you should probably just skip this film and move on to star trek vi . after all , the cast and crew made star trek vi partly to bail themselves out after their debacle with star trek v. +0 this could have been a really good movie if someone would just have known how to finish the film.

the story was going along just fine and heading towards that point in every movie like this where the " gray " characters turn " good " and the " bad " guys get their just desserts and * boom * ... it 's like they ran out of script and the cast just started to make things up.

which would n't have been so bad ... if the cast had just continued with the character development they had already put in place . but such is not the case and the movie soon becomes a goofy mess.

my advice is to watch this movie up to about the last 30 minutes ... and then shut it off . at this point , imagine how you think the next 30 minutes will look based on what you have seen so far.

believe me , the ending you come up with will look far better than how this film actually ends . trust me on this . +0 i loathe , despise , and hate this film with a passion that makes the red hot gates of hell look cold by comparison . it 's nothing but a campy , frightening , and completly shoddy trip down memory lane to that oh - so - nasty time , the 70 's , a decade i m glad i was nt a part of if this absolute trite is all that was on offer!

the animation is sickeningly dated , not least of all with it 's tacky , missing frames , and characters with huge , bulbous heads , this film is an eye - sore . from the knowing , snide nod to the parents with the freakily gay sea horse , and it 's camp hand motions and kenneth williams - esque voice , to the overtly , unsubtly druggy anthem , high cockalorum , this film , i m sad to say , is one that was forced upon me as a child and i have never fully recovered from the terror it caused me ....

this ghastly display of complete terribleness should carry an r rated certificate , so disturbing it is in it 's contents ! +0 i live in rome where the turkish director of this film lives and works . from my italian friends i have heard many good things about his films ... so after seeing the preview i really wanted to see " cuore sacro " . i am deeply disappointed , one of the most pompous , pseudo - religious , highly improbable and naive films . i love film but this one is really heavy and bad . the main character is really crazy , and should be locked up in a madhouse ... made me sympathise with the negative character of an aunt , who runs a dirty - dealing company that only wants to make money ... and i consider myself an anti - capitalist ... that bad ! ! ! +1 ( some spoilers included:)

although , many commentators have called this film surreal , the term fits poorly here . to quote from encyclopedia britannica 's , surreal means:

"fantastic or incongruous imagery " : one need n't explain to the unimaginative how many ways a plucky ten - year - old boy at large and seeking his fortune in the driver 's seat of a red mustang could be fantastic : those curious might read james kincaid ; but if you asked said lad how he were incongruous behind the wheel of a sports car , he 'd surely protest , " no way ! " what fantasies and incongruities the film offers mostly appear within the first fifteen minutes . thereafter we get more iterations of the same , in an ever - cruder and more squalid progression that , far from incongruous , soon proves predictable . not that it were , on the other hand , literally believable-- but it were unfair to tax motorama in particular with this flaw , any plausible suspension of disbelief having fallen precipitously on the typical film - maker 's and viewer 's scale of values ever since " raiders of the lost ark " became a blockbuster.

"hallucinatory " : how do we know what a hallucination is if part of having one is not knowing that we are having one ? at any rate , some people know that they enjoy " hallucinogenic drugs"-- but if motorama typifies the result of doing so , then i 'm at a loss as to why anyone would take them more than once . there is , of course , the occasional bad trip . the movie must be one of those , pun and all.

"juxtaposition of words that was startling " : how many times can a ten - year - old startle you by uttering " oh , my god ! " when he likes something , or " damn ! " when he does n't ? these two interjections are about par for the course with this script . sadly , any sense of the surreal in what passes for dialogue could only reveal , in direct proportion , one 's naivete regarding the speech patterns of the rising american generation.

"a world completely defined and minutely depicted but that makes no rational sense : " motorama 's world indeed makes no sense , but it is about as completely defined as a cartoon in an elementary school newspaper . the numerous guest stars in the cast all have cameo roles even less intelligent than our little hero who exclaims " damn ! " in the blink of an eyelash but needs several seconds to concoct the lamest lie . and even * his * character , despite appearing in nearly every scene , gets no significant development . here 's scant reward for any viewer who sympathizes , as i must , enough to wish to know him better and understand ' where he 's coming from . ' one vaguely senses a far better story and protagonist struggling to get out.

"fully recognizable , realistically painted images are removed from their normal contexts and reassembled within an ambiguous , paradoxical , or shocking framework . " no , we see a succession of stereotypical and ever more dilapidated billboards , filling stations , greasy - spoon eateries , cheap hotels , and their lowlife habitues along country highways , exactly where they stereotypically belong.

"largely responsible for perpetuating ... the traditional emphasis on content . " there is little content , moment - to - moment , in motorama.

to sum up : picture british millionaires dressed as clowns or pirates on the way to a posh costume party , sitting serene and mute as cautious chauffeurs inch their rolls - royces like fragile skiffs through a roiling sea of desperate humanity , chinese who implore them through the windows and smear the glass with blood . or imagine a stadium full of abandoned antiques , limousines like those above now rusting , and white pianos tinkled by ghosts . into this detritus wander an exhausted boy and an ailing woman to whom he clings as mother - figure becoming girl - friend , who fall asleep side by side on the grass . he is awakened-- on the feast of the transfiguration , " white and glistering " day 1945 - - by a brilliant flash on the horizon that is not the rising sun . finding that his consort has become a corpse , he first believes that he has witnessed her soul going up to heaven . later he explains only a little less innocently , ' i learned a new word today : atom - bomb . it 's like god taking a photograph . ' now , * there * are just two samples of cinematic surrealism , surrealism whose ironies ripple out far enough to invade its film 's very title : empire of the sun . if you seek surreal , * please * do n't miss it . alas , however hard he treads on the accelerator to race his chariot through and beyond the desert , no scenes so exquisitely strange , rich , subtle , or gorgeous await motorama 's poor little gus in his quest.

none of the above necessarily constitutes a thumbs - down on this film . though somewhat disappointed , i ca n't dismiss it , in view of the respectability of another genre that it does exemplify-- one influenced , to be sure , by surrealism , but also by expressionism , existentialism , and franz kafka 's pessimism amidst omnipotent power structures . let 's try on for size : theater of the absurd.

turning to e.b. 's article on this style , i am amazed by how , to the extent that theater of the absurd is a valid artistic style , the above objections to motorama vanish like a puff of smoke . i 'm tempted to quote the entire text as support of the identification.

theater of the absurd attempts to show " that the human situation is essentially absurd , devoid of purpose ... humankind is left feeling hopeless , bewildered , and anxious . " : having instantaneously achieved his purpose of getting away from a depressing home life among bickering parents , gus finds himself purposeless until he drives past a glittering billboard reading " motorama " and decides to win the lottery that it promises . as others have already revealed , this ambition proves illusory : although the game " never expires " , the sponsoring corporation has no intention that anyone should ever win , and has ways to trick , confuse , and leave crestfallen any aspirant to the reward . he , like others , is ultimately disappointed in his dream.

"absurdist playwrights , therefore , did away with most of the logical structure of traditional theatre . there is little dramatic action as conventionally understood ; however frantically the characters perform , their busyness serves to underscore the fact that nothing happens to change their existence ... a timeless , circular quality emerges . " " language in an absurdist play is full of ... repetitions ... repeating the obvious until it sounds like nonsense . " underneath a sometimes " dazzling comic surface , " we find " an underlying message of metaphysical distress . " gus 's obsession with a silly game , his inane language , the plot device wherein he divines a bleak future and/or returns to an earlier moment and takes a different but still bleak turn-- so much fits now . while an admirer of the surreal would do better with some films , anyway , of spielberg , admirers of motorama as it really is should find fellow - travelers-- not instead but addition-- in the works of beckett , ionesco , and genet.

but one ca n't quite stop here . after his disillusionment with the game , gus returns to " phil " ( i.e. , love ) , the first attendant he had met and the one person who had treated him decently , although he had also scolded him-- at a service station advertising " be full - filled ! " . under phil 's tutelage he learns a life of waiting for cars . we might note here that the absurdist playwright beckett had entitled his most famous play " waiting for godot , " and that for godot we should read " god . " god is one of phil 's preoccupations , too . furthermore , as the indirect result of his previous encounter with gus , phil is badly maimed and goes about in a cast with his arms straight out horizontally . in the last scene , gus , now phil 's protege , says that he wants to hear music . we hear none , but we see phil wiggling his fingers at the end of his outstretched arm , beckoning gus closer , and gus responds . the end.

finally , on to an author whom i happen to be reading currently , the anglican theologian william stringfellow . if this rebel - lawyer is not acknowledged as an architect or undergirder of liberation theology , which is more a roman catholic than an anglican movement , perhaps he should be . police brutality and corporate greed are a cliche in cinema and literature , including motorama , but stringfellow supports and illuminates such sentiments with impressive warrants from scripture , tradition , and reason.

his most significant work is an expose of the earthly activities of those fallen angels whom the bible refers to as principalities and powers . principalities , wrote stringfellow , are behind all of our popular three i 's : images , institutions , and ideologies . all of these commend themselves to our worship by making false promises . the more deeply involved with an image , an institution , or an ideology any person becomes , the more his own personhood becomes " depleted " and be becomes a slave to them . promising power , control , and immortality , they inexorably deliver helplessness , chaos , and death . as essentially fallen , defeated powers , they can do no more than that . yet they beguile humans with that " dominion over the earth " promised by god in the book of genesis , while in fact no one of us controls an image , an institution , or an ideology bent inevitably on its own hegemony and self - preservation . they take on lives of their own . " dominion " happens to be a mistranslation : a more accurate rendering of the hebrew would be " stewardship . " but this is a quibble beside a more fundamental problem : most of us neglect to notice that god had delegated this power to adam * before * the fall . we have no reason to assume that we , his descendents , still exercise it now : on the contrary , it should be obvious that demonic forces have stolen it from us.

one might add two observations of c.s. lewis : first , that " man 's conquest of nature " is a mere illusion , and a ruse to cover the fact that one is really talking about the conquest of some men by other men with nature as the instrument ; and secondly , contrary to popular belief , satan is no kind of good - time charlie . he may dangle out pleasures at first , but he is very niggardly with them and will withdraw them from any human firmly in his thrall , perhaps leaving his prey sitting in front of the fire feeling miserably sorry for himself and seething with resentment.

now , applying these insights to motorama , we seem them mirrored remarkably in gus 's experience . he is , if not nice , at least a pretty little boy prior to falling victim to the motorama game . the first signs advertising it glisten glamorously . the longer he continues , however , and the deeper he journeys towards the sponsoring corporation 's headquarters , the more shabby they become . he 's lonely , meeting no one else who plays the game . the stations giving out the cards have either fallen into ruins or are staffed by zombies . the people he does meet along the way are more and more ugly , deceitful , and hostile . ( the fact that the principalities answer to a common dictator does not mean that they can abide one another ) . gus 's humanity is leached out of him as he becomes not only totally self - centered and oblivious to the needs of others but partially blinded ... disfigured ... prematurely aged while infantile in the literal sense of linguistically challenged . eventually even his precious mustang is taken from him in a crash , and he must continue in a dead man 's wreck . yet at long last , having done everything he thought was expected , he presents himself to the principality in its proud tower to receive his prize . using the biblical power to confuse wielded by those who have built such monuments to their own vanity , its agents evade him , disappoint , insult , and finally throw him from the top floor . he falls long and hard , landing , finally in a body of water . in other words , in classic symbolism , he dies . he has met the inevitable bad end of anyone who has put his faith in such a deceiver.

but this fate proves to be only a warning look into a mutable future . he repents and returns to phil , and upon seeing him performs the very first generous , selfless act we have seen from him for almost an hour and a half : noting that phil is now handicapped and hardly able to insert a hose into a gas tank , he asks , " can i help you with that ? " then , seeing the " help wanted " sign , he decides to apply for the job , explaining to the motorist with whom he was hitch - hiking that he reckons he 'll get out here , because it does n't look like too bad a place to work.

this interpretation is conjectural , of course , and it may surprise or even outrage the film 's " cult classic " aficionados who see quite different points in it.

if motorama is n't quite my cup of tea , i 'm at least convinced now that it 's hardly the worst film ever made . +1 bobby and mikey are two little boys who move across the country with their divorced mother to start a new life . soon after the family settles in , their mom marries " the king " who ends up being an abusive stepfather , especially to bobby . so bobby decides that he will " fly away " from the abuse in his birthday present.

this movie was difficult to watch , especially the abuse scenes . it was hard to watch an innocent , playful little boy become abused and turn into a sullen scared , and withdrawn young man . the acting is excellent.

i cried throughout the last half of the movie . there were some funny scenes in it too like the monster brew and the dog that finds the pop bottles.

i would n't suggest letting little kids watch it . it was a movie that was painful to watch and yet it really really flew away . +0 this movie had horrible lighting and terrible camera movements . this movie is a jumpy horror flick with no meaning at all . the slashes are totally fake looking . it looks like some 17 year - old idiot wrote this movie and a 10 year old kid shot it . with the worst acting you can ever find . people are tired of knives . at least move on to guns or fire . it has almost exact lines from " when a stranger calls " . with gruesome killings , only crazy people would enjoy this movie . it is obvious the writer does n't have kids or even care for them . i mean at show some mercy . just to sum it up , this movie is a " b " movie and it sucked . just for your own sake , do n't even think about wasting your time watching this crappy movie . +0 i have seen this movie and i did not care for this movie anyhow . i would not think about going to paris because i do not like this country and its national capital . i do not like to learn french anyhow because i do not understand their language . why would i go to france when i rather go to germany or the united kingdom ? germany and the united kingdom are the nations i tolerate . apparently the olsen twins do not understand the french language just like me . therefore i will not bother the france trip no matter what . i might as well stick to the united kingdom and meet single women and play video games if there is a video arcade . that is all . +1 if you want to really terrify people , choose the devil as your subject . after all , a good deal of the population believe that he is real . therefore you are plugging into a whole meaty swathe of pre - existing religious and mythological imagery . and bound to cause quite a few nightmares in your young audience.

this episode had all the appearance of a hollywood blockbuster . in fact , having finished watching it i flicked over to another channel which was playing a recent bond film and quite frankly could n't split a hair between the differences in sfx . with a minimal cast , restricted by its situation on a space station ; complete with overwhelming panoramic views of an imploding universe , it was as claustrophobic and intense as alien or event horison . the black hole outside made it feel as if the black hole 's weight of dark matter was pressing the station onto the planet and to whatever was sealed inside . and as the horror is intensified by the knowledge that the dr and rose are stranded , the sinister ood start channelling a disembodied voice and then the characters start being picked off one by one ...

this has all the best qualities of the cream of this new dr who endeavour ; girl in the fireplace and the empty child . emotionally engaging , frightening and humorous all without seeming cheesy . this is far scarier than any amount of flying daleks . but it has to be asked , is this really suitable viewing for children ? this is not a family friendly episode . pity the poor parent who has to put their kids to bed after this one . i 'm not sure i even want to see what happens next ! +1 i just watched it for the second time today and i must say with all my heart it is about damn time they made a movie about us as people not as spiritual beings . such a waste of human life as this story was maybe some good will come out of it . and eric is hotter than ever . to often in the movies first nations people are seen as other than everyday people . we are always portrayed as chiefs or medicine people . hey we are just like everyone else . and this movie showed just that . we hurt when an injustice is done and we can win in quest for justice . it is really to bad that the big movie companies ca nt see that . i ca nt wait till this comes out on dvd . thanks to those who chose to show this story as it really was . +1 just love the interplay between two great characters of stage & screen - veidt & barrymore +0 " you got any beans ? beans is good . you just eat them and you go . " i could n't help but laugh at that bit of dialog . beans are the musical fruit , you know . the more you eat them , the more you go toot , toot , toot.

hmmmm ... ok , i can understand why the actors were in this because they needed paychecks to pay their bills with , but i 'm not really too sure what the intentions of the director and the writer were . even after watching the making - of documentary in the dvd extras.

mike rooker gave this a performance it really did n't deserve . i 've seen him in other movies much better than this one . what would have vastly improved this movie was to throw everything out , keep rooker and instead made another entry into " the substitute " franchise . rooker would have made for a terrific substitute teacher who instructs naughty and morally - impaired youth regarding the error of their ways and how they can become more useful and productive members of society.

casper , you really should n't be just pushing through the undergrowth like that as you could get poison oak . whoops . never mind . i guess poison oak is the least of your worries now . well , at least this time your croaking was n't done by the tail of giant python . there are few things more embarrassing than being skewered through the chest by a giant snake . at least the death scene in this movie had a bit more dignity to it . as well as a more liberal smearing of karo syrup and red food dye . nothing says sad and tragic death like the liberal use of karo and red dye!

first time i 've seen a monster wear a shiny rayon cape with a fur collar ruff . first time for everything , i guess . just to be nitpicky , though , if this was an indian ghost , how come it looked exactly like a monster out of european culture and folklore ? would n't the monster have been more sort of more indianish?

while i did watch this all the way to the end credits , i do n't realistically believe that i could in good faith recommend it to others . +1 of all the 48 films of brigitte bardot , " une parisienne " is widely regarded as ( one of ) her best . what we see is special : for once the plot has a value of its own , does much more than only providing a cheap vehicle for bb 's sex - charged appearance.

this film is your true & well worked - out light comedy , with a good and coherent story . set in france 's government circles in the late 1950 's , it entertains from beginning to end . providing many amusing twists & turns and some slapstick -- all acted out by at least three starring leads , including bardot.

"une parisienne " (= french for " female inhabitant of paris " ) focuses on telling a story , not on showing brigitte bardot . brigitte serves the plot very well by using her talent for acting in light comedies.

when you settle on your couch on a friday - night , tired and weary from a week 's slaving away , just turn on " une parisienne " . this film will make you feel better . +1 my ex wife and i saw and were intrigued by the trailer for this film . we waited for it to come out but when it did it did n't stay in theaters very long . several years later i bought it on vhs and i am transferring it to dvd so i can preserve it.

i found it to be very moving . it is about real events in a real country . burma got such a bad reputation for the political oppression it created that they changed their name.

i find women with little make - up on to be very sexy . patricia arquette is in this movie . frances mcdormand and spalding gray are in it only briefly.

after coming home to find her young son and husband brutally murdered laura ( arquette ) is afraid of blood . a bad trait for a doctor . her sister ( mcdormand ) talks her into going on a vacation to burma . while there she witnesses a peaceful demonstration and has her passport stolen . in a bold ( or stupid ) move she asks a tourist guide to show her something off the tourist track . her guide is injured by soldiers and she spends the rest of the movie trying to get him and herself to safety.

every time i watch this it reminds me that we in the united states forget that to a peasant living under military rule , socialism , where at least eating is virtually guaranteed , looks pretty darn good . +1 the film is not for everyone . some might think the acting is bad when it is actually understated and natural . there are no obviously evil acts and there are no stunningly beautiful moments . there is a lot of indecision , an lot of conflicting feelings.

actually this film takes a very honest look at a very complex subject , sex with minors . it is complex because the characters are trying to deal with love and sex when her body and hormones are still developing and both of their minds and personalities are still developing . complex also because society has very simplistic views of sex with minors , and complex , because the characters do n't know if society is right or if their instincts are right.

some will not like the movie because it leaves unanswered questions . questions such as who was really in charge of the relationship , who was damaged , did good come out of it , was it art , who was damaged more , did some of the problems with their relationship stem from it being forbidden by society , did some of the problems stem from their own immaturity , and probably most important , was this truly a crime?

the film is resolutely neutral on all of this , and it is this neutrality that is its strength . it is the reason for the understated acting , the simple sets , the lack of background music , soft lighting , and the general " flat " presentation . the message is clear . we do n't really understand this kind of relationship today , and quick judgments are bound to be shallow . +0 two years after this movie was made , " the juror " came out . do n't waste your time on this one . see " the juror " instead . " the juror " is essentially the same story as " trial by jury , " with better acting , better directing and a far more gripping aura about it . william hurt was not believable as a cop - gone - bad , and armand assante could n't be more unlike a mob boss if they had dressed him in a clown outfit . you did n't become involved enough with joann whalley 's character to be that upset by what was happening to her . also , the way in which she interacted with the jury was n't compelling or interesting in any way . kathleen quinlan 's role as a hooker / killer was n't fleshed out enough and quite frankly was unnecessary for to the plot . +1 i ca n't help but notice the negative reviews this movie has gotten . to be honest , i saw the preview for this movie , and the premise looked intrigued me . yes , i rented it after reading others ' comments . they are correct in that some of the acting leaves a lot to be desired . they are also correct that one of the best performances of this movie was that of dr. graves.

also interesting is scott clark , who plays grant , the kid in the wheelchair . i identify with the character he played , perhaps because i am in a wheelchair.

this movie is certainly worth your looking at . +0 i 'm a big fan of kevin spacey 's work , but this is a sub - standard film . if you think it looks interesting , or you saw it and liked it , go and check out john boorman 's " the general " . it is basically about the same guy , but is far superior in every way ( and does n't suffer from the hollywood glorifications ) . +1 lifeforce is certainly one of tobe hooper 's best films . it has some great special effects and a lot of nudity , so it seems like a typical horror fan 's dream . the film is quit creative though and i think that 's because of the script from dan o'bannon and don jakoby . nice cinematography and a good creepy atmosphere make it a solid film . +1 though not exactly a comedy in the usual sense of the word this more rewarding than any movie full of laughs but devoid of substance . i do n't think bergman 's movies can be easily classed under narrow genres , even the lightest are quite complex . this movie in spite of its light touch poses a series of problems related to marriage and its shortcomings and what happens when the flames start to die etc . i do n't really communicate personally with all these issues as i am sure others do . but the atmosphere of the movie is extraordinary , you almost wish it not to end . i have to admit that i was swept away by the bergman of the fifties , having come to know most of his later , groundbreaking efforts . before nykvist , von sydow , ulman etc . the master produced some of the richest , warm and touching movies i have ever seen . though it 's a long shot , i have seen this kind of love for human kind , in its complexity , only in fellini 's movies of the same period . a lesson in love alongside smiles of a summer night are worth seeing for bergman fans , to have the full image of the man 's capabilities , and for those who love cinema with a heart . may he rest in peace ! +0 brooke shields -- in a departure from her " suddenly susan " duties -- plays a bitter divorcee who embroils three girlfriends in a " girls only " weekend in palm springs . the problem : brooke is " unattached " and on the prowl , while her friends are all involved . hence the title implications and emotional backlash their " amoral " weekend causes.

despite a few laughs generated by dan cortese ( " victoria 's closet " ) and mtv " relationship authorities " adam corolla and dr. drew pinsky , this is somber stuff for women only . d.b. sweeney , virginia madsen and jon polito co - star . +1 when i first heard that this movie was going to be made , i was very excited to see it . the ideas to make a movie of this caliber , as good as it was , must have been very difficult . i was n't really sure if anyone could encompass all of the pope 's many amazing qualities in a movie , but the movie did his memory justice . in my opinion the most important task was to reveal to the people who the pope started out as . to his days in poland , all the way to his last days in the vatican , this movie followed every aspect of his life . thomas kretschmann , the man who played the pope in his adult life and on , did a very good job at getting the emotion across . overall this movie was educational , but also very entertaining . +1 flawlessly directed , written , performed , and filmed , this quiet and unpretentious danish film is an example of cinema at its best , and if a person exists who can watch babette 's feast without being touched at a very fundamental level , they are a person i do not care to know.

the story is quite simple . in the 1800s , two elderly maiden ladies ( birgitte federspiel and bodil kjer ) reside in remote jutland , where they have sacrificed their lives , romantic possibilities , and personal happiness in order to continue their long - dead father 's religious ministry to the small flock he served . one of the women 's youthful admirers sends to them a frenchwoman , babette ( stéphane audran ) , whose husband and son have been killed in france and who has fled her homeland lest she meet the same fate . although they do not really require her services , the sisters engage her as maid and cook -- and as the years pass her cleverness and tireless efforts on their behalf enables the aging congregation to remain together and the sisters to live in more comfort than they had imagined ; indeed , the entire village admires and depends upon her.

one day , however , babette receives a letter : she has won a lottery and is now , by village standards , a wealthy woman . knowing that her new wealth will mean her return to france , the sisters grant her wish that she be allowed to prepare a truly french meal for them and the members of their tiny congregation . the meal and the evening it is served is indeed a night to remember -- but not for reasons that might be expected , for babette 's feast proves to be food for both body and soul , and is ultimately her gift of love to the women who took her in and the villagers who have been so kind to her.

the film is extraordinary in every way , meticulous in detail yet not overpowering in its presentation of them . as the film progresses , we come to love the characters in both their simple devotion to god and their all - too - human frailties , and the scenes in which babette prepares her feast and in which the meal is consumed are powerful , beautiful , and incredibly memorable . there have been several films that have used food as a metaphor for love , but none approach the simple artistry and beauty of babette 's feast , which reminds us of all the good things about humanity and which proves food for both body and soul . highly , highly recommended.

gary f. taylor , aka gft , amazon reviewer +1 we see at the beginning of little dieter needs to fly dieter dengler , the subject of the film , an obsessive - compulsive . or at least that 's what he seems to be by way of constantly opening / closing doors and with his large stock - pile of food in the cellar . in a way director werner herzog sets up a central question , in a manner of speaking , to why dieter is like this . well , in fact , he 's not necessarily obsessive - compulsive as he is just , well , prepared . and why should n't he be after the life he 's lived ? aside from the juiciest , most dark and exhilarating and frightening and just downright haunting story of survival that 's the core of the picture , the back - story to dieter is fascinating too . dieter 's own childhood , for example , was already a slog from the start , being in post - war germnay , poor in a family without much food or prospects , eating wallpaper for " the blue in the walls " . but enter in a passion , an un - yielding desire ( which , of course , is part of herzog 's bread & butter and love of man in his films ) , which is flying , and for dieter there was nothing else but to fulfill this . what it ends up leading to , after becoming an american citizen , is more than he could 've bargained for.

dieter is one of herzog 's most compelling , quirky , and compassionately observed figures in his whole career , a man who 's memory is scarred by brutal memories of his time being a vietnam pow , though at the least it provides for some of the most compelling storytelling in any documentary of the last 20 years . ironically , the storytelling comes through- unlike in the wild blue yonder- mostly in lots and lots of exposition from dieter on some of the most minute details of his time in the different prison camps ( the torture tactics , the bugs , the brutal , wretched violence and threats like with the wedding ring tale ) , and leading into the most interesting and sad portions with his best friend duane . they escaped the prisons together , but found that their journey to reach cambodia would not be so easy . now , through most of this , the talking does something that is enthralling , which is that as dieter goes through his stories and occasionally does re - enactments ( in fashion herzog could only do , with dieter already middle - aged being led in handcuffs et all through the jungle ) , one can picture all of this in the mind . it all becomes even more vivid to try and get these little details and the intensity of it all together into a form of reality . that herzog keeps these portions simple , and knows when to hold dieter back in his answers , makes him all the more a key figure of interest . he 's not ever totally ' normal ' , but unlike a timothy treadwell , you wo nt think ever really about laughing at him either.

so , along with his hero ( whether of war or not is hard to say , as dieter disputes that claim as saying the ones who died were the real heroes , typical but perhaps quite true ) , herzog stylizes his film with a mix of old stock footage when detailing dieter 's early life ( the period footage of ww2 scenes and post german rubble is always a captivating sight , and with herzog gets up a notch in his timing and assemblage with music ) , and in capturing the footage of vietnam in aerial viewings of jungles and fields . herzog is also very wise at not injecting politics much at all into the proceedings , there 's no ' i was used by the americans ' or whatever thrown into the mix . there 's even a sense that dieter does n't hold too much of a grudge with everything that happened to him , that it 's just what happens in time of war ( and , of course , he was dropping bombs on people from his plane ) . now , through much of these harrowing- and even in the smaller bits involving what went on in prisons , bathrooms and the scraps of food it 's always harrowing- luckily herzog keeps a level of humor in check as well . one of my very favorite scenes in the film , where herzog breaks away for a moment from dieter , is when he shows a ' trainee ' film used for american soldiers meant to show what should happen in case they get abandoned in the jungle alone ... with all of the gear that they could possibly have including a knife , a flare gun , and a very fast helicopter to come around ( and this is put to hilariously dead - pan voice - over work).

yet even the moments where one laughs only brings to mind the moments of absurdity in a time of absolute crisis , and how one ca n't ever really imagine what it 's like to be alone in a foreign territory surrounded by people who will do anything to keep said person as a form of collateral in war - time . dieter , aside from knowing that flying and airplanes are the only way of life he would ever want to have ( and herzog ends the film on a wonderfully somber , elegiac note where he flies over a large field of airplanes ) , knows what it is to have to survive at all costs . but yet , as well , as in many of herzog 's protagonist driven films , there 's the near unalterable spirit that will keep on enduring if one 's strong enough , even through horrid moments ( the fate of dunae ) and problems all the way up to the rescue by the helicopter ( is he american , or a spy , they ask on the chopper ) . dieter is such a man with a spirit , and he 's given via herzog a fantastic , tragic , creative , well - shot , albeit maybe too short , tribute to his life . and , of course , it pumps me up even more for the upcoming dramatization rescue dawn . +0 i rented this movie to get an easy , entertained view of the history of texas . i got a headache instead . the depiction of history in this movie is so comical that even mad tv would not have done a better job . +1 some of the reviewers here have foolishly judged this silent film by political - correctness standards of today . < br />
"battle " was an excellent film for several reasons , correctly noted by more rational reviewers : superb cast , lots of action , innovative editing and photography . < br />
its stars were in effect the d.w. griffith stock company and to this silent movie fan , that is inducement enough to watch it and to enjoy it . < br />
i saw it many years ago and just watched it again at youtube ; that was a very poor quality print , but coupled with my memory of a good print in a real theater , i can justifiably recommend this to reasonable people and film historians . +1 this film is a great rampage of action and comedy , it gets right in to it right from the start , there 's no boring build up . the chemistry of the leading roles adds to the excitement and anticipation of the ending , even though my suspicions were not satisfied . the special effects worked brilliantly and were believable ! would have liked a different ending but it still had me reeling in emotions . the story line unfolds well however it is a film you have to watch from start to end carefully to pick up on all the details , to fully understand and get maximum enjoyment.