text
stringlengths 98
6.42k
| label
class label 2
classes |
|---|---|
As someone who has been dancing all her life and is now a dance teacher and a writer for a dance magazine, I must say that this movie SUCKED!!!! What a joke!! Doug Varone and Desmond Richardson, two incredibly respected artists, what are you DOING involved in this crap?? Patrick Swayze and the woman are so unbelievably over the top, their acting is just ridiculous. And the dancing isn't even good, the choreography is hysterically bad, and the cinematography leaves you unable to even see the movement.<br /><br />If you are a dancer, get your dancer friends together, get wasted and have a great laugh with this unbelievable joke of a movie. Especially if you are anti- a lot of contemporary modern crap that's out there right now, you'll die laughing. | 0neg
|
I was surprised when I checked the credits of this miniseries to see that it had not been based on a book. It feels like something based on a book, because it has such a complete and detailed mythology and a feeling of back story that is rare in the work of screenwriters. The Lost Room has created a very complete world for its characters and for its central premise.<br /><br />It also, like a movie based on a book, feels like you can only get the full story by reading the book. One is left with a lot unknown. For the most part this is fine, but I don't care for the fact that at the end you really don't understand .... well .... anything. Although I'll admit that even though I was worried that this would be the case, it didn't bother me all that much, because the story had good forward propulsion and a resolution that was emotionally satisfying although not intellectually so.<br /><br />Since this isn't from a book, my guess would be they're considering this for a TV series, both because some threads seem to have been left loose on purpose and because it does feel like there's more you could mine out of the material. I hope I'm right about that, I would like to see more. But if it is a series, they'd better come up with some answers. | 1pos
|
Director-star Orson Welles also adapted Isak Dinesen's rather pointless book about an aged millionaire recluse living in China who tells his employee of an incredible story he heard while in the service regarding a rich, dying man, his terrible wife and a sailor-stud. The employee explains that this tale is just a legend, but the millionaire aims to make it fact. The sexual implications in the narrative aren't ignored by Welles, though they are tip-toed around (probably due to the restrictions of 1968), and when Welles as the "old gentleman" finds himself the perfect boy to complete his plan, it's hard not to smirk when he calls the bottle-blonde "a fine looking sailor" and then offers him money. Who needs Jeanne Moreau when these two are hitting it off so well? ** from **** | 0neg
|
I am a dyed in the wool fan of Gary Daniels and believe him to be one of the best martial artists working in movies today(if not the best)but this movie is truly terrible and one of the worst I have seen in a very long time.The direction by Darren Doane is as flat as a pancake and the movie is scuppered by long dialogue scenes(one between Gary and some guy on a bench lasts about 15 minutes)and there is a scene with an Oriental actress at the beginning which has no bearing on the plot at all and the lack of any acting skill by the actress concerned is truly a marvel to behold. There is worst to come;the entirely intrusive and impossible to listen to score destroys the very things you expect from a Gary Daniels movie,namely the action.His two long and protracted fight scenes include some good techniques as you would expect from Gary but unfortunately look like they were filmed by a blind cameraman suffering from Parkinson's disease.In any case they are ruined by that God awful music which even drowns out the fight sound effects and you have to ask yourself if any of the technical team working on BLACK FRIDAY had even so much as seen a movie before let alone worked on one.I have watched many of Gary's movies several times in the past(BLOODMOON,RIOT,RECOIL)but could never envisage watching this catastrophe again.If you can imagine what the worst episode of "Miami Vice" would have been like if performed by the most inept actors and crew money could buy then that gives you some idea of how bad BLACK FRIDAY IS.I have some advice for director Darren Doane and that is..in future Darren,don't!! | 0neg
|
Don't misunderstand me. I liked the movie. <br /><br />At first I was disappointed. I was mostly examining the flaws in the acting , the poverty of dialogues etc. And then, I don't know how, I was enjoying the film very much.<br /><br />The way I see it, Poelvoorde's evolution in cinema is always aiming to get closer and closer to the poor simple guy, struggling to get a sense to his life. In that one we have three. Two are best friends, the third is Gus' wife. I won't spoil the story since I think it deserves to be seen, but they managed to give a true picture of very particular yet totally second-rate lives.<br /><br />Despite the apparent poverty of the situation (except in Gus' dreams), there's a lot going on, many clichés and references to Tarantino's movie making as well. And Van Damme is perfect: a counsellor for a dumb clueless guy who thinks he's the best karateka in the world. I think he's got his place there too.<br /><br />Pretty hard to get a clear opinion on this, there's a lot of mixed messages ... Once again I won't recommend it for people used to mainstream movies.<br /><br />I gave it 8 out of 10 | 1pos
|
This film subject is very familiar to my country and I know many refuges in personal. I must say that Angelina Jolie made a great job in film and really in personal life like ambassador in UNHCR but I think that people in general form their opinion about some crises in general with big influence of media. The true is very often hidden behind some political or financing interests. This film try to touch this topic but I think that it is not enough. It is very sad that in every part of our life politic and high interest play the role, even when some human lives can be lost. Meny of my people lose their homes and Jobs and some of them their love ones and that is worse what can hap-en to person. Wars is ultimate evil of human race. Today in my country live almost one million refuges. I just want to say that nothing are more important than a human life and everyone must think about that.(sorry about my English) | 0neg
|
Three miscreant youths, Gary Grimes, Ron Howard, and Charles Martin Smith find a wounded Lee Marvin on the road and take him to the barn of Gary Grimes father's farm. They patch him up, feed him, Grimes gives him his horse and he makes a getaway. <br /><br />That doesn't sit well with Grimes' father who has lied to a posse about Marvin not being around. He takes off his belt and tans the hide off Grimes back. Grimes runs away then and there and the other two join him.<br /><br />Like a lot of youth back then, when I was young, when this picture was made and today; these kids are bored. But back then there just weren't any diversions. Life was hard on those homestead farms, Grimes' father is a hard man, he had to be. The story of these kids is the story I'm sure of a lot of youth in the west. <br /><br />They take up bank robbing like their new hero Lee Marvin and make a botch of it. They kill a State Senator accidentally and don't even get away with the money. Fleeing to Mexico, they meet up again with Marvin who takes them under his wing now, to show them how to do it right.<br /><br />The rest of the movie is the unfolding of their disillusionment. They've killed a State Senator and they're hot. Lee Marvin does not turn out to be the hero they had in mind. But by his lights, he's operating quite logically.<br /><br />The three young actors convey nicely what it must have been like to grow up on a bleak prairie homestead and to get a chance at what they perceive will be adventure. Lee Marvin strikes the right note in a difficult part. In some ways at first he appears to the kids to be just like his character in Monte Walsh, a rugged individualist who lives by his own code. He has to be that to appeal to the kids in the first place. He tries to make them shuck their boyish illusions about outlawry, but when push comes to shove the kids can't do it. Marvin is not like Liberty Valance in this film, a sadistic bully. But he does what he has to in order to survive as an outlaw.<br /><br />The film is the last appearance of Arthur Hunnicutt, that venerable old character who enlivened any film he was in. His small bit as an aging outlaw is brief, but memorable.<br /><br />The kids fail their apprenticeships, but they and Marvin give the audience some great entertainment. | 1pos
|
This was a very, very early full-length film. According to the video box, it was the first full-length American-made film, but that is debatable--as several films have made that claim and exactly what constitutes "full-length" is pretty vague. Regardless, I have to commend the cast for trying something unique and epic, though in today's light the film is a totally boring mess and only of interest to cinephiles. Instead of the modern notion of story-telling and action, the crew was breaking new ground and made a bizarre film that appears more like a series of vignettes instead of a coherent film. Instead of a moving and evolving narrative like we are used to, the film was made with a real-life traveling acting troop. But, instead of having them act out the story, the film shows inter-title cards that describe what has occurred and the cast pose like they are going to be photographed or just make a few minimal movements or actions until the next card appears to describe an all-new scene. It's almost like looking at a series of stereoscope cards that move just a little and all together tell a very, very dull story. Very static and horrid to watch, it DID try something different and this is an amazingly important film historically--I just would NEVER want to have to watch it again! | 0neg
|
I bought this on DVD at Christmas without having seen it previously. I did the same with "The Grudge" and it was a great experience; my friend and I (23 and 21 at the time) were so scared we had to watch "Finding Nemo" to calm us down. I refused to watch "The Grudge 2" on my own, so waited for the same friend to watch it. Now, two friends (25 and 23 now) have never been less scared in their lives. I've been more scared by toy commercials than this film. It just seemed far too contrived and too similar to the first film. Bits of it were good, but instead of being scared we just said "That was good". This film is a big let down, let's just hope the 3rd one gets the series back on it's feet. | 0neg
|
I thought this movie had an interesting premise to work off of- the enmity between cats and dogs. However, one problem I had with it (besides its general low quality) was the fact that the cast the cats as the criminal buffoons. (Bear with me please - I'm at least half serious). I mean, dogs as the smart ones? Come on. Cats taking over the world is believable, but casting most of them as the not-so-smart, criminal stooges was going a bit far. Cats are smarter and more, hmm, elegant than dogs. Face it, in a showdown between cats and dogs that wasn't purely reliant on mass or strength, cats would own the dogs.<br /><br />Now if they had cast the dogs as the villains of the piece...that would be better. Cats like the position they're in - pampered and very little required of them- why go to the trouble of taking over and running the world when it already serves you? Another thing- dogs are the ones who chase the cats, very rarely the other way around- bit of insecurity or jealousy perhaps? Dogs also often have to actually perform, exercise, do handy things or otherwise. If they would play it as the dogs trying to oust all the freeloading superior cats....that could have been real fun. | 0neg
|
(Spoiler warning: Please don't read this unless you have already seen this movie or don't care about spoilers.)<br /><br />It's an anthology of three stories. In the first one, a ballet dancer is forbidden to dance because she has health problems. But when a famous ballet director (who doesn't know about her health problems) asks her to dance for him because he seeks inspiration in order to improve his latest production, she can't resist the temptation... It's the story of a love that can't be fulfilled. I liked James Mason as the ballet director, and I was impressed by Moira Shearer's dancing, although I'm not generally a great fan of ballet dancing. And I love the music they used for the soundtrack, the 'Rhapsody on a Theme of Paganini' by Sergei Rachmaninoff.<br /><br />Next in sequence there is the story of a teacher (played by Leslie Caron) who hasn't known love yet. It's in the style of a fairy tale. Young Tommy (played by Ricky Nelson), the boy she teaches, becomes an adult for a few hours (through witchcraft). He meets his teacher and they fall in love, but when his spell as an adult is over, their love has to end. But the teacher has changed, and when she later meets another man, she might find lasting love... So it's the story of a love that might be fulfilled. I liked both the story and the actors.<br /><br />The last story makes the sequence complete. It's the story of a love that is fulfilled. I liked Kirk Douglas very, very much; I found him very convincing as Pierre Narval, a disillusioned and retired aerial acrobat. I also liked Pier Angeli; she plays Nina Burkhardt, a woman who is so disillusioned she tries to commit suicide. But she is saved by Pierre, who later asks her to become his partner for his comeback. They are both haunted by memories of their past; Nina thinks she is responsible for the death of her husband, and Pierre probably feels he is responsible for the death of his former partner, although he says it was an accident. Pierre trains Nina. They fall in love, but then there is a very dangerous stunt they have to perform without a safety net...<br /><br />I liked the third story best. The others weren't as good in my opinion, but I have still given ten points because I think that somehow (forgive the worn-out phrase) the whole is more than the sum of its three parts. I think the order in which the stories are told is well chosen for a sentimental love movie.<br /><br />I think if you like the genre, this movie is well worth a look. | 1pos
|
I don't know what it was, maybe it was going through some of his own trials and tribulations (addiction and rehab), but George Carlin seems to be, well, different this time around. In a way I should've expected this- I remember reading a couple of years back when he was planning the special that it would be more based around language (if nothing else he is the single greatest linguist in the history of post-modern stand-up), and on that level the special isn't a disappointment. There are three things, however, that make the film not necessarily bad or over-wrought, but just, well, different, like a musician or band we all know through and through trying a little something new. This time, with Life is Worth Losing, there is a lot more philosophy in some ways, and also a little bit of loss in some of the timing for a few good laughs.<br /><br />The first thing is that his delivery is a little different; usually it'll seem like he'll go for his three topics (the little things in life 'Seinfeld' style, words and expressions, and the "big" world), but much of the special this time is with a delivery that doesn't (at least some of the time, maybe not for the most part maybe so) have that much of the same strange skepticism. The second thing is that he changes the structure around one base topic, suicide, and one wonders if this will be for the entire length or if there will be a switch to another topic or not. There's variations on the theme, sometimes it spreads out into the gripes of America, and it's always fascinating, but maybe not as hilarious as one might expect (sometimes it's more like ironic musings than full-our jokes). The third thing is that at times he is so into giving a lyrical, sometimes even poetic kind of rhythm to his bits and terms in his linguist way (the first five minutes of the special a great warm-up, is a keeper) that might throw people off. In a way he is even angrier than he was in what I think is one of his very best specials, You Are All Diseased, because this time his anger is loaded at present day subjects which are, quite frankly, infuriating.<br /><br />As some might come to think, I might be saying all this to shadow over thinking that the special just wasn't as funny as his best stuff. It's not necessarily that. At times I was in the same practically non-stop laughs at a few minutes a clip. As a Carlin fan all these rants that end up not leading to the same kinds of routines and such is in a way refreshing even as it is a little odd. At times I almost wondered if he was returning to a little of the spirit of his act back in the 70's mixed with his now usual brand of old-man brilliant wit and observance of all things in the world. He even seems to be going past just plain old cynicism. There is so much truth in the special at times it's kind of staggering. And to see that in such abundance and forming out into such tangents reminds me why I keep coming back to his best stuff. I'm just not sure after seeing this right off the bat that it's him at his total best, it's almost as if he's in a transition now into a totally new part of his career. Still, it's worth it to hear some of his classic takes of end of the world scenarios, the 'fat' situation in the US, and things involving suicide TV. And those last fifteen minutes are very poignant. | 1pos
|
Pitched as 'the movie the oil companies don't want you to see' but instead proving to be the movie nobody wanted to see, The Formula is a classic example of how blockbuster novels so often turn into mundane films. It has a solid cast, a solid script, solid production values everything, in fact, but a reason to watch it. It's one of those lethargic thrillers where cardboard characters constantly talk to each other about things that happened offscreen and which the film would have been far better showing us as George C. Scott's LA cop uncovers a conspiracy involving a Nazi formula for synthetic fuel that Marlon Brando's eccentric oilman wants kept under lock and key so he can artificially inflate the price of oil. The teaming of Oscar's two most famous refusniks sadly provides no sparks indeed, there seemed to be more drama offscreen between director John G. Avildsen and writer/producer Steve Shagan over the re-editing of the film, resulting in a compromise cut that probably satisfied no-one (it's a genuine surprise to find them jovially sharing the audio commentary on Warners' new DVD). Not that it seems that anyone else was so passionate about the film: there's no shortage of class talent here (John Gielgud and Beatrice Straight also turn up), but it's clear that the paycheck is of more interest to them than the script and they're just slumming it. Not a terrible movie, just a rather flat, uneventful and predictable one. | 0neg
|
Let me first say that I like "The Little Princess". I adore both the 1939 and 1995 versions, but this one was just too long. They could have cut out much of it and still been faithful to the book. Nothing much seemed to happen, it was so long! Most, but not every actor was convincing (Nigel Havers and Amelia Shankley were excellent). Shirley Temple, Liesel Matthews and Amelia Shankley (this version) are all convincing as the kind-hearted but strong-willed Sara, which was exactly what Sara was. Forget the separate nuances, that Shirley Temple was too "cute" or snotty (she was never that). No movie has to be "completely" faithful to its book. But if you feel it has to be, you'll be disappointed more often than satisfied, and that's unnecessary. But too much length is bad for any movie. The film was well-executed, and the sets were realistic but mostly unattractive. I would have given it a much higher rating if it wasn't so long. 4/10 | 0neg
|
I was just happy to see Dourif in the role of good guy for once. The story itself was dark and seedy, almost. The mad painter....the strippers....yeah, kind of a turn off if you want a half decent story-line. But, the paintings were very nice and there was a definite dark intensity to the painting, to the painter and even Dourif, himself. It proves that he can pull off a lead role, and it is too bad that even after this movie's release fourteen years ago, he is still just moving through movies as part of a film's additional cast. He deserves so much more as an actor. People apparently do not see his talent the way most of his fans do. Vive la Brad!!! | 1pos
|
This movie is one of those many movies that sounds much better than it actually is. The "death-ray by television broadcast" plot device was actually quite minor in this otherwise sub-par 'whodunit' quickie from poverty row. Overall a really poor example as I have seen much better from poverty row.<br /><br />Bela Lugosi's role really isn't very interesting and he is much better when playing more bizarre characters (Murder Legendre - White Zombie, Dracula, Dr. Carruthers - The Devil Bat). | 0neg
|
The earliest sounds films tend to be weak, awkward, and more interesting for historical reasons other than entertaining. This is a classic example. "Feet first" strikes me as quite weak, and Harold Lloyd is one of my all time favorites.<br /><br />Here, our man is a shoe salesman who tries to move up in his business. The humor and gags drag like lead, and if you have this on DVD you will skip a number of scenes trying to get through it. There is one mildly amusing moment where HL practices public speaking pounding his fists and waving his hands with a ridiculously pompous pontification "If it weren't for shoes, we'd all be---BAREFOOT!" But things don't get really funny or interesting until the skyscraper-climbing scene reminiscent of SAFETY LAST. That's well done. As for Willie "Sleep & Eat" Best as the hapless janitor trying to help Harold during his predicament, his character was WAY too stupid (such as the "hose scene") and it is horrible to hear the beloved Lloyd refer to this African-American comic as "Charcoal," (especially when one considers that Lloyd is usually kind and polite to Black and other nonwhite characters in his films). Admittedly, the fact that Lloyd and Best become equally scared at the sight of the gorilla (as was the case with Lloyd, Sunshine Sammy Morrison, and the supposed ghosts in "Haunted Spooks") takes SOME of the edge off the stereotype.<br /><br />In either case, this is only for hardcore Harold completists. Casual fans will want to stick to GRANDMA'S BOY, SAFETY LAST, WHY WORRY, etc. | 0neg
|
You're not lucky if you watch this film. Incredibly stupid comedy really stars Edward Tsang (in his stupid mode)and Anita Mui.It has something to do with an accident giving one of two brothers the ability to go into peoples dreams. Somehow Chow Yun Fat figures into the mess as a cop investigating a murder that he really committed and wants to keep covered up. Its awful, even by Hong Kong low grade humor standards with Tsang's mugging bringing everything down lower than it all ready is. Think sub low rent (homeless?) Lou Costello. Trust me you're better off not seeing Tsang dressed as a robot in the hopes of seeing girls naked. Avid this film | 0neg
|
...and I saw both feardotcom and without a paddle in theaters.<br /><br />and i've watched the films of ed wood. and sat through many a roger corman classic. and generally rented every bad movie in the bowels of the video store. <br /><br />this is the single most painfully horrible movie i've ever seen. the only other thing i've watched in recent memory that was even close to this bad was six string samurai (I was so disappointed in that one). <br /><br />But, on the upside, you can use it as a torture device to annoy your friends. There's nothing like subjecting them to bad acting, a white guy masquerading as an "albino" black man, and just generally terrible movie-making. <br /><br />I first saw this film when I was 17. I'm now 23, and have yet to find anything to top it. The one and only reason I'm giving this two stars is because I like to torture people with it from time to time. Try it back to back with the Star Wars Holiday Special to rid your house of unwanted guests. | 0neg
|
What a plot. What nice parents. What a quickie. Sex to die for. Hum! This film started off confusing enough. She felt she had killed her parents so she sees the ghosts of them. Would they have done this? The parents I mean. They loved their daughter and didn't blame her for anything. So her guilt was her own and she runs from the cemetery leaving her car behind. Sees her dead parents in the house and runs out of the house and into her car. Where did that come from? She drives from home miles and miles (how interesting-Not!) Then she picks up a stranger and chats and forgets to drop him off and gives him a hug. He was a Hitch-hiker when do hugs come into it. The then poor guy (Oh how things change) had to walk home after all. Oh and the rain that fell just in front of them without them getting wet (someone with a watering can in front of the camera?). So the story develops. This is deadsville with more corpses than you can poke a stick at. Someone said that they reminded them of the '70's but then for me the whole film did. Actually the film got a wee bit better and I did stay with it until the end. I guessed the dead bits (it wasn't hard) and I liked the idea of the sheriff being supportive (young though. And I like the idea of the drowned town and the death/hauntings. Look I was generous giving this 3 but it did have some endearing qualities. Naff lines like, killing people. Marvelous! The little girl was quite creepy on her own. And why do all dead children of the female persuasion look like her? I loved the dead getting up in the town hall. The deaths where interesting, but never really made clear. One more thing. When she drove away to go home the scene was exactly the same as the one when she was travelling in the opposite direction. Didn't they think we would notice? Watch this if you want and if you don't expect much you will not be disappointed but be warned it is z grade horror Cheers Furdion | 0neg
|
One commentator below remarked that if you wanted to see every SF movie ever made, sit through this once and never see it again.<br /><br />Well, my objectives were a little less grandiose, but when I got a chance to see this on TCM, I was excited that I would be able to view this, and mark one movie off the IL'IMDb list.<br /><br />Then the movie came on. At first I thought that all the talk and set up would shortly be followed by the blast off. I waited through scene after incomprehensible scene, as cannons are fired, arms dealers jibe, and former Pres. Ulysses S. Grant shows up.I don't mind talky sf pictures when the talk means something (The Day the Earth Stood Still is great), but this is just drivel. By the time the rocket is launch I can't even say whats going on.<br /><br />Once finally in space, the audience is subject to an excruciatingly predictable, and poorly rendered, make-plot about one of the passengers sabotaging the rocket, a pretty girl stowaway and the usual stuff that was done much better in "The Woman in the Moon" or "Rocketship X-M"<br /><br />But what really is the nail in the coffin in this is the romance between the stowaway and the young, blond pilot. It is so obviously contrived, with dialog seemingly taken directly out of mainstream romance movies of that day, that one finds himself yelling WTF?! out loud.<br /><br />An example "Oh, Whatsyourname, all I know is that when the rocket does explode, please hold me. I want to die in your arms" Might have worked for the complete lack of chemistry between actors.<br /><br />The movies one saving grace is its FX. Big budget, color, space movies from this period are actually quite rare, and this is a chance to see some fair eye candy from a relatively early date.<br /><br />Oh, and another quote (Father to girl, after discussing their inevitable death on the rocket) "Well all that matters right now is that you have cooked us a good meal" | 0neg
|
*may contain spoilers* <br /><br />I vaguely remember watching Magnum as a child and liking it then.<br /><br />Recently I bought all four available season sets and fell in love with it all over again. What is there not to like? The cast gel together so well Larry Manneti (Orville "rick" wright) is brilliant. Roger E Mosley is TC and John Hillerman is Higgins. Higgins always pretends to be irritated to death by Our Thomas but he does care (honestly) The stories are engaging and I just love tom Sellecks narration. I like the dark overtones of the fact that these Vietnam Vets are still coming to terms with their experiences.<br /><br />Favourite episode? the season 4 opener "Home from the sea " Magnum is thrown off his surf ski in an accident and forced to endure hours in the water. Cue heartbreaking childhood flashbacks. Will Higgins, TC and Rick get to him in time?. speaking of which all three are getting a funny feeling that something has happened to Magnum.How long can a person tread water for? <br /><br />"I've got to do this for Dad"<br /><br />This show had action, Tragedy, Romance, one hunky guy, beautiful scenery,a great cast , humour and a lot of touching moments. One of my favourite shows ever. | 1pos
|
ANyone who thinks RObert ALtman is a brilliant director should be tied down and forced to watch this piece of garbage! The original story of "O.C. and Stiggs" appeared in National Lampoon, and it was both uproariously funny AND outrageously offensive to both genders, ALL races, and ALL sexual preferences. Robert Altman turned a hilarious story into a tame, lame, wimpy, boring movie with no laughs and NO guts. | 0neg
|
I have to admit, this film reminded me of how drab and ugly styles were in 1980, yechh! From that opener, you can tell this film is pretty-dated, but it has a few charms that are worth exploring: namely, an outrageous-script by Margheriti and Dardano Sacchetti that would NEVER get green-lighted today by any studio. Yes, this is another one of Quentin Tarantino's favorites, and it isn't hard to see why. It's just an insane genre-explosion that owes a lot to the Italian "cannibal" genre, and a good-bite of George Romero's "Dawn of the Dead". You might add Jacopeti and Prosperi's "Mondo Documentaries" too, because I think they really opened this particular door. "Zombie" (the Italian title for DOTD) was a hit in Italy in 1979, thanks to the Argento's promotional-campaign and better-editing (I know, a sacrilege, but I have always preferred the Argento-cut, it's more fun!). With that came a wave of imitators, most-notably in Lucio Fulci's "Zombi (USA)/Zombie 2 (Italy & other " and "City of the Living Dead". The worst were the copies by Bruno Mattei, but that's another-story.<br /><br />1980: a drab, miserable year, but a time when the culture was still pretty active and vibrant. Corporate-domination of film and most other media hadn't been-consummated yet, so there were still genuine indie films, and it was a sad thing to watch all this die as a kid. This is really why horror wasn't that good in North America for some-time, and it's still trying to recover (a wait-and-see). The Vietnam war had only been over for five-years when Cannibal Apocalypse was released, so the wounds were still ripe. That's what makes this film so gutsy--pun-intended--and even depressing. At one-point during the production, star John Saxon was so-depressed by having signed-on to such a bleak movie that he contemplated-suicide. Now, how many films can say that? It just wasn't a good-time in America, though in-retrospect, life was better than it is today (2006), which should scare most young-people. <br /><br />There were more outlets for frustration and rage in 1980, and horror went-to-bat, since catharsis is one of its best-features. You have to release those fears and frustrations, and that's what horror is for many people. Horror is healthy people, we know this! Cannibal Apocalypse works-well in this area, so it has some very good-points to it. We should remember that this movie was made at a time when the draft still-existed. The draft is definitely coming-back, you can bet-on-it. Still not scared? John Saxon stars as Lt. Norman Hopper, who leads a rescue-party into a Vietcong camp to recapture some of his own troops. A battle-ensues, and a Vietcong-woman (where were the black-pajamas?!) is torched with a flamethrower, and falls into the pit she and her compatriots have been holding Hopper's men in. All this seems like a normal, low-budget war movie that was shot in Georgia, until...the starving-G.I.s begin EATING-HER. OK, C-rations and Halliburton's catering are pretty- bad, but Jesus Christ. Somehow--because the writers don't tell us how--the soldiers have become infected with a rabies-like virus that makes them cannibalistic. Cut-to 1980: one of Hopper's soldiers is released from a veteran's hospital, disrupting his already strained-life, and wreaking-havoc on American society (or at least Atlanta)! Hopper has already been fighting his cannibalistic-impulses (and winning), but the return of PFC Bukowski (done with charm by the legendary John Morghen) has brought-back flashbacks and memories of Vietnam he thought he'd forgotten. In an early-scene, Hopper bites a flirty neighborhood-girl, and he begins to succumb to the cannibalistic disease.<br /><br />And this is what is so great about Cannibal Apocalypse--it challenges your loyalties to the characters, and coaxes you into siding with a band of cannibals, led by none-other than JOHN SAXON!! For this reason, and the gore, I think this is why the film became so infamous and censored. Yet, these are the things that make is as good as it is! In many areas, it was censored of heavily-edited. Until the release of the 2002 DVD (Margheriti died in November of 2002), Americans have never seen this film in its entirety. Saxon has said he has never seen it, and I doubt he ever will. Who can blame him? Yet, he gives an incredible-performance as Norman Hopper, even one of his best in his entire-career outside of Enter the Dragon. Granted, it's just another in a long-line of exploitation films that Mr. Saxon acted in, but it's a great role that he did justice to. Of course, his own personal-misery didn't hurt either. But, Antonio Margheriti's (Castle of Blood, The Virgin of Nuremberg) direction is excellent, and he didn't have much to work-with here. Sacchetti's theme of a violent-cannibalism spreading by bites is a solid-move, however. It's very primal and hits the audience on a subconscious-level, even though it owes a debt to Romero. It isn't as-developed as it should have been, but this was another rush-production.<br /><br />So, as an anti-war film--not-so-good, the theme gets lost in the action and gore. But that's OK, it's a film that leaves people speechless, and that's what a decent horror-film is about, too. From "Cannibal Holocaust", to Dawn of the Dead, this is a hybrid-film that is unique to the time that made it. But, it is so audacious, so brazen, that it must be seen. It lags in the middle-section--pun-intended--but really picks-up towards the climax, and reminds us that movies about "the infected" are not new. I would even credit Cronenberg's "Rabid" (1977) as being first on this one, and a definite-influence on this film. There was something in the air then, and it seems to have returned. Call it war, chaos, genocide, social-unrest--but it's back. Best-move: just p*ss-on-it, you remember. No-wonder Morghen's character was named-after the American poet Charles Bukowski! If America is good at anything, it is slang. | 1pos
|
It's an agreeable surprise to find Charley Grapewin billed as the star of this fun and thrill-filled old dark house escapade. While it's possible to pick holes in the ingenious plot, the dialogue, the direction and even the cinematography, you can't argue with the central idea, the pacing, the superior production values (for a Poverty Row effort) or the obvious enthusiasm of players and technicians to make a movie that's always most enjoyable to watch and listen to, despite the obvious limitations of a "B" budget offering, set within the none-too-lavishly appointed confines of the old Mack Sennett Studio in North Hollywood. All things considered, Mac D'Agostino's sets are delightfully eye-catching. I love the trophy room!<br /><br />The picture starts off most promisingly on the right foot with an ingenious credits sequence improvised and directed by Joseph H. Lewis. The movie then quickly gets down to familiar but nonetheless pleasing business as the camera focuses on Charley Grapewin, who quickly and cleverly explains to his assembled relatives what nice round figures each will realize from his $6 million will, provided of course that his long-lost grand-daughter doesn't turn up before the clock strikes twelve. Needless to say, she doesin the person of lovely Evalyn Knappor does she? <br /><br />As expected, the mystery and horror elements (the phantom himself or herself isn't all that frightening, but there's a sequence in the trophy room that's bound to raise goose bumps) jostle for attention with some smart repartee and even a bit of knockabout. But even that is well done! | 1pos
|
Awful Truth is anything but awful<br /><br />In 1937 Cary Grant was already a Hollywood Giant. a dynamic actor and a genuine Star. But in the `Awful Truth,' Irene Dunn took him to school. Yes, Mr. Grant was as charismatic as usual, delivering his lines marvelously, perfect in comedic timing, and demonstrating great physical humor. Throughout most of the movie, Grant and Dunne sparred on relatively equal terms, each earning a fair share of the proliferus laughter generated by their antics. However, at the last hearty chuckle, it was clear that Dunne had been toying with Grant throughout. No, this is not a spoiler and has nothing to do with the storyline, but rather an evaluation of their performances. Despite the magnificence of his, her's was better.<br /><br />Irene Dunne was simply phenomenal, deserving her nomination for `Best Actress.' She was funny, charming, exuberant, conniving, manipulative, and intriguing. The movie was slow to find it's footing and much time was wasted as Grant and Dunn, in the slower portions, are not on camera together and thus unable to `duel.' But as the plot unfolds the momentum builds to a final crescendo and the mutual magic of these fine comedic artists delivers cascade upon cascade of laughter.<br /><br />The director Leo McCarey, earning his Best Director Oscar, toyed with both the relatively new `Hayes Code' and the censors, implying with sensitivity and subtlety, a physical aspect of love and infatuation that was unnecessarily suppressed in movies for decades. The witty `doublespeak' dialog at the end was fascinating as each of these protagonists explained the situation in self-contradictory fashions and yet their meanings were unmistakable. Yes, there is a predictable plot but the witty words and scrappy schemes are pleasant surprises. | 1pos
|
When I saw this movie at the store, i expected it to be half decent, but it turned out to be the worst movie I have ever seen in my life. The storyline was as murky as it could get, characters seemed to just pop up out of nowhere and be put into the plot. There were dozens of people who never even had names, lines, or any significance.<br /><br />The breasts were sub-par and the acting, horrible. The gunshots sounded like cap guns, and we never got to see a mere glimpse of Amber's hot bod. This may seem superficial but as it applies to this movie it is a viable point.<br /><br />The only redeeming quality about this movie is the character Rick, who like many of the other characters just showed up out of nowhere. Rick was the most bad ass character in the whole film, he took charge of the situation and forged a path to victory. Too bad he was killed, because the writers (even though none are credited... surprise surprise) cannot think up a good story.<br /><br />The other best part of this movie was the EXPLODING ZOMBIE LEG. Not only did Derek get that shotgun inexplicably, but apparently the zombie whose leg Derek shot wasn't actually a zombie, but a cyborg (which explains the sparks).<br /><br />I feel like I need to take a shower, wash my eyes with bleach, and watch a good movie after watching this despicable attempt at anything coherent.<br /><br />This movie was written by four people who wanted this movie to be good. | 0neg
|
I think it was the obvious title choice that didn't make this film a block buster. Word of mouth can only go so far. It is a romantic comedy that all ages can relate to. By no means is this a "chick flick" movie though. The movie has a great cast from Ryan Reynolds (Waiting) to Alyssa Milano (Charmed). The movie characters all play significant roles that tie into the theme- "Why would you want to Buy the Cow when you can get the milk for free?" It's a hilarious adventure of a film about dating and the ultimate search for your "soul mate" or the "one". It is the perfect date movie. I found it to be more than hilarious, with actor/comedian Ryan Reynolds stealing the show.<br /><br />For all the Ryan Reynolds fans out there this is hands down the funniest performance of his career. This feel good movie will appeal to all, especially to those romantic single gals and guy's out there. This movie will leave you feeling high on life with a refreshing feeling of hope.<br /><br />This is a definite must see! Excellent! | 1pos
|
This has more style than most of Hammer efforts. For that reason I'm giving it a high rating. Its based on the story Carmilla by Sheridan Le Fanu. As such it has a stronger narrative than the late Dracula films where the screen plays were not based on any novels. <br /><br />The story is about the resurrection of a long dead vampire girl by her vampiring relatives. For some unclear reason they feel she needs schooling and enrol her at an exclusive finishing school. Socially responsible these vampires. <br /><br />Part of the advantage for them is that it provides a supply of good looking women to appear for their scholastic vamp to suck on. This is only used a couple of times. Into this a stranger wanders along and is immediately given a teaching job without any checks as we are meant to have now days. He falls in love with Yutte Stensgaard's bloodsucker immediately. He is really inappropriate for a teaching post. What would he be like if he was there for 5 years?<br /><br />I knew of this film but hadn't got round to it as part of the Hammer canon until I read a review of Le Fanu by the writer and actor Stephen Armourae. On a couple of vampire websites also appeared a portrait of Yutte Stensgaard by him taken from the film. Yutte was a very good looking actress and I have recently seen an excerpt of a game show presented by Bob Monkhouse where she was assistant. Her performance was as wooden then as in this though she made a couple of good films later.<br /><br />A note on this film is that Peter Cushing was intended to play the Ralph Bates role but had to pull out due to ill health. This is to the film's credit. It would have been a shame to see Cushing die and the late great Ralph Bates does a good turn in a scene of desperation and appropriately enough lust. | 1pos
|
Director Susan Lacey made this film for the Public Broadcasting Corporation's American Masters series. I saw it tonight at the Jacob Burns Film Center in the Westchester (N.Y.) County village of Pleasantville. The director engaged in a spirited conversation with the audience after this fine documentary was shown.<br /><br />I've always been a fervent Judy Garland fan. She was one of the most talented actresses and singers ever produced in this country. I have seen all of her films, I own some on VHS or DVD, and I have a number of CDs of her singing. Her legendary Carnegie Hall concert is the highlight of my collection of this "take no prisoners" stage giant.<br /><br />"Judy Garland - By Myself" is aptly titled. As a child she was more or less separated from any normal life by mogul Louis B. Mayer and made a contract slave to the studio system, in this case the property of MGM. I'm not stretching the analogy to indentured servitude at all. As shown here with stills, film clips and spoken narration she was put into an inhuman pressure cooker where every last bit of pressure was exerted and all possible profit was extracted by a heartless machine.<br /><br />As a teenager scoring one success after another she was given pep pills to make her work harder and longer followed by sleeping pills so she could get some rest before the cycle repeated itself the next day. Any studio trying that with a kid today better have a legion of very good criminal defense lawyers.<br /><br />As shown in this penetrating biography, Judy Garland was recognized for extraordinary ability almost from the get-go with, of course, "The Wizard of Oz" propelling her to world acclaim.<br /><br />In the process she slowly began to lose her sense of self, succumbing to studio entreaties (and when that failed, threats did the job). She became involved in one doomed relationship with a man after another disappointing one, a lifetime pattern. Sickening and chilling is the account of how both Mayer AND Judy's mother virtually forced her to abort her first pregnancy because it was the "wrong" time for her to have a child.<br /><br />There are many clips of her powerful acting and incredible singing in this almost two-hour film. While sympathetic to her travails, Ms. Lacey deserves credit for showing the price she paid, a price that ended in her death at age 47 from the very drugs she depended on for decades to get her through an up and down career.<br /><br />Until the fatal end Judy Garland wasn't simply a survivor, she was a hugely talented and ambitious woman who, like water, carved out a new course when an earlier one was blocked. To her fans she seemed irrepressible and the film makes the point that the people who made up her audience were her principal motivator. She's quoted as saying she knew she always wanted to please audiences and fans. It's truly tragic that so many in show business who profited from her incomparable talent didn't have the decency to want to please her. And, probably, save her life.<br /><br />A terrific addition to one of PBS's best series.<br /><br />10/10 | 1pos
|
As a popcorn guzzling action lover, I found this film to be pretty bad. Sure, Van Damne may not be the greatest of all the action movie heroes, but he does have his moments (Hard Target, TimeCop, Sudden Death, Universal Soldier). But this film was just a waste. It was a slow paced, pretty boring film. The action of the film consists of two fight scenes, neither of which are any good. This is Van Damne's worst film, and one of the worst action films I have ever seen. | 0neg
|
This movie is a powerful portrayal of gay life and homophobia in small-town America, in this case Homer, Connecticut. Narrated through all three vignettes by Eric Stoltz's character, the character is 6 or so in "1954" when a young woman (Brittany Murphy) returns from the Navy with a Section 8 discharge for "deviant sexual behavior". In "1974", Stoltz is a fresh-from-Vietnam veteran tending grounds at the town war memorial at a time when the high school's star swimmer (Johnathan Taylor Thomas) wants to come out to his French teacher (Stephen Weber). In the last vignette, Stoltz's groundskeeper is greying, and some in the town (mostly veterans and church-goers) are protesting the marriage of two gay men, one of whom has wedding-day jitters and a father (Ed Asner) who helped organize and mobilize the protest. | 1pos
|
This movie is so cheesy, it is the funniest thing I have ever seen! My friends and I all died laughing through the whole movie. You really must see this movie, if only to see how being really bad can actually be a very good thing! | 1pos
|
Saturday night, time to catch a DVD. We were pretty much settled on "Walk The Line" until we saw this. It had Tom Green, it looked like a "comedy" so we went this way. I obviously knew "Walk The Line" was slightly more acclaimed, but I was in the mood for something light and easy.<br /><br />"Bob the Butler" is all about Bob (Green), a terrible employee who's tried a stack of jobs with little success. He comes across an ad for a butler course and decides to give it a go. While doing the course he receives a request to babysit (one of his old jobs) and gives it a go. He does well so the mum decides to hire him as the butler. From here we can work out what's going to happen and the plot plays out exactly as you'd expect.<br /><br />Terrible movie, even for the genre. An all over the place, poorly laid out script with Green way out of his comfort zone. It was sad watching him play this role. The kids were OK but that was about it. Don't waste your time. | 0neg
|
And just to make sure you get it right, i'll repeat myself: Watch the french original! It's so much better, starting from the cast (Queen Latifah is so miscast, it hurts), straight to the story/humor (it's just not right)! <br /><br />The best scene (to at least have one good comment about the title) is a scene involving Jennifer Esposito and Gisele Bündchen, which had a sort of "tension" to it, that was funny and sexy at the same time! Funnily (or maybe not so funny) enough, with the cast here, you'd be excused to think that it would be more often like that. But it's neither funny nor sexy ... and I'm not talking at the same time, at all! Except the one scene ... but that doesn't save the movie, which just is too long and has nothing going for it! It's a shame, because Jimmy Fallon can be funny, but here he's just annoying! | 0neg
|
Before i saw the movie i read some comments about it... stating it's condemned by several groups of people in Bosnia. I totally understand why, without spoiling anything, the overall message of the movie is shocking. Not only it gives a statement for the gay people in Bosnia, but also one for the whole population.<br /><br />This movie is not for a broader range of people. In fact.. you will need to respect the way it is told in order to like it. But if you do, then it's genius......<br /><br />And look for some nice metaphors which are a honor to Sergio Leone.<br /><br />This movie is available on DVD in Bosnia and other Balkan countries, so if you are in that region you know you can find it. | 1pos
|
This movie was a little bit better than i thought it would be. Which isn't saying much as the Scifi Channel has a history of showing some real sulfurous stinkers.<br /><br />But volcanoes are one of my most favorite movie genres, and wild dead horses couldn't drag me away from watching one i haven't seen yet. And i do believe i've seen just about all of them. Or at least those that i have been currently aware of.<br /><br />As this was a Scifi Channel movie showing, i wasn't really expecting an outstanding movie, and in that, i wasn't disappointed. The screenplay seemed awfully, awfully similar in some places to a certain volcano movie that took place on the US west coast, on Wilshire Blvd. Apparently, some idea "borrowing" went on...<br /><br />I was pleased to see Mike Ironsides still in the movie biz. Mike has been in good movies and in bad movies, and sometimes in the bad movies, he was the only reason to bother watching it. His character here is pretty amusing in its irresponsible ego mania and Mike plays it pretty well. The good doctor is not so good and maybe more than a little bit teensy-weensy frothing-at-the-mouth bat doodoo crazy. Ironsides' performance of the raving wacko got me snickering. I think he could have thrown in a few more drops of rabid drool for fun, but still, it was acceptable for a demented scientist role.<br /><br />A note to film makers: a shouldercam is only to be used when using anything else wouldn't be practical or for trying to give a quick and temporary intimate "you are there" feeling. Wa-a-ay too much use of shouldercam here when a tripod-mounted one should have been used instead. Sometimes the too-much jiggly camera work made me start feeling seasick.<br /><br />This movie did have one of my pet movie peeves. The characters were wasting precious moments futzing around when moments were too precious to waste. Apparently thrown in for "dramatic impact" when in real life, you know the characters would be hopped up on adrenalin and moving their butts like greased lightning.<br /><br />Is this movie actually worth watching? Well, if you're a volcano movie aficionado like i am, you KNOW you're going to watch it anyway no matter how much it reeks of hydrogen sulphide. This movie is more dumb than bad, but it will be essential to have your Dramamine ready in case of seasickness caused by the jiggly camera work. | 0neg
|
My mother bought this for Halloween at the Dollar Store for something fun to watch. Truly a bad movie. Watch for the microphone dropping into the frame from above near the pool. There is the typical nudity tease but there is none. In that respect it is safe for kids. (SPOILER ALERT) The death scenes are great fun though. Our favorites were the electrocution and the strangulation. The faces were so great we watched it over and over. Great for a laugh! Also, is that Starsky and Hutch? If you see it for a dollar and want some laughs, get it, otherwise pass. | 1pos
|
Cannibal Apocalypse is an important Italian horror film as it marks the successful fusion of the two most successful Italian sub-genres; zombies and cannibals. The plot follows a vicious virus brought back to America by three soldiers returning from Vietnam; only it's not your usual virus. Instead of turning it's victims into mindless zombies; it leaves the afflicted aware of their situation, albeit with a hunger for human flesh. Cannibal Apocalypse isn't the movie that you would expect it to be. Even though it's been cut and banned many times, the gore isn't all that nasty, or frequent; with only a few sequences really hitting the 'disgusting' mark. The film is much more intelligent than the usual cannibal nonsense, as it explores themes such as Vietnam veterans returning into society, and turns the tables on Dawn of the Dead's social commentary. It analyses it's points with a sly grin on it's face, however, and it's clear that none of the points are being made with any real conviction; but Antonio Margheriti has shown with previous movies (Dance Macabre, The Virgin of Nuremberg) that he's too clever for merely making a movie about cannibals - and that's the main reason why Cannibal Apocalypse offers more.<br /><br />The film benefits massively from the presence of John Saxon. This hardworking and criminally underrated actor leads the film with relish, and adds massively to the final spectacle; even if the man himself refuses to see this film. He is joined by cult actor Giovanni Lombardo Radice, who has worked with many of the great Italian directors, including the likes of Lucio Fulci, Umberto Lenzi and Michele Soavi. The plotting of the film is well paced, and despite a few lapses; is generally exciting throughout. Tributes to Dawn of the Dead, along with Fulci's Zombi 2 are rampant throughout; the best, of which being a sequence inside a flea market - good stuff! Margheriti's direction is as assured, as you would expect, and even if he's not quite an Argento or Bava; he's definitely among the elite of the lesser-known Italian directors. The fact that this movie is mostly set in a city sets it apart from most of the rest of the cannibal films, which tend to take place in the jungle. On the whole, this certainly isn't one of the best movies ever made; but it's a lot of fun, and won't disappoint fans of Italian horror. Recommended. | 1pos
|
Historically wrong, but the plot is great. Even if the historical facts are wrong the movie is quite good. The movie tells the story of Snapphanarna in Skåne (the southest "state" of Sweden") and the war between Sweden and Denmark during the 17 th century when Skåne became a part of Sweden instead of Denmark. Snapphanarna was a "movement" amongst the citizens of Skåne that were against the swedes overtaking their land and on occasion forcing them to swear their oath to the Swedish king instead of the danish. Party brutal scenes, but probably not the way things happened back during the 17 th century.<br /><br />The word Snapphane was an insult word, snappa in English snatch, and was used as a word of abuse. There were different categories of Snapphanar, normally we count three different, highwaymen, free shooters working for the danish army and many of these were thieves and robbers. | 1pos
|
This was a real chore to watch. I'm not exaggerating when I say that at least thirty minutes can be cut off this clunker without missing any plot lines whatsoever. <br /><br />May Britt plays Ingrid, the most unlikeable main character in movie history. Not only is she the coldest fish on earth but she's also a fierce man-hater. The small town she lives in has been plagued with murders committed by a scissor wielding madman. This makes Ingrid even more unbearable to be around as every breathing man she comes into contact with is automatically trying to rape her. Number one on her list is the town rowdy Frankie who also works as the butcher in the local market when he's not having a very inappropriate relationship with the sheriff's seventeen year old daughter. This would be fine had the man playing Frankie not appear to be in his late thirties at least. What's more absurd is that Ingrid constantly refers to him as "that boy". <br /><br />Ingrid lives alone (no surprise there) on a farm but is helped on occasion by her Uncle Carl played by B-movie king Cameron Mitchell. Did I mention that she also has hallucinations too? Usually the incoherent flashbacks come over her every few seconds. Rubbing a goat, flashback, feeling a bed sheet, flashback, someone closes a door, flashback. Ingrid comes upon a corpse left on her property and that pushes her off the mental edge she was teetering on to begin with. The ending is quite bizarre as Ingrid's fate as well as the relationship between her uncle and her mother are slapped across you face like a dead salmon.<br /><br />I couldn't care less what happened to Ingrid because her performance was as dead as the person she portrays. We are lead to believe that she was raised in this small California coastal town yet her thick accent begs to differ. This is explained near the end as the time she spent at "a European school up the coast". What? Did they suck the life force from her too? Let's hope Werewolf in a Girl's Dormitory is better. | 0neg
|
The Peoples Court is definitely the best of the TV court shows. Just to clarify a point, the Peoples Court started in 1981 with Judge Joseph Wapner, not with Ed Koch. The reason why this show is the best, is because this show is mostly about the law, not the theatrics of the Judge. In most of the other TV courtroom shows, the judge humiliates the litigants and the decisions are not based on law but based on the entertainment value of the decision. Not only is Marilyn Milian fair, but she treats the litigants with respect. She also explains in full detail why the judgement is made and also explains what type of paperwork and actions should have taken place and accompanied them. She will at times show her wit with the litigants, but without humiliating them. | 1pos
|
I look at a lot of DVDs. This one is Katt's first and it's better than all the rest. The documentary at the beginning sets it up. We've had enough of haters and it says so. We've had enough of hurting ourselves for haters and it says so. And it's done without hating back. I like that. This is also Katt's original material. Unlike some of his other specials, this DVD is over an hour of non-stop comedy and funny! He's real natural. Not all that gimmicky stuff he does in his later shows. He does talk about the perm. He does talk about being a pimp. But it takes a backseat to his comedy. That's the difference. There's comedy in this show. It's thumbs up, 10 points and you know it from you know it. | 1pos
|
Tales of Manhattan had a tuxedo. The Dress has a dress. There the similarity ends. What follows if a very smart, often disturbing parade of lives of people who happen to come in contact with a particularly hideous dress. It arouses unexpected, overwhelming lust in some, nothing in others, but it's a sure bet that if you have the dress you're in for something strange and probably not very pleasant.<br /><br />The intriguing threads that bind this tapestry of frustrated longing together are a failed textile manufacturer and an obssessed ticket taker, who voices the movies' sad and in his case, misapplied motto: "I'm normal!" Here everyone and no one is.<br /><br />The wit is subtle and sharp as a scalpel. All actors are excellent--especially unnerving is van Warmerdam himself as the doomed ticket taker. Pay very close attention to the faces and names of characters. They are sign posts for things to come.<br /><br /> | 1pos
|
Three gangsters commit murder, then take to the road where they end up at the farm of a disturbed young woman.<br /><br />An effectively spooky character portrayal by Leslie Lee and some good filming locations, doesn't quite save this ultra low-budgeter from being an unsatisfying horror flick. While it does have the occasional moment of gore, Axe a.k.a. Lisa, Lisa makes for an uneven slasher film and is a bit too light on the violence to really be considered a true exploitation thriller. It's pretty much a mixed bag, that never really finds its effectiveness. The films choppy editing and stilted direction definitely takes away from it too. <br /><br />So, all in all it's kind of hard to find a place for this weird B flick, the curious may find something of interest in it, but don't expect another Last House on the Left (1972).<br /><br />* 1/2 out of **** | 0neg
|
It feels like a recycling of all "die hard" movies combined with some segal flicks! of course they cant get away with that so they put in a kid.. This way they could add a family drama type background and an angsty fireman. All they needed more was a hint of sex.. Which they clumsily poured in at the end! The movie runs like a train! Which is undeniably good, the problem is the background. You shouldn't think too much, actually I advise against thinking at all. You need to accept a lot of facts. One of the harder ones is a fireman who in the end turns out to be a near superman! I also have to admit.. the whole plot really doesn't get me worried about who wins! I really didn't care enough! Or any of my friends.<br /><br />Its a nice no brainer, but don't spoil too much money on it! | 0neg
|
I've been reading the comments and I'm not surprised that others find this movie boring. It's not for anyone with a limited attention span. I don't have one of those and I thought this was a very interesting, if not somewhat sad look at the world of employment whether it be temp or permanent. I guess everyone wants to fit in-whether it be your job or school. If you can find some little niche that you do belong in enjoy it because sometimes that fit never lasts. I think that's what happened in this movie. The 4 main characters fit in with each other because they were temps and had that little thing in common. But what else they had in common is not clear and I think it wasn't enough to hold the little group together. Sure, we can blame it on the thief plot but in the long run relationships like that don't last because they have very little in common. As for the new girl Cleo I actually felt sorry for her-she was such a lonely soul and it seemed she tried to make friends with those 4 but they didn't want to include her in. She paid Iris a compliment and also said hi but all she did was stare back at her-funny coming from those who complain about being ignored by the permanent workers because they were temps. She stole the things from everyone because it gave her a part of them since she didn't make friends with anyone.I can really feel for the Cleo character. The four main characters are a case study in themselves. But they were a hoot and so much like those that I've come across in life. And that's why I like this movie-the characters are real. | 1pos
|
The R-rated version of THE RAFFLE is one of the most baffling movies I've ever seen. Imagine a Disney-like movie, with cute acting, and cute this and cute that, but included in the whole thing are shots of full frontal nudity from a variety of bimbos. The effect is truly jarring. The whole film has the feel and authenticity of Pamela Anderson. Is so unrealistic and artificially cute, coy, and Aw Shucks, that one can gag at the whole thing. But the inserted moments of naked women, shot like cheesy Playboy centerfold videos, were totally incongruous with the cutesy aspect of the movie. This gave the film a creepy, sleazy feel unlike anything I've ever seen before, which was kinda cool, in an unintentionally funny kind of way.<br /><br />The intentions of the artistically-challenged producers are clearly obvious: they wanted a parade of naked chicks. But they also wanted to make a movie that would be appreciated by more wholesome folks by simply re-editing the nude scenes out, and voila, a movie that can be played on some family network. But the characters of the movie, most of them men, are such losers and are so repulsive that a PG-rated version would still look bizarre and something about it would seem askew.<br /><br />Is it worth watching THE RAFFLE just for the gratuitous nudity? I guess so, if you plan to fast forward through a lot of boring moments in order to see the naked bimbos. In the end though, if you want to see boatloads of female nudity, you might as well watch a Playboy video than this tripe.<br /><br />THE RAFFLE is one heck of a confused movie. | 0neg
|
A man receives a package from England. Inside is a letter stating that he is the sole heir to a family fortune and title. Additionally, the letter states that enclosed in the box are two bottles of the finest family-made liquor and that he should make a toast to the family and his good fortune. Unfortunately, the brandy-like concoction is laced with the blood of Dracula and slowly the man changes to a vampire. Additionally, the blood fills him with a desire for a vendetta--a vendetta to kill the living relatives of the people who killed Dracula a century ago. In a real change of pace, 90% of the film is set in the Miami area--certainly a big change from previous films.<br /><br />I really am not exaggerating in the summary--this looks like a lower quality community theater group performing a modern reworking of Dracula. While this may sound pretty bad, for a Hershell Gordon Lewis movie, this isn't that bad. In fact, I'd place it in the top half of his films for quality--though it still isn't that great. The worst thing about the movie is the rather uninspired acting. Most of it isn't terrible--none of it is particularly good. The second worst thing about the film is the direction--it shows no imagination or style whatsoever. I've seen many homemade videos on YouTube that look as good or better. But, there is something decent in the film--the story. While doing yet another Dracula film isn't something we really needed, the story shows more originality than manner of the Hammer Dracula films! It is a novel idea...and that's something! | 0neg
|
My title refers to how this viewer's intelligence felt after watching the show. What a yucky, lowest common denominator mess. The concept is pretty crappy to begin and it feels likes a rudderless, directionless ship from start to finish (I didn't actually get through the last commercial break because my trusty remote put its foot down).<br /><br />I like giving new shows a chance and especially comedy ones, but between this one and keys to the hiv, there just isn't much out there worth paying attention to. Hopefully this show will not get renewed so they can fit in another half hour of Daily Show. Heck, I would take Daily Shows from the late 90s over this unfunny prattle.<br /><br />Awful show. | 0neg
|
Simon Sez is one of the dumbest movies I've ever seen. Its another one of those monstrosities that you have to force yourself to watch only so you can brag to your friends about how you were able to "watch the whole thing", and to see their shocked expressions after you say that. Other than that, there is no reason to force yourself through the consistent ineptness of this poor excuse for an action adventure.<br /><br />First off... It stars Dennis Rodman. That alone should be enough to turn most people away, but because I'm Mr. "Open To All Movies", I put in the video and watched it anyway.<br /><br />Since my brain has an automated trash filter and defragger (I still run on NTFS), I only remember small pieces of the film. One scene that stood out, and shouted to me like an old woman with a bad hip, was the scene where master martial artist Xin Xin Xiong and some woman (I forgot her name) were engaging in a tightly choreographed fight. But because Rodman was the "star" and didn't want to be upstaged up by his "co-stars", a way had to be found to bring him into this action. But Rodman can't fight. So their solution was to just have Rodman stomp into the scene like Frankenstein and claw, pounce, and push his way through the fight. And this didn't just happen once. It happened many times...<br /><br />Before I start cursing I'll just end my review here.<br /><br />Don't see this movie. Spare yourself the pain. | 0neg
|
I just got back from a free tester screening of this movie and even participated in the focus group of about 30 people afterward. To sum it up, nobody said they would have paid to see this movie and nobody agreed that they would recommend this to a friend. Though it is overwhelmingly bad, it was just a tester screening and they may yet make changes to this piece. <br /><br />Spoiler? ****The Upcoming portions has some stuff about the story, but there is nothing really to spoil other than if you thought this was going to be a good movie.<br /><br />There were a few bright spots, AKA Danny Masterson, Adam Brody, and John Cho. Danny Masterson played the supposedly geeky roommate who Anna Faris is creeped out by due to his love of Sci-Fi. He is portrayed as being, literally, a spooky Skull-F***er, ya kind of weird but funny none the less. Adam Brody plays the intelligent and economical pot dealer and in his limited role is absolutely hilarious. Anna ends up owing him money and must travel to Venice in order to pay him off, or else. This is the basic premise of the movie, it seems. John Cho is a sausage delivery man who has no connection to Anna other than she was so high she stowed away on his delivery truck in an effort to get to Venice. The only problem with all this is that each of these characters were in the movie for no longer than 5 or 6 minutes, they had no interaction with each other, and they were the funniest characters in the flick (this is bad if they all have limited roles).<br /><br />Now onto Anna, poor poor Anna. She accidentally eats a whole batch of pot cupcakes (the weird part about this is that you don't actually know that these cupcakes are pot filled) and goes on a 'fun' filled expedition to repay her debts. Sounds funny right? Not really, she acted like she more strung out on speed or trippin on some bad shrooms or LSD...Has she ever even smoked before? It was just completely unbelievable and she was basically the entire movie, considering there were no other main characters in any sense of the word. She would just go around and talk to one person, then a random event will happen leading to another person and another event. <br /><br />As far as the story goes, I don't think there was one. It just seemed like a series of random events that had a beginning, a meaningless ending, and nothing in between. There were many dull moments throughout the movie that made an hour and a half seem a lot longer than that.<br /><br />With that said, there were still moments of stoner brilliance and with some quality editing and an extensive overhaul this movie may still have a chance. Remember that this movie is still in the works and they have a chance to kick it up a notch, but I think it is unrealistic. Other than that, I'm sad to say that Smiley Face is Dead on Arrival. | 0neg
|
It is the American Civil War as envisioned by Italians, set apart from the main theaters of conflict, out in the southwestern desert. James Coburn is Col. Pembroke who has lost impregnable Ft. Holman to the Rebs and who has a private scheme to retrieve it along with his honor. He sets out on a commando expedition with a sergeant and a dirty half-dozen volunteers, scalawags freed from the gallows and kept in line (barely) with a promise of hidden gold. Telly Savalas is the Southern commander dreading Pembroke's reappearance. Some exciting action and tense situations, but credibility is strained when, with the Ft. Holman Gatling gun spraying shot into the parade ground, the Confederate troops show no interest in cover but keep milling in the open like ants from a hill goaded with a stick. Not a great or inspiring movie but a solid performance from Coburn. And for all the death there's not much blood. | 0neg
|
This movie is the "Showgirls" of science fiction. It's so bad, it's like a universal constant. Like mathematics or physics or something. There's not even any nudity to balance things out. No good acting, no good story, no boobies. <br /><br />Suffice it to say, the writer/director ripped off all the bad parts of both "The Terminator" and "Robocop". This thing makes those godawful films from India look like high art. At least Bollywood flicks have good dancing. If you MUST see this movie, see it with a bunch of your friends. You might want to consider voluminous amounts of alcohol or possibly a few bong hits to stay interested. There's no reason to torment yourself alone with this thing unless you're a complete masochist. <br /><br />After you watch it, sit and think about the fact that someone actually put up MONEY to shoot, edit and release this thing. On top of that, some poor slob had to sit and watch all the footage and edit something interesting together. Imagine the crap that wound up on the cutting room floor. The mind boggles. | 0neg
|
The first part of The Cannonball movies offers some mindless fun, just like its sequel.A bunch of crazy people participate in the Cannonball run throughout the nation.J.J. McClure is a has-been race car driver who now teams up with Victor Prinzim and his alter ego, Captain Chaos.They drive around The United States with an ambulance.They're also accompanied by the creepy doctor Nikolas Van Helsing and a blonde they call Beauty.There are many other wackos in that race, including two entertainers dressed as priests.Burt Reynolds is terrific as J.J.The great comedian Dom DeLuise, who passed away this year, is brilliant both as Victor and Captain Chaos.Farrah Fawcett, who sadly lost her struggle with cancer last summer, is a real angel as Pamela Glover, aka Beauty.Dean Martin and Sammy Davis Jr. make a great team as the former race car driver Jamie Blake and the scam artist Morris Fenderbaum.You gotta like Roger Moore as Seymour Goldfarb, who thinks he is Roger Moore.The American football quarterback Terry Bradshaw plays Terry and country singer Mel Tillis is Mel.Bert Convy is the welthy executive who drives on a motorcycle as the other half of the newlyweds.Milton Berle's nephew Warren Berlinger sits in the back wearing a wig.There's a lot of fun stuff in this movie.You laugh every time when you see the appearance of Jack Elam.Roger Moore's James Bond routine is hilarious.You know, the guy from "The Fly Who Bugged Me".The fighting scene is a riot.It's always hilarious when Captain Chaos appears, and this time he shows them hooligans.In the end we see some bloopers.We see Dom DeLuise laughing hysterically.They sure had fun making this movie. | 1pos
|
The story line would have been good if the actors especially the lead, Emily Shaw, didn't over act so much! What happened to her anyway?? I don't know what happened to the former baywatch girl but she looks terrible in this movie, that unibrow really needs to go!<br /><br />In this movie the main characters totally overacted making it difficult to watch! Don't waste your time with this one! It isn't worth a full "one" vote! Late night cable for a reason, no one wants to see this!<br /><br />This was one of the worst movies I have ever wasted my time watching! What teenager acts this way? Totally unbelievable! But what can you expect for low budget! | 0neg
|
-and I say that being a person whose hated musicals all his life with a fiery passion<br /><br />-The movie chronicles the events that takes place after the gang sneaks in to see an R rated movie. the movie is based on their favorite Canadian TV show "Terrence and Phillips: Asses of Fire." the movie contains lots of crude humor and vulgar language, and teaches them how to use the F word and other offensive language in a brand new way. pretty soon all the kids see the movie and start cussing like sailors, and this is where the problem comes from. all the parents lead by Kyle's mom decide to protest the movie and the protest soon turns into an all out war between Canada and USA. meanwhile Kenny dies and ends up in hell and whiles there he discovers that Satan and his boyfriend Saddam Hussein *LOL* are plotting to invade earth. and that's the f*cked up plot in a nutshell<br /><br />-The whole movie is told through a series of wonderful songs sang by the characters. from the Danny Elfmanesque "Blame Canada" to the laugh out loud "Kyle's Mom's A *female dog*" all the songs in the movie are just perfect and fits it like a glove. the humor is the same as that of the TV show, and by that i mean stereotypical racial jokes, fart jokes, gay jokes, pop culture jokes, and sexual jokes. the animation is also the same which must be great news for the studio because by doing that the movie was made very cheaply. Trey and Matt like always do the voices for about 70% of the characters in the movie, but this time they have some celebrity friends to help them out. I heard that Clooney did a voice for the movie but i couldn't recognize it. The best thing about this movie and also the TV show is of course Cartman. he's let loose in this movie and completely uncut so we get to hear him in his whole anti-semitic glory. Later on the movie his filthy mouth ends up saving the day. <br /><br />-I love this movie. it's exactly my type of humor, it doesn't hold anything back and is wonderfully filthy. all the jokes whether racial or homosexual jokes are simply meant as just JOKES and nothing more. conservative people who find that kind of humor to be crude can go listen to Bill O' Reilly BS them to death. <br /><br />-Don't blame Canada guys, that's where Sarah Polley lives :) | 1pos
|
******SPOILERS****** A powerful film about a man who uses his body to achieve fame and fortune beyond his wildest dreams and almost loses his soul doing it. <br /><br />Not being able to sleep before the big champion fight Charlie Davis, John Garfield, drives down to his old neighborhood where he finds out that his mother, girlfriend and all of the people who knew him there don't want anything to do with him. Back in his dressing room before the fight Charlie's reminded by the matchmaker Roberts, Lloyd Gough,that the fight with his opponent Marlow is to go the distance and the decision will be against him. The inside talk is that the good money is on Marlow. Charlie, trying to calm down his nerves before the fight, lays down to get some sleep and slowly his past comes back to haunt him in a dream. <br /><br />Being brought up in a poor and tough neighborhood Charlie takes to boxing as a young boy in the Golden Gloves. With his mother Anna, Anne Revere, being against him boxing Charlie tries to find a new line of employment Later when Charlie's father David, Art Smith, is killed in a bombing of his candy store by some mobsters, who mistook it for a rival speakeasy, and then with no money to pay the bills Charlie decides that boxing is the only way for him and his family to get out of poverty. <br /><br />Turning pro Charlie runs up a string of 21 wins in the ring and Roberts the top matchmaker in the state sets up a match between Charlie and the champ Ben Chaplin, Canada Lee, for the title. Ben has a dangerous blood clot in his brain and his manager wants Charlie to be told to go easy with Ben in the fight. Roberts doesn't tell Charlie of Ben's condition and in the championship fight Charlie hits Ben with a number of hard shots to the head that leaves Ben on the mat unconscious. <br /><br />Shocked after the fight to find out that Ben was in no condition to fight Charlie feels that his title, in knocking the already brain-damaged Ben, is tainted. Putting Ben on his payroll as his trainer, because he feels that he owes Ben something after what he did to him, Charlie defends his title a number of times but now he's up against a much younger and more formidable opponent then those he fought, Marlow. Marlow has been going around claiming that Charlie been ducking him for two years because he's "yellow". <br /><br />With Charlie set to defend his title he's told by Roberts not to try to knock Marlow out but to go the distance with him knowing that would mean that the decision would go against Charlie. Charlie at first agrees knowing that there a big pay-off for him in the fight. With betting his share of the money that he'll get for the fight, $60,000.00, against himself and with the odds 2 to 1 on Marlow Charlie can triple his money and retire from boxing a rich man. <br /><br />Telling his mom and girlfriend Peggy, Lilli Palmer, and all his friends to bet against him shocked them. Throwing the fight is wrong and dishonest he's told which in return, not realizing what he's planning to do, shocks Charlie. Charlie tells them that they aren't smart to know what the real things in life are and that's why he's successful and their not and he's the one who's been supporting them, his family & friends, all these years because he doesn't think like they do. With a huff Charlie leaves for his training camp in the country to get ready for the fight with Marlow. <br /><br />At the camp Roberts tell Charlie to fire his trainer Ben feeling that Ben is having a bad influence on Charlie. Ben's making him have second thoughts about throwing the fight. Ben angry and agitated at Roberts, whom he never liked in the first place, goes into a fit. Swinging his arms wildly like he was back in the boxing ring Ben loses his balance and falls on his head killing himself; and with that Charlie wakes up from his sleep. <br /><br />In the ring the fight goes into the late rounds with Charlie carrying Marlow for the first fourteen rounds with only one round left for him to throw and lose the fight to Marlow. Charlie, just three minutes away from losing the fight to Marlow, has a sudden change of heart. After what happened to Ben and and how bad he acted to his mom girlfriend and all of his friends who were counting on him to do his best in the fight, win lose or draw, he realizes just what a heel he's been. Charlie also realizes what a jerk he's turned in now getting his brains beat out in order to enrich a bunch of gangsters who'll use him for as long as he's is still useful to them and when he isn't they'll drop him just like they did Ben. <br /><br />Charlie with a sudden and explosive flurry of fists and leather opens up on Marlow and clobbers him to the mat where he's counted out, Charlie retains his title. Leaving the boxing arena with the crowd cheering, and his girlfriend back by his side, Roberts and some of his goons confront Charlie and tell him that he'll be sorry for what he did. Charlie Davis ends the movie with it's most famous line in it: " What are you going to do to me? kill me? everyone dies". | 1pos
|
Like in many of their previous movies twins again failed at their latest attempt to portray themselves as serious actors. <br /><br />Like many of their past movies only true twins fans can really enjoy this movie that lacks a decent plot line. Jaycee Chan (son of Jackie Chan) makes his first and only appearance to date in a film and after seeing his poor performance I recommend that he stick with music.<br /><br />The only bright part to this poorly made movie is the small appearance of Jackie Chan to add some flavour to this movie.<br /><br />To all the twins fans out their you would probably enjoy this but to all the other serious movie goers I would not really recommend it. | 0neg
|
I saw 'The Black Balloon' last night as a charity event for our local disability services. All who attending the movie premier were people who live and breath disabilities. There were teachers from special schools, carers and parents of disabled children. I am a parent of an autistic boy and employed to work with special needs children, I found this movie to be funny, heart warming and realistic to memories of my own child. The movie is based on the everyday effects of living with a disabled sibling which I'm sure many siblings will relate to (I know my older girls will). The amount of attention given to Charlie is felt by Thomas and the enormous responsibility of caring for a disabled sibling at the age of 16 years was heartbreaking for him. I gave this movie a 10/10 because I felt the movie portrayed exactly how life is for a family with a disabled child. Luke Ford was excellent with portraying Charlie and Rhys Wakefield's exceptional representation of having to live with a disabled sibling will hopeful make the public think about the family life of a disabled child/adult before they stop and stare and whisper. Offer help and do not fear them for they are angels in disguise. | 1pos
|
I watched this on 'More4' on Friday 2009-09-04, thinking that it was the work of Paul Greengrass, the genius behind 'Bloody Sunday'. One hundred and ten tedious minutes later, I thought 'he's lost it'. I didn't realise that I was confusing 'Flight 93' with 'United 93' which I've just finished watching on 'ITV1' on Sunday 2009-09-06.<br /><br />(Why did I include a spoiler alert? Well, I am assuming that in a few years' time, there will be visitors to this site who will not have heard about what happened in the USA on 2001-09-11 or, at the very least, will not remember what was special about United Airlines flight 93. For those future generations wanting an idea about what happened that day, stay away from this patronising slush.) <br /><br />A hijacked airliner in itself makes for an interesting story, but the makers of this tat appear to have assumed that everyone watching was fully aware of the context and the ultimately fatal crashes of this plane and three others. Instead, it chose to focus on several conversations between the passengers in the air and their beautiful wives and parents at home in their beautiful houses. For an hour and a half, sweet syrupy goo oozed from the screen. 'Look!' say the film-makers, 'these nasty men killed beautiful loving American people.' <br /><br />What idiot script-writer feels the need to point out that most people are nice, and have others around them whom they love and who love them back? This insults the viewer, and what's worse, insults the memory of real people who died in that crash. | 0neg
|
Well i don't actually have much to say about this movie. Butt i'll start by saying that this movie is one of the worst movies if not so THE worst movie i've ever seen. As you can see in my profile i'm from Belgium so i saw the original version of this movie ( and it rules by the way :-) ) but when i heard that there was going to be remake done of this movie i thought "well maybe it wont be as bad as every other remake" ( cause American remakes of movies are always less then the original ( no offense ) examples: The Grudge, The Ring ) but again i was wrong, choosing girls in bikini's as the bad guys(girls) was a bad mistake same as choosing Queen Latifah as the cab driver and the way that the story is brought on to screen is also really bad, i also thought that a good point would be the car itself cause in the third original TAXI ( TAXI 3 ) the story wasn't that good but the car was one of the plus points, but that doesn't apply to this movie, so i'll give you one last advice : don't go and see this movie but try to get a hand on the original TAXI by Luc Besson and i'll assure you you'll have a great time<br /><br />greetings from A.V. | 0neg
|
I would definitely recommend this film, if not for its cutely romantic outlook, or its refreshingly talented stars, I'd give it a thumbs-up just because it's English. Granted, I haven't seen a whole lot of British television or film, but it seems that everything I have seen has been either outlandishly funny or suicidally dramatic. English romance always seems to fall under the second, and sometimes numbingly depressing, idea. How wonderful, then, that I should run into this quiet little movie, which, although I will admit that Boise, Idaho is not the largest outlet for foreign film, I don't remember ever being released in my area. I remembered Mr. Sewell vaguely from "Hamlet," and have longed to see Mr. Fiennes in a film since "Shakespeare in Love," but never remember seeing Ms. Potter in anything, and I am sure that I never seen Mr. Hollander before. While I would not lie and say that this is a profound film and that there is anything to be learned from it or much to be thought of after seeing it, it would be only natural to praise it for its pure movie-like, feel-good quality, a small escape from the everyday. It resembles little, other than the highly implausible plot, of a Hollywood film. American romantic comedies seem built according to specifications designed only to provoke that slightly nervous, overly sweet feeling in the majority of female audience members. They usually have all the weight of a Twinkie, and leave one wondering how something so simple could be so utterly manufactured. This movie is more like a Wheat Thin, possibly underrated, certainly rather bland looking, but somehow much more satisfying and although it comes salty or in low sodium flavors, is surprisingly sweet without a trace of gooeyness. Hope yet for slightly awkward American girls. | 1pos
|
The film opens with the on screen paragraph 'this film is based on actual events that took place in a Central European country not many years ago'. Yeah, course it is. During the credits we see a yet unknown nun in confession. Then we are introduced to Sister Gertrude (Anita Ekberg) who works in a hospital with a Dr. Poirett (Massimo Serato) and her roommate and friend Sister Mathieu (Paola Morra), other people work there obviously but these are the only ones you need concern yourself with at this point. Sister Gertrude has recently undergone surgery to remove a brain tumour and has been experiencing headaches, black outs and a loss of control. Dr. Poirett says that he thinks she is suffering from post operative shock and the symptoms that she describes are purely psychosomatic. In actual fact Sister Gertrude has become addicted to morphine. Sister Gertrude receives no support from her Mother Suerior (Alida Valli) as she tells Sister Gertrude that "it's a nun's vocation to suffer". After Dr. Poirett refuses to prescribe her anymore morphine, Sister Gertrude steals a ring from a dead patient and pawns it in the city buying the drug with the proceeds. Sister Mathieu steals morphine for her as well from the hospital. The patients and Dr. Poirett begin to notice that Sister Gertrude's personality has begun to change, for the worse. One night Sister Gertrude notices that a patient named Josephine (Nerina Montagnani) has put her false teeth into her glass of water on the dining room table during dinner. Angry Sister Gertrude throws them on the floor and stamps on them. Later that night Josephine has a heart attack in her room and dies, this is when Sister Gertrude steals the ring. Soon after this incident Sister Gertrude senses Dr. Poirett is becoming suspicious and talks to the director (Daniele Dublino) of the hospital and convinces him to fire Dr. Poirett. Things become worse for Sister Gertrude as Father Janot is bludgeoned to death and thrown out of a high window to make it look like suicide. More deaths occur as the new Doctor, Patrick Roland (Joe Dallesandro) can't quite believe what is happening at the hospital and he too also starts to have his suspicions about Sister Gertrude. Is Sister Gertrude a drug-addicted killer? Since the hospital doesn't want a scandal they try and cover up the deaths as accidents but eventually the truth is revealed............ Co-written and directed by Giulio Berruti I really didn't think too much of this European exploitation film. The script by Berruti and Alberto Tarallo is quite slow at times and surprisingly shy's away from the stronger sleaze and exploitation elements you may expect from a Euro film from this period and of this type. A bit of nudity, a sequence where a female patient gives a man in a wheelchair a blow-job and has sex with him and a scene where a woman has needles stuck into her face is about it. The film is set almost entirely in the hospital and the fact that Ekberg plays a nun is totally irrelevant and not really used to it's full potential. There are not enough suspects on show either, I always felt that it was going to be one of only two potential killers and I was proved right. And the films title 'Killer Nun' tells you just about everything you need to know as well. The killers motives are never really made that clear and the way they are revealed at the end is one of the poorest and most unimaginative I've ever seen, the killers unmasking is better in an average Murder, She Wrote (1984-1996) episode! I just didn't care about anyone or anything in this film, and that's never a good thing. Quite well made on a certain level but there are so many more better films out there in this genre. Dull, unexciting and somewhat uninteresting. Not worth spending good money on that's for sure. | 0neg
|
Irene Dunne marries Charles Bickford soon after the movie begins. She longs to leave the steel town where they live but he's content to stay in his job as a laborer. However, through her determination and frugality, she is able to eventually convince him to take a gamble and strike out on his own. Fortunately, perhaps, they strike it rich and their life seems perfect. Perfect, that is, until Bickford starts running around with a money-hungry tramp who urges him to dump his long-suffering wife--leading to a super-melodramatic conclusion in the courtroom.<br /><br />I love old movies, so it takes a lot to turn me off of any film from Hollywood's Golden Age...but this terrible film managed to do it. Despite having the excellent Irene Dunne in the lead, this film just isn't worth your time--mostly because the last 20 minutes of the film manage to undo any good feelings I had for the rest of the movie! Here's the problem. Irene Dunne is the perfect wife in this film...too perfect--Mary Poppins perfect. Even when Bickford proves that he's a wretched jerk and cheats on her, Dunne is like some sort of saint and she refuses to divorce him. Then, when Bickford and his sleazy lawyer drum up fake charges that SHE is committing adultery, Dunne is just too sweet to really fight back. In a courtroom scene that is just too melodramatic to be true, her ultimate niceness convinces the evil Bickford to admit it is all a frame-up and he is taken away to prison.<br /><br />The worst part about this terribly over-the-top scene is not the silly way Bickford, now stricken with guilt, jumps up and admits the truth (though this is a ridiculous scene), but the way that lawyer J. Carrol Naish is allowed to attack Dunne on the witness stand! Even courts in the old Soviet Union might flinch at such a brow-beating--and yet her lawyer never objects and the judge seems content to preside over a sham of a hearing! This is just the sort of film they should show young law students in order to elicit a few laughs at all the histrionics.<br /><br />Believe me that there are thousands of better films out there from the 1930s waiting to be discovered. Try almost ANY film of the era and you're bound to be better off than with this silly dud. And, additionally, almost any other Dunne film is better than this creaky old pile of...melodrama. | 0neg
|
Oh yes, this movie. I noticed this movie on a $2.99 rack in a video store and it looked mind-blowing. The artwork was fantastic and although it reminded me of the Texas Chainsaw I still bought it. I got a refund. This movie was horrible, horrible, horrible. Basically it's about a group of teens driving on a dark highway, their car breaks down, they try to cipher gas from an old farmhouse and they are being killed, one by one, by a killer who lives in that house. This movie was a disaster but the title, it sounded good, almost like a kids book title.<br /><br />The acting was so stale and wooden it was funny. The teens would usually overact or they would not act enough when the time called for it. The movie was a horrible rendition of your classic young-girl-stalked-by-unknown-killer tale. This movie looks like a bad high school movie project. I wish that I had more to say about this title but I forgot a lot about it and I would rather not remember it. So in conclusion this is a movie that should be sent to wheat thrasher. | 0neg
|
When these two guys get together you know your in for a great laugh.The way they have to improvise when one of them makes a mistake is just poor class.As with there other video's which I also think are excellent if you in a badmood and need a little bit of cheering up look no further.I think that this video is ALMOST as good as some of the second season episodes and i hope they get around to doing at least one more bottom video | 1pos
|
As a lifelong Bette Davis fan, I have been curious to see this for a long time. In the book 'Mother Goddam', the author states that in response to Borgnine's question 'What about your family'?, Bette says 'f--k them'! So hearing her say THAT word was another reason to want to see this movie.<br /><br />Well Showtime aired it yesterday morning and I was glad to have my chance to see this, but boy is it lame. There is nothing to enjoy really, not a single thing. Davis is extremely subdued and SHE DOESN'T EVEN SMOKE or scream or use any of her famous mannerisms, and this movie could've used a little something to make it less painful. Borgnine tries hard but the odds were against him from the start.<br /><br />And to top it, the line I was waiting to hear was dubbed (badly, I might add)! She says 'screw them' instead..somehow fitting, but boy was I disappointed. | 0neg
|
While the gameplay of Jedi Knight II is far superior to Jedi Knight, I think the game is a bit of a dissapointment in other areas. For one thing, I much prefer the live action cutscenes in JK1 to the ones rendered with the game engine in JK2. The live action cutscenes really brought the story to life in JK1. Since the acting in JK2 is done by Quake 3 models, the cutscenes lack any sign of life. They look especially lifeless and flat where there are supposed to be emotional scenes, such as Jan and Kyle kissing.<br /><br />I have played JK1 many times and I always watch the cutscenes fully. I even go back sometimes just to watch the cutscenes because they are done so well. When I play JK2 again, I'll probably just skip the cutscenes because I think they look very amateurish. It's almost as if the cutscenes are an afterthought to join the levels together, not as a part of the overall story as in Jedi Knight.<br /><br />*Spoilers below*<br /><br />Now we come to the story. While JK2's story is ok, it is no where near as good as JK1. In the beginning of the game we find out that Kyle has given up his force abilities. He and Jan now operate as mercenaries for the New Republic. After several levels fighting imperials, it appears as if Jan is killed by a Dark Jedi called Desann. Kyle then goes to Luke Skywalker to get his lightsaber and force abilities back so he can avenge Jan's death.<br /><br />Now here is the really odd part about this story. It doesn't seem to bother Luke that Kyle wants to regain his force powers so he can get revenge. If I understand Star Wars correctly, revenge along with fear, hate, agression, etc... will lead to the Dark side! Don't you think Luke would try to object to this a bit more? The rest of it is pretty average "kill the bad guy and get the girl" type stuff.<br /><br />*Spoilers end*<br /><br />Overall, Raven have done an excellent job with the gameplay and level design, but the story is pretty average and I REALLY WANT PROPER CUTSCENES!!!<br /><br />I gave it 8/10 though because the game is a lot of fun to play and the multiplayer is excellent. If it wasn't for the excellent gameplay, I would have only given it 5/10. | 0neg
|
I've heard some people to call 80s 'The Golden Era' and now after I saw this again after so many years I realized why. One of the greatest Sci-Fi movies were produced during this 'era' and even if you see them now again they will still keep you excited. I haven't seen this one long time ago (more than 10 years). I still remember how much amazed I was when I first saw it. I saw it so many times after that and I was enjoying it each time while I was watching it. <br /><br />You can see the movies like this one these days. There weren't technologies which they could use to create such effects. That's why they (the effects) were just a part from the story and they weren't as many as they're in todays movies. The movies were so good because they were done with a real imagination.<br /><br />Now the story some how stays like a background for the effects. They're doing movies which are rather like 3D PC games. They aren't interesting stories and they aren't cool characters. Effects only. | 1pos
|
"rolinmoe" from austin hit the nail on the head. this movie had an interesting idea behind it, and started well. the time spent developing the chars in the first half was great.<br /><br />then, the film suffers from an identify crisis. the characters deflate, doing & saying things that were very hard to believe. by the end it was obvious that the film itself was "out of character".<br /><br />btw, biggest "Huh?" moment -- the main dude pulls his elaborate heist because he cant find the Scottish drug dealer and, inconveniently, his buddy died (er, nice plot device). OK. but *then*, after the heist he finds the scotsman on the street by chance -- and leaves him w/o getting his money. WHAT?? this is the guy that his very own life depends on finding! why did he leave him in the alley!? were we supposed to believe he inadvertently killed him w/ 3 punches? no way. anyway, a completely contrived, pointless scene. | 0neg
|
The USS Britannic is off on a cruise in the South Pacific. On board her are the rich & famous and most of all jewelry and money. But where there is money, there are those looking to take what they can get... ICE T plays the leader of a gang bent on robbing the ship once it is far enough out at sea. However, he doesn't count on a security guard (DYLAN WALSH) interfering with his plans. He also doesn't count on structural flaws in the ship which cause it to take on sea water. The film feels like a Made-for-TV film, but the action is passable enough and the dialogue so-so. Ice T's performance as the chief villain is a little over the top, but okay. Walsh's performance as the hero just lets everybody know that you don't have to be Van Damme, Schwarzenegger, Bernhardt or Daniels etc. to be the good guy. Overall, a passable film. If you spent the $7-$8 to see Speed 2...spend the $1-$2 rental fee and see this! You might be surprised. | 1pos
|
If you like courtroom dramas, appreciate excellent acting and an expertly-filmed movie this is for you. Only once, I think, have I ever proclaimed something "best movie of the year" and all that, because it's all too subjective and also a cliché but that's how I feel about this movie unless something better comes along the last few months of 2007.<br /><br />This is just a fabulous movie with Anthony Hopkins and Ryan Gosling playing battling characters who engage in a battle of wits. Hopkins plays a husband who discovers his wife having an affair, shoots her, confesses the same night and then has things cleverly arranged where it's almost impossible to convict him. Gosling plays a young, hotshot prosecuting attorney on his way to bigger and better things with a change of scenery to corporate law but gets stuck with this open-and-shut case right before he switches firms. The trouble is, it's a lot more than he figured and he isn't used to losing. Hopkins knows this, of course, and plays on his vanity. <br /><br />Gosling evolves from a me-only lawyer to someone who really wants justice, even if it costs him. Both characters are cocky and smart and the twists and turns just add to the fun.<br /><br />I enjoyed watching all the actors performances and was very impressed. The camera-work by Director Of Photography Kramer Morgenthau should also be recognized, along with director Gregory Hoblit, who seems to direct very entertaining films ("Frequency," "Fallen," etc.) <br /><br />I could have watched this story unfold for another two hours and would have been happy to do so, am I'm not one to sit still for long periods these days. That's how good this was....just Grade A film-making and storytelling. | 1pos
|
I was very surprised to see that this movie had such a good rating, when i checked it on IMDb after seeing it. This really is one of the worst movies i have ever seen and i have seen many bad movies. It looks like a good movie in the beginning, but when he comes into surgery i couldn't believe how bad it got. This voice-over destroys EVERYTHING! Just imagine you are being cut open like that and then listen to what he says. I saw the movie in German so i don't really know what he said in English, but ironic stuff like "Yeah right, it doesn't hurt.."?...what is this? Telling yourself "think about something else" and then forgetting your pain by just thinking about your girlfriend is just...stupid. And his mother...how the hell does she figure something like that out? Someone comes to tell her, her son died in surgery (what she kind of had to expect). Plus she found some letters in Jessica Albas bag. plus that "she knows the hospital" stuff... and then it takes her "one second" to figure it out? What the hell?^^ And the ending...why does the police bust them? The patient died in surgery, thats all that happened. That drunk doctor doesn't know anything else either...and then they bust them all, even the girlfriend??? Why??? Despite all that i think Christensen did a bad job, but that doesn't really count for me...those mistakes and stupid things i wrote about above are the problem. I watched this movie with some friends and we all were VERY disappointed... As i said, one of the worst movies i have ever seen... Just don't watch it ;) | 0neg
|
How badly can you ruin a great story of post-apocalyptic America? Zelaney's book, though not his best, was a good read. But this film mangles everything that was good about the concept. As I said, the vehicle, which appears to be real, is totally cool, the nuclear maligned sky is great. EVERYTHING else is just pathetic. Pass this lemon by and don't look in the rear view mirror. A "2" only for the "truck" and the sky. This should be remade. It could be a huge winner with a GOOD script, decent acting, today's CG along the lines of "Twister" "Dantes Peak" or "The Day After Tomorrow". Roger Z could be made proud if somebody could come up with a decent script from his "Damnation Alley". | 0neg
|
What a horrible movie. I had this on my list of DVD's to own. I finally bought it. If only you could return purchased movies for store credit.<br /><br />Movie starts out fine. Whether it's slow or not as other have said, it keeps my interest...as I thought it was going to be a good movie. This was nothing but a horrible attempt at...something...I just don't know what. Oh wait, I know...spend your money on this movie so I make a profit by making the cover eye catching and the summary interesting.<br /><br />The characters acting was fine. I like Ron Perlman. But there lacked a feasible plot with unanswered questions. In fact, the plot was nothing less than leaving you laughing. When you find out what was going on, I was left speechless. Speechless as in...you have got to be kidding me!<br /><br />I swear, either these quotes by the reviewers are made up...or they don't know a thing about a horror movie. One guy is quoted as saying on the cover, "the scariest movie of the year." Yeah, remember the name Bob Strauss from the LA Daily News and never listen to his reviews. I bet he is would say cotton candy is scary too. What a joke. There was nothing scary about this movie at all. Horror? No freakin way.<br /><br />Seriously, I don't know it got as high of a rating number as it does on here. Cannibal Holocaust has a better rating than this movie.<br /><br />The Last Winter ranks up as one of the most horrible movies I've seen...right under Next with Nicolas Cage. I'd rather watch reruns of Mork and Mindy. And I hate Robin Williams. | 0neg
|
This movie is just hilarious, It's definately the best movie Pryor or Wilder ever did. The slapstick comedy, and jokes from Pryor and Wilder still have me laughing. The plot does need some work, but it's so funny I dont even notice! If you are a fan of any of the actors in this movie, check it out. | 1pos
|
invasion of inner earth also known as;they is a extremely bad science fiction movie.we don't see any aliens or flying saucers,not even a pie plate on a string nothing,its a exercise in tedium,but the music on the soundtrack is OK.there are killer flashlight beams however.i don't get it what was directer bill rebane thinking?even the giant spider invasion was entertaining even if it was crappy.and there's no well known actors in this film.is it worth watching?i would have to say no unless you really want to be bored to death.the title does sound promising but really does'nt deliver.this is about 90 minutes ill never get back.but if you like bad dull boring movies then invasion from inner earth is for you,shame on you bill rebane.1 out of 10 awful! | 0neg
|
A guy meets a girl, calls his friend and they go for a walk together on the streets of St. Peterburg doing nothing, speaking, flirting, playing fools. In 90 minutes of a real-time film they live a hole life together. They love and hate each other, they laugh and cry, they FEEL the way you can feel only when you're 20 and the whole world belongs to you. But it seems like a girl has a strange secret. It comes out at the very end of the stroll and turns everything into a real tragedy...<br /><br />But now the young people are passing by the streets of St. Peterburg - the best city in the world, with its beautiful houses, crowded streets and a bit crazy inhabitants. This St. Peterburg we have never seen in movies before, but always new from real life. I love this film because of its wonderful image of the city and the perfect work of actors. And because this film is about us - or about us some years ago, our desire to live, feel and to do.<br /><br /> | 1pos
|
Thank you! t.v. cable cheap channels that have the courage to air this direct to video horror cheese flicks! When there's nothing to do at midnight on the week, these flicks air and believe me it's a pleasure for me to watch as I'm a lover of the low budget.<br /><br />"Butchered" follows the same plot as in "HellNight", "The Initiation", and many more slasher flicks from the early 80's. The problem is that this flick from the year 2003 doesn't offers anything you haven't seen.<br /><br />The "killer" kind of reminds me of the Garth Manion monsters from "HellNight" but not as near as scary. Ugh. This is a flick to booth from the trash can!.<br /><br />The flick has cheap gore effects, scares, and a dull direction even for a direct to video mess! Watch it if you're like me, a hardcore fan of low budget horror flicks. | 0neg
|
Brazilian Globo TV showed yesterday in it's "gala" time this film. Maybe the complete belief in the 'universal' (rather coprophagous) appetite of the masses for a bit of cheap entertainment between reality show "Big Brother" and the soporifics Late Hour News...<br /><br />On the other hand, a proof that prestige of American film in general, and of names like Schrader, Liotta, Fiennes are untouched <br /><br />If I write here right now that we took it as a bona fide self-parody, or maybe an attempt to emulate Ed Wood in producing the worst film possible - Yes, things like that are already been said before on this board, as I read above...<br /><br />The best point, to place it, after all, above the 'awfull' grade: It's funny, thanks for some sincere giggles and roar of laughters while the whole evolves - in short, a classic in the "worst of" category... (In this mood, don't' miss it!) | 1pos
|
This episode is my favourite because it best demonstrates the potential the show had to offer.<br /><br />I remember watching the pilot and anxious for the following week when the following episode was on.<br /><br />John Rhys-Davies was one of the original reasons for me watching the show because I saw him in "James Bond 007" "The Living Daylights" and "Indiana Jones".<br /><br />I think it is one of the best pilots I have seen for a show.<br /><br />The pilot gives reasonable insight into the characters of the show before they set off "sliding" into parallel worlds. | 1pos
|
I have to agree with other comments that list this show as cruel and ridiculous. I've seen them dress people that live in Miami beach in the same wool clothes that someone in nyc would wear. They are not conscious of climate differences or different styles for different cities. They impose the nyc style on everyone that is forced into the show. I'm sure it's good drama, but how useful is a wool skirt in Miami on a 20 year old club kid? Fashion is not about what you wear to the office every day but utilizing a personal style and self expression. I'd love to remake their wardrobes and mock them. I'm so sick of her pointy toed shoes. It's absolutely ridiculous and suppose someone isn't working in a corporate clone setting, this makes their fashion rules silly and obsolete. I'd like to see an actual fashion designer and someone with a demographic and climatic sense dress these people. Palm Springs, Miami, LA, Charleston, SC would not be wearing nyc fashion. It makes no sense. Clinton isn't as rude as Stacy but these two twits are annoying and ridiculous. It makes me nuts to see the show. | 0neg
|
This movie wasn't bad enough to make me fall asleep. Because I was laughing hysterically throughout the entire film. I want to know how anyone associated with Lord of the Rings (John Rhys-Davies) could allow themselves to be a part of this project. I honestly didn't know these types of films existed. When it is obvious footage is taken from the likes of Dante's Peak you know this movie will be horrible. Whoever green lit this film could have given the money to any charity and probably felt better about his/herself. After the initial "shock" that the world only has the time left for the plate to move another 20 cm or so I said to myself, "Okay were is the villain because the movie can't rely only on an evil-moving tectonic plate." And boy did the movie deliver! All in all the film is an SNL parody of all the disaster picks that plagued the late 90s. | 0neg
|
A fun to watch western containing Fess Parker's best performance, the show is stolen by Jeff Chandler's performance as the baddie you hate to see taken down. However, as outstanding as Chandler is, the real star of the film is Jerome Moross' pulse-pounding score, which predates his legendary music for THE BIG COUNTRY. It's every bit as good, if not better. Henry Silva is (of course) scuzzy as a hired gun.<br /><br />Catch it. Any western fan won't regret it. | 1pos
|
i can summarize this cinematic experience with one word: PAIN. every minute of this movie will make you feel like you crossed the yellow line, and by the end you'll be pleading for it to stop the intestination. despite a brilliant attempt to save the film by the rubber-faced Lincoln Kilpatrick, the acting is worse than atrocious. as far as the plot, words escape me. how exactly is paying to keep people locked up, fed, clothed, and boarded for 31 years less of a burden on society than having a second kid? the overhead that must be involved in running this prison is mind boggling. this is one of many questions you will ask yourself as you ride the roller-coaster of emotions this film provides. others may include: who decided the perfect soldier is a slow, clumsy, awkward animatronic plastic man with no lower jaw? if it is as easy to get to Mexico as driving through a single 15-foot fence that falls over in a stiff breeze, why did they bother to try to go through customs? why did it take until 1993 for humanity to discover that intestination is the most fantastic word ever invented? ultimately, this would have been a far better movie if it had had the benefit of being MST3Ked. As it is, you're better off going with the Mind Wipe. | 0neg
|
The kind of film that you spend 30% of your life watching, because you can't help yourself... especially when you have nothing to do late at night except to channel surf and watch B movies...<br /><br />Good premise of a film, got me interested, forgave the cheesy acting, didn't mind the simple FX, but the script was real bad. I could have cried.<br /><br />If you have nothing better to do, go to sleep. | 0neg
|
I saw this a couple of times in the late seventies. My parents had just subscribed to this new service called Cable TV, and low and behold we had a movie channel called Showtime. I watched it every day it was on. It gives new meaning to the word "Putz". I really wish it would be released on video/DVD. I don't understand why it hasn't been. It is sad that another generation hasn't had the opportunity to share the laughs. | 1pos
|
Christopher Guest has quite the resume and reputation for his quirky, awkward satirical mockumentaries, but "For Your Consideration" simply doesn't measure up with the rest.<br /><br />It's hard not to judge "Consideration" by its predecessors such as "Best in Show" and "A Mighty Wind." With the same cast, the same satirical (though not full out mockumentary) style, it simply asks for that and it doesn't succeed the way those movies do. <br /><br />The premise of "Consideration" is on the set of a movie (a ridiculous) movie and the overblown Oscar hype that the film gets. The film contains everyone from the actors to the producer in the cast, as well as a couple Hollywood-focused TV show hosts. The characters are still quirky and amusing in a subtle way, yet something is off. Their depth and the interest in what is happening to them is non-existent and it makes it harder to laugh at the them in the long run and considering characters tend to drive Guest's films, that makes it tough from the get-go.<br /><br />The plot is simply not as intriguing as well. This perhaps lies in the fact that the focus is not on something obscure like dog shows or traveling folk musicians, but instead on basic Hollywood, which offers less genuine interest in subject alone. Compound that with the weak characters and you have a huge Guest disappointment. | 0neg
|
I love this movie! I've seen it about four times, and every time I see it, Ramon Novarro gets cuter and cuter. He portrays the lazy and carefree islander to perfection, and Renee Adoree's performance is as heartbreaking as that in THE BIG PARADE. As a big fan of Donald Crisp, and used to his roles as kindly father figures, the lech he portrays in this film is a bit jarring, but he does an admirable job, considering he was really a big-hearted marshmallow. One of the greatest films in the twilight of the silent era. | 1pos
|
Hands down, this is my favorite concert DVD out of the many I have watched. I would say the best, but "best" is such a subjective term. This features, of course, David Coverdale as a prime example of sounding at least as good as he ever has, and quite possibly better. As for the rest of Whitesnake, I don't think he has ever assembled a better supporting cast. It has been previously been noted, quite accurately, that Doug Aldrich is given the lion's share of solos in this lineup. But Reb Beach definitely has his moments, and his brilliance does shine through more than once. Tommy Aldridge is a king in my book. What a drummer! I also think Marco Mendoza is the absolute best bass player around, at least in the style of bass he plays. I give this a 10 out of 10.<br /><br />However if it were possible I would deduct about 3/10 for the omission of 2 songs. I can't begin to understand why "Slow N' Easy' and "Slide It In" were left off of this. Truth be told, I could go the rest of my life without ever hearing "Bad Boys" again. The same can be said for "Take Me With You", although they worked that one up really well. But if you take those two away, you definitely have room for two more songs that I find indispensable. Yet these glaring omissions can't take away how marvelous this performance was. As a bonus, when you purchase this DVD, you get a bonus CD with about half of the show on it. I don't possess the words to describe how much i recommend this. I give this a 9.7 GOD bless David Coverdale!!!! | 1pos
|
A reasonably involving, decent drama, but obviously Ken Loach's main concern it to unable us to have a clearer idea of what is really going on with our 'brave new world', globalization, we all need to work harder to compete, people in China need to work harder, everyone needs to work harder, and out of this sinister scam, unending progress etc. there is still half a billion people on planet hearth who don't have enough to eat and a few people filling their pockets. What we get from the media is selective snippets of information and outright lies, while none of this bunch of mercenary hacks would even dream of questioning the soundness of the oligarchic plutocratic system we call democracy! So I guess Ken is right, we need educating! And what better way to do that that to show us how the whole thing works in practice, the smaller wheels, the larger ones, the cogs. The people traffickers in Eastern Europe and elsewhere, the people mercilessly exploiting illegal emigrants in this country. The protagonist is a working class, down-on- her-luck, single mother. She, together with her flatmate and friend, uses her previous working experience to create a small but profitable working agency for illegal emigrants. She is just a troubled person, she's worried about social services taking her son away. She thinks she deserves credit, because instead of living on the dole (welfare), she's trying to crate a business, to 'make something of herself'. Just another little well meaning cog then! The voice of reason is represented by her working class father, who, without being idealogical and in a down to earth way tries to explain to his daughter what it is really going on: 'entire country being deprived of their teachers and doctors coming to this country to work as plumbers and builders, the only people to profit from this scam is big business!' Keep educating us Ken, because we badly need it! | 1pos
|
STAR RATING: ***** The Works **** Just Misses the Mark *** That Little Bit In Between ** Lagging Behind * The Pits <br /><br />Karl Thommasson (Treat Williams) returns to teach at a tough school after a stint in Kosovo, to honour a promise to a fallen comrade in that war in the shape of taking care of his teacher daughter. He discovers a drug racketeering ring operating in the school and must stop it forthwith.<br /><br />In a role originally written for Tom Berenger, Treat Williams here returns after appearing in the first sequel. He does have a good presence as an action hero (very Steven Seagal) but sadly he is not enough to stop this dreary sequel from emerging as a sad re-hash of the last one, complete with inconsistent villains and a rather surprising lack of action. With this one behind it, I don't hold out much hope for Part 4. ** | 0neg
|
i don,t understand at all what has to do Albanian restaurant with Arabic music,,i saw the scene when they were in sk Albanian restaurant and the only thing Albanian there was the flag,,nothing else,,albaniens does nor have bellydancers in their places,,but i guess ,,someone when wanna make fool of albaniens did payed a lot of money to mix Albanian people with middle easy people,,probably it was Russians or Serbs who payed those money to George gallo for mixing albaniens with Arabic people,,nothing wrong ,,people are all same everywhere,,good or bad,,but AL least when you try to make something Albanian,,make that in right way,,not only lies there,,as an Albanian,,i feel humiliated by that horrible music,,pretending to be Albanian music,,but it was not Albanian AT all | 0neg
|
I went to the video store expecting great things from what I've heard. I don't have to have a totally action packed movie in order to enjoy it, but wow... this movie is a pretty honest account of something like what many people go through, but still... geez. I get enough of the same old stuff in real life. I gave Dancer Texas a 4 out of 10. | 0neg
|
I am a serious film lover who keeps up with the best new films. I stumbled across To End All Wars when it was shown recently on one of the Starz/Encore channels. At the end, I kept asking myself why I had never heard of it. The film is nowhere to be found in Roger Ebert's reviews or Leonard Maltin's annual guide, and yet I suspect that Ebert, at least, would rate this film very highly.<br /><br />I like films that are about something that is important, at least to me, and not just pure entertainment. Not that I don't enjoy a good action-adventure film or light comedy from time to time, but most of the time, I prefer to spend my time watching films that make me think and perhaps even ask questions of myself.<br /><br />To End All Wars is one such film. The Bridge on the River Kwai, which deals with the same historical events, is not, despite its many strong points. In this respect, To End All Wars is the better film, and the one that I am more likely to watch frequently.<br /><br />Despite its title, the film is not really about war. What it is about is the efforts of a small group of men, and one man in particular, to maintain their faith, their sense of values, and their very sanity under horrible, murderous conditions that would drive most men to insanity or to become murderers themselves.<br /><br />The film forces me to ask myself whether I could have done the same under those conditions. To be honest, I'm afraid to ask the question because I may not like the answer.<br /><br />Although the film depicts many horrible things, it is not a depressing film, at least for me. Rather, it's a positive, hopeful film, in the same way that Schindler's List is a positive, hopeful film. If one man, in the case of Schindler, or a small group of men, in the case of the ones in this film, can maintain their sanity, faith, and values in a world that has gone insane, then there is hope for mankind.<br /><br />As for the references to their Christian faith, it is not laid on with a trowel, as it might be in a lesser film. It is simply there as an important part of their lives. Whether or not we share that faith is beside the point. What is important is that they shared it, and that faith helped them to survive.<br /><br />Could the director and the writers have made their points even more effectively? Probably. Would I have liked to have known more about the individual characters? Definitely. Would the film have benefited from a larger budget? Possibly.<br /><br />All of these questions are moot, however. Every film deserves to be judged on its own terms, on the basis of what it is and not what it might have been. Not every film can be another Citizen Kane or Rules of the Game, nor should it be.<br /><br />Taken on its own merits, To End All Wars is an excellent film that I expect to watch many times and recommend to my family and friends as well. The fact that the film never got proper distribution, at least in the United States, and therefore never got the recognition that it deserves, shows just how shallow and superficial the Hollywood film industry has become. Thankfully it is available on DVD. | 1pos
|
I love this movie madly. . I saw it four days ago and it still hasn't let go of me. Floyd, Walter and Ricco have only one last night together to come to terms with the fact that Floyd will ship out on a freighter the next morning. They drift into that bleak Hamburg night like they would on any other, and the mundane becomes suddenly extraordinary as the reality of the impending farewell percolates through their celebration . What they leave behind in the night, is that total abandon you can only afford those few years between being a kid and suddenly being old.<br /><br />This is one from the heart. It's got everything, the riotous humor and fun of outrunning the crew of an Elvis stuntshow, the tempo and jumpcuts of a strobelight punkclub, a heart as big as the V 8 Walter puts in his Ford Granada and the thrill of a deathmatch...in foosball !!<br /><br />The film reminds us how intoxicating friendship can be and how good it can feel to be that drunk from a toast to a leaving friend. Like the perfect song: happy in its rhythm, sad in its melody. Floyd says early into the film something like" I wish everyone could have his own soundtrack, that there would always be music. So that if you're really down, there would still be the music...and when you're the happiest in your life the record would skip and the moment would never end..." After their last night, when Floyd looks up into the Hamburg sky one last time, the soundtrack to the film DOES skip and captures that perfect moment, the essence of parting, that loss that really isn't and that unbearable inevitability that tomorrow your best friends will be far away.<br /><br />I can only hope that this total charmer finds a distributor in the U.S.. I'm sure it would find an audience somewhere in the same aisles that loved that "Big Wednesday" coming of age urgency, the tempo and irreverence of "Go", the unpretentious humor of "It's a jungle out there" or " No more Mr. nice guy" and the unspoken loyalty in any of the "Winnetou" movies. As for Sebastian Schipper the Director, whose eloquence in talking about his film ( and cars ) at the German Filmfestival in Los Angeles rivals the ease with which this film speaks to you - In a way I'm already sorry to see him becoming famous. He'll soon join Tom Tykwer as the posterboy for the new german film and I'm afraid he'll lose his genius eye and savant heart much like he lost his enthusiasm for foosball........ | 1pos
|
A beautifully directed, well acted, and consistently faithful adaptation of the first of Sigrid Undset's Nobel Prize-winning novels about her fourteenth-century fictitious heroine, Kristin Lavransdatter. The movie perfectly captures the genius of the novel(s), the external and internal drama of a young woman's struggle with pride and sin, her rebellion against the good and yet her longing for it. Kristin's religious milieu, sympathetically but not sentimentally portrayed in the movie, forms a powerful backdrop against which this drama plays out. My only regret is that they did not make sequels out of the second and third Lavransdatter novels to complete the trilogy, since, indeed, the ending of the movie and of the first novel leave you hungering for more. | 1pos
|
I remember reading the book Jewels a long time ago. I was going through a Danielle Steel faze and fell in love with this book. <br /><br />So I was thrilled when they made a movie about it. <br /><br />I have to admit, I loved the first part of the movie best. The romance between Sarah and William was my favorite part in the book and in the movie.<br /><br />My other favorite aspect of the movie was Anthony Andrews as William. I love this actor, ever since I saw him as a kid in two movies I loved, Ivanhoe and The Scarlett Pimpernel. Casting him in the role of William Whitfield lent the TV melodrama a real sense of legitimacy. He is a great actor, and the perfect choice to play the Duke. Not only is he devastatingly handsome, he has a great sense of humor. You first saw it in The Scarlet Pimpernel, and was very important for this movie.<br /><br />I say that hesitantly though because I have to say that I was very disappointed that almost all of the humor shared between William and Sarah was taken out of the movie. I remember when I read the book, I had tears rolling down my cheeks because I was laughing so hard. And I was horrified to hear only one or two lines from the book shared between both characters.<br /><br />While I loved Anthony Andrews as William, I was not as certain about the actress playing Sarah. I like Annette O'Toole, I really do, but I didn't in this movie. I felt her acting was too over the top in some scenes and she was described much differently in the book and maybe I was too influenced by that description to really enjoy the performance. I found Annette's shaking her head from side to side to be too distracting.<br /><br />Like the book, I lost interest during the Nazi invasion, and there was another major change. In the book, the character of Philip actually loved the character of Joachim Von Mannheim, the Nazi who had taken over the château during the war, but in the movie, he hated him.<br /><br />The rest of the story involving the children interested me even less. With the exception of the brothers all being cute, the last part of the movie was very boring. Typical spoiled brats all making huge mistakes, hurting their mother.<br /><br />Spoiler:<br /><br />The ending was the dumbest I have ever seen for a miniseries. The idea that Julian would associate not only with his brother, but his ex-wife, who left Julian for Philip, and gave him their son, without caring a thing about it was ludicrous. There was the whole family, at a christening, including Philip and Julian's ex-wife, standing next to her son, and everyone is happily smiling at one another. Please!<br /><br />This ending did not happen in the book, and I was very disappointed by it.<br /><br />This is really the Jewel in the crown of all Danielle Steel novels made into a TV movie. But for anyone who read the book and loved it like me, there are some big disappointments.<br /><br />Still a good watch, very romantic in many places. | 0neg
|
I could have accepted a lot of the 'artistic license' used in this film if it were claiming to be a movie based on fact, rather than presenting itself as a documentary. A previous comment does a good job of pointing out the errors in the added period footage.<br /><br />It was a good introduction into a serial murderer I'd never heard of. It was also a disgusting overly dramatized exercise in attempting to concentrate more on the gross out factor than reporting the facts. Not content to describe once how good certain parts of a child's body were when roasted and eaten, it describes the heinous deeds in fact and again in a first person voice-over narrated by an actor playing Albert Fish.<br /><br />For shock affect it delved into ramming the details of his crimes down the throat of the viewer, again and again. At the expense of his victims and their families the film wallows in filth and was offensive in the extreme because of it. Either we're too stupid to digest the horror of his acts, or sales were forefront and above any other consideration the film makers claim.<br /><br />It's not a documentary. A documentary informs us of real events without trying to sicken people with fictitious scenes added catering to the director's opinion of what took place. That's fiction. It's not a movie, in a movie you can accept that 'based on' gives the director license to add whatever he thinks will sell. It is a sick perverted film on a sick perverted killer but that not being enough, it approaches the same type of sick twisted deeds on film, that Fish did in person. In this, the film makers succeed in showing their perverted intention on wringing out every last drop of human suffering in their own race for sales.<br /><br />Joe Coleman, obviously delighted to lay claim to notoriety by surrounding himself with the artifacts of the infamous and psychotic members of our society, sits smugly as he tells us he's thrilled to have the original letter sent to one victim's family, describing what Fish did to their child. How he was 'meant' to have it. Most serial murderers take trophies and this particular derelict of humanity, Coleman, does the same here, living with the material surrounding the worst part of themselves humanity has to offer. If any proof was needed for what I'm saying here, it's in the repeated interviews with this piece of crap. His sole participation in this film should have been only in examining this letter. Instead we're treated to repeated interview segments with no other reason than to try and help sell this presentation of crap.<br /><br />These flaws ruin what could have been a remarkable recounting of Fish's deeds. The makers of this prostituted themselves for sales and in doing so, reflect a watered down mirror of the same sort of sickness Fish succumbed to. It's a perverted reporting of a perverted person and because of this they have more in common with this man than they may want to realize. | 0neg
|
Subsets and Splits