Reviews

27 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
9/10
Dead Men May Not Tell Tales... But This One Was Pretty Good.
14 July 2003
I went to this movie half expecting it to be nothing more than a hokey Disney POS. Boy, was I surprised! It was actually very entertaining. Not what you'd expect from Disney at all.

I knew Johnny Depp could do comedy bits... so the fact that his character was so lovable was not a surprise. However, this was the first time I've seen Orlando Bloom do a bit of comedy mixed into the action, and he did it very well.

The movie was filled with funny bits, plenty of action, well developed characters (my fav), and a decent plot (another key factor).

So what's there to complain about? The only thing I can think of is the make-up. Johnny Depp was made to look like a freaking nancy boy! He was wearing enough eyeliner to scare Marilyn Manson. I could've done a better job. Even after what seems like hours in the water, no one's 10 pounds of mascara was running. Unbelievable!

The special effects were amazing, (particularly the skeletons changing form in the moonlight as they walk through the water), and somewhat disturbing, (wooden eyeball... that's all I have to say).

But overall, this was a very enjoyable movie. If you don't go to see it for the gorgeous men in shredded shirts... see it for a good chuckle and some cool fight scenes (esp. the scene in the blacksmith shop). It has some very funny bits as well as tense battles. This was ultimately a very entertaining film.

One last thing... avoid looking too long at Orlando Bloom's hat in the final scene. I felt I would go blind if I had to look at that dumb feather for more than 10 seconds. It brought a new definition to the word "fugly"... or "f#$%ing ugly" as it were.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ravenous (1999)
"You are who you eat"... and I puked this up.
5 January 2003
Warning: Spoilers
This movie brings a new meaning to the word "stupid". It actually seems to try to be bad. The beginning is interesting, (if you exclude the stomach-churning scene in which heros of war literally suck up their meat.) The story does not hold together at all. It is totally unbelievable and often confusing. Although the theme of "man eats another man to live and becomes addicted to human flesh" is interesting, the plot is full of holes and leaves the viewer in a state of confusion and disgust. As I've said before, if the script stinks, nothing will save the movie. This one was dead before filming began.

*Spoilers*

Boyd has just been awarded for being a coward in battle. He faked death to save his own life as his men were shot. However, he did manage to sneak into the enemy's camp and save the day. Now he's been promoted and brought to a nothing fort for God-knows what reason. While there, a stranger, Ives, appears in the camp and claims that he and the rest of his wagon train got lost and began to starve in the wilderness. In order to survive, they ate the flesh of the dead. When their guide begins to kill the living, Ives tells how he made a run for it and wound up at the fort, however, he left two others behind. Feeling patriotic, Boyd and the other camp members decide to go take a look-see. To no one's surprise, Ives isn't what he appears to be and goes on a killing spree leaving no one but Boyd alive. So, of course, no one believes Boyd when he tells of the events. That's when Ives reappears, but in a new fashion and begins his rampage yet again, and no one has knowledge of his true identity except Boyd. And now Boyd begins to feel the urge to taste human flesh. Can he stop himself? Will he hold back? Can he save the others!?...... Who cares? None of the characters are worth caring about. (Except poor Toffler... but he did whine a little too much.)

*More Spoilers*

What a waste of talent! I am a fan of Guy Pearce, David Carlyle, and Jeremy Davies... but, dear God, what were they thinking!? The plot was terrible (Ives' return as an officer. Where'd that come from?), the acting left something to be desired (Thank you David Arquette. We can always count on you.), and I guess the director thought "more blood means bigger audience". Uh.... no. The excessive gore was unnecessary. Avoid this movie at all costs. Take a nice walk instead. You're time will be better spent.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ravenous (1999)
"You are who you eat"... and I puked this up.
5 January 2003
Warning: Spoilers
This movie brings a new meaning to the word "stupid". It actually seems to try to be bad. The beginning is interesting, (if you exclude the stomach-churning scene in which heros of war literally suck up their meat.) The story does not hold together at all. It is totally unbelievable and often confusing. Although the theme of "man eats another man to live and becomes addicted to human flesh" is interesting, the plot is full of holes and leaves the viewer in a state of confusion and disgust. As I've said before, if the script stinks, nothing will save the movie. This one was dead before filming began.

*Spoilers*

Boyd has just been awarded for being a coward in battle. He faked death to save his own life as his men were shot. However, he did manage to sneak into the enemy's camp and save the day. Now he's been promoted and brought to a nothing fort for God-knows what reason. While there, a stranger, Ives, appears in the camp and claims that he and the rest of his wagon train got lost and began to starve in the wilderness. In order to survive, they ate the flesh of the dead. When their guide begins to kill the living, Ives tells how he made a run for it and wound up at the fort, however, he left two others behind. Feeling patriot, Boyd and the other camp members decide to go take a look-see. To no one's surprise, Ives isn't what he appears to be and goes on a killing spree leaving no one but Boyd alive. So, of course, no one believes Boyd when he tells of the events. That's when Ives reappears, but in a new fashion and begins his rampage yet again, and no one has knowledge of his true identity except Boyd. And now Boyd begins to feel the urge to taste human flesh. Can he stop himself? Will he hold back? Can he save the others!?...... Who cares? None of the characters are worth caring about. (Except poor Toffler... but he did whine a little too much.)

*More Spoilers*

What a waste of talent! I am a fan of Guy Pearce, David Carlyle, and Jeremy Davies... but, dear God, what were they thinking!? The plot was terrible (Ives' return as an officer. Where'd that come from?), the acting left something to be desired (Thank you David Arquette. We can always count on you.), and I guess the director thought "more blood means bigger audience". Uh.... no. The excessive gore was unnecessary. Avoid this movie at all costs. Take a nice walk instead. You're time will be better spent.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Deuces Wild (2002)
9/10
Another "West Side Story" but much more entertaining
20 September 2002
I had been waiting quite a while for this movie to come out. Mainly, because I was waiting to see what work Brad Renfro was doing now that he's out of jail. I was happy with the cast. Almost everyone seemed fit for their part and did a wonderful job. However, I thought that Brad's love interest, Annie, (Vicky Valencourt from "The Water Boy") didn't really fit the looks of what I thought she would be. She was too dark looking to be the "popular girl" on the block. She looked like she should be joining the gang fights instead of watching.

The movie focuses on Leon (Stephen Dorff- "Blade", "S.F.W") who, after his brother's death from a drug overdose, vows to keep the streets clean and creates a gang called "The Deuces" to make sure it stays that way. Aided by his kid brother, Bobby, (Brad Renfro- "The Client", "Sleepers") Leon is able to put the city's biggest drug dealer, Marco (Norman Reedus- "Gossip", "Blade II") in prison for 3 years, and the streets remain safe. That is, until the day Marco gets out and vows to make Leon pay for his 3 years of hell. Meanwhile, Bobby has fallen for the sister of a "Viper," the Deuces' rival gang, but promises he doesn't care about what "turf" she lives on, only what he feels for her. Although Leon objects to the couple and tries to remain calm to keep non-violence as long as possible, Marco makes sure that he tortures Leon to the point of no return, at which point, all hell breaks loose and blood is shed on both sides of the gangs.

Wonderfully acted on all parts. Stephen Dorff is wonderful as the hero, although it's still hard for me to picture him as anything but evil after his magnificent performance in "Blade." Brad Renfro has finally gotten his act together, and I'm happy to see him working again. He is a superb actor and this film lets him shine. Norman Reedus somewhat portrays his character from "Boondock Saints" as he stalks around as the revenge seeking villain and pulls it off very well. I'm a big fan of his. Matt Dillon, although hardly seen, gives an excellent performance as the sleazy head mobster tearing at the underbelly of the "fair" town. And finally, Frankie Muniz is adorable as Scooch, the somewhat adopted son of Leon whose dream is to become a Deuce. Overall, this was a very entertaining and intriguing movie. It was definitely worth the wait, and I highly recommend it. ******** 1/2 /10
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Blade II (2002)
3/10
Good thing this is a vampire movie... cuz it sucked!
15 September 2002
Warning: Spoilers
Ha ha ha! Little pun there. But that's the kind of corniness you get in this movie. Terrible plot and acting! It totally ruined the first Blade for me, which I thought was wonderful, esp. with Steven Dorff as the bad guy you love to hate. But all that was flushed when Snipes actually agreed to do this movie. I can't believe he didn't burn the script the minute he read it.



*Spoilers*

The absolute worst part was the fact that they brought Whistler back. I liked the fact that he was sort of a martyr in the first movie. Why couldn't they just let that be?

The plot was so utterly confusing and unbelievable... and I'm talking in the vampire world. These things just can't happen. It ruins the entire legend behind the vampire. You can't just change it because you think it will add to your sorry plot! The plot takes so many twists and turns that you have no idea who's good or evil or who's good but pretending to be evil or visa versa.

The story begins when Blade must make a choice between taking sides with the enemy to destroy a new breed of killer that's feeding on vampires or just let them wipe out what's left of the vampire race. Well duh! Blade wants vampires dead, right? Why not let the monsters finish them off and then wipe them out? Seems easy enough in the daylight.

*More Spoilers* The absolute worst scene appears when Blade gets into a pretty interesting fight with ninja-like vamps that are trying to stab him to death in his own hideout. But then they take off their ninja masks and... oops... we didn't want to kill you. We're just delivering a message. Well, then why didn't you say that to begin with!!! I'm sorry but stupid writing like this deserves to be criticized!

Now onto bashing the acting. Where did they dig up the girl vamp? Is she the director's cousin or something, because there was little acting going on when she was on the set. I would like to applaud Kris Kristofferson for giving a decent performance given the circumstances. I'd also like to give Norman Reedus a pat on the back. I'm an avid fan of his and I have yet to see him do badly in a film, although I was a little upset with his final scene in the movie. Wesley Snipes had little acting to do. He was supposed to be emotionless anyway. But dear god, couldn't he have refused to do it until a better version of the sequel was written!? I liked the fight scenes, but the plot is more important. And it was sucked dry. Save this one for a day when you feel like watching a bomb. This one didn't even take 5 minutes for me to dislike. A **/10
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Signs (2002)
10/10
Swing Away!
3 August 2002
What a spectacular movie! I read many reviews before going to see this, (which was set in my home town of Bucks County!! You wouldn't believe the turn out on opening night.) Anyway, many of the reviews said that this movie was either confusing at the end or had nothing to do with aliens. Both of which are completely false. The whole story was based upon the aliens and only a small portion was based on the story surrounding Father Graham Hess (Mel Gibson) and his disbelief in a higher power after the death of his wife. The ending was not confusing in the least. It was straight to the point and left you with a secure feeling, (unlike other movies of this genre.)

The nightmare begins when, in the very first scene of the movie, Hess' family discovers huge crop circles on their property. They are so perfect that many believe they couldn't have been created by man. And it is a 'sign' of the coming of the end of the world. Hess refuses to believe that they were created by a higher power, since he gave up his faith and job as a minister after the death of his wife. Aided only by his brother (Joaquin Phoenix) to take care of his son and daughter, (Rory Culkin and adorable Abigal Breslin), Graham tries as hard as he can to find another explanation to this phenomenon. But it turns out that the critters from space have plans for the population of the earth. And Hess is running out of time to save his family.

Now it's time to talk about the superb acting. I must say that, as usual, Joaquin Phoenix did a excellent job. No words were needed to tell exactly what he was thinking. I was surprised, however, to see that he was the comic relief, a role he hardly ever plays. But he pulled it off beautifully and had a real sense of how to demand attention. I found myself gasping and biting my nails in one scene and then laughing hysterically in the next, all because Phoenix would casually make a comment that eased the tension. (Look out for scenes where he explains why he believes in miracles and why nerds don't have girlfriends, they left me panting on the floor of the theater.) Then he would break into a totally serious performance that left me in shock. Mel Gibson did his usual serious/concerned act. But he does it well. In many scenes, you can see exactly how torn he is between the idea of the aliens being a gift from a higher power or yet another curse to destroy his family. His does a wonderful job playing the fatherly figure. But the Oscar goes to Abigal Breslin. She reminded me so much of the little, 3 year old girl I babysit that I actually wanted to give her a big hug and tell her not to cry. It broke my heart so much to see her tear up that I had to remind myself she was just acting. And she can't be more than 5 years old! It simply amazed me how well she did. Rory Culkin also pulled off one of his best performances. Unlike his brother's career that came to a steaming halt, I believe that he will go much farther after this movie.

In conclusion, I would just like to say that this is a top notch picture and deserves the 10 out of 10 stars I gave it. The first time you see it, it will keep you in suspense the entire time. The tension will literally keep your eyes glued to the screen. *Just remember to wear your tinfoil hat!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
One of the Most Moving War Films I've Ever Seen
30 July 2002
Despite some bad reviews, being the war film fanatic that I am, I went to see this movie. I was expecting something much like U-571, (Men trapped in a disabled boat surrounded by the enemy), and this movie wasn't far from it. I must say that U-571 is my all-time favorite war picture, so I didn't expect The Widowmaker to surpass it. However, it came very close. The story was told well and the acting from most of the newcomers was superb. However, when I left the theater, I didn't want to watch it again for a long while. Not that it was a bad movie. It was just a little too graphic. I'm one who can watch people get blown to bits, decapitated, and crushed, however, since this story is true and the way these men suffered before they died a horrible death, was a little too much for me to watch. I know they couldn't have filmed it any other way. That is what makes this movie so good... the mere fact that I was uneasy while watching it. I found myself gasping... (I'm not one to gasp.)

The film is based on the story of a Russian sea captain (Harrison Ford) that is ordered to command a new nuclear powered submarine that has been thrown together in a very short amount of time. The objective is to test a missile near the north pole in hopes that the Russian government can catch up to the US who is threatening nuclear war. Although the crew is hesitant to board the ship, they fear the captain's wrath and work without complaint. Of course, the captain is 'do or die' and works the crew mercilessly, much to the dismay of the ship's original captain (Liam Neeson), who can do nothing but watch as his crew gets ready for mutiny. When the nuclear generator malfunctions, it is up to a few brave men to expose themselves to radiation and try and fix the power before disaster strikes and World War 3 begins. What I found most disturbing was the captain's refusal for American help until 7 men were dead and hundreds more were already exposed to dangerous levels of radiation. Watching these brave men slow-cook themselves for the rest of the crew was enough to make me cringe, (while other men dove into freezing water rather than go back into a radioactive submarine.)

All in all, this movie was a bit too much reality for me. However, it was wonderfully written, directed, and acted. I gave it ********/10.
14 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Gossip (I) (2000)
8/10
Pssst... Did you hear? This movie bombed!
5 July 2002
Warning: Spoilers
Well, not totally. But it definitely left something to be desired. The plot starts out well and is very intriguing. However, the story takes some twists and turns that make it confusing and unbelievable.

The plot begins with three college friends, Cathy (Lena Headey, "The Devil's Advocate,") Derek (James Marsden, "Disturbing Behavior,") and Travis (Norman Reedus, "Deuces Wild,") who find they are very good at starting rumors. They decide to use this talent to do an experiment for a class in which they begin a rumor, track it around campus, and see how it changes and spreads. The poor subjects of their experiment are Beau (Joshua Jackson, TV's "Dawson's Creek") and Naomi (Kate Hudson, "Almost Famous.") While at a party, Derek discovers a situation between Beau and Naomi that soon becomes the rumor. However, when the rumor takes a drastic turn and students start accusing Beau of rape, Cathy and Travis must try and convince Derek that what they've started may lead to something worse. And when Naomi is found dead, the three roomates must fight among themselves and their consciences to fix a rumor that gave them more than what they bargained for.

James Marsden gives an excellent, evil performance. Norman Reedus puts a lot into his character that excels in the end. And Joshua Jackson gives a wonderful performance as a wrongly accused man. I found Lena Headey and Kate Hudson's acting somewhat bland and boring. The movie seems to try too hard when trying to surprise you. In fact, it tries so hard that it creates way too many "I have an ulterior motive" and "I'm not what you think I am" side stories. If it just went down to the basic facts and left a little of the confusion out, it would have been much better. Possibly a 10 star movie. However, because I got hopelessly lost by the end, it only earned ******/10.
26 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
I'm only paranoid cuz people are following me!
4 July 2002
When I first watched this movie, I was sure there was something missing. The story made sense, but it seemed that there was more that they just didn't want to show us. So I investigated, and there indeed were many scenes that were left out of the film. Some include Gavin breaking into the morgue to find the dead girl's body, Steve's parents finding the gun he stole from Gavin, a scene which includes Katie Holmes and James Marsden hooking up, and more. These scenes have great importance in the story line. Why were they taken out? To save time? Lots of movies run over two hours. They could've taken out some other less important scenes other than the ones they left on the cutting room floor. The original also had a different ending, (which you can see on the DVD.)

*Warning: spoliler* Gavin originally shows up on the boat just as Steve thinks he's safe, and UV ends up having to shoot his best friend in order to save everyone. (As opposed to Gavin becoming a student teacher at another school and starting the "perfect kids" all over again.)

The tension begins when Steve (James Marsden, "X-Men") and his family, after the tragic suicide of his brother (Ethan Embry, "Empire Records"), move to the small town of Cradle Bay. Steve tries to find a place in his new school and ends up making friends with two pot heads, one of which is a paranoid named Gavin (Nick Stahl, "In the Bedroom") that's certain the perfect jocks and cheerleaders are lobotomized, and the other is an albino nicknamed UV. Steve soon meets Gavin's punk friend, Rachel (Katie Holmes, "Teaching Mrs. Tingle,") and falls hard. Gavin tries to convince him that the perfect kids, called the Blue Ribbons, are out to get everybody that they consider "bad," (smoking, drinking, and sex are big no-no's.) Not believing any of Gavin's paranoia stories, Steve is offered the chance to become a Blue Ribbon, but after Gavin suddenly disappears and returns to school as a totally different person, Steve starts to believe what Gavin was scared of is actually real. Aided only by Rachel, UV, and the school janitor, Mr. Newberry, (a former friend of Gavin's that knows more than what he admits,) Steve must try to stop the Blue Ribbons before they take over. This is a great thriller. The acting was done fairly well. Thumbs up to Nick Stahl and William Sadler, (Mr. Newberry,) for their great performances. Some of the other characters needed more development, but I think the scenes that were cut out would've helped in that department. All-in-all, this was a fun movie. I gave it *******/10.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Not as bad as everyone says it is... but not as good either
30 June 2002
I was intrigued, after hearing many different points of views on this movie, to go see it. So I go to this used tape store, (why rent it for $5 when you can buy it for $2?) and buy it. I just wanted to see which side I agreed with. Most people that stated their opinions, said that this movie was a waste of time. Other people said it was the best movie they've ever seen, but I'm guessing they were fans of the video game or the 1977 version of this movie, both of which I've never seen. To go straight to the point and make it easy for those who don't know whether to see it or not, I'll let you decide for yourself based on my opinion. So to make it simple I'll just say the good and bad stuff about it.

Bad Stuff:

~Freddie Prinze Jr. sucks at acting. There's no other way to put it. I got very bored watching his one expression and monotone voice.

~Right from the beginning, I thought the music was terrible. Music is supposed to drag you in from the beginning and give you a sense of what's coming, (think "Jaws.") This just made me feel like I was about to see Captain America.

~The alien make-up was so extremely ridiculous that they looked like overgrown house pets. Not scary at all.

~I got tired of hearing people state the obvious. "Hey! I think something's wrong!" Well, aren't you the sharp one. The exploding bombs and loud "red alert" beeping didn't give it away, did it?

~The story had it's boring moments. There were parts I didn't follow and soon didn't even care, because I had gotten so lost by then it didn't matter.

~*This may or may not be a downside* I wasn't sure if the accents in this movie were taken from the video game or original, but it was way too weird. We had a Scottish guy, a ton of Englishmen, Americans, and some Asians. How did they all get on this one ship?

Good Stuff:

~Matthew Lillard did a fabulous job. I'm so used to seeing him act like an a**hole, (no offense, think "Scream.") that I wasn't expecting the serious performance he gave. It blew me away how serious he had to be in some scenes, and he pulled it off beautifully. (Although I gave the movie 5 stars, I would like to give his performance a 10.)

~The plotline, although confusing, did have it's certain interesting moments. I don't know which came first, Starship Troopers or this, but I have a feeling one of them is a rip-off of the first. However, it certainly had it's moments that put you in suspense.

~The special effect were great. It reminded me a lot of Star Wars. And the battle scenes were exciting.

~The rest of the cast didn't do too bad a job of acting. I was able to feel sorry for most of them.

I gave this movie a 5. If you have nothing better to do, I suggest you watch it. I certainly have seen worse, (read my review of "Jeepers Creepers.") If you liked "Starship Troopers" this is a movie for you. However, if you want something more out of a Sci-Fi movie of this sort, I suggest "Pitch Black." *****/10
63 out of 94 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dracula 2000 (2000)
7/10
Makes No Sense... But It's Still Fun!
28 June 2002
This film made way too many mistakes when it came to the actual histroy of Dracula and Bram Stoker. However, it was a lot better than I thought it would be. The concept of the thieves opening Dracula's coffin was original and interesting. I also liked the fact that Dracula had a goal, not just "KILL! KILL! KILL!" And he was brief when he spoke, which was good. There's nothing less scary than a bad-guy that just won't shut up! However, I didn't like the fact that after all this creepy stuff happened, and people were dying, those guys still took the coffin on a plane! And who the heck would poke at a dead body covered with leeches?! C'mon now. I do realize that this is a Wes Craven film, and he is known for his "I'm going to answer the door" kind of horror films. However, these guys made some really dumb moves. It was also kind of confusing how one of the characters, Simon, goes from vampire non-believer to rouge demon hunter in like 30 minutes. Other than that I found the film very entertaining with lots of scares. You can also catch a lot of cameos of other stars you wouldn't expect to be in this kind of movie. All-in-all it was entertaining with a fresh look at the vampire theme.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Moulin Rouge! (2001)
10/10
The Greatest Thing You'll Ever Learn...
27 May 2002
Is just to see this movie! This is perhaps one of the best movies I've ever seen. It starts out with scenes that make you feel like you're on drugs but soon turns into a wonderful story. Nicole Kidman and Ewan McGregor are superb as Satine and Christian, who become the Romeo and Juliet of France. Satine's a high class prostitute that mistakes Christian, a poor poet, for a Duke and makes him fall in love with her. Meanwhile, the real Duke obtains the deeds to the Moulin Rouge, an exciting night club, and demands that he own Satine while he is there. Zidler, Satine's pimp, orders her to end any feelings she has for Christian, in fear he will lose ownership of the Moulin Rouge. But the lovers will not be torn apart and all hell breaks loose until the final, tragic ending. This is a must-see movie filled with laughs, gasps, beautiful songs, and some intense dance numbers. (Watch for the "Roxanne" dance number, it keeps you on the edge of your seat.)I particularly like Christian's quotes: "The greatest thing you'll ever learn is just to love and be loved in return." I was very sad to see that this won almost no Oscars, but I gave it a 10. Just remember: All you need is love! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Freedom~~Beauty~~Truth~~Love~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Pitch Black (2000)
9/10
One of the best Sci-Fi pictures in years.
17 May 2002
Although the concept seems slightly stupid, the movie pulls you in right from the gripping beginning. It is one of the few movies where you root for the bad guy, (that isn't all bad, of course.) Vin Diesel is wonderful and intimidating as Ridick, an escaped convict that can see in the dark because of implants in his eyes. When a ship carrying him back to prison crashes on a planet filled with creatures that only come out when it's dark, he is the only hope for the rest of the crew if they want to get to safety. The movie grips you from the beginning to the end. Acting is superb and the story actually has many surprising twists that keep you in suspense. The fact that you hardly get a glimpse of the aliens makes it even more scary to watch. This is a must-see movie!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Bully (2001)
2/10
Almost too painful to watch
5 May 2002
After reading the book, I thought they would at least clean up all the sex and drug use a little bit. Nope. They showed it all. I realize that all of this is true, which makes it even more scary to think that these kids could do this and think they could get away with it. Although, it probably sounded good at the time, since they were doped out of their minds. The acting left something to be desired. You wouldn't think it would be too hard to play a stoner, since that's what most of the kids are. The story begins when Marty's girlfriend gets sick of watching him get beat up by his best friend, Bobby. So what's the best solution? Why.... kill him, of course! What other explanation could there be? And who took the last of the weed? Frightening, isn't it? The whole movie is based around sex, drugs, and harsh language. I know that most movies contain this, but this one takes it pretty far. A little too much reality for my taste. I'll hang around my highschool if I want to see this stuff.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Scream (1996)
9/10
It's a scream, Baby!
4 May 2002
Your typical slasher film with a twist. The killer actually tells you what you should and shouldn't do to avoid getting killed. Filled with scares, laughs, and some pretty clever death scenes, (esp. the garage scene.) With this all-star cast including Neve Campbell, Courtney Cox, David Arquette, Skeet Ulrich, Matthew Lillard, Rose McGowen, Jamie Kennedy, and Drew Barrymore it couldn't go wrong. The story begins when Sydney Prescott is stalked by the same killer that took her mother's life one year ago. Surrounded by suspects that include her best friends, father, and boyfriend, Sydney must try to survive a night of terror. It will keep you on the edge of your seat till the surprise ending. Just remember "the rules", don't pick up the phone, and keep in mind that movies don't create psychos. Psychos make movies more creative.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Another Special Effects Movie
21 April 2002
This movie was able to keep me on the edge of my seat the entire time, but that was only the make-up. I'd like to give the make-up artist 10 stars, but the movie only earned 6. The acting left something to be desired, but the story didn't give them much to work with. Although it is your typical "let's split up" horror movie, the set and make-up are top quality when it comes to giving you a scare when seeing the ghosts, (and they ain't no Casper!) Matthew Lillard milks his part for all it's worth but doesn't do to bad of a job as a psychic that captures ghosts and must lead a poor family through their new haunted house. This wasn't too bad and can definitely give you a scare!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Adam Sandler's best
21 April 2002
The Wedding Singer is a very funny movie! Adam Sandler is hysterical as an 80's wedding singer that gets dumped by his girlfriend the day of their wedding and finds a new interest on a waitress (Drew Barrymore.) She, however, is already engaged to a sleazy lady's man. They are become closer and look very cute together. This movie is far from the gross laughs that Adam Sandler is used to getting. He actually makes this movie a family movie. It's full of some great laughs from characters seen in many of his previous movies. A cute must-see.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rat Race (2001)
10/10
One of the Funniest Movies I've Seen in Years!
27 March 2002
Even from the opening credits, you can get a sense of how funny this movie is. And it gets better from there. There is no end to the laughter as you progress from scene to scene. It all starts with 2 millions dollars. John Cleese, an overly rich, Las Vegas casino owner who likes stupid bets, puts 2 million big ones in a locker in Silver City, New Mexico. It's up to 6 groups of people to beat each other to the cash. The frantic people include Whoopi Goldberg and Lanei Chapman as a mother/daughter team that need time for bonding, Jon Lovitz with his wife Kathy Najimy and two kids that must escape Nazis from the "Barbie Museum", Rowen Atkinson as a narcoleptic Italian, Breken Meyer and Amy Smart that find romance after she runs down her ex with a helicopter, Cuba Gooding Jr. as a hated ref that gets stuck driving a bus full of Lucy wannabes, and Seth Green and Vince Vieluf as a team of scheming brothers that drive their truck up an airport tower, (literally.) It also stars Kathy Bates as the much-loved Squirrel Lady. I literally fell out of my seat with laughter. This is a must see. And watch out for the Hitlermobile! (Also for those who liked "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World.") "Rat Race" is a keeper!
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Definitely Scary
27 March 2002
This movie is a terrifying thriller to begin with. When you realize that the whole story is true, it becomes even more scary. The mere fact that these animals would kill for fun, makes the viewer wonder if they were actually animals or works of the Devil. The story begins with a frustrated bridge designer (Val Kilmer) that is shipped to Africa to finish a bridge for a railroad in 5 months. But work is severely delayed as dozens of workers are being killed and eaten by two very large lions that don't seem to fear man or guns. (But seeing as nobody can seem to hit them, they don't really have reason to.) The creatures mostly hunt at night and are almost impossible to spot, which is why the natives nickname them the Ghosts of the Darkness. Coming to the rescue is Remington (Michael Douglas), a man that seems to know enough about hunting that he could kill these things in no time flat.... but that would just ruin the movie now wouldn't it? The tension can kill as the viewer waits to see who's the next meal. This movie is only for those that don't mind suspense or gore.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Go (1999)
9/10
Drugs, Sex, Violence, and Family Circus
3 March 2002
All this and more can be seen in this dark comedy. It gives you a dose of the real world seen through the eyes of drug dealers, drugees, and drug busters. This movie gives out a hilarious dose while following the stories behind 3 grocery store employees, (including Katie Holmes), that take a drug order from a fellow co-worker that happens to be in Vegas for the weekend with his own drugee friends, (including Breken Meyer as a black wannabe.) The plot turns sour when the 20 hits of X are destroyed and an angered dealer, Todd (Timothy Olyphant), comes after them. Trying to get into the spotlight are a gay couple, (Jay Mohr & Scott Wolf) that find they're getting themselves into the drug scene deeper than they want to. This movie keeps you laughing with scenes that include burning hotel rooms, deceased celebrities that begin with an X, getting high on baby asprin, and the reason why Family Circus sucks. "It's just sitting ther in the bottom right-hand corner, just waiting to suck." This is a must-see that shows the truth and irony of the drug scene.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
What a waste of film!
17 February 2002
This movie made me want to cry out of boredom and pity for Justin Long, who I thought had quite a talent. What a waste of time and film! It was as though every bad decision made during any horror movie was made by the two main characters as they try desperately to escape the evil clutches of.... Batman? Well, that's all I can say for the make-up. The acting was atrocious, (so, how many people have you seen run into a crowded diner, scream for someone to call the police, and have everyone in there look at them like they're disturbing their meal?) The plot was so poorly written that the viewer feels totally confused by the half-way point. And it don't get much better from there. In fact, it manages to leave the story with holes big enough to shove your fist through. And the ending?.... Well, I'm not going to spoil it for those of you that still feel like wasting $5, but it left something to be desired.... awww shucks.... I'll just come out and say it.... This ending must be the WORST ending to any movie I've ever seen. It's not like you didn't see it coming, though. Bottom Line: This movie hit rock bottom and someone threw it a shovel.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Where Have All the Soldiers Gone?
3 February 2002
This was a very good movie, however, it starts losing its intensity midway. The main story of American soldiers trying to take over a city in Africa to stop the starvation of its people, gets broken down into separate stories of the groups of men who have different missions. It starts out well but slowly gets confusing as large amounts of soot start covering the mens faces, and soon you can't tell who's who. Then, as the stories jump back and forth from group to group the viewer becomes utterly confused on who the people are and what they're trying to do. The plot starts out following the stories behind 3 men, Eversmann (Josh Hartnett), Grimes (Ewan McGregor), and Blackburn (Orlando Bloom). The story sticks with Eversmann the entire time but slowly loses all contact with Blackburn, (after a nasty fall), and Grimes. This leaves the viewer thinking "Where did those guys go? Were they the ones that just got shot? So who did just get shot? And why is he making coffee in a battle zone?" It leaves a lot of questions unanswered but is overall pretty riveting.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Idle Hands (1999)
8/10
Sickeningly Funny
2 February 2002
I rented this movie, expecting it to be another gory slasher flick, but it turned out to be very entertaining. It had many laughs, although most of them seemed to come from the excessive gore and the two undead, best friends Mick and Pnub. It's the story of a lazy teen, Anton, whose hand gets possessed by the devil. Devon Sawa plays the unlucky teen that must go to any extremes to keep his hand out of trouble and cover up it's previous murders, including his parents and two best friends. Sawa is wonderful at keeping his right hand doing random, crazy things while acting normal. Seth Green is hilarious as Anton's undead friend, Mick,("Look at me! I'm Leatherface! Ha Ha!") and Vivica A. Foxx and Jack Noseworthy are extremely humorous as Debi and Randy, devil hunters that must destroy the hand. *A particular scene where Randy, (a supposedly good friend of Anton's) watches Debi try to stab Anton and comments, "Isn't the knife a little extreme, kitten?" but ends up pinning Anton down for stealing his beloved Ford truck.* The laughs are endless, but mostly brought on by comments about the extreme gore. Not for those with weak stomachs, but still very funny and entertaining. I gave it an 8.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Alive (1993)
7/10
Tense but Left Much To Be Desired
2 February 2002
The fact that this movie is based on a true story makes it more interesting. It starts out with John Malkovich remembering the people that were lost in the plane crash. (42 were on the flight, 26 died, 16 lived.) In the beginning, the rugby team just seems like a bunch of jerks ignoring the directions given by the steward. Simple things like stop throwing the ball across the plane, put that cigarette out (as he lights up another) may have participated in the crashing of the plane. The acting left much to be desired. (As the plane crashes the people are orderly and completely calm, and later they exit the demolished plane in an orderly fashion. One guy actually gets out of the plane, sits down, and smokes and cigarette without saying a word except, "We're f***ed." The movie doesn't get you close enough to the characters to make you care enough when they die. The fact that this actually happened keeps the viewers attention and certainly makes them pity the people that actually had to go through this unimaginable terror of choosing whether to eat the dead or die. (Those scenes can make you a bit uneasy.) All in all this was a well made movie, but moved too slow and much of the acting was second rate.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Event Horizon (1997)
2/10
Snooze!
10 January 2002
This movie redefines "turkey." The creators have managed to make it as unbelievable and confusing as possible. (How many people have you seen get sucked into space, without a spacesuit, and return to the ship with nothing more than minor cuts?) Not even the All-Star cast could've saved this one. Sadly, the "All-Star cast" didn't live up to their title. Laurence Fishburne came off as a jerk even though he was the hero and Sam Niel was sadly miscast far below his talent. The plot moved slowly, most of the characters came off as either stupid or sharp-tongued, and the "comic relief" just came off as annoying. I would like to congratulate new-comer Jack Noseworthy for pulling off a decent performance, although he somewhat becomes like a vegetable before the movie is half over. The plot is left with holes you could drive a truck through, and leaves the viewer feeling emotionally drained and utterly confused. Nothing less than a miracle could have saved this bomb.
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed