Reviews

19 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
2/10
Disappointing, despite the cast...
25 December 2006
Considering the talent involved in this project, you would have expected a much better storyline. I know that M. Night Shaymalan's work is unique compared to most modern writers, but this film reaches far out there and is hard for even the most imaginative adult to enjoy. Stories and films about supernatural topics are not for every taste, and therefore I think Mr Shaymalan's writing should not stray too far from reality if he wants to keep viewers (and funding for his films). Bryce Howard's role was an insult, mostly because all she ever does is whisper her lines and parade around nearly naked. I think that fans of Mr Shaymalan will enjoy one sitting of this film, but probably no more than that. Good try, but go back to the drawing (writing) board and try again on the next project.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Event Horizon (1997)
A Mess Of A Film
22 September 2004
What starts out as a promising film turns into a huge, inconsistent mess in the second half. The idea for the film was great, but the script is weak at best and the editing is far from helpful. Perhaps too many last minutes changes during filming doomed the production, because what is left is an incomprehensible mess that wants only to shock and not entertain. I think the director would have especially benefited from the method of "sometimes less is more" instead of the excess of gore used in the film. Plus, the actions some of the characters insults the intelligence of the audience member (No! Don't go in there!). Considering the caliber of talent involved in this film, I am really surprised at how bad the end result really is. Sam Neil's character really leaves me scratching my head...
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Easily the worst of John Carpenter's films...
16 May 2004
A promising plot and interesting characters all begin with a good start but soon deteriorate into a mess of film. Some of the problems with the film: Strange people outside the church are never really explained or why no one else in the world seems to notice them. Exactly WHY is the devil a swirling pool of green fluid inside a tank? What's with the beetles or roaches consuming the one guy? And the bicycle impaling scene was just plain stupid. I think that if Carpenter had re-edited some of the film and put in a few more scenes that explained things better, this film would have succeeded. As it is, it is worth a late night look, but nothing to add to your film collection. If you want to see a good Carpenter film, rent "Escape From New York" or "The Thing".
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Class (1983)
6/10
Uneven, but worth a look...
13 October 2003
Uneven film at best, but does offer a nostalgic look at some of the pre-famous actors of the 1980's. Not a great plot, but one that will hold your interest due to the likeable characters involved. The ending is rather abrupt and makes one wonder if the director ran out of time, money, or both. Anyway, Ms Bisset is stunning in this role and very appealing. Enjoy!
13 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Python (2000 TV Movie)
2/10
A New Definition In Dumb
21 June 2002
If you are looking for a good Sci-Fi or Horror film, this is not the movie to see. If you are looking for a stupid, low-budget film to mock (like MST3K fans), then this is your movie.

The low budget is very evident in the scenery, or lack thereof. The acting is atrocious, and that is surprising considering the talent involved in this project. Casper Van Diem is horribly miscast as a southern business executive that works in Washington state. Casper's accent is beyond fake and his lines are delivered way over the top! Robert Englund must have needed the money...enough said.

The effects are pretty good, considering the budget. The computer generated effects seem to be top notch, but the snake moves too fast to be believable. The fx guys do use a prop snake tail in some scenes and it is very noticable in every scene it is used.

Granted, the director did use tongue-in-cheek humor in a self-mockingly way throughout this film. However, the viewer will have the impression that the director wasn't entirely sure he was making a comedy or a horror movie after seeing this film.

If a cheesy film is what you're in the mood for tonight, see this movie. Otherwise, stay clear.
16 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Bad Horror Film, No Doubt
21 March 2002
Even though Tom Savini is top billed in this film, he is only in the first fifteen minutes. For some strange reason the whole first portion of the film is shot through a blue filter. This is also done later in the film, but the effect is suppose to help represent night.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought Zombies were suppose to be dead. That means no heartbeat (and no reason to breathe for that matter), but for some reason these zombies literally spray buckets of bright red blood every time they're shot regardless of how long they have been dead. Oh, and a note for the makeup department: next time spend a buck or two and get black food coloring for all the zombies to color their bright pink tongues.

The acting can best be described as cardboard, and I'm not just talking about the zombies. The editing is atrocious and the camera angles don't help matters at all. At one point near the beginning of the film a man is holding a shotgun while in a helicopter, but the sounds you hear are of a machine gun and bullets spray the zombies! The props aren't much better (styrofoam coffins), but what do you expect on such a low budget? The budget also must be the reason for the locations.

Tom Savini looks in top form and would have made a great hero for the film, but he is bumped off early on in the film. Hopefully his next venture into film will be more respectable. Watch this film drunk with your buddies and you might enjoy it, or wait for the MST3K version.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Great book, but decent movie...
2 January 2002
American Psycho was for Bret Easton Ellis a chance to show the materialistic 80's in a different light. The shallow lifestyles of the people during this era were perfectly brought to life in his novel and in Mary Harron's film. Patrick Bateman is just another one of those shallow, successful business men that dominated the scene. However, Patrick had a obsessions and an after hours lifestyle that would sicken and disgust most everyone had they known.

The biggest flaw in the film is it's inability to have the viewer guessing as to whether the horror was real or just imagined. The novel presents the entire story in such a way that the reader does not know if the actual carnage is real or just part of Patrick Bateman's sick imagination. Although the film does try, it does not succeed.

I do respect Mary Harron's choice of using the "less is more" principle when it comes to the violence. The graphic depictions of violence in the novel would have made the film beyond a horror movie and more like a snuff film. The film is good and is worth viewing for those folks that lived during the exciting 1980's like I did.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
DEFCON-4 (1985)
2/10
Good Sci-Fi Movie that falls apart
8 March 1999
It is always a shame to see a movie that starts off with such a great storyline, but then falls apart at the end. The first half of this film, involving scientists in a Reagan-ear Star Wars Nuclear space station, is intriguing and suspenseful. But the second half of the film about the scientists adventures in a post-apocalyptic world is dull and sloppy. Maybe lack of money or loss of interest by the director caused the plot to go way out into left field, and they sped up production just to get the film out as soon as possible. Watch if you must, but prepare to be disappointed! The best thing about this movie is the creative box cover.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Another Chuck Norris Vehicle
22 February 1999
People complain about Kevin Costner making self-indulgent films, but Chuck Norris has hit an all time low portraying himself as the ultimate bad-ass one-man army. The story is convincing enough, but the direction is one-sided and the stunts are too staged. The only real excitement is the shootout in the shopping mall. But if you're a Chuck Norris fan and are looking for an action film geared specifically for his talents, this movie is for you!
12 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Saturn 3 (1980)
2/10
Tedious Sci-Fi Movie
22 February 1999
The only real plus to this film is seeing a younger Farah Fawcett run around in a skimpy white outfit through most of the movie. Kirk Douglas and Harvey Keitel are completely wasted in this mess of a film. The special effects will appear very poor by today's standards, and the sets are obvious miniatures. When this movie premired, the Robot in the film was a marvel to movie-goers but will seem primative now. The plot is revealed at a snail's pace, so if you try to watch this movie do your best to make it to the ending.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Game of Death (1978)
5/10
The Final Bruce Lee Film
22 February 1999
Bruce Lee's final film is easily a disappointment for those that are not fans of Mr Lee. True Bruce Lee fans will love the movie for what it is: an action packed martial arts film. This film contains the only filmed confrontation between Chuck Norris and Bruce Lee, which will be a plus for fans. Don't put a lot of thought into this film, and you should enjoy yourself.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ronin (1998)
9/10
DeNiro Shines Again
20 February 1999
Finally, Hollywood makes an action-adventure film that is worth seeing. DeNiro shine through as a true action hero. The story is believable and not over-the-top, and the car chase scenes will leave you on the edge of your seat! Do yourself a favor and watch "Ronin" to see how an action film should be done.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Phantasm II (1988)
8/10
Noble effort to make a sequel of a cult favorite
20 February 1999
This is a nicely done sequel to a movie that has become a serious cult favorite. This movie continues the story of the Tall Man and the secret world beyond death. The pacing is well done, but some of the special effects could have been a little better with some more creative camera work. The ending will infuriate some, but fans are sure to love it! The following sequels (Parts III and IV) are very much inferior to this movie and should only be seen by true fans, mostly due to wandering story lines and low budgets.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Park Is Mine (1985 TV Movie)
6/10
Passable Entertainment
20 February 1999
Tommy Lee Jones does his part to hold this movie together, and that's about the only thing going for it. The plot about one man taking over Central Park (!) is highly improbable, but makes for a good Saturday afternoon action flick. Don't put a lot of thought into this movie, just enjoy it for what it is!
8 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
84C MoPic (1989)
10/10
Low Budget, Great Movie
16 February 1999
Despite the obvious low budget, this film is definitely worth watching. The unknown actors are superb with the materials and situations they are given and make the reality of the Vietnam War come through in a very real fashion. In terms of scale, this is no "Saving Private Ryan", but it does have the same dramatic impact on the viewer. Highly Recommended!
19 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Another "It's so bad, it's good" film
16 February 1999
Need a movie to watch on a Saturday night with all your friends in a drunken stupor? Here's your movie! The hokey acting and special effects will give you and your friends nearly two hours of entertainment. Forget plot, acting, or decent movie sets...just enjoy this cinematic gem for what it is: Crap.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
One of Stephen Kings WORST
11 February 1999
This film, with the possible exception of "IT", has to be one of the worst films made from Stephen King. The story begins well enough, but dissolves into a series of illogical and downright stupid events that will leave the viewer angry by the last third of the film. Once you see the actual Langoliers, you will wonder who thought this script was actually worth the time and money to make! The actors give decent performances, and the visual effects are very well done (except for the actual Langoliers). My recommendation: Skip this one, unless you just want to see a bad movie.
2 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ticks (1993)
2/10
Another passable Horror Film
11 February 1999
One thing is for sure: Ron Howard must be ashamed of his brother after watching this film. Clint has a memorable role as a forrest bum that meets his demise from the Ticks.

Peter Scolari must have needed the money to make a car note or something. And yes, the kid from "Fresh Prince of Bel Air" is in this one as a supposed tough kid from the Bronx or something, but comes across as a throwback from the mid-eighties breakdancing films.

If you decide to watch this film, do it in the form of the "MST3K" guys and enjoy yourself!
4 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Disappointing Third Entry in the Series
11 February 1999
George Romero's third entry in the "Dead" series was definitely a disappointment. The acting was fair, with the best performance given by Lori Cardille hands down. The gore is full swing with Tom Savini's masterful handiwork throughout the film. But overall, the movie is way too talky and many of the actors shout their lines throughout the film. Plus, having shot nearly 3/4 of the film underground didn't help much either. Also, the ending is too abrupt to do the film justice. Let's just hope that if George Romero ever decides to do another "Dead" sequel, he looks back to "Dawn" for a great screenplay to follow.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed