captnemo

I had alway wanted to see this, having grown up watching all of the 50's SF films. This one had a cast of people I had grown up with in those SF films. I was not disappointed. The plot is slight, but well done. The 50's were not a decade for whodunits. It's pretty obvious who the killer is before the guys even leave Asia. Faith is a beautiful woman, and rarely has she been prettier than here. A little more meat on the script would have made this a better remembered film. The story is straightforward, with little in the way of subtlety. This was the same studio that made Tarantula and The Deadly Mantis. Both of those films were better than this, yet they had the same cookie-cutter feel to them. I put it up to the need to have new films in the drive-ins every week. All the studios suffered from this by the late 50's, with originality going out the window. Overall, I would give it a 6 out of 10. Good, but it could have been better considering the talented cast they had.

------------------------------------------------------------------- Since there is no way to add a Goof to this film, I'll put it here. WARNING: Spoiler ahead.

In the scene where David Janssen is killed at the bowling alley, he walks by a wall calendar several times. It is the 5th of the month when he walks past it the first time. The next time he goes by it is the 6th of the month. The date changes twice more between the 5th and 6th as David goes about his business.

I've seen this twice. The first time it didn't impress me at all. I hated all of the characters, and why watch a film if you are not pulling for at least 1 person? I saw this in a theater, with good sound and a big screen. This is the best viewing experience that can be had, and usually this sometimes makes the film better than it really is. The setting did not help. I was underwhelmed. It was well made, but that only takes you so far. Platoon and Titanic are well made, but are Garbage. I need more than fancy cinematography and good acting. I need a good story and something to hang my interest in. I found nothing here of interest. I waited 4 years before sitting down to watch this again. This time it was on a big screen TV on VHS, with a good sound system and comfy chairs. I was even less impressed this time. DeNiro was still a jerk. The other characters were no better. It was very well crafted, but hollow inside. This second viewing was an ordeal. Not quite torture, but very difficult to sit through. I would not watch it again.

On my scale, with 10 being the Ultimate in Cinema, I would give Raging Bull a 5. It's merely Above Average, and that's being very kind to it. The rating is for the excellent creation of the period and for the black and white cinematography. There's nothing else to see here.

An interesting look into the minds of 2 Star Trek fans. This film shows that Bill Shatner "Gets it." He understands the way fans can be and he just rolls along with it. It's hard to believe that there are fans out there who can recite episodes, dialog and air dates, but I've been there. I still remember where I was when I saw the Gorn for the first time, so I can relate to these guys.

Audie England is a Dream Come True-type girl. She's also a fan, not crazy, not asexual/non-sexual and very beautiful. There are very few of those around, believe me. I've been here too, but I will keep that to myself. A treat from beginning to end.

It was okay. 163 minutes of walking and talking and philosophizing can make your rump awfully sore. I kept waiting for something to happen to justify the 163 minutes. Nothing happened as far as I'm concerned. It wasn't boring, because there was that idea hanging about that there was some entity in the Zone who could help these pathetic guys with their problems. A lot of elements from "The Wizard of Oz" could be implied, except the Wizard never shows up. "2001" also comes to mind with its unseen entities. Perhaps they were the same ones in this film. Bashful critters, whoever they are. There was so much possibility and so little to show for 163 numbing minutes. Ouch! My rating: 5 out of 10. Above Average. The rating is for showing the world how bleak it is in Russia. Good for them.

Very amateurish, slightly dull spy comedy. Tries hard, but the casting is strictly off the street. The writing is schizo. One character goes from being a straight "D" student to a computer nerd in a blink. The scene when they are using Intellivision controllers to play a Macintosh game is a strain on the "Gimme a Break" monitor. Not awful, but not painless either. Even the British villain is from the John Travolta school of acting. Every line is delivered as if he had gas. The Lady in Distress is very pretty until we see her in the flesh. She then gets less and less attractive as the movie wears you down. Catherine, on the other hand, gets prettier as the seconds trip on by. Score: 4 out of 10. Don't bother.

If you don't care about continuity, then this is the flick for you. If you don't care about good characters, then this is for you. If you want to see a future Doctor Who, then this is for you. The biggest problem with this flick is the beginning. In Aliens, Ripley risked her life twice to rescue Hicks, Bishop and the little girl. It was a major plot point and very important to the overall chronology of the films. Along comes Alien3 and the first thing the director does is to kill off all three of the people Ripley had worked so hard to save. These were the only people in the Universe she had any feelings for. To senselessly murder them killed off any interest I had in the rest of the film. The remainder of the flick was unpleasant at best, with no one to root for except Ripley. What kills this film and any others that may follow is the end. When Ripley jumps into the fire pit(Whatever it was) because she is carrying a queen alien just insulted those fans for whom Ripley was the Ultimate Survivor. Now she was dead, and there was no way to carry on the franchise. Alien4 was a cheap cheat, and the less said about it the better.

I'm trying to decide if jumping into a wood chopper would be more enjoyable than this dreck. It finishes the destruction of what was once a classic couple of films. With Jedi, Menace, Clowns and Sith we have the death of Lucas' career. He wants us to swallow the Annakin is Vader nonsense? I never believed it was true. This film vindicates those feelings. The story hasn't worked since Phantom Moron, and each new film just piled the crap on until all that was left was a toy parade. I have to go. I know where some new rocks to throw are. You want spoilers? Here they come. Luke and Leia are NOT related. Vader is NOT their Father. Duke Countoo should have switched sides while he still could. Yoda has less verbal skills than Yogi Berra. His advice has never been any good to anybody. Obi Wan lied to Luke for the first two films. Annakin didn't build C3P0. He found him in the desert and lied to his Mom about putting him together from scratch. Chewbacca has fleas. This whole mess with Vader and the fall of the Republic can be blamed on that stupid b***h Amma-Lamma-Ding-Dong. If she had any brains she wouldn't have come within a light year of Annie, but she had told do what George Lucas wrote for her. What a dope!

That pretty much says it all. True, an important character dies during the film, but this is a very daring move on the part of the director. I do not care for main characters getting killed, but once in a while it's okay. It gives my "film reality" a jolt, something it needs. As a female assassin, Shu Qi ranks at the top rank of cinematic killers. I have no doubt that she could kill Arnold, Clint Eastwood or Mel Gibson in any of their film roles. She is also so easy on the eyes that her anti-social job is acceptable. The action is top notch, as is the cinematography. Hong Kong Cinema is far ahead of any other and it shows here. Rating: 8 out of 10.

If you thought Trek V was bad, take a look at Trek 6-The Undiscovered Country. Talk about crap! The major problems in this flick are so numerous that they make the few smaller problems of Trek V pale by comparison. Let's take a look:

-The galley scene, which shows real food being cooked, doesn't work at all. There's not enough room on a starship to store real food. And how about that alien with the bare feet making the food? Very sanitary. -Weapon alarms on a warship? That's like putting motion detectors in a gymnasium. Why didn't the alarms go off constantly? -Valeris leads the investigation into the murders and discovers that the killer is....Herself!!! She must be the stupidest Vulcan of all time. The Vulcan Criminal Justice System must be the laughing stock of the galaxy if it's this easy to get caught. -An object at rest tends to stay at rest unless acted upon by some force. This Law of Physics hasn't been discovered by the Klingons yet. That's why the sitting Klingons start to float in the air as soon as the gravity cuts out. (They also squeal little girls too. How Macho.) -The Enterprise is trying to sneak into Klingon space to find Kirk on Rurapentey Prison Planet. A Klingon outpost asks them what they are up to. The (stupid) Enterprise people reply- "We're condemning food." The Klingon says, "Okay, have a nice day," or words to that affect. Good thing the Enterprise ran into the stupidest Klingon in the galaxy or they might have gotten caught. (A pattern is developing.) They had to look up Klingon words in "books." It's been stated everywhere that books are a very rare thing by the 24th century. Spock gave Kirk a book for his birthday and Kirk was astonished that he found one. Yet they happen to have a half dozen Klingon-English dictionaries on board. How stupid. -At Kitomer, the Klingons are watching the Ambassador. Among them is Gorkon's daughter, who wants to kill Kirk more than she wants to breath. In walks Kirk and his friends and they walk right past the daughter, even saying "Excuse Me" to her!! The other Klingons just let them pass without a blink. Kirk should have been filleted on the spot. Here's the killer of her father walking past her to kill someone else.

I could go on, but I don't want vomit on my keyboard. Trek V may be flawed, but it has a good, solid story. The direction is also good. The camera is in the right place, and everyone is on their spots. What more do you want? The ending was supposed to have gargoyles chasing Kirk after the demon was killed, but Paramount got cheap and cut the budget. The scenes with Sybok sharing Spock and McCoy's pain are very powerful. I'm sorry, but this is one of the better Trek films. It's certainly better than Insurrection, Nemesis and Generations.

Let me say this as a springboard for the rest of this review: I still don't buy the Annakin becomes Vader story. Lucas stated that these two persons were distinct individuals, not the same person, way back in the summer of 1977. Watch A New Hope and listen to Ben talk about Vader and Luke's Father and you'll hear it. Yoda also speaks of two different people in Empire. I choose to believe them. So what happened? Lucas changed his story after Empire to please the fans, and all the myth building went into the toilet. That brings us to the latest episode from Lucas. In 1977 and again in 1980, Lucas made two films that sucked me into their world and took me for an incredible ride. It was a ride I was glad to go on many times. Clones sucked also, but in a completely different way. I don't know whether it was the sucky dialogue, the bad acting or the lousy story that turned me off within five minutes. I was not involved at all in the film. I was so tempted to speak back at the screen a dozen times or more, but my wife kept pinching me just as those moments happened. I slipped once, when Annakin asked Sen. Armadillo, `Are you suffering like I am?' I screamed, `Yes, we are.' This brought cheers from the audience. The audience, by the way, sat in stunned silence as the suckieness unfolded. Everything was wrong with this film. Only Christopher Lee and Obi-Wan brought any class to this dreck. It just plain sucked, in more ways than I have room here to relate. Take away all the razzle dazzle creatures and effects and the costumes and the sets and nothing is left but an empty, boring shell with nothing to say. For instance, when Obi-wan just walks into the HQ of the cloning world, the clone masters take him and show him everything. They don't ask for any kind of ID or proof that he's whom they were waiting for. They just assume that he's a Jedi and he's here for an inspection tour. The old Lucas would have shown the audience how the character would have bluffed his way through, ala Han Solo. The new Lucas blows any opportunity to create suspense at all. Even the fight with Jimbo Billy Bob Fett at the complex didn't raise any kind of alarm among the cloners. I guess they just never look out their windows, nor do they turn their communications gear on to hear Jethro Fett tell them that this Jedi was a spy. Nope, they don't do any of that, and the clone shipment goes ahead without a hitch. Stupid writing, even stupider plotting, sink this sucky excuse for a film in ten minutes. It was not compelling in any way, despite the effects. In fact, as I watched, I kept thinking that the effects were being wasted worse than putting curtains on a camel. As impressive as Star Wars and Empire were in their time, Clones is repulsive. I think the audience agrees with me, as the last time I looked, Clones was sinking fast at the box-office. I've said enough. I'll go back now and watch Spiderman, a far superior film.

I had heard of this in little snippets on line and else where. I collect stories about the Jersey Devil, so the moment I heard that this was about the JD, I had to see it. The trouble was, no one had it in any video store within 100 miles of me. Here I am on the very edge of the JD's territory, and I can't find his film. I finally found it on line, an unopened copy at that. I waited until Thanksgiving evening, when the rest of the family had gone to sleep. Well, let me tell you, this was disturbing. I'll not use any spoilers, but just don't turn this off until it's over. Turn the lights down and enjoy. Let it build up its suspense and watch everything. As for the blair witch, that film had no plot, point or original ideas. This film should be on the top scare lists instead of blair. A real shame. RATING: 7 out of 10.

I saw this at a revival house for my first viewing. I'd have to say that this was much better than the typical Italian western, which is 2 hours of people staring at each other and odd sounding gunshots. The cinematography was beautiful, as were the sets and costumes. The acting was pretty good, especially Fonda and Robards. What is missing was either a screenplay that filled 2 1/2 hours of screen time or an editor to cut out about 45 minutes of superfluous material. This is no masterpiece, but it is a film worth watching. Leone will be remembered as someone who made overlong good movies, but no masterpieces. Maybe these films are loved in Europe, but here in America we like some story with the pretty images. Rating: 6 out of 10.

This wasn't bad, and I would have liked it a lot more had J. L. Curtis not Crapped on the original in an interview released before the film was. She said that the acting in the original was "okay for a '70's film. I mean, come on, Barbara Harris?" For your information, Jamie, Barbara Harris was a better actress at birth than you will ever be. The 1977 original was so much funnier and so much better acted. The music was better too. The "music" in the new one was grating and amateurish at best. I've had enough. Rating: 5 out of 10.

SPOILER ALERT!!!

There is so much wrong with this film that I could spend days talking about it. So many things are just wrong and bothersome. >The Lost Boys run around on roller blades. These kids are from the early 20th century and would not have such things. >The film has a light fantasy touch until one of the Lost Boys is run through with a sword on camera and dies horribly. Nice touch, Steve. >Baby Peter (age 5 months) doesn't want to die, so he makes his carraige roll away from his parents in the rain hoping to be picked up and taken away to a place where he won't have to grow up. The odds of this happening are off the scale, so Peter was actually committing suicide by exposure. >Hoffman is lousy, as usual. The Hoffman Principle states: No Film is made any better by having Dustin Hoffman in its cast. Overall, this is a real bust, and it all lies squarely on Spielberg's shoulders. He controlled every aspect of its production, including stealing a wonderful script by Nick Castle and mutilating it to his own "standards." As you can see by the list of goofs, his is pretty typical of Stevie's output. Very few of his films work completely, and this one works not at all. Rating: 4 stars out of ten, due mainly to Bob Hoskins.

Renee Z. doesn't do a thing for me. I've seen her in several films and she comes off as plastic, phony and repellent. maybe it's just me. The real standout in the cast is Sarah Paulson, who plays Vicki. She is dynamite, and far more deserving of stardom than Renee, the new Blond from Hell. I have no idea who could have replaced her, but I can't believe that Renee was the director's first/only choice. Someone with more talent is called for, who has impeccable comic timing and can carry a tune. Sadly, Renee fails at all of these. Everyone else is excellent, from Ewan to Pierce to Tony Randall. As for the film, it's at once an homage and a spoof of the Doris Day/co-star films of the early 1960's. Surprisingly, it works on both levels. While going a bit overboard at times, it stays on track for the most part. I found myself laughing out loud every 10 minutes, surely a good sign.

This is a decent adaptation of a very good book. It strays a lot from the novel, but enough is left to hopefully inspire many young people to get and read the book. For that the film is worth it. The leisurely pace here may turn off some, but stick with it. Ask yourself at the end if you would have done the same as Winnie or would you have done something different? Personally, I would have taken a drink from the spring. The cast is impressive, with 3 oscar winners and Amy Irving, who is starting to look old. The standout is Alexis Bledel. She is impossibly beautiful here, and somewhat of a (welcome) distraction. I may even start to watch Gilmore Girls just to see her every week. Rating: 6 out of 10.

(Spoilers)While there are some continuity problems, and some of the action is a bit over the top, "League" is still a terrific film. Less "taken" from the Alan Moore comic, it's more or less inspired by it. The IMDB cast list has Roxbourgh listed as Mycroft Holmes, but he's really someone else from the Holmes Canon. Perhaps this is to not give away something. The characterizations are an improvement over those in the book, with Mina and The Invisible Man taking top honors. As a Captain Nemo fan since the age of 6, I cannot complain about him or his ship in the movie. I did prefer them in the book, but they are different here, and serve the film well. Nemo kicks butt here as never before, and that's a big plus. What can I say? This is a terrific summer film, just as good or better than anything else out there. It's set up for another film and frankly I can't wait. Another feather in Sean Connery's cap for this one. The look on his face when M identifies himself at the beginning is priceless.

Rating: 7 out of 10.

This "film" goes so overboard that it numbs the mind after about 30 minutes. It is sloppy where it should be sharp- the motorcycle races, the jumps to proper conclusions based upon the flimsiest of clues, the incompetence/competence of the Ernie Mac character. Some of the film is still not clear. I still don't know what Crispin Glover what supposed to be doing in the story. The SPFX are awful, with white matte lines showing everywhere, especially during the motorcycle races. I just can't believe anything I see in this film. I know it's supposed to be "Fun" but it also should be at least slightly competent. People won't go to see a favorite character or concept just because you make a film with that character in its title. Just look at how poorly Daredevil did compared to what the studio was anticipating it would make. Mr. McG must have the attention span of a gnat, or he believes that his audience does. One last point: whenever I see Drew Barrymore, I see a 12 year old. I just can't take her seriously as an adult.

I was stunned as this film ended. My wife and daughter said that I hadn't moved a muscle from the edge of my chair the entire time. I was drawn into this world once again and found it amazing. It's as if a camera were placed into Middle Earth and filmed the saga as it unfolded. Mere words cannot do justice to what is being shown in the theaters. Just go see it and let it take you on perhaps the greatest journey ever brought to the screen. Bring on Return of the King. Rating: 10 out of 10.

When is Paramount going to learn that they can't just make a long TV episode and expect people to pay to see it? This is the 4th Next Generation film, and I left the theater wondering why I had gone. It's not a bad film, it's just not exceptional in any way. There are the usual Trek problems of course, but most of the trek films have little problems. Since Star Trek 4, none of the subsequent films have had any punch, nothing that made you say "WOW!" Nothing that would have you talk about it until the next film. Except for the god-awful Trek 6, they've all been about the same: good, but quickly forgotten. PROBLEMS w/SPOILERS- 1- Trek equipment doesn't work properly. This always happens. They arrive on a planet and begin to collect snozzberries. Dust or ion storms interfere with scanners, but Security says "I don't think anyone is within a million miles of where we are." That's when the alien Rat Patrol comes over the hill. 2- Wesley. Last time we saw him, he had become one of the inter-dimensional Travellers, gone forever. He's no longer mortal, and told his Mom goodbye 4ever. So what's he doing at the wedding? It's like Jesus coming back for One More Supper. 3- Janeway and Admiral? For what? Surviving in the Delta Quadrant for 7 years? Is it a service issue, where you are promoted after a certain amount of time? Is it a reward for survival? 4- Why attack the Enterprise if your goal is to destroy Earth? Shinzon has an invisible warship that could easily make its way to earth and destroy it. Then they could have gone for Picard. A wasted opportunity. At least Shinzon should have followed Enterprise to the other Federation ships and blown them up. 5- Data's brother. This guy is so stupid he should be called Digit. How many of these prototypes are there? How did Shinzon get his hands on it? Why didn't they bring back Lore, who would have helped Shinzon in a snap. They could have done the same jigsaw puzzle ploy and Lore could have played (real) dumb.

I was invited to see this for free and thought "Hey, it's free. How bad could it be?" Well, about ten minutes into the flick, Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz. This is a typical surfing flick, with girls in the leads. They are stuck in an early 1960's story and Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Where was I? Oh, yeah. I won't give anything away for those who might care, but the scenery of Maui is awesome. It's my favorite place in the world and then there are the girls. Hey, I'm human, they're also awesome. Three of them in particular go to zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Well, no sense going there. See it if you have nothing to do for two hours. At least it's better than Master of Disguise and not as pointless as Attack of the Clones. RATING: 5 out of 10. Marginal.

I've seen lots of these K. Gordon Murray specialties, like the Aztec Mummy series, Nostrodamus, etc. They are all terrible, but this one has a certain charm to it. I won't give anything vital away, but a short description is in order. A man dies and his corpse goes missing. His heir, a beautiful woman, comes to take over the estate. Weird things happen involving some sort of monster and a cowboy/detective arrives to investigate. That's all I'll say. Its got some atmosphere and nice scenery, and that's all. It still stinks, but not as bad as Wrestling Women vs. the Aztec Mummy. This would have been ideal for an episode of MST3K. RATING: 3 out of 10. Barely watchable.

Newsweek called Shyamalan the next Spielberg. I'll go them one better. He's the next Alfred Hitchcock, a much better fit and a much better director to be compared with. Shyamalan doesn't seem to be the type who would hide a script so that only he could get his hands on it (as with Jaws). Nor would he lie about characters in his film (the origin of Indy's name). Nor would he blame others for the failure of one of his films (I Wanna Hold Your Hand, Hook, Goonies). Spielberg has done all of these things, and has lost any credibility he ever had, along with his story telling ability. No, Shyamalan will be more like Hitchcock, someone who knows how to weave an excellent tale without smarminess, pretentiousness or pointless screenplays. This is what CE3K should have been, rich in details that mean something. While Encounters was all pretty pictures and hollow characters, every scene in Signs added a layer to the climax, with people we could know. I won't spoil this wonderful film with any details. It covered a lot of different subjects while scaring me into silence during the last half. Like the best of Hitchcock's films, it will leave you a bit disturbed as you walk out of the theater. Very well done. RATING: 7 out of 10 on first look. Probably higher next time.

This is half an idea jammed awkwardly into 2/3 of a film. It only runs 68 minutes, and runs out of steam long before that. I laughed slightly only twice, and that was during the 16 minute end credits filled with bloopers. Other than that and Miss Rodriguez, this is a waste of time. Lame jokes are half set up and then delivered almost as an after thought. Dana Carvey just doesn't have the star power to carry even a supporting role. It's a good thing he's backed up by such superstars as James Brolin and Bo Derek. It's about as funny as getting poked in the eye. As memorable as a toothache. Less interesting than your last attack of diarrhea. Still, I'd have to say I was more entertained than I was by Attack of the Clowns, not that that's such a hard thing to accomplish. RATING: 3 out of 10.

Let me say this as a springboard for the rest of this review: I still don't buy the Annakin becomes Vader story. Lucas stated that these two persons were distinct individuals, not the same person, way back in the summer of 1977. Watch A New Hope and listen to Ben talk about Vader and Luke's Father and you'll hear it. Yoda also speaks of two different people in Empire. I choose to believe them. So what happened? Lucas changed his story after Empire to please the fans, and all the myth building went into the toilet. That brings us to the latest episode from Lucas. In 1977 and again in 1980, Lucas made two films that sucked me into their world and took me for an incredible ride. It was a ride I was glad to go on many times. Clones sucked also, but in a completely different way. I don't know whether it was the sucky dialogue, the bad acting or the lousy story that turned me off within five minutes. I was not involved at all in the film. I was so tempted to speak back at the screen a dozen times or more, but my wife kept pinching me just as those moments happened. I slipped once, when Annakin asked Sen. Armadillo, `Are you suffering like I am?' I screamed, `Yes, we are.' This brought cheers from the audience. The audience, by the way, sat in stunned silence as the suckieness unfolded. Everything was wrong with this film. Only Christopher Lee and Obi-Wan brought any class to this dreck. It just plain sucked, in more ways than I have room here to relate. Take away all the razzle dazzle creatures and effects and the costumes and the sets and nothing is left but an empty, boring shell with nothing to say. For instance, when Obi-wan just walks into the HQ of the cloning world, the clone masters take him and show him everything. They don't ask for any kind of ID or proof that he's whom they were waiting for. They just assume that he's a Jedi and he's here for an inspection tour. The old Lucas would have shown the audience how the character would have bluffed his way through, ala Han Solo. The new Lucas blows any opportunity to create suspense at all. Even the fight with Jimbo Billy Bob Fett at the complex didn't raise any kind of alarm among the cloners. I guess they just never look out their windows, nor do they turn their communications gear on to hear Jethro Fett tell them that this Jedi was a spy. Nope, they don't do any of that, and the clone shipment goes ahead without a hitch. Stupid writing, even stupider plotting, sink this sucky excuse for a film in ten minutes. It was not compelling in any way, despite the effects. In fact, as I watched, I kept thinking that the effects were being wasted worse than putting curtains on a camel. As impressive as Star Wars and Empire were in their time, Clones is repulsive. I think the audience agrees with me, as the last time I looked, Clones was sinking fast at the box-office. I've said enough. I'll go back now and watch Spiderman, a far superior film.