theholmboy

We saw this in the theater upon release. It was panned then just as it is now (by some, not all). Our family have always loved it and watch it/quote it regularly. That includes our younger children that were born after the movie was released.

I get annoyed that it is frequently compared to Austin Powers when they are clearly aimed at different audiences, with the latter mainly relying on overly crude/lazy humor. Master of Disguise has an ongoing flatus joke that is uniquely funny because of the timing and that it is a parody of when the bad guy laughs. The movie has great production design, fun characters and visuals. The grouchy reviewers of this movies are not turtley enough for the Turtle Club.

Totally mis-billed as a comedy, this is a straight-up drama with heavy-handed story telling and an inplausible ending. I gave it a chance because of my fondness of writer Mike White's two movies previous to this and also because the pictures indicated a possible relationship between Molly Shannon & John C. Reilly (which totally could have worked). Instead, she is paired up with a character named Newt, which I quickly realized was short for neutered, in a figurative sense, of course.

I will say this... This is the first drama I have seen with quirky/happy music and scoring, but it didn't redeem it.

Being very fond of the Oscar-winning short The ChubbChubbs! from whence this awful thing sprang, I had somewhat high expectations of this one. Sadly, the ChubbChubb's went from being these cool, carnivorous little creatures that strike fear into all aliens to nothing more that miniature, yellow versions of the Tasmanian Devil. Meeper doesn't have much to do here -- only participating in the overly-used plot of delivering gifts in Santa's place and, hence, saving "Xmas." Who uses the term "Xmas" anymore?! Another obligatory & mediocre "sequel" to an original, that is really good. If you want to watch a funny, animated Christmas short, check out the Madagascar Penguins in "A Christmas Caper." It is so much better.

I am a long-time fan of the book A Christmas Carol and read it at least once a year (I'm on my third reading this year). Since I am in my 30's and grew up on the George C. Scott 1984 version of this story, this one always seemed like ancient history to me, having been made 19 years before I was born. I finally broke down and bought it, thinking I may have been wrong, what with all the people saying it is the "standard." Sadly, I was right all along, at least as far as my tastes and sensibilities go. This is a classic for the geezers to watch and think of their childhood fondly and more power to them! Also, as much as I hate black and white films, the colorized version seems worse to me. They colorized Marley's clothing! He's a ghost, for heaven's sake! Don't they know ghosts are whitish-gray, even in color movies.

As for me, I'm going to keep watching the George C. Scott version and the equally good Patrick Stewart version. George C. Scott will always be Scrooge in my mind's eye, but the casting in the 1999 Patrick Stewart version is superior to all that I have seen. As opposed to this one, which has Bob Cratchit as portly and the gentlemen who come to his office asking for donations, which are described as "portly" in the book, as thin! Did they actually read the book, other than for dialogue? If you like black and white Christmas movies, stick to "It's a Wonderful Life," since it hasn't been re-done over a dozen times, like this one.

I cannot pick a favorite movie version of my all-time favorite story. I like almost all the people who have played Scrooge over the years, from Mr. Magoo to George C. Scott. However, this movie has, IMO, the best supporting cast. After seeing this version, it is more often than not, the actor from this movie that appears in my imagination as I read the book (a yearly tradition). Particularly, Richard E. Grant as Bob Cratchit and Dominic West as Fred, the two principles in Scrooge's present day life. Patrick Stewart does a well enough job, but the excellent cast buoy him up and make the production even better than it could have been. After just recently watching this one and then, shortly thereafter, reading the book, I must say that the dialogue stays extremely close to the text. This is very pleasing to me, considering I know most of the dialogue from the book by heart.

This excellent short film is my favorite adaptation of O. Henry's short story. Art Carney does a great job, although his character is French in this version, as opposed to the German character in the book. (Maybe he was better at French accents?) Anyway, it is fun to see a great actress like Hermoine Baddeley in a small, but significant role. I had to take a double-take, since this is probably what you call an independent film, by early 80's standards, and she had been in a lot of big productions for many years. (It was made for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints by their media arm, Bonneville Media.) Also, it is interesting to see then-unknowns Sydney Penny & Jane Kaczmarek in the lead roles. However, as good as Sydney was in this film, I still liked her best in Pale Rider.

Unfortunately, it is doubtful it will be on DVD anytime soon. It shares that unfortunate fate with another great LDS-produced film from that same time period. Mr. Krueger's Christmas also had a "brand-name" star, namely Jimmy Stewart. Sadly, neither are widely available, even in VHS format.

Unlike the last reviewer, I'm actually going to review Boundin', not the movie that follows it. First of all, let's keep it in perspective here. This comes before a family animated film. Pixar know their audience and this one is as good as any short they have made, and I have seen them all many times. It has a Dr. Seuss-like rhythm & style but they throw a little cowboy poetry flavor in there, as well. (I am guessing that Mr. MIT reviewer probably hasn't heard of cowboy poetry.) I thought it was a good combination and it had a good moral that needs to be heard a little more these days, which is "take what you have and find a way to be happy with it" But finding that way isn't that the sheep in the story goes on the new "reality" TV show, "Extreme Sheep Makeovers." What lesson is learned there? Not any lesson worth learning. Enjoy this one the way it is meant to be enjoyed, with a light-heart and an open mind.

I've been reading lots of reviews talking about how this is not a family film. Considering the traditional idea of a family film, I must agree. But, in our family, this is a family film. This is not one you put on for younger children and leave them alone to be scared, because they will likely be scared. But if you watch it with them and tell them what is coming, I imagine most children wouldn't be too creeped out. Our 5 & 6 year olds weren't. This one has the standard Dahl plot device of an orphaned child and lots of creepy women, as in some of his stories. Angelica Huston steals the show, but Jasen Fisher, the main character, holds his own very well. Bottom Line: If you haven't seen this one, watch it first before you watch it with the kids.

I have read a fair amount of negative reviews about this one and I am guessing that those reviewers did not get the 80's, even if they did live through them. Look, this is indeed a mindless action film, but it is fairly original. If all action movies were held to the standard of a movie like the Matrix, not many before it would survive. Dawson (Killian) does steal the show here and there, but Schwarzenegger always wins and it makes it all the more savory when his character uses the same lines back on Killian at the end. Classic. You don't watch 80's action films for the great special effects - you watch them because the interplay between characters is classic and memorable. Commando, another Arnie movie, is another good example of that. Remo Williams is an even better one. There's one that major plot point were stolen for both Matrix and Men in Black. But I digress... This is a great 80's action film. Nothing more, nothing less.

Look all you movie snobs out there. This is a classic 80's action flick and nothing more. Sure there were some effects, but that is not the focus of the story. It is the interplay between Remo and Chuin that makes this one shine. It has classic and memorable lines. And, it was good enough for major plot points to be stolen later by the writers of the Matrix and Men in Black. If you want better action sequences, see those. If you want to see 80's action in all of its glory, get this one. One last point: It is sad that the DVD doesn't have a Widescreen option.

I thoroughly enjoyed this one. I watched it knowing it wasn't going to be a light-hearted film, which was an advantage over many people I know who went to it thinking it was a happy ending sort of show. I must admit it was a little odd to see the goings-on of LDS church meetings and other LDS cultural aspects on the big screen, but it is territory that needs to be covered so that future movies that cover similar territory won't be weighed down with reviews about the LDS church rather than focusing on the movie at hand. I watched the DVD a second time with Richard Dutcher's audio commentary and, after that, I concluded that he is someone who is conscientious about finding the balance in film in regards to the religious issues dealt with, not too pro or too anti. I was quite amazed as to how resourceful he was, considering their meager budget he had to work with. The outcome was superb and he told the story in a simple, yet elegant way. I look forward to Mr. Dutcher's next film.

As a longtime fan of Nero Wolfe novels, Maury Chaykin, and Timothy Hutton, I had high expectations of this movie. I was not disappointed. I watched it for the first time with some friends that knew nothing of Nero Wolfe and we all enjoyed it. The casting was superb and the sets and props seemed to be authentic for the period. My one complaint is that Saul Rubinek does not make a good Saul Panzer. Granted, he had a well-described character to live up to - one whose abilities the author describes in an awe-striking way. But he is not at all what I had pictured in my mind. A very minor criticism of a very excellent movie.

Being LDS and a former missionary, I couldn't help but enjoy this film. It was good entertainment and we need more movies that instill hope in us and a desire to become better people. Although some of the things portrayed in the movie don't happen every day, they do happen and that is the hope of which I speak. I recommend this film wholeheartedly.

Sadly, it gives the Mormon-haters a reason to find a new forum in which to spread their hate. They seemingly abhor the LDS values that this movie portrays, yet they spend time and money to go see it and then more time telling us how much they hate the movie and Mormons. If that isn't a reason to go see this film, I don't know what is!