SCHAGELA

Actually this German movie was made for T.V. It was received so well however that it was showed at the Rotterdam Film-festival in 2002. I don't know what the score was in Holland but I found this one very good. Not being focused on German movies - so far only a few did the trick for me e.g. "Run Lola Run" and "Das Boot" - I can definitely add "Toter Mann" to my list. The story is about a lawyer (Richter) who falls in love with the nice looking Leyla who he meets at a swimming pool. After an 'interesting' night she disappears.... Before Richter has any notice, he is captured in a murder mystery with a riveting climax and a surprising end. Very well played by the cast and superb directing (great colors!) in an intelligent movie that will keep you to the edge of your seat!! 9 out of 10.

After seeing The Lord Of The Rings, there was no doubt in my mind this flick would get all the main Oscars. How wrong I was! I watched Training Day after the Oscars were handed out and I truly must say I agree on Denzel winning the actors prize. In this movie you will see him as you've never seen before: a really bad cop who doesn't seem to care about anything. Very well played - also by Ethan Hawke by the way - and very nicely 'over the top'. A must see for lovers of police-thrillers. Great!!

Although I'm not really a Sly-fan I found this movie highly entertaining and it made me laugh quite a lot. I totally agree with the comment of bensonl who, in my opinion understands the value of entertainment. Right you are, mate! I think it's silly to look for a good plot (is there one?) in an action flick like this. Anyway, who cares? If you're in for a plot go see 'Usual Suspects', I'd say.

By the way, if you're being led by all the negative comments, you'll miss the chance of (yet again) seeing Sharon without clothes.....mmmm! 8 out of 10 to push up the score.

The main topic in this movie deals with the question of what the American government has done to Vietnam soldiers concerning drug experiments. It's a dark, scary movie with superb acting by the cast, especially Tim Robbins. Although not great in every film, he reaches the same quality as in e.g. "The Shawshank Redemption". Having said that, you can draw your conclusions. The most intriguing however is the story and even more than that: the end. When I watched it for the first time, my reaction was: "Oh no, My God, how can it be?" If you don't know anything about these things I promise it will knock you off your feet, out of your seat or whatever. Overwhelming!!! 9 out of 10 for sure.

Actually I'm still in doubt if there's anything about this movie I like. As for the story: unrealistic and very exaggerated. The acting was too bad in my opinion. Not very likely that Antonie Kamerling will get a Rutger Hauer status. Some folks will expect it anyway. First let him work on his English pronunciation. If you watch the 'trip' to Paris of these actors (DVD-extra) you will most likely want to trow up. Advice to Beau Dorens: stop your acting career, you'll never get there... To the 2 main 'actors': grow up, please. Being generous, I'd give it 4 out of 10.

While there are currently a lot of films dumped on videotape and sold at very low prices, I discovered 'Blue Velvet' yesterday. Seeing the year it was made in (1986), I was afraid it would be a bit out of time. Definitely not the matter. I found it controversial and shocking, not for me but I think many people will think so. I found a film like CRASH quite shocking because of the gay contents and I thought it didn't have anything to tell. This is different for 'Blue Velvet'. I think Dennis Hopper did a marvelous job, never seen him better. Very over-the-top acting yet credible and pretty frightening. The over aged bubblegum bimbo dancing on the car, while the main character gets beaten up is just hilarious. The rest of the cast was o.k. as well. If you've never watched it, a true recommendation. 9 out of 10.

Wow, what a movie, I really enjoyed this one. Even though I'm not really a lover of the romantic genre, I think this one is great, great, great. In the form of a modern fairy tale with great acting great atmosphere and directed magically by Lasse Halstrom. With 'What's Eating Gilbert Grape he already proved he could make sensitive yet not 'dribbling' movies. This one is even better if you ask me. After about 12 minutes I found myself touched by it with tears in my eyes. Anyone should watch it, can't imagine how anyone could be bored. IMO all the Oscars that went to Erin Brokovitch should have gone to 'Chocolat'. Highly recommended to everyone!!! One of my few 10 out of 10's.

Even though I'm not really into the romance/comedy genre, this movie brought a smile to my face. I'm not going into the story here, I guess most will be familiar with that. If not, check out other reviews. I think all the problems that Jack Campbell encounters when he wakes up in a for him totally different world, are very well worked out. He finds himself in one hilarious situation after another, enough stuff to laugh about here. As there is no foul language, blasphemy or sex in The Family Man, it's suitable for all family members. That's where the power lies in this film too, I reckon. It's hard nowadays to give some joy to adults without these things. This movie proves it's not necessary at all. 8 out of 10.

Theo van Gogh is a very controversial character in Holland, not always to be taken seriously. As a director he's a lot more serious.

I think this is a really good Dutch movie. About half of it is spoken in English, very well too especially if you compare it to The Delivery, another Dutch thriller. The plot is intriguing and very surprising in the end. Acting is very good as well by the Dutch and the English cast.

This makes it enjoyable even if you're not a Dutch viewer. 8 out of 10.

Actually I think this is the first acceptable Mimi Leder flick so far. I've watched The Peacemaker which I found extremely boring and Deep Impact in which the special effects were good - no doubt - but the acting was very soapy. In spite of a great actor like Morgan Freeman. I really enjoyed Pay It Forward though. Good story, good plot, good acting by the whole cast.

I gave this one a shot, lured by the text on the cover that this flick would be like mix of the two very good above mentioned films. Not at all in my opinion. I think the plot is very cheaply worked out. The '4 dogs' could have found their way out of the situation more easily than making up this stupid idea about life insurances. I found the acting very poorly too, except maybe for Tim Curry.

All in all not worth the time or money.

This first film by writer/director Anthony Waller is above all standards. Although made with a low budget it has all the ingredients a good thriller should have. The story is about a girl who works for a film company and who gets to be the accidental witness of a murder while it's being filmed for a snuff-movie. Because she is mute, she later has lots of difficulty explaining the police what has happened. Besides that, they don't believe her. The plot in the movie keeps changing in a very original way without losing it's credibility. The high tension goes on for as long the film lasts and thus will keep you to the edge of your seat for 95 minutes. The acting as well as the directing is great. Marina Sudina (whom I had never heard of before) is not only a very attractive actress but a very good one too. Hitchcock would have been jealous of this one... 9 out of 10.

This is probably the worst historical effort in movies I've ever seen.

This movie must have cost a lot, considering all the costumes and crowdy events. A total waste of money to my opinion. What's the use of putting motorcycles and tank-like vehicles in such a movie?? Beyond my comprehension. What the cover the DVD I rented promised me, were some gruesome torturing scenes, realistic this and that and an Anthony Hopkins that would strongly remind of the Hannibal character. Nothing of whatsoever... After an hour, tediousness grew upon me enough to stop this awful film.

The main character's black girlfriend gets raped by a gang of neo-nazi's. He is forced to watch it happening, but is not capable of helping her. She later blames him for this and commits suicide. Of course this has its results on his further actions. He infiltrates in the gang and hopes to have his own revenge. A thing he didn't realize is that he gets sucked in to these gang-activities himself.... Although very poorly directed, I thought the acting was good and the story interesting enough. Those who 'enjoyed' American History X, will appreciate this movie.

After seeing this one, I can't really tell what it is about. No satisfying story-line, no moral. If so, what is it?? Just some useless sex-excesses that had no meaning at all. The car crashes were useless and disappointing as well. If there were prizes to win for making a total ridiculous and unrealistic movie, Cronenberg should get the highest possible. Disgusting. No points...

Schoolteacher Samantha Caine (Geena Davis) suffers from a bad case of amnesia and is being tortured by a mysterious past. With the help of the not too smart private investigator Mitch Hennesy (Samuel L. Jackson) she discovers her true identity: secret agent Charly Baltimore. They find out there's a conspiracy between the secret agency and Baltimore's worst enemy, gun-trader Timothy. So far for the story. What we're dealing with here is a very clever made action-comedy from Renny Harlin who also was responsible for e.g. Lethal Weapon and Die Hard II. I would go as far as to say this movie can best be described as a different version of Die Hard With A Vengeance. Only Bruce Willis is replaced by Geena Davis and the story is totally different of course. The high quality action, comedy and a lovely combination of these fine actors made me enjoy this one a lot. Sam Jackson, IMHO one of the greatest black American actors, is steady as always. I think its a shame we don't see that much movies with Geena. As well as many readers and submitters in IMDB, I think she did a lovely job in Thelma And Louise. Her acting in The Long Kiss Goodnight is definitely done with the same enthousiasm. My points: 8 out of 10.

The thing that first struck me was seeing Amanda Plummer playing in an English movie. A nice surprise. She really has some great acting skills. After seeing Pulp Fiction I automatically assumed she was an American actress. Looking at BK however, gave me the strong idea that she had to be British, speaking with such an explicit Northern English accent.... IMDB learned me that she is American after all. Tops!! Of course her role is a very bizarre one: a man-hating lesbian who seems to kill others at random. She takes Saskia Reeves with her in a negative downstream which finally results in an ending that can't give a good feeling to anyone seeing the movie. In spite of that (after having some doubt) I found that I truly liked this movie. Thanks to those two fabulous playing actresses (I'd never seen Saskia Reeves before but I liked her right away. Not thanks to the story: I never found out what the rue reason was behind all the killings. 7 out of 10.

Over-all I found 'The Stand' an acceptable TV-production. One couldn't be bothered with the length, esp. if you know the book.

Not very well casted but what would you expect from a 6-hour B-movie? The second part - the second 3 hours that is - I enjoyed more than the first. I guess it had to do with the thickening of the plot, even knowing the story by at least reading the book 3 times, the long version. Very nice to see a bit of 2 great stars like Kathy Bates and Ed Harris. (both uncredited) Their part might have been longer though, pity. I don't think choosing Jamie Sheridan for the role of RF was bad, but what would you say if a character like Michael Madsen had played this??? Anyway JS reminded me of MM somehow. Another good choice was Gary Sinise as Stu Redman. He made me think of Tom Hanks sometimes, good acting! Something that really bothered me was how Stephen King - who wrote the teleplay - messed up his own story. Rita Blakemoor being omitted is hardly acceptable for the viewers who also read the book, whatever version. (only one reviewer noticed it so far!) It certainly put Larry Underwood in a different situation and some others too, like Lucy Swann. On the other hand - if anyone had to be neglected - King could have left out the Joe-character as he did not add much to the movie. There were also pieces I could not remember from the book. The first one: a meeting between Abagail and Randall Flagg not far from the beginning, where the blood came gushing out of their hands. Another one was the shooting from a window by Julie Laurie when Tom and Nick left her alone. (comments anyone?) 6 out of 10 for this one.

I really regret I saw this one. IMO a terrible Se7en rip-off. Can't some people make up their own stories?? And if they use the base of another one, why not make it more different or even better.

That doesn't count for 'resurrecti0n' - a title I totally agree of.

To say something about the acting: just too bad. How realistic is it to have a good marriage, then 1 or two days after your wife dies, to start a relation with her sister? Well for one, I didn't dig it. The only positive thing I noticed is that the guy's English (or American if you prefer) isn't as bad as Schwarzenegger. 2 out of 10 would be generous.