burbs82

I'll make this short and sweet. One positive of this flick is Jackie Earle Haley's portrayal of Feddy Krueger. Although I never hoped nor expected that he would live up to Robert Englund's iconic dream-demon, he does a good job in both the current and flashback sequences.

Another positive is the choice of song for the end credits.

And that about sums up any redeeming qualities this "re-imagining" has. Topping the "negatives" list would be the rest of the cast, who are so bland and unlikeable that I felt a strong compulsion to get up and leave by the early funeral sequence, where our protagonists (such as they are) are speaking such unbelievably bad dialogue as to make Ed Wood look like William Shakespeare. Just another gang of Dawson's Creek clones(i.e., characters without character) that were so prominent in the post-'Scream' era, but seemed (thankfully) to have begun to disappear with some of Platinum Dunes other remakes of popular franchises like 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre' and 'Friday the 13th', and some of Rob Zombie's flicks. Please, please, please Dawson's Creek victims, GO AWAY.

Also boding negative, as others have mentioned, an overuse of CGI. There's a famous scene lifted from the original with the form of Freddy emerging from a wall just as a character is drifting off to sleep. In the original, done with latex and clever lighting, it looks fantastic. In this "updated" and "technically superior" variation, it looks like a goddamn cartoon... Flashback to 'The Frighteners'. Of course, one could make the case that the scene in the original in which Nancy's mom is pulled through a small window looks ridiculous, but the CGI updating here, which COULD have looked pretty damn cool with some prosthetics and and a little CGI thrown in, still looks pretty lame because producers just can't seem to see the value in prosthetics and MODERATE use of CGI.

Also, there's none of the exposition surrounding the mystery of dreams and the unconscious mind that the original utilized to such great advantage.

In short, this movie is awful and should not be seen by anyone. None of the teens cast in this movie should ever act again, and/or whoever wrote their dialogue and character development should never write again. But, in Platinum Dunes' favor, two out of three ain't bad... it's just that you wrecked the best of the three series you've remade so far.

This is superior horror-comedy, and actually, the best vampire film I've seen since 'From Dusk Till Dawn'. Friends Jimmy (Mathew Horne) and Fletch (James Corden) go on a hiking trip to take their minds off of things and wind up in Cragwich, a small town right of one of the old Hammer 'Dracula' films, Vicar and weird townsfolk included, only this town is haunted by LESBIAN VAMPIRES. Really, really hot LESBIAN VAMPIRES. I repeat, LESBIAN VAMPIRES... Got that? Jimmy is the descendat of a Crusade-era Templar, who vanquished Carmilla, the "queen" lesbian vampire, to the underworld with the promise that she would return with the sacrifice of one of his descendants. The two meet up with virginal Lotte (MyAnna Buring) and her hot coed friends, majoring in Carmilla lore, and much fun and vampire slaying ensues.

Mathew Horne's a likable protagonist, and James Corden is hilarious. MyAnna Buring is adorable... she looks like Deborah Harry. Hope I see her in more stuff.

For what was apparently a DTV film, the effects are actually pretty darn good, and as British horror spoofs go, I actually liked this a little better than 'Shaun of the Dead'. It's got an interesting comic-book-style cinematography and editing thing going' on, and the LESBIAN VAMPIRES are all super-hot. There are elements of all your other favorite comedy 'vamp' films ['Vamp' (1986), 'Bordello of Blood' (1996), 'From Dusk Till Dawn' (1996))], so it's not especially a new theme, but it's hella entertaining, the characterizations are very likable and funny, and the throwback to Hammer stuff like 'Dracula: Prince of Darkness' is pretty refreshing.

Highly recommended for the horror fan with a sense of humor and a love for hooters. Shame I didn't hear more about this one.

A group of mostly passable cliché teens travels to an isolated cabin in an area once occupied by the SS in World War II, and after meeting a guy who wonders out of nowhere to relate the history of the area and tell them they're doomed, the kids find a box of gold jewelery under a trap door in the cabin, and are slowly picked off until only a few are left to showdown as Nazi stormtroopers begin rising from the snø to lay siege and crack skulls... literally.

Some great F/X and visual work with the gore, and the zombie's make up and weather-worn uniforms look great.

This was a pretty fun and well-crafted zombie flick, alternating from satire to suspense, then back to satire. Nazi zombies are great symbolic imagery as well, and here they're treated kinda like the treasure-seeking pirate ghosts of Carpenter's 'The Fog', in fact the ending might be a reference. Much of the film is interlaced with references to classic 80's horror flicks, including some of Sam Raimi/Peter Deming's brilliant cinematography from 'Evil Dead 2: Dead By Dawn'.

The fact that the nazi zombies return to kill to get back their (ill-gotten or hard-won?) fortunes suggests perhaps a deeper subtext and understanding of history than appears on the surface, a balance you usually don't find with reference to the motivations of the German soldiers in the WWII era...

Also, there's some nice hooters to check out briefly.

Best Nazi zombie film since 'Shock Waves'. The kind of nightmarish way the zombies emerge from the snow is somewhat reminiscent of that film's zombies rising from the ocean. Recommended for those who love Nazi zombies, boobs, exposed brains plopping out of people's heads, and subtitles.

(I've loosely combined the whole series into this review, but it's primarily for the original and 'Final Sacrifice'...) Excellent follow-up to the 1984 cult-classic "Children of the Corn", based on the short story from Stephen King's 'Night Shift' collection (and despite the criticism, probably one of the better King adaptations).

'The Final Sacrifice' picks up in the aftermath of the original, with the surviving children of Gatlin (which, except for the one's that turned nineteen, as well as Isaac and Malachai, was pretty much all of them) are fostered to families in nearby Hemingford. Before you can pop a kernel, another child, Micah, is chosen by He Who Walks Behind the Rows to take out all the useless adults in town. A tabloid reporter and his estranged son (and Frank Redbear, local professor of anthropology! Ned Romero is great in this role) are in town for the story of the previous massacre, and they get drawn in to the nefarious plot about just what's making the sweet children of Gatlin flip out and start He Who Walks Behind the Row death cults. Not a bad explanation, because the fact that they're under the influence of chemicals doesn't really make 'He Who Walks Behind the Rows' NOT real, it's just that kids are highly susceptible to his will in altered states...

The subplot of the estranged father and son investigating phenomena in a small town is lifted from another unauthorized King sequel (and probably a million other movies), 'Return to Salem's Lot', but the dynamic between Terrance Knox and Paul Scherrer here actually works well, as opposed to the total misfire that was 'Return to Salem's Lot' (they should've gone with King's story 'One For the Road' for material).

Daniel Licht's score is excellent, quite lovely actually, and very fitting given the nature oriented them.

A very good sequel. The first two films are definitely a great watch, but with the exception of 'The Gathering', I detest the other sequels... and I usually love b-movies. I've seen good reviews for 'Urban Harvest', so maybe you'll see something I didn't if you wanna give it a shot. 'The Gathering' is watchable, but it's definitely lacking. I stopped at 'Fields of Terror'. I'm sure I was sober, but all I remember is a guy's head splitting open to reveal a flame-thrower nozzle and I'm still trying to figure out where the hell that came from. I'm seeing a remake of the original slated for 2009, and two more sequels followed which I've yet to see. Dare me? What separates 'Children of the Corn' (1984) and its underrated sequel, 'Children of the Corn II: The Final Sacrifice' (1992) are really their consistency to the theme... but, what is the theme? Anarchy of a sort. An Old Testament-style rebellion of people, in this case children, under the influence of a higher power. King's short story is excellent as well.

No ROOM for commitment! A-MEN!

I consider 'Weekend At Bernie's' a rather bizarre classic. When I was a kid I remember it coming out in theaters and being a fairly popular film, but not being really interested at the time. I was eight and considering 'Ninja Turtles', 'Batman', and 'Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade' all came out that year, I can guess why a random comedy title with no action figures to sell it to children took the backseat (Although 'Last Crusade' of the three, still holds up and, ironically, had no action figures). However, several years later, mid-nineties, I caught the finale of the sequel (probably on USA Network), I was in full 80's retro mode, and what I saw was enjoyable enough for me to want to look up the '89 original.

Based on situational (the "sit" in sitcom) humor, rather than slapstick, or non-sequitir), I laughed at several of the jokes the first couple of viewings, but what really makes this one stand the test of time are the unique underpinnings of the story, in which death itself actually becomes the joke.

This may or may not be intentional, again it's played as a lighthearted comedy where mob assassins (the great Don Calfa ('Return of the Living Dead'[1984]) are depicted as bumbling buffoons who can't recognize corpses, but that's also an interesting aspect of the story. NO ONE notices that Bernie (Terry Kiser, "Friday the 13th Part VII: The New Blood"[1987], "Three's Company"[1977]) is deceased, despite the obviousness of it. We laugh at the notion that Richard (Jonathan Silverman) and Larry's (Andrew McCarthy) inventive but still unabashedly idiotic plan to make it appear as if their boss is alive, succeeds to a degree, but it's a sad epitaph for Bernie Lomax, a thieving and probably compulsive broker and financier, whose greed seems to have afforded him much popularity, but no friends to go along with it, which casts lowly, struggling desk-jockeys Richard and Larry in an even more sympathetic light.

Jonathan Silverman and Andrew McCarthy are great as the two often clueless friends who stumble over an accounting error, and thinking that someone is embezzling money from Lomax's firm, they report it to good ol' Bern, who turns out to be the culprit. Bernie invites them over for a weekend at his luxurious island beach house with the intention of killing them, however Bernie's mob ties catch up with him and the guys arrive to find their boss dead. What to do, what to do...

It's got a good soundtrack and score, and the island (filmed at Bald Head Island, NC) is beautiful. Also features the awesome Catherine Mary Stewart, of the cult classic 'Night of the Comet' (1984), in a small role as Richard's love interest, Gwen... and a hilariously evil kid obsessed with giving the dead a proper burial.

Funny and unique comedy. If you've got the balls to look death in the face and LAUGH at his cheap wig, check out 'Weekend at Bernie's'. I also highly recommend the sequel, which forays into the supernatural (i.e. zombies and voodoo).

If the first two Terminator flicks are 10's, and being generous, we'll say Part 3 was a 5, this is definitely back to the well-written, well-paced footing of the first two films. I have to admit, I was dubious about this film, but I was proved wrong from start to finish.

The story is solid, not striking one as being somewhat unnecessary like the third film. After surviving humanity's nuclear holocaust at the hands of a self-aware military defense computer network, Skynet, It's now 2018, John Connor is part of the human resistance and he discovers that Skynet has targetted a young Kyle Reese, his future father, for termination and is desperately seeking him out just as the resistance has discovered an incredible breakthrough in their offensive effort against Skynet.

However, as always, Skynet has a new cyborg up their sleeves and this one is remarkably inventive. It's all part of a plan to ensnare the man who remains Skynet's greatest threat; John Connor. It's also an interesting reversal of the premise of the first two films. A death row inmate, Marcus, donates his body to science and awakens in the future, unaware that he is now a pawn in Skynet's calculated plan to draw out the young Kyle Reese, who along with his young, mute friend Star, essentially take on the sympathetic target roles of Linda Hamilton in the original, and Edward Furlong from Part 2, and are the real heart and moral fiber of the film, and it as an older, war-weary John Connor, and an unwitting cyborg looking for redemption, who must save Reese in order to save Connor and the future of humanity.

All in all, a great film. Marcus and Connor share the protagonist role, and since the Marcus character is new, but has an interesting background, he brings an interesting and refreshing narrative to the saga, and Sam Worthington does a great job with the character. In my opinion, Anton Yelchin actually steals the show, because the kid not only looks A lot like Michael Beihn, but he acts just like him too, and I have to admit, the original has always been (and remains) my favorite. Some really standout moments are nods to the previous films, specifically the Schwarzenegger T-800 model CGI'd in was an AWESOME touch. He even has the combover hair from the original. If only Connor could have offered up a hearty "Nice night for a walk, eh?"... Also, listen for the Guns 'N Roses track 'You Could Be Mine', from Terminator 2. Several memorable quotes referenced as well, this is essentially the continuing, and clever theme of the past influencing the future that dominated the second film.

My only VERY MINOR critique would be the score, which compared to the first two films is kind of bland. The trademark Brad Feidel drum beat plays briefly at the beginning and end, but that's all. Usually I complain if a film overuses CGI, which this one does perhaps a bit, but the CGI itself is solid, for the most part. Still, this one's a winner. Fans should definitely check it out.

Our fellow travellers at New World Pictures released many a b-classic in their day, such as 'Vamp', 'House', and 'Heathers' to name but a few, but with 'Reform School Girls' they really go all out. They've taken the old "women's prison" cliché and essentially perfected it with this parody-homage hybrid.

Linda Carol plays Jenny, a hot teen shipped off by the state to a deteriorating (is there any other kind?) reform school, headed by Ilsa-like Warden Sutter (Sybil Danning) and watched over by the hilariously evil and over-the-top matron, Edna (Pat Ast), who does a terrific job making you absolutely despise her. A state-appointed psychologist (Charlotte McGinnis) becomes concerned by Edna's treatment of the girls, not to mention the occasional "suicide" this treatment produces. As the doctor struggles to get the ever-impotent state to step in, the girls take matters into their own hands and the film culminates in a violent, bloody, punk rock showdown between the broads and the guards.

The cast is excellent. You have the usual prison inmate clichés (neccesary for any great women's prison flick) but the actresses are all top notch. Late-great Wendy O. Williams (of punk band The Plasmatics) is AWESOME as 'Charlie', the sadistic cellblock sister with her own gang (beautiful 'Friday the 13th' series alumns Tiffany Helm and Darcy DeMoss), but she is SO wired, SO bad-ass, SO insane, and SO rarely wearing much clothing, that she adds a whole new dimension to an otherwise predictable character. Not to mention the fact that, although she looks great, she's well past reform school age (don't suffer the delusion that this wasn't intentional).

Also, Sherri Stoner creates a very sympathetic character as 'Lisa', a sweet, innocent, naive, but also traumatized and neurotic girl who's been shipped from place to place and suffers the most abuse from Edna. You can predict poor Lisa cracking pretty much from the opening credits, but director Tom DeSimone does a GREAT job of building it up and he doesn't cop out. Kitten and stuffed animal lovers beware.

Some great 80's punk tracks fuel the reform school fights and riots. There are several shower sequences (and lotsa' boobies), some great b-movie humor, good cinematography and DeSimone keeps it all going at a quick pace... If you're not picking your jaw up off the floor after watching Wendy, in a rage, smash her face through the windshield of speeding truck, then climb onto the top of it to do a brief, spastic, punk rock grease dance, and THEN jump off before it hits its target, consult a physician immediately.

Anyway, I give this a ten because not only is it a great, hella-entertaining film by itself, but I'd put it at the number one spot in the women's prison sub-genre (even though it TECHNICALLY does not take place in a women's prison).

I found "The Pit" to be pretty awesome, and I'm glad I ran across it. I found no great references for it, ('Creature Features' says steer clear, whoopty-doo), but once I saw the Avco Embassy logo, saw it was made in '81, and read the synopsis I figured it would be worth a shot. It's an interesting Chiller with a range of weird influences, from Freudian pop-psychology to H.P. Lovecraft, and it's actually a pretty hilarious look at the male adolescence of, say, a young 'Norman Bates' or 'Martin'-type character who ascribes a split personality to his Teddy bear... Several great moments include the kids' dinner table beaver hunt with his new babysitter, the Oedipan bathing scene, again with babysitter and several others, but then you throw in the kids weird pathological connection to the troglodytes, or 'Trogs', weird missing-link cannibal-mutant-morlockish-"old ones", living in the woods in a deep pit just outside of town, and to which the kid begins to offer sacrifices to, and you start crossing the muddled line between madness, fantasy and reality. Very entertaining. Sonja Smits, a.k.a. 'Bianca "You look just like one of father's derilects" Oblivion', appears as the kid's teacher, and Sammy Snyders, a.k.a. the luckiest kid alive in 1981, plays the sexual deviant youth 'Jamie Benjamin'. Great ending as well. Definitely check this one out.

Who was the world's most infamous monster before he became the world's most infamous monster? That's one of the subjects tackled in 'Max', which I would have titled 'Hitler and Me'.

Being fairly well versed in World War II history and having read 'Mein Kampf', I honestly didn't find the humanistic depiction of Hitler that controversial. Hitler may have ultimately been responsible for one of several major inhuman events in history, his just happens to be one of the more recent, but only humans can be inhuman. Though given the politically correct, and highly oversensitive nature of society today, it's not difficult to imagine people finding the subject "offensive". The film actually plays into this preconception, and a very human Hitler is a clever platform for the subject of the film, which is actually art and expression, and the main character, Max Rothman (John Cusack), delights in shattering social morays with his artwork.

Rothman is a Jewish art dealer from a wealthy family, who develops an interest in a poor, struggling, and embittered young Adolf Hitler. Having both served in the "Great War", and with Rothman taking pity on Hitler, an interesting dichotomy between the two men forms an unusual relationship. The two seem to be polar opposites, not only in their backgrounds and personalities, but also in their approach to their work, but they have more in common than is readily apparent. The difference is in their expression.

Max, feeling slighted by the loss of his right arm, has embraced modernism, or abstract art, which is comparatively a mockery of traditionalism. Modernism, for Rothman, is his way of getting back at society for what it has done to him.

Paradoxically, Hitler is the traditionalist. He despises abstract art, yet Rothman deals primarily in modernism. Still living in the barracks of the German army, homeless with no friends or family, and desperately trying to get Rothman to sell his work at a time when abstract modernism was all the rage (and sadly, still is), he too feels as though life has stolen something from him. But where Rothman takes his revenge conceptually in the art world, Hitler begins to plot his in another art medium that is perhaps even more grossly misunderstood today than it was then, oratory and politics. Just as the two are the verge of a mutual understanding of one another, a breakthrough realization of commonality, a few sad twists by a cruel fate intervene, and the rest is history.

John Cusack is charming as Rothman, the affable and seemingly carefree fellow, who secretly bears disdain for the society that has pointlessly "disarmed" him. Noah Taylor is exceptional as der Fuhrer, whose own disdain for society he makes well known to all who hear his screaming, sociopathic rants that helped catapult him to the most well-known fascist dictator in modern history, but what he keeps secret, buried forever by a world that will only see a monster, is a sentimentality, a love, for art. A love he could afford that Rothman could not. Art students may find the traditionalist/modernist debate interesting. Prior to seeing the film, I once wrote a scathing essay on Marcel DuChamp, who is actually mentioned in the movie, criticizing his modern art piece "The Fountain", the urinal he painted and submitted to a New York gallery. It was basically a rant against modern art that was not at all unlike Hitler's criticisms of modern art in the film. I've actually seen some of Hitler's watercolors, which from what I've heard are his only surviving works. They're scenic houses, surprisingly calming and serene. One of Rothman's "displays" in the film, raises an interesting question... "What could have been?"

DEFENSE CONDITION FUN! Yes, sorry for the cheesy summary title, but I enjoyed this cheeseball 80's post-nuclear holocaust flick from our good friends at New World Pictures (They who brought us the immortal 80's vampire-stripper film 'Vamp' and some other goodies). It's a fun low-budget ride about a trio of astronauts manning a U.S. Star Wars defense satellite as World War III/nuclear Armageddon breaks out between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. Following this rather well done sequence, they are quickly brought down and then one of them is just as quickly devoured by starving, irradiated homeless teenagers... and it just gets campier from there.

Turns out a sadistic, well-connected college student has somehow managed to takeover this local chapter of post-Armageddon society, so alas, even in the event of nuclear war, it appears we're still destined to be ruled by idiot frat brats. The two shuttle survivors, a hilarious survivalist pervert in a kilt, and the college dude's ex-girlfriend try to make their way out of this easily-led, two-month-old dictatorship society to an uncontaminated area of the globe.

Completely lacking in logic, and desperately in need of some good post-nuclear holocaust landscape imagery, it's nonetheless an enjoyable 80's b-movie-action-sci-fi-thriller-comedy, or backfillerdy for short. Watch for the "areolae" scene...

This is an excellent comedy/documentary from Bill Maher and Director Larry Charles. I haven't heard a packed theater laugh in unison like this in a while. Essentially, it's just Bill traveling the world and asking a various assortment of religious peoples a wide array of questions concerning their specific beliefs, which are often contradictory and always absurd. In most cases, the answers and reactions are exactly what you expect; denial, anger, attempts at recusal... although we are treated to some surprising honesty, specifically when Bill visits the Vatican in Rome...or rather, after he gets kicked out of it, as well as some well-meaning near-illiterate folks who just agree to disagree.

It's interesting to watch the reactions of officials at some of the American locations he visits, such as the bible-themed amusement park he visits in Orlando and the Mormon temple. They're on heightened alert or whatever code they signal each other with... In Invasion of the Body Snatchers they used a creepy, high-pitched scream. I KID the Body Snatchers! But seriously, the religious "officials" are creepy.

Many of the interviews are intercut with some hilarious clips from various religious broadcast sermons, religious themed films, and cartoons. I was kind of hoping Bill might actually be able to track down Ted Haggard for an interview, but he does at least get a few clips. There was one clip that only I laughed at. In a moment where Bill is kind of poking fun at himself, he shows a quick clip from the 80's cult classic 'Cannibal Women in the Avacado Jungle of Death', in which he stars alongside Shannon Tweed. I love that movie.

My only criticism is that Judaism, or perhaps more appropriately, Zionism, goes by virtually unscathed with Bill innocently questioning a Rabbi about the strange Sabbath rituals forbidding certain activities with the punishment of death, and another obnoxious Rabbi who is very EXTREMELY opposed to Zionism, but he all-together ignores the pervasive, oppressive and largely destructive role Israel has played in the Middle East since its establishment by the U.N. in 1948, which has been somewhat akin to the notion of "manifest destiny" which the Europeans used as the excuse to wipe out most of the Native Americans while colonizing North America. The byproduct of which is much of the terrorism we now see today targeted at countries that show unwavering support of Israel. This isn't surprising considering his interview on Real Time with Michael Scheuer, though, as well as the 'anti-semitic' stigma stuck upon anyone who dares mention this flagrant hypocrisy. I personally find Israel's idea of "implied ownership" or "divine right" to be a completely baseless, exclusive, supremacist ideology, really no different than the sense of entitlement shared by Christians who worship the Biblical character Yaweh, who supposedly granted them this divine right. He does cover Israel's slightly more insane opposition, Islam, at great length though...

That somewhat understandable omission aside, Bill's knowledge of the subject of religion as it relates to factual history is comprehensive, and it far exceeds most of the the people he interviews. The documentary takes on a more ominous tone toward the ending, and then Bill's final message at Megido, supposedly the place of Christ's return at the prophesied, though some Biblical scholars would say mistranslated, Second Coming (and also the setting of a great scene from 'The Omen' [1976]), is outright terrifying... and it drives the film's message home in a way that is clear, concise, but above all, correct. Religious fundamentalism, state-sanctioned end-of-the-world theology, and nuclear weapons just don't mix.

This is one of those Concorde-era Corman-produced flicks that's pretty awesome if you're down with some 80's-era glam-strippers, and if you aren't then I don't wanna know ya'. The plot is a pretty standard slasher plot, but Kay Lenz is awesome and hands in a good performance as a cop going undercover as a stripper (who actually comes to enjoy the job), and actually Greg Evigan is pretty cool as her yuppie cop partner. There's plenty of nudity, senseless murder, some good strip numbers, and Three's Company's Norman Fell co-stars as the club manager who doesn't know one of his strippers is a man. If Helen only knew.

This one's a b-classic in the 'Slumber Party Massacre' sense, but the inclusion of Kay Lenz is a huge plus and makes it a must see. This must've been on USA Up All Night at some point. It's followed by 1989's 'Stripped to Kill Part II' and is alluded to in 1990's 'Sorority House Massacre II'. These were the twilight years of Corman productions, and I always enjoyed them the most.

Wow... This was actually a really creepy, freaky, and in the Corman-produced-film tradition, occasionally goofy, drive-in style space-horror film. The plot is actually original, unless I'm missing something, and this is in no way an 'Alien' rip-off, as others have said. If anything, the plot seems to have been the inspiration for another vastly underrated space-horror film which followed almost twenty years later, "Event Horizon".

A crew of astronauts (presumably hailing from a galaxy far, far away), is ordered to land on a planet for a rescue/retrieval mission of another downed spacecraft. Finding no survivors, the well-rounded crew sets off to explore a strange pyramid construct, which seems to be eminating a source of energy or consciousness on this otherwise desolate planet, and one by one, each member is killed off by what seems to be their greatest fears somehow brought to life, until only one is left to unlock the mystery...

What you have here is actually a very effective premise, and considering budget limitations, it's incredibly well-crafted and somehow meets the challenge of making the whole thing believable... Given the premise, even a film with a big budget could have fallen hopelessly flat. Honestly, I love a lot of Corman's New World (and later, Concorde) stuff, a lot of which is incredibly funny schtick and parody of the genre, but this rises above and beyond anything I ever would have expected.

The script is surprisingly good, with a diversity of characters. However, the wrong cast could have easily turned it into a joke, but everyone involved does a great job. Grace Zabrieskie stands out as the haunted captain and pilot of the spaceship, and watch for a make-upless version of Robert Englund's infamous Freddy Krueger grin when he's facing off against an evil version of himself. Edward Albert plays the main protagonist, Cabren.

The effects are great, incredible actually, thanks in no small part to the set and matte designs by James Cameron. Think 'Aliens' quality. Honestly, the matte style developed by Cameron for films like this, 'Aliens', and the future sequences in 'The Terminator', still makes modern CGI pale in comparison, in my opinion. The atmosphere is perfect for this bleak planet. The monster effects are mostly great as well, with some excellent stop motion employed here and there. There's only one scene that I can recall where the monsters look pretty cheesy, but apparently this character's fear was the dark, so director Bruce D. Clark leaves them mostly unseen and somehow it actually works.

Then, of course, there's the INCREDIBLE, MUST BE SEEN TO BE BELIEVED... RAPE of Taaffe O'Connell by a giant maggot! This scene is CLASSIC.

The esoteric opening threw me off a bit, but the whole film comes full circle with its metaphysical conclusion. Along the lines of "it was only a dream", it's the sort of thing that only a b-movie will try, because it could potentially leave the viewer feeling cheated... but, strangely, it's actually very effective here. Perhaps because the rest of the film is so outlandish and unpredictable.

This is a weird, carnival funhouse of horrors set in space, and I think it's a must-see. It took me a while to finally getting around to seeing it, God (or is it "the master"?) knows I've seen just about every other horror film by now, and after watching it, I was kicking myself for having not picked up this little cult gem sooner. It's not too difficult to find bootleg DVDs on eBay or at horror conventions, but unfortunately there's still no official DVD release from Corman. I'm crossing my fingers for a special edition.

This was actually much better than I'd expected. It's much better than the previous effort, 'Batman Begins', which was actually pretty droll and uninteresting.

Gotham City, (thankfully, minus the overly grandiose CGI of the previous film), is caught between Batman and his new admirer, and self-designated philosophical opponent, The Joker. The story isn't anything new, but it's played out well, for the most part. At some points, it tries to parody the current political scene in America, and it really comes off as corny and naive in its message of what the citizens of Gotham "need", as declared by the self-proclaimed overseers of the city. Here is where one begins to lose sympathy for this "darker" version of Batman, and D.A. Harvey Dent. They're both such megalomaniacal martyrs, that the Joker seems a refreshing change of pace. I found myself wanting him to take out as many of his co-stars as possible...

The Joker does pretty much carry the film, and having Heath Ledger play the infamous villain was probably my biggest reservation prior to seeing it, as all the films I'd seen him in previously were awful. He steps up to the part and really pulls it off, though. He's fun to watch, and the decision to give him no backstory is actually pretty clever, as it leaves the viewer open to speculate about exactly who, or by The Joker's estimation, what he is and why he's there. For the most part, he's acted out pretty much as we've seen him in the other Batman films/series, only this time he's in it purely for the masochistic fun of it. Even when he "loses" to Batman, he never actually loses.

The whole Two-Face subplot plays out well until Harvey Dent actually becomes Two-Face, at which time the subplot moves too fast for the rest of the movie to handle. Hopefully he's not really dead (one of ALL the previous films' biggest mistakes was killing off the great villains). Good effects for Two-Face, though. There are other story elements that either drag, or aren't focused on enough, so I guess the film's biggest flaw is really pacing. Also, Nolan's purported "realistic" approach (an obvious misnomer in describing a film featuring Batman) is apparent and a definite improvement in his depiction of the city, but is often subverted by unlikely and even laughable dialogue, motivation, etc. Then again, this IS a fantasy excursion, but even for a film whose main character fights crime in a bat costume, the dialogue could have used some work.

Not a bad film. I still think a comic book film should avoid taking itself THIS seriously because you always wind up with some unintended cheese when you try to play it too straight, and to that end, 'Batman Forever' is still my favorite Batman film, but I'd say this and the '89 film both run a close second. Both have similar flaws, but also, both are successful in much the same way, specifically in their somewhat unique depictions of the Joker.

This is the best of the 'Blind Dead' films... but that's not exactly a ringing endorsement. If you're going to sit through any of them, I'd recommend you be on some sort of heavy narcotic. Morphine or any opiate derivative would probably be best, as this will slow down your brain's response time enough to match the pace of the film, and unlike alcohol, you'll be too languid to get up and find something better to do. A sense of humor will go a long way in getting you through the film as well.

The decaying corpses of the Templar Knights have given up their time-honored hobby of horse riding for boating in this one, and actually their creepy old Spanish galleon does manage to provide a rather foreboding atmosphere (that is, when it's not a poor scale model filmed in a bath tub). Also, some exposition about the boat existing in some sort of Bermuda Triangle-ish, alternate dimension which is inescapable once entered adds to the almost non-existent fun. But the nautical folklore only goes so far, and the film plods along.

It's a decent setting, and a basic premise that John Carpenter did wonders with in his classic 'The Fog', but obviously, De Ossorio is no Carpenter. This barely even works as camp, but that's really the only way you can view it. The characters are all stupid beyond belief, which usually works in a campy film's favor, but the movie moves so slowly, and the dialogue is so sparse that it sometimes takes a full ten minutes for a character to do or say something that you can laugh at. Also, it takes the Templars what feels like an hour to kill someone, and they go kicking and screaming the WHOLE way. I'm all for Scream Queens, but may I recommend a cut to the other characters HEARING them scream, or a really cool death scene to justify it all instead of just a little bit of blood drooling out of their mouth?

There's no nudity,which is a terrible shame as there is no shortage of hot models, but they do spend the whole film in bikinis, so that's kind of a plus. So, yeah, watch it for the creepy pirate ship atmosphere (with cool wind sounds and all), extremely stupid girls in bikinis, clunky dialogue,and of course the skeletal Templars, who were wearing hoodies and making it look good several hundred years before you were born. Or don't watch it and save yourself the anguish. But if someone's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to pick between this or the follow-up, 'Night of the Seagulls', for God's sake, PICK THIS ONE! 'Night of the Seagulls' will swallow your SOUL!

If you've watched 'The Vanishing', 'Breakdown', and any number of other 'couple's car breaks down in the middle of nowhere' movies, or movies about creepy motels and the creeps who run them, like 'Psycho', this is familiar territory, but don't let that dissuade you. Like its predecessors, it's a good flick, opting for a non-stop, relentless pace that keeps you pretty much glued to the screen.

It's built on its own fairly unique premise, and little is offered about what motivates the killer(s), but then again it's all pretty self-explanatory so it's actually kind of nice that they didn't waste any time with dying confessions. Luke Wilson and Kate Beckinsale are the protagonists, and I found myself rooting for both of them to make it, so they do a good job. The music for the opening and end credits fits like a glove, and I don't mean O.J.'s.

All in all a taut, well-done thriller in kind of a classical vein. Great job from director Nimrod Antal (what an unfortunate name) and all involved.

Basically, if you love the show, you'll love the movie. The whole cast is at their finest here, and it ranks up there with even my favorite episodes of the show. This is improv perfected, and I was literally laughing from beginning to end. I thought they did a pretty good job of giving each of the deputies adequate screen time in what was allotted. It is basically just like an extended episode of the show with a few big budget extras thrown in, but as far as I'm concerned it's one of Comedy Central's all-time greatest shows along with MST3K, Kids In The Hall, South Park, Upright Citizens Brigade, Strangers With Candy, and The Sarah Silverman Program, so you really can't ask for more.

Best movie of '07, no competition. I just got the unrated DVD and there's a lot of great stuff on there as far as extras go. Can't wait 'till Season 4 hits the shelves.

Despite the overwhelming hatred for Superman III, I gotta say that I think it's an excellent film. One of the two best of the whole Superman saga, actually. The other, of course, is the original film. But Superman III is so much fun, and a great example of how it's possible for Superman to have enemies OTHER than Lex Luthor. The guy's been the main villain in, how many is it, FOUR of the now FIVE Superman films? I liked Gene Hackman's Luthor (far superior to Kevin Spacey's), but you gotta take a break at some point. No, Superman III is a refreshing change of pace, not only in that respect, but in several ways.

Most noticeable, and much to the chagrin of many people, is the slightly more comedic tone of the film, centered mainly around Richard Pryor's character, August 'Gus' Gorman. I thought Prior was great. He plays an over-the-top character in a movie series about an over-the-top character. I hear people complain all the time that they hate the comedy that Prior brought to the film because Superman is supposed to be, and these are actual quotes, "gritty" and "realistic". NO, he's not. Superman is not gritty, and he's not realistic. Never was, never will be. Richard Donner's original doesn't even come CLOSE to playing it straight. Just look at how he portrays Clark Kent. In the comic books and 1950's television series, the "mild-mannered" Clark Kent is treated with respect and professionalism. He basically co-exists amongst his peers at the Daily Planet. In "Superman: The Movie", Richard Donner has taken the character straight out of the old comics and TV series, with all the same mannerisms and morals, and placed him in a very modern 1978. This is a set-up for much of the films adequate amount of comedy relief. "Superman: The Movie" is not a comedy. Neither is "Superman III", but they both have comic relief. The Clark Kent character is slightly more serious in this one, thus, you have Gus. A funny little man, with an interesting power. A savant-like intellect that gives him complete control over any computer system.

I especially like how Clark Kent, Superman's alterego, is fleshed out more as he returns home to Smallville. This is a great follow-up to Richard Donner's brief exploration to Superman's early years in Smallville. The inclusion of Lana Lang as Clark's high school crush was great, even better in that they chose the lovely Annette O'Toole to portray the character. I LOVE Margot Kidder, but I think Lana is a very important character in Superman's backstory.

All the delving into Clark Kent's character and background leads us to one of the greatest scenes in motion picture history... Clark Kent vs. Evil Superman. I could sit here and expound on the scene's metaphoric implications all day long, but simply put, I found it jaw-dropping. Christopher Reeve was always perfect as Superman, but his best work is here in this scene. Evil Superman is a very physical representation of everything Clark/Superman has ever repressed, and obviously we're talking about a lot of repression here. It's great stuff. I still wanna cheer every time the victorious Clark Kent opens his shirt to reveal his famous insignia, which, by the way, is differentiated by Evil Superman's in that it's excessively bright, where as his was really dark and dingy looking. Having been a Superman fan since I was a kid way back in the day, that's one of those scenes I'll remember 'till the day I die. I remember it from my childhood, but it's actually more relateable for me now as an adult.

Superman III is one of the greats. If you haven't seen it yet, I only ask that you watch it with an open mind and not look for grit or realism where it has no place being. Instead, just believe a man can fly... again.

Jack Deth is a Trancer hunter from the future, chasing arch-enemy and trancer guru cult leader Martin Whistler through time, but not in your ordinary time machine. Time travel(in the original film) is only possible by sending a person's consciousness into a D.N.A. relative/ancestor. Deth hooks up with Leena (the lovely Helen Hunt in an early, hair-dyed-blue role), and together they hunt for the ancestors of two future council members, who if killed by Whistler, will destroy the future.

I love this movie. This is one of those cult classics which I would say is representative of the b-movie/low budget style of some of the best stuff in sci-fi/horror/fantasy th 80's had to offer. It's got a cool, far-fetched storyline and despite it's lower budget, it does wonders with its effects. Truly good stuff from director Charles Band, who not too much later formed his Full Moon Entertainment, which released the entertaining Trancers sequels.

Why a 9 you ask? Because my 1-10 scale is different, and my dreams not like yours. B-movies are on a different scale system, and this one is very special, mainly because of the ending and the totally radical Jon-Mikl Thor soundtrack. But the ending... I won't spoil it, but it will shock even the most hardened b-movie connoisseur. You WILL be left asking yourself questions like:

Jon-Mikl Thor; Genius or Madman?

Jon-Mikl Thor; Was that a skinny woman's nightie you were sporting during the (GNARLY) song 'Energy'?

Jon-Mikl Thor; Is my new-found fear of showers only a TEMPORARY side-effect from watching the movie?

Jon-Mikl Thor; Based on the lyrics to your (RADICAL) song 'Energy', do you think it's accurate to say you SOMETIMES act like a fool? And did you say 'I feel small when on shrooms'? 'Cause sometimes when I'm on shrooms my head feels small, then really big, then small again...

Jon-Mikl Thor; Is that hairspray manufactured on our plane of existence or just in the heavens? That super-hold hairspray could only be created by the Gods themselves! By the beard of Zeus!

The answer to all of these questions and more is YES! Even the ones that weren't yes or no questions. Jon-Mikl Thor is the freakin' INTERCESSOR! You'll take whatever answer he has to give and you'll freakin' like it or he'll cast you out of Valhalla and laugh at you! That's Jon-Mikl Thor! High on his mountain!

Weird, stupid fun.

Yes, the Virgin Mummies have arrived. And I must say, JOLLY GOOD show, virgin mummies. This movie was great.

The Pharoh's three virgin (yeah, right) daughters are sunbathing when they are approached by three sleaze-bag brothers who look nothing alike. Two of the brothers make out alright, but the third has issues with rejection. He also has an obsession with sucking titties. In my opinion, that's not altogether unhealthy, at least not until you wind up tying a virgin to tree and gagging her to do it. Then, MAYBE you've gone too far. So the guy, an Egyptian with the most hilarious American midwestern accent, kills all the witnesses; the three lovely virgins and his brothers. He is ordered to death by the Pharaoh, and sentenced to have his tongue cut out and be buried alive. A shame really, because I just wanted ONE more passionate, angst-riddled speech about his need to suck on titties.

Anyway, in transit to some old guy's house, the crates containing the lovely VIRGIN MUMMIES(!!!) are dropped alongside the road where they awake to be picked up by the 21st Century reincarnations of the two OTHER sleaze-bag brothers that were murdered along with THE VIRGIN MUMMIES(!!!). They recruit the lovely ladies as an act for their failing strip club, the evil mummified tit-sucking guy returns to life, he kills a random Asian hooker in the bathtub, while THE VIRGIN MUMMIES(!!!) are out buying tanna leaves from some lunatic who runs a health-food store/shack/shed which is really a cover for his drug deals(and by the way, this guy is HILARIOUS), the evil mummy attacks THE VIRGIN MUMMIES(!!!), gets his ass kicked, the end.

This has quickly joined Fred Olen Ray, David DeCoteau, and Jim Wynorski's long list of credits to become one of my favorite exploitation/b-horror movie parodies. Well, maybe that's a bit of a stretch. Those guys are really top of the b-movie game. It doesn't quite have their style or even production value (and that may sound funny to anyone who's seen "Sorority House Massacre II", but it's true never the less), but the fact that the girls are so incredibly gorgeous and are naked throughout the entire film, AND it actually has a narrative, make this film a must see for any b-movie fan.

'The Exorcist' is, in my opinion, the most brilliant and effective horror film ever made. Even the scenes that were cut and reintroduced in 'The Version You've Never Seen' work. The question is, was it a story that warranted a sequel or a prequel? Hard to say. I think each attempt has come at it with the right approach in not attempting to duplicate the original. 'The Heretic' is easily the worst of the bunch, but perhaps the most innovative. I like where it TRIES to go, but it fails in every respect. 'Legion', which was author William Peter Blatty's ACTUAL sequel to his original novel, is actually a good film. Not great, but I personally enjoyed the hell out of it. I loved the character Lt. Kinderman in both the 'The Exorcist' novel and original film, and was glad that it was in his direction that Blatty geared his continuation.

That takes us to the prequel, 'The Beginning', focusing on the life of Father Lancaster Merrin long before the events in the original 1973 film, and his initial encounter with the demon that would eventually take his life. Again, we have a good approach, but the result rivals 'The Heretic' for one of the worst sequels/prequels ever made. There are great ideas introduced into the story, but in the end I was left with nothing. Not only has this film failed to capture the essence, ideology, and philosophy of what made the original so great, but the CGI effects look like something right out of a Sci-Fi channel original movie and detract terribly from the film when one is trying to approach it seriously. The film completely collapses at the climax, and all I was left with was disappointment.

Stellan Skarsgard was great as Merrin, and it's only around his troubled character that the movie in any way succeeds. I haven't seen Paul Schrader's version, but it has to be better than Renny Harlin's. Harlin's a pro when it comes to cheesy action/horror films, but for anyone having seen his previous films to think he could handle something so monumental as a prequel to 'The Exorcist' is laughable. However, I suppose I really shouldn't have been so surprised to see cartoon hyenas and cartoon demons with his name being on the credits. I mean, I would never be so petty as to judge a film solely on its FX unless I believed that that was the director's intention, but is there ANY logic behind using CGI hyenas when it can't be THAT difficult to just get real ones and have your film look a WHOLE helluva lot better? I thought I was having 'Lion King' flashbacks, for God's sake.

I was a big fan of the original 'Final Destination'. It's creators came up with a really original and intelligent concept. Death being a seemingly live entity, with its own predestined plan for all of us, which it must follow through to the end, even when thwarted by those with a kind of sixth sense that allows them premonitions of that plan thus allowing them to temporarily change it.

The original had me on the edge of my seat...The second film, not so much. I just wasn't very impressed by Part 2. I've seen plenty of reviews bashing part 3 for as much as a person being unable to suspend their disbelief that the equipment utilizied by tanning beds shouldn't go over 250 degrees. I'm assuming this person works on or designs tanning beds for a living... or at the very least, he/she actually uses one. I don't, so I really don't know how a tanning bed works and don't really have to try THAT hard to imagine that such a malfunction could occurr. Anyway, I notice that all these people have absolutely no problem with Part 2, and in some cases, claim to like it even better than the original. Ummm...Part 2 was LAME. These people who have difficulty suspending their tanning bed equipment malfunction disbelief have no problem accepting the pathetic cast and the ridiculous characters that they play, or the fact that Part 2 tosses aside the whole 'order of death' motif halfway through the film and just starts killing people at random. Clear should have been the LAST to die if Death was working backwards, etc., and that's just one of a thousand things wrong with the movie. Sure, Part 2 had some cool gore, but it just lacks the intelligence of Parts 1 and 3.

Part 3, on the other hand, is a delightful return to the intelligence and suspense of the original and had me once again on the edge of my seat. Horror movies don't even phase me anymore. I've seen so many of them (some multiple times) that they all seem so by-the-numbers to me. Final Destination and Final Destination 3 are two very big exceptions.

I really couldn't take my eyes off the screen. Sure, it had those cheap shock scares that make you jump, but it had more. It had that which truly elevates a good horror movie over the usual standard fare. It creates a feeling of dread. Also, like the other two films, it really allows the viewer to involve themselves by trying to figure out who's next and how "Death" is going to off them, although unlike the second film, it IS possible to actually do this.

Final Destination 3 is one of the better horror movies I've seen since the original came out several years ago (and with all the horror films released in between that time, that's really pretty sad). See it and enjoy.

As a die hard horror fan, and a Jim Wynorski fan in particular, I can honestly say I never thought I could be so happy. Scream Queen Hot Party was a magical journey of wonder and merriment...In other words, there were breasts and skimpy nighties galore. It's always a pleasure to see these ladies, and before seeing SQHTP I'd already seen pretty much every film each had made. I agree with another reviewer that Linnea Quigley should have been involved, she is after all, the all-time unquestioned reigning Scream Queen, but she DID get her own work-out video, also with breasts and nighties galore, and Scream Queen Hot Tub Party and Linnea Quigley's Horror Workout make quite the double feature.

Having seen Michelle, Brinke, and Monique nude so many times (it never gets old, though), I gotta say the biggest treat for me was Kelli Maroney. I saw Night of the Comet and Chopping Mall (both excellent films) and in Chopping Mall she was the cute, quiet girl, then in Night of the Comet she was the ditzy, take-no-prisoners cheerleader but not a hint of boobies from her in either film...Well, the wait's finally over and they were exquisite. She even wears her cheerleader outfit from Night of the Comet before her big scene. I like cute, quiet girls AND cheerleaders, so I was already a fan, but now I'm an even bigger fan...if you know what I mean...Wait, what was I talking about? Anyway, she's absolutely adorable, as always.

Roxeanne Kernohan was excellent too. The only film I'd seen with her was Not of This Earth, and she was quite funny (and lovely) in that as well, although it was a very small role. In this she plays the goof of the quintet, the butt of every joke. Huh-huh...butt...get it? Sorry...

Anyway, if you're a fan of cheesy comedy/horror films and especially if you're familiar with such films as Nightmare Sisters, Sorority Babes In The Slimeball Bowl-O-Rama, Chopping Mall, Sorority House Massacre II, Hard to Die, Not of This Earth, etc., you'll love Scream Queen Hot Tub Party.

The original 'Hitcher' is one of the all-time horror greats...The Hitcher II is nothing more than a USA Network Pictures Original-esque follow-up. Luckily, I came into it with zero expectations, and while I got pretty much what I expected, I have to say that this film isn't necessarily awful...at least, not completely. It's actually a decent b-grade horror flick. It has good/okay cinematography, and in one scene it's able to build mood, and the action scenes are actually quite good, however, at its core, it simply has no soul. There's no humanity behind it, no real sympathy for the characters (except for Jim, which really has a helluva lot more to do with the original than anything else). The Hitcher himself is about as frightening as a...Well, I can't think of any good analogies off-hand, but suffice to say he isn't at all scary. Of course, Jake Busey is just so damn likable, it's hard to be scared of the guy. If he IS supposed to be John Ryder incarnate, he's too cocky and he talks WAY too much. Also, a warning for people whose lives depend on some kind of resolution, the end will TOTALLY leave you hanging...buyer beware.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is that...I reluctantly must recommend The Hitcher II, speaking as a fan of so-bad-they're-almost-funny horror films. If nothing else, rent it for a good laugh and have fun pointing out the inconsistencies and bad dialogue. It's pure MST3K all the way.