dirtychild

Spoilers galore...

This movie is probably the "Dumbest. Movie. Ever".

• Dumb Script - military open a door to another dimension and giant bugs wreak havoc in Middle America...?? Pull the other one...

• Dumb dumb characters.. What would you do if you faced a giant spider - would you just look at it a scream for 5 seconds before getting brutally murdered? Would you use lights to attract bugs which attract bigger bugs and then get killed?? Would you have problems with a child proof lock on a BBQ lighter when almost getting killed by giant bugs..? Would you dream up a plan of "let's just drive until we run out of gas out in the killer mist" rather than staying in a relatively safe supermarket? When finally running out of gas in your dumb attempt to "drive through the mist" - couldn't you just be patient for another 5 minutes and wait for the military to come and rescue you or would you just commit a mass suicide instead...? I'm not sure if these people are dumber than the religious zealots in the movie...?

• Dumb CGI - I had burst out laughing when the CGI tentacle monster first appeared. As Jay and Silent Bob would say - did this set back Miramax 20 bucks?

This movie is definitely D-grade all the way through - direct to rental...

Well after the first AVP movie - I wasn't holding out much hope for this one - and funnily enough - this one too is pretty much fairly on the garbage side.

The plot (or perhaps the dodgy story that tries to tie the Aliens and Predators on earth again) goes something like a ship with Predators crash lands on earth after a couple of face huggers / aliens escaped. The movie gets rather bogged down in a bunch of stereotypical characters - none of which the audience would have any sympathy for. These characters includes a few OC/Dawson Creek teens who are having a few relationship problems, a Iraqi War vet (cue dodgy patriotism), some ex-con and a police chief (or something) - but I can't remember the rest because they were so paper thin and boring - I couldn't wait for them to all meet horrible deaths.

The only thing this film has over the first AVP is that the Predators are quite nasty to humans (unlike the first one where they befriend the heroine and sing Koombiyah). It adds to the menace of the Predator - and makes them a bit more interesting than their alien counterpart.

This film is pretty much garbage - the plot, the unlikeable characters, the really un-scary death scenes (I wish I had a dollar every time an alien popped out from behind someone...). I hate to say this - but I wish they stop making Alien movies because the first two are just so great - and these films just pale in comparison.

Don't say I didn't warn you that this is a garbage movie!

The Simpsons used to be one of the most razor sharp satires on television... about 15 years ago. Unfortunately - just like a lot of shows that don't know when to call it quits - the Simpsons TV show has become a fairly patchy, predictable and somewhat juvenile comedy – devoid of any great wit.

So I wasn't really holding out for much out of a Simpsons Movie – and sure enough – it was fairly patchy, silly and not all that razor sharp.

The plot (if you could call it that) involves Homer setting off a chain of events that leads to the Environmental Protection Agency placing a dome over Springfield as it has become too polluted (or something)... Although there are some sort-of-funny sequences – the writers appear to be more interested in sight gags, cheap laughs and quirky references rather than biting satire and mature humour. All of the characters are complete stereotypes (which has made the Simpsons to be rather stale TV show after almost 20 years).

Another thing about the Simpsons Movie – is that it just feels like an overlong TV episode – nothing has really improved or been enhanced to make it a "big screen movie" (just some better animation). I don't think a joke at the beginning (where Homer says why pay for something that is for free on TV) doesn't help The Simpsons Movie become a big screen event. At least the South Park Movie was made into something special (eg: a musical whilst upping the crudeness of the jokes).

Please please put this stale old family down...!

The Beach is a prime example of when a good book turned into a movie goes bad...

The Beach tells the story of an American traveller in Bangkok - looking for the ultimate experience. He befriends a Scottish traveller who, after suiciding, gives the American a map to a secret beach - the most beautiful beach in the world (or so the story goes)...

The Beach feels like a bit of a train-wreck of a movie. Leonard De Caprio - although a talented actor - feels so uncomfortable as the lead.

Danny Boyle (most famous for the film Trainspotting) gives a bit of visual flair to this movie (as well as a pretty good soundtrack) - but with no soul.

The action feels forced and un-thrilling. The actors on the whole feel way too hammy.

You don't really get to feel for Richard (the main character) and his transition over to the "dark side" probably because Leonard couldn't act his way out of a paper bag in this movie.

And what is with that video game dream sequence - it probably rates as one of the most embarrassing scenes ever committed on film...

Ever since Donnie Darko - that excellent half teen satire / half sci fi and horror movie - it seems like it is all of the rage at the moment to make Donnie Darko-esquire movies.

Chumscrubber tells the story of a teenager who gets caught up in a drug dealing ring at his high school. It is set against the backdrop of a dysfunctional suburbia nightmare (a la Desperate Housewives).

I never really connected to Chumscrubber. I mean - the acting is pretty good and the plot is sort of "fairly original" but it didn't really do it for me.

Maybe I found the whole drug dealing syndicate a bit convoluted - or maybe I thought I had seen this sort of thing before (eg: Donnie Darko) - and done so much better...

Most of the characters are pretty vile and unappealing (see Billy).

It was OK - but maybe I missed something...?

Renaissance is a "film noir" anime inspired western animation movie set in Paris, 2056. The plot revolves around a cop trying to get to the bottom of a mystery surrounding the disappearance of a researcher.

Renaissance is definitely a case in point for style over substance. The film's biggest strength (and one of its weaknesses) is it's film noir black and white style animation. Think "Sin City" but a computer animated version. However impressive some of the style is - it sometimes makes the movie a little distracting and confusing.

Talking about confusing - the plot is fairly convoluted and is somewhat hard to follow. It feels like a bit of an afterthought as it seems - the movie producers seemed more focused on the animation.

Although the cast is mostly talented - the acting feels a little predictable. Daniel Craig gives a bog standard performance of a "disgruntled harden cop on the edge"... The animated CGI motion capture tends to mean that most of the characters overact.

Renaissance is style over substance - and when it should have been a richer experience - it was instead confusing and a little boring.

The Hills Have Eyes basically pits a family of god fearing, gun toting Republicans against a blood thirsty, cannibalistic "tribe" of nuclear mutants - so I basically had trouble working out who I should root for...

All things serious though - The Hills Have Eyes was a bit of a nasty piece of work. The violence was OTT (over the top) and especially disturbing during the "rape" scene (need I say any more!). The main characters (republican withstanding) were all a bit grating - people you didn't really care if they get brutally raped or murdered or both by violent mutant zombie people. The plot is a little predictable (eg: you would be pretty dumb to not figure out that the family should not have taken the short cut route through a "non-sealed road" and a "private gate"!).

The action scenes are OK - and the scene with the "democrat" guy waking up in a freezer was probably the highlight of the movie. Although the highlight wasn't the climax (which was a bit of a let down).

The Hills Have Eyes was a bit of a nasty piece of work - but I'm sure the under 13's set would have great fun watching it.

Cypher tells the story of a man who is recruited by a hi-tech company as a industrial spy, has his past history erased by the company and soon becomes paranoid with increasing numerous encounters with a mysterious woman called Rita Foster.

Cypher is very much in the whole Matrix "who am I, who is in control" style thriller where the audience and the antagonist is in the dark as to what is happening.

The characters are well cast with Jeremy Northman playing a very unassuming mild man who slowly becomes a rather suave "spy" and Lucy Liu playing the mysterious, cold Rita. The shocks can be quite shocking (see the Conference scene) and you pretty much keep guessing until the very end.

Although a short film (about 90 or so minutes) - I do feel like it sort of outstays its welcome by about 10 minutes or so. Perhaps if it had been a bit sharper with editing - it would have been a top-notch movie.

That said - this movie is still recommended if you like the whole mind-f### science fiction genre.

Final Destination 3 tells the story of a teenager who has a premonition of her own death on a roller-coaster who then saves herself and a few others - before realising that they have escaped "Death's plans" as one by one, the survivors are killed off in gory fashion in the same order they would have died on the roller-coaster.

Although I was a bit of a fan of the original, FD3 is a bit of a case of diminishing returns on a very convoluted idea. If you think "Death" stalking you is a convoluted idea enough - it is even more convoluted that the characters seem to (amazingly) find out explicit details of what happened in the first two movies over the internet (eg: someone has a premonition of their own death on a flight to Paris - the plane blows up but all the survivors die in a gory fashion later on..., etc)! Talk about a massive leap in logic or reality - one that I just did not buy.

The characters are the usual bunch of Jennifer Love Hewitt and Dawson Creek look-a-likes - so much so it is really hard to tell the difference between them.... even harder to care about their plight. The standard Final Destination "shocks" are fairly predictable - if somewhat off-putting rather than scary.

Reading all the trivia on IMDb - it sort of seems like they made this movie so they could sell a gimmicky DVD with "alternative deaths"... which is sort of a bit of a lame idea to make a movie in the first place.

I just hope they stop making FD movies - they are giving the first one a bad name!

"A Dirty Shame" is a John Waters film about a prudish, uptight mid-western woman who, after having concussion in a motor vehicle accident, becomes a raving sex addict.

Although I'm a bit of a John Waters fan - "A Dirty Shame" was a pretty big shame and a disappointment.

I guess society and comedy has moved on a bit from drag queens eating doggie-do (see Pink Flamingos). Shows and films like South Park, Wonder Showzen and Team America seem to push the envelope in terms of bad taste comedy. "A Dirty Shame" just seems to fall a little short of that "pushing the envelope in bad taste" name.

Most of the sexual discussion feels not quite as raunchy as "Sex in the City" or even "Jerry Springer"!! Most things about this movie feels a little on the amateurish side - the acting, the cinematography, the script... However - one plus was the Selma Blair character - although it sort of felt it was a little underused.

Overall - A Dirty Shame was a big disappointment. John Waters appears not to be pushing that "bad taste" envelope anymore. Perhaps he needs to return to more kitsch mainstream territory (a la Hairspray).

Friends and Family is a very slight comedy about a couple of gay mobsters whose parents come to town (knowing about their relationship but not aware of their occupation).

Despite being advertised as "from the creators of Gods and Monsters" - I'm not quite sure of any connection (after doing a quick search in IMDb) - maybe they had the same caterers.

Friends and Family doesn't really have a whole lot going for it - it tries to make fun of fairly boring stereotypes (you got your mobsters, your really camp queens, drag queens, blah blah blah) and the humour is quite limp and soggy. It really feels a lot like "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" - another movie which (in my opinion) was quite sad.

I thought the only slightly humorous idea was the hick mid-west family who were planning destruction to the "Federal Government Occupiers of the United States" - but I'm sure this was a pre-9/11 movie...

Overall - if you think "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" was the funniest movie around - you might get a kick - otherwise for those who need a bit more omph with their comedy - don't bother!

The Wolves of Kromer tells the story of two wolves who, despite being persecuted by the villagers of Kromer, fall in love.

The Wolves of Kromer is a "modern-day fairy tales" with a bit of a gay twist. The persecuted wolves aspect is supposed to be a metaphor for gays being persecuted by the straight community. Also - to add some not so subtle hints - all of the wolves are male...! The Wolves of Kromer had some potential with its interesting ideas and fresh approach to gay cinema - but unfortunately - it gets bogged down with a boring story-line featuring two old ladies trying to murder a wealthy woman to get her inheritance. The subplot doesn't really gel with the gay wolves at all.

If the movie had of been a bit more focused on the gay-wolf story - then it could have been a whole lot better. Despite all the criticism - there were some neat ideas and a half-decent twist at the end.

WARNING - SPOILERS!!

Three Dancing Slaves tells the (incoherent) story of three brothers - one living on the border of crime, the second - an ex con trying to make good after a stint in jail, the third - a gay teenager in love with an Arab into Capoeira dancing.

There are a lot of scenes in this that are reminiscent of those perv-y scenes from Baywatch - lots of buff, sexy men splashing around in water in slow-mo - total eye candy galore.

Then there are a lot of scenes which are completely confronting and dumbfounding (eg: quasi-incest scene, dog in bath with naked man) - a la Ken Park.

But I found that I just couldn't connect with any of these characters. The "plot" is way too strange for the viewer to have a grasp on what's going on (eg: quasi-incest scene, scene with a biker having sex with a transvestite, dog attack scene). The biker brother is just so strange and off-putting as a human being - you just don't have any sympathy for him at the end of the film. The gay couple is fairly underbaked and the viewer is left confused when the Arab boyfriend leaves the gay brother - unexpectedly and for no substantial reason.

Also bewildering is the homoeroticism - the movie is made up of 99% male characters - all cavorting in homoerotic behaviour (eg: gym, splashing around, getting shaved) - yet most of them are supposed to be straight. It sort of felt like they were pandering for a high "gay eye candy". It felt like at times you were watching a David DeCoteau film.

My verdict - don't bother with this eye-candy heavy film - you are probably better off watching pron or a David DeCoteau film instead (at least David DeCoteau films have better plots!)!

Michael Jackson's "Moonwalker" is more of a collection of video clips from his album "Bad" - rather than a coherent movie with plot.

Case in point - Moonwalker starts off with a live video performance of Michael performing "Man in the Mirror", then jumps into a video montage of "earlier" work with the Jackson 5 / Jacksons / solo work, then jumps to a mock "Bad" video with kids (!), then Michael being chased with crazy plasticine people, then Michael (as a transformer) fighting a drug lord and saving children...then doing another live performance...! Moonwalker (to me) really isn't a movie - and I won't give it a rating as such. If you like "Bad", and you are willing to indulge in some really wacko "Jacko" stuff - then you might like this very odd collection of videos clips, dance routines and N.A.R.C action. If not - then don't bother...

Moonwalker is full of cringe worthy "Michael - get away from those children" moments - but in its defence - the "Smooth Criminal" is awesome - cool choreography, cool song and some violence (what more could you ask for!); the action scenes where Michael transforms into a rocket ship shoots stuff makes you feel on acid and the "Leave Me Alone" clip makes Jacko look more bizarre.

Joe Pesci is a horrible stereotype of a drug baron - wanting to get kids addicted to crack (of course!). A young Sean Lennon (son of John, maker of the cool underrated "Into the Sun" CD) appears as a crack kid.

Overall - not for everyone (well.. for most people) - but hey - I get a few laughs out of it...

Superman Returns just happens to be the third film I've fallen asleep in at a cinema (the other two dubious honours go to "Backdraft" and "The Jackal")! Although I really didn't fall into a deep sleep (just nodded off a few times) - I was never really all that engaged in it.

The plot centres around Superman's return to Earth and trying to pick up the pieces with his relationship with Lois Lane. Meanwhile Lex Luthor is up to his evil self with a plan to create his own country.

Despite all the hype and "glowing reviews" from both movie critics and IMDb users - Superman Returns fails to work on any decent level. At two and a half hours in length - the movie is either overcooked or underbaked. It fails to explore Superman's absence or to develop any sort of chemistry between Lois and Superman. The humour of the film is more of a miss than a hit (apart from the excellent Parker Posey). Superman (newcomer Brandon Routh) looks too plastic and attempts to do his best to channel Christopher Reeves - but alas to no avail.

The pluses of the movie - were the throwbacks to the old Superman movies (the credits were probably one of the best things) and the rocket scene (which was quite tense). But these good things were far outweighed by the bad things.

All in all - this was a disappointing movie (especially since it was directed by the talented Bryan Singer) and was a bit of a snooze...

Nightwatch is supposedly the first out of a trilogy of Russian sci-fi horror films which surrounds a modern day battle between the light and dark forces in Moscow, whereby the balance between the two forces is set to be disrupted bringing the world into chaos.

Watching Nightwatch is sort of like watching a 2 hour Marliyn Manson video - there are some really cool visuals, really really good effects. Some scenes are a bit like the matrix but on acid.

Utimately though, the story and characters are not very engaging. I just wasn't hooked into the story (it starts off really strangely and keeps going that way for the whole 2 hours). The acting can be a bit patchy in parts and so too the lines.

And not that I'm shallow or anything - but everyone in this film has been badly beaten with the ugly stick... I thought Russians were supposed to be attractive!!?! Far from essential viewing...

Saw 2 revolves around a "not-so-straight-and-narrow" cop who gets involved with the serial killer Jigsaw's latest game of horrible torture and death.

Saw 2 tries to do things a little differently than the first film. Saw 2 has a house full of teens (or near teens) locked up in a spooky house where one by one - they meet an unfortunate death (a la traditional slasher film) but all done in the style of the "Saw" franchises death traps.

Although there are some nice plot twists (in the original Saw's style) - possibly the final twist (who the killer is) is a bit half-baked and unbelievable. The references however to the first film are quite ingenious (where the final scene takes place)...

The acting (like the first Saw) can be a little half-baked too and some of the "death traps" aren't so ingenious as the first (eg: instead of a reverse-facial-beartrap we get a spiky-mask...).

Overall - OK masochistic fun if this is your cup of tea...

6 out of 10

Creep is basically a horror film set in London's Underground, whereby Kate (Franka Potente) gets herself trapped overnight at a station and discovers that she isn't the only one there.

On the whole - Creep is an above average horror flick. Although I didn't really find the first half of the movie engaging (Kate, the heroine, isn't much of a likable character and you don't feel for her plight nor the plight of the homeless couple), the second half picks up quite a bit where she encounters the murdering underground mutant zombie doctor (of course!). There are the requisite gruesome bits (hello zombie doctor gynaecologist scene!) which should keep fans of the genre happy - but overall - there isn't that much new groundbreaking material here.

6 out of 10

Sleepy Hollow is director Tim Burton's take on the classic story of the "Legend of Sleepy Hollow" (aka the Headless Horseman).

As you would expect from a Burton film - it is Gothic, darkish with a splash of camp (no thanks to Johnny Depp's performance!).

The story centres around a New York detective who is sent to investigate the beheadings of three people in the village of Sleepy Hollow. He soon uncovers a murderous, headless ghost which his scientific background can't explain.

Sleepy Hollow is an exciting film - the headless horseman sequences are completely electrifying. They are instantly recognisable (I probably had nightmares as a kid remembering that headless horseman crossing the bridge) and totally engaging - as the ghost proves himself as an unstoppable force on the townspeople.

That said - where the film sort of falls down is it's "head rolling" plotting. It is sometimes confusing to try and make sense at all the plot twists and developments - although things are reconciled by the last 20 minutes (it all makes sense).

Overall - Sleepy Hollow isn't a sleepy ride - brimful of headless delights...

Saw is one of those sort of movies where the less said about it the better.... but the whole plot surrounds two men who wake up chained in a dirty bathroom who soon discover they are playing a psychopath's game where the only way to escape is for one man to kill the other...

Saw is a pretty interesting movie for the most part - with heaps of plot twists and "killer" scenes - it delivers the requisite thrills and chills that a good horror/thriller movie should.

Some of the scenes are just soo squirming disturbing - it should have the horror fans begging for more...

But for all its pluses - I find that the acting in Saw is a little undercooked. Leigh Whannell, an ex-Australian TV presenter feels a little out of his depth in the more emotional scenes (not to mention that his accent seems to drop in and out of being Aussie) and Cary Elwes character seems to go from "perfectly sane" to "insanely mad" in about two seconds at the climax of the film. That moment (and you would know it if you have seen the movie) - just doesn't gel like it should...

But despite it flaws - Saw is a pretty good movie (for those into gutwrenching horror stuff)...

Der Untergang (aka "The Downfall" in Engrish) details the final days of Hitler in his Berlin bunker at the end of WWII.

The Downfall is a bona fide modern classic - incredibly disturbing, scary, disorientating and emotional.

The maturity and honesty in which it deals with its subject matter is outstanding.

There are so many powerhouse performances including that of Hitler (Bruno Ganz) - who doesn't play it as a cheap villain "stereotype" - rather Hitler is portrayed as a realistic, deeply flawed human being coming to terms with his inevitable fate and that of his country. There are also some powerful, disturbing glimpses into his genocidal nature.

The scenes of Eva Braun dancing in a ballroom with the imminent Russian invasion happening outside has to be seen to be believed. It is like a disorientating cruise on the Titanic. The scenes of the SS leader's wife putting her children down were some of the most emotionally gutrenching scenes I've ever seen on the screen.

Normally - I'm not a big fan of war movies - but this is a modern classic and has to be experienced.

Conan the Destroyer, the sequel to Conan the Barbarian (one of my favourite Arnie action movies) seems to completely ignore most of the happenings of the first movie. Instead of Conan being a king, we find him being a scavenging thief, with an annoying "wise"-cracking side-kick Malak. They both get involved with some plot with an evil queen who sends them on a quest, with a young virgin no less, to retrieve a special key, which in turn unlocks a horn (or something).

As previously stated - this movie seems to completely ignore what made the first movie soooo great. Conan in the original film was a complete thud with no brains - and no dialect either. However - fast forward to "Destroyer" and his vocabulary seems to have increased at an exponential rate - so instead of being a complete brut - he know sounds like a semi-educated security guard.

The first movie was a "serious" one - full of glorious music, emotion and blood and guts. However - it feels like they have tried to completely tone down all the violence and adult themes in order to achieve a lower PG rating to get the kiddies in to watch the film. Also - half of Arnies "punches" and "sword swipes" don't seem to connect (take the first battle - whereby a punch thrown by Arnie into thin air knocks down a horse and solider!).

I'm a big fan of Grace Jones - but she doesn't seem to do her acting career any favours by having an acting range of "angry" to "angrier". Her role in this (despite being second billed) is very minor and completely incidental to the plot line.

I think they had some serious casting problems with this movie - they seem to have casted a poor-man's version of "Debbie Gibson" who can't seem to act. Also - they make her out to be "sexy" - but she doesn't even look legal! I'm glad she picked up a couple of Razzies for worst supporting actor that year! And that sidekick - he is just soooo overacted (but then again - the script doesn't really do anything for him in his favour - with dialogue like "A fine magician you are! Go back to juggling apples.").

The special effects are cheesy and rather embarrassing. Conan fights with two creatures, both of which look like a David Cronenburg rejects. The whole wizard power thing was totally lame. Mako basically waves his hands around, sounds constipated and can determine where missing virgins are or raise locked doors.

Overall - I like cheesy movies, but this just doesn't even cut it on a cheesy movie factor. Probably adding to my hatred of this movie - is the fact that this sequel cheapens the first! This is D Grade the whole way.

Project A-Ko is a Japanese Anime feature about a couple of school girl friends, one with superhero strength powers (A-Ko), the other has a really short attention span (C-Ko). When they join a new high-school, a rich girl (B-Ko) wants to befriend C-Ko and have her all to herself - so she plots to destroy A-Ko. Meanwhile - a group of aliens are attempting to find a lost alien princess on Earth.

Project A-Ko is pure B-Grade schlock - in a very hit-and-miss affair. If it was a live-action Hollywood film - critics would dismiss it immediately (with good reason).

Although I'm a big fan of subversive humour - most of the humour in this movie falls flat on its face. I would usually find transvestite aliens funny but this movie didn't even omit a single smile out of me.

The characters are annoying - someone should give C-Ko some Ridlon or flush her head down a toilet because she is the single most self-obsessed, ADD, cry-baby character I've seen in a movie for a while. A-Ko appears to have an anger management issue. And B-Ko needs to come clean and confess that she has a lesbian crush on C-Ko (not that there is anything wrong with that!).

There is a bit of "fan-service" but I find it mostly inappropriate given the age of the characters.

The only redeeming feature is a couple of set-pieces in which A-Ko is in action fighting aliens in a spectacular fashion - but you need to sit through the rest of this dribble to see.

Over-hyped B-Grade nonsense!

Star Wars Episode 1 "The Phantom Menace" is the first episode of the Star Wars movie saga. It tells the story of a couple of Jedi knights who, whilst assisting a Queen save her home planet Naboo, find a young boy who could be the "chosen one" who could bring balance to the mystical "force".

I've got to be frank - the best part of this movie is where the "Star Wars" logo appears over space and the familiar Star Wars theme blasts out. If you are a fan of the first films - it is a fantastic sense of hope, excitement and exhilaration. Pity that as soon as the "Star Wars" logo fades into the darkness - so does the movie.

The traditional opening "Star Wars" backstory text talks about an intergalactic trade embargo, taxation and a blockade. Wow - that doesn't really get you going does it. And as soon as you settle into the movie - the characters are cardboard and only act as a background to the special effects; the story uninspired, over complex yet toned down for kiddies; the dialogue - ever so wooden ("Are you an angel?"/"What?"/"An Angel. I've heard the deep space pilots talk about them. They live on the moons of Iego, I think. They're the most beautiful creatures in the universe."...as a case in point); the special effects aren't all that; and ultimately - maybe the backstory behind the original Star Wars trilogy isn't all that exciting. I mean we all knows what happens (Anakin gets the Queen knocked up and becomes Darth Vader)?! What's the point

Most of the actors (most of which are really good in other films) look somewhat bored with the material. Perhaps they should have attempted to ad-lib the script - as George Lucas' script writing ability is at the 4th Grade level.

The movie is terribly edited and paced - the movie gets incredibly bogged down over an unexciting "pod race" sequence and lead-up. I felt like I was watching a bad video game (everything including the acting is computer generated!).

Perhaps the only redeeming feature of this movie is the final half an hour - it almost makes it feel reminiscent of the old Star Wars climatic sequences. But to be subjected to the first hour and a half is just unbearable.

If only Lucas had just quit while he was ahead and stopped making Star Wars after "Return of the Jedi". I mean - I think I enjoyed the "Ewok" telemovies better than this junk.

Die Hard 2 (aka Die Hard 2: Die Harder) follows John McClane (Bruce Willis) who arrives at Dulles Airport to pick up his wife for the Christmas holidays. But, being a Die Hard movie, some terrorists take over the Airport's traffic control system and hold all the inbound flights "hostage"... There is only McClane (and the Airport cops, and the army) to put a stop to the terrorists.

This movie is fairly dumb. There are soooo much implausibility and a tonne of plot holes:

1. McClane arrives a few hours early to pick up his wife at the airport. I mean - who goes and picks up their loved ones from an airport a couple of hours early?! Probably only the stupid and lonely....

2. The fact that the old granny smuggled a cattle prod on the flight is pretty silly (unless pre-9/11 they didn't check for weapons on flights?).

3. You see terrorists getting nasty with the luggage area of the airport - but what does this have to do with taking over the airport's traffic control system?

4. If the British Plane thought that the ground was in fact 200 yards higher than in reality - shouldn't it have crashed before the runway?

5. The total implausibility of McClane and his wife getting caught up together with terrorists again - plus the fact that the obnoxious news presenter from the first film is, not only in this film, but travelling on the same flight with Holly McClane on Christmas Eve with his camera man in tow. Why would a reporter from LA be flying on Christmas Eve to DC with a camera man?!

6. The stupidity of the police who don't bother to check the immediate area to find out where the terrorists were hiding.

7. Why couldn't all the planes hovering over Dulles just fly somewhere else (it isn't like Washington DC is in the middle of nowhere)?

8. Holly McClane mentions that she was on a 5 and a half hour flight from LA to Dulles - but it only takes less than 4 and 3/4 hours.... duh!

9. The bunch of terrorists dressed up as painters in the annex - what do they have to do with anything except for the excuse of having a gun battle with the SWAT team?

10. The rental car woman that tries to pick up Bruce Willis - clearly he is old enough to be her father and it is sick. Plus she was mega-peeved when Bruce stole her stamp pad and paper - but when he gets back - she gets all flirty.

11. The reporter who sneaks into the control tower... what the? Security?!

12. The polite service on a British carrier??! Not in this universe.

13. Bruce Willis manages to call his wife on the plane phone. I'm not sure how that works...? Speaking of phones - the reporter appears to go to a "pay phone" near the toilets of the plane.... I've never seen those?

I'm sure just about everything single bit of this movie has some sort of plot hole or implausibilies. But if you switch off your brain - it ain't a half bad dumb action film. Just not up to the standard of the first one.