Look, I understand this was a "I'm lost and we're all human" movie, but the idea that our protagonist creates trauma for a sixteen year old while her friend hits on a suicidal, under-age boy puts them both in the position of being monsters. Monsters that really have no consequences to their actions. The high schoolers in this movie are 'throwaway lives' to the adults and are used that way. Horrendous way to make a movie - why would this get made and distributed?
I'm not sure why there is a ten line limit on these, it seems odd that I can't just say a film is horrible as a warning to people not to see it, or simply say its great to hope someone sees it. The point of making us prattle on (as I'm doing) is completely lost on me. How verbose do I have to be to share an opinion about a movie? Anyways, this movie was a cute movie and I think could have been really good. The problem is that the timing and flow of the movie is completely off, sometimes taking you all the way out of the movie and leaving you to sit and wonder why you are watching it. When the movie does have good points (Andy Griffith, or some intimate scenes with the lead) it really does a good job of driving home.
The ending leaves much to be desired with our lead, after not caring for her child at all, has an epiphany that suddenly lets her divorce her abusive husband and leave the person she has a fling with. It is horribly unbelievable and pat. It also raises the question of what men are good for in this movie besides making babies (the husband), giving someone money they didn't earn (Andy) or giving someone support and help just to be crapped on (Nathan). In the end it left me unfulfilled and annoyed.
A not-too-bad little horror flick about six semi-attractive British chicks who appear to live in a Mountain Dew commercial. On this adventure, they wander into a "never explored cave" in the Appalachians that they found. Of course, as things get hairy they find they are not alone as these slimy, scary, but ultimately sissy blind Gollums types harass them.
Although not bad, the logic meter on this movie just wouldn't leave me alone. I set it for "horror" and for "foreign film", which will usually stop it from going off, but this movie just had problems....
1. I'm a British chick, and I'll find a cavern in the remote mountains of America. Not the people that live there or anything.
2. These CHUD like creatures are humanoid, hunt above ground, but apparently so liked the wet, cold caves that provided no sustenance that they stayed there and went completely blind.
3. These completely blind creatures have been killing folk in this are since time out of mind, but are pretty easy prey for 109lb UK chicks, because of their mad killin' skillz
4. There seems to be hundreds of these creatures, each the size of a man, but their predation goes unnoticed by fish and game or the locals, because they are underground. Now, you over-fish or hunt in the Appalachians, they will be on your ass as it is all closely monitored, unless you are a white, blind slug-man, then its hidden.
5. Six UK chicks that all hang out doing rock climbing, rapids riding, spelunking and stuff, and no girl on girl action? This director should go to school, and by school I mean my butt.
Hi, I'm Hollywood, and not the "good Hollywood" that bought us The Godfather and Bosom Buddies, but the "other Hollywood" that, for some reason that boggles the mind, cannot turn a comic book into a movie to save our lives.
It should come as no surprise, then, that when we got ahold of the superman series, we would ignore everything done well in "SmallVille" and branch out on our own, the better to hurl the feces of our discontent at this beloved icon.
We'll start with an opening sequence that goes on for one full solar day, as a tribute to the Sun God. From there we will turn Lex Luthor into a creepy villain by making him.....swindle an old lady out of her money!!! (bum bum bummm). This puts him in the same realm of super villains reserved for used car salesmen, furnace repairmen and my uncle virgil. He is able to get out of jail because the appellate court called Superman as a witness, but he didn't show. You heard me. Now lets get to the crux of things. You see, there are two big things that go on to bring us all of those wonderful things like character development and back story that makes great films. 1. Superman left for five years without telling anyone he was leaving or when he would be back. This was because someone told him they saw Krypton. Apparrently none of his super powers were able to bring him either the memory to remember that his planet was blown up, the trust to believe his father when he told him it was blow up, or the common sense to know that if Krypton was still around, they probably would've called by now. 2. Superman has a child w/Lois: But because he used his Kryptonian "miscreant" powers, he doesn't know it. Lois has also handled Superman's unexplained absence well by hating him (not being worried he died or anything), writing an article on why we don't need him, and then shacking up with the boss's son (or nephew or something). Oh, and not telling him he has a son until he's dead. BTW- its a good thing his son will inherit his super powers as his mom drags him around the news office all the time and even while breaking and entering, so I don't think a normal kid would last long with this completely unlikable version of Lois.
So see, we did get character development. In particular this movie shows that both Lois and Superman have bad characters and should probably take a day off of chain smoking, child abuse, seducing engaged women and criminal levels of self-involvement and attend a Jerry Springer taping.
Now, they also leave us with a series of annoying things that fans will cringe at. Sometimes Kryptonite disables superman, sometimes it really doesn't effect him and sometimes it kills him, depending on his mood and the amount of angst he can show on his plastic visage. Why Lex learns all of the secrets of Krypton and the 12 known galaxies and uses all of that to build an uninhabitable atoll. Why Superman, when he sees Lex at this point, doesn't just thrown a pebble through his head at a safe distance. There are a lot more, I'm just already as bored with this write up as the movie.
You should not see this movie, and I'm not kidding.
Now, I've said it, let me say this. There was an excruciating excitement in watching something that, right from the beginning, you knew was going to be one of the messiest, stinkiest turds you've seen. I accepted that and lived within it gloriously.
There was somewhat of a payoff with a semi-good sex scene near the end and a semi-twist that lent you some insight into how this could have been a good movie.
To finish up, however, if anyone offers to have you watch this film, only watch the last five minutes. If they insist you watch the whole thing "for context", then kill them. Do not run away, they may trick someone else into watching this, you have to put them down.
Why? Why oh God why would they do this to me? What a horrible movie! I actually almost saw this at the theatre, but luckily I didn't, I may actually have asked to have my money back! Doesn't anyone get fired in Hollywood anymore? I mean, someone had to greenlight this, right? Someone had to look at it and say "That's it!" and stuff, right? What a travesty! It really is too bad, they had a great cast, I like most everyone in it, except Cameron is getting on my nerves. She is likable, but how many more booty-shaking "crazy" blonde girls can she play? Its like watching the same damn movie over and over again, and they are all starting to suck. She should make a movie with Nicholas Cage and Tom Cruise and they could all play themselves! Anywho, the rest of the cast is good, I like Applegate, she kinda plays the Vince Vaughn of this "Swingers: The Vagina Monologue" movie. Batemen is always funny these days and Jane has a real presence. It had a lot of potential, but it was all wasted in this slapped together crudfest of suck. Really, I don't care how much you like to see Cameron in yet another bra, don't see this movie.
Look, no one expected this thing to be some kind of epic thriller or Academy nominee, but seriously, what a stupid movie. The plot is so thin you can see right through it to the horrible acting and choppy editing. This thing has been done before so many times and in such better ways. If you want to see Brad and Angelina, you are on the Internet, just download them, don't waste your money here. If you are unfortunate enough to catch this at a friend's house, ask them to put some Christmas batteries in a sock and beat you with it instead of watching this. If they are a true friend, they will.
And by the way, what "agencies" are it that they work for? The 1960's agencies of the "all women/all men" spy agencies that have fold out ovens and secret rooms? And why are they suddenly safe when they kill all the agents in the black suits at the end? If the agents are that easy to kill, don't these "agencies" kinda suck? What was the deal with the explosions in the desert that killed nobody? Why are our two heroes ruthless killers that we are supposed to root for? If they are both so stupid that they didn't know the other was an agent, aren't they just plain stupid? How did they get shot twenty times a person during the end fight, but after they get out of the little barn they never get hit again? Why the Hell was Vince Vaughn even in this movie? Gahhh!!
If a movie sucks, it must be the dumb Americans fault
Anytime you try to do a movie as involved and conceptual as this, you are gonna have disagreements as to its effectiveness and how good it was, which is fine. So much depends on who is seeing the movie, and when, and the atmosphere etc. etc. that movies get wildly different ratings, this one is no exception.
What I love about this is that, if you think this movie sucked, its because you are a Pepsi swilling, stupid American who just isn't as smart as your European counterpart who enjoyed it. I think I'll say the same about "Doom" for any Europeans that didn't like it. Hey, it was this great piece of art, but you are too stupid to "get it". But, for every "stupid American" out there, or even any open-minded Europeans who don't think they are better than everyone, I'd like to review this movie.
OK, after my rant above, I don't have a lot of time. The acting - well, this movie is full of good actors, but they were either not directed well or had no idea what they were going for. The mom seems vapid, dull and drugged and Anna seems simultaneously on a quest to save and destroy everyone. The writing is pretty awful, though the sound was so bad I couldn't hear parts, so maybe it was better during the time the sound sucked. The plot itself made no sense. Now, I know that many people who claim to be really smart will try to explain it, but it doesn't. First of all, for seven parents to slaughter their own children, that, by the plot, they must love, you would think they would need a reason. All we are given was "It was an experiment". Huh. Let me see how that would go down.... Evil doer: "Do you love your child?" Parent: "Yes, very much." Evil doer: "Would you slit his/her throat at this one house during an eclipse for me?" Parent: "Why?" Evil Doer: "I wanna see what will happen." Loving Parent: "Well...sign me up!!" So the plot is immediately crapola. Add to that most of the "scares" of this movie basically come from turning the sound down low, then flashing pictures while applying a strong bass, something that can be seen in any cheap horror movie, and can be done with gyrating pictures of puppies to the same effect and it is a hard movie to love. Now...the ending. Remember, very artistic, which is your super-secret decoder word to mean "baffling". So the "wise, evil dark" tricks Anna into the blackness where it can "get" her? And it does this by...driving a car around in the light? I mean, if it could drive a car around in the light, couldn't it just run her over? What's it need to go to the tunnel for? I'll also leave you with Anna stabbing her father's throat and the, at some point completely not shown, him dying. So your grandfather patiently, and oddly, explained to you that anyone slitting your dad's throat at this house during the eclipse would ruin all mankind, then lets you go. So you get to the house, during the eclipse, stop your mom from slitting his throat, and then perform a tracheotomy by stabbing him...in the throat...in the house...during the eclipse. You top it off by watching him die instead of grabbing a pen that would've saved him. Or dragging him outside.
I'm sorry my European friends, I think this movie was a great idea, superbly cast, but wihered on the vine. I "got it" plenty, but the care and time was not taken to tie it together into the great movie it could have been. It was pretty bad.
I remembered this from my childhood as a great movie, and, inspired by my recent Smallville addiction, thought I'd have another look. Boy, does this movie suck. I mean really, really sucked. Let me regail you with how this movie sucks...
1. Valerie Perrin, but not naked: F 2. Dimwitted super genius?: F 3. Margot Kidder's poetry while flying around?: F 4. All of the horrible, horrible liberties taken with physics: F------- 5. Clark's mom doesn't have the 'attributes' of Anette O'Toole: F
In watching it now, it is almost impossible to believe that this movie could have grossed anything, it has 'straight to video' written all over it. Maybe those were different times, populated by a public so desperate for a good super hero movie that this one did it for them. Truthfully, though, it was pretty bad.
I saw this last night and am glad I only rented it. I think Tarantino is a hack and a thief. Don't get me wrong, I liked resevoir dogs and the first half of that vampire movie, but 'Pulp Fiction' and this were crap to me.
Now, I know, I know, there are legion who think this man is a genius for taking anime to its next level and making us pay twice for it, and there may be something to that. For my part, I can only see Quentin salivating over scene after scene where two hotties battle each other in high naughty school girl film attire. The violence was punctuated by scenes more unnecessary than any segue from a modern Stephen King novel. To me this movie looks like someone loaned $140,000,000.00 and forty hot woman to a bunch of anime geeks with oxicream still on their noses and they shot this crap.
I always like to see movies like this, where the plot is impossible, events make no sense, and the heroes of the film are a professor who commits three Grade-A felonies, and a druggie loser student who fixes games and black-mails the FBI. This is really a film to take the kiddies to, maybe *my* child can grow up to be a worthless adult!
But, I have serious hopes that she will choose better vehicles in the future. As much as I like her, by the end of this movie, I had the desire to duct tape her to a theatre chair while I extracted my fifteen bucks from her purse that I paid to see this train derailment of a teen flick. Andy, talk to her boy.
I love Bill Shatner. I have seen most anything he's done, and even went to Ssplat attack II to see him. Still, he shouldn't just take any damn movie. I mean, there is that stupid chef show, now this, this horrible, horrible movie. You may think 'how bad can it be?'. Well, I was dehydrated for two days from spitting on the DVD and cursing Bill Shatner's name.
I just saw this last night on DVD and I have to say...HUH???
The acting was OK. Liam did a good job, and I like historical movies. However, I'm not sure that this was a "historic movie" worthy event.
The plot is a crappy built russian sub, that leaves too early, and gets into trouble because of it. In order to save this piece of junk, we watch sailor after sailor irradiate himself and his co-workers, all so that this "craptacular" sub can be towed back to dock. This movie would be noteworthy if the crew had elected to save themselves and scuttled the boat. It is much easier to build a boat than a loyal, trained crew of a nuclear submarine. The price was too high, and the crew's willingness to do it smacks more of lemming than patriot. Sorry guys.
I thought I was a huge LOTR fan until I saw that this move was rated over a 9 on IMDB! You fanatics have to calm it down a little bit! Lets look objectively at this film... First, the special effects and battle scenes are great. The actors are the same and still good. The plot, of course, is great and you do get a pretty good feeling of the epic of this. However... The constant cuts to the "love" story? Can anyone remember "attack of the clones"? It didn't work then, it doesn't work now. Stop that. And the constant soliloquys by Jar Jar, er, I mean, Gollum got a little tiring.
In the end this one just does not "grab" you like the first, and does not feel as important. It looks a little rushed and the tempo is too erratic. Its still a movie worth seeing, but it is not the best movie this year as LOTR was last year.
I heard people say of this movie, "It was good, but I didn't understand it." What this means then, is that these people were entertained by colors swirling on a big white screen. The point of a movie is to tell a story. Now, unless I'm a retard or a toddler, if I don't understand it, then somebody dropped the ball here. This was the case with "Solaris". Put together a bunch of meaningless, if poignant, scenes on a beautiful, mysterious backdrop and then hope the audience feels it went over there head and doesn't mind dropping seven bucks on a convoluted story that has no clear purpose or ending.
Well, I'm there to tell you, slapping some goo together on film that befuddles an audience is easy, it's not "artistic" and it doesn't make you some "mis-understood genius", it makes you a bad director or producer or whoever it was that made me waste my time on this movie.
Again, we see what could be a really good movie fail. This time a "new" director decides to "break the mold" and be "stylish" and "edgy". What does this mean? It means that someone will take a small budget, second rate actors and a horribly written script and make a movie that is a miasma of looks and scenes that confuse you. You will then be told how clever it is and that you didn't get it. You, however, are in the majority, as this thing runs, not walks, straight to video. So learn the catch words people "Edgy, stylish, innovative, clever" = "Not released in theatres because people would riot"
I got this move as a free rental, which is a good start to it. Robert Redford and James G. are so, so good in this (and what about James's sidekick, I thought that was brilliantly underplayed), but the story...oh...it's so bad. At one point the inmates at a marine prison manage to build and hide...a siege engine, whose only point is to hurl pet rocks at James Gandalfini. Now, I can see hiding a shiv, or a sharp tooth brush, but a catapult? What were they thinking? A side note to our Canadian friends, I apologize for a movie where we Americans take pride in our country. I regret, sincerely any honor, dignity, or bravery that was displayed. I am made indescribably weepy by any movies that show the US as good, healthy or has a sense of national pride about it. From this point forward I pledge to see only Canadian movies...that suck.
Well. Yes. I didn't think it would be. I am no Josh Hartnett fan, and I thought the idea for the movie ridiculous. When my girl made me go, I set my expectations really low hoping to be surprised. I was, it was much, much worse. This movie did the one thing I thought could never happen, make so many masturbation jokes that they became un-funny. Add to it the list of completely non-sensical parts and this movie truly made me want to see "crossroads". A saving grace might have occurred had one man or woman in it had a healthy, mature attitude about sex, but not the hero, not the clergy, and not any man or woman in it did. A bad premise, for a lot of bad jokes, and bad acting. Think of how funny it is to see Josh Hartnett coming down from a crack high. Now sit through an hour and a half of it.
There are and will be a lot of coming war movies at the theaters, and most have been done extremely well in making sure people understand the heroics of the American soldier. This movie accomplished that and was a step above. Not since D.W. Griffith have we seen silence be so powerful and moving. Great performances, one of the best movies I've seen in a long time.
This movie was great, don't get me wrong. But if anyone were checking the top 250, this is, right now, number one above the Godfather? You people need to calm down. Was it a great movie? Yes, definitely. The casting was great, the scripting worked very well, the effects were nice and it stayed quite true to the series. But even I, a pretty good fan, have to admit that there were some points where I felt myself exiting the storyline, either because of tempo or length. Voting this movie the best of all time are the same people that voted the Phantom Menace so high, they are doing it only because they are hysterical fans. It's for this kind of thing that we have to have Jar Jar back in episode II. Please...everyone...show some restraint?
I understand that people have different senses of humour, and may laugh hysterically at something that I find pointless, disturbing or stupid. I am a Tom Green and Rip Torn fan, but they have managed to make the above statement obsolete. They have produced a comedy that is simply not funny. No...it's not.
I just saw this tonight and it reminds me of "The Phantom Menace". Besides the villain, there is nothing salvageable in this movie. The acting does not exist, the characters are uninteresting, the plot makes no sense (especially the end) and I cannot tell for whatever reason they chose to do this. If you really have to see this movie, take ten bucks, set it on fire, then beat yourself on the knee with a sewing machine. It takes less time. Tim Burton should be destroyed for making this film, thank God Arnold backed out.
I know a lot of people will see this movie, see the excellent acting in it, and call it a good movie. They are wrong. While the entire cast does themselves proud, this movie is still a creeping, too long boring crap ride of stink. Remember what "Mosquito Coast" taught us, a confusing movie does not mean art.
Rarely anymore, since "Mission to Mars" do I go to see a movie opening day for fear of getting burned. I figured this as an exception because of the big name stars etc. Well, they showed me. A lot of reviews on this site talk about the horrible woman characters in this movie. They are simplified and un-entertaining, but as a guy, I have to say they get the good part. The men in this movie are made to look like lazy, non-driven, non-caring oafs next to the women characters. I think everyone loses in this movie, except for Mel, who for some reason does a great job in a horrible movie.