TheWraith

Really, I can't fathom the people who don't like this show. It is, simply put, one of the most brilliant programs you'll ever see, and it's a shame that it was canceled. The writing is classic Sorkin, and you've got a cast that is absolutely phenomenal in their roles. Some people have complained that it's not funny--they're wrong. Maybe too many years of brain dead sitcoms have dulled their sense of humor to the point where they can't appreciate comedy without a laugh track. But S60 managed to weave a tremendous amount of humor into what was, fundamentally, a dramatic series. It's barely thinkable that this didn't become the same kind of breakout hit that The West Wing did. Unfortunately, the critics trashed it--shows what they know--and the network didn't give it a second chance. Any show which can make you laugh, think, and tear up within the same episode as much as this one did deserves more consideration.

The person who said that they loved the original series but can't stand this needs some perspective. The original was fun and quirky in its way, but the new BSG is by far one of the best shows on television. It's dark, it's vibrant, it has a cast who come off every bit as flawed and honest and genuine as real people. It takes serious issues like faith, trust, torture, free will, and what it means to be human, and sets them in a world that's like ours, but different. I wouldn't hesitate to recommend it even to someone who doesn't like science fiction--Battlestar Galactica is as far above typical schlocky sci-fi as a gourmet meal is above a frozen entrée.

I must admit I was a little surprised at K-PAX, since it seemed largely billed in the trailers I saw as comedy. While it has that certainly, it's predominately a sort of light drama, and a good one. It really does make you think.

Because the ending of K-PAX is so delicate, you really can't discuss it too much without ruining it. Suffice it to say, it's quite good, and in no way deserves being labeled vague, as some of the reviews have done. It's so artfully done, that if you disagree you can happily believe the opposite is true, while leading everyone to an excellent conclusion. Watch it with an open mind, and you'll enjoy it.

Alright - I'm not big on formulaic endings. But even a predictable, happy ending is better than a completely unhappy ending. It's certainly enough to sour the movie, and guarantee that I'll never watch it again.

One of the great unwritten rules of B movies, SciFi in particular, is that the villains are usually more entertaining than the heroes. I suppose this is because being evil takes acting talent, and being 'good' only requires stiffness and noble sacrifice. That said, the best part of BE is Travolta as Terl. His performance is the only thing keeping this movie remotely watchable.

And I mean the *only* thing. Having never read the book, I can't comment on how faithful an adaptation it is, or how much the story had to be accelerated, but the movie's plot has big enough holes to drive a Star Cruiser through. The 'good guy' humans are so boring and annoying you start to wish the invaders would get rid of them *now*. Basically, the only people to whom I would recommend this movie are fans of the classic SF bad-guy, because it's a real treat seeing Terl rub a dead rat in the hero's face while shouting "DO YOU WANT LUNCH?"

Mission to Mars really doesn't merit much verbosity - most elements of the plot are pretty much cut from the cloth of other movies. Even this could be lived with, if it were done well - most TV and movie plot point have been used before, going back to greek plays. However, MtM takes you from an extended build-up sequence, through one interesting EVA scene, and into a lackluster climax building to a patheticly cookie-cutter 2001 ripoff finale. For better Mars movies, check out Red Planet or Escape from Mars.

I greatly enjoyed The Mummy, and honestly, I had low expectations for The Mummy Returns. I was, however, pleasntly surprised for the most part - they did a relatively good job stitching together the two movies, the plot was decent, and overall it's a fairly worthy successor. The humor seemed a little lacking compared to the original, and I was greatly annoyed by the imitation of scenes from the original (If you've seen it, you know what I mean). Also, the otherwise stunning visuals broke down slightly with the Scorpion King. But all in all, it's a decent sequel to a movie that wasn't made for sequels.

Very few movies become classics, epics, or shining examples of film making. Films virtually never leap from the there-and-gone success of modern release to the status of being remembered without creating something truly unique, blending quality stories with top-flight work in every catagory.

Which is something that, unfortunately, Elizabeth fails at. You can clearly see that the people behind this movie put a lot of effort into it, and they had the fertile storyground of Elizabeth's rise to power to use. So what went wrong?

Simply put, it lacks that elemental ingredient usually referred to as 'magic'. In trying to blend elements of historical drama, romance, intrigue, and biography, it fails to give any of them a real chance. The film hops around between genres, leaving you feeling distracted, disaffected, and ultimately dissatisfied.

I could go on a five-page rant about the many, many failings of Deep Blue Sea, but I'll restrain myself to a brief rundown. The premise is decent - Not unlike Jurassic Park with sharks. The rest of the movie is a greater letdown - the dialog ranges from half decent to god-awful, the plot devices are not only unlikely, but downright impossible, the acting is lousy, and the writing is atrocious. Not only does this film suffer from an extremely poor script, but also a simple lack of care on the part of it's makers. Some examples range from having a huge, fragile plate glass window 50 feet underwater, to a character running DOWN STAIRS to get away from flooding waters. If someone with a little knowledge and experience had written this, it might have been much better. Unfortunately, the acting isn't much better. Saffron Burrows, while being quite pleasing to the eyes and ears, seems to lack any acting talent whatsoever. Thomas Jane isn't much better. Samuel L. Jackson is good, but he gets about 10 lines. I can only assume he did it for the money. There is one really genuinely startling and scary moment in this movie - if you've seen it, you know what I mean. But unfortunately, it isn't worth it. If you want killer critters, watch Lake Placid or a Jurassic Park movie.

Out of all the scary movies I've ever seen, including all the Scream and Alien movies, Jaws, The Stand, and plenty of others, this is the only one that *GOT* to me. I spent several hours after I saw it looking around waiting for the walls to make a false move. VERY VERY good! Doesn't at all deserve the 5.4 rating it gets

The Invisible Man is a demonstration of a great show built on a classic foundation. Wonderful characters, humor, plot, atmosphere, the works. It and the Sci-Fi Channel's other top series, Farscape, are great examples of how SF is at it's core about telling good stories, some old some new, with the twists of imagination only sci-fi can bring.