Sparrow_in_flight

I'll admit - when I was first introduced to Witch Hunter Robin, back when Cartoon Network aired it in 2003, I wasn't very interested. Well, at least, not until episode 6 (Raindrops). Somehow, the idea of Witch controlling a bunch of what appeared to Barbies grabbed me. And I watched when I could.

But I didn't see the series in its entirety, or even the end of it, despite the fact it's only 26 episodes long. I forgot about it until a friend picked up the DVDs in 2006. When I borrowed them, I was hooked from the beginning.

As fans and non-fans alike have pointed out, Witch Hunter Robin appears to take a while to get to its actual plot. Subtle hints are given, however, in the beginning episodes. For instance - if Witches are so dangerous, why is the STNJ so unique in that they capture the Witches instead of killing them? Where's the benefit? And you have to wonder what Robin finds so disgusting about the Orbo, without even knowing its origins.

Once WHR does find its footing, however, it takes off. This is not an action series, not really. Or, at least, I never viewed it as such. There is action, but it's not as important as character development (even stock archetypes can be interesting when handled correctly, which Witch Hunter Robin does indeed).

This show is meant to make you think - what seemed black and white (Witches are bad, Hunters are good) turns into gray as the series progresses. Those Hunters who are Craft Useres can be Hunted themselves, if Solomon brands them a Witch. Some Witches commit crimes using their powers, but not out of malice (episode 8: Faith). And then Robin herself becomes the hunted, labeled a Witch shortly after killing someone during a Hunt.

Obviously, there's more to it- after all, Solomon routinely executes Witches on Hunts - the STNJ is an exception. By the end, we know Robin is a manufactured Witch, and we also see that she's no longer the same person from the first episode. But is she as large a threat as Solomon believes, or not? Witch Hunter Robin is a show of questions. Some of them are resolved, some of them are left for the viewer to provide an answer for. In this sense, WHR strongly reminds me of Fullmetal Alchemist (another show in which you can say good and evil isn't always clear cut and finding humanity within yourself can be difficult). Some will find the slow buildup to a rushing, only partially resolved finish boring. Others will enjoy it immensely.

Plot aside, I'd also like to note that the English dub is filled with exceptional talents. It is equally enjoyable to view in both Japanese and English, something I've not encountered with most anime.

Also, the art and the soundtrack - again, these seem to be on a love/hate level, same as the plot. Personally, I found the tone and style of both art and music fitting, and that they made the emotion of the story more real.

Don't get me wrong. I grew up on the old toons and loved 'em to death. Sad to say I never read the comics that started it all.

I went into the movie fully expecting to mock the entire thing. After all, I took a peek at the newer cartoons, and hated them. And I'd never, EVER enjoyed the old films (though now I'm planning to go back and re-watch 'em, see if things have changed).

Imagine my surprise when I actually enjoyed the film. Some elements are definitely meant more for big-screen viewing - the fight between Raph and Leo, for example. The plot definitely wasn't bad.

As I said, too, the turtles had to grow up, in a sense. If I'd gone in and heard multiple cries of "Cowabunga!" I would have enjoyed them...but at the same time, really felt out of my element in the theater - a 21-yr-old going a kiddie film, basically. It was far more fun to watch Mikey dress up with a Yoshi-like mask as a party mascot, Don struggling to do tech support for idiots, Raph being more reckless and vigilante-like than before, and Leo having wised up some.

I do have to say, though - the one thing that really bothered me? Splinter! He looked too funny to be taken very seriously, at least not without some effort.

Anyone remember The Secret Files of the SpyDogs? The 1998 Fox Cartoon that lasted one season, which featured dogs bent on protecting the world, and cats bent on conquering it? Sound familiar? Did I mention the high-tech gadgetry and inventive disguises featured in this cartoon? Again, sound familiar? The acting isn't horrible, the animation could be worse....but really, did they truly think they could make a successful film using a plot that couldn't even make a cartoon last long before the gags ran out? SpyDogs had charm going for it, at least. This...not so much. This may be a cute kids film, but for older audiences...well, I suppose if you're bored at 2 in the morning or need background noise, and there's nothing better on, you might enjoy it.

Based off the Uzumaki (or Spiral into Horror, whichever title you know it by) manga, this film is just...odd. While it ropes in events from the manga, somehow, the creepiness of said events is lost in transition from manga to movie. The music is at times reminiscent of fighting a boss from an old video game, and some of the more supposedly horrific moments are just laughable.

The film is also rather quiet - if you do watch it, be sure to turn up your volume to make sure you catch everything. Yes, there's subtitles, but after all, half the emotion is conveyed through voice tones.

I give it points for capturing the strangeness from the manga, if not the creepy feeling, and points for the spirals that occasionally show on screen for a split second before vanishing. But overall, the movie failed.

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire has finally emerged...and didn't disappoint. Though some scenes seemed rushed (I would have liked to have seen more of the Quidditch World Cup, really) and the subplots were gone (No SPEW...poor Hermione), the overall tone of the book is still present.

Though we can't forget the danger presented at the beginning of the film (in fact, if the music alone won't let you forget, the nonstop action and some of the characters' conversations will make sure you remember), there are still plenty of laughs (in fact, Moaning Myrtle's scene in the book has been expanded a bit in the film...providing plenty of amusement though poor Harry would probably say otherwise).

Some things, I think, could have been done better (Sirius' head in the fire just looked goofy and Voldemort's "I can touch him now" line...well, it can be misconstrued quite easily by fanfic authors writing slash), other bits that I had worried about surprised me by being well done. The dragon, for instance, was great - and the scenes involving Cedric Diggory's death were handled well.

Overall, 9 out of 10.

When Eerie, Indana first emerged, I was thrilled. It wasn't a cartoon, it had interesting characters, and every episode featured something weird. Urban legends, monsters, UFOs, and more...it was great.

Now, as an adult, I've re-watched the series on DVD. And I've discovered I still love it. The acting is just as great as I remember, and to see great acting in a kid's show is somewhat of a rarity.

Eerie, Indiana also had some innovative moves for a kid's show. Rather than every episode being a separate plot in its own, with no tie to the series as a whole, Eerie actually tried to work in a myth-arc. Unfortunately, the show was killed early before we could see what would emerge in regards to Dash X. And most shows would like to pretend they're not anything else. But "Reality Takes a Holiday", in which Marshall suddenly finds himself on the set of a show called 'Eerie, Indiana' and that everyone thinks he's an actor, proves the show knows exactly what it is: a TV show meant to entertain and slightly creep out. It took itself seriously, but no so seriously that it forgot that.

After Eerie ended, a horde of other kids' shows in the same niche emerged, including, of course, a remake of the original. While the new Eerie show followed the adventures of Simon and Marshall's counterparts in an alternate universe, and had some creative ideas, it missed the mark.

This show broke ground for this genre of kids' television, since I don't recall many other kids' shows of the area dealing with the supernatural. Perfect for anyone who likes weird stuff.

It had its moments. Sometimes. And it was definitely better than Signs, which was a waste of money, in my opinion. The acting was good - there was no problem there. What was wrong was the plot. How many times have you read a book or seen a movie or TV episode that contains a place no one is allowed to explore? A lot. How many times is said place really as frightening as those who forbid it claim that it is? I admit, that's probably more of a 50/50 chance. How many times is the ending supposed to be a total surprise, and yet is actually totally predictable? Again, probably it is a 50/50. In this case, The Village failed. The ending was very much a predictable outcome: the monsters didn't exist, they were simply a myth. The village is simply a community of those living where the outside world can't reach them, as they are sick of it. The signs, of course, were there along the way: going through the woods for medicines, the group of adults that are hiding something, etc. It's all there, and it's too predictable. If you've never read anything along these lines, or seen anything, you'll probably like it. If you have - don't bother with it.

I have no complaints against the artwork or anything like that. Actually, I thought the art was pretty good. The plot is okay too, though not the world's greatest. There was a fair amount of humor as well, with Agent Paper's obsession over her book. Though sometimes I wondered about her feelings for Nancy...for barely knowing someone, those feelings were pretty intense.

Perhaps it was because I saw this on TV, but things seemed a bit rushed and disjointed at times. And yes, I know any movie can end up this way...but I just find it annoying. Because of this, I think the main reason I'll watch it again, if I do, will be to make sure I understood everything correctly.

Therefore, I won't say if it was good or bad, just that it was...interesting.

OK, so maybe some people prefer our American-style horror films with the blood and gore. Give me Japanese psychological-style of horror anyday. It's much scarier.

For one thing, you never known all the story - just enough to leave you knowing that you missed something and you can't always figure out what. The movie stays with you longer.

And another thing: Japanese ghosts are a heck of a lot scarier than American ghosts - I mean, how many American ghosts can leave the haunted house to kill someone? And you can't get rid of a Japanese ghost no matter how hard you try.

While I don't quite agree with the reviewer who said this is better than the TV show, this is definitely one of my favorite movies (and I just bought it yesterday).

For those unfamiliar with the show, the movie provides basic introductions and some facts needed about the main characters. For a better synopsis, though, either check out the "Special Footage" section of the DVD (which can seem disjointed) or find an online episode guide (TV Tome is helpful).

Inuyasha: Affections Touching Across Time (US Title) definitely has some moments that truly stand out (not saying the rest of the movie is bad, but these moments are exceptionally memorable.) For instance, the meeting of Kagome and Kikyo after Kagome is forced to shoot Inuyasha with an arrow, leaving him slumped against the God Tree...with both girls in miko clothing, it is eerie to see....especially Kikyo's words to Kagome: "You truly are my reincarnation"...

And let's not forget the meeting of Kikyo and Sesshomaru! Short, yes, but definitely a memorable moment, in my mind.

Overall, InuYasha, Affections Touching Across Time is a great movie that does the TV show and manga proud.

I loved this when I was younger. Although it isn't done like The Lorax or The Grinch Who Stole Christmas, both of which are one-story, half-hour videos, it's still enjoyable.

Dr Suess' ABC is meant for children too young to perhaps sit though the lengthened versions of The Lorax or The Grinch, with their songs, added lines, and longer run times. Instead, each story on the tape takes about ten minutes to do. What shows on the screen are the exact illustrations in the books, while the words are voiced over, just as if someone was reading the book there with the viewer. If a child cannot sit through the full time of the tape, no problem! Just watch one story, stop the tape, and view the others later!

Parents can enjoy it, too, as it means the can re-experience the fun of hearing Dr. Suess, rather than being the one who reads the story. A great way to take a break from say, reading book after book before bedtime.

In about the time it takes for, say, two or three commercials, tops, the kids tell you what you need to know about upcoming Disney movies. Sometimes it's a bit too annoying, or the jokes aren't that great. Then again, it's geared for younger audiences, and not for people 18 and up, like me, who see it while babysitting, watching a Disney Channel show because we actually still like Disney, or just channel surfing.

It does have creative moments, like the musical version currently showing to advertise Disney's The Three Musketeers. Overall, think of it as "Movie Surfers" for a younger audience - shorter and with fewer people.

I have to admit: Eerie, Indiana, The Other Dimension did better than I expected. But the series lacked the seriousness of the other show. More than anything, the adventures of Mitchell and Stanley seemed purely for the chance to do continuous gags, than an actual plot. And the kids just weren't as believable - they unfortunately did not have the grasp of their characters that Omri Katz and Justin Shenkarow had.

The show was also rushed out at a time when FOX already had at least one show of this nature. Two at once was pure overload.

I feel I must also mention that the books written for the series at times had more detail and plot than the show itself, another reason to its failure.

It tried. And you had to admire the effort. But the original Eerie, Indiana was creepier, better written, and better acted.

This is a Disney live action family that, unlike The Parent Trap (either version) has a lot of sappy moments. (Don't get me wrong though, I love The Parent Trap). Not to mention a level of violence not normally seen in a live action Disney flick - I'm referring, of course, to the fight between Cluny and Casey, and the fight of villians vs good guys.

The storyline is simple, and yes, done before and after, but it is done well, and that's what counts. Acting is great, considering the main characters were mostly kids, and there are some great lines to quote. Overall, it's a simple, fun, family movie. One that I think could appeal to almost everyone.

Sction. Adventure. Things exploding. Light romance. Humor. Drama. All the ingredients for a good summer movie. And this is one of the best.

I have to be honest, if this came out during non-summer months, it'd do well, sure, but probably not as well as it is now. I could be wrong, that's just what seems to be the trend with most sci-fi movies that I know of. But in no way do I consider myself an expert on this stuff.

Acting is great - Will Smith gets some great one-liners, as usual. There are a few moments that give a sense of deja-vu (MIB, anyone?) but not many.

I enjoyed this. And I think I may read the Assimov book it's based on, though I already know the two are bound to be different. It always happens with movies, that there are differences between them and the stories they are based on. Still, if a good movie leads to a good story, or vice versa, there's no harm done. I hope that's the case with I, Robot.

Dracula. A classic vampire novel, a good story (though in my opinion, could have been better told).

Dracula - the 1992 movie? It takes a decent story, and rips it apart. Had I not read the book, some parts would have had me very confused. As it was, I was confused by why explanations were left out, and the romance between Mina and Dracula thrown in.

Dracula of the novel does not love, not mortals. Mina is simply a pawn to be used, nothing more, really. Why drag in a love story between the two, when, had it been better done, the love story of Jack, Arthur, Quincey, and Lucy, or of Jonathon and Mina could have been emphasized. At least those tales were in the novel.

And while Anthony Hopkins does a great job of Van Helsing, the character of the movie seems far less sane than the Van Helsing of the book, and far less caring.

While Jack, Arthur, Quincey, and Jonathon's characters were unaltered (and Renfield altered only slightly), instead of being the major characters, they have taken up secondary roles to Mina and Dracula. Why?

The movie is okay. Ir makes for an interesting vampire film. But if you want an adaptation of the book, look elsewhere. This is more like an adaption of the Spark Notes.

Well, okay. Who knows, maybe there was a romance between Anna and the king, even though in real life he was about 60 at the time.

Despite having inaccuracies (which, if you look this movie up through Google, you will learn they are apparently severe enough to have it banned in Thailand), the movie itself is well done. Performances are magnificent on all counts, and this version of the story is better than the musical, as it feels more real. I have not seen the animated version which came out about the same time, but I would bet this surpasses it as well.

This movie is very entertaining, and has become a favorite of mine. But, as with all movies based on truth, take it with a large grain of salt.

Most Adam Sandler movies are tolerable, cute in some moments, but overall just movies to watch when it's 11pm or so and you need something to do. But this one is different.

At first, I thought that it would be much worse, when the first jokes emerged. But once Drew Barrymore entered the picture, the movie improved.

of course, I worried this would still fall into a typical happy romantic movie mode, where a wonderful solution to cure Barrymore's memory would suddenly become obvious. Fortunately, while a solution is found so the two can stay together, it is not a miraculous recovery, which adds to the film's charm.

Overall, this is one of the best Adam Sandler movies there is. But that's just my humble opinion.

Well, I admit some parts could have used some improvement, (MJ's lines to Peter at times do not seem to have improved much) the sequel was great! Doc Oc isn't quite as entertaining as the Green Goblin, but that's mostly because of the fact he seems to have more of a struggle with being the bad guy, not that that's a bad thing, really. Just different. Of course, he did have his moments, especially the bank robbery.

What are probably the hokiest moments of the film, other than MJ's line near the end about how Peter loved her even though he said he didn't, and how she always knew in a way who he was, would be the moments where Peter is deciding what to do: abandon his responsibility of Spiderman and maybe get MJ's attention again, or to give up the Spidey suit and he has that talk with Uncle Ben, or Normal Osbourne's appearance in the mirror to Harry. While they served their purpose well, the scenes just seemed a bit out of sync with the rest of the film. Aunt May's hero lecture lays it on a little thick, but hey, aren't most relatives like that when they give an important talk? :D

Overall, despite some hokey moments, the sequel is great - as good and maybe even a bit better than the first Spidey movie.

First off, it was definitely not as creepy as the trailer made it seem. And secondly, I was a bit disappointed that the whole moral of this book seemed to have been lost in the writing of the script. What happened to Hagrid's talk to Harry and Ron about friends being more important than broomsticks or rats?

I have nothing against the acting in this film, except for that of the man playing Pettigrew. Ugh. i couldn't wait for him to get off the screen. Partly because makeup had really overdone making him look like a rat, and partly because he just didn't make a great Wormtail in my eyes. Otherwise, great acting all around.

What I disliked were the cuts from the book (better Marauder's Map explanation, Hagrid's lecture,Hermione and Harry fighting, etc), and the rearranging of scenes (like the Firebolt), as well as some of the building upon the book. What, may I ask, was the purpose of the shrunken heads? They became annoying very quickly, though I suppose some may find them funny. Just as the effects of the dementors was tiring after a bit. I realize that it was done to better convey the affect dementors have on living people, showing the iciness externally, since you can't really see the characters feeling it internally. But I'm sorry - it was used too much. And it wasn't too convincing when you realize that while the window on the train iced over and so did the flowers by the school, nothing iced or frosted over when the dementors attacked Harry and Sirius. Nothing.

I did like the movie, for there were some creative additions (the candy, the clock and bridge, Hermione calling werewolf Lupin away). As a film, it was good. As an adaptation, it did a fairly poor job as it failed to capture the moral of the book, though it grasped the coming-of-age idea a bit, and failed to explain some things, leaving them instead to be done better in later films, thereby cutting time away from those plots.

I would like to end with the statement that I think Micheal Gambon filled Dumbledore's shoes nicely.

The "colonists" do not appear to have understood what they were signing up for, and are unwilling to forget the 21st century, as they would need to, to do their job properly. Instead, laws that would have been strictly applied in the 1600s are bent, broken, or abandoned. A colonist was allowed to simply because he no longer felt like participating. Family emergencies are understandable grounds for leaving, as is having leaving assigned due to the role you were cast in.

Women were second-in-line to men - this is something all the women should have understood before signing on board. Yes, occasionally, there were exceptions - but not often. Indentured servants were barely above slaves. That was how things were, and how things are now should not have been brought in.

The younger children should have been working as well, for while they would have had some play time, everyone pitched in in those days.

While the idea of building a house probably seemed great, the colony might have done better to add on to an existing house, or something like that - less work to do, more time to work for sending things back to England.

Many things could have been done differently, but I won't list them all here. I will simply say a lot could probably have been done better, both preparing these colonists for their roles, and then the colony could have been managed better.

I have no idea if they passed or failed - that episode comes on later tonight. But if I were the judge, they would fail. I doubt, had they been a colony then, that they would have made it through full year, or even a winter.

Stick around after the end of the movie; don't just stop it after you see the ending scene. I know, I know, hard to believe that still has to be said, but it does. Some friends of mine never knew that existed because they are the type to stop the movie right after the final scene, since they don't care about the credits. A good way to miss out on things. Things like this cute little extra. :) The way the songs blended into each other was great, and I loved the song choices - a little bit of modern, a little bit of old, so that it's likely to satisfy everyone.

Course that could be for a reason: I saw Scary Movie 3, which spoofs it pretty well, before I saw this. Or it could just be that while the effects are cool, the plot just isn't too scary. Scary would be the acting jobs of the two kids, which do give the move a slight flavor of weirdness and creepiness. But not enough to compensate for the rest.

Personally, Ringu is better. Granted, it's only about as scary as this, so slightly to mild, but it does a better job of explaining things, and the lead charcters don't seem to be quite as stupid. Also, it doesn't involve the death of a horse, which just bothered me with The Ring, though it made sense later.

Still, it was a good movie - just not that scary.

Tonight, I saw both Ringu and The Ring. My frineds wanted to compare, and I was just there for the ride, having not seen either.

Ringu is far better, as far as explaining things goes. I like the psychic parent deal - the smooth, psychic experiences do a far better job at connecting the background pieces, than the disjointed moments of the American version. The steps taken are more logical (let's get a shovel and buckets to locate and empty the well, rather than just look in and end up getting shoved in by the TV), and while the effects aren't as impressive, that's ok. Acting is better on the whole, as well.

Plus, Yoichi is far more likable than the kid in the American version, who, while adding creepiness, just isn't that likable.

Overall, better than The Ring.

But the film just didn't have the same magic as the first, or the slightly redeeming qualities of the second. There was nothing wrong with the kids - no, this was a problem with Sylvester Stalone, and the plot. First off, starting the movie with a detective cliche is just...uninteresting. I was bored immediately. Secondly, while the video game world looked kind of cool, I sat there, just watching the tried and true video game ideas get horribly overdone. And instead of the mostly subtle family values message of the first movie, which was slightly less subtle the second, this one doesn't even try. The ideas are simply shoved down the throat, and...yeah. The whole ending sequence is bad. Sylvestor Stalone....should not be a kids' movie vilain. All I need to say.

I appreciate the effort, but Disney and Robert Rodriguez should have known when to quit.