KDWms

I got the impression that the writer tried too hard to make this different. Dumb-ole-me was able to keep up, but, its many twists and turns are too lengthy to recount here. Some superficial content of the plot portrays recalcitrant horse-raiser, Steve, subsequently apologizing for his individuality. While doing so, however, the ONE nearby person listening to him, is murdered from afar; therefore, Steve appears guilty. A regional lawman (Lane) is passing by and witnesses Steve's innocence, but, aware of widespread anti-Steve sentiment, Steve accepts an alternate offer of help to evade the lynch mob. Little does he know that his "helpers" want Steve to obtain some information and impart it to them. Lane works to get to the bottom of all this. Except for its complexity, it's a rather routine Western effort.

Tired of meager gig funds, guitarist Jonesy seeks bucks by helping rob a nightclub linked to a bully who generously practices his strong-arming tactics. This accounts for Jonesy's teaming with Cowboy, who is a very unstable Englishman. It's an affiliation which Jonesy tries to conceal from his girlfriend, Bonnie. In my opinion, this movie deserves a "poor" grade because of its inferior acting; sub-standard sound and lighting; and unimaginative writing. And how realistic is it when more than twenty shots come from Cowboy's hand-gun with no apparent reloading of it? Having such an arsenal, however, would be one way (although nobody better DO this) of accommodating what I suspect will be a large portion of the audience wanting to be put out of its misery.

Carl hates everybody. His mom made him that way. His piano-teaching is only a slight, temporary smoke-screen for his contempt for all of society. By film's end, Carl has become a mass murderer and captor of the apple of his eye. The captive is pretty messed-up, too. She escapes from Carl and actually returns voluntarily to be imprisoned by him again. This movie evidences some initial intrigue, but it eventually deteriorates into considerable incredulity, although its other components are not terribly bad. Maybe I just wasn't in the mood for this type of show when I watched it. Whatever the reason, I rate this flick "below average".

Most of this film shows the late Jeffrey Strouth, in the back seat of a car, talking and talking and talking and talking about his many unusual experiences. Either he has a huge, exaggeration-inflated imagination, or, he's one of those folks who is extremely often effected by planned and co-incidental timing, resulting in his involvement in a plethora of rare occurrences. In any event, I don't dispute the interestingness of his tales. But I sure did get tired of his banter: a style which others have characterized as queenish and effeminate. Sorry if I'm dwelling too much on delivery and not enough on substance. I'm not bothered by fingernails screeching on a chalkboard; but Jeffrey's rambling really turned me off - to the extent that I was unable to fully concentrate on the dialogue. Therefore, it's MY expectation that, in this case, the book must certainly be better than the movie.

Songs not so western-sounding; Dale and Roy initially at odds; coastal setting; believable, interesting story with intelligent humor - elements of this film which favorably impressed me, without a "try-too-hard-to-be-different" result. "Apache Rose" is the name of a small boat, skippered by Dale. Oil prospector Roy dislikes Dale's delivery plans for his equipment, but, eventually, they warm up to each other, with disguised Dale actually assisting to apprehend the villainous Reed Calhoun, who operates a casino-boat and covets oil-rich land owned by Dale's suitor - the gambling-indebted Carlos Vega, and his sister from out-of-town, Rosa. Some of the comic relief is aptly provided by the bumbling, years-worn, Roy-admirer, Alkali. After twelve years of pretty-much formulaic Roy Rogers movies - which, by this time numbered around 75 - it's nice to see one which is not quite the same as many of them, but doesn't overdo the uncharacteristic.

This film got enough "only-in-the-movies" head-shakes from me that it also gets my "below-average" rating. The Three Mesquiteers bring a group of reinforcers to The Texas Rangers, who lack authority to address rampant bullying and lawlessness in a nearby area, which later became the "panhandle" of Oklahoma. The plan is to lure the boss desperado and his gang into Texas, where the good guys can do battle with the villains. Another part of the plan involves one of the Mesquiteers impersonating a look-alike fugitive. But then the REAL wanted man arrives on the scene. ROCKY MOUNTAIN RANGERS might give realists such as me a mild workout.

This film proves that ANYTHING is fair game for offering to the public. But, relying on word-of-mouth to aid in this movie's success just ain't gonna happen. I suppose that, if the viewer of this is to notice anything in addition to the strictly personal documenting of somebody's Bar Mitzvah, it'll be that some adults are more messed up than kids, and kids pick up on things that might be totally inconspicuous to adults. Other than that, everything else about this picture is, in MY opinion, extremely bush. The amateurness of the performances convince me that this is, actually, a home-movie, with simply terrible sound, lighting, scripting - you name it. Plus, this even STRENGTHENS certain stereotypical notions. Good that we recognize that the boy has become a man. Bad for anybody who watches these events.

I'm reluctant to describe a film as "the worst movie I've ever seen" because, undoubtedly, one'll come along which is even lousier. But, without question, this is right down there among the awfulest. Just terrible. Much of the action has no relevance to what precedes or follows. Much of the dialogue is indiscernibly soft, or drowned out by music. It seems impossible that anything could be worse, but, the acting is (or it MIGHT be - much of the spoken part of it is camoflauged by its inaudibility). And the story...well...it develops with extreme immaturity. It insulted my intelligence to watch it (and I ain't very smart to begin with). It's about a Russian scientist, who has fled to the United States and has developed a Life Extension Formula, which causes the Soviets to want him back. His grand niece (?) meets - and wants to marry - a co-worker, who rescues her after her kidnappers (some of them dwarfs) have suspected that she may know her uncle's (?) whereabouts. If that causes you to check this out - I apologize.

Samantha is engaged to Adam but Samantha is "doing" Adam's dad, Harold. Adam's best friend, Bobby, a do-nothing barfly after his pro-football-career-ending knee injury, is unattached, but always looking. In a singular liaison outside of his relationship with Samantha, Adam gets it on with Lynn, who also went to bed with Bobby. Lynn is a nurse, who attends elderly AIDS patient. Mrs. Applegate. One day - before all of this - Lynn was caring for Mrs. Applegate and accidentally punctured her finger with a needle with which she had just injected Mrs. Applegate. Lynn contracted AIDS, which made her a sociopath, with DEcreased instead of INcreased inhibitions, and - you get the picture - a lot more people may be infected. The seriousness of this subject matter could very easily have further reduced my rating of this flick: Usually I avoid "heavy" films, preferring that my movie-viewing experience be more uplifting. But this production - although sometimes unevenly paced - lacked other elements to really bring it down, so, it gets a passing grade from me.

Looks like the proponents of this film could use a little help. OK. Here it comes... Not being much of a historian, and stupid about discards from other pictures, I am unable to evaluate it with these things in mind. Perhaps this lesser intelligence accounts for my being entertained by this flick. It's about a newly-transferred General who concludes that somebody with access to his Command Post is tipping off the Germans with regard to his division's movements. I was not distracted by any inferiority in the easily-seen stuff, such as the acting, sound, lighting, writing, etc. Therefore, I was intrigued by the effort here to identify the source of the "leak". I, for one, would say that FIREBALL FORWARD (which refers to the nickname of the headquarters of the top brass) is worth reconning, and is no more of a gamble as to whether you'll like it or not, than most other movies.

Am I wrong to regard a movie as similar to a business...in that it is supposed to make money? Then I watch stuff like this and imagine that many people who had anything to do with this must be bankrupt. It depicts five mercenaries, intent on rescuing a businessman's wife, who is reportedly held captive by a Panamanian thug; except when they get there, they find that the spouse WANTS to be where she is. This is preceded by a couple of scenes showing the martial arts proficiency of some of the group, and another wherein a psychic helps them locate the tropical estate. It's like what I would expect to see in a flashback of my playmates' imaginary backyard "adventures". So it seems even stupider that anyone would PAY to see grownups participate in anything so childish.

I recently watched an interview of an "A-list" actress, who's main concern is the believability of her projects - an element which is distractingly absent from CHAMPION KILLER. It is so unrealistic, in fact, that, as the action proceeded, my primary focus became noticing things which just weren't depicted as they would happen in everyday life. Utterly laughable. Also, the actors often try too hard, or, they're simply incompetent, although it's probable that NOBODY could convincingly deliver what's written here. And a few times, the dialogue is difficult to hear. The plot contains so many extreme events as to be too far-fetched: A cop cheats on his wife, but she and their son are murdered. Next, his partner is wounded and the successor is a female, with whom our main character falls in love. Then, a bullet finds HER shoulder. And HE is suspended from the force for brutalizing a drug-using homicide suspect who he shot in the leg once before. After the perp kills more victims, and repeated payoffs to him fail, the mean mistreater is reactivated to pursue the culprit. My impression is that it is just not well done.

There are a few wrecks here, not the least of which is this film in general. Malcolm's purposeless crotch-rocket tour stops near Mountain Glen, AR, after rescuing LeRoy and meeting trick-flier Lester and his bi-plane. Next, Malcolm gets smitten with Susan. Much of the action includes stuff which just wouldn't happen: hell, the most accident-prone of all blue-hairs drives better than this. The acting ain't all that great, either. Add to that, lousy sound and shallow plot, and there's little positive to hang your hat on. So be forewarned: sparse results should dictate sparse investment.

According to the IMDb, the length of this film is 82 minutes. That's 81 minutes too long. It should be only a 30-second P.S.A. for D.A.R.E.; and a 30-second message suggesting that adults listen more to kids. Besides these two topics, everything else is pure garbage. The movie is so named because an obnoxiously-successful football player is convicted of D.U.I., and his sentence is 90 days of being a teacher's aide. (Hmmm...I wonder if that's saying something right there?) His own martial arts learning is imparted at school, and the rest of the picture is about the students and him acquiring the skills and conditioning necessary to defend themselves against nefarious dope peddlers. The dialogue is mechanically recited, and the limited action is sickeningly staged. It has that tell-tale sound of a cheap production, and the effort to fill time (with two dangling tunes and by repeating certain video) is offensively blatant. How ironic that the main character's punishment is also ours.

Chances are that you could easily find a better way to spend your time and/or money than this debacle. Policewoman Samantha is reassigned from the narcotics squad to the much less exciting Personnel Surveillance Force. Her first new mission is to pacify the routine of a well-known actor, who's gonna be filming in her beat for awhile. With his marriage seemingly on the rocks, the situation between Sam and the actor becomes quite heated. But, when the actor's estranged wife talks reconciliation, Sam turns out to be a sore loser, which I don't think is supposed to be as predictable as it is. Also, throw in there Sam's unpleasant recollection from childhood of her father-figure relationship, although he, too, was a cop, killed in the line of duty. Some of the acting and behavior is very stiff and contrived. Much of the film is botheringly slow-paced. You should be awarded a BADGE OF -NO- FEAR if you view this entire production.

There seems to be no end to the supply of movies which exemplify a totally inferior product. DEADLY DISCOVERY causes me to repeat that opinion. A flatfoot's forced time-off after killing four-sixths of a gang, is spent chillin' with a now-retired co-worker, who flies single-seater aircraft these days. A third important character is Renee, who's inconsistent behavior lends complete incongruity to her role. Do you want to know more about the plot? Nah...if I tell you, it might cause you to increase your attention to this wastefulness, when thorough abstinence is warranted. The primary accomplishment of DEADLY DISCOVERY is a demonstration of what happens when actors perform with unmitigated ineptitude, and situations are terribly contrived and unnatural. Watching it simulates a dream in which you die and go to Hell.

This flick pretty well bridges the gap between a centuries-old concept and a modern environment. I regard this to be a difficult task in our contemporary era of pragmatism, so, this gets an above-average rating from me for its attempt. But I guess that SOME elements of the vampire belief just CAN'T be left in the past, and they, unfortunately, remind me that this IS a fantasy, evoking my idiosyncratic prejudice against that genre. The story is about a squeamish law-student/morgue worker and his nurse/girlfriend, who, in their positions, see some deaths which involve blood loss. As the guy's fascination intensifies, so does his alienation of his shack-up and the cops, who tire of his tries to convince them that his theory is worthy. I think, however, that you will agree that there is nothing unprofessional about this movie, and that you will, therefore, also conclude that this is an adequate investment.

To clarify, it's really no treasure, but, neither do I agree with the consensus. As of this writing, other comments are overwhelmingly negative. But I don't think that this flick is all that bad. Sure - it's a temptation to compare it to other Hammer films and Frankenstein movies in general. But, because Peter Cushing and Boris Karloff aren't in it, THAT shouldn't be held against Horror of Frankenstein. (They weren't in Citizen Kane, either, but THAT'S a pretty good pic.) I'm guilty of too much comparing, myself, but, for some reason, I did not do it here. Maybe that's why I rated it "respectable". I'm satisfied with most aspects of this production, although, admittedly, the outset is a bit dialogue-heavy and action-starved. It takes a long, mundane time, but, through it all, we meet (among others), sociopathic med student, Victor Frankenstein; his straight-as-an-arrow classmate, Wilhelm; destitute-destined neighbor, Elizabeth; the buxom housekeeper (but lousy cook), Alys; the one-step-behind police lieutenant, Henry Becker; the good-at-what-he-does body and parts supplier and his widow; and, of course, the towering, impetuous monster. It has an easy-to-follow story, with enough Hammer cleavage... urrr, diversions... to make it interesting. This attempt is okay, in my book.

It impressed me as slightly above-average because it's a bit different than the standard World-War-era, black-and-white, mass-produced western. Much of this film occurs at a trial, and, the bang-bangin', therefore, is more sparse. The "courtroom" is "ruled" by cantankerous old (and often humorous) fire-and-brimstone Judge Plunkett (although it's obvious that he's slightly less caustic to Bill). Dub Taylor, too, is the refreshingly-less-familiar but capable singing sidekick named Cannonball, who enlists Bill to travel with him to Independence, where Cannonball's father was killed by Jessup - witnessed by only Marsha. So, Jessup wants to marry Marsha because "a wife can't testify against her husband." Marsha's guardian is her niece-beating uncle, Rufe, who Jessup will pay to allow Marsha to become Jessup's bride. But Marsha is in love with Johnny, and, it's at Johnny's trial (for running away with/kidnapping Marsha) where Defense Attorney Bill states his suspicions regarding Jessup. An hour of time adequately spent.

I rate "1", movies which are so awful that the actors seemingly know it; and "2", awful films wherein the actors seem to be still tryin'. So this gets a "2" from me. Sometimes I reach the "total loser" conclusion and point to the inferior sound and/or lighting in the mix. But even though those elements are adequate here, this misfortune accomplishes "sheer mess" status by virtue of nothing more than most of the cast, and, the extreme unbelievability of the unfolding developments. And - oh yeah - I WILL say that some of the dialogue was noticeably re-recorded AFTER the action; "noticeable", for example, as one character incongruously exhales a giggle, simultaneous with his swallowing moonshine from a jug. In a nutshell, the plot consists of a retiree and his daughter butting heads with a quintet of visitors on the day after a series of nuclear bombs have wiped out the rest of humanity. (THEY are not effected because of the strong updrafts in their neighborhood.) My only other storyline sentence refers to the contradictoriness of much of what follows; contrived, it seems, as we go along; not thought-out. It's one of those classic, head-shaking, shoulder-shruggers which makes you smile because it's so ridiculous.

This is one of the most technologically-inferior films about which I have ever commented. No wonder that there are no crew credits. No self-respecting professional would want the affiliation. But I'm not gonna be duped into NOT saying other negative things about this lemon. The audio is atrocious. The lighting is terrible. The script is pitiful. Most of the acting - that which I can hear - is horrendous. Portrayed are a group of scumbag telemarketers and their money-hungry bosses; bilking funds from anyone who they can defraud; preying on the gullible. Authorities pursue them, but, their illicit activities continue sans imprisonment. And the activities are not solely limited to sales. What a bummer!!! A perfect example of how NOT to make a movie. I thought that I could dislike nothing more than telemarketers - until this abortion came along.

Two twenty-something bachelors from Goshen, NY - friends since grade school - set off to Malibu, by way of North Carolina. Enroute, they meet an enigmatic female, also going to Cali, who reveals that her father was abusive. Sharing burdens, one of the guys tells her that he regrets not being able to prevent a fatal fall by a classmate twelve years earlier. Enough about the intrigue. Regarding the professionalism of the production, let's just say that its later part is very different from its beginning. The start was low-key, laid back, and some questions and suspense evolved believably. But then the "only-in-the-movies" tendency took over and my impression became less favorable. Not negative enough, however, to suggest that you completely disregard this. To some, it may have some worth, but I think that, to most, its rating will be less than half.

Murder; rape; bullying; a mother's dominance; a father's back-turning; revenge; brown-nosing - just a few of the wonderful topics depicted in this movie. That might be reality, but, some of it is lost in the actors' reactions to these subjects. Or, perhaps they were TOLD how to react by the director. Anyway, LETHAL JUSTICE didn't quite hit the mark with me, although it DID evoke some of my appropriate emotional responses to these misbehaviors. The jist is that a bullying high school student rapes one of his teachers, but, the milktoast principal is intimidated by the boy's domineering mother and is too inactive to satisfy a group of the victim's co-workers. So, they take discipline into their own hands and, as a result, one of them is killed by a friend of the accused. Might appeal to those who get off on negativity and believe that violence begets violent justice.

When I grade a movie, I start at five and add or subtract the pros and cons from there. There are a couple of things which I like about this film: Its ability not to betray its ending, and its scenery (mother nature sure was kind to this spot in Mexico AND to Barbara Eden). But, in my opinion, it has more cons than pros: It shows a few too many times bare from the waist up, the character, "Paul"'s aging bod, and him recording his babblings of his encounters with the "Hunter" couple. (The latter is extensively written into the flow of the pic.) Is it also a BAD thing that there are so many shots of Miss Eden? Other impressions are of its excessive slow-movingness and, at times, echoy audio (especially during some indoor scenes). The basic story is of a wealthy couple, vacationing in Acapulco, being of interest to artist "Paul", of whom Mrs. Hunter becomes increasingly suspicious, after some initial sparks between the two. (She is tempted, no doubt, as a result of her husband mixing too much business with what was supposed to be post-wreck pleasure for her.) I wouldn't discourage anyone from spending time and/or a little money for THE WOMAN HUNTER. Maybe this person's negatives will be somebody else's positives.

If you realize that a movie critique represents an INDIVIDUAL'S opinion which may be very different from your own, you probably also don't take these comments too seriously. But - for what it's worth - here's mine re: Goin' South: I found it very entertaining (and I'm probably fussier than most when it comes to movies). That's what I value most in a film: entertainment. Any negative comments about this flick come from the more erudite crowd which knows or looks deeper for such things. I was even able to get past Nicholson's character's need for a good nose-blowin', which usually really bothers me, but, in this case, I found it utterly hilarious. We're gonna leave out recapping the plot - THAT'S pretty well taken care of not too far from here. But I just couldn't pass up the opportunity to write something good about this picture because I think that it richly deserves it.