MairegChernet

The characters: Stan and Kyle are Trey and Matt's cartoon counterparts and the two characters often exhibit the views and opinions of the creators themselves. These two main characters are best friends (as are Matt and Trey) and usually are the voice of reason. Matt and Trey also voice their tales of morality via these two. In the earlier seasons this would come in the form of "you know, i learned something today". Eric Cartman on the other hand is the personification of evil. He's a manipulative, racist, sexist, antisemitic trouble maker and has an increasingly contentious feud with Kyle (a jew). Kenny, on the other hand, is an underprivileged fun loving and altruistic character who's always there for his friends. These four dynamic characters are the center of most episodes and they are what make this show great. They offer a look into the human psyche. They also give the otherwise cynical show somewhat of a heart. They keep the show from being a dark and self-righteous satire.

The adult characters on the other hand are usually the center of the satire and often exhibit hypocritical and incredibly buffoonish behavior. They serve to present the overall hypocrisy of America as a nation. It is through these characters that Matt and Trey show what is wrong with this country (the elementary school teacher with the unresolved daddy issues, the inept school counselor who is a big time hoarder, the president of the country who doesn't seem to care about beavers, etc.) In fact, the only sane adult whom the children connect with is Chef, the kind advice-giving cafeteria worker.

The episodes: what i love about most south park episodes is that they always juxtapose a seemingly simple situation with some underlying social criticism. and they blend the two so well. It's hard to believe each episode is made in only one week, considering how well crafted it is.

Terrence and Philip show: This is not a huge part of the show. The Terrence and Philip Show is a Canadian TV show that most kids in town are obsessed with. It mainly features fart jokes and is despised by most adults. I brought this up because when I watch south park i feel like the four kids watching the t&p show. Most of my elders don't understand why i watch this "simple minded cartoon". but to me it is more than just kenny lighting his farts on fire. To me south park is a brilliant and hysterical satire that I can never get tired of watching. And I believe this is how the kids must feel when watching the t&p show.

Although i don't doubt that this is one of the most disgusting movies anyone would ever see in their lifetime, i believe that Lars von Trier's usage of such explicit cinematography is not without a purpose. What is the purpose of this movie, one might ask? Why show the audience such graphic and presumptuously grotesque images? Well, von Trier's purpose is to explore human emotion, and to do so in such a dramatic and a detailed manner. Thus, the graphic scenes and interactions help him achieve such precision. Antichrist is a movie about a couple whose baby dies as a result of their negligent behavior. The baby falls out a window and plummets to the ground as the couple were having sex in their bedroom. Naturally, the couple are stricken with grief following their toddler's death. The death takes a special toll on the mother who collapses during the funeral and spends months in the hospital.

Her husband, who is a therapist, suggests they go to their cabin in the woods (terrible idea) in order to cope with their grief. Their arrival in their cabin home soon turns deadly as the wife slowly loses her mind. Von Trier's depiction of a grief stricken wife is done with so much precision that it makes the audience feel a part of her mourning. The interactions between the anonymous wife and husband have a gloomy and dreary tone. From start to finish, the movie does not seem to convey an ounce of positive energy or optimism. Von Trier's main purpose for this movie to show a couple of things. First, he is showing how much of an impact certain life experiences and emotions can have on the human mind. He takes a basic human experience such as grief and stretches to the absolute extreme. Secondly, Von Trier is showing the evil side of nature. To begin with, it was the couple's natural instinct (sexual urges) that led to their own child's death. Also, the moment they arrive at the cabin, the wife is haunted by the sounds of falling pine cones cricket sounds, resulting in long sleepless nights. The husband also encounters a talking fox who exclaims "chaos reigns" in a rather ghastly voice. This proves that nature is not a peaceful and soothing place, as they had assumed it would be. Therefore, Von Trier is suggesting that nature is the ultimate antichrist, a place where all things bad happen. Although i find this to be exceptionally cynical, since i am a nature enthusiast myself, he does have a point. When a person is going through grief and depression (as was the case with the director himself throughout his adult life) nature does seem to be the evil-doer and it loses all its value as a safe and relaxing place. This does not mean nature becomes evil when a person is depressed. It simply means that a person's view of it becomes tainted and that person is only able to see the evil side of it.

I can safely say that despite the many disturbing scenes and images, Antichrist is one of the most well-crafted and detailed movies I've ever seen. it might make you stay up all night. You might even walk out in the middle of it. However if you ever decide to sit through the entire thing, I promise it's a movie you won't soon forget.

Nowadays, It takes something extraordinary for me to write one of these reviews and this movie is extraordinarily bad! So here goes. I feel like Rob Zombie was confused as to what he is supposed to do with this movie. There are so many things that were wrong with this movie. I don't even know where to begin. First of, what the hell is this movie about? There's no definitive or structured plot. It starts off as cops chase bad guys type of scenario but it quickly spirals into this lazy and bland piece of crap. The plot was dumb and could have been better... a lot better. And the actors were so unconvincing and unfit for their roles. They just looked like they wanted to get it over with and go back to whatever they do when they're not making terrible movies. The characters were so annoying half the time and just awkward the other half. The characters in the nude scenes were probably the only appealing aspect of these otherwise bunch of unattractive people. The tall guy with the long hair looks like Jim caviezel in the passion of the Christ and he was not scary or threatening at all. He just looked like he was depressed or something. That fat clown guy needs to see a dentist quickly and as scary as clowns can be, this guy was just laughable. And the girl, apart from being extra attractive, did not look like she belonged in a family of killers.

Other than the annoying characters, the movie was filled with way too many subplots, unnecessary melodrama and excessive blood and gore. I can go on and on. But it's not worth it. Please don't ever watch this movie. It's flat out one of the dumbest things ever. They say you'll appreciate this movie more if you watch house of a thousand corpses first; but I say avoid both or any other terrible Rob Zombie movie... which is like all of them.

So i haven't done one of these in a really long time, but I just had to for this movie. Easy A is the most adorable and entertaining high school movie since Mean Girls. Everything about this movie is done to perfection. Emma Stone is as charming as ever. The Scarlet Letter based plot is effective. And the Juno-esque dialogues never fail to amuse.

Easy A starts off as an average teen comedy with the protagonist and the best friend along with the obnoxious antagonist. But what makes this movie different from all the other mediocre films is its intelligent narration and its fast-paced yet deliberate story-telling. And unlike other teen comedies, Easy A doesn't just throw vulgar and clichéd jokes at you and expect you to laugh. Instead it is presented in a subtle and ironic manner.

This film also contains many rich and relatable characters. To sum it all up, this is one of the best teen comedies of recent years.

9/10

He does it again. The king of blood and gore once again proves that he can keep audiences entertained for almost 2 and a half hours. Inglourious Basterds is a Tarantino classic in many aspects. One, it offers plenty of violence and bloodshed. From Start to finish, heads are blown off, people are shot fatally and scalps are cut off gruesomely. Second, it has Brad freakin' Pitt. Tarantino movies always have one or two stars and a million up and coming actors. In this case, Pitt and Roth shine out while the rest of the supporting cast do an outstanding job of portraying their minor roles (not to forget Melanie Laurent.) Third thing is, the direction is wonderful. The sound effects, the camera shots, all the cinematographic aspects are excellent.

In short, Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds is an exhilarating action flick that is full of entertainment from start to finish.

HP6 is a dark and emotionally thrilling masterpiece. It combines magical awes that appeal mostly to children as well as mature and dark themes that appeal to almost everyone. It discovers the dark and mysterious past of you-know-who and leaves the audience aching for more as its two and half hours run time go by in a flash. The film contains dazzling visuals and terrific cinematography. It is indeed a satisfying experience that will please just about everyone. One thing is for certain though: in resemblance to the Rowling novels, the film series seems to get darker and more mature with every passing film while keeping an incredible PG rating (in the exception of HP4 & 5). This film not only has some bangs and booms but also explores the theme of teenage love as the three protagonists find themselves tangled in teenage romances. Overall a top notch film worth seeing over and over. Cant wait for the arrival of the Deathly Hallows.

***MINOR SPOILERS***

Drag me to hell is one of the best horror/ thriller movies of the decade, as well as one of the best PG-13 thrillers ever made. Without exaggerating I jumped off my seat at least 15 times during this film. It is not just the fact that demons and ghosts are in the movie, but it is all about how Sam Raimi directed it. He refrained from presenting an overwhelming amount of blood and gore (come think of it this film didn't even have any blood and gore in it) and that is the beauty of Sam Raimi's direction. Unlike his previous entries such as Evil Dead 1&2 (filled with Zombies and violent and bloody scenes), Drag me to hell relies much on loud bangs and eerie musical scores that can make anyone jump off their seat at any given time. Although I've never heard of Lorna Raver before watching this film, her disturbing and creepy character kept giving me nightmares for a couple of days after watching the film. The plot of the film is also short and to the point There were as many characters as needed to be and all the actors played their roles perfectly. And not to mention the explosive ending I didn't see coming. This is the perfect horror film and I LOVED IT. I can't recommend it enough.

This second one tries its best to outdo the first one but this is in no way as good as the first. Battle of the Smithsonian had too much childish humor and way too many characters with a wobbly character build up. In the second one Jedediah and Octavius were the only two characters I sympathized with (and only because they were in the first one). I'm not praising the first one here, but at least it had an original plot and momentous humor. Battle of the Smithosonian also relied too much on the performances of Stiller and Adams- as well as, although to a smaller extent, Azaria. Although it had its moments, Battle of the Smithsonian fails to improve on its predecessor.

5.1/10

I can't remember a single negative thing I noticed in this film while watching it, but once I was done watching it I felt like there was some kind of void in the film. I felt as though the film was missing something, maybe it was the cheap special effects or the repetitive narration and plot build up style. Either way this film was missing something that kept it from becoming a classic. However, I thoroughly enjoyed Jackman's performance as Wolverine as well as Liev Schreiber's as Sabretooth. This movie is not near to the depth or the intelligence of X2 or other superhero films but it manages to deliver mindless entertainment worth the price of the ticket.

Season seven has been quite mediocre. The jokes have been redundant and the cutaway gags have been too long. This episode displays more of the same but has more originality as far as plot and jokes were concerned. in the episode Stewie begins a using steroids in order to gain some muscle after a Joe's daughter kicked his butt. In the process Stewie develops a macho stature as well as an obnoxious behavior, picking on Brian and others around him. However, there was a sub-plot which took up almost as much time as the main plot. the subplot was about Chris dating a popular girl at his school and the whole thing was just not quite family guy material. it was just filled with dry dialogues and not-so-funny jokes. overall the part about Stewie and his steroids was quite funny and for this I say the episode was an improvement for the season.

420 wasn't really bad. Especially compared with other season seven episodes, this wasn't very bad at all.

After a couple of rather lame episodes, 420 revives the season as Brian goes out to legalize marijuana.

One striking feature of this episode is the musical, which hasn't been really used very well since the shipoopi episode.

Another feature of the episode that has improved since the last couple of episodes is the length of the flashbacks and the cutaway gags.

Dialogues are also quick and funny. Although still flawed, this episode is an improvement from the last ones

8.5/10

***MILD SPOILERS***

Oh what a surprise, Family Guy, known for poking fun at pop culture icons ridicules an ex football hero who is to this date much controversial. OJ is the victim this time, and FG takes a shot at the whole "Did he kill her?" controversy. In the episode Peter befriends OJ Simpson after playing golf with him and decides to bring him down to Quahog where he'd supposedly reshape his image. But that turns out as a rather failed attempt. Overall this episode was okay but not as good as it could have been. Weighing it with other episodes, this wasn't the best ever but still quite humorous.

7/10

This is what I call a family guy episode, articulate, speedy and in short a hell of funny. This episode, despite its much controversial topic, is witty at best and kept me laughing throughout. The episode was filled with fewer cut away jokes, which gave the actual plot line more time to develop and the cutaway gags that were included were irresistible. This episode differs from most other episodes of season seven for it had a biting social and pop culture satire and an original storyline. The mentally ill horse, the gay Peter and his homosexual partners were just hilarious. Keep up the good work Seth and crew, and all else involved in the making.

10/10

What are the odds of finding a movie adaptation that surpasses the book? Let's see… one in a hundred maybe. Was it Randall Wallace's Pearle Harbor or was it one of Stephen King's creepy books that was made into a movie and outdid the book? No. So rarely do we see a movie that exceeds the novel from which it was adapted.

Zora Neale Hurston's timeless novel about the quest to find one's voice and ultimate independence comes to the small screen as a TV movie under Oprah Winfrey's production. And awful might be one word to describe it. Or maybe shallow is a more refined and scholarly term. Either way you put it, Hurston is not done justice by this film. And Oprah's so called effort to romanticize the film fails as a futile attempt that does nothing but leave the movie with major plot holes and a crippled screenplay written by a rather unknown writer named Suzan Lori Parks. (Who?)

"Their Eyes Were Watching God" is a movie version of the 1937 novel written by Z. N. Hurston. The film, made nearly a century later in 2005, was directed by Darnell Martin, and the teleplay to the television written by Suzan Lori Parks. The movie, being a TV movie, did not receive a PG PG13 or R rating and instead got a well deserved tv-14 rating. According to the FCC and of course the viewer, the film had mild and frequent sexual references. Although co-produced by Oprah's production company, Harpo Films, the movie was distributed under the American Broadcasting Corporation or as we all know it, ABC. It runs a good 113 minutes and features some renowned and some not very popular actors. Among them plays Halle Berry as the free spirited Janie Starks and Michael Ealy as her romantic companion Tea Cake. Terrence Howard plays the cynic Amos Hicks and does it perfect.

"Their Eyes Were Watching God" resembles the novel in some ways but falls short to deliver the same type of dynamic narration and heartwarming characters that were provided by Hurston in the novel. The movie focuses little on Janie's background and shows the viewer very little what Nanny's (Janie's Grandma) motives were in making Janie marry an old man like Logan Killicks (played by Ruben Santiago-Hudson) and from Oprah's introduction of the movie, one can foreshadow that the film was going to be a spineless and cheesy love story. Not that there is anything wrong with a love story, but the film focuses more on the French kisses and prolonged sensual scenes between Tea Cake and Janie and less on Janie's quest to find her voice and what her motives are in going in and out of marriages. The film also lags behind the novel because of a rubbish teleplay that left out major parts of the plot, such as Janie's background and characters such as Mrs. Turner.

The writer of the film, perhaps intentionally, left out Janie's background story, maybe because she thought in a love story like this one, bringing in additional characters might ruin the film or maybe because they thought the film was all about the love between Janie and her husbands. Well the writer was wrong. According to the book, Janie, most of the time, if not always got into a relationship for all the wrong reasons. She enters a relationship because she thinks the men can provide for her and that it is one step closer to finding her voice, but the film does not go into detail as to why she enters the relationships and that she is always looking to be independent. Also, Logan Killicks did not get enough screen time. This impeded the film from exploring Killicks in more details. This also prevents the viewer to contrast Killicks and the other men in Janie's life.

As far as the acting goes, Halle Berry did a mediocre job. This is not her best work, and she wasn't successful in showing that there was something hidden inside of her waiting to explode, like the character did in the book. For example, the last few scenes Janie is seen content with her achievements and the relations she has gone in and out of. But as far as the movie as a whole is concerned, the movie might be appropriate for sensitive girls whose emotions can easily be stirred by these kinds of cheesy romantic movies and are willing to accept its shallowness and emptiness.

There's something wrong with the rating system of this website. I don't even think votes are properly worked out into an arithmetic and posted with accuracy. As the demographs reveal 39 people voted it 10 out of 10 and only 4 voted 1 and yet the episode's average rating was under 5.0 for the longest. Not that this is the best episode ever but the ratings were too low and not accurate. But that's besides the point, I just wanted to use this opportunity to address that issue. This episode, Ocean's Three and a Half was a mildly entertaining pop-culture filled episode. One defect I saw in this episode, as well as most other episodes in season seven , was the prolonged flashbacks and cutaway gags. Seth and crew are overdoing these things, to the point where viewers, even the most devoted fans, get tired of them. Especially the Christian Bale segment was way too long and unnecessary. The makers need to do something about that and save the show from losing all its fans and, worst of all, lose its air time, in short... cancellation.

This year's Academy Awards ceremony was way better than last year's. Hugh Jackman did a tremendous job hosting, I thoroughly enjoyed Beyonce's and A R Rahman's performances, and Hugh Jackman's tribute to the movies.

The Pineapple Express short was also hilarious. The atmosphere was just dazzling, the stars were beautiful and the results were, for the most part, as expected, (although I was indeed rooting for Mickey Rourke.) Everything about it was unforgettable.

Kudos to directors producers and to everyone else involved in the making of this amazing awards show!

IDK if somebody has already said it but I've always wanted to say that. Because, he truly does. Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson was a hell of a macho man in this film kicking some serious @$$ and looking cool while doing it. And who cares if the plot was "cheesy" as some critics described it. And who cares if it didn't set the bar for movies to come. All I care is that it entertained the hell out of me. The action was thrilling. The actors were fit for their roles. And it was just as witty as it was action-filled. Truly entertaining cinema. Way to go Peter Berg and all involved in the making of this simple yet exhilarating film.

In the third installment, Brett Ratner (Rush Hour) takes over the saga. And I actually found it somewhat entertaining but at the same time disappointing. I don't know if it was the multitude of villains that made me like it or the CGi filled action scenes, or maybe the fact that Logan's claws seem to have gotten longer. I don't know.

Alas, the film lags behind the other X-Men movies due to many flaws. One is that the X-men are united no more. (as they were in the previous two films) and worst of all we see Jean entering "the dark side." This just made the film tasteless. Two, not only were the sequences bizarre but Ratner and crew did not dedicate enough time to character and plot development, as opposed to action-filled and explosive scenes.

Was X-Men 3 entertaining? Sure. Was it filled with lots of action? Of course. Did it have multiples of villains and good guys? Most definitely. But was it made up of a concrete plot, a steady character build up and edge-of-your-seat moments? Not really. I wouldn't bet on that.

Once again we witness that sequels are worse than the original. It wasn't bad. It just wasn't as expected.

6.8/10

Frost/Nixon is one of the best film of the year, and certainly a strong contender for best picture. Langella's marvelous performance as the bedazzled Richard Nixon and Michael Sheen's terrific portrayal of the rigorous David Frost combined with Ron Howard's magnificent direction make the movie a memorable one. Not only that but the supporting cast- including Sam Rockwell, Kevin Bacon, Matthew MacFayden and Olvier Platt- was also phenomenal. Frost/Nixon is an epic, an epic that involves not guns and human sacrifices but words and tense emotions. It's also a historically significant film, for all who crave to know what really happened and whether or not Nixon didn't "obstruct any laws." In short Frost/Nixon is an amazing film filled with sharp dialogues, amazing performances and tense and provocative sentiments as well as an explosive yet subtle ending.

10/10 Go see it!

DiCaprio + Spielberg = Sheer brilliance.

Catch Me If You Can is another awesome flick by the legendary Steven Spielberg. And DiCaprio's top notch performance as the brilliant con master combined with Tom Hanks' amazing performance as the committed FBI agent illuminated the already shiny film. The film from beginning to end is filled with suspense and tense chase scenes. And the fact that it was set in the sixties gave it an archaic and classical touch. I admire and respect DiCaprio even more now. His tremendous acting skills are advancing with each passing film and we expect to see more from him.

Enough said, because those are the four things this futuristic movie relied upon. Action-filled scenes, Direction, visuals and LaBeouf. Michael Bay, after a box office success with Bad boys 2, makes a comeback with Transformers, a film based on the popular animated series. And let me just say I got what I was looking for, a simple film filled with a bad guy loses good guy wins scenario, and a film filled with heavy special effects. Michael bay directed the film to his best. And one constituent that rose above the rest was LaBeouf's tremendous performance. The Even Stevens star gives a top-notch performance filled with huge laughter, energy and the usual a teenage boy has a crush on a girl story. But above all lies the consistent and exhilarating action in the film along with the personification of the alien robots and the stunning visuals, that had me longing for more.

This film left me with a mix of feelings from drowsy to confused, from thrill to numbness. The film has an outlandish plot, and a wacky series of occurrences with no backbone. However the lazy and plagiarist plot is revived by solid performances from Shiw LaBeouf and Michelle Monaghan, as the main protagonists of the film. Plus, as unrealistic as Eagle Eye might have been, it delivers its fair share of edge-of-you-seat moments. The car chases, the shoot outs and all the other tension filled scenes make the movie seem so cool, although it's just another suspense film that hugely relied on those that came before it. However, the one thing that made me love Eagle Eye is Shia LaBeouf's solid performance. He was just phenomenal. He was witty at times, and aggressive throughout the film and possessed an awesome enthusiasm and consistence. Other than that Eagle Eye remains to be another mediocre attempt at the suspense genre.

In the second installment of Ace, overtaken by Steve Oedekerk, Ventura travels to Africa with the duty of finding a sacred bat that belongs to an African tribe and is a very sacred symbol.

As seen in the first one, Jim Carrey dominates the rest of the cast with his witty and outrageous performance as the crazed pet detective. The plot of this film, though outlandish and a bit bizarre, somewhat maintains the humor seen in the first installment.

This is a film, though not better, that is as good as the previous one. Two thumbs up for Jim Carrey

8/10

Let me just start off by saying that my stomach was hurting constantly throughout the whole thing. Ace Ventura: Pet Detective is just outrageously hilarious and Jim Carrey's tremendous performance as the so called "goofy" detective is just beyond words can describe. His constant sarcasm combined with his smart & quick wit and the outrageous shenanigans he's always putting himself in make the movie irresistibly amusing. Though the supporting cast didn't really hit their mark at delivering solid performances, Jim Carrey's undoubtedly amazing performance belittles the flaws and makes the film seem the best ever. Years have past and Ace Ventura remains to be one of the funniest films ever.

9.5/10

Okay here we go. QS delivers strong performances from all the actors and actresses, starting from Daniel Craig and Judi Dench all the way to Olga Kurylenko. It also features a breathtaking series of frequent action scenes, combined with wonderful special effects. In addition it displays a wide range of settings. While these positives might sway away those reading this, the negatives will definitely make them think twice. Okay here go the negatives.QS lags behind other Bond films including Casino Royale and those before it because of its bizarre plot, its unstable character build up, and its multitude of villains, who, I felt, did not get enough screen time. The James Bond suave, though debatable, is still there. The action in this one is still as riveting as in its predecessors, the Bond is still awesome. However QS is not as good as the other Bond films, yet Marc Forster should be proud of sustaining the delight in a saga that began before he was born...