Inverted heads, broken wrists, floating nuns? "Do you know what you are, darling ... you're a burning bush, you're a miracle!" Goldie, Meryl and Bruce, who clearly excel in comedy, give subtle and hilarious performances. Who'd've thought spray paint was so useful? Honestly it needs a couple of viewings to get the copious subtleties. Bruce Willis, who is normally so masculine plays a very feminine henpecked surgeon turned undertaker. The script is witty, of course the acting hammy in a good way and the music fabulous. Enjoy it.
Not sure why I watched this through as really was excrutiating. The music had a motiv that repeated over and over. Bodies bitten in half with poor quality gore sewn on. The shark was slow and unconvincing. Don't waste your time.
Jane Fonda, what a body (though I'm no expert) gets sent on a mission to end proposed tyranny by the galactic president. Considering when it was made, the ScFi effects are not bad really, far too much use of bear fur for my liking as wallpaper and alien custumes, but meh. I loved this film, apart from the hideous biting dolls, most of it made smile.
"Why on earth we don't make love unless out psychocardiograms are in harmony". Hands held out for "the act". Very interesting. Barbarella strips off, the alien strips off to reveal an equally hairy chest to his fur costume; lots of weird imagery depicting a certain male body part deflating!
I think, to truly enjoy this film, one must be high as a kite.
Look, I found this on Tubi, which is liberally peppered with dreadful acting. The women were all quite decent actors if unknown. The story is nothing new, hunted by bogans (hillbillies), one of whom seems indestructible. Girls get revenge, the survivors crawl out onto a road (reminded me of The Descent). Give it a go, seen far worse and far better.
I was a little bit amazed that the woman, the psycho, the scorned woman wasn't murdered before halfway through the movie. She is completely horrible it sums up America and greed really nicely. Bad acting (unless you call screaming acting), bad hair (shows its age). Don't waste your time.
Seriously I am trying to find one thing about his movie that actually made me feel OK about watching it. The acting was dreadful the filming was very poor quality the script was amateurish in the extreme it wasn't in the slightest bit scary and nothing happened for 45 minutes. Go take up knitting or crochet or barndancing or learn to drive a combine harvester but do not watch this film.
First off, many comments point to the acting and SFX being amateur. I had no issue at all with the cast, the two female (uni room share) leads were both fine. Noah I really liked, played with innocence that totally suited the role. I wasn't so fussed on the Assistant Tutor and I loved the little sister. The creature was freaky, made me go goosebumpy. I, personally, would have kept it more hidden, maybe just ruby red shining eyes in the darkness.
The story wss cool, hardly original, but had history and a little development. I might have made more of the child in the opening scene ... he loom scared but he could have been given a more prominent role.
I don't remember any music, so it was probably missing or uninteresting.
It reminded me of Land of the Giants. Not enough of story development to carry for more than an episode of The Twilight Zone and far less effective in the FX department. That said, it was pretty amusing, I wished he have picked one of his dolls up and bitten it in half, or fedvit to the cats, rat, dog ... who play nice cameo roles.
Two couples go on an adventure. By chance they spy a sign 'Antiques', against the better judgement of of the men they pull of the road and investigate. Karen discovers a portal to the past, yo the bewilderment of her husband, things go from slightly weird to quite unsettling. Definately worth watching.
Not sure why this got such high ratings. It's not terrible but also not fsntastic. John Ritter's acting is uninspired bordering formulaic. Grandpa just reminds of Hillbilly too much. Consuela (sp) the maid is excrutiating, as bad as Alice in Brady Bunch. The dialogue is neither good nor bad
This film has absolutely no redeeming features. It is so badly acted that it's excruciating, the camera work is amateurish, the music I don't remember it. So I give it 1 star, giving zero wasn't possible.
Flimsy, unconvincing, dreadful dialogue, waste of time
What a total waste of time. The 'sisters' were way too girly to be deranged psychos. The story is lame, camera work tedious and extremely unimaginative, please, play chess, learn French, stick pins in a voodoo doll of your high school bully but DO NOT WASTE YOUR PRECIOUS LIFE on this s_h_i_t.
Dreadful waste of over an hour of one's life, don't bother
This is tawdry humour at its American worst. Every situation deemed "funny" is so completely contrived as to be tedious, boring and decidedly NOT funny. The woman who plays the maid, totally unforgettable, spends most of her time screaming with a really grating voice. The so-called detectives are just stupid, I guess that was directed that way for comic timing. Well, sorry, just fell short really profoundly. Add to that stupid voice from the radio ... just go peel potatoes, or boil eggs. You'll end-up having done something worthwhile.
My BIG gripe is the American insistence in this film (just one example) on explaining puns, endless. No, it wasn't funny, and explaining the puns simply is just annoying. Total s_h_i_t, don't waste your time.
I do not like movies were musicians are played by actors. They rarely get taught correctly, classix case when the protagonist is conducting the singers and he gesticulates pitch change by moving his hands up (higher) and (down) lower in pitch. Except this is just random. Shame on the director for not bothering to undertake research. The piano playing, very little correlation to the sounds coming from the instrument. Too slow moving hence tedious and boring.
I read a lot of criticism about the Seth character, no I never saw him before, and didn't see the Hobbit. I thought his performance as a poor, love starved, nobody was pretty decent. Nothing new in the concept, kidnap someone, and put them im a cage. Not a particulary gory film but there were a couple of scenes where I looked away. The character Holly ended up being just as much the psychopathic manipulator as her captor. Nice film, small cast, some lines seemed to be delivered in a lacklustre way, but over all I enjoyed it. Better than I was expecting. Nice twist at the end, too.
The film is about revenge, almost more brutal in some ways than the original crimes. It has a dark focus on bullying the weak, not just the woman but the friend Mathew who is obviously mentally deficient. There are no special effects, no big expensive orchestral scores, in fact no music to speak of. The dialogue is gritty and natural, the setting disturbinly bucolic, this conflicts with the nast mysogynistic focus. Jennifer's character is hard to understand, no call to the police, just revenge plotted over a few days, a quick prayer in the local church, then ...
I was worried it would be a bad prequel to a brilliant classic. Many have said it's a wrong angle they took. I don't agree, it's what it is and that's ok with me. I find the storyline a bit strange simply because it seems to just wander endlessly.
I do not like "mother", had I been Norman, I'd have killed her off in the first season. I also don't like the character Norman, the only positive is he looks remarkably like the Norman Bates in the classic original Psycho.
After a while, it just turned into another t.v. soap opera. There are, for me, some outstanding characters, Dylan and the Sheriff in particular are both wonderful. Emma is outstanding, as well, but the breathing apparatus is just annoying (yeah, it might have seemed like a good idea at story board time ...).
Look - there is far worse on the tube, it's not all that bad, just over winded.
Successful films RARELY turn into successful series. Even Alien, which is brilliant, only had two of the four worth watching (Alien and Aliens).
The 'Poltergeist' trilogy really takes the prize for truly awful becoming truly-truly awful and insanely stupid. I can only hope nothing stays with me from THIS abysmal chapter in the series. Not to speak ill of the dead, but Heather O'Rourke truly showed her (lack of) acting here. Granted, this is the first time in the series she's been expected to really perform (beyond 'They're here' and 'They're back'...oh, and a LOT of shrieking), and she was only 12 at the time, but who would build their movie around a performance that would embarrass a drag queen?
And that awful, hideous Zelda Rubenstein: 4'3 of bad voice, lard and acting. She really should have stuck with her career as a lab assistant. She might've actually made a difference to the world.
Now I know special effects have come a long way since this shocker. But seriously, it all looked like goopey snot. The costumes, well, no complaints as they were part of that awful era of large, hoop earrings, gaudy coloured vests and BIG hair.
OK, so I'm not going to put up a synopsis as I don't see the point, plenty of others have. I have MAJOR issues with some aspects of this production.
1) Music 1.1 the title music with modern drum kit, why? 1.2 the violin used is wrong as is the bow, the bow picture in this did not evolve to the shape shown for another 300 years 1.3 Henry VIII was a very keen musician, yet no mention here
2) Historical facts, most of them are completely wrong, or twisted or misrepresented, even outright wrong. Please, read your history books if you don't believe me.
3) Actors: like most of them except the goose who plays Henry VIII: not a ginger, not of large stature, no huge manhood, why?
Apart from these minor issues, love it, very much. Especially the costumes, thought I'm no expert but those "in the know" say they are not quite accurate.
This is just the most boring load of drivel I've seen in ages. Nicholas Cage simply can't act, all he does is posture and rant like some baboon who is p.i.s.s.e.d...o.f.f about his turf being violated. To add insult to injury, the scenes where he is crying over the dead body of his daughter were actually really excruciating, and I don't mean because of the anguish here, simply because of Cage's bad acting. He has about as much talent for characterization as a cardboard box. Give me Meryl Streep, Kathy Bates style of actors any day. To add insult to injury, just in case you didn't get the subtlety of this waste of time, the music is unoriginal, predictable and leads you along emotionally ever step of the way. That's probably a good thing, because if there were no music score this film would just seem pointless. The acting certainly doesn't carry it along. Take, for example, Bridges of Madison County (different genre I know): very little music and brilliant characterizations from Streep and Eastwood. Do NOT waste you time on this one, just pure nonsense.
First off, I am a big fan of Stephen King's books and, apart from The Shining, I don't much care for the movie versions (obviously for reasons of space they leave way too much out). This is a movie version of a King book, though one I've not read. So we find Mike Enslin, a spectacularly unsuccessful author (relegated to paperback book bins, as one of this film's characters refers) undertaking research for a book about hauntings. He is a sceptic and has no belief in god, ghosts or any paranormal bulldust. He hears about this hotel in Manhattan and decides to book a night in the infamous room 1408. He attempts to book 'the room' and is told it's not available, a lawyer tells him he can due to some legal technicality which I didn't get. Anyways, he ends up in 1408 and his night of terror begins. Although the "night in a haunted house" scenario has been done to death, Mikæl Håfström for the most part effectively plays his audience with an eerie, often jarring, soundtrack, clever cutting, and a minimum of effects. "1408" is a ghost story, not a horror or slasher flick. It is much more about the 'unseen' terror – and this he achieves with panache. John Cusack is brilliant as the beleaguered "soon-to-be-new-ghost" character AND I loved Samuel L. Jackson. He gives a chilling performance as a manager whose intent is ignored. I also kind of got the feeling his character was one of the many ghosts. The music was unmemorable and the stupid radio kept playing "We've Only Just Begun" a song I loath. The graphics/GCI were very fine, indeed. I loved the various people leaping from the window!
Our protagonist's life does not begin well, as a baby his parents fight and end up suiciding jointly over the balcony of their apartment. He is then brought up by an equally obnoxious aunt/uncle, so once he's an adult he moves to Paris. He works in an accountant's office for a moronic boss BUT he spies a gorgeous lady teaching ballet in the studio across the road from his office. He 'steals' her wallet and then phones her to return it (a muse to try and get a date) ... it all goes terribly wrong.
Not a big fan of comedy, I must say but this was absolutely brilliant. All set against the backdrop of Paris versus the Bretons in a soccer (football) final. There are some outrageously odd sight- gags, including many that are set in the background. Really worth backtracking and watching this for a second time when you're finished. Brilliant, love it, hilarious.
"Monsieur Lazhar" is a substitute teacher who approaches a school principal to get work. He fails to tell her that he is a 'political asylum' seeker, not a permanent resident, to get work. Of course, he does get the job. This, by the end of the film, made me wonder why he didn't undergo a background check ...
I loved this film, M. Lazhar (played incredibly well by Mohamed Fellag) is a teacher I wish I had but never did. He's charming, sensitive and really gets his student's minds back to learning (after their teacher hangs herself in the classroom). As an Algerian immigrant, he has ended up in Canada after his family were murdered by political extremists. His role, from what I could understand is to get his children to talk about death. This seems to be a taboo subject and the politically correct Canadian education system has troubles with this.
However, for me the best characters in this film were the students, what a great bunch of young actors, amazing: Sophie Nelisse and Emilien Neron were amazing.