john-p-hanssen-i3v6

First of all, I really need to ask, WHAT ON EARTH WAS SO BAD ABOUT THIS MOVIE?!?!? This was quite simply the Moulin Rouge! of the 80's. The acting may have been a little cheezy, but it wasn't all that great in Moulin Rouge! either. People need to understand that this is a MUSICAL and musicals aren't necessarily known for their great acting performances. They are noted for their brilliant choreography, songs, and stage settings, which I felt both "Moulin Rouge!" and "Xanadu" contained. Moreover, the story in "Xanadu" wasn't all that incoherent and reminded me a lot of "Field of Dreams" when Kevin Costner is inspired by a voice from an invisible muse to build a baseball field. So, while some of the criticism of this film is justified, I feel much of it is not and it took way more of a beating than it should have. One has to remember that there have been many films made which were raked over the coals by critics, yet the films became enjoyed by many later on.

Normally I laugh uproariously when a movie of this fashion comes out. I normally am not thrilled by dodgy cinematography, flubbed lines, and the like. However, this film, despite its flaws, was great!! I really don't know how I can explain it. There were a number of loose ends, with parts of the movie not making sense, yet with all of this, it still seemed to work! The little girl, Natasha Ryan, really carried the movie and another aspect I liked was the "Close Encounters" type of feel to the movie. Also, the aspect I enjoyed the most was when the family is re-united and they are upon the hill looking upon the fabulous City of Light at the end. There was such a spiritual feel to this scene. Very well done. There were flaws in this film, yet the special effects and the interesting plot seemed to give it a redeeming quality. 7/10 stars.

This is THE best out of the entire Planet of the Apes series (although the first one was not too far behind this one) and had a very powerful message about the rediculous and often tragic result of religion claiming to be peaceful and even preach "love your brother" yet give no second thought to slaughtering their fellow man, even MEMBERS OF THEIR OWN FAITH!!, on the battlefield!! (This is one of the reasons why I belong to the faith I do today, the Christian Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, because they aren't involved in warfare.) People have bemoaned this movie because of the flaws that existed. Okay, there were a few flaws, however they seemed to be nicely glossed over with a powerful theme-- a message that is even more pertenant today than it was thirty years ago when this movie came out.

This film was far better than "Threads" (of course, any movie would be better than that one) and yet not quite as good and as powerful as "The Day After". I did think that the acting was superior, however, especially on the part of Jane Alexander (Who ever did this, God Damn You!!). When you make a movie involving something as tragic as nuclear war, you need it all--good acting, good special effects, and convincing story lines. "The Day After" is the only nuke film I've seen that contains all that is needed. "Threads" did not contain any good acting or special effects or anything else for that matter. "Testament" scored brilliantly with plot and acting, but failed in producing convincing special effects, especially in the arena of radiation sickness (it would have been far worse than what was depicted in "Testament". All and all not a bad film, though.

This has to be one of the most sickest and depressing movies I've ever seen.

It even made "The Day After", movie about the horrors of nuclear war, seem like an upbeat movie in comparison. The majority of people out there don't realize what this kind of tripe is really inspired by. It is inspired by women's childhood sexual molestation issues. That is why women are so fascinated by vampires, and let me tell you, Anne Rice had an extremely rough childhood in this arena. So it really sickens me when people view this as just harmless entertainment without looking at the REAL issues behind movies such as this. (A book to read is "Women Who Love To Much" by Robin Norwood. It goes into topics such as this.)

I saw Jem for the first time on video last night and could not believe all the positive messages it contained. Kids need more of this now more than ever. Also, I really enjoyed the artistic animation it contained. Favorite episode was when Jem and her friend Dance sacrificed a major award to help lost abused runaways. It was nice to see such morality existing such artistic, creative, and beautiful 80's Bohemian women at the same time. This is a show that is good for the whole family. Hope that it comes back to be viewed for today's kids. Recommended for the entire family. Also, recommended to teach kids values they need for today unlike all the "South Park" or "Beavis and Butthead" trash that's out there today. Go ahead and see it for yourself!! (I'm such a kid at heart!!)

First of all, I would like to say that I could not believe how many positive reviews this movie actually got. "Threads" has to be one of the worst acted, poorly filmed movies ever made. The cinemtography was so bad that it looked like it was made in the early 70's on an extremely low budget. Even the scenes that were supposed to be gory looked so pathetically fake due to the poor filming. In "The Day After", however, you truly saw scenes that that will be etched in your mind forever--people X-rayed, cities devasted, people's lives shattered forever. Threads offered none of this to the full extent that "The Day After" did. So comments like "disease of the week" film or "Ooh, I hope WW3 doesn't ruin my weekend Mom" really apply to "Threads" and not to TDA. If "Threads" had been directed by the Australian directors Gearge Miller or Peter Weir, it probably would have been even better than TDA. Even though the after effects were toned down in TDA, it still was far more realistic than "Threads". If you want to see a more realistic version of nuclear war, see "The Day After". See "Threads" if you want a film watered down by pitiful cinematography and acting.