This episode blew me away. The ONLY reason why I give it a 9 and not a 10 is because (even though I can't think of the name of the film) a great deal of Mulder's imaginings were borrowed from a film about Christ being shown what the world would be like if he were to live a "normal" life and not die for our sins. Therefore, I say that it's not as original as it could have been, but it is still amazing! I absolutely LOVE the scene in which Cancer Man opens up the curtains in Mulder's bedroom where he lies on his deathbed to see that the world is being destroyed, that it is burning up.
The final scene of the episode is totally and completely epic as well, a scene in which we see Mulder and Scully confess their need for each other. It is quite clear throughout this series that although it may not necessarily be romantic, there is an incredibly deep love between these two characters, probably more so than I can say for any two characters in any television series. Anyway, this episode is epic; I cannot stress it enough! It is by far one of my favorites of the series, especially since the question of Mulder's fate regarding his exposure to the "black-ink" virus is FINALLY answered.
James Patterson's bestselling novel 1st to Die is brilliantly displayed on the screen with Russell Mulcahy's made for TV film. As an avid James Patterson fan, I was unexpectedly very much impressed by this film, especially bearing in mind that it is a TV film.
Patterson's pages fly by in a lengthy two and a half hours, and the length is a feat that I greatly admire, because it leaves less room for mistakes. The longer the film, the closer it can be kept to the text, and, with a few meager exceptions, this film is very close to James Patterson's novel.
Inspector Lindsay Boxer (Tracy Pollan) finds herself in the middle of a grisly murder. Two newlyweds are found brutally murdered in their hotel room with both of their wedding rings missing. However, as Lindsay predicts beforehand, the killer is at large, and he's not done killing. As more newlyweds are found murdered, Lindsay's adrenaline shoots sky high, and she finds herself seeking assistance from her friends, medical examiner Claire Washburn (Pam Grier), D.A. Jill Barnhart (Megan Gallagher), and her newly obtained companion, reporter Cindy Thomas (Carly Pope). Together, they form The Womens Murder Club with the intent of examining evidence in a different way in order to solve cases.
As the case starts revealing more evidence, Lindsay and her partner, Chris Ralleigh (Gil Bellows), find that their list of suspects is narrowed down to only one, but is he really their killer? Is there more evidence than meets the eye? Unfortunately, Lindsay is not only struggling to hunt down a madman, she is also fighting for her life. After being diagnosed with a very severe and potentially fatal blood disease, she fears that in near time, her closest friends will no longer have her in their lives, as her condition, even with treatment, seems to worsen. But will she be the first to die? With the exception of the ending of the story being slightly different, this film sticks pretty close to Patterson's novel. I was also surprised by how graphic the film is, again considering that it was made for television. Don't make the unwise decision to turn this film down just because of a negative review. If you enjoyed Patterson's novel, then you will enjoy this film.
Also recommended to you is Womens Murder Club, coming to ABC on Friday October 12. The series will revive Inspector Lindsay Boxer and the other members of the Womens Murder Club in a television series based on Patterson's book series.
George Clooney sets the stage in a very professional manner with the film Good Night, and Good Luck. The film is based on actual events that took place during the Cold War.
The movie takes place in 1953, when the television is still a new establishment. David Strathairn plays the role of Edward R. Murrow, a broadcast journalist whose program used to be featured on the radio but is now on television. Always ending his stories with his quote "Good Night, and Good Luck," he finds himself in a conflict with Joseph McCarthy, the junior senator of Wisconsin.
As communism was a major threat to citizens of America at the time, being accused of practicing it was a major enormity. When Joseph McCarthy accuses Edward Murrow of being a communist, Murrow decides to editorialize his news program and deal with the issue on television, retaliating as he grows weary of the senator's methods. This stirs a considerable amount of controversy, but Murrow still doesn't capitulate. He continues to form reprisal by stating his ill opinion of McCarthy on the television for the citizens of America to hear.
This film helps open eyes to some common issues that were dealt with during that time period, something that is motivating to those who see it. It does not only apply to the 1950's either. The issue dealt with in this film are still highly relative today.
Good Night, and Good Luck is presented in black and white quality which helps capture the cinematic era for its viewers. It is, undoubtedly, an exceptionable work of historical fiction, and it can currently be purchased or rented on Warner Brothers DVD.
Lindsay Lohan is an extremely attractive young woman who is often under-appreciated by many. Even though this movie (compared to The Parent Trap, Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen, Get a Clue, and Freaky Friday) is intended for a more mature audience, it is much better than any other Lindsay Lohan film that I've seen.
Lindsay Lohan plays Cady Heron, a teenager who has never been to actual school before. She has always been home-schooled in Africa. Now she must face the unfortunate realities of high school, which include cliques and bullying. However, she also makes a couple of friends including the artistic goth-punk Janis and the homosexual Damian. They do their best to help her survive, but the seducing power of "The Plastics" (a.k.a. The "Mean Girls") overpower Janis and Damian's plan to get the 4-1-1 on Regina, the meanest and snobbiest "Plastic" of them all, because as Cady begins to hang with "The Plastics," she begins to become more and more like them everyday.
This movie has the best plot, the best band of characters, and the best setting out of all three of Lohan's three most major movies (Freaky Friday and Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen as the other two). This movie expresses Lindsay at her best. I recommend it if you enjoy this genre of films and you are fond of Lindsay Lohan.
The Dukes of Hazzard... a classic. (:-0 Oh, whoops. I forgot to mention that that is what Hollywood is all about now, which is ruining classics.
The Dukes of Hazzard is based on a TV series which premiered in 1979 with the same name. I'm not very familiar with the TV series, as I've only seen a couple of episodes, but I do know that it was nothing like this ridiculously horrible movie which I knew had no potential anyway.
Bo Duke (Sean William Scott) and Luke Duke (Johnny Knoxville) are more than just best friends. They're cousins, and they're even closer than brothers. They have been best friends since they can remember, and even though they often argue about stupid unnecessary things such as girls and sex, they're still best friends, and they will be until the end, which in this movie's case, is hopefully as soon as this movie goes out of theaters.
Bo and Luke have an extremely attractive cousin named Daisy Duke (Jessica Simpson), and they're always willing to stand up for her when other guys attempt to milk her for what she's worth. They believe that you are never to shame the Duke's name, and unfortunately, they often get into violent quarrels because of it. If it wasn't for Daisy and their beloved Uncle Jesse (Willie Nelson), they'd probably be behind bars for life.
When the evil and unfeeling Boss Hogg (Burt Reynolds) decides to make a coal mine out of Bo and Luke's farm, they must try to stop him, and that is pretty much what this entire 105 minute movie is about. With the help of two attractive girls that they used to be closely associated with, Daisy, and Uncle Jesse, they will have to perform stunts that won't exactly please the police.
The primary complaint that I have about this movie is that it starred Jessica Simpson as Daisy. I mean, come on, I guess it is a small world after all. Out of all the young and beautiful women out there, was it necessary to cast Jessica Simpson? She simply cannot act, and she really needs to just stick to her singing career. She bombed this movie.
Allow me to get to my point. The reason that this movie was so successful was because it was aimed at teen audiences, which is probably why Jessica Simpson was casted, and most people wanted to see her act (sorry about the disappointment). Another reason is that this is obviously a remake of a classic TV series, as I've already stated, and that's another reason why it was so successful. It held too much temporary capability because of what it was.
There are definitely other things that I think sucked about this movie, but I won't take the time to go through the extremely long list of disappointments. It isn't worth it, because I've already made my strongest points evident, and in my opinion, that's all that needs to be stated about this movie.
I don't find it just that this show didn't last very long. It was only on for a few weeks, and this was a great show. Dylan Baker as the father of the family was an excellent choice of casting and so was David Henrie as Petey, who was hilariously mischievous.
The Pitts is about a dysfunctional family who can't be like other families. This isn't because they choose not to, but because of their outrageously bad luck. Everything they attempt to do normally ends in disaster and grave misfortune. This isn't like other shows on Fox that portray an unfortunate family in a realistic and usual way. This family's bad luck is unnatural and non-realistic. As an example, in one episode, the parents turn into werewolves. Man, this show was a classic!
My favorite episode aired was the one where Faith got a new car which could think for itself and even talk. The end of the episode was a smile evoking conclusion where the family went to Vegas, along with the strange car, of course.
Whatever happened to this show? Why does Fox have to be so ridiculously unreasonable and keep dumb shows of bore fest such as King of the Hill and The Simpsons for years but immediately take good shows such as this off the air? It's unjust, and I wish so badly that they would bring this back.
It is January 9th of 2000, more than five years ago, and Fox viewers are waiting until 8:30 to see what Fox's new show Malcolm In The Middle is all about. Fox has referred to it as being a live version of The Simpsons, but would that really be true? Would fans come to admire Malcolm like they do The Simpsons? Well, that's why it was crucial to watch it, to see if it was going to be good.
My own personal judgment would tell you that no, even to this day, Malcolm In The Middle has not become as popular as The Simpsons, but it is still an excellent comedy. It has lasted for more than five years now, and hopefully, it doesn't plan on leaving anytime soon, even though I know that if it's losing a drastic amount of viewers, it won't have a choice.
Malcolm (Frankie Muniz) is your typical kid. He has a family, he goes to school, and he even has an older brother that he looks up to. However, did I forget to mention that his family is dysfunctional, he once went to a special gifted class for a few years which only caused him to become a laughing stock, and the brother that he looks up to has a criminal record and once went to military school for a long time? Typical? Well, maybe that was a bit of a deception on my part.
Malcolm has three brothers (four including Jamie), which are Dewey (Erik Per Sullivan), Reese (Justin Berfield), and Francis (Chris Masterson). They can almost never get along, except for when they all agree on a prank or a stupid activity to do such as dropping a cart load of merchandise that belonged to their parents off the roof of their house. Francis hasn't lived home for years, as he first went to military school, then to Alaska where he got married, and then to a ranch where he worked for a couple named Otto and Gretchen.
Malcolm's parents are anything but two of a kind. His mother, Lois (Jane Kaczmarek), is a controlling and aggressive parent who never allows the kids to get away with anything, except for when it's impossible for her to stop them. His father, Hal (Bryan Cranston), is an easy-going, active, and tolerative parent who has a tendency to give into the kids every now and then (which I think is because he knows that he once used to be just like them).
The family does "seem" to be unlucky, as a number of disastrous and god-awful things have happened to them, such as their brand new refrigerator being blown up by a grenade. Of course, these disastrous events have nothing to do with the stupidity and restlessness of the boys. (:-)
This is an awesome show, and I hope Fox keeps it for another couple of years. I especially liked that the producer of the show (Linwood Boomer if I'm correct - please send me a private message if I'm wrong)has failed to reveal the last name of the family. It just makes it more simple and even mysterious. Please don't give up on it (continue to watch it), and maybe Fox will keep it for a while.
I am a big fan of The Punisher, but allow me to assure you that it wasn't this movie that promoted that. The new movie is by far much better, because this one is too centralized on Frank Castle being a vigilante assassin and not on him being a man. This one fails to actually show you what happened to his family, which I was very disappointed with. This movie could have been so much better.
I saw the new movie starring Tom Jane first, and then when I found out that there was an old 1989 film as well, I immediately decided that I wanted to see it too. I'm glad I did, because I got to see a different version of the film and most importantly, the comic book, but I just wish that this movie would have been better than it was.
I'm not saying that I hate this movie, because I'm far from that, but I most certainly don't love it either. There isn't enough of a storyline, as it is too action-packed. Also, Frank Castle (Dolph Lundgren) has no character, because all you are pretty much allowed to know about him is that he is an assassin, but you don't get to discover his personality or his human traits (which would point to a tortured and desperate man who does what he does as a way of driving his grief and his pain away).
The new movie causes you to feel sympathetic and it almost makes you cry when you see his family slaughtered. However, you don't even get to see that enactment happen in this one. Why? I don't know, but it killed the movie.
The only aspect of the movie that I did enjoy was the torture rack scene. Call me a sadist if you want, but those things are cool! I thought it was so cool when Castle got the thug on the torture rack, turned it on and left him cuffed to it. That scene was cool.
If there's a way that you can see this for free, then go for it. Otherwise, don't waste your money on it unless you really feel that it's something that you are desperate to see.
Awesome ending! (Don't worry, there are no spoilers!)
It really is sad when an eleven year old child is a better actor or actress in a film than anyone else in it, especially when Robert DeNiro is part of that very small list. However, Hide & Seek is one of those films. It is difficult to believe that an actress that young (probably ten when this movie was made) can act with such superiority, but unless the film was a documented reality movie (which don't worry, I don't really wonder whether it is or not), that is the case.
A young girl (Dakota Fanning) loses her mother to a suicide incident and is never the same again. She misses her mother with passion, and all of the happiness and life she once had is drained from her. She therefore creates an imaginary friend named Charlie, which is all well and good, up until Charlie starts committing heinous acts against her father (DeNiro).
The movie is very fast paced and it leads to a nearly fatal ending that you will never forget. The twist is not predictable, and you will never be able to pick up on it during the movie, unless you're very observant (there are some subtle hints throughout the movie).
The ending is what makes this movie. I love movies that kick me in the balls at the end, and I have seen a countless number of movies like that (The Others, Secret Window, and Vanilla Sky as some examples), and I have yet to be able to see it coming beforehand.
Raise Your Voice is a movie that was released that everyone knew way ahead of time Hilary Duff was going to be in, and as expected, it wasn't a major success. However, I still think that it is one of Duff's better performances, and I wish to explain why in the following film review.
Hilary Duff plays Terri Fletcher, a young woman who loses her brother in a car accident that she was in as well but survived. She loves to sing, and she has dreams of one day going to Los Angeles to go to a Summer music program. That is rather difficult, however, because her father's strict oppositions are always an obstacle. Before her brother, Paul, passes away in the accident, he sends a DVD containing clips of Terri performing and singing during regular routine activities to the music program. After the accident, she discovers that she was accepted into the program, but decides not to go due to her grief and guilt, which were both direct results of the accident.
That fails to get in the way, as encouragement from her mother and her aunt eventually changes her mind, and she as well as her mother and her aunt must lie to her father by saying that Terri is staying with her aunt when she's really at the music program.
The film is filled with charm and heartwarming moments, and it is also the most powerful film that Duff has ever starred in as far as emotion is concerned. It's a great film for the whole family (as it only bears a PG rating) and it never fails to cause you to shed some tears. Great movie!
An excellent retelling of the event that changed America!
This movie is an outstanding effort to take a tragic life-changing event and portray it in a realistic and heart-pounding manner. The film is also backed by a very supportive and entertaining storyline, which includes Ben Affleck, Josh Hartnett, and Kate Beckinsale as the cast for a love triangle that makes the movie so it doesn't bore the audience.
First of all, if all the entertainment business wanted to do with this movie was portray the attack on Pearl Harbor and only the attack on Pearl Harbor, the movie would only be approximately fifteen to twenty minutes in length, so there has to be some sort of storyline to back it up. Second of all, if all they wanted was an informative film that educates people about what happened sixty-four years ago on December 7, 1941, then they would be wasting their time with a pointless remake, as there already is a boring and disappointing movie out there like that entitled Tora! Tora! Tora! which was released in the year of 1971. No, they wanted something better. They wanted something that would attract a movie audience, not something that would attract a History Channel audience. In my opinion, this was accomplished successfully and wholesomely.
Ben Affleck plays Captain Rafe McCawley whose only dream is to be a pilot. When a young woman named Evelyn Johnson (Beckinsale) deliberately passes him when she tests his sight even though he wasn't deserving of the deed, he immediately falls in love with her and the two become an item with no time wasted. However, a tragic event leads to emotions composed of envy and revenge. When December 7th comes upon them, people find that they must fight for their lives and their only chance of survival is through strength and hope.
This is a wonderful and brilliant film that is supported by an outstanding cast, an excellent storyline, and a tragic ending that is guaranteed to leave you in tears.
The first comment that I would like to make about this movie is that if Johhny Depp wasn't in it, it would be worth almost nothing. Depp is what made this movie what it is. The plot is too ordinary and by far not unique enough. Even though I had never seen it before, I had felt like I saw it prior to the first time I actually did. However, Johnny Depp's character is what gives this movie its value, even though Christopher Walken is excellent in this movie too.
A man named Gene Watson (Depp) and his daughter face a great deal of peril when two criminals who want the governor dead use Watson as a scapegoat and drastically blackmail him in the process. They kidnap his daughter and threaten to kill her by 1:30 if he doesn't kill the governor by then. They give him a job to do, and he desperately attempts to escape it by seeking out help by other people, but one of the criminals (Walken) stalks him and appears to be everywhere he tries to go. The final showdown is excellent and magnificently performed.
This is a decent thriller, and I recommend it to anyone who likes Johhny Depp and expects a good action-packed and adventurous ride.
Ashley Judd... wow! She does it again! (No Spoilers!)
This truly is an awesome movie. There are some things that I was disappointed with. As an example, I was disappointed with the ending, even though I didn't see it coming. It could have been so much more. However, Ashley Judd's character as Jessica Sheppard makes up for that and the movie's plot and series of events perfectly tie into the overall quality of the movie.
I am a big fan of Ashley Judd as it is. I have seen her in Someone Like You, Twisted, Kiss The Girls, High Crimes, and Double Jeopardy, and I loved every single one of them. I don't agree with the reviews that state that Ashley Judd's reputation of starring in movies with this genre is too consistent and therefore boring. I like Ashley in Crime movies. It works for her.
This film starts as Jessica Sheppard (Judd) successfully arrests a convict who has a series of murders on his plate. Soon enough vicious and raging murders begin that contain evidence that points to Jessica from all directions. It is very convincing too. I won't spoil the ending, but I will say that up until you find out whether or not she is the killer, you will be convinced that she is, and that effect doesn't spoil the surprise either, because there are still reasons for you to doubt it.
This is an awesome thriller that deserves much better reviews than it has been receiving. Many people only enjoy looking for something to complain about, and they really need to live a little and find something to really enjoy.
So America enters a stage of consistently making film adaptations of comic books (Spider-Man, Hulk, Daredevil, Elektra, The Punisher, Catwoman, X-Men, Batman Begins...). The question is... where are our classic four heroes that everyone knows and loves? We already took care of Spider-Man and Hulk, but where is the Fantastic Four? Well, here they are. Weren't they easy to see coming?
I didn't expect a very good movie. I'm not a very big Fantastic Four fan anyway. I prefer darker comics such as Batman, The Punisher, Elektra, and so on. I was very disappointed when I first saw the trailer for the movie, because it didn't look very good at all. However, I still went to see it, because I'm a big fan of comic books, and other than Hellboy (which I'm not sure whether or not is an adaptation of a comic, but I heard from someone that it is) I have seen every Marvel & DC movie that has been released since Spider-Man (which obviously is the film that started this comic madness). I was actually rather impressed. It wasn't all that, but it was much better than I expected.
Doctor Doom's character was played with an awesome dark and sinister quality, which I believe was the highest point of the film. All four of our lost and confused heroes are played with excellence and brilliance, especially Johhny Storm/The Human Torch. He was very funny, and that helped brighten up some of the very few moments that got too slow-paced and a bit boring.
I also liked that the movie both possessed innocent and illuminated qualities such that Spider-Man did and also dark and murderous qualities similar to how The Punisher did (as Doctor Doom unreasonably murdered an approximate total of five civilians).
A good movie if all you're looking for is a good movie to watch while mouthing down a delicious bag of buttery and salty popcorn. If you're looking for excellence and near perfection, then it is not a recommendation. It still somewhat holds my original expectations of being a disappointing movie, but since it was much better than expected, I did like it.
A Godawful adaptation of the classic tragic romance story...
This was a horrible and disastrous version of Gaston Leroux's love story. There are now completely different characters, which means goodbye Erik Destler, goodbye Christine Daae, and goodbye Roaul de Chagny, and there is also a completely new storyline. Let me make the comparison.
Gaston Leroux's Version of the Story:
A hideously deformed "phantom" known as Erik Destler is born with facial deformity and distortion, which causes him to hide his face away in a mask. When he sets sights on the beautiful Christine Daae, a soprano at the Opera Populaire, he decides that he loves her and therefore teaches her to sing and gives her lessons daily. This is all well and good up until the point where Roaul de Chagny, a man who is also in love with Christine and was childhood sweethearts with her, comes into the picture. Then a love triangle forms and a war begins because of it.
This Version of the Story:
A man loses his wife to suicide after she receives a bad review, and as a result of his anger and frustration, he is burned in a chemical spill. The burn causes his face to appear horrifying and frightening, and he hides it away with a full face mask and returns as The Phantom of the Opera five years later to avenge his wife. He sets sights on a woman who possesses almost identical features of his wife and falls in love with her, but unfortunately, she already has a lover, which results in the final showdown.
This version of the story is distorted and untrue, which brings the value of the movie down by far. It is also incredibly boring and slow-paced, and that's a lot to say coming from an obsessed freak of the story.
An impressive adaptation of the classic Bram Stroker story of darkness and immortality...
I happen to be a fan of Gothic art, including clothing, music, and of course, film. I have seen Gerard Butler in the new adaptation of the Gaston Leroux novel, The Phantom of the Opera, and I thought that he was absolutely amazing and wonderful in that film, which wanted me to see this even more. I'm glad that I had the idea.
This was a very decent movie, considering that the whole idea of Dracula is ridiculous and stupid. Gerard Butler's performance is again excellent, and he made a perfect Dracula. I would have liked him to have talked more in the film, but then again, he didn't talk very much as the Phantom either. He pretty much only sang, with the exception of a small line here and there.
I do not recommend this movie to people who expect a horror movie, because that's not what you're going to get. This is not a frightening or horrific movie at all, and the gross-out effects aren't even really made to gross you out, only make the scene more intense and lively. Good job, Wes!
When I saw this movie, I had been told by many people that it was a horrible and pointless movie. They told me that it wasn't something that I should waste any time or money on seeing, because I would be utterly disappointed. However, I loved this movie! It was beyond my expectations by far. As for the people that say that the ending was predictable, I strongly disagree. I never suspected it the least bit.
A writer named Mort sees his wife sleeping with another man and secludes himself in a lake house where he lives like a slob and never cuts his hair. He is confronted by a man named John Shooter who claims that Mort stole his story. He also says that he wrote his story in the year of 1997, when Mort wrote his in 1994. Mort does the best he can to drive the man away, but a series of incidents and eventually murders keep happening every time he makes an attempt. The final showdown is awesome and a wicked twist, and I believe that you won't ever guess correctly before the end of the movie, but there is one thing that someone wrote in a review that I agree with. The twist is something that has been being used too often in suspense thrillers lately, and hopefully that doesn't give any clues.
I was very impressed with this movie, and I think that it was an awesome idea and overall, an awesome movie. I love Johnny Depp as an actor anyway, and this definitely is one of his best pieces of work.
Finally... a heart-breaking and emotional Star Wars movie
I walked into this movie expecting to be upset by Anakin being converted to the Dark Side, and I assumed that Padme was going to do die somehow, because she isn't in the other three movies. However, I walked out of the movie, not only upset for Anakin, but crying and grieving for the conclusion of the film, and I'm a guy!
This movie really is one of the best movies I have seen in years, and I've seen a countless amount. I expected this movie to be another action-packed sci-fi story just like the other five movies, but I was completely wrong. The storyline and the persuasion of the characters is amazing, as you actually do feel as if you're in the movie and you're in the character's position, which is something that none of the other five films even came close to accomplishing. You feel angry when Anakin is angry, you feel hurt when Padme discovers the truth about Anakin, and you feel betrayed when Obi-Wan finds out about the path that Anakin has chosen. That really is an overwhelming and dominating experience to be able to feel the way the characters feel.
This movie does have some intense and violent images, as it is the only film out of all six films that earned a PG-13 rating. I won't say a word about Anakin's disturbing and unfeeling "end" but it will leave you in tears and it will cause you to feel the pain and loss that Obi-Wan felt. Like I said, this movie was able to accomplish what no other movie, for me, has ever done, and it's magical.
I give this final and superior Star Wars film a perfect score of 10. Don't be different and be the only one on your block who hasn't seen it yet. When the DVD is released (which will probably be sometime during the holiday season) rent the exceptional chapter of this pop culture icon and know that I'm not lying about it.
I had been a regular viewer of the TV series on Disney Channel long before this movie was released, and I enjoyed the series very much. I expected the movie to be much like the TV series, but it was much more than that. As this technically was the series finale for the show, it was meant to be a memorable experience for Lizzie fans, and that is exactly what it was.
Casting Alex Borstein as the new High-School principal was a wise choice, and even though she really didn't carry her reputation of hilarious roles on Mad TV into this movie, she still played the part beautifully and unforgettably. As for Duff herself, I believe that she didn't stay true to the original McGuire personality, but her part was still done with excellence and admiration. As an example, I don't think that the Lizzie McGuire we all know would have handled everything the same way that she did in this movie. She never would have agreed to sneaking out and meeting an Italian guy that she didn't even know. I simply can't imagine her doing something like that on the show.
I liked the fact that the movie took place in Rome, and that helped add a great atmosphere to the movie, and that is what makes the movie so good. The lights at night, the fireworks, and the beautiful architecture are all elements that have to do with that, and that really is an awesome idea when a movie's setting actually outweighs the storyline.
As usual, Hilary Duff is hot and extremely attractive, and she always causes the male portion of her audience to wish that they could be there with her so they could see if she really is that hot in reality. A lot of people that I have talked to seem to strongly disagree with me, but I think that if you really think about in it depth, you'll soon come to the reality that Duff is a beautiful young woman with superior talents that she isn't properly recognized for.
The setting and the atmosphere of this movie impressed me dearly. If you haven't seen it yet, it is a strong recommendation of mine.
Not exactly worth the Oscar, but still a decent blockbuster...
This movie is a rare breed that doesn't come along very often. Its simplicity and meaningless plot are both factors of why it's a good movie. I absolutely detest films that have too deep of a plot and its difficult to keep up with it. A movie shouldn't be confusing, and it shouldn't leave its viewers in bewilderment. Napoleon Dynamite is an exception to that, and that's cool.
Napoleon is a confused and lonely high-school student who wishes that he could fit in (even though he doesn't try very hard with his afro, weird T-shirts, and random boots). He even finally asks a hot girl to the dance, and she reluctantly agrees. He does make a new friend named Pedro, and he is very similar to Napoleon as far as how pathetic and miserable he is.
I was very impressed with Haylie Duff's role as Summer. This is probably the first role that she has had that you actually get to see her acting ability, and results showed that she is talented and bright just like another Duff that everyone knows of. All of the casting is excellent in this film, and even though the plot is kind of stupid, it's still so stupid that it will make you laugh.
So in the name of a liger and the desire for tots, see this movie if you're in the mood for a good laugh. It features excellent casting, a fair (but pointless) storyline, and the ridiculous chronicles of an unfortunate being of miserable existence.
I believe that this film is a ridiculous adaptation of the classic Gaston Leroux tale of horror and love. It's a decent movie, but it is nothing like Gaston Leroux's. I like Leroux's version of the story the best, including Andrew Lloyd Webber's. Honestly, I'm surprised that they even gave credit to Leroux in the beginning of the film, as the movie technically isn't just called The Phantom of the Opera. It's called Gaston Leroux's The Phantom of the Opera. Allow me to explain why I was disappointed with this movie.
The first complaint I have with this movie is that it is far too gory and violent. Erik's story was never supposed to be like that. Erik was never supposed to be a serial killer. He was responsible for Joseph Buquet's death, and that was about it. He wasn't supposed to have killed Carlotta, especially not the way he did in this movie. In this version of the story, Erik is an insane madman who you have absolutely no compassion for, and I believe that the primary reason for that is because he wasn't born like that. Instead, he sealed a deal with Satan which involved him spreading his music worldwide for everyone to know, and in return, his face was eternally scarred. That was simply ridiculous.
If you want to see a satisfying and heartwarming version of this tale, see Andrew Lloyd Webber's film adaptation of his own stage musical with the same name. It was just released this past December 2004, and it stars Gerard Butler as the Phantom instead of Englund. That was a good movie!
Another conflict with the movie that I had was that there is still too much of Freddy in Englund. You can never stop thinking of Freddy whenever you see him in the film, and that's not a good thing. I don't know about you, but I don't want to think of Nightmare On Elm Street when I see The Phantom of the Opera. They're supposed to be two completely different movies, even though they're not, because this is a horror version of the story.
I do have to say that I like the Ripper affect as far as the Phantom is concerned. He stalks the streets of London and ruthlessly slaughters people. That was kind of cool, but other than that, this film is disappointing.
This movie is one of those movies that make you wonder why every movie isn't as good. However, if you are aren't the type that likes intense violence and content a bit more mature than PG, then I don't recommend this at all to you.
Tom Jane plays Frank Castle, a broken and confused F.B.I. agent who loses his family to a band of mobsters, who horrifically slaughter every last one of the members of his family, including his extended family. The pain and anger that he deals with causes him to become what he used to hunt down, a murderer who slaughters criminals day and night. His first target is the man responsible for his family's murder, a man named Howard Saint (terrifically played by John Travolta). The suspense and excitement experienced throughout the film eventually unfurls into a dramatic and astonishing conclusion that movie-goers will never forget.
I can't think of anything more to say about this movie, so I will say this: The value of this movie is beyond words. At least 10x better than the original 1989 film starring Dolph Lundgren as the executioner, this is a memorable and unforgettable film that is guaranteed to leave you in awe.
This is undoubtedly my favorite Batman movie out of all five films. Michelle Pfeiffer as Selina Kyle was an excellent choice, as was Danny Devito as The Penguin. Tim Burton's dark and twisted cinematic atmosphere is strongly expressed, and Michael Keaton's role as the Dark Knight is even better than the first film.
As usual, Tim Burton captivates his audience and causes people to want to enjoy his work repeatedly. I did feel sorry for The Penguin because of what his parents did to him when he was only an infant. It was cruel and inhumane. As for Michelle Pfeiffer's part as Catwoman, you still cheer her on even though she is an opposing force to Batman in the story. Her hidden identity and obvious beauty are both elements that help make that happen.
The lack of daylight and Gothic architecture are also factors that help make this movie as good as it is. It helps create a mood and a sense of life for the film. In other words, Burton does it again!
I believe that this movie can never be outdone by a future Batman movie, no matter how many times the attempt is made.
Whenever I see a film, I almost always walk into the cinemas with hopes that the movie is going to be good so I don't feel that I wasted money on it. I go to see almost every movie that is based on a comic book, because I happen to be a big fan of comic books. It's very rare that I am deeply disappointed after walking out of a movie, but this is an unfortunate exception.
To begin with, this movie is not called Bruce Wayne Begins. The focus on Batman is too low, as you hardly ever see Wayne in his costume. It isn't even until more than halfway through the movie that you first see him as Batman. I understand that this movie is supposed to inform you of Bruce Wayne's background, which is something that the other four movies failed to do, but the focus on him is just ridiculous. I was very bored throughout much of the movie, because of how slow-paced and centralized on Wayne it is.
The only performance that I was vehemently impressed with was Cillain Murphy's part as The Scarecrow. For the first time in a Batman movie, the villain actually is frightening. However, he had no reasonable motive for his actions, and neither did Bruce Wayne's teacher.
For all of you that are expecting to see this movie and walk out of it with a feeling of positive astonishment and satisfaction, don't waste your money or time on it, unless you're a Batman fan. Big fans of the Dark Knight may find this movie enjoyable, as you finally get to discover Batman's origin and Bruce Wayne's motivation. However, I am not a major fan of Batman, and I feel that this movie is too deeply involved with Bruce Wayne and not involved enough with Batman.
For the most part, I found this to be a very satisfying movie. People are way too hard on this movie, and they have improper insight about it. This film was good, and Halle Berry was a much better Catwoman than Michelle Pfeiffer. The only reason why many people liked Pfeiffer better is because she was a backed by a certain dark knight that couldn't have possibly been in the new movie.
To begin with, Catwoman is supposed to stand alone in this movie. That's why her name has been changed from Selina Kyle to Patience Phillips. That's also why her costume is completely different and why the story has nothing to do with the original Catwoman. Also, of course she isn't going to look like Michelle Pfeiffer's character. This isn't supposed to be Batman Returns 2! It's not even a spin off. Elektra is a spin off to Daredevil, but this was supposed to shine more light on a not so popular character in the DC Comics series.
Patience Phillips is not supposed to be the new version of Selina Kyle. Patience is a new Catwoman. As the movie explains, there have been many Catwomen, and Selina Kyle was one of the previous ones. That's another point that I feel necessary to express, because that is something that I've heard many people criticize the movie over, as it was a completely new character that had nothing to do with Selina Kyle. It's not supposed to!
Another major problem with this movie is that there was another certain comic book flick that sparked new light on the box office ratings for that time frame that was released only weeks before. Yes, I am specifically referring to Spider-man 2. Almost everyone that saw Spider-man 2 loved it, and it was a smash hit movie the summer that it was released, which was the same summer that Catwoman was released. I think that everyone that saw Spider-man 2 and loved it expected Catwoman to be just as good, or close, because it was two comic book films that were released around the same time, and that's what disappointed them. Catwoman is not nearly as good as Spider-man 2, so if you haven't seen it yet, and you're expecting it to be as good as Spider-man 2, I hate to be the messenger to tell you that that's not what you're going to get, but apparently, it seems to be I have to be the one to deliver the bad news.
The only complaint that I had about the movie was that Sharon Stone bombed as an actress, and that affected Laurel Hedare's potential charisma. She was a terrible actress in this movie, as you could tell she was saying a line when she spoke, but it barely affected my overall opinion of the movie, because it's not even noticeable unless you pay the attention that it takes to notice. In other words, you have to know that that's what you're looking for.
This is a good movie, and I strongly disagree with the complaints that many people had about it in past reviews. I believe that they were just looking for things to find wrong with the movie, because they expected another Spider-man 2, and with my regards to the many who agree with me, this isn't nearly as good, but it's still a very good adventurous ride that will cause you to think differently of Halle Berry if you always thought ill of her before.