Reviews

XMen 2 seemed to take for granted that people were content to go along for any ride it wanted to take. As to hardcore fans, this assumption was probably right. As to the curious rest of us, it was a horrible miscalculation and an insult. Slow, boring, uninspired, meaningless, and shallow. I gladly walked out before the climax, after sitting through a pointless hour and a half. If we are supposed to feel so sorry for mutants, develop their characters. Give us a reason to like them. Tell a story, at least. Do not assume that we have seen the first movie or that we have read the comic book. I am a man, and I played sports and read about sports when I was a kid. I did not read silly, nerdy comic books. That is why I can satisfy women. This movie can't satisfy anyone with a brain and guts.

I have not seen Spoorloos and I liked The Vanishing. For the critics here, I suspect it is sort of like the effect where you read a book before seeing a movie--it is hard for the movie to measure up. It must be like that when you see a movie remade in America. I have seen Point of No Return bashed here, too, and it was pretty good. Maybe it is just Anti-Americanism gone rampant. Anyway, The Vanishing definitely had strong performances, suspense, emotion and terror. Those are hardly the ingredients of an awful movie. If they made a few changes to appeal to American audiences, well, it was the same director, so how bad could the changes be? I will see the original, but it better be good, or I will bash it.

"...And folks who put me in a passion may find me pipe after another fashion." --The Pied Piper of Hamelin, by Robert Browning

For some reason, I always remember that line. It kind of rings true sometimes, actually. Great comedy, one of the best of the eighties. Dangerfield is terrific, as is the entire cast. Looking at the few negative reviews, they kind of remind me of Phillip in the movie, the boring, jealous business prof. This is a feel-good, funny movie that holds its own against just about any of its kind.

I remember when I used to do work around the house for my Mom when I was fourteen or so, I enjoyed it because I thought it was getting me in shape. I wonder whether this movie caused me to think like that. Probably. This is a very good coming of age movie, a good friendship movie and a good love story. If you were pre-teen when you saw it, like I was, it made you look forward to how cool things could be for you in couple of years (once you got out of sorry middle school). There really is nothing bad to say about this movie.

The Innocents is one of the most overrated horror movies of all time, maybe the most overrated. It just never gets scary or interesting. The Others, a very similar movie, while merely o.k., is much better than this. That, at least, is my opinion. But go ahead, see it and make up your own mind. I want you to have to sit through this like I did. In fact, make it a double feature and rent The Changeling as well. Can't you just feel the excitement and the anticipation of viewing these amazing classics for the first time? (I will admit, The Changeling starts out promisingly, but boy does it ever drag and go downhill. The Innocents doesn't even start out promisingly).

The first time I saw this, I think I was tired or distracted or something. For whatever reason, it didn't make much of an impression on me. Or rather, I didn't pay enough attention to appreciate it. I'm glad I watched it again, and I don't know what I was thinking before. "Almost Famous" is one of the best-written, most fun, most touching movies I have ever seen. It gets better the more you see it. McDormand is excellent and right on as the Mom. Hell, the whole cast is excellent and right on. This movie is a gift to our culture. We are richer and fuller because it was made. That is rare praise, but this is a rare movie.

There are people who like this kind of movie. Many of them have written reviews here, and one of them works at the rental store where he convinced me to check it out. I, however, did not like this movie. It is way too far out for its own sake, scattered, and, ultimately, incredibly dull. It would probably be better in a theater, where you are forced to watch it all the way through (although I am sure lots of people just walked out). Just descends into the mouth of terrible and boring as it goes. Watch it if you want to waste your time.

"The Fog" is on many top ten lists of classic horror movies. I have tried to rent lots of those movies (the ones I can find). Frankly, many of them, from The Innocents to The Changeling to The Burning to even Don't Look Now, are disappointing. The Fog is not. It will please modern audiences just as much as it pleases fans of "classic horror." It has excellent suspense, plenty of scares, and a very interesting atmosphere. It is actually quite amazing that fog can be made quite so scary. But it isn't exactly just fog, is it? Classic revenge, getting one's come-uppance stuff, here, too.

There is an incredible amount of energy, intelligence and life in this movie. I suspect that most of its critics here got caught up and turned off by some of the superficials--the drug use, sexual talk, etc.--and ignored the humanity of the characters. That is a huge mistake, and they missed a great movie. If I were going to make the argument that Sean Penn is a great actor, Hurlyburly is the movie I would cite. His complex portrayal of Eddie, a funny, sad, frenetic, depressed, passionate, brilliant, childish, pathetic, loving, authentic individual is incredible. Spacey is up to his usual high standards here, too. This is the best I have ever seen Palmentieri. His angry, funny, lost, violent, sad character is almost as complex as Penn's. Shandling is even good, and so is Meg Ryan. Actors should really study this film to see what great acting is all about, and writers should study it, too. See this movie.

This movie had some buzz around it, so I rented it to watch before going to bed while summer vacationing a couple of years ago in Colorado. I should have had a few drinks at the local bar, instead. This movie is a rambling mess, and today I can hardly remember a thing about it. I do remember that Katie Holmes gets naked--if those are her real breasts, see Heather Thomas in Zapped, a great movie by the way, much more entertaining than this. Anyway, Katie can't save this mess. I guess the main thing I would say is, I was wishing it would end so I could go to bed and do something more fun and real the next day. A good movie should make you enjoy it no matter where you are.

It amazes me how few horror movies actually are scary for adults, or at least for me. I usually watch them alone, in the dark, and they still are rarely scary. But, Candyman scared me. I was reaching for the baseball bat, looking around, that kind of stuff. I was doing it a lot. It was creepy. The plot kind of goes in a strange direction, and, in my opinion, loses some steam and scariness, but the fright meter overall is way up there among horror rentals. If you have been disappointed by the horror fare at Blockbuster, etc., check this one out.

O.k., that is kind of a cheesy opening, but my point is that this movie works as a love story almost as much as it does as an action movie. It is an amazing movie, maybe one of the ten best I have ever seen. It gets better with time. Its few critics here, it seems, just want to blow up the eighties. Good luck. Instead, try making some memorable films today so that this isn't thought of as the empty period of popular movies. For example, people are praising and praising Lord of the Rings The Two Towers and even the latest Star Wars, mainly because our expectations have slipped. Compare those two movies to Terminator. Granted, the evil, dog-like humanoid war creatures in The Two Towers are amazing and scary as hell, but that, along with a little suspense in the battle scenes, is about it. As scary as the Two Towers creatures are, Terminator himself was equally scary, and there is just so much more in terms of character development and prolonged suspense. As for the new Star Wars and its phony CGI effects, there is no reason to even compare it to Terminator. My point is that popular, mainstream movies are a reflection of the time period. Terminator reflects well on the eighties. (Terminator II was good, but it is probably an 8 at most, somehwere around Two Towers' neighborhood, slightly below The Fellowship of the Ring, which at least had emotion and character development, slightly above the latest Star Wars. Terminator is a ten).

What a whiny movie this is! Literally, the "Maniac" whines and moans like a wounded animal. I'm sorry, I felt no sympathy for him. I also didn't feel that any of these women would have let him in their lives. The shotgun scene on the roof of the car is probably legendary for pure gore fans (I am not one). Even so, this movie is a real downer and a real whiner. Watch at your own risk (of wasting your time). It is sick, depressing and stupid.

I have been a baseball fan all my life, I have played the game, and I have even been compared by one girl to Kevin Costner's character, Crash Davis, in Bull Durham. I like Bang The Drum Slowly better than Durham. For one, the lines stand up better. Many of Bull Durham's lines are ridiculous or unnecessary or unrealistic. The whole "I believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone..." monologue, for example is silly when really looked at hard. (Who would make such a speech?) There are lines in Bang the Drum, however that stand up over time. "It's sad, it makes you wanna cry. No, it sad, it makes you wanna laugh," for example. Even though I have actually had to explain the meaning of that line to one person, I love it. Just the way the players, especially Moriarty, talk, is so authentic. "Not a bad ballplayer, either once people got off his back and let him play." Great performance by De Niro. A good little sports film that will make you cry a little and give you lines that you never forget. "From now on, I rag no one."

This movie was very hard for me to find for rental. Unfortunately, being hard to find doesn't necessarily make a movie good. This is one of the most hyped movies in the history of horror, renowned for being so "disturbing." At the time it was made, it probably was ground-breaking, and I hope I will always be disturbed by rape and murder. But this movie did not meet my inflated expectations. It just wasn't all that scary, partly because the goons were so goofy and the pacing too slow. The lead girl was gorgeous, no question, and I was all for revenge on her behalf. But the movie just wasn't as extraordinary as I had been led to believe. (Granted, some reviewers have always said it is terrible-- Ebert, for example. It isn't terrible, either, though). Last House on the Left is not as depressing or sick or bad as Maniac, and it is commendable on that note. But it wasn't worth all the effort to find, either.

This movie is so phony, so stupid, so terrible. Yet, hoards of people on this site and elsewhere love it. That concerns me. If we stop valuing intellect (as anybody can see our society increasingly does), I worry about our future. Are we going to just get more superficial? Are we going to get still stupider? Is the prevailing attitude at all times going to be, "just let me sit back and enjoy it?" People curse the "superficiality" of the eighties. But the eighties was a time of boundless enthusiasm and intellect. You didn't have to be mindless to be cool in the eighties. You could actually have a brain. Your friends wouldn't assault you with cries of, "it's just a movie," in response to your criticism. All drugs are bad. But if a culture is going to be on drugs, cocaine--the so-called drug of the eighties--is probably better than heroin, the main drug of today. Cocaine is associated with being up, on the go, and an overactive mind, perhaps, but at least one that is alert. Heroin is the pathetic, "let me feel nothing and not think and have no energy or aspiration" drug. Just using this metaphor (and saying again, drugs are awful and they destroy), heroin seems to define too much of this time. If you have to turn your mind off to like it, it sucks. Oh, and girls can't fight or play sports like men, either. Get over it.

I was flipping around from channel to channel on the weekend and stopped on this. It held me instantaneously and I watched the whole thing. The writing is special. Downey's charisma on the screen is almost unmatched, and he is in top form here. (Contrary to one review on this site, with Downey, as opposed to most effeminate, loser leading men of today, you actually see why the girls would, even should, stay). The two ladies are very attractive. The story becomes increasingly touching throughout, until you realize you have not been watching exactly what, or who (in terms of character), you thought you were watching. A special, memorable movie full of feeling. I would bet that many of the negative reviewers failed to watch the entire movie.

This movie was at times scary, at times suspenseful and, most often, darkly funny. Great villainous turn from Kilmer, the big bad wolf in this modern, very much not for kiddies take on Little Red Riding Hood. But this is Witherspoon's movie, and she delivers big time. Attractive, witty, tough, resourceful, pouty, cunning, she is just amazing here. The look on her face in the last scene is priceless. This movie actually had me feeling pretty good when it was over, contrary to at least one sentiment I have seen expressed here.

I hate to say it, but of all the brat pack type movies of my early high school years, this one was the most like the experience I was having at that time. It is also probably the only one that I looked to for hints at style and clothing, etc. If I ever thought I was starting to lose control (we are all melodramatic in those years) I would sometimes think I was becoming like Julian. But I also wanted to be cool and sophisticated, like Clay. These weren't everyday thoughts that I had, but they floated around in my conscious and unconscious mind. I don't know what the high school experience is exactly like for kids today, but at my high school in 1986-87, in a rich area in Houston, it was a lot like this movie (which actually deals with the year after high school). We had keg parties in mansions, lots of drugs, lots of kids out of control. It was actually considered cool to be out of control then. I don't know if it is that way, now. While not perfect, this movie is much better than the reviews here would suggest. And, in the end, it comes down on the right side. Drugs are bad, they really are. Most kids of that era figured that out by the time they graduated college, if they made it that far. (You might notice I am Khouston 86. That is actually because 86 was my favorite sport year in Houston--Rockets in NBA finals, Astros in playoffs against Mets. But it was also an incredibly exciting, if also dangerous time in my life).

This movie makes it clear from the opening scene that thinking is not welcome. It does so by presenting dialogue and posturing so phony that thinking about it is pointless. It literally forces you to sit back and try to enjoy it. And if you watch the whole movie that way, it is pretty enjoyable in a mindless way (even though, just to remind people, if you did anything important without your brain, the result would be eventual disaster).

The male mind is wired so that we can fantasize about women whether we are thinking hard or not. Thus, watching the lovely, seductive Asia Argento for 2 hours is very enjoyable here. In fact, she was really the only thing I liked about this movie, to be honest. And, please, no one, no one ever try to claim that this movie is smart. You just can't be smart when you scream lines like "I live for this ...." for no particular reason.

I really like this movie. It drew me in with its style and its content. Made a star out of Del Toro, and rightfully so. He is amazing here. Loved the ending, which is huge in movies. Didn't win as many awards as it deserved, even though it won some. Also loved the performance by Douglass' daughter--Christiansen, I think. She was extremely charismatic and her story powerful.

This is one of those movies that got strong reviews and seems like it would be real funny and cool. It isn't. I almost think the reviewers were trying to prove they were "in touch" by acting like they liked this movie. I was over at my mom's house for Christmas and I brought this movie for people to watch at night if they had nothing better to do. I was completely embarrassed to have to watch my mom watch this crude, fowl, wannabe movie. Did they think they had to make a tasteless movie to appeal to a black audience, or what? If so, that is unbelievably condescending and stupid. Halle Berry is beautiful, but so what?

It would be easy to dismiss this movie. But the easy choice isn't always the right one, and it isn't here, either. Yes, there are similarities to Point Break (a good movie). But many good movies have borrowed from other movies (check out 1980's The In-Laws and compare it to Meet The Parents if you want to see major imitation). Lots of the characters here--but not all--seem kind of stupid, but I don't think they were trying to present rocket scientist car racers. I think the dialogue and acting and writing actually rings true, if you pay attention. It is nice to have an action movie that at least allows you to pay attention without feeling ridiculous for having done so (contrary to XXX, where you know from frame 1 that thinking is not welcome). The action scenes, while not plentiful enough, are also good. Don't let the hoard steer you away from this movie because it is "dumb". Their reviews read sort of like the pot calling the kettle black.