Reviews

I just caught the first episode of this show, and if that was anything to go by, things need to improve greatly for this to rate anything more than awful.

The pacing of the show was pedestrian, the lead actor made Kevin Costner look animated, Much was portrayed as a moron, rather than the simple miller's son of the story.

Keith Allen's portrayal of the Sheriff of Nottingham was way too campy.

It came across as politically correct drivel, not so much Robin Hood, more Robin Hoodie.

The writing was awful.

Sorry but Robin Of Sherwood with Michael Praed/Jason Connery in the lead role is still the definitive portrayal of the legend.

I only gave it 1 out of 10 because a zero rating is not supported.

This is a truly awful film. What they have done is taken a TV show, which was never aimed at young children & given it the George Lucas treatment (i.e. ruined it by kiddifying it to appeal to the younger audience).

OK so the Thunderbirds TV show wasn't exactly the most cerebral of shows, in fact it was pretty formulaic, but it was always enjoyable to watch (especially when the models got blown up) and the voice cast wasn't too bad.

This suffers from bad casting & bad acting (with the notable exceptions of Sophia Myles as Lady Penelope & Ron Cook as Parker, who seem to be the only cast members to have a clue about how their characters should be played) & after this travesty I wouldn't let Frakes direct traffic.

The whole point of Thunderbirds was that it was about the whole Tracy family & how they worked as a team, preventing disasters or coming to the rescue of those involved in disasters.

Avoid this rubbish like the plague.

I only give it 1 out of 10 because a zero rating is not supported.

This film suffers from the Wachowski Brothers getting too absorbed in their own hype. The plot is nonsensical, the final resolution a total letdown, the performances in general were diabolical.

The two best characters throughout the trilogy were Agent Smith & Morpheus.

Consistently worst actor was Keanau "I'm so bad an actor that people can only picture me as Ted from the Bill & Ted movies" Reeves.

The man cannot carry a film as its' star. He cannot even act. If you need further proof watch Bram Stoker's Dracula. His performance as Jonathan Harker was diabolical, he cannot cannot carry an accent in a bucket.

But back to Matrix Revolutions. Larry & his brother took what was a good idea (i.e. the plot of the first matrix movie & tried to make something bigger & better & made a total mess of the whole thing.

The special effects aren't that good. I'd like to know who designed the combat walkers the people of zion use. What moron build something like that where the pilot is totally unprotected ?

As for the score, well that sucked too.

Back to the performances, Hugo Weaving was consistently the best actor throughout the whole series. Larry Fishburne had some truly awful moments in reloaded & revolutions.

If you were planning on renting this film don't bother. It's a complete & utter waste of money.

I first saw this film in 1986 - I loved it then - I still love it now. The comic twist (the guy who thinks he's the hero actually being the sidekick) still works for me.

One of John Carpenter's & Kurt Russells greatest movies.

I Give it 100/10.

John Carpenter & Dan O'Bannion's Student film - made on a shoestring budget. The acting's ropey, the jokes are corney & the special effects are ultra cheap. But it's fun - a good laugh especially the scenes in the lift with the Beachball Alien.

It's my understanding that percentage wise this is the highest grossing film of all time - made for approx $30,000 - has made at least 1000 times that.

Cheesy, Yeah - But I love It.

A nicely tongue in cheek Star Trek spoof. Good all round cast - especially Alan Rickman as the angst ridden Shakesperian actor in what he considers actor hell - Alexander Dane. Good special effects and a nice predicatbly corny villain.

I loved it.

I've spoken online to William Shatner about this film and he likes it too.

As I said - a real hoot - worth a view or two in my opinion. I give it 10/10.

I rented this on strength of the recommendation of a friend. I enjoyed it so much I bought it. Contrary to what what so reviewers say I thought Jason Statham did a good job in the role.Plus, I like Luc Besson's writing.

I'd give it 9/10, I hope Besson directs the sequel.

Point of No Return is one of those films that proves that Hollywood film studios should no try to remake foreign (to them) films. Their only real success on that front was The Magnificent Seven. It also proves that you can have an all star cast (Gabriel Byrne, Bridget Fonda, Anne Bancroft, Harvey Keitel etc.), a well known director (John Badham), a big budget and still produce an abysmal piece of work.

Nikita is a much better film than this rubbish - the whole dark tone to the film makes it work. The upbeat ending of this remake is one of the things that ruins the film, that and Bridget Fonda just does not seem right for the lead role.

marks out of 10 - 0

I for one, prefer the original film. The sequels and series were completely unnecessary. I think Adrian got picked for the series partly coz he looks & sounds a bit like a young Sean Connery. I don't think he's that good an actor (He was in the War Of The Worlds TV Series for cryin' out loud), but he does have some stage presence. I think Christopher Lambert made a better immortal, as on of the other reviewers put it, more the Everyman Immortal.

Worst Highlander Villain: - Mario Van Peebles in Highlander 3 - a poor imitation of the Kurgen (essentialy a black Kurgen).

What really made the film was the ensemble cast who worked very well together. The cast in the series just didn't work for me. Too many immortals around - the Gathering is supposed to be closed to happening and the planet seems to be teeming with them.

A few good episodes, but on the whole distinctly average - whereas Highlander (the original movie) is considered a classic.

To all those who say this is the best version of the Robin Hood story- Hang your heads in shame - It's utter garbage - apart from Alan Rickman & Morgan Freeman (who as a another commenter put it does look a little out of place). Kevin Costner produces one of his worst performances yet (almost as bad as Waterworld - shudders). He's outacted by the scenery - more wooden than Sherwood Forest. Alan Rickman steals every scene he's in, playing Nottingham ever so slightly OTT - but it works - casting Christian Slater as Will Scarlett was also a bad move but at least his character is more animated than Costner's Robin. Yeah, Men In Tights was a much better film.

But for the definitive Robin Hood fil/show watch HTV's Robin Of Sherwood - made in the 80's did a much better job of telling both versions of the story than this does of telling the nobleman's version.