Reviews

I think there are two target audiences for this movie: kids, and anyone who's a bit of a fantasy geek. This movie succeeds in catering to those two groups, and quite well, in my opinion.

The acting in the movie is pretty good. It's not quite at the level of some children actors I saw growing up--the Sandlot for instance--but it's better than quite a few of the kids' shows I've seen on television. The plot is basic enough: kid is bullied for being a geek, kid finds out that 'fantasy' stuff is real, kid goes on adventure to beat the evil bad guys. It's also well-executed, and there are a few really good lines in the movie that had me chuckling.

On the down side... The troll in the movie sounds like someone trying (and just barely failing) to do an impersonation of Gollum from the Lord of the Rings trilogy, and that bothered me--but only a little. And the CG in the movie is... Well, it's not horrible. On its own, it's pretty good, especially for such a low-budget film. The "low-budget" part is obvious once you realize that the cg animations have to interact with real backgrounds/places/people, and then it's just... Not as appealing. Not a big issue though, really.

Here's the bottom line: If you're a childless adult who's never been into fantasy games, TCG's, etc., then this probably isn't for you. If you're a parent who doesn't mind watching a slightly cheesy movie with an 80's adventure feel to it, then you'll be okay with the movie--you probably won't love it, but you'll have had worse ways to spend an hour and a half with your kids. Kids will probably love this one--especially younger kids and tweens. Anyone who's fond of fantasy, gaming culture, trading card games, etc. will probably get a kick out of this charming film--a fair amount of the humor and references are aimed at people like us.

Okay, folks, let's make it clear: this movie tells you in the title EXACTLY what you're getting when you turn on your DVD player. You have zombies, strippers, and zombie strippers. Some of the jokes work better than others, and a few of the actors teeter dangerously close to ridiculous over-acting. Having said that, I loved pretty much everything else about this movie. I watched it with my main group of friends, and we all enjoyed it. Granted, we're a bunch of goofy college kids, and there may or may not have been some margaritas and wine coolers involved... but that's honestly how I recommend watching this movie. Grab a bunch of your friends, as you'll over-think and over-criticize rather if you're by yourself, rather than just being able to kick back and enjoy this movie, ridiculous as it may be. If you like zombies, and you don't mind topless women, this movie's definitely worth a watch. You may be surprised how much you enjoy it.

This has to be my all-time favorite take on the classic "Dracula." The imagery, costumes, filming style--everything is a true delight to behold.

I've always been a big fan of Anthony Hopkins, and I wasn't disappointed by his performance here. In fact, I wasn't disappointed by anyone's performances--each actor or actress did a superb job in portraying their characters.

This is definitely worth watching in my mind. I've seen it multiple times, and have yet to tire of it. In fact, I'll most likely be watching it again within the week!

Maybe I shouldn't have liked "Best Men," but I did. I watched it late last night on either HBO or Showtime, I don't remember which, with reservations and low hopes. The rating of 6 here seemed decent enough, but the comment(s) that showed on the main info page seemed rather negative. Still, I decided to give the movie a chance.

I'm really glad that I did. This movie had some laughs and some teary-eyed moments. I, personally, both laughed and cried hard, and I know for a fact that it wasn't just because of the late-night time affecting my rationality and/or emotions. I missed the first 10 minutes or so of the movie, which had me a little confused, but I don't think it mattered too awfully much--I'll be sure to rent or buy (this one should be cheap if I can find it) it and watch it again to find out. That being said, I'll move on to my opinions of the individual actors/characters.

I'd never heard of Dean Cain before. I vaguely recognized him without knowing from where--turns out he was the host of "Ripley's Believe It or Not," which I used to watch fairly frequently. That's the only place I'd ever seen him, so I had no idea of what his acting skills were going into this movie. I was pleased with Cain's performance as Buzz. He had a perfect body and attitude for the "tough military guy," although he could've been a bit softer during certain scenes. Still, he did well enough, and certainly didn't detract from the movie.

I went into the film liking Andy Dick. He made me laugh my head off in "Hebrew Hammer," I watch his series "The Assistant" whenever I can, and I've enjoyed all the little guest parts he's had in a great deal of movies. With the exception of "The Assistant," I'd only seen him in slapstick settings. Although he was certainly funny--even hilarious at times--it was a different type of funny, and I really liked it. I'd like to see him in more roles like this: funny, but a little serious. He did a great job as Teddy; I only wish he would have had more time on-screen. Maybe if I'd caught those first minutes of the movie I'd have seen more of him.

Sean Patrick Flanery was definitely the star of the show in my mind. The only other movie I'd seen him in was "Powder," and I didn't recognize him at all here--I only found out it was the same actor when I checked his bio page here. In "Best Men" he did a truly superb job as Billy. He delivered his Shakespeare lines incredibly well, without sounding hesitant, fake, or anything like that. The lines just flowed out, and I think I fell in love a little. His scenes with his father were perfectly believable. All in all, Billy was just my favorite character.

Mitchell Whitfeld did well as Sol. I'd never seen him before this movie, so I didn't know what to expect; I wasn't disappointed. His best line in the movie is the "I'm Jewish" one--so funny!

I've seen lots of Luke Wilson's movies before, and I've always found him thoroughly enjoyable. This held true in "Best Men" as well. I felt really bad for his character, Jesse--I mean, come on, stuck in a bank robbery on your wedding day? That just sucks. A good character, though he (surprisingly) wasn't on screen that much compared to the other characters.

Finally, there's Drew Barrymore as Hope. This woman is one of my favorite actresses of all time, so I was a little disappointed to see that she was barely ever on-screen. For the few minutes we see her, however, she did well.

Although this movie seemed a little random--unequal parts humor, drama, and action--it was still a very good watch. I'll definitely rent this, and if I ever see it for sale I'll be sure to buy it immediately. I give it a 7 out of 10--a slightly more coherent plot would have given it an 8.

I can handle gore to a certain extent. I enjoy scary movies. I love intelligent movies that make me think. Unfortunately, this movie wasn't quite what I love.

The gore in this isn't blood-spattering, like in the remake of "TX Chainsaw Massacre," which I was thankful for--at first. Instead, it's a cruelly sadistic enjoyment of torture and death for their own sakes. That made me uncomfortable, but I sat (or squirmed, rather) through the movie anyways. On the plus side, this movie *did* scare me. It scared my sister's boyfriend, too--we watched the 10:00 showing of it along with my sister, and the two of us were paranoid the whole night. My sister laughed at us--she thought it was decently spooky, but nothing that great. Since that first viewing, I've watched Fear.com twice. I don't know why I did it, but I continued to get just as scared. That's why I gave this movie a rating of 6/10--it scares me, and that's the point of a scary movie.

As for the intelligence I love so much in movies... I think that Fear.com was trying to be smart and unique with its premise. It succeeded, but only for a few seconds--I enjoyed the young couple with the camera for the way it was shot, and the idea of the little girl with the white ball was nice as well. Everywhere else the would-be intelligence failed. You thought things were explained, but then matters changed and more confusion came in. Just who is the lady that asks "Do you want to play," and why wasn't she satisfied with being found? Why tell us that the male detective knew the killer from a previous case, only to completely ignore that until the last few minutes of the movie? Things pulled together about mid-way, then unraveled horribly. I was left confused, but in a bad way.

Like I said, I gave Fear.com 6/10 points, but that's only because it scared me consistently. I think that's because I'm constantly online, and the idea of an evil, deadly website--however improbable and silly that seems--terrifies me at some basic level. For people that only use their computers to check e-mail and type up school reports won't have that problem, and a lot of the scare-power will be gone. For them, I give the movie pretty much what its IMDb rating is--a 3/10.

First off, I have to say that I watched this movie when I was about 14 years old, either in '99 or 2000. That probably affected my rating of it, as I was in an off-and-on "adults suck" phase. I haven't watched the movie since, which explains why I can't go into any detail.

Okay. I gave this movie a 5 out of 10. It wasn't a great movie. But in the mind of a young teenager, at least, it didn't *suck* either. I remember being amused by the attitudes of the babies, and I'd always believed that infants and pre-speech toddlers are a lot smarter than any of us adults (or even other kids, for that matter!) give them credit for. So the dialogue wasn't great, I remember that much. I do remember, however, laughing at quite a bit of what the main little baby said. I felt bad for this one little baby that got trampled on (figuratively, that is) by babies and adults alike. And I felt bad for whomever had to clean up the house those kids were in.

I don't remember anything specific about this movie, good or bad. That's why I gave it a 5. It's nothing special, but I don't remember it as being horrible either. I'll never watch it again, though. Basically, I guess it'd be worth a watch if nothing good is on and you're curious to see just how bad a movie this was.

Thinking about it, I maybe should have given it a 4 of 10. Oh well.

I was a kid when I watched this one, and even then I knew it was a "just OK" type of movie. Still, it had me laughing. Not long, and not hard, but I laughed all the same. My grandfather was passably amused as well--I think he got a kick out of watching me watching the movie. I rate this a 4 out of 10. Watch it with a ten year old on a rainy day; the kid will laugh, you'll smile at their laughter, and you'll kill some time until something good comes on TV. Oh, and this reminds me--the Hulk can act outside of the ring!

Well, sort of. I'd never want to see him in a serious role, but he pulled off this comedy bit well enough. I just think he should stick to wrestling.

Or retirement. Or whatever.

I feel bad to see that this movie got such an incredibly low rating. Granted, it was no masterpiece. Then again, I don't think it was supposed to be.

I first saw this movie when I was fairly young, and I absolutely adored it. I had a crush on the brothers (the "Double Dragons" of the title), and I borderline-idolized the glow-in-the-dark punk kids. They were just so cool to me!

About a year ago or so--maybe two years ago--I watched this movie at about 2:00 in the morning during the summer, when there was nothing else to watch except infomercials or music videos. I was either 17 or 18. The movie wasn't as good as I'd remembered, but, to my very pleasant surprise, it wasn't nearly as bad as other people remembered it to be.

This is a good late-night movie, or nice if you're in the mood for something cheesy and nostalgic. I give it a 6 out of 10. A little above average--but I think that's just nostalgia. For most people viewing it, it's probably worth a 5.

I thoroughly enjoyed the first Grease movie, as well as its on-stage equivalent--I had the fortune of seeing it performed live in my town, and I adored it. I made the mistake of getting my hopes up over Grease 2. I didn't watch the entire thing, just the first 30 minutes, but I will say this: I want my thirty minutes back.

What little part of this film I saw, I watched while babysitting the kid next door. She's, what, five, give or take a year? And this is one of her favorite movies. I pity her. This movie is a piece of junk, no two ways about it! That's where the disappointment came in.

Now, you may be wondering about the "appalled" part of my summary line. That's easily enough to explain. You see, the little girl I babysat has two older siblings--one about 8, and the other 10. They really like the movie too, and that bothers me. Some of the lines in the songs are very frank in their sexuality. That's not so bad for a five year old who simply won't understand them, or the equally suggestive dance moves that accompany them. A ten-year-old, however, will. I'll be the first to admit that I am literally one of the most liberal, open-minded people you'll ever meet, so it isn't the content itself that I object to. What bothers me is that it's contained within a musical that people let their kids sit down in watch without thinking to worry (since the parents themselves probably wouldn't be able to stomach much more than the first 10 minutes).

What I'm basically saying is this: the movie might amuse very small children that aren't paying attention to the lyrics. The tunes themselves aren't too bad, and the dancing can be amusing, especially when you *aren't* paying attention to the lyrics. Older children--about ages 7/8 to, oh, 11, probably don't need to watch this. If anyone above the age of 12 can sit through this entire movie, they have my complete and utter respect--I don't know how they do it.

I give this movie a 2 out of 10.

I watched this movie not because I wanted to, but because I was too lazy to go somewhere else while my parents watched it. I'm pleased that I stayed.

I'll admit that I liked Lindsey Lohan going into this--I thought she was funny and cute in "Freaky Friday." I just didn't realize that she was even in this movie. (See how much attention I paid to it during previews, commercials, etc.?) She was very good in this movie as well.

The story was simple, nothing unique or original. What makes this movie shine is Lohan herself. She's a great actress for her age, and her character is wonderful too. I wanted to be annoyed with her at times, but I just couldn't! Sure, she (the character) got overly dramatic at times, but note the "Drama Queen" in the title. It's there for a reason, after all.

The actress that played best friend to Lohan's character did well, as did the snobby "enemy" girl. I didn't like either character much, but that's okay.

Overall, I gave this a 7 out of 10. I really enjoyed it, and would happily watch it a second, maybe even third time.

I'm surprised that this movie got such negative reviews. Initially, I had not desire whatsoever to watch "Anchorman" in theaters; I thought I might watch it once it hit DVD, but I wasn't sure if I'd even do that much. My friend convinced me to watch it with her (my first time, her second), and even as we were going into the theater people were warning me away from the movie. Needless to say, I was nervous about what was to come.

I needn't have been. The first few seconds of the movie did, to be honest, have me nervous and fidgeting--it was neither funny nor remotely enjoyable. My friend wouldn't let me leave, though, and I thank her for that. The rest of the movie was truly hilarious.

Granted, it didn't make a whole lot of sense. It was the most unrealistic that I'd seen in ages. I still loved it. I loved it so much that I convinced my sister--who didn't even plan on watching it once it was on DVD--to go with me to see it again. She loved it as well. And you know how the commercials said that you'd be quoting this movie all summer? Well, in the case of my friends and me, they were absolutely right.

I think you should give the movie a chance. I did, and I adored it. I give it an 8 out of 10--it was equally funny for me on the second viewing, and that rarely happens.

There are countless reviews of this movie stating that Donnie Darko is "the best movie of my generation," "the best movie ever made," etc. I agree with these people, but only for myself. Stunning as the imagery is, compelling as the storyline is, believable as the characters are, this movie just isn't everybody's cup of tea. My sister and I (I'm 19, she's 17) loved the movie.

The Sci-Fi type group at my college loves it. My dad thought it was okay, and we can't convince my mom to watch it with us; it really might be a generation gap, I'm not sure. Now, that having been said, I'll get on to a real review of the movie.

Donnie Darko truly is one of the best movies I have ever seen. The acting in it is great--Jake Gyllenhaal as the title character, Donnie, is detached but likable. Drew Barrymore really surprised me as the English teacher; she wasn't in the movie for long, but you got to like her a lot (but, in all fairness, I may be biased--I'm getting a degree in secondary education, with English as the focus).

The character that's the most surprising, other than Donnie himself, is Frank. Frank is a demonic bunny. We're not talking small, fuzzy animal that hops through the fields and is sold in countless petshops across the world, though. This guy looks like a school mascot or something--blue, tall, and with one *scary* face. His voice is low and distorted, and it may take a repeat viewing or two to understand everything he says. It's worth it, though--I can assure you that every time you watch this movie, you notice something new.

I don't want to risk giving anything away in the movie, so I won't do a summary of it--read all the other ones here. Instead, I recommend that if you like the movie, you go to the official website: it's full of a ton of extras that help flesh out the movie and explain the confusing bits. It's an extremely well-designed site, and it's actually *fun* to navigate it.

Overall, this is an intelligent, engrossing movie. I give it an 8 out of 10, but if you are in the mood for a movie that doesn't require you to think, don't watch this one.

I've heard people dissing this movie, but I don't agree. I loved this movie as a child, and even now (I'm 19) I still enjoy it. Sure, the whole gang isn't there, but that's fine. I was never a hardcore fan of the series, but this movie is fabulous. The "little ghouls" are adorable and lots of fun. Matches, the "pet" dragon of the boarding school, is really great, and the friendship he develops with Scrappy is nice to see. The beginning to the movie is actually really funny, and the exercise scene (don't ask, you'll just have to see it yourself!) that follows soon after always puts a smile on my face. It all starts as a misunderstanding that results in Shaggy and Scooby meeting monsters they (gasp!) aren't afraid of... and, of course, some new villains that *are* quite scary. All in all, this is a really entertaining watch. I love it, and gave it an 8 out of 10.