Reviews

IF you're old enough to remember the 50s and going to the movies with your friends on a Saturday, where-for two or eight bits a head-you got a couple movies, a cartoon, the next episode of a serial and, maybe, a newsreel. Another two bits got you goodies from the snack bar!! And, being a theater chucked full of popcorn-throwing kids on a Saturday afternoon, at least ONE of those movies would be from the beloved genre of "Monster Movies!" Those over-the-top, poorly written, poorly acted, poorly costumed, very low budgeted, grainy, Black & White "B-movies" were held in high regard in a special place in our childhood!! We never heard of Visual or Special FX!! The important things...the focal points...were the monster(s) and the sexy female victim(s) (and her more-than-obvious 1950s Bullet Bra).

Those monster movies of the 1950s were "fun" movies, and THIS movie (Eight Legged Freaks) is exactly that! This is a fun movie to watch! It has all the parts and ingredients, properly blended and balanced, to give the viewer a good time, without being "silly" and a waste of time. It has subtle contents that add to the fun without going overboard. For example, many spider scenes are scored with various versions of "Itsy Bitsy Spider." It's not surprising to feel a need to watch the movie two or more times! Do yourself a favor ... sit back and just enjoy this movie! Don't look for hidden social statements. There aren't any. And, the movie won't try to "teach" you or convince you of anything. You'll find that, unlike SO MANY of the movies produced since the turn of the millennium, this movie wants only to entertain!!

Awhile ago, I viewed and reviewed the movie, "GRAVITY!" At that time, I gave the movie a score of 2/10. Today, I happened across the movie as part of a return from a search for another movie. I said to myself, "Self, there was a lot of work put into making that movie! The cinematography, alone, was fair to good, and, in places, the effects were bordering on outstanding. (See what a kid with a descent computer and the latest cell phone can do in his bedroom?) Maybe I should give this movie another look." I did. Maybe I shouldn't have. The re-review resulted in a score of 1/10! The movie is downright silly and wrong on so many levels! First, you have to buy into the fact NASA would allow such a poorly trained, dim-witted, crap-for-brains "astronaut-scientist" to ride one of their vehicles! Not likely! Then, you have to believe that, left on her own, she can read and understand English, Russian and Chinese! More than that, she knows how to fly and operate spacecraft from those countries! And, she believes that critical commands, like "ABORT", are beneath her! You can see why she was voted "The One Astronaut You'd Love to Punch in the Nose in the Dead of Space, Then Leave Her!" They REALLY missed the mark with this character! They needed to dump this actor for one more believable in all aspects. No...I was right the first time I reviewed this movie! The only "good" I can find in this movie is that it provided employment for a lot of folks! Period!

REALLY?? They REALLY went and remade the classic animated movie of Pinocchio? WHY?? After watching this remake, that's the big question...why? This was more like a kid's Saturday morning TV show. To me, it's also the SECOND recent movie in which Tom Hanks really sucked!! There's no "feeling" to this movie! There's very little of an emotional link to anything in the movie, except for maybe the cat...and that's only because it was cute! The first version of this story-the animated one-had some substance to it; the viewer invested part of himself/herself, emotionally, in it. Not so, with this version! This was closer to something you'd put on for background noise while you play video games.

(Groan!) Here we go...another attempt to make the world's greatest "Old England Meets Gladiator" series!! I get the feeling they did this series only because they could. And, there it lays, in the cold, dank, bloody English dirt! Moving on.....let's get some real entertainment. Let's see what's on The Weather Channel!

What's next, big trucks coming to life and attacking folks trapped in a truck stop? What? What was that? It's been done? The hell you say! And, I thought THIS movie was bad!

Counting all the GOOD actors, in this B-movie, I came up with 11/2...Sam Elliott (that's 1), and the butler (he wasn't ½ bad). The rest either looked like they just came out of acting school, or need to go BACK to acting school. Yes, that includes Ray Milland, who's disdain of the production was apparent on his face in every shot he's in. The movie gets high marks for doing such a fine job of producing the overall look common to bad, low-budget films. They were true to the subjects being filmed...the phony animals looked just like phony animals, the prodded animals looked exactly like live animals being prodded by some out-of-frame wrangler and it was easy to identify the dazed and confused real animals, who's only thoughts were, "Let me get my ass outta here!" It was particularly evident on the face of the terrifying and deadly garter snake! I hope the black snake gets paid by the number of shots it's in. FYI, the living tarantulas used in the movie make good pets and are amazing animals to watch and handle for hours at a time! As to the frogs and toads...what kid wouldn't want a few of them to call his own? Hopping, croaking and humping, with a fly, moth or butterfly thrown in for lunch, is about as exciting as it get, for them! Through this movie, you can see how they got their reputation of being such a fierce, monstrous, horrible, hair-raising, deadly member of the animal kingdom! Even as tadpoles, they've been known to invade entire pools of water and......swim around! I shudder to think of it! BTW, has anyone found the hundreds of frogs and toads that escaped captivity during the production? I hate to think of hundreds of those gross, deadly creatures hopping, free, throughout the land! This is, for certain sure, one of those movies you'll love to hate (or the other way around)!

As with most folks submitting their opinions here in IMDB, I'm not an expert nor professional in any phase or area of moviemaking or play production, with the exception of one critical area...I am a consumer of the product...a member of the audience! With my fellow members, I pay to be entertained, and sometimes we pay a lot in money and time. We audience members are the ONLY folks qualified to pass judgement on a movie or, as in this case, a "play-movie." Along with fellow members, I know what I like and what I don't I know when I'm being entertained, and when I'm not. And, I know when the product lives up to my expectations and when it doesn't. I assume the movie "Hamilton" is an accurate representation of the play as presented on the stage in NYC, and what I see in the movie is what I would see if I attend the play. I'm glad I didn't spend the money nor the time to see the play, so it follows that I didn't like the movie, either. It's difficult, and just a little unfair, to critique the movie without critiquing the play. Movie-wise, I found myself working hard to keep pace with the movements of the characters and understand the meanings of their movements, individually and in groups. Harder still was the effort needed to understand the dialogue between characters due to the rapid-fire style of speaking. I noticed the focus of my attention was often pulled away from key performers, due to other uninvolved performers milling about in the shadows. Lighting, in the movie anyway, was nothing to write home about, and scenes often appeared dark and murky. The entire movie lacked the energy and "spark" I expected to see, given the subject matter. Overall, the production seemed draggy and sluggish, at times, in spite of "fast talk." The music was a disappointment, at best, for the subject! And, dance segments often lacked the snap and crisp synchronized movements expected of a musical on a NYC stage! Once I worked my way around the tremendous hype created by talented promoters, I found the play fell far short of expectations. Therefore, the movie also fell short of what was expected and anticipated. I felt that, in the end, the "play-movie," "Hamilton" failed to properly tell the story it set out to tell. If you compare the STYLE of the musical "Hamilton" with the STYLE of a musical such as "The Greatest Showman," it's very easy to see that the style of "Greatest Showman" does a much better job of telling a story and relating to the audience than "Hamilton" could ever hope to do. And, the style of storytelling used in "Greatest Showman" is far more entertaining and engaging than the style attempted in "Hamilton".

This was an embarrassment! I was embarrassed to admit that I wasted.the time it took to watch this....uh....movie. Did you ever watch a movie or a TV show or even a play that was so bad, you couldn't stop watching? Here's another one for you to endure. I awarded ONE star, and ONE star only, in honor of the folks who turned up for work, each day, to labor on this project. Folks like them are heroes of the entertainment industry...the duct tape, bailing wire and chewing gum that keeps the industry running! God bless their little hearts! I would have given the piece a "9.75" rating, if it had been submitted as proof that writing, directing and acting talents, in the movie business, have gone the way if the dinosaurs!

I'm only at 0:49:47, but I HAVE to ask...is there an actual MOVIE that's gonna break out anytime, soon? I guess, technically, there are frames of images, and the images change from one frame to the next...so, you could call it a movie. But, frames of images, linked together, lacking a story, and lacking direction, acting ability, purposeful dialogue and any redeeming social value....is it still a movie??? The sale of "No-Doze" (sic) must have shot up, when this offering was first released!!

Episodes thus far are slow and boring! Acting and directing is lacking in smoothness! The series, so far should be titled "Elsa Goes to Camp in 1883". Elsa is the most millennial, pain in the ass, half-witted, daydreaming idiot and should be written out of the story...maybe she'll get eaten by a bear, or drown while playing in the river!! Snakebite would work as well, just as long as she goes!!

They say you only have one shot at making a first impression. The first impression of this series is not very good! If the pace gets much, much better, the direction improves and the acting approaches professionalism, this series might survive! Oh, getting actors who can properly ride a horse would help as well!

Can I get reimbursed for the time I wasted watching this...this...this THING? Thank god they gave the male lead to "the world's greatest actor", or it would have been a REAL piece of...well, you know what I mean!

Good story...good actors...REALLY good at dragging it out! For an area with such a high potential for seismic activity it requires monitoring by a lot of high-end equipment and experts, the scientists and professionals sure do a lot of sitting around with their thumbs up their.....noses!! I was surprised by the apparent lack of knowledge on the part of "pros" as to rules and procedures! During a rapidly developing emergency, with the likelihood of overwhelming fatalities and injuries, the key characters seemed to move in slow motion with a constant expression of total confusion! I got the feeling this "dragginess" was intentional on the part of the director, producers and writers, all trying to stretch a 0:45:00 story into a 1:45:10 movie.

FINALLY, a series that gets its hooks into you, holds your interest and won't let go! Compare it to "Sopranos" and "Deadwood" in that it was disappointing to have an episode come to an end. It leaves me wanting more. I was never a fan of Costner. I always thought he was stiff and sounded like he was reading his lines off cue cards, as opposed to saying them. But, he's mellowed over the years, and he's excellent in this series. The cast...good guys and bad guys...work together smoothly. Almost every character is a mix of good and bad, and you find yourself pulling for the "not-so-bad" ones, and hoping the "really bad" ones get theirs! You, also, find yourself hoping this series doesn't go the way of the "Sopranos", in which there were strings of episodes that were strange and not worth the viewing. It was as if the writer(s) were hard-pressed to come up with quality material. And, you hope the studio doesn't pull a "Deadwood" by suddenly and unexpectedly pulling the plug on the production (as HBO did). Hopefully, this series will be more like the "Gunsmoke" series by running for years providing continuous episodes of entertainment.

This was terrible!! It starts off weirdly and ends terribly!! In between, it drags!! If you can't sleep, watch this.

Please forgive me.... I'm sure this goes against the rules of etiquette for reviews like this, but I just couldn't hold back! A short time ago, I submitted a review for this work of total silliness. But, that was before it turned into complete insanity and became dangerous to mental health! I felt compelled to break the established rules, for the sake of my fellow viewers, and issue a SECOND REVIEW!! WATCH AT YOUR OWN RISK! There are too many illogical, nonsensical, irrational, stupid and even dangerous things in this series (like bringing a generator into a hospital room) to even attempt to list here!! And, leaving a fully stocked and equipped hospital to go to Charleston because....because....because, oh, I don't know, because the writer's mom once lived there, and it was the only town he remembered how to spell? As good a reason as any, I guess! Anyway, in true Spielberg fashion, we're gonna pack up all the patients we don't asphyxiate with carbon monoxide gas, and move them from this completely stocked and equipped and functional and defendable hospital and move them through alien infested countryside to Charleston, because! Sure sounds like something the Pentagon would come up with, squarely backed by our ever ready, astute and quick acting Congress, doesn't it? If we paid them based on their job performance, we'd all pay about $2.78!! That happens to be about what they should pay US to watch this series! My heart goes out to the cast, especially actors like Will Patton, who had to suffer through this third-rate attempt at writing, producing, directing and storytelling!! There were enough writers, producers and directors! You'd be wrong to thing they could have gotten it right!!

Does this thing ever end? Obviously, Spielberg watched "The Tingler" too many times as a kid!! It made too much of an imprint on his mind, as did some other movies the rest of us kids watched, enjoyed and moved on from. Obviously, he's never been able to do that to too many stories, and it's been a shame, because he's an extremely creative storyteller, as long as he has a truckload of money behind him to be "spectacular"! He's not very good in the "inventive" department in his own right! This particular series quickly became very redundant and boring, especially once it moved into the 2d season, and in spite of a constantly fine ongoing effort by the cast!

Another shining example of "Spielberg Junk"! The movie might have been slightly better with another leading woman, and a different kid!

Today, I noticed that Jurassic Park was going to air on one of the cable channels. I figured that, since I haven't seen it in over a decade, it might be fun to watch....so I did. It didn't take long for the movie to remind me exactly why I hated it the first time I saw it!! The biggest problem is that it's a Spielberg product with his fingerprints all over it! In typical Spielberg fashion, many of the scenes don't make sense, are ambiguous or are totally illogical, as if he was making it up as he went along. Then, the movie tanked when Dern showed up in the very beginning. The whole movie would have been better without her attempts at acting. Another huge problem is that the only similarity to the book is that there are dinosaurs. The book was a thousand times better than what Spielberg turned out.

You're kidding me about this being a serious movie, right? You're kidding me about the lead female character not being one of the STUPIDEST, ANNOYING, INCAPABLE, BRAINLESS, AIR-HEADED, HALFWIT characters in movie history! And, the same descriptors apply to the writers!! What an annoying, silly, non-entertaining waste of film stock and the talents of a few good actors and crew!

Amazon paid $200 million for THIS? I wonder what they would pay for a GOOD movie? Amazon got ripped off, because this movie sucked! $200,000,000 for one lousy movie! I wonder how many small houses that money could build for homeless vets?

Sometimes, I wish we viewers could rate individual components of a movie, in addition to an overall rating. Components such as Story, Acting, Directing, Writing, Foolishness/Silliness, Potential, Crew Effort, Waste of Time & Money and so on, should be available to rate. And, the point value scale should run from 0 (ZERO) to 10 (TEN), inclusive. This movie would lend itself to such a rating system. The STORY has POTENTIAL, and is fairly interesting, but some of the WRITING bites the big one! As to some of the ACTING (or, rather, the LACK OF ACTING) is concerned, especially on the non-male side (does "non-male" offend anyone these days?), let's not even go there. Since there were so many places in which there was no real non-male ACTING, there's nothing to talk about under that category. Bottom line....if you're looking for a not-so-great movie to watch, or to have running in the background as noise, consider this as a candidate. However, if you're looking for an entertaining movie of quality, move along .... you'll be glad you did.

Whatever this offering is, it surely is NOT what you think of when you think "Tom & Jerry!" "Tom & Jerry" is a classic...as individual cartoons and overall as a concept. The characters moved and interacted in a certain way, with each other and with the world and characters around them. The background score was always part of the story and part of the action, almost as another character. The background music, here, is just.....music. It doesn't add anything, the way it did in the old cartoons. To be a "Tom & Jerry" cartoon, an offering had to have certain qualities, the same way a cartoon had to have certain unique qualities to be a "Looney Tunes" or Warner Brothers cartoon. You knew it when you saw it or heard it. It either WAS or it WASN'T....there was no middle ground. This movie ISN'T! It's one thing to draw "Tom & Jerry" characters, and quite another to make a "Tom & Jerry" movie or cartoon!

If you've seen "Band of Brothers" and "Saving Private Ryan", you've seen this movie. The only difference is the landscape. A movie that didn't need to be made. $200,000,000 that didn't need to be spent.