I would guess a lot of people don't like this show because it reflects everyday life and all the crap that comes with it. Why would anyone want to watch a show in which the main character was always p***ed? I didn't expect much from "Becker" when I first started watching it (mostly because I didn't much like Danson), but within the first month that it aired, I became a hardcore fan. John Becker reminds me of my own father, so it's funny to see someone with that attitude on television--and Ted Danson fills the role perfectly. I'm still sort of surprised it developed enough of a following to become a stable show for CBS. Of course, Shawnee Smith's perky (heh) presence doesn't hurt either.
Reviews
6 Reviews
The Mutilator
(1984)
worth seeing
9 March 2000
Warning: Spoilers
I'm not big on the slasher genre, preferring zombie epics or gialli, but "The Mutilator" is enjoyable trash. The story is typical slasher filler, with the running around finding places to screw, then being dispatched. It's been a few years since I saw this one, but I remember some suspense (not a lot!) and the killings were violent enough. The last kill is my favorite though and should please any gorehound (it really made the movie worth watching for me, but that was before I found Fulci). I mean, who wouldn't like to see someone getting cut in half by a car? (sorry for the spoiler) Just make sure you see the uncut/unrated tape. Not great, but not bad either. Worth a rental and better than watching a "Friday the 13th" sequel.
one man's trash is another man's treasure. . .
7 March 2000
And does that EVER apply here! I have a really soft spot for this crapper. Long, long ago, I saw it under the title "A Virgin Among the Living Dead". It made no sense! Then, years later, in my pursuit of obtaining bad films, I found an almost-uncut version. There are so many different edits of this film, it's hard to find the definitive cut. The one I currently have makes much more sense than the usual rental version.
To clear things up, zombies were not part of the original film (titled "Christine, Princess of Eroticism"). The zombie footage was taken mostly - if not entirely - from "Zombie Lake" (1980), which means they were spliced in well after "Virgin" was released (1971). Anyway, "Virgin" is about a girl named Christine, who journeys to her uncle's chateau for the reading of his will. What she finds is both revolting (to the squeamish) and humorous. Jess Franco does his job of playing the disheveled freak rather well. He just looks like a sleazebag. He also does an adequate directing job. The movie is very stylish as is typical with Franco's work, but also rather visually stunning, with the shots of the lush forest surrounding the chateau. There is even some strong atmosphere, particularly when, in one scene, Christine's uncle is drawn back into the shadows after speaking to her.
The film culminates in a sexual ritual that is severely--not to mention ridiculously, at least with the "Zombie 4" version--edited on any of the American prints. In fact, many of the scenes that help make the film more cohesive are also excised from American prints. The (as close as possible to) uncut version is really good if given a chance. Though not necessary, outside. . .influences can only help the viewer (and no doubt were used during the making of this trash classic). "Virgin" + melatonin + dank fun dreamy state.
Unfortunately, as so many others have mentioned, you won't see Christine nude unless you can find a completely unedited tape. She sure is hot! Shame she was only in three films (at least according to the IMDb). So that's it. I like it, but most don't. It's worth seeing just because it's better than any given American slasher flick.
To clear things up, zombies were not part of the original film (titled "Christine, Princess of Eroticism"). The zombie footage was taken mostly - if not entirely - from "Zombie Lake" (1980), which means they were spliced in well after "Virgin" was released (1971). Anyway, "Virgin" is about a girl named Christine, who journeys to her uncle's chateau for the reading of his will. What she finds is both revolting (to the squeamish) and humorous. Jess Franco does his job of playing the disheveled freak rather well. He just looks like a sleazebag. He also does an adequate directing job. The movie is very stylish as is typical with Franco's work, but also rather visually stunning, with the shots of the lush forest surrounding the chateau. There is even some strong atmosphere, particularly when, in one scene, Christine's uncle is drawn back into the shadows after speaking to her.
The film culminates in a sexual ritual that is severely--not to mention ridiculously, at least with the "Zombie 4" version--edited on any of the American prints. In fact, many of the scenes that help make the film more cohesive are also excised from American prints. The (as close as possible to) uncut version is really good if given a chance. Though not necessary, outside. . .influences can only help the viewer (and no doubt were used during the making of this trash classic). "Virgin" + melatonin + dank fun dreamy state.
Unfortunately, as so many others have mentioned, you won't see Christine nude unless you can find a completely unedited tape. She sure is hot! Shame she was only in three films (at least according to the IMDb). So that's it. I like it, but most don't. It's worth seeing just because it's better than any given American slasher flick.
Beyond the Darkness
(1979)
A classic in the splatter/gore genre
21 February 2000
Since so many others have already given adequate synopses and well-deserved praise regarding this fine flick, I can only add my own "it rules!!" to the bunch. Don't listen to any naysayers as they are obviously not fans of the late, great D'Amato. If you have a burning desire to see some of the sickest scenes on celluloid--and not necessarily the gory moments, though those are sweet, too--try finding this film. And to make the viewing experience more fun, watch it in front of the family!
don't waste your time. . .you've been warned
12 February 2000
I like to think of myself as a huge fan of horror--mostly gore/splatter films, but I can sit through a lot of stuff, even lame slasher flicks. This installment of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre is, without a doubt, utterly PATHETIC. From beginning to end, it MAKES NO SENSE! And Robert Jacks' Leatherface really sucks. I mean, it doesn't take a genius to play the part, but this guy just didn't cut it (no pun intended). It should be an obvious sign that this movie stinks if Gunnar Hansen didn't want to reprise his role as good ol' Leatherface. Who can blame the guy, though? The script must've mortified him! To top it all off, the amount of people who die can be counted on one hand. When I watch a horror movie, I want to see massacres of immense proportion, not a measly three or four murders. Besides all that, there's zero gore and pretty much no blood. Bah, what a disgrace.
Phantasm IV: Oblivion
(1998)
a very worthy sequel
2 May 1999
Phantasm: Oblivion is a fantastic installment in the Phantasm series. I'd even go so far as to say it's the best since the original (even though the other two are great). There is a noticeable lack of physical action, but the real action is cerebral and extremely satisfying. This film has so many insights to offer about The Tall Man while posing a mind-boggling number of new questions pertaining both to The Tall Man and his entire world. The gore has been toned down, but it's not really essential to the story anymore. Any of you out there doubting the positive comments on this film, please do yourself a favor and at least watch it. I was surprised at how much I liked it myself. Phantasm: Oblivion is truly a work of art.
Tell Your Friends