Reviews written by registered user
ElKabong-3

Send an IMDb private message to this author or view their message board profile.

Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
18 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
This one doesn't even come close, 13 September 2005
3/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

OK, first we got the stupid premise of the government training a whole family as a secret undercover investigatory team, including the 2 teenagers. This team is checking out reports of supernatural deaths at a high school due to a ghost. This, of course, is not the case. A much-bullied science geek whose uncle was harassed to death years before is taking revenge on those he sees as the same types that were responsible. The inconsistencies in this film are legion We have the family FBI unit, which would never happen under any circumstances. We have a school building infested with large, very aggressive and highly poisonous spiders that nobody notices until they figure out the cause of the mysterious deaths, but after that you can't swing a cat without disturbing a huge clump of arachnids. As another reviewer mentioned, the daughter, though FBI trained and skilled, squeals like an 8 year-old at anything that startles her and screams constantly once the spiders are discovered. Overall, this turkey needs to be forgotten, a bad idea poorly executed. If I saw this for free I'd want my 2 hours back. Really awful, a must-pass

3 out of 10 because at least it wasn't that even more awful House of Wax from earlier this year.

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
The first truly great film I ever saw., 20 August 2005
8/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Lemme see, what can I say about this film that has not been said many times before? Probably nothing. This was a magnificent movie, touching and topical, and a fitting vehicle for Sidney Poitier's tremendous talents.Set in a secondary school in a rundown part of London, Mark Thackery, recent graduate and prospective engineer takes a job teaching a class of seemingly unreachable kids. Intimidated at first, he decides that the curriculum is worthless to them and commences to teach them life lessons about courtesy, civility and the real world into which they are about to emerge. I was 11 years old I guess when I saw this film, and it touched me deeply to think that a teacher might care as deeply about his charges as Poitier's character does in the film. Add to that one of Poitier's greatest performances IMHO, and the film is riveting, emotional and deeply moving. Before this movie, probably the movie that touched me most was Old Yeller. Now I was real young so it wasn't like I had a 20 year track record. For many years afterward this film would be the standard by which I judged all movies.

8 out of 10 for a fine film and a powerful performance by Poitier

1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
A steaming pile of dung, but very heroic dung, 16 August 2005
3/10

Ridden with clichés, a predictable cornball back story, this film manages to take one of the more monumental tales of the 20th century and reduce it to a tale of a love triangle in uniform. The main characters are stiffly played, and so unrealistic that I was unable to care about their fates by the end of the picture. 2 hero wannabes fall in love with a nurse who can't keep her legs together (my interpretation). Her true love is reported missing in action, and she responds to the news by putting out for his best friend. The Pearl Harbor story spills over into the story of the famous Doolittle raid on Japan. Alec Baldwin emotes the role of Doolittle with his typical hammy style, causing the audience to begin to sympathize with Japanese anti-aircraft guns, and hope that they are successful in shooting down the mission, even if after their bombs have been delivered. An enormous effort was made to take this epic historic war drama and reduce it to cornball melodrama.

3 out of 10 (Rent the Victory at Sea series if you want a quality WW2 film experience)

4 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Half-nekkid amazon warriors follow their busty queen, 13 August 2005
5/10

Let me say up front that this is NOT a great film. No Oscar nominations, probably none of the cast was ever in an award winning film. What this is, is your basic raunchy action flick, complete with bouncing bare bosoms. This is late night cable TV fare, watch it for free when you can, and be glad you're not watching the Ya Ya Sisterhood movie. Lana Clarkson is more than up to the task of providing the bouncing boobies frequently throughout the movie. The plot is stale and formulaic, the acting stiff, but there's still that charm of scantily clad amazon warriors led by their rather randy queen in a revolution against the Great Evil which is in power. This is from the eras before Hollywood became so concerned with accusations of smut mongering, the films of the last decade or so have been lacking the delightful skin scenes which used to be a standard component of such films. If this film were being made today, the amazons would be covered much more thoroughly and Ms. Clarkson would not share her bountiful charms with us. If it sounds like I miss those days, I do. Many a mediocre film was made worthwhile by a liberal splashing of young nubile skin. Don't watch this for an example of great cinema, watch it for young lovelies on display.

5 out of 10 for obvious reasons.

1 out of 15 people found the following review useful:
I would only see it again at gunpoint, 24 July 2005
1/10

A bad remake of a bad 1960 film, somebody inexplicably decided that it would play better as a musical. It doesn't. A really weak plot about a carnivorous alien plant made all the worse by putting it into musical form, thus treating us to Rick Moranis' singing "ability". Far worse than the original for just awful acting performances, a miserable score, and laughable special FX. I would not even consider seeing this turkey again unless somebody held a gun to my head or the head of a loved one and forced me to. Since that is unlikely, I am thankfully done with any involvement with this pitiful failure of a film.

1 out of 10. only because they won't register a zero.

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
simply fantastic!, 23 July 2005
8/10

Among the very best of the comic book superhero movies, ranking up there with Spiderman and Batman Begins for quality. Casting was good, acting was adequate, special effects were tremendous. I hope my appreciation of the FX is not colored by how much superior they are to the 1994 dog of a flick directed by Roger Korman. Aside from the title, the two films have almost nothing in common. The plot line adheres to the comic book story very closely, with the only major difference being that of Dr. Doom being exposed to cosmic rays and changed along with our heroes. While a fairly major thing, this did not seriously detract from the film story. There were other miniscule departures, such as Ben Grimm being married, but these did not have a big impact on the plot. I have heard it said that the story was somewhat juvenile, to which i say, "It's a comic book Superhero movie." you aren't going to get Gone With the Wind, but you do get a fine and entertaining film. I haven't heard of anybody who thought that they wasted 8.50 by seeing it. Personally, I enjoyed it greatly, the film makers made the story come to life from the pages of Marvel Comics. Probably the best of the superhero movies from Marvel comics, and surpassed overall only by the magnificence of Batman Begins in all the comic book genre of films. I heartily recommend.

8 out of 10

1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
another 3rd rate gore flick calling itself horror, 14 June 2005
4/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Aw c'mon, this one isn't even close. This film lacks the outright slaughter quality of Holloween or Friday the 13th and pretends to be a serious movie, but fails in doing so on a number of fronts. The plot twist at the end doesn't make any sense and leaves way too many holes, such as: Where did the van come from? What happened to the creep with the disembodied female head that we see in the original scene with the van? As usual with horror movies, how is it that our killer is always faster, stronger, and smarter than any of the victims? About the best I can say for this turkey is that it's better than House of Wax.

I'd recommend another horror film to watch instead, but I don't remember the last time I saw a good one. If you really want a good scare, watch the local news. This film isn't gonna do the trick.

4 out of 10 for decent photography and because one of the young women actually showed us a little skin.

(yeah, it's THAT hard to find anything good about it)

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Stupid and Pointless, 8 June 2005
3/10

This is one of those short subjects that makes you want to scratch your head and go, "huh?" Made with puppets, the short is a series of scenes (actually the same scene over and over) which are given a time line and location. The locations used are Berkeley, California and Cedar Sinai Medical Center. There is no dialog, just grunting and muttering sounds like you would hear from somebody making a noise while vibrating. The visual scenes are all the same, puppets shaking, one of them upside down. I was left with the impression that there was film left in the camera after a film shoot, so they gave it to their 10 year-old to play with. No symbolism that I could see, just stupid puppets shaking over and over in 2 different places. The only redeeming value at all to this short is that it was very short. It was mercifully over in about 5 minutes. If you're watching when this turkey comes on, it's a real good opportunity to catch a bathroom break or to make a sandwich. You won't miss anything.

3 out of 10 Why did they bother?

Backslide (2003)
3 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
reminds me of someone I know, 30 May 2005
8/10

This short subject features 2 religious teens (from the 70's, judging by their fashions and hairstyles) who are torn between their religious belief in abstinence and their feelings toward each other. Without being explicit, it is clear that the young couple have just fornicated and are wrack ed with guilt. They pray together, asking forgiveness and for the strength to resist their lustful desires. By the end of the short subject, the young couple has determined that they will never again place themselves in the way of temptation. As the camera fades to black, we see the pair embrace and begin kissing passionately, followed by audio only of the girl saying, "Oh God".

This short reminded me of my own youth and of the fundamentalist baggage that I carried around for way too many years. The young man in the short could very well have been me, and the girl, well, she knows who she is.

Well made and well acted this is one of the more easily understood short subjects I have seen. It is repeated on a semi-regular basis on the Independent Film Channel's "IFC Shorts Collection." A description of the program does not typically include names of the individual short subjects which will air, so you are pretty much stuck with watching the program blind and taking pot luck as to what you'll see.

8 out of 10 for taking me back to a place from which I thought I was far removed.

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Only 1 good reason to see this movie, 28 May 2005
3/10

If you're a guy, the only reason to see this film is to continue getting laid. I can't imagine what women saw in it, but I've about given up on figuring that out.The male reaction to the storyline in this film would be,"Hell, my family is more trouble than they're worth. Screw em" Women, on the other hand, insist on going back and reliving past mistakes and hoping that things will turn out differently this time. That's pretty much what this film is about, Siddalee knows that her mother is a bitch but desperately wants her to be something else, so she tries to change the past and the woman who abused her. This is the kind of movie where you can feel the testosterone being sucked out of your body and the rational and logical thought process being sucked from your brain.

A complete waste of time, no reason for any straight male to see this turkey ever, unless you have to in order to keep the woman in your life putting out. 3 out of 10, one of the worse movies I've ever seen, and I've seen some real dogs.

James Garner was apparently seduced by the Dark Side for the making of this film. It may have gone deeper still, after all, he made The Notebook after this one.

Support the Untied Dyslexic Church of Dog!!


Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]