Reviews written by registered user
pessimistic_girl

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

7 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

3 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Who suffered more, Jackie or Rose?, 11 August 2002
6/10

In my opinion it was Rose Kennedy, she lost 3 sons (Joe Jr., Jack/John, Bobby) and 1 daughter (Kathleen "Kick"). I've never been all that into the Kennedy's, for one JFK, in my opinion wasn't much of a president and Jackie-O was almost singlehandedly responsible for thousands of big cats dying for the sake fashion. Leaving those two things aside I really did enjoy this mini-series.

It was a refreshing change from all the Kennedy films where they focus on the assassinations of JFK (and sometimes RFK) because here they were just a bit of the background.

The real trouble I have with this mini-series is that I don't care. I don't care if Jackie suffered because I'm not fond of her. However it was nice to see her relationship (strictly platonical) with Bobby Kennedy, played very nicely by Andrew McCarthy, the only face I recognized in this whole production. There were a lot of funny scenes and the acting was admirable, and I must admit I did shed a tear or two.

Final rating: 7 ½ / 10

Grease (1978)
0 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Used to be a lot funnier..., 10 August 2002
7/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I first saw this film when I was 10 years old, and loved it. As I watch it today it makes me realize that there were a lot of things I enjoyed more as a 10 year old; like jumping rope or building sand castles. This is not to say that Grease is a drag, quite the opposite in many ways it's a charming movie.

The songs are catchy and the choreography is very nicely done. They've also managed to pick out a team of actors that work well together, playing off each other superbly. So what's missing?

In the simplest term; decency. All the characters are more or less shallow and are possibly the OLDEST high schoolers I've ever laid eyes upon (and I've seen Beverly Hills 90210). That's the first mistake, the second is that everything is so stereotyped. Rizzo = slut. Kenickie = height of cool and very aware of it too. Jan = the chubster (where?). Frenchy = loveable ditz with heart of gold. Danny = cool guy but really a big softy. Sandy = scared, meak girl far away from home. These elements are portrayed immensely and get old really, really fast.

Then of course the old clichés start kicking in. (SPOILER warning) Boy likes girl. Boy is tough, girl is not. Boy's friends don't approve. Boy acts like an idiot and looses girl. Girl decides to change her life just so she can be with boy. This, sadly, is a pretty accurate description of Grease. I do realize that it takes place in America in the 50's and that attitudes were different then than they are now. Still I can't see it without thinking how awfully dated this story is.

Leaving the dating aside, the movie is very well made and flows easily between the different stories. And my, my, my is John Travolta dreamy! ;)

Final rating: 6 / 10

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Look, I'm not going to discuss my private life with total strangers., 10 August 2002
8/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

And yet that's precisely what they did. Breakfast Club is one of those movies that is easy to like. It's witty, moving fast, covering many differing subjects (such as drugs, sex, child abuse, alcoholism, suicide etc.) and has a set of more or less likeable characters that many of us can relate to on various levels. Keeping all of these facts in mind it would be very hard to figure out what this movie is lacking if you have as of yet not seen it.

What's missing is credibility and a certain sense of reality. Anyone who's ever served a couple of hours in detention are aware that for the most part, unless someone you know is there, you don't go blabbering on about your own difficulties and personal problems. Strangers are just that; people you do not know well enough to speak to about private matters. And after 8 hours in a room together it's unlikely that strangers suddenly become friends (SPOILER alert) and even lovers.

Despite the issues I've just mentioned I do love this movie and have watched it a dozen times (at least). Because firstly, it's mainly a teen-flick and secondly it's an 80's teen-flick; plot holes and "unrealisticness" can be overlooked slightly.

Truth is, this movie is entertaining and a very well made dramedy that makes you laugh and get teary eyed at the same time. The characters are not as one dimensional as you are lead to believe, they all interact well together and the acting is very nice indeed. The movie runs pretty smoothly throughout except the ending which is my humble opinion seems slightly forced.

Final grade: 7 ½ / 10

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Not an Oscar contender but hilarious none the less..., 4 August 2002
7/10

Weekend at Bernie's may not be an intellectual masterpiece, or even remotely educating, but that doesn't matter! What does matter is that this movie is an absolute scream!

Larry (superbly played by Andrew McCarthy) is my fave but Richard (Jonathan Silverman) also manages to amuse me with his inability to make up his mind. And I have to salute Terry Kiser, the best "dead" body I've ever seen!

Ok it's already been pointed out that it isn't exactly the most realistic plot in the world. I mean, you usually would know if you were sitting next to a rotting, ice-cold corpse. But even so, it's a movie (!), and you don't really question sci-fi flics for being unrealistic do you? So why criticize this one for it.

The movie had a good build-up and showed an impressive flow of interesting characters, i.e. the party goers were a hoot. Also Larry and Richard show an amazing ability to work under pressure and come up with various clever solutions how to keep Bernie on the move.

What you essentially need to see Weekend at Bernie's is an open mind and a very strong sense of humour. Because of all the gags about dead bodies it may be offensive to some, especially those who get hung up on the need for realism. I however am not such a person therefor I continue to watch it and laugh my a$$ off.

My rating: 9½ / 10

Nothing like the book, for better and worse..., 20 July 2002
7/10

I think I'll start by saying that I am not a fan of the book, which I found rather childish and pointless. Therefor I had no higher expectations when I went to see the movie. But fortunately I was proved wrong, I think I can honestly say that apart from the names Bridget Jones's Diary (the movie) is nothing like Bridget Jones's Diary the book. And in my case that was a good thing... for a while.

Strangely no matter how dull the book is I get slightly ticked off if the movie doesn't follow it. And in Bridget Jones's Diary there are very few elements that resemble the book. On the upside, the movie runs smoothly and all parts are equally entertaining (for the most part). On the downside the movie is such a far cry from the book that I wouldn't recognize them if they didn't share the same name.

So for the acting; Hugh Grant is great, and a lot less annoying than usual. Colin Firth was way too dry for my taste but I guess that's how Marc Darcy is. Renee Zellwegger did have me impressed, especially with the accent, I saw her in Jerry Maguire a few weeks ago and was stunned at how different she sounded and looked. Bridget's friends are fine, although you see VERY little of them.

But honestly my main problem with this movie is that Bridget (and Renee Zellwegger) are NOT overweight. According to the BMI calculator 136 lbs on a 5,5 foot frame is HEALTHY! Bridget's BMI would be 22.6, that's normal. Over 25 is overweight. It's really sad the way Hollywood (and other parts of entertainment) makes 136 lbs out to be overweight.

I guess I'd give it (with the cut scenes that were hilarious): 7½/10

4 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Very confusing... and a bit frustrating too, 14 July 2002
8/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Ok for starters I would just like to break down the summary on the back of my video. SPOILER WARNING:

"He's a rich heartthrob and she's a poor girl from the wrong side of the tracks..."

POOR?! POOR!? She lives in a HOUSE, they have TWO cars and a dog (a big one at that) and still she's poor? Then what am I, living in an apartment, no car and a little cat? Sounds to me like I might as well be on the streets.

"...they face the peer pressure..."

HUH? There were only TWO people that had any real objections to Blane and Andie and those were; Steff (who was mad Andie wouldn't date him) and Duckie (who was also mad Andie wouldn't date him). Other than that I don't see what peer pressure they're talking about. Betty? She didn't like Andie anyway, and from the looks of it she was no friend of Blane's.

But leaving these two facts aside the movie is pretty enjoyable, except for the pairing of Andie and Blane, but that's mostly because I do not think Andie deserves Blane, no way. And that's no being prejudice or anything it's that I'm no fan of Molly Ringwald and big fan of Andrew McCarthy.

Plus I don't think I even have to comment on the fact that Andie was so NOT pretty in pink. What was she wearing to the prom, a garbage bag?

The real highlights of this movie are Steff (with Blane) and Duckie. Furthermore Steff seems to be the only one with a smidge of common sense. All in all maybe you have to be American to understand the whole 'peer pressure' 'poor' sorta thing but no matter how cliché this movie gets I still find myself watching it almost once a week. So it must've done something right.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Brilliant!, 19 March 2001
9/10

The first time I saw the trailer I thought to myself: What is this? The second time I saw it, I sighed. The third time, I became interested in going to see it. And the fourth time, I was convinced. Unfortunately, I never did go. Instead I did the second best thing, I bought the book. I read it and then bought the video. I didn't mind the change of cities much. Something that did bother my remotely was the fact that his Laura was blonde (in the book she was a brunette) and that Charlie was a brunette (in the book she was a blonde). Other than that I loved it! Especially the parts in the video store and his burst out towards Laura's new boyfriend. Like I mentioned earlier they had changed a lot of things for an example one of the girlfriends on his breakup list, that he didn't visit his parents and that he didn't meet the couple with horrible music taste. Those were some of the most enjoyable moments in the book for me. But Cusack (both of them) were brilliant and I simply loved Jack Black. He was hilarious. But I would still recommend people who loved this movie to read the book also. It may take you by surprise.