Reviews written by registered user

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

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Great acting, made plot more straight-forward, 21 November 2009

The movie is wonderful. There is passion and a sense of magic - even if it be dark magic - throughout the entire film. You cannot tear your eyes from the screen. However, if you're looking for a faithful adaption of the book - look elsewhere. Oliver is your Heathcliff, exactly as Ms. Bronte imagined him, but Oberon, while a brilliant and talented actress, is not your Cathy. She is a far more innocent creature than the fiery Cathy from the novel. Also, this movie will leave out some major parts from the book. For a more straight-forward theatre-going experience, it focuses solely on Cathy and Heathcliff. It was a nice change to watch something that was far less complicated than the novel, but that does not make the movie superior. I would recommend this movie to those who enjoy the novel because it is very poignant and rather true to the story. Every movie has its downfall, but this one is still very enjoyable. It gives an outline of the indescribable love that has been immortalized in Wuthering Heights.

Up (2009)
Wonderful movie, not so great for the little ones, 21 November 2009

"Up" was a very good movie, but it was not what I expected it to be. It was not filled with jokes, nor funny the entire way through. The main jokes or funny scenes were seen through previews and short "Upisodes" on the movie's official website. However, that does not mean that it was not enjoyable. The characters were endearing and the animation wonderful. The story is quite involved. Children will not want to sit through the first ten minutes (quite an endearing back story that I enjoyed, but will be of little interest to kids who want to be entertained), never mind the entire movie. I would hazard a guess that a normal child would not be able to sit through more than half of this movie, simply because the plot gets complicated. Also, the movie tries to tackle many issues - such as death, divorce, estranged parenthood - that deserve more focus, although I applaud their efforts. Once again, such issues would probably be lost on a younger audience.

Altogether, I think "Up" was wonderful and extremely enjoyable, but those under age 7 will not be able to appreciate it. It is not as age-appropriate as "Snow White" and "The Lion King," although the magic is certainly there. That is one thing Disney has not lost.

Hair (1979)
1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Opinion of a musical buff, 22 August 2009

This musical is fun. To be honest, I put off watching it because I like really in-depth musicals. I thought that this would be about hippies, and drugs, and generally grate on my nerves. I didn't expect anything profound. Well, I just finished watching it for the first time five minutes ago. It's playing on my television for a second time right now. I will agree with Hair-buffs that there are some great points in this movie (that I have yet to fully understand, because I can't say I caught everything upon my first viewing), however, it is just plain fun for the average viewer. It is completely brainless (I do not mean that in an insulting way) *if you want it to be*. I can see why it's a cult classic and a legend. I suggest that everyone, no matter their opinion, keep an open mind and watch this movie once they are old enough for the nudity and basic themes. As for me, not only will I watch the movie a few more times, I will pay the money to go see it on Broadway (2009 revival) as soon as I can. My pre-formed opinion was not only disproved, but completely reversed.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Too cute!, 12 July 2009

I expected to see a chick flick, not worth a second glance and probably less than enjoyable the first time 'round. What I got was a humorous, well-made chick flick. Some unexpected things happen that keep you interested throughout the movie. All of the principle actors gave wonderful performances. The movie was well balanced between the two countries and slightly-entwined plots. The writing was great, despite very few, very small ill-fitting lines. Overall, it was simply an enjoyable movie. I would highly recommend it to anyone for simply a fun night. I'll definitely be sitting down to see it again! I thoroughly enjoyed it!

Good film just not historical, 31 July 2008

If you are looking for something historical, then look elsewhere. If you are looking for a good movie to keep your interest, "The Other Boleyn Girl" will help.

The actresses (and actors -- gotta love that Eric Bana!) all put on fabulous performances. You are at once plunged into King Henry's England and drawn into the dramatic lives of those of Henry's court. The costumes are wonderful. They truly add to the affect. The plight of Henry and the two sisters will keep you entertained, just as long as you are not looking for historical accuracy. The film was well projected and moves quickly. It may not be a film you want to return to, but it is one that you will want to have seen anyway.

Perfect Body (1997) (TV)
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Pretty good; accomplishes goal, 15 July 2008

The entire point of this movie was to show how desperate girls can be to reach their dreams, how they think that they're helping themselves, and how they ultimately crush those dreams all on their own. The gymnastics may not have been realistic -- I'm not going to pretend that those girls were ready to compete in Beijing -- but I really liked the eating disorder part. We followed Andie and we saw how she got to be that bad. We went on her journey, felt her fears, understood her mindset. I also don't think that she cleared up her problems in the end. She says that it is going to take a while; we just don't *see* it taking a while because movies are short. I thought that this was a good portrayal and an eye-opener. It is definitely worth viewing, maybe more than once. Is it anything that teenage girls these days don't hear? Maybe not. It could very well go in one ear and out the other, but it's worth a shot.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Has the right idea; needs better execution, 15 July 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

A value: 6. B: 6.1 All of the actors were top-notch. Everything was perfectly believable and very, very realistic. My problem was with the plot itself and its execution (under the New Code, let us call these the A values and the B values).

A value: This movie has the right idea: to show people that sports (and gymnastics in particular) is not all glitz and glamour. It shows the hard work that all gymnasts have to go through to become the elite, the girls that grace our television screens and amuse us for not even a month every four years. These girls come across caring coaches and those that border on (or completely cross) the lines of verbal abuse. However, every coach has to be tough to some degree. It is true that gymnasts have to work through pain and learn how to deal with high-pressure situations, because, if they plan on competing at all as Seniors, that is all that they are going to deal with.

B value: My problem is with the execution of this film. They only briefly touched upon Katie's problems and focused more on her mother. I think that we should have seen Katie a little more. While it was very, very good to watch the mother's slow descent from parent to cheerleader, we did not watch Katie's descent from enjoying the sport to seeing it strictly as a competition. We heard briefly about her diet and her pain, but it was not seen enough so as to make the viewer think of it as a problem. We need to see what is going on in Katie's mind because she is what really counts. The mother should be looking out for her, but the mother can only *correct* the problem -- we need to see what spawned the problem in the first place.

It is good for a made for TV movie and it is definitely worth viewing, but I, personally, do not see myself going back to it again.

Door to Door (2002) (TV)
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Inspiring and Unforgettable, 11 June 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I never knew that the story of Bill Porter was real! This is a beautiful, inspirational story about a man with cerebral palsy who is determined to become a salesman -- just like his father. It shows the real-life struggles of a man who was told no by the world. Society would rather let him collect disability, care for him like a child, than be inconvenienced as he tried to make his way in life. However, Bill Porter was not a man of charity. Nothing was left out or candy coated -- everything, the good and the bad, was represented with amazing clarity. A man who was told to sit at home and collect a check instead made a living for himself and, moreover, worked his way unforgettably into the lives of his clients. He made his mark on history and is still making it! The acting in this movie was phenomenal. Emotions were represented perfectly and not once was I distracted from the story. I am not a fan of Kyra Sedgwick, but she did a truly amazing job. William H. Macy was touching, inspirational, and unforgettable. Everyone should see this movie. You're cheating yourself out of a great and possibly life-changing story if you don't. I'm going to be my own little salesman here. To quote Bill Porter, "What do you have to lose?"

4 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Raises serious questions, 10 June 2008

This is based on a true story. The real Michael Crowe has seen the movie and is impressed with how truly the case was represented. This movie is a must-watch; it truly raises some serious questions about our justice system. It gives you information that the average American citizen is entitled to, but usually does not have. Watch it, learn from it, and arm yourself with knowledge of just what is possible. It does not mean that the American government or justice system is entirely corrupt, but investigations may not be as pristine as they appear. For their part, however, I will say that the movie focuses on the point of view of the affected family and not the officers. The most common speculation is that the officers accused Michael because they did not wish to do all of the work of a true investigation; they instead just wanted to prove their theory, right or wrong. Because this is about Michael's suffering and obvious innocence, that is pretty much point of view given.

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
The best book-to-movie film ever, 20 February 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Never have I seen a more touching film. Set in the time of the Great Depression, this movie explores the life of Paul Edgecomb, a guard on death row. His job is, for the most part, a good job -- it pays well and is relatively easy to do. He simply has to keep the prisoners calm in their last days and then walk them to "Old Sparky," the electric chair, for their execution. It was pretty much cut and dry... until John Coffey came along.

John, a big, black, giant of a man, is accused with the murder and rape of two very young, innocent girls. He was found clutching their broken and bloodied bodies, saying, "I couldn't take it back." Yet when he arrives at the prison, he seems completely harmless. An accurate quote from the book says something along the lines of, "He looked like he could have snapped the chains that held him as easily as you might snap the ribbons on a Christmas present, but when you looked in his face, you knew he wasn't going to do anything like that." Something about this giant made him seem human.

It is not long before Paul Edgecomb realizes that there is something very different about his new prisoner. John Coffey, whose education consists of nothing more than being able to spell his own name ("Like the drink, only spelled different"), easily heals wounds by simply touching them, taking the illness into his own body, and later releasing it in the form of a swarm of fly-like creatures. Paul goes as far as to arrange an outing for John; he actually takes the prisoner off of death row so that John can go heal a friend who has a brain tumor. He does heal her and he never even tries to escape. John seemed the epitome of innocence. He couldn't harm a fly.

Now Paul must choose between his soul and his job. His job orders that he kill John Coffey, but his soul balks at the idea of killing a creature of God ("When I die and I stand before God awaiting judgment and he asks me why I let one of HIS miracles die, what am I gonna say, that it was my job?"). John replies that he actually wants to die, that Paul is doing a kindness for him ("I'm tired, boss... Mostly I'm tired of people being ugly to each other. I'm tired of all the pain I feel and hear in the world everyday. There's too much of it. It's like pieces of glass in my head all the time.") Paul has to obey. He treats John to a last request (which is to go see one of those picture movies) and then straps him into Old Sparky. It would be Paul's last execution on the Green Mile (so named for its green linoleum floor leading to Old Sparky), as well as his friend Brutus' last execution. John changed his life forever, and to this day John has given Paul a very special gift.

As both a fan of the book and movie, I have to say that this is the least disappointing film I have ever seen. It makes me cry every time I watch it. You get attached to the characters and understand their plights. It is almost word-for-word, scene-by-scene like the book. Everything is easily understandable and the three hours it takes to get through this movie feels like a half an hour. You will not have to watch the movie more than once, but I guarantee that you will want to!

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