Reviews written by registered user
femaleanimefan

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

Page 1 of 5:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [Next]
41 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

2 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Not that bad, but definitely not a must see, 13 February 2010
4/10

I hate romantic comedies, so I didn't have high hopes for this movie. The reviews were bad, the trailer didn't look promising, so I went in expecting to hate it.

I didn't. But I didn't like it too much either. It had a few sweet moments, a few mildly funny moments, but it ultimately was too predictable and had too many stars. I could tell what was going to happen in every storyline. Nothing surprised me. There was nothing new or fresh, which I expected.

The actors are, honestly, mostly charming in their roles, but aren't given enough screen time to build on that charm. They are all good-looking, likable performers, but they are given absolutely nothing to work with. I would say the best performance would have to go to Jennifer Garner, who has a few funny moments but a completely uninteresting storyline. The worst would definitely have to be Taylor Swift. I don't hate the girl, but even playing an airhead bimbo, she is awful. She completely overacts, and I didn't laugh once. Taylor Lautner isn't too bad, he at least pokes fun at himself but he is still pretty stiff. There are tons of other stars who turn in admirable work (I particularly enjoyed the Bradley Cooper and Julia Roberts scenes), but are otherwise wasted. But Jessica Alba, who is top-billed, is only in about four scenes! She isn't even the greatest actress, but she had absolutely nothing to do.

If you want a good date movie, I don't recommend this one. It is definitely an inferior version of the imperfect but ultimately heartfelt Love, Actually. While it wasn't as horrible as I thought it would be, the script is too weak and there are too many story lines. I say skip it.

0 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
The best Potter yet, 15 July 2009
9/10

Book purists beware: if you expect every scene in the book to be covered here, you'll be disappointed. If you're expecting a fun, well-crafted, well-acted, exciting adaptation that captures the essence of the book, you'll be satisfied.

This is by far the best Potter film since Prisoner of Askaban, and arguably the best yet. The visuals are terrific, the acting is wonderful, the editing is top-notch, and and the writing and direction are all pitch-perfect.

Many fans have complained that the film spends too much time on comedy and romance than on the action. All I have to say is: did they even read the book? The novel didn't have as much action as the others, and instead focused on story and character development, which the comedy was part of. The humor was well done, and always funny.

The acting has very much improved. Out of the trio, Daniel Radcliffe has most improved. He has wonderful comedic timing and real dramatic chops as well. Rupert Grint and Emma Watson have also improved, with Grint becoming more than just comic relief and Watson growing out of her occasional woodenness. Tom Felton has more to do this time as Malfoy, and he is positively mesmerizing. You really feel sympathy for the poor kid.

The adult cast is top-notch, as well. I have finally gotten over the beloved Richard Harris, and I believe Michael Gambon was absolutely perfect as Dumbledore. Jim Broadbent shines as Professor Slughorn, making up for the drastic physical change with charm pitch-perfect delivery.

I was not a fan of David Yates's Order of the Phoenix, but I am now convinced after this film that he is the one who will lead this series to greatness. I can't wait for Deathly Hallows Part I & II, and hopefully they capture the essence of that book there as they did here.

9 out of 19 people found the following review useful:
Reasonably atmospheric, but overall, clichéd and forgettable, 27 March 2009
4/10

I have never been too fond of "true story" flicks, so I didn't expect much from this. I expected it to be bad, and it wasn't. But it wasn't great or memorable either.

The plot: After a family is forced to relocate for their son's health, they begin experiencing supernatural behavior in their new home, which turns out to be a former mortuary.

The good: A few good performances here. Though Virginia Madsen, who I loved in Sideways, was rather flat, Kyle Gallner was great as her son. I've been a fan of his ever since he portrayed the insecure, mass-murdering rapist Cassidy Casablancas on Veronica Mars, and he was actually very good here.

The bad: The script. Everything in it is cliché. And even though I did jump a few times, there was really nothing fresh, scary, or groundbreaking here. Just another run-of-the-mill supernatural horror flick. And if that's all you want, then check it out. But if you want a terrifying, memorable film going experience, you'll be disappointed.

Final Verdict: Wait for DVD. Don't rush out and see it; it's not worth it. You may get a few jolts, but overall, "The Haunting in Connecticut" brings nothing new to the horror genre and will most likely be forgotten.

** out of *****

The Spirit (2008)
5 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
Unique visuals and terrific atmosphere can't save the film, 24 December 2008
3/10

I was really looking forward to seeing 'The Spirit'. From the trailers, it looked like an interesting, entertaining film. However, when I finally saw it, I was underwhelmed. The dialogue was silly, the plot was dumb, and the execution was extremely poor. Not even the talented cast could save the terrible script.

The visuals, as many have said, are very unique, even stunning. When I first saw the trailer, I was intrigued. However, the rest of the film is rather hollow. I couldn't even figure out what the story was supposed to be, and though the cast was top-notch, they do little to help the atrocious dialogue.

Overall, the film is easy on the eyes, but it's rather dull and difficult to understand. Frank Miller doesn't seem ready to be a director. What he has created is a dull and quickly forgettable film.

D+

31 out of 37 people found the following review useful:
Someone please kill Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer, 30 August 2008
1/10

If nobody does, I will. After the critically panned Date Movie, Epic Movie, and Meet the Spartans, these two assholes decide to make another. It's the same formula, they make fun of popular movies in a tired, unfunny fashion.

I saw it with a few friends, hoping maybe I could get maybe one or two laughs out of it (I didn't expect anything). When I came out, I was seriously stunned at how lame the movie was. One friend actually liked it, all I had to say was, "What have you been smoking lately?".

I'm not even going to bother explaining the plot, since there really isn't a plot at all. All I can say is, don't waste your money watching the film. It contains no genuinely funny humor and is one of the worst movies ever made. And everyone thought Meet the Spartans bad, wait until they get a load of this one.

3 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
So bad it makes the prequels look stuff for the Oscars, 17 August 2008
1/10

When I first heard there was going to be an animated Star Wars film, my reaction was : What the hell are they thinking? I had the same reaction when I was coming out of the theater after watching this horrible mess.

Most movies I initially think will suck end up being good. I was pleasantly surprised by Tropic Thunder this weekend and Iron Man earlier this year, I hoped I'd get the same impression when I saw The Clone Wars. My faith in Lucas was misplaced, and I was angry when I got home.

The old Star Wars are some of the most beloved films of all time, and they are some of my favorite films. To be honest, the prequels aren't all that bad. Especially when compared to this one. ROTS was great, but not in the same league as TESB.

The plot is nothing worth talking about, but I must say, it's nothing great. It's tired, bland, and unoriginal. The voice acting is as wooden as the animation. I never thought I'd say this, but I miss Hayden Christensen as Anakin. This new guy makes Anakin a completely different character, overly sarcastic and immature. It is nice to have Samuel L. Jackson back as Mace Windu, but he is rarely shown. The other returning voice actors, Christopher Lee and Anthony Daniels, are good too, but don't help the film at all. The only remotely good VA is James Arnold Taylor as Obi-Wan. He actually sounds a bit like Ewan McGregor.

There are two things that make this movie worse than it already is : the Ahsoka character, and the fight scenes. Ahsoka is so very irritating that she makes Jar Jar Binks look lovable. Anakin shouldn't have gotten a padawan at all.

The annoying thing about the fights is that they are loud, noisy, and repetitive. They are all the same. Unlike the Mustafar fight in Episode III, which absolutely took my breath away, they just seem out of place.

Anyway, to wrap this up, this is an unworthy addition to the original series, and one of the worst movies I've seen this year. Star Wars fans: skip it. You're not missing anything.

5 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
Full of great characters and non-stop laughs, 17 August 2008
9/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I don't think I've laughed this hard during a movie in years. I initially thought it was just going to be a stupid movie with a few laughs, like Get Smart was. But I was wrong. Tropic thunder is a hilarious film full of great characters and ridiculously funny moments.

The plot, as you probably know, is about a bunch of actors : Tugg Speedman, an action star whose career is going down the toilet, a rapper named Alpa Chino (say it), an Australian method actor named Kirk Lazarus (Robert Downey Jr. in another great performance), a heroin addicted comedic actor named Jeff Potnoy (Jack Black), and a rookie actor, who is also the only one to attend boot camp named Kevin Sandusky. After just 5 days of shooting, director Damien Cockburn (Steve Coogan) cannot handle how self-absorbed the actors are. So Four Leaf (Nick Nolte), who wrote the book the movie is based on and also claimed to be part of the war, decides to throw them out in jungle with cameras placed everywhere.

It's a lot funnier than it sounds. Every moment in the movie is genius. From the interaction between Lazarus and Chino, Tugg being kidnapped by the "Flaming Dragons", and Jeff's constant heroin needs, there is never a dull moment in the film.

The acting is surprisingly great. First off, since everyone is talking about it, the Tom Cruise cameo. He's barely recognizable, but he's also pure genius. It's not really a cameo, since he appears many times during the film. It's great stuff. Another stand-out is Robert Downey Jr. as Lazarus. He steals almost every scene he's in, and also does a great Australian accent. The rest of the cast is good too, and I actually liked Ben Stiller.

All in all, it's great summer entertainment. Definitely one of the funniest movies in a long time, and possibly the funniest of the year.

272 out of 475 people found the following review useful:
Spit out the 2003 version of Hulk like a bad taste in your mouth! This is an exciting movie, 8 June 2008
9/10

I wasn't really sure if I'd like the movie. Ang Lee's version didn't please me at all. It didn't have enough action and it had far too much dialogue. I had never really been a fan of the Hulk comics, but I did like all the movie adaptations of the Marvel Comics. While I didn't enjoy The Incredible Hulk as much as Iron Man, it's still great fun, and it will definitely make a big profit at the box office, and hopefully more money than the first did.

I also must say the cast is a lot better this time around. Edward Norton is far more convincing as Bruce Banner than Eric Bana was. Liv Tyler does a good job as Betty, Bruce's girlfriend, though I do like Jennifer Connelly a bit more. The supporting cast is also great, and they all deserve to at least be nominated for some awards. My favorite performance is tied between Norton and Tim Roth.

Now, to the special effects. Predictably, they are magnificent. With recent superhero movies, the effects are always brilliant, and they certainly adapted the Hulk character more closely to the original comics from what I've heard. The action scenes are cool and fun to watch, and fans of the comic books will be on the edge of their seat in excitement.

All in all, it's a great movie that comic fans should enjoy, and even if you don't really read them, you'll still like the movie, as I did. While it's not my favorite superhero movie, it is a whole lot better than Ang Lee's version, and a fun time at the theater.

10 out of 24 people found the following review useful:
Overadvertised, 30 March 2008

Normally I don't hate kid's shows, but this one is just terrible. The acting is wooden, the characters are all unlikeable, and the plot is not as interesting as the advertisements made it out to be. It may be just a kid's show, but not even kid's will enjoy it. My niece finds it extremely boring and unfunny.

The show has two huge flaws that make it practically unwatchable. The first, is the god-awful acting. I know they're inexperience kids and all, but come on, they can do way better. Their delivery is off, and the way they act, especially during the comedic scenes, is incredibly awkward. It seems they are trying to hard to make the dialogue funny, which is hard to do because of the horrible script.

The second flaw is the laugh track. We've all seen it in Disney shows before; a character does or says something funny, and you hear an audience laugh. The laugh track in this show, is completely overused and annoying. After practically every line of dialogue, you hear the audience laugh. I am beginning to doubt there is even a real audience, and that the laughing is prerecorded.

This show is a definite waste of time, and painfully over advertised. It's a show that simply isn't worth your time. 1/10 stars.

Devil May Cry 4 (2008) (VG)
0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
The best in the series, 22 February 2008
9/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

--NO SPOILERS--

This game is major badass. Not only did it have great characters and voice acting, it contains excellent gameplay and is easily the best one since the first. The first DMC game was great, but had a few cheesy moments. The second one sucked, and the third was pretty good. This one owns 2 and 3, and only beats 1 because it barely had any cheesy moments.

When I first heard there was going to be a Devil May Cry 4, I found out that Dante would no longer be the main character, but Nero would, a new character who looks a lot like Dante and Vergil. I was a bit surprised and thought I would be in for a disappointment. When I finally played it, I found Nero an incredibly different and refreshing character, and I'm glad Dante was at playable for part of the game.

Devil May Cry fans won't be disappointed with the game, and even people who have haven't played the first three should enjoy this game.


Page 1 of 5:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [Next]