Reviews written by registered user
talel_bj

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

1 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
sorry guys, but it just doesn't make sense..., 25 November 2006
5/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

everyone here seems to be truly fascinated by this film and i know i'll come of cynical and pragmatic but seriously folks, it just ain't logical. i don't care for any explanations on how this time shift thing works. i am willing to accept this as pure magic, but in it's parallel magical universe it should still all make sense and it just doesn't add up. he's in the past she's in the future. she saved him from getting killed in that car accident so why didn't he show up for that dinner? in her past the accident had already happened and she tried to save him then already. but she didn't recognize him. there moment at her birthday party was kinda special and she doesn't notice the guy dying in her arms is him? and as i said i don't need reasons for the time shift, but suddenly keanu is in sandra's present in the end. how did that work? he survived so he could've shown up on her doorstep circa valentine's day 2006? too many questions, just too many questions. beyond that the actors did a decent job, but i am wondering why they signed up for a film with so many plot holes...

Hostel (2005)
disgusting and pretty numb, 29 October 2006
4/10

people told me a lot about this film, so i was warned that i am getting myself into some kind of weird hardcore-horror/softcore-porn flick. there were some really disgusting scenes and the terror of the victims at times really gets to you. i must say though that i am mainly unimpressed. the movie is pushing some buttons (some reviews said the event in this film inevitably reminds you of what went on abu ghraib) what ruins it is the fact that the film just lacks any intellectual depth so it feels strange that people will make movies like that just for entertainment. there are also some pretty violent scenes of revenge so i suggest any affiliation of this to politics or some serious effort to criticize some things that are going wrong in this world can be condemned as unbelievable. i was irritated overall with the way people in general are portrayed in this movie. so eli roth thinks that everyone out there is obsessed with sex and violence? i disagree. all in all not terrible but definitely not a must see

7 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
worthless crap, 8 October 2006
1/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

i am shocked how many people enjoyed this horrible film. the "plot" was contrived and unbelievable, paul walkers "acting" sucked (well, his character was unlikeable anyway) and i seem to be the only one who thought the visuals were neither interesting nor original. i am not playing the moral card but i think the only way to enjoy this film is to have much fun seeing harsh brainless violence. but even if i'm not judging that i think it's pretty sad that they brought in pedophiles just for the shocking value. seriously, they had nothing interesting to say on that subject, so why even bother presenting story lines about raped children. that's pretty low. anyway, the final resolution was silly (undercover? for 15 years? witness protection? oh please...) this movie sucked!!!

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
crap that could have been fun, 8 October 2006
3/10

i am not a fun of the original basic instinct at all, but i'm working at a video store and i get to rent films for free. this looked like fun trash so i decided to go for it. i must say the first thirty minutes were pretty cool in a crappy way. the dialogue was kind of fun and sharon stone (whom i've never considered a great actress) was actually enjoyable in an over the top catty way. the opening scene in the car was funny and i must say the overall look of the film isn't that bad. but the whole plot was silly and the lead actor looked as though he was a capable actor but just didn't fit into this role. i had a good laugh at the dresses mrs stone wore during the therapy session, i doubt there appropriate for the occasion. in the end the mystery didn't work and the trashy fun of it wore out rather fast. by the way mrs stone looks great but i think the plastic surgeon did a rather mediocre job on the boobs. all in all: not unbearable but certainly bad, while it really could've been fun

Proof (2005)
0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
i liked it!, 3 October 2006
7/10

i rented this film with basically no expectations at all, but i was surprised at how watchable it really was. the plot definitely reminded me of a beautiful mind which i thought was brilliant. but this one is really nice too. that said it certainly didn't amaze me or anything. it was ninety minutes of intriguing human drama with some nice acting. i'm a big fan of jake gyllenhaal and hope davis, who're both making the most of their small parts. i am not that big on anthony hopkins who i happen to find a bit overrated but he was certainly effective. and than there is this thing with gwyneth paltrow i have. i really like her and again there is absolutely nothing wrong with her performance but somehow she always fails to really impress me and this time is no exception. still overall this was a good film that is worth seeing. i must say though you can tell it's based on a play and i suppose i would have rather liked seeing it on stage. anyway, i liked it!

The Dark Area (2000) (V)
5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
masterpiece of worthless film-making, 29 September 2006
1/10

a friend of mine bought this (very cheaply) and decided to give it to me as a birthday present. i thought i'd never watch it 'cause i knew it was a joke and the cover of the DVD looked pathetic, but then my friends and i got really bored and watched it. from start till finish! i know quite an accomplishment but it really is a masterpiece. it's hard to describe. you should see it, it's a real lesson on what people are capable of when they believe they're creative and smart and really aren't. The "acting" is sous-terrain (you can actually see the "leading lady" laugh on some occasions, she's definitely the worst). the "story" is to stupid to be summed up and really everything in this film sucked. please, pay special attention to "the sheriff". the guy is an adult and therefor has absolutely no excuse to be involved in this. he's extremely bad as well. whatever it did have some hilarious moments. check it out, haha

Havoc (2005)
0 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
i'm embarrassed on behalf of anyone who was involved in this!, 13 August 2006
1/10

oh my god,i still can't believe this film. there are so many questions i have. what was the point of this film? why did anyone participate in the production of this crap? how did they get the money to do it? i like anne hathaway. she's very likable yet sophisticated in all the roles i have seen her in so far. not here. she's miscast and she knows it. you can tell. i felt sorry for her at times watching this. you know, there are actors that have a versatility and some should just stick to a certain kind of on screen persona. i'm not saying she's a limited actress...though, wait, i'm afraid she is. lovely but limited.

other than that the guy from 3rd rock from the sun had a small part and he was terrible beyond words. dialogue and "plot" seem contrived and at no point this whole documentary storyline is explored or really used. i'm horrified and i recommend this to no one!!!!

Goth (2003) (V)
4 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
i'm devastated..., 7 August 2006
1/10

wow, this movie definitely is a new low. i have seen a lot of crap. my friend and i usually rent bad movies and we enjoy laughing at them, but this one is different. i'm not going to agonize over the acting (horrifying) or the pathetic "plot" if there is one. it's the disgusting nature of those sex/rape scenes that really upset me. don't get me wrong, i am certainly not crediting those so called filmmakers with the ability to create intensity, i found it was just poor in taste. i am not recommending this to anyone. it's bad bad bad. i'll rather cut my throat than watch this piece of worthless crap again (isn't that goth of me?)

Derailed (2005/I)
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
interesting plot-the film doesn't live up to it though, 2 August 2006
4/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

i heard a lot of negative opinions on this film but i must say: i was really disappointed! not because it was horrible-it really wasn't- it was plain boring.

the major plot is cool. joe average gets on a train meets beautiful woman, makes one bad judgement and next thing he knows his life is completely out of control. simple but captivating.

i fount the beginning quite convincing, the whole story in the middle is dull and then in the end it gets kinda cool again-even though you saw the plot twist coming like half way trough the film.

i like clive owen and he did a decent job. i like jen aniston to (who doesn't), i just felt at times she was trying a bit to hard. she wanted to be seducing and intriguing but once you try to be all that you just start to come across a bit stiff. i do do though understand why she was attracted to the part and i don't think she was that bad. overall a nice try but just nothing special. sorry...

12 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
the finest hour of television-ever!, 21 April 2006
10/10

i was only six years old when twin peaks premiered in Germany (it was no hit, by the way), but i did remember the huge a hype surrounding it at first. years later i stumbled upon it at a video store and rented the first season. i think the two-hour pilot of twin peaks is a masterpiece.

the characters and the atmosphere, the enigmatic power of laura palmer, my TV was dripping from magic. i think the show (and the resolution of her murder) never lived up to the pilot, but i still think that David lynch really proved his genius with this pilot episode. i could watch over and over again.

later on the show got confusing (well, surprise it's lynch) but you must rent the first season of this.

brilliant!!!


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