Reviews written by registered user

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

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

8 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
Right on, Casper!!!, 13 July 2007

Man, this guy is hilarious!!! I laughed nearly all the way through this stand up DVD.

I had seen Jim Gaffian on that commercial where he has the beard comb-over and th wayyy to short cut-offs, so I thought, "Hey, this guy might be sick enough to make me laugh". Well, he is.

He also gets as many laughs without the nonstop vulgarities that seem to fill up most comedians acts these days. Don't get me wrong, vulgar = funny, but it's also refreshing when somebody does stuff that doesn't require and f-word translator to get the joke out of the dialogue.

His routine is great and I really recommend checking it out if you're a stand up comedy fan. plus, there's as much material in the special features as in the act itself, so you get double the money's worth.

Aw come on!!!!!, 13 July 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie would have been a '10' - home run, right out of the ballpark... if it weren't for the "grim reality" twist. Personnaly, I have always HATED movies that have anything that ruins the "fun for everyone" aspect that was so hyped up in the commercials ("fun for the whole family" and "Truly magical").

Everything is going great, the whole family is rapt. halfway through, disaster! ****Caution - Spoiler**** I won't tell exactly what happens, but a tragedy happens and the rest of the movie is pretty much ruined. The kids are all crying, the wife is mad at me, and I'm just glad I didn't buy it, but rented it.

When we rent a movie for family movie night, it's to escape the day to day terrible events that populate the news. There's enough tragedy and sadness in real life, we don't want to watch it in a movie, too.

So, even though I hated where the movie went, I still had to give it a 6, because hey, the visual effects were great.

They shouldn't have plugged it as a "great fun for the whole family" movie, when in fact, it's a drama.

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
lowest Budget EVER!!!!, 13 July 2007

I was excited to see this mini series, because I had seen a couple Gaiman films. I was pretty impressed by the visual mastery in Mirrormask, so I was looking forward to it, as the synopsis was reminiscent of "alternate reality" stories, like "Weaveworld' and many others by Clive Barker. Well, the first few seconds were so excruciatingly bad, I was seriously hoping it was preview for something else.

Alas, no. This was the movie, and I was looking at, what...a million hours in dog years to suffer through it? No thanx. I forced myself to sit through half of the first disk, since I pad good money for it, but that was it. I HAD TO stop. I don't know what happened, other than he was given a Mac'n'Cheese budget and two weeks in which to finish the film.

I couldn't believe how many great reviews there were on this film online. I mean, did I get a different DVD set by mistake? I don't think so, the box sure looks the same.

I hate being so tough on a film for having a low budget, and I do like many low budget, indie films, but this one flat out stank! I couldn't get into the plot, because the sets, costumes, and acting was so awful.

So, if you are a HUGE Giaman fan...or just like low budget indie films, bu it....of course if you want to throw money away so bad, mail it to me.

Dracula (1992)
A second watch, 23 April 2007

Now, first time I saw this film, I was on a date with a huge vampire fan, gothy-girl. Holy cow, the lines were long! We waited for like two hour, got to the window and were told, "sorry, all showing tonight are sold out".

She really wanted to see, so we trekked across town to the other googleplex theater, waited another couple hours and got tickets to the midnight showing. By this time, I was thinking, "this better be a great 'censored' movie", but it was witching hour, and we were getting to see the much hyped movie.

Well, it was fairly cheesy with the fade ins and fade outs and artsy fartsy, love story, roses superimposed in the background, lovey dovey ilk. I could have puked! There was some cool special effects, the atmosphere was ruined by the 'trying to hard' cinematography, stealing classic film trickery from old movies like Citizen Kane, and not to mention being like 3 hours long.

I have an attention span of like 1/2 hour, so I have to watch movies like that in shifts.

So, needless to say I was very disappointed, my date fell asleep, so I took her home and went home mad.

But wait.......many years later, I'm at the video store,and the shelves are picked clean like a carcass after the jackals. So, I go to the old movie section. Yes, of course the horror section. Dracula was in the "employee recommendation" section, so I figure, what the heck. Worst case I get to sleep easier.

This time, I liked it. It was still dripping with pretentious cinematography, and wayyy to heavy on the love story, but it wasn't too bad.

So, if you hated it, try it again. You may be surprised. Maybe they have two versions (like the lawnmower man).

Vampire Journals (1997) (V)
4 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
It was pretty good, 23 April 2007

Well, I am a big fan of Full Moon Videos..after all, that's where some of the Lovecraft films came from, and I'm a big fan of them. Alright then. This is a somewhat artsy-fartsy vampire movie, kind of continuing the line of the subspecies films. Unlike the Subspecies films, there were no cheesy clay-mation gargoyles, and the budget seemed to be relatively decent. Thank God for Romania, eh? At any rate, the plot was pretty good, the cast not bad. The atmosphere great, and the whole movie flowed pretty well.

This would make a nice addition to any vampire fan's movie collection.

Also, if you like it and want to get more depth into the story, get the rest of the Subspecies movies. They're more cult-classic, like the rest of the Full Moon horror movies, but worth a watch.

Believe me. I've seen thousands of horror movies, and would make the best horror critic in the world, if it paid........and I got to use my usual potty-mouth to get my point across.

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Awesome!!!, 23 April 2007

Okay, now they fixed the very little that was wrong in the first one. First off, more closeups of Kate Beckinsale's most excellent hiney. Cudos, guys! Hell, they even through in a bit of nudity. Extra nice!!!! Then. the villain is as tough as he is marketed to be. No sissy-fighting. RIGHT ON!!! Not to mention the incredibly cool-scary vampire effects. Oh man, this movie was right up there in the running for Best Vampire Movie EVER! Good job, guys. You somehow managed to make a love story bearable for us guys....which is in itself a great idea, that was our women won't nag us to death for wanting to see a movie filled with monsters, gunplay and closeups of Beckinsale butt. Thanks guys! So, now if you haven't seen it, and maybe want to have an at home movie night with some hot, little goth girl (which most of them are - YOU GO GOTH-GIRLS!), here's a great double feature for you.

Underworld (2003)
Spoiler alert!!, 23 April 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I love horror movies and grew up on the old classics. And when there are more than one kind of monster in them, all the better! needless to say, this film was right up my alley. And Kate Beckinsale? Oh my God. Mean, tough, slinging guns around AND wearing skin tight black clothes? Doesn't get any better, I say. The special effects were very well done, the characters all superb actors and actresses. The story great, the atmosphere excellent! So, why didn't I give it a 10? Soiler Because of the "super-godlike-ultra-megga-hybrid" they build up and build up through the movie. Then, when he's supposed to come up and slaughter the enemy/win the day, he fights like a sissy, and pretty much gets his butt kicked. He ends up only winning pretty much by accident. That's pretty lame. I know the film makers want to build excitement, but when you keep making this thing out to be the next biggest thing to God himself, MAKE HIM THAT WAY. Much like in Blade (the sissy blood God), and Lord of the Rings (the troll guy who you think is going to lay everything to waste and his first fight with the beardy guy is over in two seconds. Okay a human kills the most evil, tough thing to roam hell?) Sigh...maybe its just me, but that's a plot hole that could have easily been filled by the hero-godlike-monster at least fighting his way through a few foes, totally kicking-butt so at least he's a little tired for an excuse for fighting like a sissy.

But that's just me.

It still was a killer movie and more than worth the watch.

Disturbia (2007)
1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Hellohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, ripoff!, 23 April 2007

Have not seen the movie yet, so I'm sorry if I'm not using the forum correctly, but come on!! Can anyone say "ripoff"? get some originality, folks. A few similarities? I don't think so. More like plagiarism.

I hope I'm not the only one seeing this. It's one thing to give props to a master, and another to steal from him.

Funny thing was the marketing I saw for the trailer, "best new, original scary movie". Man, that's rich. Why don't they just remake Gone With the Wind, call it Civil-War-Otopia, and market it as the best new original epic?

Or, remake any biblical movie, like The Ten Commandments and rename it "Religium".

okay, so I'm grouchy today, so what?

11 out of 18 people found the following review useful:
Dreams in the Witch House, 3 April 2007

Okay, so I'm a Lovecraft freak, so what? There's lots of us out there....lurking. Okay, I'll add the Clive Barker episode, too (Haekler's Tale). Well, I personally thought that one was really Lovecraftian, too. Okay, first, Dreams in the Witch House. Not too bad. Pretty typical Stuart Gordon (particularly with changing most of the story). The main character, Ezra Godden seems to be able to hold his own in the acting arena, so I imagine die-hard Combs fans won't die outright. It worked. Since that was such a short story, it all fit into the alloted episode time, without leaving out too much. Overall, it was a pretty good adaption, so all you Lovecraft fans won't be disappointed.

Now, Onto Haekler's Tale. The HPL influence is really strong in some modern writer's material. This is no exception to the rule. The setting was done really well, and the mood, nice and evil.

It's to bad this series was canceled. It was very good for a horror series and there was plenty of good episodes.

It's too bad so many people prefer "Loser TV" (aka reality shows). Get a life, losers! TV is to entertain people, not point and laugh at the misfortune of others. I don't know about the rest of you out there, but I for one and very sick of seeing the EXACT SAME THING with different names clogging up channel after channel.

And, yes, this is relevant. Good shows get canceled, because everyone seems to want 5 different versions of American Idol.

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
eEeEviL, 3 April 2007

The Silent Hill VG series is the undisputed dark, creepy kings of horror/survival games. I went to see the movie with an open mind (haveing been severely disappointed with the screen play versions of good games....yes, I'm talking about YOU House of the Dead, and Alone in the Dark). So, being a big fan, I was hopeful, but skeptical. Well, it didn't take long before all skepticism was banished. It was so dark and creepy, I didn't leave, because I didn't want to miss any.

Although it was more of the story from Silent Hill II, and shovelhead wasn't in it enough, I still think the movie rocked!

I think Milla Jolvovich would have been way better in the lead role, but what's her name did pretty good, too.

I personnaly can't wait for a sequel

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