Reviews written by registered user
|34 reviews in total|
I do not understand the point to these so-called "reality shows". The
funny irony here is that "King of the Nerds" doesn't even have
real-life nerds. I was actually expecting to see something having to do
with computer people or something similar to TruTV's "World's
Dummest..", but the so-called "nerds" in here make me think of stuff
like Steve Urkel in the old sitcom "Family Matters", which used the
most stereotypical definition of a nerd. I hate to tell you this, but a
good majority of the actual people are a lot more like someone out of
the sitcom "Becker" and they tend to have a lot of sarcasm built in to
them along side their intelligence.
Give it up people, the reality shows are basically dead. One of the few reality shows that even made sense to make was the stuff like "Cops". At least those shows were about real-life moments in reality, and not one of the silly little games that simply fool around with people's lives, like "King of the Nerds" does.
I honestly only liked the first couple seasons of Family Matters. I
think the name of this show ended up being a rather ironic name.
Considering that the family was basically gone by the end, with Steve
Urkel having taken over the show like a bad disease.
I never really understood why everybody seemed to like the Steve Urkel/Jaleel White character so much more than everybody else. I would assume that it was just because the girls thought he was so attractive. My favorite character in this show was actually Mother Winslow/Rosetta LeNoire; that lady played her character so well, and she also had some of the best lines in the whole show.
It's rather sad when you look at the show's poster, because it kind of symbolizes how the Family Matters show ended up in real life, Steve stands in front of the camera, with the family getting smaller and smaller in the background.
I find it interesting how they can call many people's clothes
"childish", yet I would say that their method of telling these things
to these people is what is truly "childish". If they did this in a
calmer and more informing way, instead of just dramatizing everything
to death, with even a hint of respect to the victim in this, I think
this could be a much more successful show, and not just the criticizing
joke that it is.
If the show hosts had a little class of their own, and didn't just go around shoving their so-called "class" down people's throats, I think this would be a much better show. Because it is hard enough to take normal criticism, let alone when the criticism is meant to be purposely embarrassing.
Instead of embarrassing people to death, then handing them money and telling them to go buy expensive clothes, wouldn't it make more sense to actually teach them to use what money they have to get a better looking wardrobe for job interviews, or whatever else it's TRULY needed for? And if your job situation doesn't require you to look like royalty, what's the point to dress like one? Because many companies in the world today have taken in the more laid-back model working environment from Silicon Valley, and let their employees dress like, what this show calls "childish."
What are these people trying to do? Get everyone to go around 24/7 looking like they're the King or Queen? Because, according to them, it's OK to go around dressed like a hippie-style executive, just as long as they're not what they call, "dressed like a whore."
Honestly, how is this any different than if they were trying to get an overweight person to loose weight by getting a bunch of people at work to point at them and call the person fat, then handing the person a famous cook and professional trainer for a couple months?
How in the world can Discovery still call this channel The Learning Channel?
I don't understand why people have given this show such a low rating.
Honestly, I think "Bait Car" might be even better than "Cops", and I'm
a big fan of "Cops". These shows teach you that reality shows can be
made of truly real-life moments in reality, and not just of stupid
games playing around with people's lives.
I think "Bait Car" has some really memorable, and comical moments. One classic moment is where the girls take the bait car, get trapped in it and scream "oh my god! we're in a stolen vehicle!" Well, duh it's stolen, you stole it!
"Bait Car" really shows you how many people just can't say "no" to a simple car with keys and an open door. And every once in a while, there's a nice ending with someone being honest and locking the car up so it doesn't get stolen.
Is this a sign the idiots are bringing down CourtTV/TruTV and turning
it into a copy of the failed Discovery Channel? This show is nothing
but a stupid daredevil game. I don't even like MythBusters, but at
least that show goes after a few truly questionable myths here and
there. Looney Tunes stunts are nothing but idiotic unbelievable crap
(as most cartoons are supposed to be). Any scientist that wastes their
time questioning Looney Tunes doesn't deserve the title of "scientist".
These people have way too much time on their hands.
What's the next Looney Tunes theory they're going to test? Whether a pebble rolling down the hill will turn into a 15ft boulder?
What is more beautiful than a tribute to the most obnoxious people on
TV? What happened to the concept of the Discovery Channel creating
shows about things that really mean something in history? As this so
beautifully proves, today, all they can seem to come up with is a
tribute to people that mean something to the paid programming shows on
early morning TV. Basically, the lamest, most deceptive and obnoxious
programming that exists on TV. Their products and the so-called "deals"
are what they should really be busting myths about.
Why couldn't they just do a show about commercials? At least there's an amusing commercial here and there. The only thing that's amusing about this stuff is how many saps fall for the sales pitches of this junk. The show itself looks like it cost Discovery only $9.95, it wasn't even good enough for the $19.95 price.
You know, the only true difference between a pitchman and a car salesman is that a car salesman knows when they're lying to the customer. I give up. It's officially dead. R.I.P. Discovery Channel.
(by the way, I wrote this comment before I had heard about the guy's death, I just stumbled across the marathon of this on the Discovery Channel the other day)
"WarGames" is more than a quarter century old, but yet it is still the
most believable movie about computers that was ever made. I find it
amazing how much the world today relies on computers, but yet every
movie with a story based on computers is ridiculously unbelievable.
"The Net" is an example of a classic joke in all of this.
"WarGames" taught people something that they can't seem to learn in today's society... There is no such thing as absolute security, and finding ways around things is frequently easier than anyone would ever like to think.
The only thing I roll my eyes at in this movie is the whole WOPR scenario, I'm still waiting to see voice recognition that works reasonably well, let alone something with artificial intelligence.
This movie was made 25 years ago, long before everyone had a computer sitting on their desk at home, and I'm still waiting to see a movie about computers that even remotely compares to "WarGames"
I will admit, when this movie came out when I was little, I was
obsessed with Jurassic Park, but when I watch this today, I roll my
eyes at Spielberg's many screwup's in this movie.
For instance, when the t-rex gets through the fence chasing after the kids, somehow once the dinosaur gets through the fence, the path back through there is suddenly a 200 ft. drop into the trees below. Then, when the car falls into the tree below and Dr. Grant comes to rescue Tim, he gets Tim out of the car, and right there, both Dr. Grant and Tim are safe out of the way of the car. Why do they have to get back in front of the car? Just so there can be a dramatic scene with the falling car chasing them? Plus, that car most likely wouldn't just fall like that, the car would probably just tumble out of the tree.
The majority of the movie was devoted to Spielberg's need for ridiculous drama, not making the story believable. I just don't understand how Spielberg can work so hard to make the dinosaurs look believable and then screw up so much else in this story.
The story the book told was so much better than this.
I roll my eyes so many times watching this, I see more of the ceiling
than the movie screen. There are so many flaws in this movie's story, I
don't know where to begin...
The most famous scene in Speed, is the biggest joke. Why does the bus have to jump the gap in the road when there were numerous exits before it? (like the exit the bomb squad took). And when the bus is circling the airport runway, they can hardly keep the little cart Keanu Reeves is riding under the bus stable, yet, the bus turns round and round, with his cart following flawlessly.
I also love the last action scene in Speed. This movie was so over dramatized, that all the drama with the bus wasn't even enough, they had to put the characters together on a failed subway car as well. First of all, the subway car wouldn't be running on a track that is still under construction. And second, with the failed brake, why couldn't they just shut the engine off and let the car roll to a stop? (instead of having to jump the track) They can speed it up, why can't they just slow it down?
Speed is all about ridiculous, over dramatized action, and definitely not logic. For crying out loud, Arnold Schwarzenegger movies are more believable than Speed!
This movie did not get the rating credit that it truly deserved. Keanu
Reeves and Morgan Freeman played excellent rolls in Chain Reaction.
Although, Morgan Freeman's roll was a little strange when smoke only
came out of his cigar a couple times during the movie.
I'm a fan of efforts made to save the environment, especially clean energy, and I think the beginning of this movie is absolutely beautiful. First with the professor's speech about pollution, then when they get the hydrogen device working, that moment in the movie almost brings tears to my eyes.
Considering the ties that the oil companies have with the US Government, especially with George W.H.A.T. Bush as president, I wouldn't be surprised if there's a bit of truth to the idea of a secret government organization framing two scientists to try and abolish a clean energy technology. Was this movie based on the first Homeland Security concepts?
The only thing I don't like about this movie is that it has a few scientific errors. For instance, the idea of a sound frequency making the hydrogen device function correctly is pretty unbelievable. And Morgan Freeman's character wouldn't be smoking next to hydrogen in the real world (I hope!). Some of the action scenes are a bit exaggerated too, but other than that, I think this is a great movie.
|Page 1 of 4:||   |