Reviews written by

Page 1 of 8:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [Next]
79 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

3 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Pretty cool as video games to movies go, 15 September 2004

Not bad for the second entry based on the popular survivor horror game. Milla Jojovich returns as Alice and is joined by Sienna Guillory as Jill and Oded Fehr as Carlos Olivera , fans of the games will note the characters from the games and the monsters too like Nemesis. The action is cool and slick but the fight scenes are rather jarring ,with a lot of quick cutting , they need to get a good martial arts choreographer so they don't have to cut in so much , much of that action is too blurry . The plot and storyline pretty much follow the games with an ending similar to resident evil outbreak. Not a bad effort for what the movie is about . You do not go to see movies like this for acting ,just for the fun and gore which by the way needs to be more emphasized ,an r rating to me was a bit strong , a few gore scenes involving eating body parts but not really enough to be like a day of the dead for example.

hope the sequel and there will be one since the ending opens the door wide open will be done better especially the fight scenes ...

Hero (2002)
Very overrated and dull, 30 August 2004

This movie is getting an IMDB rating that is way too high. Very overrated , I found the scenery to be beautiful but the acting and action to be very bland. Told in flashbacks the movie is very incoherent with multiple endings and jarring tones. Jet Li simply walks his way through this movie and the other characters do not help much.The Chinese with English subtitles gets annoying after a time and the way some of the dialogue is delivered you would think you were watching a very bad Saturday morning Jackie Chan movie.The scenery and backdrops are beautiful but thats about it , the fight scenes are very few and the martial arts are very CGI and not very entertaining ,slow mo is used alot and they do not last long and the camera angles are horrible and blurred and make you dizzy. At least with Crouching Tiger ,Hidden Dragon you had some entertaining martial arts and a more interesting storyline. Hero is bland at best ,not worth the 8 dollars to sit for almost 2 hrs of boredom. I give it 5 out of 10 for the scenery.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Dull, 3 August 2004

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

All the hype of this movie and it is rather dull. Stars Joaquin Phoenix,Adrien Brody and William Hurt.Sigourney Weaver makes a brief appearance as Phoenix's mother. A village in the middle of the Pennsylvania woods is the setting for the movie.Starts off interesting but plods and goes downhill.Seems there are supposed creatures in the woods surrounding the village and the people respect this so they do not go into the woods and the creatures do not come into the village.

Possible Spoilers. The time period is part of the plot, the way people are dressed gives you the impression it is colonial times or maybe just a little after that. The movie has pretty scenery but thats about it.Much time is wasted on heresay conversations and things the audience will find of little interest. I do like Joaquin Phoenix and Sigourney Weaver and a surprisingly disheveled William Hurt but they cannot save this movie from itself.There is a surprise twist towards the end of the movie but I think most of us saw this coming ,the girl who needs to travel outside of the village to get medicine ends up following a gravel road which would not have existed in colonial times. I did like the actress who played the blind girl(Ron Howards daughter) but for someone who is blind she seems to have Daredevil like senses when running through the woods,blind people's hearing for the most part is heightened and they do have some sensing but not like this girl seems to have.Was unrealistic to me.If youve ever shut your eyes ,even in an empty field your not going to run full steam for fear youll hit or fall into something,she does end up falling into a pit but for the most part ,she has little concern for running into trees or other obstacles in a very thick forest.Also Adrien Brody overacts as a mentally challenged weirdo who has a thing for the blind girl.He seals his own fate. By the time the movie concludes you are left feeling cheated out of your 8 or so dollars.Sure this movie will rack it in but only because its been so heavily promoted and hyped as a suspenseful chiller.M.Night Shamaylan who also did signs made a bogus documentary about his secret life too just to hype it more. This is a poor film and you will feel ripped off.

1/2 star out of 4 and thats for the scenery.

House (1986)
0 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Good idea,bad writing and script, 22 July 2004

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

An interesting premise that could have been so much better.The idea of a haunted house and creepy things going on is great now if they only had written a good script instead of this silly stupid crap.

Spoiler . An elderly woman hangs herself at the beginning of the movie and then her grandson moves into the house that she hung herself in.Strange things start to happen, he sees his dead grandmother again and she goes to hang herself again but disappears as she jumps off the chair(she warns him about the house tricking her and that he should get out while he can).Now after seeing that scene I thought this is going to be a good spooky flick.Surprise the remaining 80 minutes of this movie are nothing but crap and it actually goes in a totally different direction and tries to play it for laughs.That totally ruined the movie .The trailers and ads say ding dong your dead but there is nothing really scary after the first 10 or so minutes.A bunch of silly monsters that look like high school creations and an even sillier plot to the whole thing. Followed by several brain dead sequels for some reason. Trash follows trash. I suppose a few desperate pathetic William Katt or George Wendt fans might like this movie(George actually gets one good laugh in the movie but by then it had already hit the fan if you know what I mean).

0 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Funny ,but could have been better without Eastwood, 20 July 2004

Funny comedic western musical type movie that made me laugh over and over.I love Lee Marvin and those wonderful big hands of his and that big ol stache.He is a big belly laugh of fun.This movie i'm told was also a stage play as well. My beef is Clint Eastwood, What the hell is he doing in this movie? What idiot cast him ? I mean thats like making the movie Tombstone into a musical and having Sam Elliott sing My Clementine and waltz across the screen. Lee Marvin can pull it off as he just exudes silliness and fun with his expressions and has fun. Eastwood cannot and belongs in serious roles only not comedy. Casting against type doesn't always work ,would have been better to get someone like Harvey Korman or Gene Wilder even. They could have pulled it off better. Sorry clint but in this movie you suck.

Excellent, 20 July 2004

Sissy Spacek is funny and wonderful as Loretta Lynn. She looks and sounds just like the real Loretta Lynn ,you'll get sucked right into the whole thing like your really there with her experiencing her life.

The way its played out is so good and you really understand exactly how tough it was for the real MS Lynn to make it to the star she is today. Just about everyone thought she was a stupid hillbilly when in reality she was smarter than most people realized.Her husband played nicely by Tommy Lee Jones was a bit of a louse but realized her talent and started her on the road to fame. Lots of nice backdrops of all the little towns she traveled through and also a very good portrayal of Patsy Cline by Beverly D'Angelo(even more surprising is how well she sings Patsy's songs in her own voice) hard to imagine she did National Lampoons Vacation movies which were such a step down from this.i have enjoyed watching this movie over and over and always see something new in the background. A wonderful tribute to a lady who's made us all feel good over the years with her music.

0 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
OK at best., 19 July 2004

The movie while cute does suffer from your typical Hollywood play the gay guys as cartoons instead of people. Nathan Lane's acting is so overdone,it turns into a whine fest of how irritating he can get the more queeny he acts,overdoing it is an understatement and Robin Williams is just not believable as a gay man who is Lane's lover-his character was married before and has a son yet he seems to be like a light switch -he is just not believable. And of course no affection or kissing is allowed between them besides the customary light peck on the side of the lips like youd give your grandmother. The cabaret that is the setting for the show is so unbelievable as being this huge packed house place , seems unrealistic that a drag bar would have packed houses with a mostly straight crowd and the kennedys as guests?

Maybe back in the seventies but not in the 90's.Hank Azaria is another typical man acting like a queen ,hollywood likes to play on making gay men more effeminate as if it makes it funnier.there are some funny moments in the movie but its a shame that they are played off gay clichés like having gene hackman in drag. overall its not bad but i suggest sticking to the original la cage aux folle which was done better.

I, Robot (2004)
I,LUV IT!, 19 July 2004

Probably better on my part that I have never read any of Isaac Assimov's books. So many have torn this movie up regarding that. I just love the action and it has a lot of suspense too. Will Smith as an old school looking kinda detective plays it well albeit some corny lines which I expected in this kind of movie. Since I didn't read Assimovs books and quite frankly it doesn't really matter to me whether or not the movie follows the book. I just love seeing a good sci fi action flick . If your going to be so anal about a movie then we can analyze lord of the rings all 3 parts and go into how much they left out or changed. This movie is raking in the bucks so it must be doing something right to get people to see it again and again. Spectacular special effects abound with lots of eye candy. Too bad James Cromwell is wasted in a rather small part(he is a very talented actor and he is barely on screen) Overall though I give it an 8 of 10. Action packed blockbuster material and Will Smith again shows that he can pull in the crowds.

13 out of 15 people found the following review useful:
Cute and a good family film, 19 July 2004

Shirley at 12yrs old is a delight as the sad little girl left in a very snotty all girls boarding school while her father is away at war in 1899,later on he is reported killed and leaves shirley with noone and no money so she is forced to work as a servant to pay her way.. I do admit that this is not one of Shirley's best,for example Shirley's crying scenes are a bit heavy handed and forced but overall she is still so cute you just cant help but love her. I also enjoyed the girl who played Becky ,she was so cute too. Mary Nash could have been the wicked witch in the wizard of oz ,she does good as the nasty head mistress. Look for a very young and handsome Cesar Romero as the Indian servant of an English nobleman. Best scene , Shirley giving a snotty schoolgirl her comeuppance. A timeless family classic to show your children again and again.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
supporting cast does better than hanks phony accent, 28 June 2004

so so film has its moments but really over hyped especially saying that hanks performance is Oscar caliber,its actually very sub par hanks who to me is miscast and cannot pull off an obviously phony accent,he sounds more like yakov smirnoff doing a sat night live skit.he stars as a foreigner of a made up country who loses his identity in a NYC airport as a result of his country's civil war.he ends up trapped there for 9 months ,loosely based on a true story.the movie has some cute scenes but does drag at times. the man who plays head of airport security ops is really good at being nasty and vindictive and some funny supporting actors make it bearable. what bothers me is this movie will probably get nominated for Oscars which i don't think is right.also with catherine zeta jones looking surprisingly unattractive as a flight attendant/emotional doormat who cannot say no to having affairs with unattainable married schleps. at least she admits to hanks character that she is a bad risk which he of course ignores. the ending though really grates ,it is unsatisfying and leaves you wishing you could change it . oh well ,,i give it a 6 out of 10 overall due mostly to the supporting cast not hanks, the ending i give a big fat zero.

Page 1 of 8:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [Next]