Reviews written by registered user

Page 1 of 27:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
263 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Indiana Jones: Jurrasic Park, 5 April 2011

I cannot say it any more succinctly than "daveygandthekeyboard" did. So I am quoting his entire review. Below I add one comment which I think makes this the perfect review of this "just okay" "blockbuster"??

-QUOTE- Implausible action scenes kill this movie 2 June 2008 | by daveygandthekeyboard (United States)

All I can really conclude about this movie is that it was just okay. I can forgive the ludicrous plot, the cheesy "family" dynamic of the film, the fact that Harrison Ford is old (which is really nowhere near the worst part of this). I don't even really mind Shia LaBeouf's presence. But many of the stunts and the action scenes are so implausible that it renders all of the action scenes implausible. For example, Shia LaBoeuf sword-fighting (!) spread-eagled on two moving vehicles; a boat going over not one, not two, but three waterfalls with absolutely no one getting a scratch (I mean, what are we watching here, The A-Team?); and the "if the film hasn't jumped the shark yet it certainly has now" moment--Shia LaBoeuf swinging through the jungle a la Tarzan. It was ridiculous. And because these parts are (forgive my overuse of the word) implausible, it highlights the fact that the rest of it doesn't work, either. After seeing a number of old series trying to come back for another run (Rocky Balboa, Rambo, the Star Wars Prequels) I have concluded that when filmmakers attempt to cash in on a once-popular series, artistically the best they can hope for is to break even. Sometimes there really is nowhere to go but down. I wanted to love this, but the most charitable thing I can say is that it was just okay. Very disappointing. -END-QUOTE-

I would add only one thing - the filmmakers should be specified as only American. The key is in the cash. They want more profit. Amazingly, they get it. This made 115 million in profit. No wonder they aren't discouraged to keep making these fiascoes.

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
All Duhamel, 2 October 2010

First let me say that the supporting actors are all very talented - but it's not apparent here. (In my opinion, that's the director's fault.) Kristen Bell, while I can see can be likable in a romantic comedy, acted here as if this was a late afternoon soap opera. However, the one shining star in this non-romantic non-comedy is Duhamel. Even though the script is weak, the production just OK, the acting below par, Duhamel stands out for his talent. Watch this only if you're a big fan of his.



my faith:

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Perfect., 28 September 2010

Hasbro hit a grand slam put out of the park home run with this _non-stop_ action adventure. It's hard to describe this one for me since everything is so tightly done. So I will say it anyway if "perfect" doesn't say it clearly - perfect acting, perfect script, perfect action, perfect timing, perfect flashbacks, perfect music, perfect quips, perfect production, perfect story, perfect editing, perfect cgi, perfect direction, perfect seriousness balanced by perfect humor, perfect fun, and perfectly entertaining. So "perfect."



my faith:

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Buy organic!, 25 August 2010

I first became aware of things not being quite right when I developed an allergic reaction to various products. So now I started looking at the labels of all the products I consumed - from soap to toothpaste to food. What I discovered was that the American food diet is a slow death sentence. E.g. after brushing my teeth, my stomach would ache and I did not know why. I finally read the label of my toothpaste for the first time in my life. It warns you that if you swallow too much of it, you should call the local Poison Control Center. I was slowly poisoning myself, and it is sold over the counter - it contains bleach! I switched to Tom's of Maine and no longer have those stomach problems. I then saw the movie "Supersize Me." It confirms that the American "fast-food" food industry is a slow death sentence. Then I saw "King Corn" and it confirms that the corn being grown in the US is inedible - unless it gets "processed" at a plant! Now comes "The Future of Food" and ... I am depressed. I apologize to every single organic food grower, and consumer for ever thinking you guys were "full of it." The irony is of course that I was the one full of "it." Please let others know what is going on - tell everyone you know to see this movie ... and BUY ORGANIC! That's my plan. If we stop buying their sewage then they lose profit. If they lose profit, THEN we get their attention. may God richly bless you and yours, in Jesus' name, amen.

Solaris (1972)
28 out of 49 people found the following review useful:
Pretentious yakking, 21 August 2010

I just saw this and did not fall for it. Here is my comment I posted at NETFLIX. I think you will see that it is nothing but pretentious yakking.

8/21/10 @ 10:08 PM

I did not find this movie to be "painterly" or "deep" as others have described it. First of all, my major dislike of this movie is that _no_ science is done. Science is about answers, philosophy is about questions. So in a real scifi, there would be information gained through interaction. Instead the characters stand around - with an alien in their midst - and discuss 'what is happiness'. Did you see "Contact" with Jody Foster? When she arrives she has a thousand questions. The reply makes sense. Now that's how it's done. This? "If you are happy you never ask about the meaning of life." WHAT?? WHO CARES! A freakin' alien life form is standing in front of you and all these guys can do is get pensive??? So OK, here's the REALITY about this movie - it's typical Russian over self-indulgent mental gymnastics. Don't waste your time. You will learn nothing from this drawn out psycho-babble philosophy paper. See The Seventh Seal for a much better film. (Now I have to go see the modern American version of this.)


Edit: (before any one flames me for not knowing what I am talking about) I have been a professional photographer, I have a Masters in physics, and a Bachelors in philosophy (Heidegger was my interest: Dasein, there where being manifests itself, and Husserl's Phenomenology - reducing the experience to its essence) and even studied jazz dance, modern dance, and ballet. (Currently I have returned to school for a degree in Anthropology with a concentration in Archaeology.) So please, I have a very broad taste, and information base, for all things art.



my faith:

9 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
Oscar Performance, 28 March 2010

Oscar Performance across the board. This is one of the best movies ever made. The movie opens with only pieces of the story being told and those are out of sequence. It involves a young man, Ben Thomas (Will Smith putting in a phenomenal performance), and his life - past, and present.

The movie is so strong I don't know where to begin to tell you how involved the story is, yet how simple it plays. All I can say is that I was utterly drawn in and I think it was because I didn't read anything about the movie other than I remember someone telling me to see it.



my faith:

Beowulf (2007)
2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Hold on - it won't let you go!, 14 January 2010

Phenomenal. Wonderful. An epic hero is brought to life in Zemekis' cgi project. If you like stories where the hero is gritty, powerful, strong, dynamic, and ... heroic. Such other movies as '300', and 'The 13th Warrior' (ok, the Vikings) then you will LOVE this movie.

I saw 'Final Fantasy: the Spirits Within' and lauded over the cgi. This one is on a fairly equal par in that area, but this story, the way Zemekis spun it, is so freaking wonderful that I think this movie has heralded the end of the "pretty boy Hollywood" actor.

I mean let's face it, all the modern (2010) male actors are metro-sexuals. How can you possibly cast those guys in a role as powerful and dynamic as BEOWULF! You can't and Zemekis, the talent that he is, didn't - to the everyone's enjoyment and advantage.

So if you love strong heroes told in epic stories in a powerful way - aka ENTERTAINMENT - then you'll love B:tDC. 10*

Robot Jox (1989)
0 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
How do you spell crap?, 31 October 2009

R O B O T J O X.

Burn the master.

Grotesquely horrible.

No ending; no closure.

Completely and utterly the worst movie ever made.

Replaces "The Adventures of Pluto Nash" as the worst movie of all time.

I hate this utterly unacted, unedited, unscripted, undirected, unproduced mess of a thing called "Robot Jox" - and I just found out - THEY MADE A SECOND ONE!?!? I apologize to Adma Sandler (Zohar the Beauticin) and Eddie Murphy (Pluto Nash) for hating their movies. This mess of a thing makes those movies only bad - not terrible horrible and grotesque like this thing. This is the only movie for which I have ever said this - REMOVE IT FROM NETFLIX - NOW!!! 10,000 out of 10 people found this comment helpful.

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Death Trance ... what? when? how? where???, 14 July 2009

Phew. Well, most westerners think the same - "this movie has no plot!" But if you're into metal/heavy metal/dethklock etc ... then it's a no brainer you'll love this flick. As for me I liked it enough to give it a 10 rating b/c I could see the attention to detail given every costume as well as sound-track and location. Add to that the amazing special effects, choreography, and _beautiful_ photography as well and I had to give this a 10.

Now as for the plot, what I can gather is that this is post-apocalyptic; this is fantasy; this is about (Japanese) gods and demons; ... and a coffin. The rumor is that the coffin will grant you any thing for which you ask - if you open it in the western forest. BUT the truth is very different. So the first guy steals it and sets off to open it; then he is chased after by the last monk who survived the slaughter at the temple. (Now this slaughter is weird b/c all the other fights are bloodless ... all punching and bashing with clubs ... did John Carpenter leave the building?) Then another guys shows up and chases the guy with the coffin for himself and his own interest (he's carrying a doll tied to his belt). Finally a third character shows up who can whip the snot out of everyone in the room. She is the one who helps the viewer understand about the special sword. The monk is carrying the special sword - a sword that only the chosen one (chosen by the sword) can use... why? B/c your wish ain't what's waiting for you when you open the coffin in the western forest after you get through the (secret secluded hidden mysterious) gate - opened by none other than a character who seems to have no point ... but she's always there. So just b/c the story wasn't that interesting to me I wasn't going to reduce its rating - it's definitely a 10 and a bit of a rough ride for those not use to Japanese story telling.



my faith:

Star Trek (2009)
9 out of 16 people found the following review useful:
Roddenberry's legacy trampled, 30 May 2009

The opening was like OH MAN! and then it became soap opera pulp.

Me and my friend are both TOS fans and agreed that TFB failed. (He said "... it was OK. No drama, all effects and then BOOM!"


Kirk was an *** throughout the whole movie

ORIGINAL: was clever, and likable

Spock was ... Spock "lite"

ORIGINAL: was clever, warm, lovable, and _real_

Bones was too tall/large for re-creating McCoy kept spouting the original's lines like he was spitting out popcorn

ORIGINAL: was well written, and lovable

Scotty was a clown

ORIGINAL: was clever, hard working, and charming

Uhura was petulant, always angry, and self-important

ORIGINAL: intelligent and sweet

Sulu was OK but "SAMURAI" DOES NOT EQUAL "fencing" (The writers clearly just copied and pasted these lines without thinking.)

ORIGINAL: mysterious and serious

Chekov was OK ... 17? gee, to whom are they pandering? HE DIDN'T EVEN GRADUATE HIGH SCHOOL!!!

ORIGINAL: was cool and fun

Now I see that there are three "generations" of fans:

Generation 1: TOS - the best ever none even came close. This is pure, un-pc-ified, un-soap-opera'd - the pure undistilled stuff right out of the bottle

Generation 2: DS9 - the politically correct fandom - banal pale and droll.

Generation 3: TFB - the new breed of "scifi soap opera" fans (scifi has become little more than soap operas in space: Big Brother meets Outer Space)

I understand that TFB is a new timeline and that they wanted to break away from the original TOS and start new. But this movie was all glitter and gloss - like a woman's lipstick - superficial and empty. It has no heart.

The Bottom Line: No one will ever be able to recreate Roddenberry's masterpiece. The chemistry between the crew of TOS was palpable. (Regardless of their off-stage relations) They portrayed a crew who respected and enjoyed working around each other. At the same time they were all _the_best_of_Starfleet_!

So trying to re-create TOS is _impossible_. It would be like trying to re-create a Michelangelo or a VanGogh - once the original artist is gone all we have left to enjoy is what they left behind.

Since TFB was not created by a genius, and definitely not created by even an artist, but instead created by a studio then this new version, wrapped in the ST icon, has now become nothing but a franchise. (see "The Replacements")

Page 1 of 27:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]