Reviews written by registered user

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

Page 1 of 150:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
1495 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

It had its moments, but ultimately not an impressive movie..., 30 August 2014

Well, at least "Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome" was better than the abysmal first movie in the series, but nowhere near the second movie.

Sure, "Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome" has the best production value and most likely also the biggest budget, but the storyline just wasn't all there. And it seemed like they were trying to cater to a whole new audience here. What was up with every other scene having a kid in it or being about the tribe of children?

While being nowhere near the "Mad Max 2: Road Warrior", then "Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome" is still watchable, but take into consideration that it deviates quite a lot from the previous movie.

I will say that they went all out in "Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome" with the sets, costumes and vehicles. They had managed to build up a more distinct atmosphere and environment here, and that was one of the best things about the entire movie.

One thing I didn't get was why they recast Bruce Spence for this third movie. In part 2 he was known as the gyro captain, and in the third movie he is known as Jedediah the pilot. Was it supposed to be two entirely different characters? I assume as much, since there were no relationship or rekindled partnership between Max and this pilot character. If that was the case, it would have been more believable if they had opted for a different actor all together.

It was nice that the underlying homo eroticism tones from the previous two movies were eliminated and replaced by a more harsh and unforgiving post apocalyptic atmosphere.

"Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome" is enjoyable enough for what it was, but kind of anti-climatic following after the second movie.

The sequel surpasses the first movie by miles..., 30 August 2014

Compared to the first movie, then "Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior" was a major improvement, not only in entertainment value, but also in story, execution and atmosphere.

The first "Mad Max" movie was a chaotic stew of what appeared to be random footage put together, but "Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior" is a much more coherent movie experience.

There is a lot more action in this sequel and there is a more post apocalyptic feel to it, especially because you see nothing but the wastelands. As to the first movie where you could spot farm houses in the backdrop and such.

However, there is a heavy undertone of homo eroticism throughout the movie. Just take a look at Humungus and his gang. Their outfits and their behavior was screaming homo eroticism.

Looking past that, then "Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior" is actually an enjoyable movie, and this is how I remembered "Mad Max" to be from my childhood. So I will just forget all about the abysmal first movie.

The acting in the movie was quite good, especially Mel Gibson was doing a great job in developing Max in growing into a legendary action hero. As for the people in Humungus' gang, well... A bit of the acting was just forced and bordering on being comedy.

"Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior" is fast paced, lots of action throughout the entire movie, and there is a great red line throughout the course of the movie. The action scenes are well choreographed. But especially hats off for the director and film crew for the driving sequences. They were just spectacular.

All in all, then "Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior" is well worth watching. And for an action movie from 1981, then it still holds leverage as being watchable today.

Survival (2013)
Watchable, but not overly impressive..., 30 August 2014

Anything even remotely zombie, and I am there.

And having sat through "Survival", I must say that this is not amongst the worst of zombie movies that I have seen. And given the production value and budget of the movie, then I will say that the movie-makers actually pulled it off quite nicely.

The story, however, wasn't really overly impressive. A business man's daughter is kidnapped and a former US navy is hired to bring her back. Sent to a remote research facility in Poland, it turns out that something sinister has been unleashed here.

Storywise then "Survival" didn't really stand out. And one of the greatest issues that I had problems with throughout this movie was the fact that the infection, zombies, call them what you will, were running around with high mobility, they were utilizing weapons, and some even clutched to throat and abdominal injuries. I didn't know that zombies were capable of that...

The effects were actually adequate and were one of the better things of the movie. However, the zombie make-up didn't really pass as believable, especially not when you cover someone's face with a substance that is so obviously a powder material that even a blind man would go "whoa, that looked awful", and when you forget to apply the powder to the flesh areas of the arms and hands. It is just such a typical low budget zombie movie error to make.

As for the acting, well people were actually doing good jobs with their given roles. But it was hard to buy into the fact that people were supposed to be American or Canadian when they speak with a really thick German accent.

"Survival" is a slightly below average zombie movie compared to so many other zombie movies out there. But it is so obvious that the production value here was wholeheartedly and people were in the movie for their love of zombie movies.

It is worth to sit down and watch "Survival" once, just to check it off the "to-watch-zombie-movie-list". It is adequate entertainment for a zombie movie from Germany, but not really up to par with the 2010 "Rammbock" movie.

As equally disappointing as the first movie..., 30 August 2014

"Tekken 2: Katzyuas Revenge" didn't really offer much to the Tekken universe that already didn't fail in the first "Tekken" movie. And I dare say that it was equally boring, uneventful and unnecessary.

Some things just doesn't translate well from being adapted from a console game to the big screen, and fighting games is definitely one such things. Just look at the atrocities that are "Street Fighter", "Mortal Kombat", "King of Fighters", "Dead or Alive", "Double Dragon" and of course also "Tekken". These titles are great as console games, but translated into movies, it is just mindless nonsense. I guess it is just a matter of time before they make an "International Karate+" movie as well...

The story is about a young man who is suffering from memory loss, and he is forced into labor for a mysterious man called The Minister.

And that was basically it. The storyline in "Tekken 2: Katzyuas Revenge" was so abysmal and devoid of contents that it was a strain to sit through it.

What managed to make the movie pass as even just remotely watchable was the fight scenes, although for a movie based on a fighting console game, then there were surprisingly little fighting throughout the movie.

The acting in the movie was adequate, but nothing outstanding really, nothing memorable either.

"Tekken 2: Katzyuas Revenge" is not really worth the time or effort.

An interesting twist to the Leprechaun franchise..., 30 August 2014

It was nice to have a revisit to the "Leprechaun" franchise, despite this deviating quite much from the original movies.

But this deviation is not a bad thing; far from it. What this movie lacks in terms of one-liners, funny dialogue and Warwick Davis, this 2014 "Leprechaun: Origins" more than make up for in brutality and ferocity.

The story is about a group of young people who are trekking in Ireland who come across a small remote village that claim to have ancient artifacts that could be rooting back to the origin of the Celtic culture. But the village harbors a secret that glitters like gold, and the surrounding countryside is the home of a creature that wants that gold.

I will say that the storyline was good, despite being predictable and not really bringing anything new to the horror genre.

One thing that really annoyed me was the camera work, especially when the leprechaun was in the shot. What was up with the constant focused view, then out of focused view, and back to focused view. It was such a major nuisance, and it really brought down the overall enjoyment of the movie, almost to the point of being as annoying as the 'found footage' movies.

I didn't know that Brendan Fletcher was in this movie prior to sitting down to watch it, so that was a nice surprise. Garry Chalk really carried the movie so well with his great performance.

It was a shame that whenever the leprechaun was on the screen, then the camera work turned questionable and every other frame was out of focus. From what I saw, then there was some interesting creature design with the leprechaun. And it was a radical change in direction from the previous movies.

The movie would have been much more enjoyable if the camera work was consistent and always in focus. And also if they had actually shown more of the leprechaun, then it would have been a notch up in the right direction.

Just another average Scooby Doo adventure..., 30 August 2014

If you enjoy the Scooby Doo cartoons, then you will also enjoy "Scooby-Doo! Frankencreepy", as this is a fairly average run-of-the-mill typical Scooby Doo cartoon and story.

The friends venture to a small village named Transylvania in Pennsylvania, where Velma has inherited a cursed castle. And it is up to the friends to figure out what is going on in the cursed castle and the nearby spooky village.

Again, this 2014 cartoon follow the exact same method of building up a story as every other episode and movie of the Scooby Doo stories.

Kids will enjoy this cartoon.

13 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
Possibly the worst natural disaster movie ever made..., 28 August 2014

"Disaster Wars: Earthquake vs. Tsunami" was a disaster movie in every sense of the word, literally.

The storyline was fairly generic for a movie of this genre. Mankind sets off a massive natural disaster that proves deadly and it is a race against time to find a way to stop this event before it lays destruction and waste to the world as we know it.

Right... Nothing new there in the storyline department. Aside from it being very boring and uninteresting.

The effects in the movie were abysmal, and I wonder how a special effects team in 2013 could look at the effects that they made for this movie and seriously go "yeah, this looks good. The audience will really buy into this." It was without a doubt the worst CGI effects I have ever witnessed in a movie, and believe you me I have seen many a bad movies in my time.

As for the acting, well just watch the first 5-10 minutes, with the submersible scene, and the level of acting for the rest of the movie is pretty much determined. It seemed that no one on the cast list were buying into the storyline, and it showed blatantly on the screen, because the performances were not even half-hearted.

There are many really bad movies about natural disasters, but "Disaster Wars: Earthquake vs. Tsunami" really is the icing on the cake of bad disaster movies.

Not even 20 minutes into the movie, I was starting to drift to do other stuff and it was a losing battle to keep the attention span to the movie, because it was just so bad.

I suffered through the 85 minutes of this movie so you don't have to. Heed my warning, and stay well away from "Disaster Wars: Earthquake vs. Tsunami".

A generous 1 out of 10 stars...

Sometimes it is better to let the ship sink..., 26 August 2014

I can't claim to have seen the original 1972 movie, only saw the 2006 re-make, so I don't really know how this 1979 sequel was in comparison to the original movie that it was a sequel to.

But being overly familiar with the storyline, it is still possible to watch the 1979 sequel. But it wasn't really an astounding experience, and the movie was just adequately entertaining.

The marooned Poseidon is still afloat, when captain Mike Turner (played by Michael Caine) along with his crew Celeste Whitman (played by Sally Field) and Wilbur Hubbard (played by Karl Malden) come across the upside-down floating vessel and because of financial troubles, captain Mike Turner decides to venture into the vessel in search for valuables. Just as they are to go in, another vessel turns up with a rescue crew led by captain Stefan Svevo (played by Telly Savalas).

The storyline was adequate enough, but there was just too little happening throughout the entire movie. And you didn't really sit with the sense of the people who ventured into the vessel were in any real peril at any time, especially not when they could afford all those breaks and sit down for something to eat as well.

What was impressive about the movie was the talents that they had managed to muster together for this 1979 sequel, and that was actually what managed to keep the movie afloat - pardon the pun.

"Beyond the Poseidon Adventure" isn't really a memorable movie experience, and I doubt that this is the type of movie that you will watch more than once, because it just didn't have all that much to offer.

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Interesting storyline, but not a great movie..., 25 August 2014

It should be said that "Bad Johnson" at least is a different kind of comedy. And when that is said, then it should be said that the movie was kind of a slow-paced and actually disappointing comedy.

Why? Well, for starters, then I didn't laugh a single time throughout the movie. And the little comedy that was incorporated in the movie just didn't really punch through on any scale.

The story is about Rich (played by Cam Gigandet) a guy who cheats on just about every woman that he goes out with. Until one day when he makes a distressed wish to be distanced from the source of his trouble between his legs. Waking up the next day, Rich gets a call from someone he knows intimately and things starts to go awry.

I will say that the idea behind the movie was interesting, but just a shame that it wasn't executed skillfully on the screen.

The acting in "Bad Johnson" was adequate, but the lead part could perhaps have been given to someone more enthusiastic and involved in the role. Cam Gigandet didn't really bring anything to the movie in any way.

"Bad Johnson" was a stale experience as comedies go, and I wasn't really properly entertained. As such, I am rating the movie a mere 4 out of 10 stars.

Want something to put you to sleep? Look no further..., 24 August 2014

"Starship Rising" is one of those Sci-Fi movies that tries too hard to accomplish a lot of things, but failing to do so and managed to swing and miss greatly in the attempts to achieve greatness.

The storyline is sketchy and not fully coherent. It is about a crumbling empire, and ah, well forget it, I don't really know, because the movie was just not easy to submerge yourself into, and I have to admit that I gave up not even 35 minutes into the movie.

What made me give up on the movie, aside from what seemed to be a series of random scenes put together and calling it a movie, was the overall sense of failed blue (or green) screen scenes that were dominant throughout the entire movie. The scenes just looked so fake that you want to claw your eyes out.

The CGI effects were adequate though. Although I didn't really get the fact why every spaceship had to fly in turning spiral. It just didn't make any sense. And the weaponry on the ships, well they were just laughable and anything but believable. And the infantry weaponry as well, a rifle that was almost bigger than the woman carrying it? Sure, why not...

The movie borrows a lot from other Sci-Fi franchises and movies, and that ultimately makes it seem like a product that is not its own, but a mere cash-in on what other TV shows and movies managed to succeed on. Except that "Starship Rising" just failed to execute it.

This was definitely a Sci-Fi movie that swung wide and missed even wider.

Page 1 of 150:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]