Reviews written by registered user
|11 reviews in total|
A strange Hong Kong movie from 2004, "Where is Mama's Boy?" has a plot
involving a long-lost son, a gambling/"entertainment parlor" and a good
amount of poorly-done 'wire-fu'.
Oh yeah, and songs. Some really bad Cantonese songs are sung repeatedly, but William Hung (who seems to be the reason why this movie was made) steals the show with his performance of a song about "Shaobing", a kind of Chinese pancake.
The HK DVD has some English subtitle problems, which I think contribute to the confusing plot. I'd recommend avoiding this stinker, but if you can find it for $19HKD (2.25USD), it might be worth the purchase, just for the camp value.
This is a documentary, shot with little introduction or narration, telling the story of four women who live in the village of Phoenix Bridge who have gone to Beijing to work as maids. The women, who often talk directly to the camera while hanging out in the shack they live in, talk about the stresses they feel while being separated from their families, the pressure to get married, but the desire to earn living wages. It's a very raw, rough documentary, but is very sad in some ways. It's worth seeing if you're interested in modern Chinese problems, as this is one of the few films which let the workers speak for themselves, directly to the audience.
This is a really powerful documentary. I first saw it on my first day of Gifted & Talented Education at Pinewood Elementary. I was so amazed by the revolutionary ideas, especially the part with the ping pong balls at the factory. Balls come off the production line and are tested to make sure they bounce within a certain range. One ball bounces higher and is rejected, and ends up bouncing further and going on to greater heights than any others. For a Gifted & Talented class, this was a really powerful metaphor. This is a great film to make one think critically about the world surrounding us and how ideas can be influenced by others' opinions -- especially if the opinions later prove to be invalid and fearful. 4/****
I screamed my head off because seeing this movie was my first movie going experience ever at some 13 months old. I remember it being incredibly bloody and it made me angry. I watched it again on tv a few years ago. Big mistake -- the acting is wooden, the plot non-existent and the movie lacks merit unless 23 year-old T & A is what gets you going... 0/****
I was really surprised by this movie. It has so much heart, so much cleverness (San Franc-Lisco?) and is so much like what being a temp can feel like. I really relate to Josh's work style when on a temp job -- as does any honest temp... the freaky ex coworkers who call, the weird office manager and the scary boss who has no clue. Imagine my surprise when two weeks after seeing this film, I went on a temp assignment and was given 14 letters to send out; for various reasons I had to delay sending them until I got another form in the mail... eerie. A brilliant gem for any office worker, or someone who loves one.
Whoa! I saw this movie on a dare, and was shocked. The characters were
unlovable, the disabled kid was the butt of jokes (since when are jokes at
the expense of someone with Tourette's syndrome funny?), and it was
icky. Lopez's character was mislabeled... she called herself a lesbian,
really was very much bisexual.
Affleck was a cartoon. A cartoon goon. That anyone could find his character sexy amuses me to no end. His language was interesting, and he had a kick-ass apartment for a "contractor." When did someone with so little class get such nice taste? Something didn't add up -- many things didn't add up in this film.
I had read that they used the f*** word 45 times in the first 15 minutes. I gave up counting at 61 about a half-hour or so into the feature. The profanity was used so often, it lost all value as a word. I felt the script was full of these verbal packing peanuts... ...and then came Turkey Time. I was horrified. The 10 or so people in the audience groaned... wow... How could a script this poorly written get made? Swept Away and Glitter were much better -- which is saying something considering they're horrid movies. Ay... watch it on cable next year... don't pay!
This is not a great movie, but not the worst I've ever seen. Guy Ritchie's style of direction is interesting, but it's far too jerky for what should be a slow, methodical movie. A puzzling piece of work, but entertaining nonetheless. :o)
I'd have to say that this is a pretty exciting movie. Great acting by Micheal Keaton, Marisa Tomei and Lynne Thigpen. It's a favorite in newsrooms everywhere, and I know that while this isn't a movie for everyone, it's an exciting, well-told story of a day at a newspaper.
This movie is just like Carl Hiassen's novels (upon which it was based) -- a little off, a little crude and incredibly funny. The dark humor mixed with the believably bizarre characters makes this a wonderfully funny time. I almost died laughing... especially Burt Reynolds, who steals every one of his scenes. Not for everyone, but this film is hilarious if you take the time to enjoy it.
This movie struck me as very tired. The jokes were old, the characters seemed comfortable... the whole film seemed to be on auto-pilot. Sad, because Mike Meyers and Beyoncé are very talented leads and shouldn't be wasted. The saving grace? Miss Knowles -- she had the best lines, best delivery and seemed the most awake.
|Page 1 of 2:|| |