Reviews written by registered user

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

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

0 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Eat Julia, Pray Julia, Love Julia..., 25 June 2011

It is all Julia, just a venue for the producers of this film to make some money off a big name actress.

Contrived story line, average acting, and silly melodrama make this a must miss movie.

But even though I have given my review already, I have to keep writing or IMDb will not allow me to submit this review!

In Julia's defense, even actors like Steve McQueen, Paul Newman, and Laurence Olivier were given clunker roles at the end of their careers, just to make some money.

But then she is not in their category...not even close! But that's what you get when you have to add a couple lines to get your opinion published.:)

3 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
Can't get any more stupid, 21 September 2010

Big robots with English accents.

Did they attend Oxford? Dialogue that makes no sense.

No plot, no action.

lots of mugging for the camera.

We are now officially the most stupid nation on the face of the planet for allowing this crap of a movie.

I love comic books and some of the movies that are made from them, but not this one!

Don't go to the theatre, don't rent it, don't even watch it for free!

Getting your nipples pierced would be less painful than watching this movie.

61 out of 97 people found the following review useful:
Uneven, incomplete, and boring depiction of the story, 30 May 2007

Very slow moving movie, which detracted greatly from the story it should have been telling. If you haven't read the book, or knew nothing of the history of this story, you would be completely lost.

The cast was great, and the acting was good. It is not the actors fault that the direction and editing was terrible. I had high hopes that the story telling would be straight forward, of a relatively well-documented event, based on the well known book.

The title is misleading; it is not Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, it is a small excerpt combined with some other story I was not familiar with. The ending of the movie is really mangled, combining color with black and white for dramatic effect, but it just doesn't work, especially when it never even shows the event depicted in the title.

Watch it for good acting, good music, great camera work, but don't expect to be educated, or entertained. The atrocities committed upon this Indian nation deserves a better rendition and remembrance, than presented here.

26 out of 49 people found the following review useful:
Watch the movie, you will like it!, 23 March 2007

I love this movie. Great actors, great scenes. The song the panzer commanders sing is a great moment in movie history.

I read other reviews and many of them I don't understand. Some of them give one star because they say the movie is so historically inaccurate. Was the TV show Combat accurate? Was the popular movie Dirty Dozen accurate? If you want accuracy, stick to the History channel, and even then there will be debates. If you want an entertaining war flick, watch this one! There are none much better.

Another gripe I have with reviews on this movie is with those that question its title. There actually was a Battle of the Bulge in military history. But there never was a "Longest Day" battle. Titles of movies are meant to bring people to the theater, not teach history.

Lest you think I am not an educated reviewer, you should know I was an enlisted Marine, then an Officer of Marines 30 years ago. My family goes back to the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, WW1, WW2, the Korean War, Vietnam, and afterwards.

Even if I was a fly on the wall watching one of my ancestors participate in the Battle of the Bulge, that would not qualify me to comment on the entire battle. Watch the movie, you will like it for entertainment. Then read a book afterwards if you worry you have not been sufficiently educated.

Jane Eyre (1996)
2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
A haunting movie, 18 October 2006

A haunting movie. Charlotte does a stunning job of playing Jane Eyre. William Hurt is perfectly cast.

The story is a sad one, of bitterness, and a down trod human spirit, and the meanness of humanity.

Jane brings brightness to the lives of others, even in the face of treachery from others. As a child, she overcomes the ill-intent of others by her shear strength of will and determination.

The movie has great suspense, even when you know the story, you are still pulling for a happy ending.

I see the movie has a relatively low rating, but its not a movie for today. Its a 19th century rendering of life at that time. A great movie, I highly recommend to those with patience.

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
If you believe this I have some swamp land in Florida for sale., 2 October 2006

I went to USMC boot camp in 1977, rose to the rank of Private First Class. In 1978 I went to Junior OCS, and again in 1980 Senior OCS, when I was commissioned as a 2nd Lt. Finally, in 1985 I attained the rank of Captain. I completed my service in 1990.

With that said, I can assure you that there was nothing right, accurate, or plausible in this movie.

However, I am a sucker for Clint Eastwood, and he was fascinating to watch in this movie. Watch it, but please do not assume this has any resemblance to the Marine Corps.

I recommend it as a generic military movie. Without Clint, I would have given it 2 of 10, with him it gets a hearty 5 of 10.

5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Powerful acting and writing, all-star cast, 28 September 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie is similar to 12 Angry Men, just with a lot more scenes and locations.

As another reviewer said, it bears a second watch to appreciate it fully. Holden plays an intense character who constantly analyzes the situation as it develops. In fact, all the characters are intense, each having having both a business and personal reason for their actions.

The more I watch this movie the better I like it. Every scene has its importance, and there is no wasted dialogue. It moves quickly to its conclusion without ever giving away the ending, since its very basis is the unpredictability of human nature.

It is also a very accurate portrayal of how business works at the "tower" level.

Another reason I liken it to 12 Angry Men, is its use of body language. For example, in the penultimate scene when Holden is delivering his blockbuster speech for the election of President, he stalks around the table, stopping at the chair of various directors. At one point he plants his hand on the shoulder of the Stanwyck character, and you can see her emotions shift. Shortly after he puts his hand on the shoulder of Walter Pidgeon.

His speech and mannerisms provide an exciting climax to the movie, as he breaks out as the strongest of the bunch, and gives closure in an exciting ending. All in all, this is a great movie with an all-star cast, that requires close attention in order to appreciate its greatness.

7 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
It's a feel good movie, 24 September 2006

I really should have given it a 5 of 10, but it just felt good to watch.

This movie reminds me of some of the Elvis movies where they surrounded him with great character actors. Audie was famous years before Elvis, but in a different way. I would not be surprised if Audie was a hero of Elvis.

Anyway, this is a vehicle movie made for Audie, and it works fine. Audie is a good actor, and you will always get what you expect from one of his movies. Sandra Dee is good as well; she conveys much with her pouty face without ever saying a word.

Worth watching.

3 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
I just don't get it...., 1 September 2006

I have seen this movie 9 or 10 times, and still don't understand why it is so highly regarded.

I find the plot to be very uneven, and most of the actors performances are blatantly overacted. I love westerns, and I love John Wayne and Jeffrey Hunter, but both of them were just too odd in this movie.

I know this movie was supposed to dispel certain prejudices, but I think it does the opposite. Some of the girls who were abducted by the Indians went nuts, others supposedly fit in so well they couldn't remember their lives otherwise. There just wasn't enough supporting material in the story to support why it would happen one way or the other. For the most part, the Indians were portrayed as savages or idiots.

Give me High Noon, Cimarron, or even Dances With Wolves anyday, but this movie just doesn't do it for me.

27 out of 35 people found the following review useful:
How can you go wrong with Disney?, 31 August 2006

When I was a kid in the 50's and 60's anything connected with Disney was by definition great. What happened? They are able to get any actors and actresses they want, the best of their time. But somehow Disney manages to screw things up in spite of their abundant resources.

Disney can afford the best writers, the best producers and directors, but still...they screw things up! This movie is crap. The sad thing is that I suspect Disney in their arrogance does not even know when a movie is good or bad.

It is only due to the talent of the actors that I can even give it a 3 of 10.

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