Reviews written by registered user

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

7 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

Scorched (2003/I)
1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
harmless fun, but don't go out of your way to see it - minor spoilers, 9 January 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This came on TV yesterday, and I saw that it had some actors that I like, so I watched it. While most of it was funny, there were some parts I just found annoying, like Rachael Leigh Cook's warrior-woman fantasies. Actually, her whole character was pointless to me. She was barely connected to the other characters and didn't really affect the main plot. I was also sometimes annoyed by the Woody Harrelson-John Cleese scenes. If you have any qualms about watching animals get hurt for laughs, there are a couple scenes you won't appreciate. But I enjoyed the rest of the movie for what it was - fluffy entertainment. Doesn't require strict attention and most of the characters are extremely likable, especially Alicia Silverstone and Ivan Sergei.

Cursed (2005)
Needs to be approached with the right mindset, 28 February 2005

Even though I usually disagree with critics, I didn't know whether I would like this or not. I love most horror movies, though, so I gave it a shot. I ended up loving it. So did my best friend. We thought it was fun. Even halfway through, we decided the critics just don't understand this kind of movie. They don't know what to make of it because it's not a straightforward horror movie, and it's not a parody.

No, the special effects aren't the best (but I've seen worse), and some of the dialog is clunky (again, there has been much worse), but it had the same feel and tone to it as the Scream movies. Anyone who likes Kevin Williamson should like it. If you are looking for a really scary movie, yes, you will be disappointed, but go into it looking to have fun and you might just enjoy it.

Spartan (2004)
3 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
A waste of time, 16 February 2005

I should say first of all that David Mamet's movies are hit or miss with me. That being said, I found this one to be a huge disappointment. Even though there was plenty of action, it couldn't hold my interest. I was bored through most of the movie, and kept waiting for something to spark my interest. I will admit that I rented this solely because of Kristen Bell, who is phenomenal as TV's Veronica Mars. I didn't really know who else was in the movie or what it was about until I looked at the box at the video store. The only things I liked in the entire movie were Kristen Bell, who didn't disappoint at all, and Derek Luke, who I am liking more and more.

If you're a huge Mamet fan, Val Kilmer fan or fan of "rescue mission" movies, then this is for you. If you are like me, and just wanted to see it for Kristen Bell, watch Veronica Mars instead.

Elektra (2005)
246 out of 415 people found the following review useful:
Better than I expected, 12 January 2005

I saw this movie at a free preview screening. I wasn't expecting much because comic book movies are usually disappointing, but this one was actually good. The special effects and action sequences were well done and didn't look over-the-top.

The cinematography was beautiful and the colors almost seemed alive, they were so vibrant. I don't see many movies where the colors make that much of an impact.

I didn't find the dialogue corny or forced. There was only one moment where the audience laughed "inappropriately," and that was at a character's name. The acting was excellent, in my opinion. Jennifer Garner and Goran Visnjic have a natural rapport and Kirsten Prout was very impressive. I hadn't seen her in anything previously. All three of them did a good job of giving these characters some depth and making you care about them, which can sometimes be hard in this type of movie. The villains were, for the most part, subtle and not in your face, as with many movies of this genre.

Overall, I liked this movie and recommend it to anyone who likes a good action movie with non-cardboard characters. In addition to the action, there is drama, romance (but not too much), elements of sci-fi and a few laughs.

Better than expected, 21 June 2004

I mostly went to see this movie for Alan Tudyk, because I'll see anything that he's in. I rarely see movies that are this silly and mindless - which I expected this to be. I was pleasantly surprised. I laughed throughout the whole thing. The jokes aren't always consistent, but they are funny. Vince Vaughn did a great job playing the straight man to all of the weirdos he's surrounded by, and I was surprised because a few of the actors made me care what happened to their characters. That's not easy to do with a script that isn't concerned about the depth of the characters. This movie is by no means a masterpiece of cinema, and isn't going to win any prestigious awards, but it IS highly entertaining and a good way to spend an afternoon.

If you don't *really* love Frodo and Sam . . . (SPOILERS), 18 December 2003

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Overall, I liked this movie. However, it was far from what I was hoping for. The most important thing to know is that, contrary to the title, this movie belongs to Frodo, Sam and Gollum. If anyone else is your favorite character, you'll be a little disappointed. I acknowledge that Peter Jackson did a wonderful job in bringing these cherished characters to the screen. But when some of the characters are barely there, it seems that some poor choices were made. I won't go into a lot of detail, but I'll try to cover the basics. First and foremost is the complete deletion of Saruman, of which everyone was already made aware. All we know of Saruman in this movie is that he's locked in his tower, and for some unexplained reason, has no more power. There is no mention at all of what happened to Grima. We barely see Faramir, except for a few scenes with his father. The romance between Faramir and Eowyn was nonexistent. David Wenham did a wonderful job with the little material he had. Hopefully, all of his scenes will be restored on the extended edition DVD so we can see some happiness for him after all of the horrible things he endured. Eowyn does have more to do in this movie than in Two Towers, especially during the Battle of Pelinnor Fields. However, she seemingly disappears at one point (since the whole Eowyn/Faramir romance was cut out) and is not seen again until near the end. Aragorn is in it more than Eowyn, but not by much. I expected much more with him, since he is the titular king. The same holds true for Legolas and Gimli, as they are off with Aragorn. Arwen is in a little bit more than in TTT, but not by much. Merry and Pippin needed more to do, although Pippin fares a lot better than Merry. Gandalf does have a decent amount of screen time. Elrond has a few scenes as well. A few of the characters shouldn't have bothered to show up, including Eomer, Galadriel and Celeborn. Their screen time was negligible. It was just disappointing to see the movie skewed so heavily toward Frodo, Sam and Gollum when there were so many other characters whose stories also needed to be told/wrapped up. The special effects were amazing and didn't overwhelm the story. I especially liked the army of the dead. The last thing I will mention is how the ending dragged on way too long. There are a couple of false endings, and I thought that the movie could have ended at least once without leaving the audience hanging. But it kept going. And going. We didn't need to see Sam get married. We didn't need to see Frodo and Sam after they returned to the Shire at all. Knowing they both lived and would be able to go home is enough. RotK is still definitely worth seeing, of course, but just be aware that Frodo and Sam will be taking up most of your time.

1 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
What a disappointment!, 22 September 2003

I had heard only good things about this movie, so my friend and I decided to rent it one day. I think that everyone who likes this movie must have seen a different film than we did. We were just glad that we had rented it instead of seeing it in the theater. That way, we could rewind it and constantly stop it to discuss the several things that confused us. If I had seen this in the theater, I would have walked out. It was almost impossible to keep all of the characters straight. I absolutely hated the overlapping dialogue. I didn't care about most of the characters or what happened to them. The murder mystery was boring. Shall I continue? I usually like these actors, especially Maggie Smith, Clive Owen and Jeremy Northam. What a waste of a talented cast! I haven't seen very many Robert Altman films, and this experience does not inspire me to see any more.