Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
You Got Served (2004)
You're Getting Served.
I'm not gonna rip on this movie too hard. I thought the dance sequences were fantastic. The rest of the plot isn't important. What matters is connecting dance sequence A to dance sequence B. If they wanted to make a fantastic piece of cinema, they would've hired actors, not B2K. You can't grade a movie like this on the same scale as other movies. Is "You Got Served" gonna be on par with "Lord of the Rings", or "Lost in Translation", or any other movie released in the past year? No, and it's not trying to be. It has the focus where it counts, on the dancing, the sub-plots aren't important at all. It has just enough plot to distinguish it from Darren's Dance Grooves, which is all it needs.
Go see You Got Served if you like hip-hop or dancing. Don't go see it if you're an overly judgmental, frequent cinema patron.
You Got Served gets a 7/10 for a good dance battle movie, nothing more.
Ahhhh....A fitting end to a glorious trilogy of fine pieces of film. Delivers on every level! Notable are the effectively creepy roles of Gollum, and that CGI Shilob, or whatever the hell it's name is. Fantastic action sequences with stunning special effects and sound that knocks you back into your seat. A perfect resolution to the trilogy. Perfectly captures the drama, the pain, and the suffering that is experienced by Frodo and Sam as they venture closer to Mount Doom, as well as the comraderie between the remainder of the fellowship, the bravery of the Hobbits, and even the very lightly mentioned love between Aragorn and Arwen. I can't find anything wrong with this movie outside of the unexplained absence of Chris Lee as Saruman....Scores a 10 of 10 in my book!
The Ring (2002)
Kids need to toughen up.
I'm going to keep this short. This movie was garbage. If this is what scares kids today, kids today are pussywillows. The only good thing about this movie was the cinematography, and even that wasn't as good as most movies. The story is terribly linear. Naomi Watts has the answers to every question that is placed in front of her, with very little conflict. Anyone who says this doesn't resort to jolts and loud noises must've been high when they saw the movie, because that's the only way they got any kind of rise out of me. This is just more proof that the horror movie industry is dying a slow and painful death. The studios have run out of ideas, and have to make remakes of foreign films that no one has heard of to bring anything fresh to the screen. Naomi Watts looked good, Brian Cox was good in his role, as he always is, but the movie that my classmates describe to me as "The scariest movie I've ever seen" are really mis-informed. The Ring is scum, awful, awful scum. I'm talking shoe scrapings after stepping in turd and waiting a year to clean it off scum. of ten, I would be kind and give this a 1.1/10. Go see the Exorcist, then talk to me about a well done scary movie. Wow, I guess I didn't keep it very short.
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (2003)
I want 98 minutes, and $6.00 back!
I'm going to keep this short.
This was a pointless remake of a horror quasi-classic. The kids look terribly out of place in terms of cloths and attitude and speak, and the acting is about as bland as can be. This "Gore-Fest" that was hyped to me is nothing short of a crap-fest. The only gory scene in the entire film is seeing what-his-face's leg get cut off by Leatherface. Other than that, it's one death after another, with a really unscary villain, and Jessica Biel lives for way too long. This scores about a 1.5/10 from me. And that's being kind, giving it points for mild creepyness. I can make $6.00 back no problem, but New Line owes me 98 minutes of my life, and I want them back, now!
Just a Public Enemy said so well, "Don't Believe the Hype!".