Reviews written by registered user
craigman

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

300 (2006)
7 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
Stupid and Forgettable. Waaay Overrated., 21 April 2009
1/10

I agree with a lot of the negative postings. This was really ridiculous and annoying. I am not a movie snob or anything, but this movie was extremely overrated and dumb. I almost fell asleep a few times. At one point I thought I was watching Disney's "Hunchback of Notre Dame".

I thought Persians were ancient Iranians, so why were they Black here? Also, since the filmmaker loves violence and gore, it was done very stupidly in this movie. For instance, the blood that "flung" out when someone got cut just disappears and never appears on the ground. When someone is beheaded, there should be a fountain of blood spurting out, but here, there is no blood! The electric guitar riffs throughout the monotonous fight scenes also added to the stupidity. Were piercings really in fashion that long ago?

17 out of 31 people found the following review useful:
Super-Turd with Elisabeth Hasslebeck on top, 16 December 2008
2/10

Wow, this was bad. I really have to put my foot down and stop letting my wife subject me to such utter crap! Why are women drawn so much to any movie that features a wedding? Ugh, I could make a really long list of all of the things that just annoyed the hell out of me from this formulaic cliché-fest! For one thing, I am so sick of all of these "romantic comedies" set in Manhattan! Also, all of the characters were one-dimensional cyphers. People act in stupid, unrealistic ways only seen in movies and not in real life. Plus, the lame attempts at humor were pathetic and immature.

The main guy, who of course has to be rich by some inane invention, or a "lovable loser", played by the inexplicably popular Patrick Dempsey, was a grade-A jerk that women cannot resist. This is shown in typical Hollywood fashion, with women constantly throwing themselves at him in such embarrassing ways in which women in real life would never do. At one point, a woman jumps on top of him, screaming "service me"! This one-note commitment-phobe has all of these stupid rules he follows to keep women from getting too close. He also has a female friend for ten years that gets to watch him sleeping with all of these women for a decade, before deciding predictably that all of the women were sluts and she is the one he loves and should marry. Barf! Everything is predictable and trite. The only parts that were vaguely entertaining were the shots in Scotland. The only part that made me smile was when Kevin McKidd punched out the sniveling Dempsey. The part that really put this in the dumpster was the despicable Elisabeth Hasslebeck making a bizarre appearance in some instructional video. Movies like these could be used to torture the average guy!

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
I'll give it some points for originality, 5 December 2008
6/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I just watched this with my brother, who liked it more than me. I grew up on a steady diet of horror movies, but I usually don't prefer the torture types, like Saw or Hostel. I must admit, it held my interest and was fairly unpredictable and broke the formula of the average horror movie. It definitely didn't take itself too seriously, and broke the taboo of child murder. I admit, I was cheering when Watts shot one of the baddies, like most would, and groaned when her victory was deleted, "Click"-style. I understood why the director did this.

I found myself yelling at the family to do something, anything, like fight back. The father, while injured in the knee, still had three working limbs, but never used them to defend his own family! Many chances to escape, or grab a weapon were given, but the family seemed to stupidly think they would survive the ordeal if they stuck together and did nothing, I guess. Well, they were "dead wrong"! Sorry, couldn't help it.

The main message I got from this movie was that the average American, or any civilized family seems to have become so soft and complacent, that when faced with such a threat, they become quivering masses of jelly. They don't have any fighting instinct left. Like our beloved dogs (most of them), they have forgotten how to use their teeth and nails to defend themselves and loved ones. I would like to think that my two Labs would leap to my rescue, but most likely they would cringe and cower.

It's easy to say that you would have done a lot more than this family did in order to survive, but most people don't know how they will react in such a situation unless it actually happened to them. I would like to think that I would would fight tooth and nail to protect my family, until my last dying breath, which I feel I would, but I don't even have any defense training! I think I'll sign up for Karate...

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Hilarious, Ripe for Parody, 18 November 2008
5/10

I have to admit, I only say about 20 minutes of this straight-to-video "movie", and it was on a Spanish speaking station, so I couldn't understand any of the dialog, but from what I saw, I liked for some strange reason. I guess it was the bizarre imagery of the freaky cult ceremony and the pumped up poor man's Van Damn! that made me watch. It was so bad in funny way, with the evil cult leader making funny faces and the clueless military leader stumbling into the cult and getting killed. The hairstyles were hilarious mullets for the men and frizzy-crimped for the women. This movie had an 80's feel even though it was released in 1995! I would love to see it in its entirety and laugh my butt off!

Supernova (2005) (TV)
2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Luke Perry Cannot Act His Way Out Of A Paper Bag, 13 November 2008
1/10

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Wow, I feel cheated out of the time I wasted watching this utter garbage. It came on channel 35 (ION) in the middle of a Sunday. That's when I usually get suckered into watching something crappy, I guess, since I was feeling particularly lazy and absolutely nothing good was on the TV. While most of the other reviewers rightly pointed out out how awful this was, I don't think it will become a "cult favorite", like some said. There really is nothing redeeming about this.

Why does Luke Perry still get ANY acting jobs? All he does in this is kind of mumble and stumble around. He has the charisma of a turnip, and doesn't even know how to act angry when some killer is trying to kill his annoyingly cute wife and child! I was rooting for the bad guy to kill him. The killer inexplicably only knocks him out! Then his wife has to save him! And poor Tia Carerre. I always thought she was hot looking, but she always seems so cold and sexless on-screen. It's as if she is under orders to never flirt or act sexy, or ever kiss anyone! She is always single and childless as well.

The scenes with Peter Fonda and the lone blond woman on the beach were excruciating to watch as well. They are killed in a really stupid manner by a heat-seeking sun-chunk (don't ask). After suffering through about 3 hours to the end, I was hoping the sun would indeed put everyone out of their misery! No such luck, though. Like so many other stupid "disaster" movies and TV shows, there is always a stupid happy ending! The creators never have the stones to actually follow through on their "end of the world" scenario!

0 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Really bad, and not in any good way, 27 October 2008
1/10

Wow, I just saw this on T.V. as one of the "scary" movies they show around Halloween. Was this rated G? There wasn't really anything to make this movie scary, or worth watching. Also, other people say this is a spoof, but I don't think so. For a spoof, you need something called "humor". This low-budget crap-fest didn't have a shred of humor, and it didn't make much sense, either. You basically have a goofy looking monster (man in rubber suit) coming out of closets, killing people, I guess, since you never see the monster doing violence to anyone or any bloody aftermath. The spinning newspaper tells you that people were killed by the monster, so I guess that's good enough.

The military tries feebly to kill the monster, which isn't much larger than a man. They have very bad aim. Then the military FLEES! Wow, did this movie make the U.S. military look pathetic or what? The monster, while hard to kill, doesn't do much besides shuffle around and roar. Oh, and occasionally a second head pops out of its mouth and shrieks. It was a slightly interesting, yet a total Alien ripoff.

What was the deal with the scientist playing the Xylophone to attract the monster? It was hard to understand a lot of the dialog due to the poor sound quality. Also, why did the monster carry around the main wimpy guy for so long? Why didn't the monster go into the closet when it had a chance? Why do I insist on trying to make sense out of the senseless?

31 out of 55 people found the following review useful:
Worse Than "Viper", which it rips off completely, 19 February 2008
1/10

The only reason I watched this was because I had some nostalgic feeling for the original "Knight Rider" and that there was nothing else on at the time. This show really was lame and stupid. It could barely hold my interest. I kept walking out of the room and changing the channel, looking for anything else to watch. While this show didn't completely hold my attention, I can remember quite a few things that annoyed me:

1. The bad guys were basically humorless douchbag cardboard cutouts with absolutely no personality. I know they aren't supposed to be likable, but at least make them slightly interesting!

2. The whole sun-drenched look was stupid. I felt like I was watching the O.C.

3. What purpose did the lesbian cop have other than stupidly being caught by the bad guys? Also, how could she afford a beach house? One of the stupidest exchanges came between her and some young California blonde she just had sex with. She basically said she had to go and the blond said something like "You are going to leave me in your house? You barely know me" Then the lesbian cop said "Oh, it's okay" and just left! STOOOPID! The blonde should have cleared out the house, like in "Risky Business"! That would have taught her a lesson!

4. The dialog seemed like it was written by a 4 year old.

5. All of the annoying Ford commercials that seemed like part of the show.

6. The storyline was full of cliché's and stupid characters, like the main guy in bed with 2 bimbos, owing bookies a ton of money, having his goofy, useless friend threatened by thugs.

7. The car didn't really do anything groundbreaking, and actually didn't do hardly any of the cool things the original K.I.T.T. did. Also, the car's "nonotechnology", directly ripped from "Viper" is sooo '90s!

There are many other stupid parts that I really don't want to try that hard to remember. Overall, this "remake", or "continuation" has a very old and dated feel about it. Other posters said they are happy this isn't a "re-imagining" like the updated "Battlestar Galactica". They got it backwards. "Battlestar" is about a billion times better, sex changes and all!

60 out of 135 people found the following review useful:
It was so-so, 26 September 2007
5/10

After watching the great new Heroes episode, I decided to stick around and see if this show was worth watching. I agree with another poster in that nothing really unsettling or interesting happens. It seemed really formulaic, and very similar to "Quantum Leap". Actually, "Quantum Leap" had more interesting elements to it.

The basic premise is that a Scottish guy (who feebly tries to hide his accent, why?) living in SanFrancisco, played by Kevin McKidd (whom I liked a lot in "Rome") gets inexplicably bounced backward and forward in time, like the guy in Kurt Vonnegat's book "Slaughterhouse 5". But, for some reason, he is drawn to a man whom he believes he has to "interfere with", to correct something "bad", so history will be "saved". That concept is pretty much the same as "Quantum Leap", except that in "QL" a machine from the future caused Sam to jump back in time, and only his brain traveled though time, temporarily settling in some seemingly random person's mind. Sometimes Sam inhabited a woman's body, once even a chimpanzee! Also, Sam was accompanied by a hologram that tries to guide him on his "mission". There also was quite a bit of whimsical humor. Wow, that was a good show.

Here, McKidd experiences some blurry special effect and finds himself a few years in the past. I watched the whole episode with an open mind, but found my mind wandering. It got a bit boring at times. Moon Bloodgood definitely got me back interested, especially in the scene where she want's an "afternoon delight" with McKidd. When the show ended, there really wasn't the "oomph" you get when you watch a great new pilot, like the thrill I felt at the end of the new "Battlestar Galactica" pilot. Maybe this show needs some time to hit its stride, I don't know. I may watch the next episode if there is nothing else on...

27 out of 47 people found the following review useful:
Very lame and boring, 29 August 2007
1/10

I cannot believe how popular this show is. I consider myself an avid sci-fi fan. I have read countless sci-fi novels and have enjoyed many sci-fi movies and TV shows. I really wouldn't even consider this true sci-fi. Every episode I have sat through was like a lame, watered down version of a Star Trek episode, minus anything that might make it interesting or exciting.

It's basically a bunch of people standing around in ARMY fatigues, talking about something boring, who occasionally go through the Stargate and end up on a planet that looks just like Earth, with people who look and sound just like Humans! It seemed extremely low budget. The characters are all forgettable one dimensional cutouts, and the many attempts at humor fall flat. It reminds me when you see a commercial with a famous athlete in it, trying to be funny, but he is not. It is just sad.

The movie was terrible as well. There is so much you can do with a portal through space, yet every place the ARMY people go is BORING! This shows no imagination! I actually thought the TV series "Alien Nation" from a few years back (based on the movie Alien Nation) was much better. That show actually had good story lines and decent characters. I wasn't crazy about "Alien Nation", but compared to this overrated crap, it was great!

Also, unlike the great new "Battlestar Galactica" series, "Stargate" copied the look and feel of the lame movie too closely! They should have at least updated the cheesy "toilet flushing" special effect of whenever somebody goes through the Stargate.

1 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Where the $#@ were the $#@ing lasers?!?, 13 August 2007
1/10

I only watched this movie because I was bored one Sunday afternoon and I had received a Sci-Fi Classics collection as gift, and because it starred the late, great Brandon Lee, whom I only have seen in the movie "The Crow", which I loved. I love to watch cheesy low-budget sci-fi movies, and movies that are "so bad they're good", but this was neither. It was just horrible all around. Probably the most annoying part was the terrible sound quality. I would have to turn my TV's volume on maximum and I still couldn't hear the muffled dialog, yet soon afterward there would be a deafening sound effect. Haven't these people heard of boom mikes?

Also, the story was a muddled mess, with basically Brandon running around, looking a lot like a poor man's Dean Cain, shooting black guys dressed in Army fatigues and being a jerk to the obligatory blonde sex-interest. I must admit, I liked the woman much more than Lee. Her cute 80's look and nice cleavage were the only things that kept me from completely tuning out this "movie". Someone else called this a B-movie, but that is giving it way too much praise.

The things that usually make these types of movies appealing are mostly absent, like gratuitous violence (there is virtually none here), a sci-fi element (none), sex or nudity (none worth mentioning). etc. Why this was in a Sci-Fi collection is beyond me. And the main thing that bothered me: NO FREAKING LASERS!!! WHY THE HELL WOULD YOU CALL A MOVIE "LASER MISSION" AND NOT HAVE A SINGLE DAMN LASER IN IT?!?


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