Reviews written by registered user

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

Gordon Jump's single best episode, 27 January 2016

Not one of Andy's best episodes, but truly Gordon Jump's best episode. His seen with the owner of Red Wiggler's, Ralph Manza (of Banacek fame)is phenomenal. Jump's subtleties are wonderful and his steady but warm leadership is captured well in this performance, surpassed only by the episode of Jennifer's having been photographed in the nude. In the final scene, Jump's standoff with the head of CURB is amazing. Truly Jump's best episode. A joy to watch him. He really found his groove in this one. Also noteworthy is Richard Paul's portrayal of a Jerry Falwell like character. While today, this subject seems kind of pointless, it was a cutting edge episode with excellent acting.

15 out of 22 people found the following review useful:
a decent summary of the defense's case, 16 June 2014

I have seen a lot of people trash this film, and if you are looking for something on the level of Angelina Jolie's "Changeling", you will be disappointed. If though, you are tolerant of a low budget but effective dramatization of a very tangled, disturbing, and tragic story about 3 young boys losing their lives to murder and 3 young men losing their lives to a group of detectives and justice system blinded by emotion, you will appreciate this film. Reece is fantastic as the mom of one of the victims. She is the big name in the film, though you will recognize several actors who are not quite up to her level of star power. I am a bit of a junkie on this case, and I was not disappointed. I think it does a fair job of presenting the defense's perspective. Granted, if you think they are guilty, and there are many who do, then you will be angered by its presentation. Nonetheless, I was very pleased with it.

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
A great show that deserved more respect, 13 November 2013

I am a huge fan of the original WKRP - I have watched every episode probably twenty or thirty times, if not more. The reality is though, in comparing the New WKRP to the original, there is a tendency to angelize the former and demonize the latter. This is unfair. The reality is, there were as many problems in the original as the New WKRP. While Jan Smithers was beautiful, she was not an overwhelming personality on the show. The same is true for Gary Sandy. He paled in comparison to the others on the show. Of course, Loni Anderson, In many ways, the New WKRP made up for some of the failures of the original, in that most of the cast were, overall, much better. Returning were Gordon Jump, Richard Sanders and Frank Bonner (Carlson, Nessman, and Tarlek) for every episode, and they pick up right where they left off. Howard Hesseman also made several regular appearances (and all were excellent), as did Mama Carlson (Carol Bruce)who seemed to have aged very well.

Three bright and shining characters that add to the new cast were Marla Rubinoff who played Nancy the receptionist. She was as hilarious as she was beautiful (she left TV and went on to become a counselor and therapist). French Stewart, later of 3rd Rock From the Sun fame, was quite entertaining as the morning DJ Razor D, and of course, let us not forget the gorgeous Tawney Kitaen. She was a much better actress in her early days than her later career would evidence. She had great timing and filled the screen with her presence. We must not forget Mykelti Williamson either, who would later go on to play Bubba in Forrest Gump. He brought a lot of energy and great timing to the role of the station manager.

Overall, I have found the episodes to be of excellent quality, and with a stronger cast (overall), I think the writing is better. I hope that one day, these will be available on regular DVD, but for now, they can only be purchased from people who have the VHS tapes (on Enjoy, I know I have!

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
A decent series of documentaries, though a bit dry, 8 October 2013

The reality is, Ken Burns and his magnificence have spoiled us when it comes to broad, sweeping documentaries on topics as wide ranging and diverse as "the Great Indian Wars". Burns is in a league of his own, and it is unfair to everyone else who attempts to do documentaries on any subject that he is so good and so well known. After all, everything pales in comparison. His western documentary is, of course, greatly superior to this collection, but the advantage this collection has is that it is focused almost exclusively on the tragic history of the native American, US Military conflicts. Sure, it is dry. It would have benefited from some music other than Indian drumming. It is a good primer though on the conflicts that comprised a 50-60 year period of American history and it wets the thirst for those who so desire to, study in more depth the subject at hand. All in all, a very good documentary set for a low price.

Uwharrie (2012)
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
dude! i hate the word Dude! But Dude - it's not too bad a movie., 3 October 2013

Not a terrible film for its low budget - one reviewer online wrote about the humorous dialog as a way to endure the problems of its being low budget. I don't have a problem with films being low budget. what I do hate is the continuous use of the word Dude. If you took that word out, the opening 30 minutes would have a total of about 3 minutes of dialog. Otherwise, the silliness of the movie is somewhat endearing. Being from NC myself, I enjoyed seeing local areas on screen and hearing the "local dialog" of the hunter.

The most redemptive aspect of the movie is the final 15 minutes of the movie. The dialog is hilarious. I enjoyed the Indiana Jones reference about halfway through, as well as the Bigfoot hunter parody in the last 12 minutes. It was very witty. In addition, the conversation the two main characters have about adapting to his new handicapped status is hilarious. This last few minutes redeems the whole of the movie.

11 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
Amateurish across the board, 18 September 2013

While Paranormal Asylum benefits from a wonderful concept, that of searching for the true story of Typhoid Mary, it suffers from three major problems.

1 - a ridiculous back story of the film maker trying to get out from under his girlfriend's family.

2 - filming quality that, while the coloring is lovely, it looks either like a college graduation film or a commercial for local TV.

3 - terrible acting. Across the board, terrible acting. No one in this film was even Disney level quality. While good looking and in great shape, while they had nice hair even, the range of their dramatic skills covered the gamut from a to b.

On the positive side - when the film sticks to the found footage genre (which I love!) it is above average. Unfortunately, it only uses found footage techniques for about 15-20 minutes total. This is unfortunate, because the tricks used in those scenes are excellent.

Ultimately, I was left dissatisfied with the movie, knowing that it could have been so much more which is a shame, because I enjoy most found footage movies. I give it a 3 for the few minutes of found footage techniques and the twists employed therein.

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
terrible - furry frequency w/ no plot, 17 February 2013

Years ago on "Bob and Tom," a morning radio show, i heard a comedian say, 'You know the other day, i watched a really boring porn. Did you know those things have credits?" In a way, that is how i feel about this film. The women are attractive, yes (if you like the really furry type). i am not necessarily opposed to the natural look, but sometimes, too much of a good thing can begin to become tiresome. This is a film of excessive closeups, no plot, soft focus camera-work, actors who's heads are cut off by the camera in various shots, and enough boobs and sex scenes to satisfy most any viewer of adult films. for myself, once was enough - not sure i will watch anymore Jesus Franco films, as i have a feeling, when you have seen one, you have seen them all.

Mask Maker (2011)
0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Not a bad film, just don't expect too much, 18 September 2012

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Watched this on Netflix the other day - Those who compare them it to Friday the 13th are dead on - killer is mad because people killed h is mom and so he is now getting revenge.

but some other comparisons might be made - first, this film definitely has elements of Texas Chainsaw Massacre - in that the killer is deformed and is putting on masks of human skin.

i would also add that it seems to parallel every one of the "kids out in the woods" films.

Overall though, not a bad film - both the lead actress and actor are really good - and it is always nice to see Treat Williams - one of my favorite actors ever since "Deep Rising".

one of the great films - laugh out loud, 16 March 2012

I hate to say it, this is one of my guilty pleasure films. Truly one of the funniest movies I have ever seen. Excellent cast. Great pacing. Wonderful dialog! I have seen this film numerous times, and every time I watch it, I laugh. With such great lines like "Don't be a whore and a murderer" and "So what are you anorexic or bulimic? Just skinny. Don't make me hate you." Hilarious. Mena Suvari is awesome, as is Marley Shelton. Both are great. Of course, the cast as a whole is very well matched. I would recommend this to anyone that enjoyed the wit of Juno, though it is not as forced as Juno was at times (not to say that Juno wasn't a great film, it was).

Also, keep an eye out for the hilarious opening scene with the mascot and the old principal. Enjoy. It's an under appreciated classic.

Arrival II (1998)
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
not nearly as bad as everyone says -, 14 November 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I am evidently in the minority here, but this film is not nearly as bad as everyone says. For myself, the worst part of both films was the incredibly bad global warming science, but other than that, the second movie did a really good job of fleshing out the ideas from the first.

I liked the idea that after Zane Ziminski (Charlie Sheen from the first movie) dies, he planned ahead well enough to send packages to five people who will potentially keep up the investigation into the alien invasion. I thought this was a really strong plot point, and it was nicely intertwined throughout the film.

The obligatory love interest, Jane Sibbett is a beautiful woman, not a terrible actress, but has a squeaky voice. Patrick Muldoon is not bad in the lead, just kind of one dimensional.

To be honest, if you are expecting Godfather II levels of quality for a sequel, you are expecting way too much. In reality though, the first movie was not that good. Charlie Sheen's enthusiasm and quirkiness carried the film, but there are several slow scenes that drag it down for me. I did not find the same to be true for the sequel. I felt it kept its pace really well. As sequels go, it is not terrible, nor is it great. It is a solid film that has its share of flaws, but to say it is terrible in comparison to the first one is not really fare, because this makes it sound like the first one was a masterpiece. it was not. rather, the the first one was a solid b+ film and the second arrival is a solid b- film.

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