Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
Great show, for kids and grownups
I must say, I was a great fan of some CN shows like Dexter's Laboratory, Foster's Home, Adam Lion, JOhnny Bravo, Edd, Ed and Eddy, and all the classics, but my 8 year old daughter (7 then) liked Chowder most of all. So I gave it a chance. And it didn't disappoint me. What a funny greatly done artistic show! :) And what a great surprise: Chowder (voice) is really a kid, he almost looks like his character, he's adorable. That's a big plus, and all the actors are great. Amazing although sometimes a but tough humor, but still amazing. And there are already some cult lines in the show, and some incredible artistic shoots. 10* from me!
The best comedy TV series I've ever watched!
This is, by far, the best comedy with best lines I've ever watched, and maybe the best of all considering relationships between men and women. I simply couldn't stop laughing and it's hard to make some more describing comment for this big piece of comedy art. It's simply impressive how besides very open language and pretty open conversations about anything in this relationship and sex area, there is nothing offensive in the script, and how almost every sentence is hilariously funny. ALthough all main characters are really great, I am almost more impressed with female characters because in many series of this (or any) type, they tend to be cliché, plain boring or stupid, or just annoying, but not these girls. They are cool as much as male characters even though writer is a guy. And that's just wonderful! Total recommendation, a must see!
Wonderful experience! A masterpiece!
To be honest, I didn't expect much of this movie. When I read the plot outline, it didn't sound really promising. It sounded kind like an typical low budget horror crap. But, people who saw the movie constantly praised it, so I gave it a chance. And wasn't disappointed! Both actresses Anna Faris and Angela BEttis (also stars in another horror movie Toolbox murders and does a great acting job here too) are perfect in every single way in their roles, and even Jeremy Sisto is here much better than in overrated Wrong turn. Music in this movie is enchanting and fits perfectly into every single scene. "May", though it's a primarily horror movie, gives strong artistic vibes, it feels poetic, spiritual and psychedelic at the same time. It also has a funny vibe, like it's partly a comedy. Though this could sound as if "May" is a combination of genres, everything works perfectly and this movie is certainly worth watching. Angela Bettis is bright spot in this movie. She played the role of May absolutely to the perfection.
The Descent (2005)
One of the best horror movies I saw recently!
When someone told me the story of Descent, I though "Oh yeah, just another stupid movie about a bunch of stunning college girls in revealing clothes trapped by accident somewhere in nowhere and being chased by bunch of freaking monsters, then slaughtered one by one in horrible ways but not before we see most of their perfect bodies." Surprise, surprise, it's not like that at all. First of all, I was pleasantly surprised to see that movie was British, and since I have a big respect for British cinematography it was actually a good sign for me. Second surprise: it is actually scary! And it's done very well, very professional direction, great script, great actors and genuine scares. Women (not girls!) in the movie are beautiful though, but not in a pin up way. What hit me most is the many ways story could be interpreted. I can not describe those ways of interpretation here, because that would contain a lot of spoilers, but it's fascinating how many details in movie have symbolic meaning and how their interpretation, which depends on the viewer, can affect the whole plot and the way we see the story. Even without surreal horror elements in The Descent, the movie would be scary because of all that claustrophobic setting that is offered. Just the thought of being trapped 2 miles in the underground cave with possibility of never seeing sunlight again is scary enough for me. And the whole expedition into the caves looks genuine enough for me to believe. Characters are also great, well developed, though uneven. It's quite clear that some of them are more in focus, more developed than the others. Even so, the Descent is great horror movie.
It seems that creators of this movie wanted to make a light romantic comedy, something cute and entertaining, with no particular dark corners. But, based on what I've seen, they've gone to far. "Bewitched" seems too light. Character of Isabel is too bland, too cute, too lovely, to the point that she becomes pale and non-interesting, a character hardly anyone can identify with. On the other side is Farrell, who plays his role extremely bad. I don't really know if Farrell is good actor or not, but in this movie, he's irritating and annoying, and I am not sure if that was the actual goal or he's just a bad actor. I don't like Farrell's character Wyatt one bit, and I don't really care if he and Isabel will get together or not. That is not good thing for a romantic comedy. On the plus side, there are cameos of Michael Caine and Shirley MacLaine but that was not enough to make this movie worth something. Idea of movie is not so bad, but it's not too interesting also. Story is clumsy and not well put together and humor is too sweet and too safe. It may have worked in 60's Bewitched series, but now it needs more spice to give it some vitality and strength. Maybe I am doing injustice to this movie, as I am not particular cute romantic comedy lover (I like ones like My best Friend's wedding, with much more spice and much more of dark elements), but while I was watching it, I was bored as hell. I wouldn't recommend it myself, but if you like cute, cutest movies with cute characters, go ahead and watch this and have a good time.
Bruce Almighty (2003)
What is the message here...again? Anyone?
When I read the summary of the movie, something like what happens when a man gets powers of a God, and how he later learns that having supernatural powers requires giant responsibility and strength, I though that was clever and original concept. Casting was promising too, Carrey, Freeman, Aniston... How can movie with a good idea and good actors, not to mention costs of filming, can be bad? It can. Idea is good, but script and story itself is terrible. Bruce Nolan is, let's be honest, a pretty mediocre journalist, with not exactly great stories (like a story of a giant cookie, what a faux pas, and the Niagara report is complete fiasco!), he's a man with a job he completely DESERVES (he's not a good journalist, he's a comedian), considering his potentials, with a nice home, sugar sweet girlfriend, and OH HORROR!!!! Dog who is not house trained!!! Yes, as soon as Bruce, at the beginning of the movie starts addressing GOd in a "God, why do you hate me!" manner, average viewer must think: "Why, what's wrong with your life, Bruce?". Bruce is not, and definitely NOT the man with real problems in life. Most the troubles that happen to him are minor and not really worth of all that fuss he makes, and some of them are really only the result of his stupidity. Most people have really big problems, worth of attention, most people are more worth of attention that Bruce, who doesn't seem too human after all, doesn't look even realistic, too goofy and neurotic, but God still addresses to him. Why? Though Morgan Freeman looks nice as a God, I can't help but to ask what is he doing in this particularly bad movie. And what does Bruce do when God gives him his powers? God in this movie could as easily give his powers to a 5 year old kid and there hardly would be any difference. No, wait, a smart kid would probably use his God powers better than Bruce. What does Bruce do? Pulls the moon closer to earth to create romantic atmosphere, parts the red soup, lifts up a pretty woman's dress on the street, answers prayers via e-mail and make all of them come true!!!! No more, Bruce, please! What Bruce did could actually end the world, but in the movie, that doesn't happen, because this is "nice, family, little movie" and doesn't make any sense at all!!! Not a hint of sarcasm, of real humor, of wittiness, of some dirty humor at least!!! Nothing. Just Carrey playing silly, which is starting to look pathetic on middle aged actor. Aniston here is understated. She plays pale, undeveloped character of Bruce's girlfriend Grace, and stays completely forgettable in this movie. Nobody in the right mind would believe that this two have any chemistry at all between them. When Grace says prayer for Bruce it sounds not only lame and pathetic, but completely false. These two are not meant to be together. I would give three stars, but I doubt movie deserves a one. Bad script, lame dialogs, lack of real humor, wittiness and any sophistication, as well as undeveloped characters and understated Freeman's and Aniston's roles, total lack of boldness and sarcasm, it all makes movie hardly worth ***. But OK, there were few funny moments, and Freeman is always nice to see in any movie so, lets leave three stars.
Some Like It Hot (1959)
One of the best comedies ever!!!!
Even now, almost half a century after this movie was made, "Some like it hot" is hilariously funny. This is, by no means, one of the best, if not the best, comedies ever made. Jack Lemmon is especially perfect in his role, as Jerry/Daphne with his most charming smile. I saw this movie about 10 times and still laugh at almost every line. Jerry as Daphne: "I feel like everybody is watching me." Joe: "With those legs? Are you crazy!"
Jerry as Daphne: "I am engaged." Joe: "Oh, who's the lucky girl?" Jerry: "I am."
This movie is funny, entertaining and charming.
Bad twist in a good movie
When I was watching Identity, for first 40 minutes of a movie I was thrilled. I thought, now THIS is a GOOD MOVIE. Great actors, especially Cusak and Liotta, great horror-thriller atmosphere: heavy rain, night, scary motel in middle of nowhere, homicides... well, I was very enjoying this. Idea of movie is obviously taken from Agatha Christy's novel 'Ten little Indians' and that was fine with me. Ten mysteriously connected strangers caught up in a lonely motel in the middle of nowhere with scary motel owner. And then one by one, ten strangers are being murdered. Brrrr! Who is the killer? How are those people connected? Then, circa 40 minutes into the movie, there's strange plot twist happening. And spoils everything. Since that moment, I don't care about people in motel, because I know they do not really exist. I know who is a killer (at this moment it's pretty much obvious). I don't care about rest of the movie. It's just not interesting anymore. I even feel cheated. The end is just stupid. We discover who the killer is and we knew that already since we saw the plot 40 min into the movie. I could predict exactly what will happen and it spoiled second half of the movie. Then comes end. Stupid. Why did they let dangerous killer drive without any real security? Who in the right mind would fall for that old trick "Aghhhhh, I feel bad, open the cage!!!!" 7 stars because first half is great.
Forced humor and too much humiliation of Bridget
Yes, Hellen Filding's novel is great. Yes, casting in movie is great. Yes, there's a lot lot lot of money involved. So, why do I feel cheated? Why this movie still sucks? Problem no 1. This movie has nothing to do with Filding's novel. Many things you can see and feel in the novel, are improperly used in movie. Bridget is novel is not fat. Renee (leading actress) is not fat. Bridget in novel is not stupid, she's even lucid in her own way. She's not even clumsy (the scene with parachute fall in the pig pen in the novel does not exist nor the scenes with silly skiing into the pharmacy and stupid stupid dialog about buying pregnancy test-it's not even funny!). So why screenwriters treat her as a fat and stupid person? Why screenwriters expect of us to empathize with this person who is so self destructive and silly that she simply doesn't seem at least real? Problem no 2. All characters in the movie are too flat and one dimensional for me to care for them at all. Maybe it is to the script or it is to actors who don't try hard enough. We have Darcy on one side, who, in the novel, is quite charming, I must say, he's almost as cute and refreshingly silly as Bridget. Firth is not novel's Darcy. He's just a good (veeeery good) looking human size doll. Cold, rigid and distant. I don't care for him at all. Grant is good. Grant is great, indeed. He steals scenes in this movie. But, still to one dimensional character (scumbag). Problem no 3. Thai prison. Do I need to explain? (this scene exist in novel too, but fairly better and much more realistic) I am not sure how to answer all this 'why' question, so I'll have to give 3 stars.