Reviews written by registered user
walteraquilina

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

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

Magic Mike (2012)
Uninteresting, boring and hard to watch, 8 February 2013

A movie about a group of strippers sure sounds good, especially knowing it includes Channing Tatum, Matthew McConaughey, Alex Pettyfer and Matt Bomer. So, naturally, I knew I had to watch it after watching the trailer. I wish I stopped at the trailer though, because Magic Mike is one of the worst movies I've seen this year. I honestly think that the only decent bits of the movie were in that trailer.

The bad:

The acting: Bad, very bad. I've seen better acting on straight-to-video horror. This wasn't helped by the fact that the script is horrible. I mean, I firmly believe I could write a better script than that. Dialogue sounded forced throughout, both because of the bad acting and because of the fact that the lines were incredibly lame to begin with. The only "decent" actors were Channing Tatum and Matt Bomer. Cody Horn, on the other hand, was by far the worst of them all. I pray she won't star in any movie I might end up watching in the future.

The plot: Cheesy, simple and unimaginative. You can tell that the story focuses around Mike, but it never really goes anywhere. It's a plot you would expect to see in a 20 minute episode of a long-running TV series, not a 2 hour movie. You can tell how it's going to end from the first couple of scenes.

The characters: Downright lifeless. There was no character development in the entire movie. The character of Adam looked like it was starting to go somewhere at one point, but that vanished quickly. The rest of the characters are just wooden from beginning to end.

The good: A couple of well-choreographed stripping scenes...that's about it. Oh, and a side view of Matt Bomer in a thong.

There's nothing to see here really. I'd fast forward to all the stripping scenes and be done with it. The only reason why I gave this movie a 2 and not a 1 is because of Matt Bomer. The rest is uninteresting. Avoid.

3 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Quite terrible, 21 March 2009

The first Species movie was awesome, the second was a big disappointment, the third was surprisingly decent, but this is even worse than the second...somehow. Species: The Awakening left me checking how much was left of the it every five minutes or so. Though the plot was not that horrible, the movie is just not entertaining.

After the first half hour, I must admit I thought this movie would actually be as good as the third. I was wrong, very wrong. As soon as the characters get to Mexico, this promising movie turns into a cheap, cheesy excuse for a horror movie. Why? There was no excitement. There is definitely not enough gore, almost all the sex scenes were unnecessary, and some stuff just didn't add up or made any sense whatsoever (the reason for Fisk's lies, the taxi-driver and the reason for Azura's actions when they arrive in Mexico - just to name a few).

The reason for this getting a 3 and not a 1, is the first half hour of the movie, and the not-so-terrible acting. Apart from that, I'd suggest staying away from this movie, since it's by far the weakest Species movie so far, it makes Species II seem like a masterpiece. Even if this film wasn't a Species movie, it's still a movie to stay away from.

0 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Fun, but doesn't stand up to its name, 29 November 2006

Yes, this is pretty fun to watch, but doesn't stand up to the previous two. This movie isn't scary at all. It's as cheesy as they get. It made Ben Willis look like Jason Voorhees who only gets hurt by a hook. It also doesn't give you the chills like ISWYDLS did.

Plus, where's Jennifer Love Hewitt? Her screams were one of the main reasons of why I loved the movies. The new blonde actress barely ever screamed. The other downfall of this movie are the "special effects". For example, you don't get to see a thrilling chase like of Sarah Michelle. The movements are all computerized. You never see the fisherman chase someone continuously. First he's somewhere, then, in a second, he's on the other side of the room.

So, rent at your risk. It's pretty fun, but if you didn't like ISKWYDLS, stay away from this. 2/5

2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
The worst sequel, 5 August 2006

Since the third wish is never granted, or the Djinn dies before, I thought that this would be awesome because we finally get to see what happens when the prophecy is fulfilled. But I was so wrong. The prophecy wasn't even fulfilled, so the title is pretty much wrong.

Out of 90 minutes, this has about 15 of unnecessary sex scenes which don't really add anything to the story. Not that I hated it, but it just wasn't needed and the time could've been spent on the story, like the Hunter thing, which I had no idea from where and why he came.

Another bad thing was the special effects. They were just awful. I mean, this movie was made 4-5 years ago and it was like watching an 80s horror flick. Nightmare on Elm Street had better special effects than this load of rubbish.

Just stay away from this horrible movie. If you were unlucky enough to waste money on renting the third, don't make an even worse mistake.

Bad, 1 August 2006

I wasn't expecting a lot from this movie since I saw the IMDb rating before renting it. Although I still tried it out since the rating of horror movies are usually always low. That's were I was wrong. The rating can be very accurate sometimes, if not higher than it should be. Because this was one lame movie.

First thing that I hated from Wishmaster 3, is the fact that Andrew Divoff wasn't cast as the Djinn. Instead, there's this weird, old guy who definitely doesn't match up to Divoff. I also hated the fact that the stone suddenly changed places. I think maybe because it was a different Djinn or something, but I still didn't like it.

The only reason I gave this movie a 2 and not a 1 because I enjoyed some of the wishes. For example, the weight-loss and heart-breaking ones were cool. And also because it has the most disturbing death in the Wishmaster series; the rat scene. That made me shiver and I couldn't even imagine the pain that she went through before she died.

Besides that, I found this movie pretty boring and stupid. I'd still rent it if you enjoyed the first two. Maybe you happen to like it. It didn't happen to me though, so it's your risk.

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Pretty bad, 31 July 2006

Like all Carnosaur movies, this is a joke. The way the dinosaurs move, reminds me of when my sister plays with her dolls, because they cannot be any stiffer or more fake-looking than they were.

The plot had no sense whatsoever. I mean, first they're on a bus, then in a warehouse then, all of a sudden, they're on a boat. And let's be serious, does it make sense that a couple of dinosaurs can stay together on a van, or on a ship? I thought dinosaurs were the biggest animals, and now they can fit on a moving van. It sounds stupid even when you think about it.

The only reason for which I gave this a 3, is because it's still entertaining. I found it better than the first one (haven't watched the second yet). Just, don't rent it. I saw it on TV and it's a good thing I did because I wouldn't have wanted to waste money renting it.

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Personally, I expected it to be better, 30 July 2006

Usually, when a horror movie has a 4-6 rating, it's probably good (since it's very rare that horror movies get a higher rating than 6). I was a bit disappointed when I watched this. I expected it to be at the same level as the original, but it wasn't. The original was far more entertaining.

The thing that I didn't like were the wishes. Well, not the wishes exactly. Just how they were granted. I thought there were a few flaws in almost all of them:

**Spoilers below**

1- The walking-through-the-bars wish was great but he didn't actually walk through them, he got squeezed through one, which wasn't what he wished for.

2- When that guy in the beginning said that he wished he was never born was flawed cause everyone remembered him after that. If he was never born, there would be no record of him and no one will remember that he ever existed (because he didn't)

3- When the cop said "freeze", he didn't mean that he wanted to be frozen. The Djinn should only grant people what they wish for, and the cop didn't mention anything about wanting to be frozen. So, that was a clear mistake (unless I missed something)

4- Last but not least, the casino thing. The manager said that "the casino wishes all customers the best of luck". Then, all people's souls were taken. But, the casino isn't the people. The casino is the building. So, that's a mistake I found rather silly.

Overall, it was watchable, but I think it was rushed a little too much. I had the potential to be as good as the original but it failed because of clear plot-holes. I'd just watch the original and stop there, since that's the good and entertaining one from the series

Bleed (2002) (V)
1 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Well, it has its ups and downs, 24 July 2006

Sadly, more downs than ups. The plot was pretty decent. I mean, nothing out of the ordinary, but it had a story, unlike the other modern horror flicks. The other good thing was the cast. I'm not saying that the acting was good, because it wasn't, but every actor/actress was hot and attractive.

One of the downs are that the movie only become exciting after the first 40 minutes or so. The rest was quite boring. Another down (or you could consider it an up if you want) is the excessive nudity. All 4 girls were topless for a few minutes, and all the guys showed their butts for a long time. It's not that I'm against nudity, but this was a horror movie, not 'The Dreamers'.

Unless you're very desperate to watch some guy take off his swimsuit and run around naked for a few minutes, or watch a girl get naked for no reason, or you're a die-hard fan of Debbie Rochon, than this is the movie for you. But if you're looking for a good horror movie, stay away.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Oh my god!!, 17 July 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I rented this movie cause I loved another one of Uwe Boll's movies, BloodRayne. Since it's rating was also low, I thought that people were voting 1 or 2 because they hate the director, not cause the movie is bad. But I guess BloodRayne is the exception cause this movie is very, very bad. And I don't mean bad as in "it's so bad, that it's actually good". I mean it's just bad, nothing good about it.

Let's start from the beginning, who in the world would pay a thousand bucks to attend some party on an island? I know Simon's character was dumb, but that's too much. Then the fisherman told them that they call it Isle del Muertos. I'm no expert in Spanish but I'm pretty sure that means Island of the Dead, but the movie is called House of the Dead, right? When they arrive on the island, they see that everything was upside down. Do they leave? No. Like a bunch of idiots, they stay there for no reason whatsoever. Then, three of these kids go looking for the party while two of them stay at the party site. These three find a house with another three people there. Then they go look for their other two friends. After a couple of deaths, some unnecessary conversations and the discovery that zombies spit out acid, they find the fisherman. Co-incidentally, he has a box full of guns. The stupid kids take them and head back for the house. All of a sudden, they become professionals with these weapons. No one misses any shots and their fighting ability was awesome considering that they were boozed teenagers looking for a party. That scene takes forever and becomes one of the most boring parts of the movie.

The house looked like a single, small room from the outside, but weirdly, when they went in, it was actually a palace with lots of rooms and a lot of floors in it. Over there they found a lab. In it, there was a box of zombie blood. When the blood touched the zombies, they woke up immediately. If that's not stupid, I don't know what is. After that, they went underground and there they found the mastermind that created the zombies, who, although being a zombie like the others, could talk and acted like a normal human (you'll never get to know how in the world he managed to create zombies though).

They manage to kill him. It was the dumbest death in all the movie. I mean, how can you crush someones skull by simply stepping on it? When he dies, no zombies were to be seen, even though, before, there was a huge amount of them, roaming the island. The movie ends there. Zombies were magically gone just because their creator died and then, the rescue team comes and saves the remaining kids.

That's the story. It's kind of a Wrong Turn/Resident Evil plot but about 50 times worse than them. To make it even worse, there is some footage from the game every 5 minutes or so. Pretty darn stupid, isn't it?

Just, stay away from this movie. If you rent it, you'll find yourself in the position like these teens were in; you'll wish you can get out alive (or at the very least, awake)

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
One of the few decent Halloween sequels, 14 July 2006

This movie isn't as bad as they say. When I read the reviews, I thought I was going to watch a stupid, boring horror movie, but I was surprised. Halloween can be scary without having Michael Myers. I dare say that this movie is better than the original (which I didn't really like) because it's original and includes millions of people dying, not the few people in a house like in the other "Halloween" movies.

Deaths were pretty cool and scary. That rich family getting killed in a few seconds and the misfire death was pretty unexpected. The driller death was also very disturbing.

The only thing that I didn't like at all, was the use of excessive science fiction. It was like watching a Terminator or Alien movie or something. The killer masks are one thing, but the robot guards and Stonehenge shooting some sort of laser is a bit too much.

Still worth watching though. If you want to watch good Halloween movies, just watch this, the first two and H20, don't bother with the rest cause they're all awful. 7/10


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