Reviews written by registered user

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

Page 1 of 10:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [Next]
95 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Don't worry about the plot, just go with the flow, 15 June 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Enter the mind of Ethan Hunt, a slick and clever spy working for the IMF. He's the James Bond of the new century, getting cool gadgets and working with a crack staff of team members. Mission Impossible, based upon the hit TV series, gives us a new look at spy's. Unlike Bong who gets all the girls and kills the bad guy in a matter of minutes, Hunt gets no women and can't even pin the villain in a matter of three days. Brian De Palma gives the spies in Mission Impossible a more human shell, which whom they really are and not some Super-Man hit-man. Mission Impossible, though unfaithful to the series it's derived from, sets itself up as a intelligent spy franchise. The only problem a person can have with this movie is it's confusing plot. But the only way we can get past the plot is just go with the films flow, and we do.

Tom Cruise plays Ethan Hunt, the point man spy in a group of agents under the control of their leader Jim Phelps, played by John Voight. They are assigned to crash a party and photograph a man who is said to have a computer disk containing every name of every IMF agent in the embassy and their aliases. Hunt and his team go to the party undercover and retrieve the photographs only to have each member of the team picked off one by one. Even Phelps gets knocked off and Ethan is the only one left alive. Ethan is then told the mission was a fake to flush out a mole who's been paying an arms dealer and they suspect Ethan of being that mole. It's now up to Ethan to find the real mole and save his name with the help of a few suspended operatives, including Ving Rhames. Now this plot may sound simple, but that's because your reading it. I had to watch the movie twice to fully understand the plot.

Mission Impossible may have this overly thought out plot but you forget all about it. Tom looks cool, the gadgets are cool, and the action is neatly done to give us a nice ride through a spy mission without even remembering what the plot was about. Tom's acting is perfectly done to give Ethan the on the run spy. Ving is awesome as Ethan's partner and Mrs. Beart as Claire Phelps is a nice touch. The special effects are nice. A little hokey looking though, especially the final chase scene on a train being fallowed by a helicopter. And the bad guy, even though there feels like there's three of them, is a clever plot twist that leaves us satisfied. Plus the gadgets are awesome. Exploding chewing gum, fluid spewing pens, exploding video cassettes, it's all here and not over used like any Bond weapon.

The only real beef with this movie is that there wasn't enough action. De Palma acts out by directing this movie with more brain then brawn. We have too much plot but little action. The real movie's blunder doesn't even pick up till half way in when we have the memorable shot of Ethan dangling about an inch over a pressure padded floor trying to retrieve the disk of aliases. With the name Mission Impossible, we expect plenty of action sequences but instead we have a warmed over plot going three different ways. Even the ending battle isn't that memorable and it leaves us with a feeling of, not awe, but shallowness. But that doesn't mean De Palma didn't do a good job. He does a great job giving his Hitchcock touch to the movie, giving us smart characters and a real atmosphere. Mission Impossible gets a 7 out 10 from me. It was cool, but does't get our attention right away. And if you had to choose one M:I movie to see, go see part 3. Part 3 was best, easily beating out this brain scratching film and John Woo's weepy sequel. Mission impossible= B.

From De Palma to Woo, 14 June 2006

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Every director has his own sense of style. Brian De Palma is a Hitchcock stylist while John Woo is pure action. With the first Mission Impossible, De Palma made it slick and intelligent with a very in dept story line and crafty action. Woo on the other hand makes Mission Impossible 2 a low key love story filled with explosions and boring dialog. Woo diverts all our attention away from the previous M:I's feel into a whole new setting with a whole new tone. With Woo's non-stop rush of adrenaline, he turns Ethan Hunt from a cool super spy into a hardcore daredevil.

Tom Cruise makes his return as Ethan Hunt, a spy who is on holiday climbing cliffs who happens to be called in on a very impossible mission. Seems as though a rogue IMF agent, played by Dougray Scott, has crashed a plane and kidnapped a top secret disease only known by it's name, Chemira. Hunt is assigned to enlist a jewel thief to help find out the agents plan. Along with Ethan comes his super hacker pal Luther Stickell, played ounce again by the brute of a man Ving Rhames. Together, Ethan must save the world and the girl who he has fallen in love with. Wait, a love story in a Mission Impossible movie? That's what Woo is giving us?

John Woo is a good director, I'll give him that, but he should have left this movie alone. Brian De Palma had already set up a clever spy franchise and Woo took it down within the first ten minutes when we see Tom Cruise scaling a cliff like he's Spider-Man. Ethan is totally different here than in the previous movie, looking like a regular Steven Segal poser. The acting is worse than part 1, total boredom. Woo, instead of entertaining us, bores us to tears. And the villain is horrible. The plot is a deflated idea used over fifty times and yet Woo decides to pump it up with air again and use it. The special effects, alright. We get some good CGi here and there, and an excellent shot of an knife about to stab Tom's eyeball out, but sense it's six years later after this movie was released, it's old.

The only real saving grace is the action. Woo throws in as many bullets and explosions as he can. We have a cool motorcycle chase, a glass room shattered to pieces with bullets, exploding sun glasses, and even a two man wrestling match atop a hill. Sadly, the action itself is either to slow or too fast and it looses it's willpower. The movie acts like a Dawsons Creek episode, a love triangle while death is involved. Sorry Mr. Woo but this movie was pretty bad. My advice to all the viewers out in the world, see Part 3. JJ Abrams made the best one, cooler then De Palma's and makes Woo's looks like trash. Mission Impossible 2 gets a 6 out of 10. C- on my grade.

The Fog (2005)
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
This movie will move you. It sucks so bad that it will make you get up from where your sitting and Move over to the TV to turn it off, 29 January 2006

The gentle glow of a morning mist flows across the sea and it makes you wonder, can there be something hidden in that cloud? That question can take a toll on your mind when it's around midnight and a giant fog bank is now flowing across the sea onto land. The Fog takes that idea, originally made by John Carpenter a while ago, and remade it into a joke rather then a scary question. The Fog packs one to many boring moments into a long movie that just treads on and on with no sense of horror or entertainment.

Young Nick Castle and his girlfriend Elizabeth suspect their island of a hidden secret when finding a diary of one of the islands founders. The night before, a large fog bank rolled over Nick's boat and everyone except for his pal Spooner is killed off. Spooner gasps it was the Fog but no one believes him. The truth unravels as Nick discovers the island was founded by lepers, leaded by a rich man named Blake, who was ambushed and attacked on the sea's waves by the fake founders of the island. Now the town is being haunted by Blake and his team of ghost in the fog banks and it's up to Nick and Elizabeth to save the whole town. Yawn.

This movie made me shed a tear. Not because I was so into the movies depth and genius, but because I was bored to death. I promise you there is not one moment in this whole film that will reach out and catch your mind and make you enjoy it. The movie is so slow and badly paced that it will make you leave the movie running as you go find something else to do. None of the actors make it worthwhile. Tom Welling plays a younger and gentler Nick Castle with so little enthusiasm, you feel as though he's going to look at the camera and ask "Where's my paycheck?" Maggie Grace plays Elizabeth who now has a purpose to be in the movie rather then Jamie Lee Curtises passing on through town character. She makes the role a slap dash dribble of damsel and secret holder. And we have Selma Blair playing the radio mistress Stevie Wayne who looks and sounds like she's sleepwalking through the part with such little acting that she's a complete mess.

The special effects are alright, nothing special. The only problem is the special effects takes the mystery out of the ghost in the fog. Trying to give the fog a mind of it's own with computer generated ghost sucked. In the original, the ghost were scary because they were played by real people in solid form and you could not see their faces. In the remake, you can see the ghosts faces but can barely make out where they are standing because the frames are so cloudy and cobbled together with fire and smoke. The ghost were trashed apart in the movie, only being in it for a mere three minutes and having a newer purpose to kill. No they're not after a stick of gold, but love. And that my friends is a pure example of Changing the story and it will Suck.

Director Rupert Wainwright came into this project and actually made it look like a cool movie to see but the film was a big disappointment. It crashes and blows up in the second act and can not pick up one ounce of steam to actually make it enjoying. This movie will move you. It will make you get up and Move over to the TV and turn this pile of trash off. The Fog gets a 1, a complete mess and one of the worst remakes ever. John Carpenter must be kicking himself for this producing choice, destroying one of his classic movies. John, let me give you some advise. Don't remake classics! The Fog= D-

Uncle Sam (1996) (V)
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
It's bad, yes, but it still glows with the entertainment of gore and a patriotic tag, 31 December 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

What makes a hero? That is what the question is in Uncle Sam. Jody Baker thinks his enemy slaying Uncle Sam was the definition. Others like veteran Jed Crowley thinks there is no such thing as a hero, but a lunatic. Uncle Sam itself is a movie that asks a question, Am I A Good Movie? I caught myself a copy of Uncle Sam and popped it into my t.v, expecting a horribly bad and god awful movie just so I could laugh at it. But to my surprise, it wasn't what I expected.

Uncle Sam is about Sam Harper, a soldier in the war who died from friendly fire. He is brought home to be buried and his coffin is nestled inside his nephews house. His nephew Jody is very sad about his metal earning Uncle. Jody even tells his family he wants to recruit in the army one day. But on the morning of July Fourth, three flag burners wreck havoc in a cemetery and awakes Sam's spirit. His crisp corpse pins his war metals to his chest plate, kills a peeping tom and steals his Uncle Sam uniform, ready to show how evil the world has turned.

Uncle Sam to start is a cheesy B-Movie with horrible acting and bad effects. The storyline for start is the same old slasher crap. This time it's actually a soldier killing people like tax collectors who tax to much, or flag burners, or kids who beat up younger kids. As usual, the killer is deformed and wears a mask, but it works due to the creepiness of the Uncle Sam costume. The acting is horribly done, except for David "The Shark" who plays Sam wrecking havoc on the 4th of July. The characters are all badly molded, and the horrible acting doesn't make it better. Jody is horribly annoying, Jed is crazy, and Uncle Sam is blood hungry. Some of the characters aren't even needed, the dreaded Pointless Character curse. This one character is a kid who is scared for life from kids blowing fireworks at him. Due to this prank, Sam is nice to the boy and will bid the boys revenge by killing the bully's.

The special effects are nothing special as well. In the finale, you see Sam blown through his house with a cannon. And here's something to look out for, you see the wire pulling Sam through the house. The gore is nice from an Axe in teachers skulls to national anthem screecher's heads being sliced off. It's always going to be war when Uncle Sam is in town. Now I thought this movie was going to be so bad I would die of laughter but to my surprise I didn't. Uncle Sam sets itself up as a mediocre horror and tries to climb the latter of progress but gets no where. The movie though succeeds in good gore and cool death sequences. Sure this movie is bad and cheap but I was entertained so maybe you will too. Uncle Sam gets a 6 out of 10, pretty low brow and stupid but you might be able to enjoy it. Uncle Sam= C+

Jack Frost (1997) (V)
0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Jack Frost melts pretty fast from being a Cheesy B-Movie to a Stupid B-Movie, 26 December 2005

Jack Frost, no kids it's not the warm hearted family movie about a dad who comes back from the dead in the form of a snow man. It's about a sadistic killer named Jack Frost who is sprayed with some acid fluid and is morphed into a killer snow man. I happened to catch a copy of this movie so I could have a nice sit back and laugh at it. A killer snow man? Ha, sounds like the perfect comedy/horror movie! Well I was wrong, very wrong.

Jack Frost is about a killer who is being transported via truck to jail so he could fry in the chair at midnight. But it's a snowy night and it collides with a government tanker carrying a new DNA fluid. Jack escapes only to be burnt to death by the acid and morphs into a killer snowman. He returns to the small town of Snowmonton where he was caught by a small time sheriff. Here he is ready to kill again, now as a snow man with cooler powers. He can condense into water, shoot out ice cycles as spears, and grow killer fangs. The only question is, who can stop Frost? This movie is below the typical B-Movie line. The movies begins cheesy but as soon as Jack is burned by the acid, it quickly drops below the cheese line and goes flat. The acting for one is appalling! Here we have a whole cast of unheard of actors who either can't act, can act but has a pointless character, or is just here for a few extra bucks. The only good actor is Scott MacDonald who plays Jack. He looks like a young Richard Kiel combined with Frankenstein. Sadly his appearance is only reduced to three minutes and all we ever see of him is his new snow man form and his wise cracking voice. Plus his wisecracks are anything but funny. Groaning, stupid, and bad.

The plot is horrible! Throughout history there have been numerous murderers. A killer in a hockey mask, a killer with a razer glove, a chainsaw wielding moron, a rapid St. Bernard, but now we stoop to a tacky killer snow man? Oh come on! And the way the characters are introduced are terrible. For one I really wanted Jack to kill the sheriffs son, I mean giving his dad oats with Antifreeze in them so they won't freeze? All the characters are dumb and pointless and the deaths are to cartoony. One woman in strangled with Christmas lights and has her head smashed into a decoration box and a girl is humped to death in the shower (where is the carrot in that scene eh?).

And to top of this horrible movie is the special effects. The first big special effect we have is Jack's DNA mixing in with snow and boy is it terrible. I mean it looks like a 60's fashion of art design, PU! Jack looks fake as well. He looks like a person covered with rubber snow man skin. All the blood and gore is cheesy and the film never takes off with greatness but instead stoops to low levels.

Jack Frost is one of the worst slasher movies ever made. I thought it would be a riot but no! It doesn't try to be funny and it actually tries to be scary. Jack Frost gets 4 out of 10, it at least made me laugh from it's awfulness. Don't even bother with this piece of trash. Jack Frost= D+

Dukes of Hazzard the TV series: pure old age family fun. Dukes of Hazzard the Remake: Total crap fest!, 15 December 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Remember those good old boys Bo and Luke Duke from the Dukes of Hazzard TV series back in 1979? Those two wild family members who rode around the town of Hazzard in their General Lee, outsmarted the evil Boss Hog, wacky officer Roscoe P. Coltrane, and got help from their Uncle Jesse and short shorts clad cousin Daisy in really bad mishaps. That show was pure old age entertainment. Well it's 2005 now and Hollywood is running out of ideas so what do they usually do? They either pile on more sequels to make a classic one stand alone film into a franchise or either remake it. Well they dug out the Dukesof Hazzard series and pinpointed an idea for a remake. Here is an outdated poor piece of remake crap that totally ruins the original TV series. Director Jay Chadrasekhar seems like an above average film maker, he even looks like a Dukes of Hazzard fan. Maybe he'll stay true to the TV series...wrong! He makes this film look totally offbeat from the original, it's like he's never even seen the series.

Johnny Knoxville and Sean W. Scott play moonshine racing cousins Bo and Luke Duke. They are usually being seen all round Hazzard in their General Lee, smuggling Uncle Jesse's (Willie Nelson) moonshine and kissing girls. Right when they are about to enter a race to go up against an old rival who's now a big time racer, the evil Boss Hogg (poor Burt Reynolds) schemes up a plan to shut down the town of Hazzard and mine it for gold. With his henchman Sheriff Roscoe P. Coltrane, they shut down the Duke farm for smuggling illegal moonshine and pay for the race to be rigged. Now it's up to Bo, Luke, and their cousin Daisy (Jessica Simpson) to step up and save Hazzard ounce again!

This remake has the worst casting for a remake of all time! Knoxville and Scott play the Duke boys totally wrong. In the series, the Dukes were smart and witty. In the remake, they're a couple of boozed up yahoo's who have too much of women and cars on the mind. Jesscie Simpson does a poor job as the beautiful Daisy Duke, making the short shorts look way to long on her legs. I never thought such good talented actors like Nelson and Reynolds would be pulled into this greed trap, playing poorly doubled versions of the original. Nelson plays Uncle Jessie as some old crumpled farmer who packs punches and tells bad stand up jokes. Reynolds plays Boss Hogg as a not so rough and tough villain with a slim figure and cruddy attitude. And who the heck thought of making Roscoe P. Coltrane a evil guy? In the series he was a bumbling fool and that's why he was so funny. In the remake he's a hard boiled snake, shame on the director!Cooter is here as well except he is more handy in bad acting then car tune ups. We also have new characters like a dim witted geek named Sheevs who doesn't like to wear pants.

The plot is terribly lame. The movie scrambles together a bad plot that the show some how never used and cobbles it together with meaningless swerves of landscapes. First Bo and Luke find soil samples, then they go to the city to find some girl, go to a lab, go to the hood, wind up in jail, and it just keeps getting worse and worse and worse! The jokes though are the worst part of this wreck. Bo and Luke do nothing but swear and make out which shows no relationship with the TV series. They hit each other with books, drag safes down the street, blow up clay, light up cocktail bottles, and party with topless collegians. And the worst joke in the movie is what makes the film racist. They roam on into a black neighborhood, faces blackened with soot, and have the confederate flag pained on top of their car. Sorry but I don't like movies that make fun of other races, sorry Jay.

Now here's the only good thing about this movie, the General Lee. In the beginning of the film, it has no similarities with the series General Lee except for the paint job. After it gets torn up, Cooter transforms it into that beauty we all know from the 1979 series. It jumps sky high, smashed up cars, and doesn't take no for an answer. The stunts in this film are really good, the only real redeemer in fact. The stunt men must have been crazy to jump as many cliffs as they did in the film. But still this film just overruns with wheezes of lame jokes and bad acting. It all gets molded into a bad remake that just gets worse by every second. It keeps bringing in bad language, nudity, and vulgar humor which destroys the image of a ounce beautiful TV show. Dukes of Hazzard gets a 4, cool stunts but it totally doesn't succeed. As it's own film, it's good but as a remake of the classic series, it's a major crap fest! The Dukes of Hazzard=D

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Some may consider this Adam Sandlers best, but I don't, 3 December 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Billy Madison, Happy Gilmore, Bid Daddy. These are just a few of my favorite Adams Sandler films, and his best may I add. But some people consider The Waterboy Sandlers best film ever. Well I'm sorry but I beg to differ. Sandler plays Bobby Boucher Jr. who is considered an idiot because of his annoying accent and slow mind. His devil hating mama pampers him too much and he just got fired from his job as water boy distributer from a big college football team. Bobby then becomes the new water boy for the worst college football team ever The Mud Dogs, being coached by mentally broken down Coach Klien played by Henry Winkler. Bobby gets insulted by his new team mates only for the coach to tell him to stand up for himself. Bobby then pictures the people who has made fun of him in his life on his targets shoulders and tackles them to the ground! Thanks to Bobby's anger tackles, he becomes a tackler for the Mud Dogs and leads them to the Burbon Bowl. Problem is along the way, his momma goes into the hospital with a "broken" heart, Bobby's jail bird girlfriend disrespects him, and his old football team are the ones who will be facing him at the Bowl. What will Bobby do?

I'm not saying this is a bad movie but it is totally off from a great movie. One main problem with the movie is Sandler himself. He does a great job as Bobby except his characters accent (which is more of a stutter, whine, scream, and mentally retarded yelp rolled into one) makes your eardrums cringe every time he speaks. It gets so annoying after half the film that you just can't wait for the movie to pick up the pace and be over with. But if you really get past the voice and look beyond the dumb atmosphere, you fall right into the movie and really enjoy it.

Now Sandler isn't the only character that makes the film "dumb." Every character in this movie is like a rejected Bugs Bunny cartoon character refused to be shown on cable broadcast. First there's Bobby with his nails on a chalk board voice, Coach Klien who likes acting retarded every time he has a bad play thrown, evil Coach Red who is just a stupid jerk, Farmer Fran the assistant coach who is nothing but a dumb Amish farmer who can't even speak right, Mama Boucher who's devil hating persona falls to the ground only after three minutes of depth, Rob Schnider as his classic Townie character who shout's nothing but "You can do it!", and of coarse we have Vickie Valencourt, Bobby's love interest, but she isn't really needed in the movie. Sure she's a nice piece of cast decoration but her character is so annoying. She's a criminal, psychic, and murderer wrapped into one body and the only time she does anything good is to help Bobby at the big football bowl game in some stupid plot turn that only last a mere thirty seconds.

The jokes are real cornball but in a good way. With all the football moments and hard tackling, the jokes are pretty low tack. The special effects are just plane bad looking when Bobby pictures his anger on people's shoulders and the coach pictures babies and pooches. Also the whole football team are nothing but big babies wearing jerseys. One is a dumb playboy, another is a dim witted Frankenstein, another seems like a gay punter who likes to picture KKK members heads on his football before he kicks em', it just gets so stupid after a while. You even get tired of watching this movie all the way up to the big bowl game at the end of the film after seeing all the really bad jokes and seeing Bobby tackle so many people for some stupid reason. Like in one scene, he tackles his professor for saying his mama was wrong about what makes an alligator so mean

What the Waterboy is though is a good time slot filler. If you just want a slow paced dumb comedy, sure you will get a kick out of it. Like I said, it's not a bad movie but it's too stupid and corny just to take seriously. I enjoyed it a little so maybe you could too. I give the Waterboy a 6. If you want Classic Sandler, get Happy Gilmore or Billy Madison. If you want Sandler's second to rate cornball comedies, get this. I still say Happy Gilmore was his best. The Waterboy= C+

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Predictable from beginning to end, 2 December 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

What can I say about Christmas with the Kranks? Here is a little holiday movie based on a classic holiday novel written by John Grisham which involves a grouchy couple planning on skipping Christmas to save money. Sounds like a good idea for a movie right? It made a good book so why shouldn't it make a good movie? Well director Joe Roth asked himself that question and decided to make Christmas with the Kranks a big screen movie. Bad idea Joe! Tim Allen plays Luther Krank who's daughter just moved away to join the Peace Corps. While shopping with his sad and dreary wife Nora, played by a depressed Jamie Lee Curtis, on a really rainy evening he see's a poster advertising a Caribbean ship cruise that is only half of their shopping bills. Luther springs the idea on his wife and she agree's, only their neighbors don't. While all the other neighbors put up Christmas lights and Frosty the snowman, we have Luther and Nora getting tans and buying swim ware. But when their daughter calls and tells her parents she's coming home with her foreign boyfriend to spend Christmas with them at their annual party, it's a race against the clock for the Kranks to have another happy Christmas with their daughter.

Here's the main problem with this movie. We have three great actors in this movie: Tim Allen, Jamie Lee Curtis, and the late and great Dan Akroyd. They seem funny enough to be in a little holiday romp, but they do not exceed as their characters. Tim isn't as evil as his novel self, Jamie is nothing but dreary and out of shape to play her part, and Dan is just showing off his age and receding hair line rather then playing an annoying neighborhood snoop. The film is weighed down to a level of corny with tacky jokes and a gooey plot that keeps falling apart every minute. You just begin to ask questions as the film progresses. Why should the neighborhood be angry at the Kranks for skipping Christmas? Why doesn't Luther and Nora just flat out tell their daughter they are skipping Christmas? Why not even invite their daughter with them on the cruise? It's major plot holes that shuts this film down without it even taking off.

Now the writer of this film has never seen really good comedy's. This movie never shows a real funny moment. And if it does, it's usually a joke that's been reused over a thousand times. Throughout half the film, the plot just goes from corny, to tacky, to flat out dull. It's all about the neighborhood calling for a battle with the Kranks. Here we see Luther spraying his icy stairway path with a hose to topple carolers and freeze a white kitten to death. Is that really the only good joke the movie can offer? It's goofy twists like that is what sends the film into a spiral of wreckage. The neighbors do nothing but wine, smacking signs into the Kranks property, putting wreaths on their doors, neighborhood children shouting "Free Frosty!" at the top of their lungs. What else can we expect? Luther and his wife flee to their basement with their Frosty statue looking at them with an evil snarl of pain and hate.

I expected better from Tim and Dan while watching this film. It shows how old they have become and what age does to your personality. It sucks the energy from you! The film begins slow with stupid wine jabs and rain humor, soon dishing out tacky neighborhood pranks involving stealing Christmas tree's and having the police come to the rescue, and it ends with a tragic note of sour bitterness and the happily ever after moment that makes you cringe with the thought of "That never happens in real life." Christmas with the Kranks is nothing but a tragic miscalculation turning a wonderfully written novel into a predictable flick that shows off actors age and slamming your head against doors. Christmas with the Kranks gets a 4 for being nothing but predictable. I say you should skip this train wreck and see another holiday movie fun for the whole family. This sure wasn't.

Mean Creek (2004)
1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Could have been predictable, but it chose not to be, 24 October 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Mean Creek is about a young boy named Sam who has gotten beaten up by a fat bully named George. Sam and his older brother Rocky set up a prank to pull off at Sam's river birthday party so they can trick George into strip and run home naked to get him back. Sam and his brother along with Rocky's friends Marty and Clyde and Sam's girlfriend Millie pick up George and set off for the river prank. But along the way the friends discover that George might not be all that bad. But they will have to learn at a price.

I first heard of Mean Creek because I am a Josh Peck fan. I saw he made a movie called Mean Creek and I decided to check it out. This movie had a simple plot that has been reused hundreds of times, each one with the same old corny hip happy ending. But Mean Creek delivers something different, and more cooler then the other prank movies. The acting is done fabulously. The actor who played Marty had some of the most powerful lines in the movie and Clyde made you fell sorry for his life. Even Josh proves he can do drama's rather then comedy's. The directing though is a tad strange. Due to the low budget it must of been filmed with a hand held camera, you can tell by a lot of scenes in the film. The middle of the film leaves you guessing what's going to happen next after the big Truth or Dare scene and you feel as though the ending plummets with a long dreadful groan, which gives good questions making this film superior. Mean Creek is both powerful and lesson giving. While not perfect, it has a lot of potential. Mean Creek gets a 9 out of 10, I suggests you go pick up a copy. Though I must warn there is a lot of language and drug humor in the movie so be warned for the younger viewers. Enjoy!

24 out of 37 people found the following review useful:
Tom Green, you sicken me, 23 October 2005

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Freddy got Fingered is about a slacker cartoonist named Gord, Tom Green, who finally moves out of his parents basement to work at Hollywood in a cheese sandwich factory and try to sell off his cartoons for them to become a TV show. But when a big time Hollywood producer, Michael Anthony Hall, tells him he will never make it in life, Gord moves back home with his sleazy father played by Rip Torn. Gord's life is then turned into a big contests where he and his dad try to settle an age old battle between whether Gord should suck up and become a man or be a complete loser for the rest of his life.

Freddy Got Fingered, should have been named Animals Got Fingered. I'll admit that I'm not a big Tom Green fan but by the way the trailers for the film worked it looked life it would be an okay movie. I was wrong! Tom Green proves right here in this movie that he can not act or direct. This film losses effort on every film making level but it succeeds in being a master in every bad level of film making. This film is a complete waste of talent and time with animal masturbation and blow job jokes. Plus the title, what is with the title? Sure Gord says that his father fingered his younger brother Freddy but that subject is only in the film for eight minutes top! Now the main character Gord must be mentally retarded. In one of the most sickest scenes in the movie, Gord finds a dead deer in the middle of the road. He remembers the words of Mr. Davidson telling him he needs to get inside his cartoon animals so they can be more lively. But to Gord he thinks he should literally get inside the deer! He cuts the animals stomach open and rips out it's insides. Then we see cute little animals roaming the forests to the sweet melody of a female singer only to be interrupted with Gord running around, shrieking like a retard and wearing the deers bloody body as as a coat. I was about to blow chunks after I saw that scene. Maybe this movie might be funny to some of you people if you like Tom Green licking bloody wounds, playing with animals privates, or swinging a dead baby around a hospital by it's cord you may laugh till you die! But people like me will just be disgusted by this movie. I only chuckled a few times in this movie, like twice! Freddy Got Fingered gets the low 1, if I could though I would give it a zero. Tom Green, you sicken me.

Page 1 of 10:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [Next]