Reviews written by registered user

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

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

1 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Machete overkills, 27 December 2013

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I liked the first "Machete", but this one really is bad. Well, it actually starts out OK. The first 20 mins or so are all right, over-the-top of course as you would expect, but after the introduction of a schizophrenic Mexican warlord (?) the films totally derails and becomes a flaming train wreck that doesn't even have the decency to end properly.

So what went wrong?

Apparently the writers couldn't think of anything remotely interesting, smoked some crack pipes, watched "Moonraker", wrote a few pages and then handed the script over to some drug addicted monkeys who then wrote the second half. At some point you just don't care anymore because anything could happen to anyone. People die, come back from the dead, die an even more ridiculous death. Another celebrity appears for one scene, kills somebody or gets killed. Jump to the next random scene. Machete himself apparently also isn't human anymore as he survives basically anything, killing not only his enemies with ease but also any suspense there might be left.

There is a thin line between funny and stupid, and Machete 2 crossed that line way too often into stupid territory. Just because the writers think a scene is clever, funny or memorable doesn't mean it really is. Here too many scenes are just repetitive and cringeworthy, so over-the-top that you can only facepalm instead of laugh.

Despite its relatively short runtime, the film felt long, which is never a good sign. I found myself checking my watch several times.

It was nice seeing Mel Gibson again, but I don't know if he chose a good movie for his comeback. Better luck in 2014 with Expendables 3, Mel.

All in all I unfortunately have to join the people who cannot recommend this movie. Machete 2 tried way too hard to become a cult-classic and fell flat on its face. After watching this I hope a third part never happens.


11 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
this one is a fail, 21 October 2013

Of course one cannot be surprised to find out that this latest Helge Schneider flick is trash, that is what Helge does and did brilliantly in the past.

I was a fan of him in the early 1990s already when Helge was pretty much a nobody to the German public. Truth is you either like Helge or you hate him, same with his films. I admit that I loved the first 00-Schneider in 1994 and also his "Texas" movie. Although both basically only consist of outtakes and bloopers, both films were actually very funny and quotable.

But apparently Helge is not the same Helge anymore - or he does not want to be. "Im Wendekreis" is Helge's latest attempt, scenes once more don't make any sense, offer weird characters and no plot to speak of. But this time it is just not funny. It is a walkout.

Sorry Helge, this one is a fail. Stick to CDs or try harder next time. Additional star for the slo-mo fight at the end.

In Time (2011)
27 out of 35 people found the following review useful:
Interesting concept, but ..., 9 December 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Let me play the nitpicker here: First off, the idea that your "clock" is always visible is pretty stupid to begin with. That's like us walking around with a bank balance stamped across our arm. It should become visible with a touch on the wrist or something.

The fact that all you have to do is touch arms to take time is stupid, ,too. There's no way to make it voluntary? No kind of security? I mean, it's you life for crying out loud!!

Will and Sylvia robbing their first time bank. How did they get a hold of an armored truck in the first place? All you have to do to rob a bank and get all the time you want is crash into the front? If it was that easy, everyone would be doing it! There are people dying in the streets everyday and no one has thought to do this?

Olivia's death, it was too cliché. Literally missing it by like a second? Come on!

Why would the lead Minute Man want to 'fight' Will? (also, they never made that concept clear until they sat at that table) Why wouldn't he just take his time and be done with it? He had nothing to gain from it. It was just weak writing in my opinion.

And what happened to that subplot of Will's father? They kept alluding to some great reveal or that Leon knew something Will didn't, but then the film just forgot about it. Are they trying to tell us that Will's altruism was hereditary? When Will got to Greenich, what was his plan? It seemed to me like he was just buying his way into high society and playing with the rich. I couldn't figure out what his endgame was going to be.

This one is again not a flaw, but can we all agree that car crash into the ditch looked just ridiculous? Terrible CGI and not believable at all.

And how they got the jump on Weiss, Sylvia's father. He's got more security around him than the President, but all you need is a pair of sunglasses to get the jump on him? Does the "security team" consist of random people who do not know each other? Then once you got him to lead you upstairs, all his bodyguards did what? Went out for lunch? Why didn't they go after him? Why weren't they waiting downstairs for him? Why weren't any alarms sounding? Stupid. So you have a million years in you hand and presumably only an hour on you wrist, yet you don't take any for yourself? I guess handing a little girl 999,999 years, 11 months, and 28 days just doesn't have the same resonance.

You can pay one year to get into Greenwich zone ... or you just walk in, there is no security or guards anyway.

"Wire me my per diem- wait, never mind ..." that was stupid. All he had to do was put his arm out. Also, it made it obvious from that point how Leon was going to die.

Conclusion: If you're the kind of viewer who can overlook flaws like this, I can see someone finding this movie enjoyable, it had an interesting premise, with a good cast, but plots holes you could drive a monster truck through.

Predators (2010)
15 out of 25 people found the following review useful:
disappointing indeed, 12 July 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I didn't expect much of this film but was still disappointed. The actors are not very convincing, the plot not very suspenseful and it is hard to identify with any of the characters. In fact, hardly anyone of them is likable. Adrian Brody is no match for Schwarzenegger. The story falls flat : as the viewer already knows from the trailer that the gang is on a remote Alien planet, it still takes Adrian Brody and his friends 20 mins to figure that one out, which results in a snore fest for the audience. The movie has no real beginning and no real ending and therefore it feels a bit choppy and patchwork-like most of the time. Some good ideas don't make a good film.

Action also only ho-hum, only one memorable scene at best. Soundtrack ripped off from Silvestri, nice to hear it again but it also makes you yearn for the 1987 original. Laurence Fishburn with a 10 min cameo that is more confusing than cool.

All in all a low budget B-movie that neither the fans nor the world really needed.


Robin Hood (2010)
7 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
"Gladiator" it is not, 15 May 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I went to see the film with low expectations and I wasn't disappointed. The film starts with some good action in France and the first 15 minutes are well done.

After that, with the return of Robin to England, the movie slows down a lot and basically nothing interesting happens for the next 90 minutes. Lots of talking, some plots unfold, but all in all only ho-hum. Nothing to write home about. I espected more action and especially more suspense in a film about Robin Hood

Then the last 20 minutes the film picks up speed again and has a nice final battle on a beach. But what were the "feral boys" suddenly doing there with Maid Marian? That was silly and never explained.

All in all, the film doesn't play in the same league as "Gladiator", although Crowe and Scott are involved again. Crowe shows a solid performance, but nothing memorable. The film shows some great locations and sets, but doesn't do much with it.

The villain is well played by Marc Strong, but criminally underused, and the final showdown between him and Robin Hood is a huge letdown compared to "Gladiator".

Personally, I rate this film 5/10. The film is not a flop, but it is one of those films you see once and then forget.

12 out of 20 people found the following review useful:
Le Comte de Monte Nothing, 16 April 2009

I was fooled into buying this DVD set after I saw the high ratings on IMDb, but after one hour of watching I already regretted my decision.

The film/mini series has a running time of about 6 hours, but after already 45 mins you have already seen (or rather NOT seen, and I kid you not!) : Dantes relation to his wife and family, his background, the conspiracy, his 18 year "suffering" in Château D'if, his relationship with Abbe Faria, his escape, the treasure on Monte Christo and his return to the mainland as "Count".

All that in 45 mins! And it is as rushed and stupid as it sounds. Of course everything of the above happens so fast that you can barely see whats going on nor would anyone without background knowledge understand what is going on.

Who is this Dantes? Who is his wife? Why is he imprisoned again? What was the conspiracy against him? Who are the traitors/bad guys? (you see them for about 10 secs!) Who is this Abbe? What is his relationship to Dantes and why does he tell him about the treasure? And so on. People who have not read the book will have a hard time following the plot here.

You can imagine I was shaking my head constantly and was wondering with what they were intending to fill the other 5 hours. Answer : With not much. Talk, talk, talk and no action. They had 6 hours but wasted the most interesting parts of the story in the first 45 mins. Unbelievable. The "revenge" part in the last 5 hours is (of course) very drawn out and not very interesting.

Depadieu is a fine actor, but miscast as the hero. You just need to see his body after so called "18 years in prison with no food". I wonder what they put into that soup there?

683 out of 948 people found the following review useful:
The weakest of the Indy films, 21 May 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Before I start my review let me say I am a huge Indy fan and have been waiting for this movie for 19 years.

Bad news first : Number 4 is the weakest of the Indy films. Good news : It is still good entertainment.

Let me explain further :

The Good :

Harrison Ford still IS Indiana Jones. He still has the magic to impersonate this character. You really see his efforts to make this film work. Great camera work and sets. Shia LaBoef is actually quite good and not annoying at all, he has some funny lines and scenes. I never regretted that he was in the movie. Some really good action scenes, esp. in the first half of the movie with believable stunts and not too much CGI, e.g. the motorbike chase or the Warehouse battle. Great! Humor was OK and many jokes worked for me (best : the quicksand scene).

The Bad :

John Hurt as Oxley looked like Dumbledore on Ecstasy. I didn't like his character very much and was glad when he finally became "sane" again. Problem was by then the movie was almost over. Sorry guys, Karen Allen. She was overacting too much, smiling and laughing all the way even during the deadliest action sequences like a soccer mum. We know she is tough and so but it never felt believable. Also her interaction and reunion with Ford seemed a bit forced. The Villains : Blanchet was OK, but not very menacing or intimidating. You never felt she was a threat to Indy. She was always behind him. Russians? Give me Nazis as adversaries any day. Ray Winstons character (forgot the name) was confusing and underdeveloped : "I am on your side, no wait I am a traitor, oh wait I am CIA, never mind I am a traitor again". WTF? Ant scene : Stolen straight from "The Mummy". Shame on you, Spielberg.

The Ugly :

Sorry, but the last third of the film was the pits. The jungle chase was far "over the top" action, I thought Indy and Mutt were human beings, not supermen. They pulled off moves and jumps that even Spiderman couldn't do. Indy not using his gun once. At least he didn't carry a walky-talky instead. Nuclear explosion scene. OMG. How embarrassing, who came up with this idea? What was supposed to be funny only got howls of disbelieve and "Yeah right" from the audience. Indy survives a nuclear explosion in a fridge (!) and then is whirled away miles through the air, exits the fridge and walks off? Was Spielberg on drugs when he filmed this? Who on earth could survive such an explosion? I couldn't believe it! The plot : Not very suspenseful. Parts of it even boring. Aliens? They waited 19 years for this script? I believe almost anything would have been better. At least the Aliens only appear during the last minutes.

All in all a small disappointment but still a watchable Indy movie. I think "less would have been more" in this case. More believable stunts, less CGI and a better script and the movie would have rocked. I blame Spielberg and Lucas. Kudos to Ford. Should have made Indy IV 10 years earlier.

I give it a 5/10 despite all the negative points. First third of the movie 8/10, rest 2/10.

57 out of 84 people found the following review useful:
Nobody would have followed *this* Hitler, 8 June 2007

Just imagine the real Hitler, who was a master of propaganda and speech, would have been such a mumbling moron as Carlyle portrayed him in this film.

Nobody would have followed him, not even a desperate, unemployed guy in the 1920s.

This is just a Hollywood cardboard piece of propaganda itself, disguised as "true history".

I pity everyone who actually believed anything from this show. Carlyle and the producers didn't get anything right with this.

Why was Hitler able to win so many people, a whole county for his ideas if we was such a sausage? Why did people follow him to death? By portraying him as such a loser they make their own film totally unbelievable. This film is a mixture of old WW2 propaganda and MTV urban myths about one of the most important persons of the last century. Imagine a film about Churchill where the director only shows him as a drunkard for 90 mins.

This film is a disgrace and I wonder how they could talk an actor like Carlyle into this dreck.

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Good boy Dex ... you moron!, 29 December 2005

OK, normally I don't write a review about a film I have seen but once in a while there is a turkey that deserves some bashing.

This one is called "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow".

It starts OK : the opening theme music is catchy, cool, breathes adventure, very much like John William's best. Then it goes downhill fast.

First big mistake : wooden actors. Jude Law is a nice guy and I like his films but this one was obviously too much for his shoulders. He couldn't carry the film. Even worse was Paltrow, who gave the word "wooden" a new dimension. You really have to see it or you would not believe it! 100 feet tall robots next to her? Flying a plane between skyscrapers? Seeing the weirdest animals? Running next to a gaping abyss? You won't see any reaction from Mrs Paltrow! She walks through the entire movie as if she was stoned! Her life is in danger all the time, chances of surviving are slim to none and all she shows is ... nothing. No fear, no excitement, bland face.

Hello, McFly!? Razzie awards!!!

Also the plot was crazy, even for a comic book movie. Plot holes galore, too many to list them up here (i.e. plane full of holes suddenly becomes a submarine, weired 2020 technology in the 1930s, clothes being burned and reappearing, scenes that makes no sense at all, etc etc).

And I am sorry, I didn't like Dex. OK, I didn't like anyone in the film maybe except Angelia Jolie, but Dex. "Good boy, Dex! Good Boy! Go fetch the stick! Fetch it! Good boy!" I mean, is he a man or a dog? Doesn't he have any self respect at all? Like all the other characters he was total cardboard. Stupid.

All in all I gave this one 2/10. 1 for the music, 1 for Angelina Jolie.

Stealth (2005)
30 out of 61 people found the following review useful:
Worse than Pearl Harbor, 10 September 2005

Wow, when you think you have seen all bad films another one comes around the corner and takes the cake. This film is as dump as a stump and a new low after the mess called Pearl Harbor.

We see some handsome actors walking around in USAF costumes, pretending to be pilots. They talk a lot of rubbish in front of blue screens ("War is teamwork", "We are the elite", blah blah blah). Of course there is also some time to invade other countries and bomb some stuff. God bless the USAF! Hooray!

Add some stupid plot that no one cares about after 2 minutes and you have a big fat turkey of a movie. Hey Hollywood, we don't need more propaganda movies! This is "Top Gun" for idiots. 1/10

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