Reviews written by registered user

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

Page 3 of 14: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [Next]
139 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

14 out of 31 people found the following review useful:
Recycled crap it's at best a 4.3, 17 April 2013

Yet another movie where the sins of some 70's hippie college kids lashing out at the imperial government comes back to haunt them.

The movie is very slow, very predictable and very boring. Shia Lebeouf proves once again he's Hollywood's golden boy after vowing to never make a corporate studio movie again, jumps on board with all these powerhouses to churn out what is ultimately vapid.

I have lost all respect for these actors. Redford lost my respect a few years ago shortly after Lebouf did. Now I have to add a half dozen names to that list which is sickening. Anyone with sensibility and in touch with the intelligent consumer who this targets never would have signed onto such a terrible script. They clearly did it for the MONEY.

Why else do you make a 2 hour movie from recycled scripts and cast actors who still pull in at least 5 million per movie. You do it for the money knowing you own the critics and they will tell everyone SEEMINGLY intelligent how amazing it is and to go and see it. As an engineer, symphonic musician, inventor, writer, comedian and actor I am telling you right now, DO NOT see this movie.

Stand up for yourselves for a change......

10 out of 19 people found the following review useful:
Haha yuppie scum will be the end of the Republic!, 22 February 2013

This movie is bad. It's slow, uncreative, depressingly boring and just nothing really happens. Call it propaganda because of the ending if you must, I just call it poor film making and a waste of the tax payer's dollars. That's right I will say it again. EVERY CENT TO FUND THIS MOVIE COMES OUT OF OUR POCKETS THROUGH MONETIZED SIGNATURE LOANS.

This is how they pay an actor 5 or 2 or 15 million dollars before the movie has made 1 single cent in the theater. The signature is monetized through the federal reserve and the funds to finance the film are CREATED not transferred. The actor's contracts are paid the exact same way. This increases the float currency in the USA and of course also gets discharged into the debt system so it does double damage devaluing every single dollar in America.

Granted we NEED the performing arts for culture, recreation, and a variety of other reasons but it shouldn't cost 100 million dollars nor should it cost 100 million dollars and STINK like this movie did. It's just boring. It's targeting the mindless yuppie zombies that think any questioning of the system is paranoia or conspiracy well it's not. If you can sit through this and actually feel entertained, you have the dullest life on the planet. If you can sit through this while thinking it's loosely based on reality, you are wasting my air.

5 out of 17 people found the following review useful:
Yuppie America take over, 17 February 2013

This movie is awful and what qualifies as art in the yuppie world of clip art and overpriced gadgets that sit in drawers and on shelves because they really have no useful purpose. I understood the film but it just wasn't good. Someone took a couple good formulas, combined them, wrote a 300+ page script and talked their way into a mega million dollar movie contract.

A movie budget we the tax payers foot the bill on so OF COURSE they are doctoring up the reviews on these massive bombs. When they sign these contracts, the signature gets monetized through the federal reserve and the money gets created. The float currency in the USA then increases by that amount and the debt ultimately written off into the tax system when the movie never makes back the cost let alone a profit. Hence no collateral is ever used either. WE ARE THE COLLATERAL.

The movie comes out and if enough big stars or well designed promotion gets us all to see it and jump on the bandwagon of it's brilliance, they just might churn a profit after it's been out on DVD for a while.

When people rave about what a brilliant, artistic film this is, it's because they are either 1, 17 years old or younger or 2, an eccentric yuppie who is easily appeased by expensive effects, flashy wardrobes, film locations and of course, big shot celebrity names.

The ultimate truth for me as a musician, a writer and a well rounded scholar is that this just isn't what these positive reviewers and forum posters claim it to be. Some bad movies that people love are the equivalent of fast food. This one is more like a writer judging his own writing. A song writer judging his own song. A dancer who dances alone and without an audience. Self promotion can go a very long way when nobody else has actually seen your work but you know how to sell empty words.

A rough in the diamond, 1 January 2013

I've watched about a dozen episodes over the last few days and again find myself wondering why this didn't get at least a 3 year reign. The first couple episodes aren't flattering but it picks up immediately after. Mark got far more into character as it progressed and it becomes easier to accept the conflicts with the movie as well as the elements that are a bit silly. Consider it's the difference between films that can be rated R and late night, low budget television.

Once again, The Crow franchise set a standard and trend that created the stage for a lot of shows that followed. And once again, the bigger networks and wealthier studios commercialized it, packaged it up and ruined it by turning it into more pop culture teeny bopper crap. It's cool that future generations get art styled after the previous which at the time, was so cutting edge and revolutionary but unfortunate that the following generation gets the cheap, poorly executed reprint of the work that at best is just conceptual.

This is another show that dare I say it, could be revived. Mark ages about 3 years for every 10 that pass and the rest of the cast is funny enough, for the most part irrelevant. My real point being is that this show is still good and worth the attention of today's generation into darker entertainment.

Without shows like this, there would likely be no Supernatural. No Vampire diaries(ugh) and probably a dozen other shows that are popular and still airing or otherwise. When you prove an audience exists with your work, pass or fail the audience is still always waiting for more or something similar.

I lock the memory of this show away in my heart in the vastly empty space of what could have been......

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Why this bombed...., 31 December 2012

Number 1, the absolute failure of a box cover. Number 2, casting Eddie Furlong at the peak of his obscurity. He's never been a very good actor even though I feel he did a decent job in this movie but it definitely could have used a better actor capable of being more physical.

Overall it's probably the best sequel. Why? Well we finally find out what was occurring in the other movies and how the clairvoyant woman got her powers. Why these events seemed to be taking place in a hell on earth scenario. Why Erik Draven and Shelly were originally killed!

This movie has it's weak points but I still thought they did a great job in contrast to the other sequels, particularly the horrific sequel starring Eric Mabius with the dreadful rap soundtrack and two bit plot. The second movie starts out pretty awful and picks up about 25 minutes in. The real short coming to some sequels is a weak opening and by the time things pick up, nobody cares anymore. They aren't in the right mood to appreciate where things finally went.

This movie may have even made it into theaters had they not cast Furlong. It really is that simple. A lot of his emotional scenes, his makeup and action scenes were absolute failure. He did a great job as the town loser everyone hates and at points he does the crow character justice with his confusion as to how he, the biggest screw up to have lived, has been given this second chance and the power to take revenge and even save the world.

There are however Crow sequels even worse than the ones known floating around that are so budget, they couldn't even get distribution. The bootlegs are floating around and at one point were on youtube. Unfortunately the franchise is pretty much down the drain and now we'll likely see a reboot with some Hollywood celebrity douche bag with absolutely no justification for being cast in this type of movie.

The opening is weak but, 28 December 2012

It takes off after about 20 minutes or so. Pretty much once we reach the hell ride there is a leap in quality that is of course overshadowed by the weaknesses of the scene which follows. I feel it's at about the point where he pulls out the deck of cards and the way he does it the film finally starts to fulfill expectations.

Overall it's certainly worth watching but I do not challenge the dislike so many people have for it. When you watch it with an open mind, you can see about 20 minutes of footage needs to be cut, rewrote, reshot and maybe 5 or 10 minutes of footage added for story and character setup.

I watch this movie once every couple years and each time I think omG this is BAD. Then as always, it gets better as the story continues not better each time you watch it. The fact is, they could have fixed everything wrong with it and it might have still been a box office disappointment. People wanted Brandon or at least an exact duplicate of the first in far too many respects for this B caliber sequel to get a chance.

All that speculation cast aside, I still see the potential in this film that if explored properly, would have produced a sequel as amazing as the first. The soundtrack just wasn't there and the 20 minutes of turd needed to be cut, rewrote and reshot. It also doesn't help that the footage looks like it was shot on a high quality JVC commercial grade camcorder with the same texture as soap operas and low budget TV shows then some type of opaque effect added for a generic comic book feel.

That says everything really. This was one of the first B-movies in many years to find it's way into the theater. That in itself is quite an achievement even though it's pretty common today. However, you'll find majority of the B-movies that followed it's coat tails into theaters were similar genre and visual style. It actually paved the door for a lot of the B-movies that squirmed their way into theaters from various genres, not just these dark fantasy action thrillers.

For better or for worse, we now see a lot of B movies in theaters that are absolute garbage compared to this film.

"Arrow" (2012)
38 out of 77 people found the following review useful:
I guess if you're inept and childish, 3 December 2012

Then this will be an amazing show.

If on the other hand you set your own standards and can read beyond the 9th grade level well, you'll find the dialog, premise and sensationalism just too void of all reality and sensibility. The characters interaction with one another is very one dimensional and monotone. It's like they're robots with the single emotion of despair.

The male characters conversational scenes all have that "" innuendo much like Smallville, Supernatural and most any show that has been produced by the CW or the people involved in these shows. The only thing missing from the homosexual innuendo is the scenes followed up by glorified anal sex.

The dialog is just outrageously terrible. As if everything in these character's lives is emotionally draining and just having a simple, normal, human conversation is beyond their coping abilities. Every conversation is a scene of coping! It's just so manipulative in an attempt to get the consumer deeply empathizing with the characters and creating a very unhealthy, unnatural emotional attachment to fantasy rather then finding these needs within their REAL relationships!

EVERY show on CW does this and I truly see the fate of our species being quite dire as the consequence. Sure, it's your fault for watching but just as much theirs for making it available.

The action varies from awesome to stupid. We have the nonsensical flipping, spinning, acrobatic maneuvers that would get you killed along with a man with a bow and arrow out gunning 12 men with fully automatic weapons that never seem to run out of bullets. How is that good entertainment? It's just the same crap I've been seeing since I was 8 years old that became increasingly stupid to me starting at about the age of 15. It went from well I am watching for the outrageous, unbelievable fantasy action film or show to, why am I still watching this crap?

It's a lot of money to deliver us the same nonsense we're used to. They're exploiting the immaturity of the current generation who has decided to let the world set their standards and assume that since everyone else is going along for the ride, their standards must be high. I just see no point in taking the action style of Hercules Legendary Journeys and giving it a bigger budget and more takes so the editors can churn out something suitable for prime time.

Face it, you're a bunch of half wits with pathetically low standards if you're over the age of 16 and think this is an "awesome!" show. It's a show for children, teenage girls and middle aged women like most of CW's programming.

16 out of 74 people found the following review useful:
Pureed garbage where's the negative 10 star?, 10 November 2012

Okay so not only are American films getting bombarded with foreign actors but they're really bad actors as well. I live in America, I pay my dues and do as expected. No apologies here I just want American businesses to stop outsourcing our jobs because plenty of us are going without.

This Rebecca Hall is an absolute joke. Her acting is terrible, she' average looking and small chested at best. Soon she will probably be forced on us as the next "it" girl and they will put words in our mouths about how amazing we think she is. She's terrible. She clearly can't deliver a solid performance when directed and as an actor running unbound she's clearly an airhead that sprung a leak. It's not that it's the character, she's very clearly a dingbat without discernible performing skills. All the flashy schooling and biographical background in the world can't polish a turd.

The writing is mediocre at best. The story idea isn't bad but the dialog and execution is quite daunting. Laura Prepon couldn't act her way out of a speeding ticket if she were topless and in a g-string. Her accent was one of the worst I have ever heard in a move alongside actors this famous. Gerard Butler still holds the title for that POS he did with Jennifer Anniston. He's hands down THE WORST foreigner to steal American jobs.

Bruce is of course Bruce. He's a good actor but for some reason, he out of nowhere started signing to these contracts for the small movies with these god awful hipster actors, rappers etc that are so feebly talented I have discarded my absolute respect for him because he clearly does not respect himself or those of us that made him famous and so pointlessly rich.

Joshua Jackson is the same apple pie faced revolving door he has been since the day he was thrown at us. I say revolving door because that describes his range. He just keeps going in circles giving the exact same performance since the day he stepped in front of the camera. He would give the same performance as a priest as he would a cannibalistic serial killer. He might as well just wear a dunce cap in everything he appears in including real life. If his goal was to be the most famous mediocre actor to have ever existed....well he still may have to duke it out with George one face Clooney.

These people are definitive proof that the word celebrity is not synonymous with the word actor.

If you can get into this, I'm assuming you also enjoy watching paint dry but probably for the fumes. If you think this is a good movie, you probably think McDonald's is delicious and a well balanced meal because there's lettuce and tomato on their burgers loaded with cellulose(wood plastic).

I'm SO over Hollywood and their pee brained, narcissistic, sociopath "I'm the voice of the people" celebrities that in truth haven't got a clue about the real world and what life is like on the outside of their elitist mafia. This movie is truly a big piece of s**T and I am soooo sickened by the ability of television to FINALLY be able to control what people say is good and bad. Before when they put words in our mouths, it was just a lie. It took them 10 years to turn it into the truth. Everyone is so concerned about each others feelings they just say everything is wonderful and pat each other on the back. This movie is NOT wonderful and it makes me want to STAB them in the back not pat them on it.

Avoid this POS if you have any sense of free will and standards left in you!!!

5 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
Laced with propaganda and naive insults, 1 September 2012

The usual nonsense about how the deaths in America due to fire arms are so much higher than the UK where criminals are much richer and at the highest levels, tolerated. Where their rights are a sad joke compared to ours(which aren't all that great currently either). Where their population is nil compared to ours. Where the standard of living is higher than ours. Where the vicious, murderous imperialism that brought about our need for guns started in the first place!!

We don't need more gun control at all. We can not keep guns out of the hands of lunatics. Most mass murderers that use guns are incredibly intelligent. If they wanted the highest number of deaths, they would merely block the entrances and start a massive inferno or use explosives. They choose to use guns because for them, it will be FUN.

Once you fire a gun, you realize that these devices will NEVER go away. You realize that any machinist with less than a high school diploma can design and build a highly sophisticated gun. You realize that people who want to kill people are going to use whatever means they desire to kill those people.

Should we outlaw cars? Poison? Kitchen knives? Baseball bats? ROCKS?!

For those that oppose guns completely, there is a place they clearly have never lived. It's known to the rest of us as reality and gun proponent or opponent, there's unfortunately not many of us here. The police can VERY RARELY PROTECT YOU. In most cases, all they can do is try to catch your killer and they aren't always successful anyway. If your neighbor or a thief comes to your home with a gun with intentions of hurting you, the only person to protect you is you. The fact that some idiot in this doc claims we need to keep guns out of the home is ridiculous. What would she think after a home invasion where she were gang raped, her bf murdered in front of her and then she's left to call the police. She might in fact just kill herself with a kitchen knife at that point.

Would the gun have saved her? No. Her or her boyfriend USING that gun might have saved them. It's no different than the stupid saying, guns don't kill people, people kill people's true.

0 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Well I guess this is what you have to write to get greenlighted, 20 July 2012

This is another movie showing that if you write a really outrageous script and throw in nonsense that gives it an artistic sense, you too can get financed.

But it's just sort of stupid. I get the impression that well to do city dwellers perceive this to be a realistic account of middle America even though it's not. If there's an intelligent message here, I sure couldn't find it. If there's a stupid, nonsensical message totally irrelevant to reality, I definitely noticed it.

It's reasonably entertaining but drags on. It's mostly slow and well placed shock value with the most oblong characters one could feasibly conceive without completely losing the viewer or reader. It has the same feel as Napoleon Dynamite, John Waters movies etc. The writer really made a point to exploit the sexualization and misguided sexual decisions of preteens and very young teens. I think they do a good job in exposing the secret sex a lot of awkward, unpopular or just ignored girls participate in seeking attention and acceptance but that message is just completely lost in the mumbo jumbo artistry. The writer tries to make it about love which this behavior has absolutely nothing to do with. It's really just exposing airheads that stumble their way through life and put very little thought into love or even desire into sex.

If you want to make movies exposing this taboo and completely ignored, if not unknown realm of middle America, it would make a lot more sense to give a more direct message and trim all the fat.

Page 3 of 14: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [Next]