Reviews

344 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
A Great American Tragedy (1972 TV Movie)
4/10
Not really worth your time
26 July 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I'm not really sure what to think of this film, a bit over-dramatic in my opinion. I love how you can always tell where the commercials would be inserted because of the fade-out and the sound of the music. All in all, I don't think I'd recommend this film to anyone, not because I thought it was bad, but just because it's rather pointless, personally I didn't get anything out the movie, it wasn't thought-provoking, it wasn't terribly interesting, there wasn't much of a moral lesson (other than "don't give up"), there was virtually nothing to it. The film can literally be summed up into a sentence or two. Man loses job, man can't find new job, man gets desperate, man realizes his family is more important than a job, man continues seeking new job, the end.

So, in the end, I wouldn't recommend seeing this for any other reason than to perhaps see James Woods in one of his first roles ever. Other than that, there really isn't much to be missed. I'd strongly recommend watching something else.
2 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A look into the 30's film-making
26 July 2006
I've never been a fan of westerns, which is probably why up until last night I'd never seen a film starring John Wayne. Of course it doesn't help that our lives only overlapped by a year, so I didn't have a great deal of opportunity to see any of his films (in the theater at least). I received this film in a VHS films lot that I won from ebay, so I finally popped it in last night and gave it a whirl.

I went in expecting a really low budget, really old western...needless to say, my expectations were pretty low. All in all, I'd have to say the film really isn't that bad. I don't have any other John Wayne films to compare it to, so thus far it's my favorite. I can however, compare it to other westerns, and frankly, it was no "Tombstone", but it was worth my time.

The story is nothing fantastic, but it's has it's moments. The acting was just fine as far as I could tell and overall production value was OK, granted it was made in the 30's, so again, I wasn't expecting much. One scene in particular made me laugh out loud. Whenever the halfway-house is shown from a bird's eye view it is CLEARLY a scale model, it's hilarious how bad it actually looks...but again...30's.

In any case, I have no idea who to recommend this film to, but I will say that it's really short (60 minutes) so it won't take up too much of your time and it's kind of fun to see a film this old to appreciate films of today and how far they've come, not to say that this is bad, but just to further appreciate film-making.

Hope you enjoy it.

P.S. I just realized that this film has the honor of being the 3rd oldest film I've ever seen (as of 7-26-2006).
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A New Low in Cinematic History
26 June 2006
There is no other way to put this other than this film is just plain terrible. I was a fan of the "Tom Green Show", although I've only watched a handful of episodes, so I was slightly interested in the film and saw it for under $5 at wal-mart or something...so I thought I'd just buy it and check it out. Let me also note that I like just about everything, and most films have something good to offer...there are of course a few exceptions. After watching this film I can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that "Freddy Got Fingered" is absolutely in the 10 WORST FILMS I've ever seen, no question about it!!! This was TERRIBLE!!! It is absolutely devoid of any redeeming qualities. It really isn't that funny either, it's got a few laughs, but most of the time it's just moronic and sick. It is truly rare that I would recommend someone NOT see a film, but I strongly urge you to spend your time doing something else or watching different movie, any movie. I'm actually considering throwing my copy of the film away, cause I'm sure I'll never watch it again.

-LebowskiT1000
11 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Copper Mountain (1983 TV Movie)
5/10
Only for a Jim Carrey completest
13 April 2006
There's no way around it, this is a very bad movie, the plot is virtually absent, the dialog is nothing great and the film quality is as if they filmed it with an everyday camcorder (from 1983). So, don't start watching this film expecting a well-written hilarious Jim Carrey film, as you will be quite disappointed.

The only people that will have any interest in watching this film are the die-hard Jim Carrey fans (such as myself)...or I guess Alan Thicke fans. Other than that, there is really no need to see this film. Although, it is only 60 minutes, so it's a rather short film to watch.

If you still feel the urge to watch this film, just keep in mind that this is Jim Carrey's first lead, and pretty much his first film all together, so don't expect anything great. Thanks for reading.
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Was good, could have been great.
9 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
After watching this film several times now and having let enough time go by to really let the film sink in, I feel I can now write a well-rounded, as objective as possible review of the film. So here it goes...

Let me start by saying that I liked the film a great deal and it's "fun-factor" was quite good, but the film really missed the mark, in my opinion. While the film was good, it could have been spectacular.

Let's start with the acting. I can't say it was great and it wasn't ALL bad, but there was certainly nothing to write home about. Hayden Christiensen is nothing spectacular and comes off as rather laughable at times. Natalie Portman is normally quite good, was just OK in this film. As for Ewan McGreggor, I'll say this, his acting was well executed, but his dialog could have been much better. Samuel L. Jackson....well...he's a great actor and I love most of his films, but I sincerely believe that he should never have been cast for any of the SW films, he just doesn't fit with the character, nor can I take him seriously as a Jedi. I truly believe he just didn't work well with the role and the role would have been better suited for someone else. Ian McDirmid was just awful in this film. Normally he is a fine actor, even in the previous SW films and his other works. There were times where I thought he was fine, but there were many times were I couldn't help but cringe. I just wasn't impressed with his portrayal of Palpatine/The Emperor in this film. Everyone else in the film did a fine job.

Now for the story. I'm sorry, but it was just bad! It could have EASILY been MUCH, MUCH better. I didn't buy into the reasons why Anakin became Darth Vader and turned to the Dark Side, it felt WAY too forced. Not that it really matters, but this is what I would have done (and was hoping for): Anakin becomes increasingly impatient with the Jedi council and becomes more and more unpredictable (in the vain of him killing Count Dooku...I did like that), Padme becomes fearful of Anakin and decides it would be best for her (and her unborn child{ren}) to leave Anakin (with Obi-Wan's help). She proceeds to leave and of course Anakin wants to know where she is and what happened to her. Obi-Wan and the Jedis try to help Anakin understand that due to his actions she does not feel safe with him, etc... This, of course, only makes Anakin more angry. Then somehow amidst a fight or something Padme is severely injured and ultimately dies (unbeknownst to Anakin). Then Obi-Wan tries to tell Anakin that she has been killed and he does not believe him and is sure that he is simply trying to keep Anakin from Padme, so this begins his journey to the Dark Side, he begins to hate Jedi's for keeping him from his love. Who do you think would be there to help him find Padme? A certain Darth Sidious perhaps? Anakin then begins hunting down the Jedis, hell-bent on finding Padme, refusing to believe that she (and their child) has died...and when the Jedi's don't give him the answer he wants to hear...he kills them. This could also lead to a kick-ass fight between him and Yoda, where he really works Yoda, and thus forces Yoda to go into hiding until a match of Anakin/Vader's abilities can be found (this could take place after the fight between Obi-Wan and Anakin, so he's already become a cyborg, got the Vader outfit and had time to develop his Dark Side abilities). OK, so that's Episode III as done by LebowskiT1000. You may disagree with me that this would be a much better story, but it really doesn't matter, cause I seriously doubt Lucas is going to let me re-direct the film.

Let's talk about the directing and dialog. There are certain scenes, such as the scene where Mace Windu attempts to arrest Palpatine that were excruciatingly bad, everything in the scene was terrible, the directing, the dialog, the acting...just plain bad. Why did Palpatine's own electrical storm cause his face to get all wrinkled up? That was dumb! I always assumed that the reason he looked the way he did in ESB and ROTJ was because he was REALLY old (as he would be). Assume he's probably in his mid-to-late 60's in TPM, then he'd be at least in his late 90's to early 100's in ESB and even older in ROTJ, so of course he's going to look all wrinkled up and old. So, in my opinion you could have omitted the entire electrical-storm-wrinkling plot-point and it would have been a better film. There are many other scenes where the dialog/directing was less than stellar, but I'll leave it to you to find them an dissect them.

The bright and shining star in the film is the special effects. This is one thing that was really well done and if you disagree, then I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to disagree with you. The special effects are simply amazing in this film, all the CG worlds look great, the CG characters look fantastic and there really is nothing to complain about. General Grevious looks fantastic, by the way.

In the end, I thought the film was quite fun and worth my time, but it was VERY disappointing, it had the potential to be a fantastic bridge between AOTC and ANH and to just be an overall great film, but due to some bad choices in writing, directing and dialog, the mark was missed. Having said all that, I do strongly insist you watch the film yourself and come to your own conclusions, I hope you enjoy it. Thanks for reading my review/comment/rant.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hulk (2003)
7/10
Bad choice for director.
21 December 2005
I remember back when I first heard that Hulk was being made into a motion picture. At the time I was rather excited, as I grew up watching the Bill Bixby/Lou Ferrigno TV Show and really loved it. But then a bit later a director by the name of Ang Lee was hired on to helm the film. I vividly remember my first thoughts: "He is going to ruin it!" At the time I'd only seen two other Ang Lee films, "The Ice Storm", which was a fine film, but nothing spectacular and "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" (Which personally I thought was a complete waste of time). So, yeah, I'll be the first to admit that I judged the film before I'd even seen it, but I knew his directing style and it just wasn't going to fly with "Hulk". After seeing the preview I was less than thrilled with the special effects, but even still, it looked like it might be fun and just maybe he'd prove me wrong. Sadly, he did not.

In some respects, the film was better than expected, but not many. For instance, I thought the special effects were much better than they originally looked in the trailers...it may have been that they were in context within the film, maybe they had more time to work on them, or maybe I'd just come to terms with them, I don't know. But in any case I thought they looked pretty damn good at certain points and rarely looked terrible.

It is my personal opinion that in order to make a really good comic-to-film adaptation you need to base the film in reality and then throw in some border-line far-fetched sci-fi and finally some fantastic characters, all without going too far. In my opinion Ang Lee went too far with the fantastic-ness of Hulk. Bullet-proof...OK, maybe. Being able to hurl himself miles in a single bound...I don't think so. It's not a major plot point in the film by any means, so I could get passed it, but it was just a little too much for me...it made him look a little too cartoonish.

The fact that you have to watch quite a bit of character development before you get to see the green beast didn't bother me too terribly much, but the editing, the acting and the way the story was told did bother me. I really didn't like the whole comic-book-editing that he tried in the film. Sometimes it worked, but other times it was too distracting and made it painfully hard to "get into" the film. Personally, I dislike any editing that reminds me that I'm watching a film and that this is not reality.

As far as the acting talent goes, I thought it was less than impressive. Sam Elliott is usually a great actor, but I found him incredibly annoying in this film, like he was acting overly angry throughout the entire film. Eric Bana was OK, but I didn't buy his angry moments, he just didn't pull it off. Jennifer Connolly did a fine job however, I can't say anything bad about her. Josh Lucas was decent, but nothing spectacular. Nick Nolte was also decent, but very annoying at times, more due to the dialog than his acting abilities.

And the last order of business is the actual story used to bring "Hulk" to life. For the most part, I thought the story was actually pretty good with some really good ideas...but then again, there were some god-awful ideas too. The entire last 20 minutes of the film was HORRIBLE, just plain RIDICULOUS (special effects were pretty good though). As one other reviewer on this site said, it seemed like they ran out of ideas so they slapped together something to get the film released, while not bothering to think that perhaps this just doesn't make any sense. There were also other minor story points throughout the film that either didn't make sense, seemed silly, or just plain didn't work.

I'd also like to say a little something about the soundtrack. The soundtrack was really good, but way too repetitive, I was in shock how many times the main theme was used. It sounded good, but too much of a good thing makes it not a good thing anymore.

All in all this could have been a really good film with a different director. Ang Lee may be a good director within certain genres, but comic-based films is not one of them. I'd place this film somewhere between Daredevil, Punisher and Elektra as far as quality goes. Far below Spider-man (1&2), X-Men (1&2...and probably 3), Fantastic Four, and Batman Begins. Although, it was far better than Catwoman. I guess I can say this, if you are a die-hard fan of Ang Lee and like experimental films, then you might like this film. If you want a fast-paced, fun comic-book film, this is probably not the film for you.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Payback (I) (1999)
7/10
Interesting...
9 October 2003
I'm somewhat at a loss for words with respect to "Payback". I thought it was an interesting movie and a well told story, but it certainly isn't a "fun" or "happy" story. In this film, there really isn't any good guys and bad guys, they're all bad guys...also the person you should be rooting for (Mel Gibson) is sometimes a bigger a**hole than the guys that are supposed to be the really BAD bad guys.

The acting in the film is great on all accounts, although it's really hard to accept Mel Gibson in a role such as this. He's great at playing rogue cops or all-out good guys, but an anti-hero is not his strong suit.

I suppose if you like Mel Gibson, go ahead and check it out, just remember, this isn't his typical type of role. Or if you just like films where you are rooting for a bad guy, than by all means check it out. I guess as far a production value and directing, acting, characters, and all that, it was a great movie. But personally, I'm not terribly fond of the subject matter, so there's just no way I could say this is an excellent movie...but it was interesting. Hope you enjoy the the film.

-LebowskiT1000
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Encino Man (1992)
10/10
A fun time.
9 October 2003
"Encino Man" is just an all around fun, silly movie with some good comedy and numerous quotable lines. The story behind "Encino Man" is very simple, it's about two friends that find a frozen caveman in their backyard while trying to dig a pool...then the caveman wakes up from his frozen slumber. Yeah, it's a silly plot, but it's all in good fun.

The characters in the film are great, as is the acting on all accounts. Brendan Fraser plays the title role of Link. Brendan has very few actual lines in the film, mostly just grunts and sounds...but nonetheless, he does a fantastic job with the role. Sean Astin plays Dave Morgan, the main character, who desperately wants to be popular, but has yet to be discovered. Stoney, Dave's best friend is played by Pauly Shore, a guy who is content with himself and really doesn't care for popularity. Megan Ward is Dave's love interest in the film, and looks nothing short of fantastic throughout the film. And finally there's Michael DeLuise, as the antagonist, Matt, Dave's arch-rival. There's also a few notable supporting cast-members. Robin Tunney ("Vertical Limit", "Empire Records", "End of Days") in one of her first roles, Patrick Van Horn ("Swingers"), Jonathan Ke Quan ("The Goonies", "Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom"), Rose McGowan ("Phantoms", "Scream", "Monkeybone", "Ready to Rumble") and Jack Noseworthy ("Breakdown", "U- 571", "Event Horizon") all fantastic actors rolled into one comedy.

All in all, this is a great film. The cast is great, the characters and acting are great, and the story is silly, but good at the same time. There's even a few somewhat touching scenes here and there. If you like any of the actors mentioned above, be sure to check this film out, or if you just enjoy a good, silly comedy, this is the one for you. I hope you enjoy it as much as I do. Thanks for reading,

-LebowskiT1000
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Good sequel, worth watching.
8 October 2003
I had always thought that "European Vacation" was much funnier than the original "Vacation", until just recently. I watched both films back-to-back and in the end I've got to concede that I like the original "Vacation" more than it's sequel. I think the two films are equally funny, but the first one has a little more originality to it and a slightly better cast. Don't get me wrong though, "European Vacation" IS a funny movie and a very good sequel, but just not as good as the original.

Chevy Chase and Beverly D'Angelo of course, play the parts of Clarke and Ellen Griswold (although spelled "Griswald" in this film for whatever reason) perfectly. The parts of Rusty and Audrey Griswold were re-cast (for whatever reason) with Jason Lively and Dana Hill. I thought Jason Lively was a fine replacement for Anthony Michael Hall, and even slightly resembles him. Although, I was less than impressed with Dana Hill. Not that she did a bad job acting, but more that her character seemed quite different and didn't resemble the original Audrey (Dana Barron) at all. It was nice to see both Eric Idle and Robbie Coltrane in the film (both playing very small roles).

"European Vacation" was a good film and a nice sequel, but still not as good as the original. Although, I would strongly recommend you take a look at this film if you liked the original or just like Chevy/Beverly. Chevy Chase is great, as is Beverly D'Angelo, both make the film well worth the time I put in watching it and I hope they'll make your time worth it as well. Thanks for reading,

-LebowskiT1000
27 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rocky II (1979)
9/10
Excellent sequel
8 October 2003
"Rocky II" is one of those sequels that is just as good as the original, if not better in some aspects. I can't say it's better than the original because you can't have the second film without the first one. Meaning that this film does not stand on it's own, you need the first film to understand the characters and back-stories of everything in this film. But all in all, I think "Rocky II" is slightly more enjoyable than the original "Rocky".

In all honesty, I think this film is better directed than the first film. The story seems to flow quite nicely and is slightly faster paced than the original. Not only that, but the main fight in the film is much more exciting and longer.

The acting in "Rocky II" is better as well, or at least I thought so. Sylvester Stallone does a fantastic job with his role of Rocky Balboa and really struts his stuff here. Talia Shire and Burt Young also pull off nice performances. Carl Weathers plays the character of Apollo Creed to a "T". And of course, Burgess Meredith does a fantastic job as Mickey.

This is one of those sequels that truly has the same feel as the original. Granted, it isn't as fresh as the original...but it's a re-match that can't be missed. If you liked the original "Rocky", then you definitely ought to check this one out, I don't think you'll be disappointed. I hope you like the film as much as I do. Thanks for reading,

-LebowskiT1000
84 out of 90 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Vacation (1983)
9/10
A classic
7 October 2003
"Vacation" isn't the funniest movie ever made, but it sure does have it's moments. At first glance you may think that this is a family film, but this film most certainly is not. The film is aimed toward the adult audience (or those over 18) and is rated R for a reason. You must also keep in mind while watching this film that it was made in the early 1980's and therefore will have a great deal of differences in humor than today's comedies, so it must be treated as one.

There are some aspects of the film that are just all-around hilarious, then there are others that are rather morbid and dark, and even some moments that are very un- Politically Correct by today's standards. But, all in all, it makes for an excellent film.

The cast members are all quite good and all pull off fantastic performances. Chevy Chase leads the film and does so quite well, in one of his funniest roles to date. He's reason enough to watch the film, Chevy is great. Beverly D'Angelo, looks better than ever and pulls off a very nice performance, she fit the role perfectly. Anthony Michael Hall and Dana Barron play the two children in the film, both of which do very nicely (it's too bad neither of them returned for any of the sequels). Christine Brinkley, Randy Quaid, Eugene Levy and John Candy all pull off excellent performances, despite having such little screen time. Also, it's rather interesting to see a very young Jane Krakowski (of TV's "Ally McBeal") in the film, as Cousin Vicki. I also feel inclined to mention cast members Frank McRae and John Diehl, neither actor is terribly well known, but I like them.

Like I mentioned above, "Vacation" is a classic! And should definitely be seen by anyone who appreciates a good comedy. Some of the comedy is a bit dated or has been done countless times since, but nonetheless, it's good to know where it all started. I would definitely recommend seeing this film to anyone that likes comedy films, or just likes Chevey Chase, director Harold Ramis, or any of the other cast-members. I hope you enjoy the film as much as I do. Thanks for reading.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rocky (1976)
8/10
Worth seeing.
7 October 2003
This is probably one of the most well known movies of all time, and I finally got around to seeing this film some time earlier this year (2003). I can't believe I consider myself a movie fan without having seen any of the films in the Rocky series. I decided the time had come to remedy that situation.

To be honest, I thought "Rocky" was a fine movie, although I am surprised it won best picture. These days, the chance of a film centering around a sport of any kind has virtually no chance of even getting nominated for an Oscar. I guess that just shows how times have changed.

To my surprise, "Rocky" was a rather slow-paced film. The beginning and the end are pretty exciting, but most of the film is full of dialogue and situations that lead up to the main event.

All of the actors in the film did a fine job with their roles. Carl Weathers as the heavy- weight champion, Apollo Creed (what an awesome name!) is great. Sylvester Stallone pulls off a rather nice performance, somewhat annoying at times, but I would credit that to the character, not the actor. Burgess Meredith pulls off probably the best performance in the film. Talia Shire and Burt Young are very good as well.

In the end, I'd say this was a good film, and certainly worth watching, for a number of reasons, but I wouldn't call it a must see. The main reason I see for watching this film is to understand all the references that are made to this film in other films and to see Sylvester Stallone in one of his first roles. Thanks for reading.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Bond is back! But Connery isn't.
27 August 2003
"On Her Majesty's Secret Service" marks the sixth film in the Bond series and the first without the great Sean Connery. Prior to seeing this film I was very curious as to how George Lazenby would hold up as James Bond, and I must concede that he did a fine job. There were quite a few times where I thought his voice sounded exactly like Sean Connery's voice and I thought he filled Sean's shoes quite well. You have to consider the amount of pressure that must have been on poor George Lazenby, and despite that pressure he was able to pull off a fine performance.

As for the other actors, they all did a fine job. Diana Rigg was an excellent choice for the "Bond Girl" in this film, she's a fine actress and of course, quite easy on the eyes. Telly Savalas was a great choice for the role of Blofeld, perhaps even better than Donald Pleasance's portrayal (I say that mainly because of Donald's voice...not very menacing). Telly really nailed the character and has a very evil/menacing voice. Lois Maxwell returns yet again to the role of Moneypenny, playing the role as well as ever, and exhibiting the same chemistry she had with Sean Connery. Bernard Lee and Desmond Llewelyn both return to their roles of M and Q respectively. Both of whom play their role just as well as their previous efforts, although their screen time is surprisingly small, despite a surprisingly long film.

The story in this Bond film is decent, but nothing terribly earth-shattering. To sum it up, it's basically about James Bond pursuing Blofeld from the previous film and upon finding him, he discovers his new maniacal plan and of course, has to stop him. What I found extremely odd about the film is that when James Bond confronts Blofeld, Blofeld acts as if he's never met James Bond before. What happened to the previous film, did he forget about their previous rendezvous? And on top of that, what happened to Blofeld's nasty scar on his face? Perhaps this film was supposed to take place before "You Only Live Twice"...or perhaps it's just bad directing/writing, I'm not sure. Maybe if I read the books someday I'll more clearly understand this.

All in all, I thought this was a fine addition to the Bond franchise, with a few problems here and there, as nearly all films have. I enjoyed the film very much, more so than I thought I would, and furthermore, this film has some interesting twists that make this film somewhat special in the Bond films. If you are a fan of the Bond films, than I would definitely recommend checking this one out. I hope that you enjoy the film as much as I did. Thanks for reading,

-LebowskiT1000
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Definitely caught my eye.
9 August 2003
When I first saw the trailers for this film I didn't think it looked like anything spectacular. Although, I am a fan of Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks, so I wasn't going to miss this collaboration. I must say that I was definitely pleasantly surprised, the film was much more than I imagined and really quite fun.

The story is just incredible, and what really blows my mind is that it's based on a true story. There also a great deal more to the story than the obvious, it's not just about a kid that breaks the law and eventually gets caught, there are a number of subplots that make the story infinitely more interesting. Not only is the story and subplots great, the but the characters, the portrayal of the characters and the chemistry between them are just perfect.

Of course the great Steven Spielberg always puts on a great show, but this was particularly good. I think the best way to put it is that Spielberg really nailed the feel of this film right on the nose, and was very consistent in his style. I know there's been a few of his films that had certain scenes or lines that I felt were out of place or oddly placed, but this film didn't have anything like that, everything worked perfectly. Then there's the always great, Tom Hanks! A truly gifted actor, he ALWAYS puts on a good show and doesn't let you down here. Leonardo DiCaprio was an excellent choice for the role of Frank Abagnale Jr., and really nailed the role. He has the ability to look older or younger than he really is when needed, not an ability every actor has. Other cast members that should be noted are Christopher Walken, Martin Sheen, Amy Adams, James Brolin, Nathalie Baye, and Jennifer Garner, all pulling off great performances.

This is definitely a Spielberg film not to be missed. Do yourself a favor and make sure that you see this film. Even if you are like me and don't think that it looks terribly appealing, give it a shot, you may be surprised. There is virtually nothing I didn't like about this film, which is a somewhat rare thing for me to say. I hope you enjoy the film as much as I did. Thanks for reading,

-LebowskiT1000
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
My favorite Eddie Murphy film!
8 August 2003
Every time I see Eddie Murphy the first thing that comes to mind is "Beverly Hills Cop" and how wonderful of a movie this is. This film is possibly one of the best action-comedy films out there. The action is done extremely well, the comedy is right on, the characters are likable, the acting is fantastic, and the story is great.

Eddie Murphy really shines in this role as Axel Foley, a very likable Detroit Cop, and does a fantastic job of laying out the groundwork for a great franchise, as does director Martin Brest. Judge Reinhold and John Ashton play Axel's Beverly Hills counterparts. Both pulling off fantastic performances and playing very enjoyable characters. Ronny Cox also does a fine job with his role in the film. Bronson Pinchot and Paul Reiser also deserve some notice as well, despite having very little screen time, they both make the best of it. I'd also like to point a little known actor named Damon Wayans in the film, playing an extremely small part, but nonetheless a good one (he's the man that gives Axel the bananas).

As I mentioned before the action and the comedy are right on and the scenes flows very nicely together, you never once get bored throughout the film. If you are one of the few people on this earth that hasn't seen "Beverly Hills Cop", I strongly suggest you watch this one. It's a fantastic film and deserves to be seen. Hope you enjoy(ed) it. Thanks for reading,

-LebowskiT1000
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Anaconda (1997)
7/10
Far from great, but kind of fun.
21 July 2003
I don't think anyone is going to argue that this is not a great movie by any means, and it definitely has it's share of problems, but there are still yet some good things to be seen. Some of the special effects in the film are rather good and there is a great deal of beautiful scenery as well.

The acting in the film is nothing spectacular, but at the same time you have to remember that these actors are acting against a big mechanical snake, or in some cases nothing at all, so I'll give 'em some props for doing a decent job.

The cast in the film is surprisingly good. Jon Voight does a fine job as the antagonist (although I didn't like him at all the first time I saw the film). Jennifer Lopez does a good job as well, but again nothing spectacular. Eric Stolz makes an appearance as well, although his screen time is very minimal. The great Owen Wilson is also in the film, one of his first film credits. While, not having a terribly important role in the film, he was a cool character, and sadly I would have like to see him make it to the end. Kari Wuher is reason enough to watch this film. What a gorgeous woman! I definitely look forward to her future work. Ice Cube is in the film as well, I don't know what it is about this guy, but I just don't like his acting, in any movie. So he was the only cast member that I didn't really care for and sadly he's one of the few that actually survive the the entire film.

All in all, if you like films about huge killer monsters/animals, then you may like this film. If you're the kind of person that going to nit-pick every little factual discrepancy, then stay away from this film! In any case, if you do end up seeing the film, I hope you enjoy it. Thanks for reading.

-LebowskiT1000
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Jim Carrey and Tom Shadyac can't go wrong!
18 July 2003
Jim Carrey has got to be one of my favorite actors, I have yet to see him in a role that I didn't like. He's nothing less than hilarious and I don't care what anyone says, he's a fantastic actor. On top of that, Tom Shadyac is a superb director, making his third film with Jim Carrey (the previous two being: "Ace Ventura: Pet Detective" and "Liar Liar"). The instant I heard they were working together again, I knew I'd love the movie. So opening day rolled around and I wasted no time in getting myself to the movie theater to enjoy the film. And of course, I was not let down, I laughed myself silly and had an all around great time.

The story is beyond far-fetched, but it's all in good fun and actually has a good "moral to the story" as they say. The film is mainly about doing what it right and being happy with yourself.

I'll admit though this is the first movie where I thought Jim Carrey was a little too nutty at times. Like the whole tantrum on the bed when Jennifer Aniston is telling him to get out of bed, and a few other cases. But the scenes where I was laughing so hard that the tears started flowing more than made up for those few "too nutty" scenes.

On top of the great story and the hilarious comedy, there is also a fair amount of special effects in the film, which are nothing less than great and work very well with the story. And of course, there is the lovely Jennifer Aniston, need I say more? She's looked better, but she did a fine job in the role and I enjoyed watching her performance. Morgan Freeman was another fine addition to the cast, doing a very nice job with his role.

What it boils down to is this. If you liked "Ace Ventura" or "Liar Liar", then you definitely ought to check this movie out. If you like Jim Carrey in general, see this movie! If you aren't a fan of Jim Carrey, I'm not sure what to tell you, I guess I'd say see it anyway...you never know, you might like it. Thanks for reading.

-LebowskiT1000
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
An excellent installment, worth the 12-year wait.
14 July 2003
When I first heard that James Cameron wasn't going to be involved with the third installment to this fantastic series, I was less than pleased. The thought of another director taking over the franchise kind of upset me, I just had to hope that they would find a director that could fill those rather large shoes. I later heard that Jonathan Mostow was named director of T3 and was pleased due to being VERY impressed with both of his previous directorial efforts, "Breakdown" and "U-571", but of course I was still skeptical.

So the film was finally released and of course I went and saw it opening weekend. Let me tell you I was NOT let down! I thought the film was truly fantastic! I'm sure a lot of people will disagree with me and I'm sure plenty might even get upset with me, but I thought "Terminator 3" was just as good as both previous installments of the series. They all had their pros and they all had their cons.

I was at first a little uneasy with the idea of a female terminator. But, after seeing the film and thinking about I've come to the conclusion that having a female terminator if a brilliant idea. What would have an easier time infiltrating just about anything? A gorgeous and sexy woman or a large intimidating man? The woman, definitely! Besides, Jonathan Mostow did such a fantastic job with the T-X that it just worked perfectly.

The special effects in the film are truly amazing, looking even better than the effects in T2. There were VERY few times where I thought it looked like obvious CG. There is one scene in the first few minutes of the film that show a slew of Terminators walking around doing what they do that nearly brought tears to my eyes, it looked so awesome! I won't get into the specifics, but the special effects are reason enough to see this film.

The actors all did a fantastic job. I thought Nick Stahl was an excellent replacement for Edward Furlong. When I first heard Nick was taking over the role I didn't think he looked the part, but he really pulled it off. In fact, in the end, I'm happier that Nick took over the role rather than Edward Furlong continuing his role, because I really don't think Edward looks the part anymore, he was fine as the young John Connor, but I don't think he'd work well as the John Connor of this film. Claire Danes did a fantastic job as well, she pulled off a great job in the film and looks as beautiful as ever. Kristanna Loken plays the part of the T-X very well, looking sexy as can be and doing a great job with her facial expressions and her limited dialogue. I'll definitely be keeping an eye out for her future work. Then of course, there's the great Arnold Schwarzenegger, reprising his role as The Terminator (T-800/T-101). Arnold, again was excellent as the Terminator and didn't let me down. There is also a very nice cameo by Earl Boen, the only other actor to reprise a role from the first two installments in the Terminator series. Despite having very little screen time, he did a great job and I was very happy to see him in the film.

Personally I thought the story in this film was great and very well thought out. There are a few things that may have been overlooked or improperly explained, but nonetheless, this is a movie we're talking about here and there are bound to be a few plot holes, so I didn't let those little things affect my enjoyment of the film.

The only thing I would complain about if I had to, is some of the humor in the film. I won't deny that the jokes were funny, but I thought some were a little misplaced, this is, after all an R-rated sci-fi/action film. There were only really two or three comedic moments that I thought should have been excised from the film, but otherwise I thought everything worked pretty well.

I would definitely recommend this film to anyone that liked the previous Terminator films. I would hope that you can enjoy this for what it is and not what James Cameron MIGHT have done had he directed the film. Just because Cameron opted not to direct the film does not mean it's a bad film. Don't get hung up on the fact that Cameron didn't direct it, just sit back and enjoy the ride. Thanks for reading my review, and be sure to check out my reviews for both previous films: "The Terminator" and "Terminator 2: Judgment Day".
35 out of 51 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Judge Dredd (1995)
9/10
I LOVED IT!
6 July 2003
I'll be honest, when I first heard of this movie I had never even heard of Judge Dredd, so I hadn't the foggiest idea what to expect. I thought it was a fantastic film, with a really cool story, great action, cool actors, decent acting and some great bits of comedy.

Sylvester Stallone was the PERFECT choice for the role of Judge Dredd! He completely fits the mold and does an outstanding job portraying Judge Dredd. Rob Schnieder was an excellent choice for the part of Herman Ferguson as well. Rob added a great deal of comedy to the film and it was all good comedy, nothing terribly cheesy or annoying, just perfect. Diane Lane looks nothing short of fabulous throughout the film, and pulls off a fine performance as well. Max von Sydow is not someone I would expect to be in a film like this, but nonetheless, I'm glad he did, because he did a fantastic job. Armand Assante was excellent in the antagonist position. He makes and excellent "bad guy", I'd love to see him in more films. The rest of the cast was good as well.

The special effects in the film are very good for the most part, there's nothing much to complain about. The thing that completely made this film for me is the ABC Warbot. What a beautiful design! Truly fantastic!!! The only thing I would have liked to see is a long shot of the Warbot walking, but I'm sure with the budget of the film that was virtually impossible, so I'll deal with it. But all the scenes with the Warbot are just fantastic!

I don't really see why people tend to dislike this film. I thought it was an all around fun movie with plenty of good things going for it. I would definitely recommend this film to anyone that like super-hero movies, or just futuristic action films. I hope that you like this film as much as I do. Thanks for reading.

-LebowskiT1000
14 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Cameron has a knack for making sequels better than the originals!
6 July 2003
If you didn't think it could get any better than "The Terminator", then you haven't seen "Terminator 2: Judgment Day"! This is one of the best sequels of any movie ever done! The story is fantastic, the acting is great, the special effects are ground-breaking and nearly perfect, the make-up effects are better than ever, and the action is non-stop!

This is definitely one of those films that I wish I could erase my own memory and watch again for the first time! There's no other way to put it, I love this movie! I've probably seen this film more than any other.

The story is perfectly told, working seemlessly with the original Terminator film. The special effects are truly fantastic! The design for the T-800 (Arnold Schwarzenegger) and the T-1000 are brilliant!

Arnold Schwarzenegger plays the perfect T-800, as he did in the original Terminator film. Robert Patrick will forever be ingrained in my memory as the T-1000, he IS the T-1000 and is surely the perfect choice for the role. Linda Hamilton does a particularly good job with her role. The contrast between her "Sarah Connor" of the first Terminator film and the "Sarah Connor" of this film are very different, but with good reason. She definitely worked out a lot for this role and pulls off her best performance to date (in my opinion). The scene where she first sees the T-800 is EXCELLENT! Edward Furlong, Earl Boen, Joe Morton, Jenette Goldstein and Xander Berkeley also pull off nice performances.

What it all boils down to is this. If you like the first film and have been putting off seeing this film, you need to stop wasting time and go see this film. I wouldn't even bother renting it, just go buy it, it's worth it. If you haven't seen any of the Terminator films, then I would recommend seeing the first film then seeing this one...although you could probably put the pieces together without having seen the first one...but nonetheless you should still see them both. If you're one of the last remaining people on earth that hasn't seen this film, then I hope you enjoy it. I know I did. Thanks for reading and be sure to read my review on "The Terminator".

-LebowskiT1000
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Sci-fi/Action done right!
6 July 2003
James Cameron deserves a lot of credit or hatching this incredible story and brilliant idea! This is one of the best told sci-fi/action stories out there. The action never stops, the story makes complete sense, the acting is great, the special effects are top-notch (given the year that it was made) and the make-up effects / creature designs are phenomenal.

All of the actors involved pull off fantastic performances. Particularly Arnold Schwarzenegger (although he has VERY few lines in the film), Michael Biehn, Linda Hamilton, Paul Winfield and Lance Henriksen. Also, keep a watchful eye for Bill Paxton in the beginning of the film, as one of the punks that has a rendezvous with The Terminator.

The special effects and make-up effects are outstanding, given that the film was made back in 1984. By todays standards some of the effects aren't very impressive and at a few times they're actually rather silly looking, but nonetheless well done. But there are a few times that are just as good as today's special effects and are simply jaw-dropping.

The only complaint I have about the film is the music at a few points in the film. It's not really that bad, it just brands the film as an OBVIOUS 80's film.

As I mentioned, the story is just spectacular and told perfectly well. The story fluidly unfolds from scene to scene and definitely keeps your attention. If you are one of the few people out there that hasn't seen this film and likes science fiction movies, you should DEFINITELY check this film out, there's something for everyone in this film. Although, be warned that this NOT a film for children, it definitely has an R rating for a reason. Do yourself a favor and go see this film, I hope you enjoy it. Thanks for reading.

-LebowskiT1000
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Death to Smoochy is GREAT!!!
4 July 2003
I remember when this first hit the theater I really wanted to see it, but as fate would have it I wasn't able to get myself to the theater in time to see it. I couldn't believe how quickly this film was in and out of the theaters. I saw the trailers for it and couldn't believe that it could be THAT bad. So, finally the film came out to DVD and I wasted no time in renting it. "Death to Smoochy" is awesome! I makes me so sad that it didn't do very well in the theater. The cast is awesome, the story is hilarious, the acting great, the directing is top-notch, everything about this film is great.

Edward Norton is a truly gifted actor, and he plays the part of Sheldon Mopes perfectly! His character is awesome and extremely well done. Then you throw Robin Williams into the mix, a great actor as well, a bit of a different turn from his typical roles, but nonetheless pulls it off. It seems weird to hear Robin Williams cuss, but it works well in the film and definitely with the character. Catherine Keener deserves some notice as well, not a terribly well known actress, but hopefully she will be someday. Great actress! Danny DeVito, Michael Rispoli, Jon Stewart and Harvey Fierstein also deserve some notice, they all play their parts very well.

I will admit however, that this film is definitely not for everyone. I can surely see why some people would dislike it and why this wouldn't appeal to a lot of people. It's not a "happy" story and it's definitely got a great deal of dark humor to it. Dark comedies are usually not my "cup of tea", but there is something about this film that I really like.

Like I said this film isn't going to appeal to everyone, so I wouldn't recommend it to just anyone. I guess, if the trailer makes the film look interesting to you and you like dark comedies then go for it. If you're simply a fan of the one the actors, then be my guest, check it out. All I can really say, is I loved it and I hope you do too. Thanks for reading.

-LebowskiT1000
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Postman (1997)
10/10
An excellent post-apocalyptic film!
4 July 2003
I remember seeing this in the theater back when it first came out and thought it was an excellent film. Since then, I've seen it a few times and just the other day watched it yet again. I honestly cannot figure out why so many people find this film boring and give this film such a low rating. I thought it was excellent from start to finish and very well paced. Usually I'm the kind of person the notice when a film is longer than 2 hours, but this one didn't have me checking my watch at any point during the film.

I thought the story was a quite interesting take on the whole post-apocalyptic world. At first I thought the idea of a mail-service of sorts starting up any kind of feud between two groups was just absurd, but I have to hand it to the writers and director Kevin Costner, it was done extremely well in this film and works very well.

As far as acting goes, I thought everyone did an excellent job in the film and showed a great deal of emotion in their scenes. I thought Kevin Costner did a particularly good job in "The Postman", as did Daniel von Bargen, Olivia Williams, Larenz Tate and Will Patton. Will Patton was definitely a bright star in the film, I couldn't believe this is the same guy from "Armageddon". His character is a truly sick individual in the film and Will does a phenomenal job showing it. Personally, I thought he was a perfect choice for the role of General Bethlehem.

In all honesty, I thought this was a better film than "Dances With Wolves", but I must admit that I've only seen "Dances With Wolves" once or maybe twice and don't remember a great deal about it. I would definitely recommend "The Postman" to anyone that hasn't seen it. I hope that you like it as much as I do and can enjoy it for what it is. Thanks for reading,

-LebowskiT1000
3 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Potential to be great, in the end just ok.
27 June 2003
Warning: Spoilers
First of all, I have to say that I'm not a very big fan of Martin Lawrence. He's got a few decent movies out there, such as "Bad Boys", "Blue Streak" and "Nothing to Lose", but just found him flat out annoying in "Black Knight" and "Big Momma's House". I also saw "Life" which was ok, but that's it, just ok. Anyhow, back to "National Security", the only reason I saw this is because of "Steve Zahn", this guy has such a cool style about him and he's such a funny actor, so I had to see it because of him.

I was surprised how angry I was getting during the film at Martin's character (Earl) and how p**sed I was getting for Steve Zahn's character (Hank). First of all Earl has no respect for a law officer and takes no responsibility for his actions, on top of that he was lying through his teeth throughout the whole movie. I found it very hard to laugh at the "comedy" through all my frustration with the character. And poor Hank ends up getting thrown into jail for doing his job, and consequently looses his girlfriend and his job. Then he has to put up with Earl following him around for the rest of the movie refusing to leave him alone, yeah, that's hilarious.

[although this is rather predictable] I guess you could argue that it was worth it for Hank to put up with Earl's pestering and nonsense because he ends up getting his job back as well as his girlfriend, but I still felt sorry for the guy having to put up with Earl's crap. [End Spoiler]

I'm not totally dumping on the movie, there are a few good laughs to be had in the film and Steve Zahn does pull off another great comedic performance. He also has some rather good action scenes and shows off some of his true acting talent in a few particular scenes (ex: When his partner gets shot in the very beginning).

Anyhow, if you are a fan of Martin Lawrence then by all means, check this movie out. If you are a fan of Steve Zahn (like myself), then you may want to check it out, but don't get your hopes up. All in all, I thought it was just an OK film, but had quite a few problems in it. If you aren't a big fan of either star, or director Dennis Dugan, then you might want to spend your money elsewhere. Thanks for reading,

-Chris
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Next Man (1976)
3/10
Why did Connery do this?
22 June 2003
I'm usually not one to say that a film is not worth watching, but this is certainly an extenuating circumstance. The only true upside to this film is Cornelia Sharpe, looking rather attractive, and the fact that this film is REALLY short.

The plot in the film is unbelievably boring and goes virtually nowhere throughout the film. None of the characters are even remotely interesting and there is no reason to care about anyone. I'm not sure why on earth Sean Connery agreed to do this film, but he should have definitely passed on this one.

The only reason I could see for seeing this film is if you are a die-hard Sean Connery fan and simply want to see everything he's done. Save this one for last though.

Well, if you by some miracle end up seeing this despite my review (or any of the other reviews on this site), then I hope you enjoy it more than I did. Thanks for reading.
11 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed