77 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
20 September 2016
How can I describe The Fast and the Furious Tokyo Drift in one word? I would have to say "forgettable." I'm a huge fan of the Fast and the Furious movies. I think they're awesome. I watched Tokyo Drift once on TV. I wasn't impressed. After having loved The Fast and the Furious and 2 Fast 2 Furious, I hated Tokyo Drift. After that, I really had no interest to see Tokyo Drift again. But I saw it a second time only because I was hanging out with friends and one of the guys turned it on. I didn't leave. I watched it and decided to see if it would be better a second time around. The opening to Tokyo Drift really wasn't anything special. The race was nothing great. Especially when you compare it to the first impressive race they had to start off 2 Fast 2 Furious. The protagonist we are introduced to is Sean Boswell, but there is really no immediate reason to really like him. I also guessed from the beginning of the movie that the soundtrack was going to be terrible. And oh boy was I right. This movie had one of the lamest soundtracks ever.

The storyline to the movie isn't really that original or interesting. It's basically Karate Kid and Karate Kid Part II, only with racing. The writers were clearly inspired by those movies instead of the previous Fast and the Furious movies when they wrote this. There's the new guy moving to a new place and starting at a new school. He meets a girl he likes, the girl has a mean boyfriend. The mean boyfriend and main villain of the movie is D.K. D.K is a cross between Johnny Lawrence from Karate Kid and Chozen from Karate Kid Part II. Only unlike Johnny, instead of kicking the protagonist's ass and humiliating him with karate, D.K. does it in a race. Sean, our very dull hero, realizes that racing in Tokyo is a hell of a lot different. It's a different kind of racing called drifting. He is taken under someone's wing and trains. D.K., like Chozen, gives our hero a beating, gets dishonored in the movie, and even has a powerful uncle that he respects and fears.

There was one interesting idea in the whole movie and that was the new way of racing. They decided to try something new with the drifting. Personally, I prefer the good old street racing from The Fast and the Furious and 2 Fast 2 Furious. But hey, they wanted to try something new with Tokyo Drift. Unfortunately, the other new things just didn't cut it.

The cast of Tokyo Drift was nowhere near as good as the solid casts they had in the other Fast and the Furious movies. The villain in Tokyo Drift is a weak villain, the love interest, Nathalie Kelley was nothing special, Sung Kang was nothing special, and Bow Wow just wasn't a good casting choice. Seriously, Bow Wow?

Finally, I have to get to the star of the movie, Lucas Black. Lucas Black couldn't top Paul Walker or Vin Diesel. I didn't think he was going to. How could anyone? But he was just a terrible leading man. He was dull and boring and had zero charisma. Paul Walker and Vin Diesel are certainly not dull or boring. And they both have charisma. They were able to use that charisma to make you cheer them on and root for them as you watched the movie. I don't know what they were thinking when they cast Lucas Black to play the hero. I saw this movie twice and both times were out of curiosity. The first time, I wondered what it was. The second time, I wondered if I'd like it more. The movie didn't come through. To all of you Fast and the Furious fans out there that absolutely love this franchise, skip Tokyo drift and go straight to Fast and Furious. It featured Paul Walker and Vin Diesel and that was the way it started and should have stayed. Okay, 2 Fast 2 Furious didn't have Vin Diesel. But Paul Walker did great carrying the movie and Tyrese was just fine. Tokyo Drift had no one to carry the movie or save the movie.

Seeing the Fast and the Furious movies that followed Tokyo Drift only make you realize more how bad Tokyo Drift really was. If you decided to start a Fast and the Furious collection, great. But I'd leave Tokyo Drift out and focus on the other movies that have everything you could want in a movie. We definitely could have done without Tokyo Drift. It's a shame they decided to tie it in to the rest of the movies because it was unnecessary. We also could've done without Sun Kang's character Han. And just in case you're wondering, Lucas Black wasn't used for the rest of the movies. He only showed up once and for a minute in Furious 7 to help tie in Tokyo Drift. The dull Lucas Black and his character are, like Tokyo Drift, forgettable.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Reprisal! (1956)
Good idea that could've been done better
6 February 2015
Warning: Spoilers
The movie had the great idea of showing the prejudice that the Indians had to live through. Most Westerns, not all, didn't usually do this. Our hero of the movie is Frank Madden. He's a half-breed and he's hiding it. He decides when he grows up that he is going to be a white man and leave his Indian roots behind. As far as he's concerned, he's not an Indian anymore. He is not Neola (his real name). Now he is Frank Madden and he is going to own his own land. An Indian couldn't own their own land.

This could've been a very good movie, but frankly I was letdown. The biggest problem is Guy Madison. With a better actor, this could've really worked. First of all, Madison does not look at all convincing as a half white and half Indian man. If they want an actor to look like a half-breed then they shouldn't get someone that looks so white. I loved Guy Madison in Till the End of Time. But in this movie he just wasn't good enough. This should've been such a dramatic role. But it's trivialized. Madison doesn't do a good enough job. He's not likable in the movie, you can never see the anguish or torment he's going through, or his inner struggle of a man that is torn between who he is and where he belongs.

Imitation of Life was about a girl that was ashamed of being half white and half black. Like Frank Madden, she denies who she really is and passes herself off as white. When she makes her mother, who is black, go away in one scene, you can see what she's going through. When she is ashamed of her mother, you can see some emotion. Madison's performance is just dull and boring. When he has the scenes with Ralph Moody, who is playing his Indian grandfather, when he wants him to go away and leave him alone, they are so dull when they could've been so much better.

This movie really just wasn't that good. You got some good performances out of Edward Platt, Wayne Mallory, and Michael Pate, who play the Shipley brothers. They're villains you love to hate. But they were just part of another Western cliché of a family or a group running a town and being above the law. Felicia Farr was okay as Catherine. Kathryn Grant was good as Taini, an attractive Indian girl. The ending also could've been so powerful when he finally reveals himself to be half Indian and tells the whole town his name is Neola. In the end, it takes tragic circumstances for him to finally come out with it. He is ashamed in the end that he left his people and went with the white men, who never gave him a chance. He declares he will go back to his people. He decides he's leaving and he will go to a place where people are accepting of him and will let him own his own land. Sounds powerful, right? It wasn't. Again, what could've been powerful is very dull.

I compared this to Imitation of Life, but I have an even better one. This concept of the hero being a half-breed that doesn't know where he belongs was done years later when they made the Western Flaming Star. My advice is, check out Flaming Star instead of this. The idea in Flaming Star is used so much better and so much more effectively. The movie stars Elvis Presley as Pacer. It's a serious movie, very dramatic, and very memorable. There's also way more action and better action scenes with a better story. The movie also has a better script and Elvis Presley's performance is way better than Guy Madison's. In Flaming Star, Elvis had a chance to do all the things Madison should've done. The movie used the whole idea of the hero being torn way better. The hero also has a chance to make two great speeches. One when he decides what he's going to do and another at the end of the movie. Guy Madison never does this nearly as well. Not with enough feeling and not with enough emotion. His performance can be blamed partly on the script, but he did have a few chances to shine and he was very dull and had no charisma. If you haven't seen this, you're not really missing anything. But I do highly recommend Flaming Star, which is a better Western and a better movie in every way.
1 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Pillow Talk (1959)
Rock Hudson, Doris Day, and Tony Randall at their best
5 February 2014
The story goes like this. We begin the movie with Jan Morrow. She is a frustrated, rude woman that has no patients. She is also not in any kind of a relationship. I guess she's waiting for the right one to come along. She is sharing a party line with Brad Allen, played by Rock Hudson. He is the opposite of her because he is far from frustrated. He has relationships with the opposite sex every night. In the middle of these two is their friend Jonathan Forbes, played by Tony Randall. Jonathan also happens to want Jan and has no idea Brad even knows her. Jan and Brad have many arguments and they aren't exactly crazy about one another. That's until Brad sees her at a restaurant and overhears who she is. Being that Jan appeals to Brad and that he also feels like screwing with her head, he wins her over and begins a romantic relationship with her. Only she doesn't know who he is. He is Brad Allen on the phone, but with her in person, he is a Texan named Rex Stetson. His western accent hides his real voice that she hears on the phone. When watching the movie, you wonder if she'll find out who he really is. And if she does, what will happen.

There are so many funny scenes in this movie that I don't even know where to begin. The three actors in this movie are great together. We have Rock Hudson, Doris Day and Tony Randall, a perfect trio for a romantic comedy. This movie is very funny and fun to watch. This is probably my favorite movie that Rock Hudson and Doris Day made together. See this classic. See this great romantic comedy and you won't be disappointed. Turn it on, get a bowl of popcorn and watch a great movie. It's great for a date night.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
One of the most powerful episodes
18 January 2014
All I can say is what a great episode. It was such a great concept to have the sunlight go away and to have total darkness brought on by hate. This is a phenomenon. It's a happening. Maybe it is an act of God for all we know. But it's certain that people are to blame for the light going out. The writing was great and the ending was powerful. The music and the acting was also great. There were some great performances in here from Paul Fix as Colbey the news editor, Ivan Dixon as the Reverend Anderson, and Terry Becker as Jagger. Even Goober was great as Deputy Pierce.

I always know George Lindsey for playing Goober on The Andy Griffith Show, but in this episode, Lindsey plays someone so mean. This isn't Goober. More like an evil Goober. He perjures himself, hangs a man he knows is innocent, he's glad the man is going to hang, rubs it in, and is probably a racist along with the rest of the townspeople. He really was a good actor to make such a transformation into someone so bad. When he's taking pleasure in watching Jagger die and when he's telling off Colbey in one scene it comes off so convincing. The ending to this was so great and so effective. I also thought Becker gave the best performance next to Goober. Michael Constantine was okay as Sheriff Charlie Koch.

Constantine plays probably the weakest character. An innocent man was hung and he stood by and let it happen. He didn't speak up when there was evidence in the man's defense. He admits in the end how he wanted to get re-elected sheriff. Koch doesn't like that they are going to hang Jagger and knows it's wrong, but his attitude is basically that's just the way that it is. He shows remorse. Pierce shows none. Colbey even takes some responsibility in a way when he admits how he left things out when covering the story when they might've helped Jagger. Jagger was a great character and well played by Terry Becker. Jagger was different than the rest of the townspeople. He killed a Ku Klux Klan member in self-defense. Jagger was probably idealistic and he wasn't a racist. In the end he tells Colbey how the "cross burner and bomb thrower" is the hero to the townspeople and that he is the bad guy. He accepts that to the town, he is the "town kook, a "neurotic," "the one with the causes and banners," and the "village idiot who tries to be his brother's keeper." In the end, Jagger is angry and bitter and full of hate. He has become just as hateful as the people that have condemned him. He is defiant and tries to show his enemies that he's not sorry for what he did and he will accept his fate. But there is a powerful scene when he gets to the noose and looks at it and you can see that he is afraid and he knows it's curtains. Before Jagger is hung, he has an exchange with the Reverend Anderson that is classic. So beautifully written. When Jagger is finally hung, you really feel it. You don't even have to see it. Just the sound of him dropping and the sound of him swinging. Then of course there's also the music, the reaction of Ivan Dixon, and the reaction of the actors playing the mob when they gasp. The townspeople are vengeful and want blood from the start. But when Jagger finally does drop and hang there, all of that disappears. Then, in another great moment, the Reverend Anderson makes a speech to the townspeople to let them know why it's getting so dark. So effective and so beautifully written. Then Rod Serling's great closing narration puts the icing on the cake.

I am the Night- Color Me Black is one of the best episodes of the fifth season of The Twilight Zone and maybe even one of the best episodes of the whole series. It has top-notch writing, acting, directing, and music. I recommend this episode to everyone and especially to a Twilight Zone fan that has never seen it. Definitely check this one out.
16 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Phantom Punch (2008)
The mystery has been solved
23 November 2009
Robert Townsend said in reports that he wanted to show the true Sonny Liston and he said, "History hasn't been kind to Sonny Liston." He goes and he makes Liston's death look like a suicide instead of a murder? He shows Liston just plain quitting on the stool in his first fight with Ali? He shows Liston trying to blind Ali in the first fight? He shows Liston throwing the Ali rematch for no apparent reason? Townsend is an idiot. This movie is so bad it makes Meteor Man look like a masterpiece.

I was unfortunate enough to see this movie and now I know why it was never released. It is a piece of garbage. This is one of the worst movies I've ever scene. Not only is it a terrible boxing movie, but it's an awful biopic. I was really shocked at how bad this movie was. I couldn't wait for a movie about Sonny Liston and this is what I got? This movie hasn't been released to theaters and it never will be. If Townsend is lucky, maybe the movie will get released straight to DVD or maybe they will put it on TV. But I don't see this doing well wherever it goes.

Meteor Man failed to mention in his movie that Liston was the favorite in his fights with Ali. In the first fight, Liston was a 7-1 favorite. It would make all the sense in the world for him to take a dive for the mob. I read accounts that Liston said he was "only following orders" when he quit on the stool. Another stupid part of the scene that had me shaking my head was the part when Townsend shows them putting a foreign substance on his glove to blind Ali. First of all, Liston did not need to cheat. Liston was a great fighter. He was one of the toughest fighters in history and he wasn't afraid of anyone. This is a man that knocked out the great Floyd Patterson in 2 minutes. Then it only took him 5 seconds more in the rematch. He slugged it out in 2 wars with Cleveland Williams. He fought a whole fight with a broken jaw and only lost a split decision to Marty Marshall. Second of all, why would Liston try to cheat in a fight that he was going to throw? There's no doubt something got in Ali's eyes during the fight, but to say Liston put it there is ridiculous and there is no proof. In the end of the fight Townsend tries to make you believe Liston just quit like a spineless bum. I know some people would love to believe Ali was this mighty man that overcame Sonny Liston, but let's get real. That's not the way it was.

The movie gets to the big moment, the infamous "phantom punch." The scene is so uneventfully done in the movie it's pathetic. Townsend never even tells you why Liston took a dive in the rematch. He just goes down for no apparent reason. Townsend had the nerve to keep the mob out of that fight too. That fight was fixed. It looked like even more of a sham than the first fight.

This movie failed to show Sonny Liston's hard upbringing. It also failed to show that he really wasn't a bad guy and that he loved children and even tried to help people that were less fortunate. One of the biggest slaps in the face to Liston is how they handle his death in the movie. Instead of showing Liston getting murdered they make it look like a suicide. I was completely outraged. I didn't think Townsend could be that dumb. In the movie they make it look like Liston was depressed over his girlfriend on the side leaving him, so he does heroine one night. The guy was deathly afraid of needles. He never did drugs in his life. Sonny Liston was M-U-R-D-E-R-E-D.

You want the real scoop on Liston, get the book The Devil and Sonny Liston by Nick Tosches. Nick Tosches did what Townsend lied about saying he was going to do. Townsend made Liston look like a no good bum, but that wasn't the real Liston. Townsend should be ashamed of himself. Check out the Tosches book. Avoid this horribly written and directed movie at all costs. I do not recommend buying it or renting it. It's not even worth watching on TV. I don't think Townsend was taking his job seriously when he made this movie. By the looks of it, it's like he was just fooling around. If you were wondering why this movie was never released, you have your answer. The mystery has been solved.
33 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Alfred Hitchcock Presents: Breakdown (1955)
Season 1, Episode 7
Breakdown is Brilliant
30 June 2009
This episode of Alfred Hitchcock Presents is probably one of the best episodes I've seen. Maybe "the" best. The whole concept of the episode was brilliant. Sometimes you get a groundbreaking idea that is poorly executed and a good idea is wasted. This is not one of those times.

Breakdown features Joseph Cotten in the lead as William Callew. Callew is a stern businessman and a real mean SOB. Callew is away at the beach relaxing when he gets a call from an employee that was canned. The man is frantic and crying on the phone. The suddenness of being let go is too much for him and the poor man doesn't know what he's going to do. Callew, who is anything but compassionate, is disgusted by the man. He doesn't want to hear it and just hangs up the phone. Raymond Bailey plays Ed Johnson, a friend of Callew's. He heard the whole thing and like the audience, cannot believe how unfeeling Callew is. Callew tells Ed how disgusted he was by the man showing that kind of emotion on the phone. Callew says, "I hate that kind of weakness."

Joseph Cotten, as always, gives a great performance. He spends the beginning of the episode getting us to hate Callew and he succeeds. But this is only one way Cotten plays the part. After Cotten's character gets into a horrific car accident, Cotten pretty much has to play a corpse for the rest of the episode. Cotten actually pulls it off. Callew is pinned behind the steering wheel and looks dead. He isn't dead, but he is paralyzed. He literally cannot move a muscle. Callew is just sitting there with his eyes open and looks like he really is dead. Of course, Cotten does a voice over, to let us know what the character is thinking and feeling. Cotten's job for the whole rest of the episode is to make his character sympathetic. He pulls this off too.

The whole episode is pretty much Joseph Cotten. There are instances when different people approach the crash thinking Callew is dead. Callew realizes the bad spot that he is in. He has to find a way to let people know he is still alive. Time is running out and unless Callew can show he's still alive, he is going to be declared dead.

I found this episode very effective. The whole episode you are on the edge of your seat wondering what will happen. There is a particularly chilling scene of Callew ending up in the morgue with a sheet over his face. At the end of the episode there is a surprise ending that no one could've ever saw coming. I won't give anything away.

Check out this brilliant episode with masterful directing by the Master of Suspense himself. The writing and acting to the show are also great. Check out one of the best episodes of Alfred Hitchcock Presents. This is by far, some of the best work I've seen from Alfred Hitchcock and Joseph Cotten. I also commend Francis Cockrell and Louis Pollock for writing something so original and so riveting. You are in for a treat with this brilliant episode. See it and I promise you won't be disappointed.
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Normal Life (1996)
No Redeeming Qualities
19 June 2008
I'm surprised to see so many positive reviews for this movie. This is the first movie I've seen in a while with no redeeming qualities. It's a shame that I caught this yesterday afternoon on TV. I wasted time watching this garbage when I could've just watched something else.

The protagonist of the story is Chris Anderson portrayed by Luke Perry. Anderson is a good cop and overall a good guy. One night he meets a young attractive blonde in a bar. Always a great place to find the girl of your dreams. She's screaming and cursing (what a dream) at some guy who was lucky enough to get out of there. Anderson on the other hand isn't so lucky. He approaches the woman who has cut her hand from a broken glass. Anderson plays the knight in shining armor and helps her. They have a slow dance and she tells him her name is Pam. From the start, Anderson should've known there was something up with this dame. Don't get me wrong, Ashley Judd is a beautiful woman, blonde or brunette. But once you get to know Pam you'll wish you didn't. Anderson drops Pam off home and he decides to see her again. The more the movie goes on, Anderson gets to know Pam and the movie makes less and less sense.

Pam's behavior gets more and more neurotic and you realize along with Anderson that Pam is damaged goods. But for some reason, he loves her and wants to help her. Chris ends up asking Pam to be his wife.

He never really does help her. He just keeps beating a dead horse. Our idealistic cop turns into a complete idiot. He takes someone who is mentally ill and completely out of it. He thinks that by marrying her and making her his wife that is going to help her. Not only does Chris do nothing about her illness, he also turns a blind eye while she does drugs and drinks. As the marriage goes on, Pam gets sicker and Chris gets dumber. Pam goes to the store to buy a special telescope to view an eclipse. Instead she comes home with a knife. Instead of being worried he's angry that she spent $500. He comes home one night and sees that she has cut herself all over. His solution is to buy her a dog. Whenever Chris has Pam around his family it is obvious that she doesn't know how to interact with people. Chris gets mad and yells at her. When Anderson's father dies he tells Pam to get a dress and make sure that she's there. Pam shows up at the funeral parlor dressed like she's ready to go roller blading. Still Chris does absolutely nothing to help her. This is the woman in trouble that he was going to save and he doesn't have a clue.

The couple have financial trouble and they are barely able to live in the shack they're in. Chris loses his job as a cop and we are never told why. Later Pam loses her job because of her drug use. Chris comes home to find Pam with a gun to her head. By now, Anderson has to be a complete idiot to not see that his wife is suicidal. What does he do? He continues to leave her alone and tends to their money problems by becoming a bank robber. Like I said, as the movie goes on it makes less and less sense. There is even a ludicrous ending. Why bother to continue? This movie is very difficult to watch. Whoever made this has to be either crazy or just stupid. Poor Ashley Judd, who has a great body, is stuck shedding her clothes for no good reason. I've never seen a movie with such unnecessary nudity. Ashley Judd is filmed naked in many scenes just for the sake of being shown naked. Whoever made this movie must have something wrong with them.

I'm sorry I ever saw this movie. I hope I never come across it again. I almost didn't even want to waste my time writing a review, but I figured others should be warned. Don't even waste your time on this garbage. Ashley Judd fans especially should stay clear of this. The very talented and very attractive Ashley Judd is wasted. Actually, she is exploited. Luke Perry fans should stay clear of this too. Sometimes it looked like he was giving a decent performance when he was yelling, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was really yelling because he was sorry he got stuck making such a horrible and worthless movie. Stay clear of this trash.
4 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The Conqueror (1956)
Don't Knock It Till You've Seen It
11 April 2008
I'm probably not part of the majority here, but I think this is a good movie. A lot of people are probably knocking it before they've even seen it because John Wayne plays Temujin.

As the story goes, John Wayne wanted the role and he was very serious about it. He found the script in Dick Powell's office. I'm sure Powell had his reasons for wanting to throw the script out, but it can't be that it was that horrible of a script. The script is actually pretty decent. I can't complain about the make-up either because I think that was very well done too. John Wayne, between the make-up and his hair, really looks Asian in this.

People that criticize this movie keep pointing out the nationalities of everyone involved. If you are going to do that then you are just nitpicking. Yes, John Wayne is a white man playing a Mongol. But you couldn't have expected them to cast a real Mongol in the role. Whites played Orientals and Native Americans all the time back then. Anthony Quinn, who is of Mexican and Irish descent, played Attila the Hun once. Omar Sharif, once played Genghis Khan. Stephen Boyd played Kahn's blood brother Jamuga. That Sharif and Boyd movie was horrible, by the way. The Conqueror is way better than that. The Conqueror is more accurate too. You're probably going to wonder, "Why John Wayne?" I said the same exact thing and I thought the movie was silly at first. But I actually sat down and watched it and I thought it was good.

The Conqueror's opening is great. It opens with Temujin riding through the dessert with his Mongol army. The scenes of the army riding are great. They are shot so well. The action scenes of the Mongols fighting enemy armies were great too. If you want action, this has plenty of it. Another nice touch was the love story between Temujin and Bortai. Bortai is played by Susan Hayward. She was pretty decent in her role. I enjoyed her scenes with John Wayne. I also enjoyed Pedro Armendariz in his scenes with John Wayne. Armendariz was also decent in his role as Jamuga, Temujin's blood brother. A previous reviewer said that John Wayne and Pedro Armendariz are not believable as brothers. Keep in mind, the movie never says they are brothers, but they keep stressing blood brothers.

Overall, I think The Conqueror was a pretty good movie. It pushed all of the right buttons for me. I enjoyed it very much. The Conqueror is a well made movie, with good performances, great directing, great cinematography, decent writing, great costumes and great make-up. I thought the score by Victor Young was great too. I especially loved the Romantic theme that Young uses throughout the movie. That was very memorable.

If you ever get a chance, see this movie. If you are interested in the subject matter, check it out. If you are a fan of the old time classics or those Hollywood epics, check it out. If you are a fan of John Wayne and you want to see him in a different role for a change, check it out. John Wayne won't disappoint you. The Conqueror and John Wayne are not bad at all. Don't knock this movie until you've seen it. People were way too harsh when they placed their votes on IMDb. I'll bet that some people gave this movie a 1 without even seeing it. All they saw was John Wayne's name in the credits.
10 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Very Effective
23 March 2008
This may be one of the very best movies made about Christ. In the beginning I didn't really know what they were doing. It looked like they were making their own story up. But things got better and better as the movie went on. There were so many effective images in this movie that it is unforgettable.

The magic starts when Jesus is finally introduced. What an entrance he makes. A blind girl goes to Jesus for help. There is a bright light and you can tell by the little girl's performance that something is happening. Our view gets blurry because we are seeing through the little girl's eyes. Then the picture comes into focus and we can see Jesus standing in front of her. From that moment on the movie was amazing.

H.B. Warner is one of the greatest actors to portray Jesus. He has such a commanding presence in the movie. He does look a little old to be playing Jesus. At the time of Christ's crucifixion he was around 30. Warner was around 50. But this does not hurt the film at all. Warner does not look like an old man one bit and he had the perfect eyes and perfect face for the part he was playing. In the crucifixion scene when you see H.B. Warner without his shirt it's amazing how he has the perfect built to play Christ.

There were so many things that amazed me. The movie was silent, but it didn't even matter. There were so many effective images. This is what people went to the movies for before there were talking pictures. The first amazing scene was the scene when Jesus cures the blind girl. That was very well done. Every scene of Jesus performing a miracle was amazing. The Last Supper scene was very well done. When everyone leaves the table, the cup that Jesus was drinking from is shimmering. That would later become the Holy Grail. Throughout the movie Jesus is a glowing image. This added to Warner's presence in the film. The scene when Jesus is condemned was very well done and accurate. I was glad they got Pontius Pilate right in the movie. Pilate did not want to kill Jesus. The film also shows you how his wife truly felt. In this movie you see Pilate send Christ to be chastised rather than put to death. After the scourging, you see the people condemn him. You even get to see Pilate washing his hands. People complained about how Gibson's Passion of the Christ made Pilate look, but no one complained when they did the same in this. It is widely known that Pilate was not a villain. The King of Kings that came later in 1961 failed miserably in how it portrayed Pontius Pilate, not to mention a lot of other things. Seeing this makes you wonder what King of Kings with Jeffrey Hunter would've been like if Demille made it. Too bad he didn't.

My favorite scene in the movie would have to be the Resurrection. You will know why when you see the movie. Seeing everyone hugging Jesus in the end was so heartwarming. In the end you even get to see Jesus ascend into heaven. That was all very well done. The special effects in the movie were unbelievable. I was surprised how great they were. The movie was made in 1927. The storm after Christ commends his spirit is an awesome display. Amazing special effects. Seeing H.B. Warner on the cross is also a haunting sight. He really looked the part.

The final thing that I must praise is the performances by the actors. Everyone was great. Every single person in the cast. Everybody looked the part that they were playing. It was amazing. Dorothy Cumming was the perfect choice to play the Virgin Mary. Ernest Torrence was great as Peter. Victor Varconi was great as Pontius Pilate. Joseph Schildkraut was great as Judas. I couldn't believe that was the old man I saw on the Twilight Zone. In this movie Judas is a handsome young man and it is also the first movie were I've seen Judas without a beard. Schildkraut's interpretation of Judas will be something very new to you, but it turns out great. His performance was especially good when you see him in agony over betraying Jesus until you finally see him hang himself. Jacqueline Logan was a great choice to play Mary Magdalene. She was very attractive and great in the scene when Jesus casts the seven deadly sins out of her. Great effects in that scene too. Joseph Schildkraut's father Rudolph Schildkraut was also great as Caiaphas. This movie shows him for the villain that he was. Again, nobody complained about that in this, but they complained about Gibson's movie. Finally, H.B. Warner was great. I couldn't believe that was Mr. Gower from It's A Wonderful Life.

This is one of the greatest movies you will ever see about Jesus Christ. This is way better than King of Kings with Jeffrey Hunter. This movie was for the most part, very accurate. The special effects were great. The direction by Cecil B. DeMille was great. Again, too bad he didn't do the Jeffrey Hunter one. The performances by the actors were great. The King of Kings is an amazing movie and you will not soon forget the images that you see. Be sure to see this one. I promise you will not be disappointed.
17 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Miracle (2004)
Miracle Gets A Hat Trick
6 March 2008
Miracle is a Walt Disney movie about hockey. This sounds like Mighty Ducks, but believe me, it's not. Miracle stands on its own as a great movie. Disney has made true stories about sports in the past like Remember the Titans, and movies like that had the same Disney feel. Miracle is a movie for everyone to go see. It is a wonderful movie about a true game in history.

This movie tells the story of Herb Brooks. Brooks works endlessly studying films and picking players to represent the United States in the Olympics. He doesn't just see this as a job, but he sees it as a second chance. Brooks was on the 1960 Olympic hockey team, but just before they left to compete, Brooks was cut from the team. The team went on to win, but Herb Brooks wasn't there to get the gold. Now this is his chance to win. The movie starts with Brooks getting the job and from there we see his plan. Brooks tells his players from the start how he's not going to be their friend, but he's going to be their coach. When Brooks says something he means it. Brooks changes the way the Americans play and he teaches them the way their tough opponents play. Brooks plans to beat them at their own game. It seems impossible in the beginning for Brooks to get these young guys that have never played together, and teach them a whole new way to play. It also seems impossible for the USA team to defeat the Soviet Union. The Soviets seem like an unstoppable force that can't be beaten. When you see the Soviets in action it does look impossible, but this movie shows how nothing is impossible. Miracle really doesn't go into all of the players, except Jim Craig. Craig and his father are going through a tough time because of Mrs. Craig's death. You see Jim struggle and all you want throughout the movie is for him to win the big one for his family. Besides Jim Craig, you're never really introduced to the rest of the guys. The only one that you're with throughout the movie is Herb Brooks, well portrayed by Kurt Russell. You see what it's like to assemble a winning team. You also see Brooks getting so caught up in his work that he has no time for his family. All you want is for this guy to win.

This movie is more than just a sports movie. It is a movie that shows dreams can come true. You watch a team of young guys bond and become a family. You see these guys win from all of their hard work and determination. Their win at the time was a miracle and even today watching this movie you get the same great feeling that these guys did the impossible. This is a great sports movie and even if you don't like sports, it is still a great movie.

I highly recommend this movie to everyone. It is a movie that you should definitely see if you're down because it is a movie about hope. It is also about victory and when the movie is over it will have every red-blooded American cheering for the good old USA. This movie must have done something right because it had everyone get just as excited as they would have been years ago. When the USA team shoots that final goal to make the score 4 to 3 and the clock starts to wind down, you see everyone getting more and more excited. Finally when the clock runs out and you see that the USA has won, everyone is on their feet cheering. Then when the American flag is waved high in the air you hear the people in the theater cheering USA. Miracle made you feel as if you were back in time witnessing the real game. The movie lets you know what's going on at the time with clips from history and it is just amazing how a film can do this. Be sure not to miss this spectacular film. I guarantee you will not be disappointed. The movie is well written, well acted, and well filmed so Miracle gets a Hat Trick.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Rocky IV (1985)
A great movie and one of the best of the series
10 February 2008
This is a very good movie. The very first Rocky is a classic. There's no doubt about that. But this movie is still very good and very inspirational like the other Rocky movies. Rocky IV was very well made and very well done. The acting by everyone is great as usual. Tony Burton gives one of the best performances in this one. He has so many great lines. Because Duke loses Apollo and bonds with Rocky, it makes him such a big part of Rocky IV. You really end up liking him even more after this one. I can't understand why Tony Burton was barely used at all in Rocky V and VI. Other things I loved about Rocky IV were the training scenes in Russia, the masterfully choreographed fight scene, the fact that he grows the beard in training, and the fact that this is the first time that Adrian doesn't think he can win. Even though Bill Conti didn't do the score for this one and Vince DiCola was in there, it's fine. DiCola's score is great. It fits in perfectly with this Rocky. The songs on the soundtrack were great too. I loved Rocky IV's music. It was a nice departure from the same old thing. I honestly don't understand why anyone would think this is a bad movie.

The Cold War type storyline is good in this too. The USA Vs. the Soviet Union. We were always in competition with them. It was either buildings, our space program, or our military. There was also much competition in the Olympics for that gold medal. This movie has many great scenes. One of my favorite parts is when the Rocky Vs. Drago fight is about to start and the two of them are staring at each other. I also love the training scenes and the final fight. People keep knocking that little speech that Rocky gives in the end. I don't know why. That was very well done too. He tells the Soviets how they felt about him and the way he felt about them was able to change from the fight. If something so great like that can happen there, then there is hope for the Cold War to some day end. Rocky says, "If I can change and you can change, everybody could change." Great ending to a great movie.

What I don't like are these horrible, negative reviews. All of you really need to lighten up. This is just a Rocky movie. All of you stuffed shirts are ripping it apart and trying to analyze it. It's just a movie. I can also prove a lot of these negative reviews wrong. First off, maybe you think the Apollo Creed and Drago fight is fake and would never happen. It can very well happen. In 1962 Benny Paret fought Emile Griffith. It ended tragically in the 12th round. Griffith trapped Paret in a corner and mercilessly beat him until his head went crashing into the ring post. Paret was lying helplessly on the ropes and Griffith kept banging the hell out of him. Griffith hit Paret 20 times until the referee stopped it. Paret went into a coma and died 9 days later. Maybe you think it's fake how Rocky keeps going down in his fight with Drago. In Primo Carnera's fight with Max Baer, Carnera went down no less than 10 times. Carnera also happened to be a 6ft 9in giant that couldn't even lick my kid brother. It seems you people also think that Rocky would have never won in real life. If you took a 7ft giant, taught him how to throw a punch, pumped him with steroids and put him in the ring against a great fighter I wonder who would win. A great fighter like Rocky would obviously win. Ivan Drago was just a giant that was taught to hit hard and be like a machine. As soon as Rocky cut him he didn't know what to do. Steroids and freakish strength do not make you a great fighter. Also keep in mind that Drago's fight with Rocky was his first professional fight. It was also the first time he was fighting someone that could fight back and the first time he ever had to go 15 rounds. It's a wonder Drago did as good as he did. The Soviets were shocked when Rocky started making a fight out of it. There were a lot of things they didn't consider with there machine. One of those things was Rocky. Drago was, in a way, just like Mason Dixon from Rocky VI. He had to really show what he was made of and he probably came out of his experience with Rocky a better fighter. Towards the end of the fight the Russian people were cheering for Rocky. You people think that wouldn't happen. "Everyone" loves an underdog. When Jesse Owens, an African American, won at the Olympics, Berlin cheered for him. Hitler even waved to him to congratulate him. So tell me now if Rocky IV is far fetched and could never happen.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The Twilight Zone: The Encounter (1964)
Season 5, Episode 31
Don't Rush To Find This One
8 January 2008
Whatever you do, don't rush to find this lost episode. This one is a non-syndicated episode for a reason. The Encounter has to be the worst Twilight Zone episode I have ever seen.

The Encounter begins with a World War II vet named Fenton. Fenton is cleaning out his attic when a young Japanese man comes by looking for work. Fenton offers the young man a job to help him clean out the attic. Fenton even offers the young man a beer. Reluctantly the young man joins Fenton in the attic. We learn that the young man's name is Arthur. But as the episode goes on, we learn more about both men. But it really doesn't matter. The episode never goes anywhere.

The problem with this episode is that it's a complete mess. I have no idea why it was ever accepted as Twilight Zone worthy material. This episode has to be one of the thousands of scripts submitted from viewers. I guess this is one of those scripts Rod Serling forgot to throw out. How this ever got filmed is beyond me.

The Encounter, never makes any kind of statement, it never makes up its mind of the kind of story it is or where it is going. There's really no story. You find yourself watching this, not knowing what is going on. Is Fenton crazy? Is the young Japanese-American crazy? Is Fenton a bigot or is Arthur just being sensitive? Is a samurai sword possessing Arthur or is he just a maniac to begin with? There are too many unanswered questions here. There is too much comical overacting. To really put the nail in the coffin, the episode's ending is laughably bad. I couldn't believe what I was seeing. I'm going to forget I ever saw this ludicrous episode. I refuse to recognize such amateurish garbage as a Twilight Zone episode. A kid in elementary school can write something better than this. Stick to the true episodes of the Twilight Zone. I always keep an open mind whenever I watch an episode of this brilliant series. I find it hard to hate any episode. But The Encounter has no business in the Twilight Zone series and I wish it wasn't even part of my collection. The Encounter is worthless and a waste of time. Stay clear of this ridiculous idiocy. Let this lost episode stay lost.
15 out of 77 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The Twilight Zone: What You Need (1959)
Season 1, Episode 12
Very Flawed Episode
20 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
"You're looking at Mr. Fred Renard, who carries on his shoulder a chip the size of the national debt. This is a sour man; a friendless man; a lonely man; a grasping, compulsive, nervous man. This is a man who has lived thirty-six undistinguished, meaningless, pointless, failure-laden years and who at this moment looks for an escape—any escape, any way, anything, anybody—to get out of the rut. And this little old man is just what Mr. Renard is waiting for."

That was the opening narration for What You Need. After hearing this, you would assume that Fred Renard is one of Serling's usual down on your luck characters. Almost all of the Twilight Zone episodes had a hero or heroine in a "rut." Hearing this narration you feel very sorry for Mr. Renard. You can see the anguish in his face as he sits at the bar. Then the needling bartender is on his back about how he's not ordering another drink and he's just sitting there taking up space. Renard responds by saying "How would you like to take a flying jump at the moon." Hearing this, you cheer Renard on.

I don't know what happened when this episode was written, but somewhere along the lines, something went wrong. The episode starts out great. You see the gift that the peddler has and how he can help people. He comes across an attractive young woman and he gives her cleaning fluid. She doesn't know why, but he tells her it is what she needs. Next, the peddler comes across Lefty, a former pitcher, who's career got cut short when his arm went sour. You learn from the needling bartender, who is laughing at Lefty, that Lefty took up drinking because of this. The peddler gives Lefty a bus ticket to Scranton, Pennsylvania. What the peddler gives the young lady and the pitcher, turns out to be just what they needed. Naturally, when the old peddler leaves, Mr. Renard follows him outside to find out what he needs.

Slowly but surely, the episode gets worse from this moment on. The old peddler gives Renard a pair of scissors. Renard, like the others, doesn't know why he would get scissors, but he needs them. They end up saving his life. He goes back to the peddler and he wants him to keep supplying him with what he needs. The peddler refuses to help him any longer. He tells Renard that it "must stop." A confused Renard wants to know why it has to stop. The more the old peddler refuses to help Renard the angrier he gets. Fred Renard, who is still the same desperate man we met at the beginning of the episode, grabs the peddler and tells him how he was born under a lousy zodiac and that he's been getting the dirty end of the stick since he was 4 years old. The old man tells him that he feels sorry for him. But Renard doesn't want pity. He wants help.

The episode ends with the old peddler giving Renard slippery leather shoes and baiting him into the street to get hit by a car. A man with such a gift uses it to murder someone. The peddler tells the lifeless Renard that he saw a vision of him killing him. But Fred Renard is not a killer. We are only told that he is a miserable unhappy man. People assume that Renard is a gangster or a thug only because Steve Cochran is in the role. But there is no mention of that. There's no gun, no knife. Just a man down on his luck. If the episode was made right, Jack Klugman, or anyone else could've played the role. Why would Renard kill the peddler? Why would he kill the only person that can get him out of the rut that he is in? It doesn't make any sense. The only reason why Renard was even getting angry with the peddler is because the old man was refusing to help him and giving him the business. What You Need is a very flawed episode. The second half and especially the ending, was lousy. They took a sympathetic character and turned him into a villain for no good reason. They took the peddler, a god-like character, and they messed up with him too. God would've helped a man like Mr. Renard if he asked. We are given no real evidence to show that Renard was so bad and undeserving of help. We are given no real reason for why he deserved to die. Check it out for a great beginning, but don't expect it to get better after that.
6 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
The Outsider (1961)
Not your average movie
19 July 2007
Warning: Spoilers
The Outsider is not your average movie. It is not your average war film and it is not even your average biopic. It is a very dramatic true story that really makes you think.

The Outsider tells the true story of the Indian that raised the flag on Iwo Jima with the five other marines. He is Ira Hayes, one of the most reluctant heroes you will ever see. As a young Pima man on the reservation, Ira decides to enlist in the Marines. He talks it over with his chief and then he is off to honor his tribe. I don't think they make the Marine Corps look tough enough, but the scenes are good when he is writing home to his family, telling them how great things are, even when they could be better.

Along the way, Hayes makes a friend, Sorenson. There is a scene when Sorenson and some of the other marines get drunk. When they are literally pouring liquor down Ira's throat, a brawl ensues. The fight scene between Hayes and Sorenson plays out very realistically. When they're through beating the hell out of each other, they're sorry. Hayes keeps the drunk Sorenson out of trouble and the two bond. Their time under fire on Iwo Jima only strengthens their bond. Sorenson is even there to raise the flag with Ira and the others. Knowing the impact that flag raising had and what it symbolized, you would assume it was a high point in Ira's life. But it actually leads to his downfall.

After Sorenson is killed, Ira Hayes and the two other flag raisers that are left, Rene Gagnon and Doc Bradley, are shipped home. Upon arriving they receive a hero's welcome. They are there to go on a tour around the country to sell war bonds. Ira hates the whole idea. He can't stomach being called a hero. Hayes is riddled with guilt for cashing in on, what he feels, is a lie. It is also eating him up inside that he survived and all of his friends were killed. In Ira's book, they were better men than him.

After a while it is more than he can bear. Ira takes up drinking and his life goes downhill. He drinks and drinks his life away to escape all of his sadness and guilt. At one point in the movie, Ira Hayes is mentioned alongside Jim Thorpe, another Indian hero. The saddest thing about that is they both became alcoholics and died young.

I actually found this to be a well-made film. Tony Curtis' acting was great. I think Curtis was even better than Adam Beach in the role of Ira Hayes. I would definitely call it one of his best performances. I've seen Flags of Our Fathers, but I'd have to say the portrayal of Hayes in The Outsider is much better. Thanks to Tony Curtis and the great script, I actually found it to be more believable. This movie really shows you Ira's guilt and anger. One of the best scenes is the one when his friend Jay comes to visit him. The great Indian hero of Iwo Jima is now working as a janitor. Jay can see how much Ira has changed. Jay asks Ira what happened to the Pima boy he used to know. Ira yells that he never came back. Ira also says that he's got no right to be there. Another great part is the part when Ira meets Sorenson's mother. It is a very heartwarming scene and it kind of reminds you of the scene in Flags of Our Fathers when Hayes meets Mike Strank's mother.

Before I saw this movie, I wondered why they called it The Outsider and then I realized it was because Ira Hayes could not find a place he belonged when he got back from the war. They never do tell you in the movie that Hayes has Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, but it's plain to see all of the screams on that island of men dying really weighed on him. The Outsider isn't even a violent movie. You are left to use your imagination.

I didn't like how they only talk about one of Ira's friends in the movie, Sorenson, who wasn't even a real person. The movie should've talked more about his other friends and it should've talked more about his interaction with Gagnon and Bradley. I also think there should've been more battle scenes. It would've added a lot more to the film. The ending was a little inaccurate too. They showed Ira Hayes losing his guilt and finding his way back home, only to lose all hope when he isn't elected on the council. The truth is, his feelings never did change. After attending the ceremony portrayed in the movie, Ira never did find hope. He did however go back to the reservation. But the part about not getting elected isn't true. One night Hayes drank himself to death. In reality, Ira Hayes passed out in a hut and he ended up dying from exposure. In the movie they really dramatize his death. Instead, they show him climb to the top of a mountain of despair. He realizes that he doesn't belong anywhere anymore. He gets drunk and passes out on the mountaintop. It is inaccurate, but one of the most original death scenes I've seen. It was very well shot. As he's passing out you can see the camera in a first person view going out of focus.

Overall, The Outsider is a great movie and a classic that deserves more recognition and a DVD release. Don't miss this one. If you can get a hold of it, definitely see it.
11 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Flaming Star (1960)
Great Presley movie and Western
1 June 2007
For a movie that was originally planned for Brando, Elvis sure does a good job. According to the trivia, it was planned for Sinatra too. I'm assuming Sinatra would've played Clint, while Brando played Pacer.

While some might find the movie to be too depressing, I say, it calls for it. A movie like this, with a story like this, can't have a happy ending. So if you're expecting the usual Presley picture with singing and all, look somewhere else. If you want a movie with a great script and many memorable lines and scenes, see Flaming Star. If you are a fan of Elvis, see this movie for sure. Elvis shows what a natural actor he is in this movie. He also proves that he could star in a serious movie with a serious role.

If you are looking for a movie with action, look no further. Flaming Star has plenty of action. If you just want to see a good Western, see Flaming Star. Once you start watching Flaming Star you won't be able to stop. The movie had me watching up until the powerful ending. Everyone did their job well when they made this movie. Steve Forrest was great as Clint, Pacer's brother. Dolores del Rio was great as Neddy, Pacer's mother. John McIntire was great as Sam Burton, Pacer's father. Even the other supporting actors were great. Everyone was great. The actor that portrayed Buffalo Horn, Rudolph Acosta, was very memorable. Elvis was of course, great as Pacer. When you start watching the movie, in the beginning, it seems like the movie isn't really about Pacer. But later on in the movie when he has to make a choice of whether he will fight with the white man, his father's people, or the Kiowas, his mother's people, the movie gets very interesting. Elvis is put in many situations in the movie when he has to fight for his family and for his life. Pacer becomes the film's hero once the fighting starts. The whole movie is very powerful and unforgettable, so don't miss this one. You are in for a pleasant surprise. Elvis Presley fans will be pleased. Even people that aren't really fans of Elvis will be pleased. See this great movie and you won't be disappointed.
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Not as good as the first one, but still good
6 November 2005
I just want to start off by saying that The Legend of Zorro is not as good as The Mask of Zorro. But I don't think it is supposed to be. Usually the first is always the best anyway.

The beginning is similar to the first Zorro. There's a lot of commotion and Zorro gets there to save the day with the people cheering him on. After California is finished with there election, goons show up to steal the ballot box. The bad guys are led by a creepy looking guy with wooden teeth. Zorro does not take long at all to swing right into action and neither does this movie. When Alejandro gets home he is urged by his wife to give up being Zorro. He tells Elena that the people still need Zorro. Elena tells him that he still needs Zorro. From the start you could tell that Alejandro is going to have to make a choice. Alejandro refuses to give up being Zorro and he is sent divorce papers later on. Alejandro turns into a depressed and lost drunk. Elena ends up with a French aristocrat Armand, played by villain regular Rufus Sewell. Armand is Alejandro's rival, but he turns out to also be a dangerous rival for Zorro. Armand has more dangerous plans than simply wooing Elena. It doesn't take long before Alejandro discovers this. Alejandro realizes that he must pick himself back up and stop Armand. He must also get his family back. His wife left him and his son, who he hardly sees, is slipping away with her.

I enjoyed this movie very much. I especially enjoyed the climactic train fight. I liked the part when Zorro tells Armand that no matter where he goes, the world is not big enough for him to hide from him. I also liked how Abraham Lincoln shows up in the end when California is joining the Union. That was a nice touch. I really don't understand why a lot of people talk so bad about The Legend of Zorro. Many reviews I read in the papers gave this movie a mere 1 star. After seeing the movie I was shocked. The Legend of Zorro is a lot better than it gets credit for. It was action packed and there were many exciting stunts. The Legend of Zorro is also a good movie in how it shows you to never forget who you are. Maybe this movie is not as good as The Mask of Zorro, but that does not make it a terrible movie. The Legend of Zorro has a lot of silliness. There are a lot of things that you see that can only happen in the movies, but hey, you know what they say, "anything can happen in the movies." This also does not make The Legend of Zorro a bad movie. I can't understand why people complain about the performances. Antonio Banderas, of course, was good as Zorro, Catherine Zeta-Jones was good, no surprise. Even Adrian Alonso was good as their little son Joaquin. Nick Chinlund and Rufus Sewell also do their part as the villains of the movie. Sewell may not be a Basil Rathbone, but he was still a good villain. Sewell even played a believable Frenchman. I really had no problem with any of the actors.

Instead of listening to negative reviews, go out and see this movie for yourself. Maybe you will enjoy it just as much as I did. If you enjoyed The Mask of Zorro then check this movie out. If you enjoyed The Mark of Zorro with Tyrone Power, then check this out. If you enjoy a good action movie or just a nice family movie, then check this out. Believe me, you won't be disappointed.
7 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Dillinger (1973)
This movie sucks
20 September 2005
Once again I have seen a movie made by people that know nothing. I just recently reviewed Baby Face Nelson. Now I've seen Dillinger and I've had it.

This movie is garbage. I don't know how anyone in their right mind could compare this to a classic like Bonnie and Clyde. This movie is far from a classic. Someone called it brilliant. That's an insane thing to say. This movie can't get any facts straight and it has the worst casting I've ever seen. I don't know whose dumb idea it was to cast Warren Oates as John Dillinger. First of all he looks nothing like him. Second of all, by the time John Dillinger was killed he was 31. When Oates made this he was 45! You could even tell that he's older than the real Dillinger just by looking at him. Not only was he too old, but so was Ben Johnson as Melvin Purvis.

They show Baby Face Nelson die, then Homer Van Meter, and finally John Dillinger. John Dillinger was killed before both of them. The last one to die out of the three was Baby Face Nelson. Not only do the writers not know when they died, but they also don't know how they died. Baby Face Nelson was not killed after he escaped from Little Bohemia in a robe. Homer Van Meter was not killed by farmers with shot guns. Homer Van Meter was cornered by the police in St. Paul and gunned down with machine guns. Another member of Dillinger's gang, Harry Pierpont is shown being shot by police in this movie. Pierpont wasn't shot. Harry Pierpont was captured and sentenced to die in the electric chair. I go into what happened to Baby Face Nelson on my Baby Face Nelson review so I'm not going to go into it again here. Let me also add that Richard Dreyfuss' portrayal of Baby Face Nelson is pathetic. There's a scene where he attacks Dillinger and then gets a bad beating. While Dillinger was beating him he was crying like a baby and screaming, "Leave me alone!" Baby Face Nelson and John Dillinger never fought. Maybe Dillinger didn't agree with Nelson's bank robbing methods, but they never fought. Nelson also never cried like a little girl while getting beaten. They keep calling him Lester "Baby Face" Nelson. He was never in his life known by that name. Nelson's real name was Lester Gillis and he changed his name to George Nelson. The black guy that escaped from jail with Dillinger was Herbert Youngblood, but in this movie he is known as Reed Youngblood. John Milius doesn't know anything. Where the hell did John Milius get his information? I could probably make a better movie than him.

Finally the way they showed John Dillinger die is outrageous and inexcusable. The movie shows Dillinger walk out of the Biograph with the Lady in Red and his girlfriend Billie Frechette. By the way, Billie Frechette wasn't even there that night. But a girl named Polly Hamilton was. Melvin Purvis yells, 'Johnny!' Dillinger pulls out his gun and is blown to hell. It is a proved fact that Dillinger did not have a gun that night. The FBI gave him no chance to surrender and as soon as he was in sight they blew him away. They didn't even have to shoot him. They were so close that powder burns were found on his face. It was murder. They also say that the man killed that night was not John Dillinger. After killing tons of civilians in the Little Bohemia incident can you imagine the FBI reporting that they had just killed another innocent unarmed man? The gun they had on display that was supposedly on Dillinger was also proved not to have been manufactured until after Dillinger's death. I could go on and on how the man they killed wasn't John Dillinger, but I'll stop here. If you would like to know more check it out here

See the Dillinger version with Lawrence Tierney if you want, but don't waste your time with this inaccurate piece of garbage movie.
5 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Paparazzi (2004)
Just a joke
28 August 2005
While I was watching this movie it occurred to me that maybe it was a joke. Maybe this movie was only made for one purpose, to take shots at the paparazzi. The movie is too ridiculous to be good. The acting is just too horrible. No one in this movie can act. The only actor in this movie that shows he can act is Dennis Farina. The worst of them all is the leading man. Cole Hauser has to be one of the worst actors I've ever seen. I bet he won't get too many good offers after this. The guy looks like he's never acted in a movie in his life. I saw him previously in 2 Fast 2 Furious. I laughed at his acting in that. When I saw the preview to this movie I said in disbelief, "That guy is playing the hero?" Many actors where offered the lead for this and Cole Hauser was the only idiot that they could get. The other actors were probably smart enough to read the script. Cole Hauser is just such a joke. In the therapy scenes his acting was so terrible that I found myself saying, "Is this guy for real?" Another ridiculous thing about this movie that I remember is how the first paparazzi dies and Dennis Farina informs Hauser. Hauser's response is, "That's too bad." Another paparazzi dies and Farina comes to Hauser again telling him, "I got another dead photographer that was involved in your accident." It's so comical. One line in this movie that is shown on the previews is, "I am going to destroy your life and eat your soul." What the hell does that mean? I could understand if Sizemore just said, "I am going to destroy your life." But "eat your soul?" The bottom line is, the movie has a good plot, but it all goes down the drain from a horrible script and horrible acting. If you don't want to see a movie where the whole time you keep saying, "This is so stupid," then don't even waste your time.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Very Good Movie
15 January 2005
I thought this movie was great. I really can't see any reason why people should be criticizing The Phantom of the Opera. Unless you detest musicals and unless you hated the play, you have no reason to put this movie down. There are certain stuck up critics like the one in my paper that like to give an outstanding movie like this 1 lousy star. After seeing the movie for myself I thought he was insane. I could tell by what he wrote he had no interest in musicals and he didn't care for the play. That's what happens when they get the wrong person for the job. But anyway, don't listen to the negative reviews because they are just ludicrous.

I went to see Phantom of the Opera and I was blown away. I just couldn't believe how good it turned out to be. The whole cast was perfect in their performances for bringing this great achievement of a play to the screen. You would think that the music would not be as good in the movie as it was in the play. But the music in the movie was just as good and sometimes even better. The whole cast was great, but to name the two best actors of the picture would not be very hard. Emmy Rossum and Gerard Butler are without a doubt the best. Their duets are so powerful. Emmy Rossum has been nominated for a Golden Globe and I think she should win. I like so many others could not believe she was 18 years old. Her voice and looks are stunning. Any man could see that it wasn't very hard for the Phantom to fall for her.

Gerard Butler really surprised me. I think it is an outrage that the Golden Globes did not nominate him. But they nominated Kevin Spacey for a movie he had no business making and only did it to show off his singing. I didn't know too much about Gerard Butler except that he was in Dracula 2000. I could see by his acting that he was too good for trashy horror movies like that. I don't blame him for Dracula 2000 being one of the worst movies I've ever seen. When I heard he would play the Phantom I kept my fingers crossed. I've read many reviews saying how terrible his singing was. But I didn't see terrible singing at all. So what if he didn't sound exactly like the Phantom you heard in the play? I actually liked him better. Roger Ebert thought that Gerard Butler was just another pretty face. I think he needs to see the whole movie again with his ears and eyes open. Gerard Butler's singing and acting was great. I especially liked him when he did the song Music of the Night. All you have to do is listen to him sing that and you will see how good he really is. The Music of the Night sequence is one of my favorites. My others would have to be the scene on the roof; Gerard Butler is so powerful in that scene, and the Point of No Return sequence. What a great scene. People may think that Gerard Butler is too handsome to play the Phantom, but that isn't his fault and it doesn't hurt the movie in any way. His piercing blue eyes only gave more humanity to the Phantom and there's nothing wrong with that. When I read the book I thought the Phantom was just too pathetic. When I saw the silent movie with Lon Chaney I thought the Phantom was too villainous. But the Phantom portrayed in Andrew Lloyd Webber's is just right. I was able to sympathize with him the most.

Don't listen to any of the negative reviews. See this movie and you will not be disappointed. The Phantom of the Opera became a great play and now it became a great movie. The plays Grease and West Side Story became great movies and this movie is in that category. Not only was Phantom of the Opera nominated for Best Original Song and Best Actress, but it was also nominated for Best Picture. It won't be any surprise to me when it wins these awards.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Alexander (2004)
Biggest waste of a movie I've seen yet
11 December 2004
I heard so many negative things about this movie. But I went and saw it anyway. I tried so hard to go into this movie with an open mind. I tried so hard to enjoy this movie, even though it was an Oliver Stone picture. Stone is a director I could care less for. I enjoyed Any Given Sunday, but after seeing Alexander I lost all respect for him. Many people, including Roger Ebert, have said Alexander the Not So Great. Believe me, that's putting it mildly. Not so great, is probably the biggest understatement I've heard about this movie. Why doesn't Oliver Stone just stay away from biopics? Okay, he stayed faithful to Ron Kovic's book for Born on the Fourth of July. But he made a mockery of Jim Morrison in The Doors. Jim Morrison is one of the most talented men of Rock. He wrote great music and had a great voice, but Oliver Stone managed to turn him into a drunken fool that took drugs every minute of his life.

Many people have complained about the image that Oliver Stone shows us of Alexander the Great. People say that Stone concentrated too much on gayness, but that is beside the point here. Either way the movie still sucks. I went to see this movie as soon as my local theater opened. Too my surprise I was the only person sitting in the theater. I had the whole theater to myself. I was excited, but by the time the movie was over my excitement had turned into disappointment. This movie is the biggest waste of a movie I've seen yet. The movie has a promising topic and it just goes to waste. With a man called Alexander the Great you would think he would get a better movie. Not only does Oliver Stone screw up showing us Alexander's life, he also screws up showing us his death. While Alexander is lying on his death bed it looks like he's on LSD.

Alexander just has nothing going for it. This movie has so many scenes of horrendous acting that it is impossible to take it seriously. In most scenes I found myself laughing. Every actor in this is just terrible. Angelina Jolie, Val Kilmer, and especially Colin Farrell where on their coffee breaks when they made this. Out of all these actors Colin Farrell was the biggest disappointment. I expected so much from him after his performance in Phone Booth. Even the accents in this movie are horrible. Why does Colin Farrell talk with his Irish accent? Why do a lot of the other actors? What accent is Angelina talking with? Why is Rosario Dawson's accent so phony? These where some of the many questions going through my head. Alexander the Great has such an interesting story. The man conquered 90% of the known world. After seeing this movie you are left very unimpressed. If you are expecting a good biopic go look somewhere else. If you're expecting good battle scenes definitely don't look here. Okay, we all know Oliver Stone was in Vietnam. When is he going to stop trying to give us Post Traumatic Stress Disorder? The battle scenes in this movie are grotesque and disgusting. You get nauseous watching them not only from the camera being all over the place, but from the gore that doesn't let up. I was looking forward to the battle with the elephant army, but now I wish I never saw it. The whole scene was just animals getting butchered. If you can't stand the sight of animals being slaughtered stay away from this movie. I'm not exaggerating either. That's what the whole scene was.

There are rumors that Alexander was gay, but Oliver Stone, Mr. Controversy, doesn't stop mentioning it. After a while I found myself saying, "All right already, we get the point." I think that if it is only rumors it shouldn't be shown in a movie as being true. There are rumors that Errol Flynn was gay, but should they portray him as gay in a movie? People are always complaining about this one fault. Complain about more things. The whole movie sucks. From beginning to end the movie really sucked. Don't waste your time or money on this trash. Watch Gladiator, watch Spartacus, watch Ben-Hur, watch Alexander the Great with Richard Burton, and watch any Sword and Sandals movie you want, but stay away from this. This movie is so bad I rather sit and watch The Silver Chalice 100 times straight.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Tyson (1995 TV Movie)
Great movie about the rise and fall of Iron Mike
24 November 2004
I really enjoy this movie every time I watch it. I think everything in Tyson is just right. The actors are perfect, the music is perfect, the script is perfect, and the boxing scenes are perfect. I really liked how this movie starts out with Tyson as a young hood and shows him become a champion. I liked the scenes with Tyson and Cus D'Amato. I don't think they could've got anyone better to play Cus than George C. Scott. He looks exactly like him in this and his acting was great. Everyone was great here, but I think people should give a lot more credit to Michael Jai White. I don't know what everyone was looking for. When I watch the movie I forget it's an actor playing Mike Tyson. He doesn't look exactly like him, but he really comes across as him. Michael Jai White deserved a Golden Globe nomination for his performance.

This movie also tries to show you the other side of the stories you heard about Tyson. You probably heard about how Tyson got fresh with Teddy's niece, but this movie shows you that maybe Jamie was going after Mike. You probably heard stories from Robin Givens, but this movie shows how deceptive she really was and how she took advantage of Mike. You probably heard stories about Don King. This movie shows what a jerk he was. It doesn't show it as much as his biopic does, but you get a pretty good idea. You probably heard that Tyson was convicted of rape, but this movie leaves it up to you. It doesn't prosecute him.

I also liked how the movie shows how Mike Tyson isn't the heartless fiend you think he is. It shows that he could love. He loved his mother, he loved Cus D'Amato, he loved Jim Jacobs, he loved Robin Givens, and he loved pigeons. When he loses these people, his life starts to go downhill. The movie also shows Mike Tyson isn't made out of stone. He really was nervous at times and he wasn't always strong, especially when Cus died.

There's really nothing you could say is wrong with this movie. It does everything it's supposed to and pushes all the right buttons. I even thought the fight scenes were great. They were accurate and staged beautifully. My favorite part is when Tyson fights Michael Spinks. You want to know what Tyson was all about watch that fight.

This movie was great for an HBO movie, but I still can't understand why a movie hasn't been released to theaters about Mike Tyson. Maybe they'll make one years and years from now. The movie Ali was just a blown opportunity and a waste of time. If anyone does make a Mike Tyson movie it better not be like that.

I don't just like this movie because I'm a huge Mike Tyson fan. If you took a person that despised Mike Tyson and told them to watch this they would probably end up understanding him by the time the movie's over. It shows who Mike Tyson truly was. I stress the word "was" because the man you see today is not Mike Tyson. The Mike Tyson I saw in this movie would've never lost to Evander Holyfield, or any other fighter that beat him today. The man I saw would've never bit Holyfield's ear, or did any of the things he does today. The Mike Tyson I know is the one I saw beat every challenger in sight. The Mike Tyson I saw knocked out Michael Spinks in 90 seconds. That is the only one I will ever see.
16 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Not very accurate, but still an entertaining movie
5 October 2004
If you're planning on writing a paper or doing research on Lester Gillis AKA George "Baby Face" Nelson then you might want to pass this one up. While the action is great and the leading man C. Thomas Howell is great as Baby Face Nelson, the movie is fiction based on fact. I hate it when they make a movie about a real person and then add fictional characters to the story or change names. I also hate it when they fabricate real life events. But I really hate it when they get the wrong man to play someone. In this case it was F. Murray Abraham and Martin Kove.

Where do they come off getting Martin Kove to play a legend like John Dillinger? It's also kind of ridiculous to get F. Murray Abraham to play Al Capone. They got him to play the part again in Dillinger and Capone. That's another movie that shows how they don't know how to cast actors. Both of these actors look nothing like who they're supposed to be. For Dillinger they pick a guy that doesn't look or sound anything like John Dillinger, or a gangster for that matter. Kove even has long reddish hair with a mustache that is way too thick to be Dillinger's. I know Dillinger was Irish, but give me a break. Maybe they didn't know what the real Dillinger looked like. The people that make these movies come off looking dumb because it shows how they do no research and know nothing about the subject they're making a movie on.

The only thing about this movie I could say that is perfect is the leading man. Howell saves this movie. Even though he is a little too handsome to be Baby Face Nelson he still passes as him. Even though C. Thomas Howell is 5' 11" and the real Baby Face Nelson was 5' 4" it doesn't matter because he still passes as him. C. Thomas Howell really makes you believe that he is Baby Face Nelson.

The scene with Al Capone telling Nelson to get out of town was made up. They went their own separate ways because Capone didn't like Nelson's methods for taking care of business. Nelson's tools of trade were a knife, a .32 caliber revolver, a Thompson Machine Gun, and a baseball bat. The guys he was supposed to be smacking around were turning up dead. Capone felt it was very bad for business. Capone didn't hit Nelson in the mouth a couple times and then throw him out of the car as shown here. They never even met and the one that really let him go was Jack McGurn. You are able to see Baby Face getting picked on as a kid, but true events are never shown. His childhood years, which were probably the years that turned him into a cold-blooded killer, are never shown here. You see him as a kid for probably 2 minutes. I can't understand why they didn't want to go into detail and show him grow up. In this movie he is the hero, but in reality he killed a hell of a lot of people. A lot of the people he kills in this movie are just asking for it though. Baby Face didn't always have a mustache, but from the moment you see him as an adult in this, he does. This movie really doesn't go into any detail and skips a lot of Nelson's life. It was a shame.

The final scene is very cool, but it is definitely not how things really went down before Nelson died. In real life Nelson was spotted driving a stolen car by 2 FBI agents. Let me also add that his wife and friend were in the car with him. They started to chase him. He pulled the car over and he immediately advanced on them. They were shooting him full of lead, but he kept moving forward and kept squeezing the trigger to his Thompson. Baby Face Nelson died later on after the shootout, but he took the two agents down with him. In this movie you see FBI agents surround him while he is trying to cross the Canadian border (I don't know where they get their information). The car turns over and he ends up crawling out with his wife and friend. By the way, his friend's name in this is Paul Chance. In real life, his friend's name was John Paul Chase. Instead of 2 agents there are about 10. There is a very big shootout. I kept waiting for Baby Face to say, "I've had enough of this cat-and-mouse!" I read that was what he said in real life when he went after the two G-Men. But he never does. He's yelling, "Come on, you yellow bellies!" He even says, "Smile, copper." The ending to this movie is still cool though. You are left with an action packed climax with a Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid like ending. The protagonist of the movie goes out in a blaze of glory as he did in real life. A previous reviewer made it sound like FBI agents would never shoot an innocent person. At the time, they sure did. Just look at the shootout at Little Bohemia.

The bottom line is, if you want a movie that is about the life and times of George "Baby Face" Nelson then this movie is terrible. If you want a movie loosely based on Baby Face Nelson, this movie is good. Give the movie a try. This movie could've even better if it stuck to the facts. The true story was interesting and exciting.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
You haven't seen the worst
14 August 2004
There is really no way I could stop liking this movie. I've liked it since I was a little kid. I was one of those monster movie buffs. I rented Plan 9 from the video store thinking Bela Lugosi was the star. Around that same time I rented Ed Wood thinking it was about Lugosi. I didn't even know who Ed Wood was. I know who Edward D. Wood Jr. is now. He was a director that worked hard and was very dedicated. After all that work he was voted the worst director of all time. Believe me, I've seen worse. When I was little I never noticed the silly mistakes in Plan 9 From Outer Space. It wasn't until I saw Ed Wood and read about this movie that I realized them. Just because there are mistakes that doesn't mean you should hate it. I always found Eddie's movies to be interesting, original, and fun.

I think the script to this movie is very good. It tells an interesting story and it is fun to watch. Despite the silly mistakes it is still a very good movie. There are a lot of effective scenes in this movie. The best part is when Criswell comes on in the end and makes his closing monologue. I also liked how Wood used bolts of lightning for the opening. The music in Plan 9 From Outer Space is good too. People say how there is bad acting. I didn't notice any really.

Tor Johnson was pretty good in this. When he portrays Inspector Clay when he is alive, Tor really isn't that bad of an actor. He has a heavy Swedish accent that makes it a little hard to understand him, but he's fine. Tor Johnson isn't bad in the movie when he's dead either. One actor that was fine for a few minutes was Bela Lugosi. I love Lugosi's scene in front of the house when he is touching the flowers. You know, in shots from the side and from the back, Tom Mason actually can pass as Lugosi. I don't think they should have ever showed him from the front though unless his face was covered enough. In some shots he doesn't cover it enough. I noticed that Tom Mason kind of has Lugosi's ears and his hair was made just right. Sure he's a little taller, but it's not a big deal. In one scene I even noticed that Tom Mason was walking like Bela. I really don't have a problem with any of the actors except Gregory Walcott. He thought he was such a big shot. Where did he ever get? He read the script and said how it was the worst he had ever read. It by no means is the worst.

Plan 9 From Outer Space is by no means the worst movie. If you think this movie is the worst then you haven't seen the worst. Try seeing; The Day Mars Invaded Earth, Cabin Fever, Hostel, The Cell, Ghost Ship, Dumb and Dumberer, Gigli, some Friday the 13th movies, some Nightmare on Elm Street movies, Return of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Spice World, Mortal Kombat Annihilation, Bones, sequels to Halloween, Dracula 2000, In the Cut, End of Days, Mars Attacks, AVP Requiem, Phantom Punch, Pompeii. After you see those then tell me which movie is the worst of all time. After you see those tell me if you have seen the worst acting, the worst writing, and the worst directing. A week from now you can be paying a lot to see the worst movie of all time. There will be more and there might be worse. God help us in the future.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
One of the best movies I've seen in a long time
13 August 2004
When I saw The Passion of the Christ I didn't know what to expect. I heard many things about this movie, but no matter what I heard I wanted to see for myself. I went into the packed theater and I saw one great movie. This movie is definitely without a doubt the best movie I've seen in a long time. This movie will probably be the highest grossing one too. It deserves every dollar it's getting. When I saw Mel Gibson's name involved I knew from the start I wouldn't be disappointed.

When the movie starts out you know it's going to be in another language. Many people have said it's in Latin, but in fact it's in Aramaic. The film moves right along and it starts with a man praying and asking God to protect him. This man seems very frightened. When you get a good look at his face you know right away from the great makeup and costuming to this movie that it is Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is phenomenally played by Jim Caviezel. In The Passion of the Christ Caviezel doesn't just play Jesus, he becomes him. When I first heard that Jim Caviezel was playing Jesus I was a little unsatisfied. I never saw him in anything before that impressed me. But after seeing him in this, there is no doubt in my mind that he has some real talent. Surprisingly the leading man to this movie isn't getting any attention. In the 1961 movie King of Kings, Jeffrey Hunter was given a lot of attention. All eyes were on him, not for his performance, which I thought was very good, but for his youthful age. People at the time unfairly called the movie I Was A Teenage Jesus. Anyone who can say this movie is just like any other biblical picture is very wrong. This movie is like no other film put on screen.

After Jesus is arrested his life starts to change for the worst. He is spit on and beaten, but he goes on and he refuses to yield to the High Priests. People complain that this movie doesn't go into the miracles of Christ, but that really isn't what the movie is all about. When people see the word passion they think of romance. This movie has nothing to do with romance. This movie has to do with the suffering Jesus went through. It is about the pain he went through. The best part about this movie is that you feel as if you're right beside him for every last minute of his life. When he is being tempted by Satan, you're with him. When he is betrayed, you're with him. When he is brutally scourged, you're with him. When he is condemned, you're with him. When he is finally crucified, you're with him. During the crucifixion scene while he carries the heavy cross that he will be nailed to, the camera is so close that you feel like Simon of Sirene, the man that helped him carry it. One of the many touching scenes of this movie is when the Virgin Mary rushes to her dying son's side. The whole time Jesus is suffering you can see a look on his face that's saying, `I have to go through with this.' When he is placed on the cross to be nailed you are feeling exactly what he is feeling, fear. There is one shot of Jesus on the cross that makes you feel as if you're up there with him. While he is up there forgiving his enemies and telling a sorry criminal that he will be with him in paradise, you can't help but feel very sad. When Jesus finally does commend his spirit you feel exactly how the Romans are feeling, `Truly this man was the Son of God.' This is a great movie that I highly recommend to all. I think that Mel Gibson is a brave man for making this quintessential movie. If you want a strong story, genuine acting, and amazing directing, then this is the movie for you. Passion of the Christ deserved every dollar it made and next year this movie should win many Academy Awards. People say that this movie does not change your feelings about religion. I would have to disagree with that because this movie is a great religious experience. I also agree that Catholic schools should go to see this. This movie is violent, but it is also true. The violence does not ruin the movie, but it gives it more strength and accuracy. Kids in Catholic schools have been reading about this. I think it is time they saw the whole story and the whole truth. Years from now this movie will be remembered and it will live on as a classic.
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Good Universal Monster movie
3 August 2004
This movie was a very good Universal Monster movie. It once again stars Lon Chaney as The Wolfman and Glenn Strange as Frankenstein's Monster. Oh yeah, that jerk John Carradine is back again as Dracula. I like every actor in this movie. I especially liked Onslow Stevens as Dr. Edelmann. (It's spelled with 2 n's) I thought it was a good idea to have the goodhearted doctor himself doomed like Talbot was. One scene that I think is very good is the scene when Dr. Edelmann is in deep thought as he changes. Everything that is troubling him flashes before your eyes. The good Doctor is saying no while his evil side is saying yes. That's the only reason why I didn't want the Dracula character eliminated completely from this movie. I thought Dracula had no business in House of Frankenstein. If his character was taken out you wouldn't miss him. In this film the doctor's blood is contaminated with Dracula's, giving him his Jekyll and Hyde curse. I hate John Carradine and I don't think he should have ever played Dracula. I didn't mind other actors playing the Frankenstein Monster after the great Karloff because they all did good jobs. But when they get another actor to play Dracula it stops right there. John Carradine thought he was so high and mighty. They offered him the role of the Frankenstein Monster once and he turned it down because he thought he was too highly trained. I could just picture Carradine if he did play The Monster arguing with the director on the set, "I don't have to take this from you, I've done Shakespeare." John Carradine wasn't Dracula and he never will be. Sorry John, Bela Lugosi is the one and only Dracula. Thank God they got Bela to come back as Dracula for Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein.

Don't miss this movie. It doesn't disappoint you and you will enjoy it as you did the other. This is a very good addition to the monster movies. If you're a collector, be sure not to leave this one out.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed