Reviews

40 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Vanilla Sky (2001)
1/10
this is irritating....
2 March 2003
Vanilla Sky is a very irritating film. You know sometimes you see a film that is so bad that you become embarrassed to watch, because you know that your smarter, better self is dissapointed in what your doing? This is the kind of film.

Tom Cruise, well, after seeing him reinvent himself and go for interesting roles (Eyes Wide Shut, Magnolia), he has now gone back to formula, playing shallow yuppie, spoiled upper class, Hollywood bird magnet brat (himself?) and obviously this is the intention, no fault of the 'Cruiser', its Cameron Crowes' (writer/ director) for having such a bland view on relationships and the even more irritating Penolope Cruz, whom you want to place faeces on her head and smack more than you'd like to make love to.

The love affair between the two, the 'chemistry', is like a really, really disturbing horror film, that can take a while for the after effects to heal and natural, healthy sleep to reinhabit itself and overcome the trauma. It is so unremmitingly shallow (like episode of Freinds' without the canned laughter) and makes a shambles of superior (I'm talking 'God Like' proportions) remake Open Your Eyes that approached its themes with more depth and panache (don't they always).

For 'cake and wine' fanatics and fans of the 'pyjama with popcorn party' only, and for them they are bound to say, 'wow, wasn't that deep? good but a bit weird at the end, don't you think? but what does it all mean? did he really do this?' e.t.c. At which point you vomited. Then leave the room. And let them clean it up. And chuckle your a** off on the way out.

no stars (out of infinity)
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Flashdance (1983)
ONCE UPON A TIME I SAW BLUE FLAMINGO..........
20 February 2003
I listen to soundtrack now and am thinking, WHY NOT NOW? Why they not make like this now, I not know- is better than Flubber, is better than the Hugh Grant Nine Months Later, or Six Weeks Notice, Stripteasing, the Showgirl, The Street Fighting Man, Velvet Goldminer, Silver Magnolias, the Internet, and I do not know what- is better than all this masterpises. The music, by Georgina Mordinna, is fantast, and Jenny Eels, she is like SEX MANIAC OR SOMETHING! REALLY!! You can see from the dancing- she crazy, like she need one, she need something (I HAVE!). This is good one from the child hood, make me hard, feel good, and better, is a happy, nice one, give to me a smile. Good to break to (or something like that, maybe not the same).
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Blade II (2002)
ATROCIOUS B MOVIE FOLLOW UP TO SUPERB ORIGINAL
30 January 2003
BLADE was fantastic. A super cool, super sexy, kick ass vampire film with a great (super) hero, great villains (a perfectly cast Stephen Dorff) and fantastic fight sequences. Blade 2 is just atrocious. WHY? It shouldn't be, it has the same script writer (David Goyens) and a seemingly bigger budget. But it looks cheaper. The acting is atrocious and believe it or not it is actually really badly dubbed in some scenes (why was it dubbed to begin with?).

It looks very cheap. Badly lit, cheap 80's stylisation and very few fight sequences- we spend more time with the blood pack (rubbish breed of semi vampires) and plot set-ups that fall into place later in the film, that dominate over action (ignore reviews that say Blade 2 ups the ante on action- we see Blade kick ass three times and it's seems to miss out on the originals self conscious sense of coolness). The original had a really frenetic pace and a hero in Blade who was too cool for school but was also fairly angst driven. In this he spends half the time insulting the blood pack and investigating fancy gadgets and not nearly enough time getting down to business.

The truth is Blade was just a few steps behind the Matrix (in terms of the modernisation of it's fight sequences which actually came out before the Matrix). BLADE 2 looks and feels remarkably similar to a cross between Alien Resurrection (right down to the appearance of Ron Perlman who plays a very> similar character in both) and an episode of the A Team (if it ever featured vampires).

Admittedly the effects of the Reapers are excellent (but are severely underused) as is the creative spin on the CGI driven fight sequences (these are quite remarkable in never-before-seen ways, but are also severely underused). Most shocking of all though is that most critics seem to think it's an improvement over the original!! That's like saying the PHANTOM MENACE is the best Star Wars ever......it simply is BS.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Animalympics (1980)
I LIKE THE LIZARD!
29 January 2003
I LIKE THE LIZARD IN THIS ONE! He looks so real, like he Came to normal (or something like that). The music is so nice! everything! it looks so believe, like you believe it, or something (like this one). I recommending it? YES!!!!!! GO TO WATCH!! YOU WON'T DISSAPOINTING!!!!
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Futurama (1999–2013)
cancelled due to originality
12 November 2002
Futurama, in many ways, started off quite like The Simpsons season 1. Great, refreshing, a bit different. It wasn't until season 2 though that the show found it's own niche, and brand of humour. Apart from a few exceptions, the show really wasn't that different from sci fi satires such as Mel Brooks' Spaceballs (obviousley an influence). If the show had continued in this vein, it would have quickly become tiresome with its brand of conventional humour.

I saw the first season, thought it was pretty good (but saw room for improvement), then something happened. For a while I hadn't seen the second season until it appeared on British terrestrial TV, then it just hit me; the show had finally adapted to a very unique sense of humour that would have people like myself laughing in shock at the genius of it all, and others, whose sense of humour is more conventional, scratching their heads in confusion. At last, I thought, somebody out there appreciates and shares my own sense of humour. Wittiness, (ironic) chauvenism, political and social satire combined with subtle surrealism, which manages to avoid the repetition of Family Guy (the show which it bares the most resemblance to).

I can only presume that this is precisley why the show is being cancelled after the even more drop dead genius sense of humour of the third season. More surreal than ever, it will undoubtely even influence many feature film comedies in the foreseable future. It's also a damn sight better than watching the extremely poor recent series of the Simpsons, which resembles more than anything a half assed attempt to condense a hollywood feature film in the space of about 22 mins. Now THAT should have been cancelled a long time ago.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Pi (1998)
IMPRESSIVE DEBUT
26 October 2002
The first film I saw of Aronofsky's was Requiem For a Dream, which I thought in all honesty was crap. It didn't explore anything new about drug addiction and it seemed as though they set out to make the most down beat film ever made (they succeeded). Pi, however, is far better. The look of the film, shot in grainy black and white, is very reminiscent of the brilliant and overlooked Tetsuo (an asian film).

It starts of as an exploration of a mad mathmatician (the excellent Sean Gullet) who tells us repeatedly that maths is the pattern of life. He attempts to crack the code, which he is certain contains 216 digits, and beleives that nature can be controlled when applying the code into a stream of accessible numbers and by applying letters.

Then the film kind of turns in on itself and heads (succesfully) into spiritual territory, followed by a very genuine (not to mention dark) decent into madness.

Don't be put off by the fact that the film is about maths, I detest maths as much as the next (imaginative, creative, non technically minded e.t.c) person, but watch it if you like artistic, underground film making made with real flair and imagination. Reccomended for avant garde film buffs everywhere.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Signs (2002)
Jamal James Gabriel Potter reviews 'SIGNS', a motion picture written, produced and directed by M. Night Shymalan, and starring Mel Gibson.
20 October 2002
AHOY THERE! So, you guys wanna know what the holy Jamal thinks of SIGNS, eh? Well, you guys have gotta see this movie. I mean, you really, REALLY gotta see it. Its fantastic. Everyone is great in this movie, man. EVEN THE DOG! My verdict, why- TWO THUMBS UP!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Signs (2002)
GREAT!
20 October 2002
Warning: Spoilers
I don't usually write reviews, but after reading alot of misjudged comments on this film made by pretentious idiots I feel as though I have to defend it in some way as the weaknesses, noted by said idiots, are in fact what make the film better.

******SPOILERS AHEAD!!!*******

First off, the fact that aliens have travelled across the universe and have built UFO's but can't get out of a pantry and are allergic to water. Well, there is a possibility that the aliens may also be primitive, maybe more than humans, but in a different way. They just react badly to the earths natural resources (and were not aware of this), the same way that when astronauts attempted to land on say, Jupiter, but have realised that the gasses on that planet is what humans react badly to. Kind of like unwanted territoriality, they're just not meant to be there, as certain forms of nature, even, may not survive in anothers habitat.

As for the pantry thing, well, we never get to see a UFO so there is a possibility that they're version of a door differs from ours (which it most probably does) so they may have problems opening a wooden door. CYNICS TAKE NOTE! Those who critizised this film for this purpose have missed out on one of the more intelligent portrayals of how a different life form is effected by another life forms natural habitat. YOU FOOLS!

Thirdly, the alien itself, I thought, was kinda freaky. How it was portrayed at the end of the movie is kinda like how we might react if we saw something like that in out front room. It might have been a better idea had we just seen it's reflection on the TV screen, just a blurred image (better for our imaginations).

Fourthly, the twist. I got news for you my freinds, THERE IS NO TWIST! Just cause Shymalan had twists at the end of his last two movies, it doesn't mean that they all have to. At least he's making a departure, avoiding the title 'That director like David Fincher who always has twists at the end of his movies'.

***********END OF SPOILERS.***********

Signs works great as sci-fi, character study, B movie tribute, horror, comedy, you name it. If there is one small flaw, the themes of redemption and faith are a little over simplified, it doesn't really tell you anything you don't already know (unless you are so simple and niave). Other than that it's great as the thinking persons popcorn movie. Maybe not much more, but this in itself is already a compliment, it's a great combination. I RECCOMEND IT!
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
WOW!
15 October 2002
WOW! At some times, and very often, before like the last one, I wonder why this film, the movie, it is called Deep Throat. Now I know why? NOW I KNOW WHY!!! This film, it has everything. From the title (surely one of the best in CINEMATIC HISTORY!) to the beautific chinnese girls, I just keep cuming back, for more, and ever. It has deep throat (like the title, it is suggesting) and sexy things. I reccomend for one, FOR ALL!
20 out of 53 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Straw Dogs (1971)
NOT FOR LIBERALS!
10 October 2002
Straw Dogs is a complexly layered thematic film involving issues such as the true nature of violence, masculinity, territoriality and above all, the price we have to pay for displaying these naked emotions. But it's also an unbearably tense, gripping thriller. David Sumner retreats to rural Cornwall, to get away from street violence in America, only to find out that it exists in every place in the world, only in a different guise. The 'locals' (inhabited, imbred 'scum') pick on David for two simple reasons- he is a foreigner (well, American) and that they fancy his wife (understandable- it's Susan George).

What makes the climax so inevitably true to life is how the locals attitude towards David starts off as mild hostility and gradually degenerates into full blown violence, who look for any excuse to terrorise David, his wife and his home. Much has been said about the rape scene, which, in this complete version is actually far less offensive. But what people don't often realise is that the two characters involved (Amy, David's wife and a scumbag local, Charlie) is that they already have a history together. Of course, rape is still rape and it is very shocking, even by todays standards, but considering that the two characters involved are far from being every day civilised human beings and are pretty screwed up- for them it may just be extremeley violent seduction, as when the second person rapes her-it appears that Amy does not enjoy this at all (this part was originally omitted from the cut version, which makes it's morals more ambiguous).

Amy's feelings for Charlie (who for me isn't the definition of masculinity- more like an image of false macho, bouyish energy) have been so well hidden that the scene of violent seduction almost plays out as cartharsis, for both of them, which brings them rather oddly together (but as stated previousley, both are odd characters) and David is the only truly human person out of the lot (and more masculine than Charlie- he stands his ground when it needs to be stood- rather than resorting in false macho posturing).

The fact that David is referred to as a coward by his wife says everything (does she have stronger feelings for Charlie because he projects himself to be more of a man? Typical!)- but he'll only fight back when its completely necassary, and when he does- well, see it for yourself. If any of this sounds like Fight Club, well, it must've been the equal, if not the surpassed version, released in 1971. Like most controversial films who are willing to make a bold statement, it all rings horribly true, which is probably what garners the respect of every artist, like Sam Peckinpah, to gain their status as a vital artist in their own medium.

A MUST SEE for any film fan who likes their films to be bold rather than woossy, compromised tosh. Just don't show it to thick liberals, they'll never get it.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Blue Velvet (1986)
THIS LOOKS LIKE A NICE FILM
20 September 2002
THIS looks like a nice film. It has white picket fences, nice songs, and a young couple in love. Nice one. But it also have Denise Hooper, with oxygen mask, he fright me, very scare. Very darking. And Izebel Rosnini, she crazy, like mad woman, and she make it dark. I remember seeing this WITH friend, and at the beginning, he say it look like nice film, nice one, but when it come dark, it is too shocking, surprise me (and you too, it is sure). So the MOVIE, it is worth it too see just for this, the juxaposting of light and dark is FANTASTIC! It move me. And you too, it is sure.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Animal Kwackers (1975– )
FREAKSHOW!
15 September 2002
THIS is postive proof that the older generation who grew up in the 70's spent most of their time as children witnessing a freakshow on television. Animal Kwackers, along with Picture Box, was pretty damn scary, more than any Hollywood movie ever could be. The blue Rastafarian lion looks more terryfing than anything Rick Baker could ever achieve. I think this was made by a bunch of LSD taking rock n' rollers who thought it would be funny to scare the pants off of kids expecting a Banana Splits spin off. Perhaps the scariest thing of all, however, is the fact that the music sounds as though it's been written and performed by none other than Paul McCartney. And everyone thought that John Lennon was the weirdest Beatle.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
WHAT IS THAT?
4 September 2002
This film, confusion. I don't understand. What is that? I like the monkeys, in the start of movie, they are nice! When they shout!

I also like the scenes with the lady, and when the baby she is speak to his father, on her birsday, this is nice. And the one with the bone. The music, it frights me! I feel sorry for HALAL, the robot, I don't think it's fair for him to die. But I think he returns in 2001 part 2, so this is good. Bye!
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Good, but not great......
3 September 2002
Only a handful of DVDS/ videos featuring music promos by bands are a must buy. HIStory by Michael Jackson is one of them, another could be Faith No Mores' Video Croissant. Some of them, like Madonna or David Bowie, are worth buying because they're so dated they're hilarious. Massive Attack is a bit of both. I'd say that some of them are a little dated now (Safe From Harm, Daydreaming shot in moody, cliched black and white) but others, like Be Thankful For What You've Got, are great (for obvious reasons when you see it). Teardrop is unforgettable (a baby in a womb sings the song through the whole video) and of course, there's contender for Greatest Song Of All Time- Unfinished Sympathy, featuring Shara Nelson walking through the streets of LA. A surprisingly poignant visual image that actaully enhances the song, when you reach this promo, you'll have it on repeat. Worth it to buy just for this.
13 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Bloodsport (1988)
FIGHT!
22 August 2002
Joen Claud Vandan, in this movie, is truely remarking. He really fight, REAL! And he beat everyone in the way of him. The fighting scene, and many of them, they are surprising, they are shocking. There is too much blood, so much, and to many it will be disgusting. He is cool, when he is looking in the camera and STRIKE A POSE!!! So this is ok. Should it win oscar nomination? OF COURSE!! And the music sound it maybe, but not definitely, could be DOKKEN, a rock band from Germany, so of course, this is cool. A very good American fighting film.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Barfly (1987)
A NICE ONE!
20 August 2002
Perhaps Mickey Rourkes' final great performance, BARFLY sees him as prolific writer/poet Henry Chinaski who rejects conformity in every day society and believes it to be frustratingly fake. As a result, he is a drunk, and prefers to hang out with 'all his friends' in a regular bar by getting into fights whilst the crowd pays the winner (no guesses as to what he spends his money on) until he meets a 'strange girl' at a bar- Wanda (Faye Dunway). The two instantly click- both are intelligent indivuals who reject over regularity in every day passive conversation (Dunaway- 'I hate people, don't you? Rourke- 'I don't mind them, but I seem to feel better when they're not around'). The two form an instant freindship/relationship because of one major primary function that can keep them together- drink. A researcher who picks up talented writers like Henry enters the frame and falls for him due to his prolific writing and offers him a place in 'the good life' with her- but Henry rejects this when she tells him he will 'grow into it' (Rourke- growing is for plants- I hate roots).

BARFLY manages to do something profound that so many films fail to do- in showing us that conformity isn't suited to intelligent, open minded creative individuals like Henry. Rourke excels himself in this role, it's as good a performance but a completely different one from his role in ANGEL HEART (starring in 3 great films, including RUMBLE FISH, really doesn't do him justice- he was the best of his generation in the 80's). He plays Henry not unlike how Jeff Bridges plays Jeffrey 'The Dude' Lebowski in THE BIG LEBOWSKI (I'd be very surprised if the Coens didn't take inspiration from this film, and fans of that particular film should also check this out) as some one who you would consider to be an every day loser but is probably a darn sight more smarter than you believe them to be (as well as having a self serving purpose for the life they have chosen to live). Faye Dunaway, as usual, is uniformly excellent as Henrys lover/drinking partner, managing to convey an aura of sassiness and casual sophistication, and who has also chosen to take this particular path in life for a reason- the same as Henry's. The chemistry between these two leads is astounding, and the script is pitch perfect with dozens of memorable lines (Dunway- 'Whatever happens, don't expect me to fall in love with you', Rourke- 'That's ok, nobody has ever fallen in love with me anyway'). To me at least, Rourke's performance as Henry is the single most likeable character created in any film, and it stays with you long after the film is over. Touching, funny and profound- a minor masterpiece, a 'nice' film, I RECOMMEND IT!
24 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
WHY?
19 August 2002
Why they make this film? Is cheap, and it make you larf more than fright. WHY? The little boy (who is in sixth sense) is not so good for this, and freddy look like janitor in school playground, not like a fright man. Wose of all, NO DOKKEN!!!! They make the song for part 3, best of series, Called Dream Warriors, and they are a Germany rock band. I miss this one.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
nearly good one!!!
19 August 2002
This film, its better than 1 and 2, but not 3, as is missing the good one, the best one, DREAM WARRIORS, a SUNG by DOKKEN, a rock band from Germany. But is better than first two, because it have some nice effects, good real things, like the girl who turn to cockarooch, and the pizza guy. Some times is confusing, like the scene where it happens 3 times, again and again, and you see it. A like the girl who fight for Freddy, this is good, she is strong, and she try to beat him. Is not very scare, but it is nearly, and, ALMOST.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Turk 182 (1985)
So Much laughter!!!!
19 August 2002
This film, to me, has so much larfing I find I am on my knees, like man before, with tears brought down. There is alot of good times, alot of nice ones, tender, emotion, it has too much. Music, like the other 80's films of the 1980's, IT IS the best. Kim Qutro, she is so nice in this film, better than Pretty Woman!!!! VERY ATTRACTION!! I recommned to many one, to all, that this film is TOO good, watch out for the motorcyces!!!!!
1 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Summer Rental (1985)
SUMMER!!!!
19 August 2002
I am noticing now that, in this day, why they are not have films with summer in the name. In those times, 1980's, they are, why I do not know. I think in 80's summer was big celebration, like ONE CRAZY SUMMER and THE SUMMER RENTAL (this one). I miss this. It is innocence. This film remind me of when we have betamax, and we bought (for one night only, A SUMMER RENTAL!!! < stupids joke) we also have it Nightmare On Elms Street, which was very scare and fright me, and this one, nice one, funny one, relaxt my nerves, it help it to calm me. I think it is good film for this, to watch peoples paying with fun, meeting adventures, this is the kind of thing. I like one when they are at the beach, near the mountains, and the fat guy sit on the small guy when he eat chilli. YES YES YES YES GO SEE NOW!!!!!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
INTO THE GROOVE!
19 August 2002
LIKE many others of filmsis from the 1980's, alot of the decoration is in pink. Why? I think 1980's peoples like pink. I remember why I see this film, I love Madona big hit song Get Into The Groove so I want to see where it is in the MOVIE. When I see it, it is in nightclub (this happen in 80's movie alot of it). Roseanne Courgette is too good, and Madona, who have the pseudonomey of Susan, is also too good (but she is still herself), like the scene when she is in bathroom and she put the hand dryer on hair. In this time of the filmsis this was maybe rebellension, maybe wrong, but now many do it and I think for me this is the charm of the film, what is rebellension and how now is normal. Madona is like punk rocker, bad girl, and I think this is funny :-).
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Lynch's masterpiece
13 August 2002
Who would have thought that a true autuer like David Lynch, creator of a truelly unique concept and style in cinema, creator of such classics as the Elephant Man, Blue Velvet and the underated Twin Peaks Fire Walk With Me (as well as the ground breaking TV series) would make his best film after nearly 30 years and 8 films and a long running TV series? Mind you, it took Hitchcock a while before he made Psycho (he made many great films before that), so I guess its possible.

Mulholland Drive comprises footage Lynch shot for an intended TV series, but the producers backed out, fearing the material would'nt be a success (obviousley, they forgot all about Twin Peaks and how successful that was) and then sent it to another production company, who loved what he shot and gave him some extra money to shoot more footage and make a complete feature film. Perhaps because of this, the film breaks new ground and is unlike anything you have ever seen - to the best of my knowledge, this has never been conceived before in film history (when a TV director shoots footage which gets rejected by the TV companys, the footage is dispenced with, but in Lynch's case, who is simply too much of a respected director, its bound to turn up some where).

The first 2 thirds of the film, the pilot, rely heavily on perfect script writing craft- note that there are at least 5 classic scenes during this part, and the last third, shot seperatley, contains pure Lynchian, nightmarish imagery, and attempts to resolve everything in the first 2 thirds during this process. So the film is obviousley going to be unique because of this, because as stated, it is doubtful that it's ever been done before (even if it was an accident).

What makes this Lynch's best film, and to me, one of the greatest films of all time and a classic by any definition, is just how effortlessly paced the film is. As we all know pilots for TV series have to be tightly written and constructed to maintain a viewers intrest (to make an impression) - and the way the film turns in on itself at the end is just amazing. There is never a dull moment, and after 10 years of properly eating, sleeping and breathing films I can honestly say I have never been so captivated.

As for the film making sense, all great works of art aren't really supposed to. This film is more like a classic song than a movie, it becomes increasingly addictive and life enhancing the more you indulge in its beauty. This film has the perfect combination of basic human emotions- humour, glamour, love, deception, fear, guilt and above all, confusion- and is compressed into a perfect dreamscape (as you feel these emotions when watching it, you don't just see it). At the end, you feel exhausted and completely different to how you felt before, because if you see it by yourself in the dark, and are captivated, you feel these emotions during it's 2 and a half hours which most people only feel during a day, even a week. Words cannot do this film justice, if your open minded and have respect for Lynch, you'll realise just how special this film really is.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
SO CUTE!!!!
8 August 2002
The kids in this films are so cute, I want to bite it! This movie is about the kidsis on the stickers, the garbage pales, who spend time having fun, having troubles, meeting adventures, and to fell in love. Its not as good as the stickers and the bubblegum, because it's a movie, but is still one of the greatest, and is made to be as good as it can. Every little puppet should win something. A nice one.
1 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Tuff Turf (1985)
VERY TOUGH!!!!
8 August 2002
This movie is a very hard one, very rough. Is about the rules of playing in grounds, to fell in love with good person, and not with bad one. Very tough film! James Spanner is the star, the man who fell in love with wrong girl, and want to get out of it. The bully is a not so famous guy, but he is good for the part, still. It should win a oscar nomsination for the parts, for the people who play them, because they are so rough. And great soundtrack, TOO!!!
6 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Incredible Hulk: Married (1978)
Season 2, Episode 1
SPECIAL!!!!
8 August 2002
The incredible hulk, when he turns green, really used to fright me when young, and when he turn, I RUN!!! Very scare. But in this one, he has love affair with a young lady, nice one, and is very touchy, surprise me. Is not too bad, not as scare as other series, because of love affair, it make it touchy, but when he turns green, I STILL!! RUN!!!
6 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed