Change Your Image
Prestige_Never_Pride
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Disaster Movie (2008)
What a disaster....
Wow. "Disaster Movie", huh? Fitting title, plus they had a disaster script to match.
Way to go. You've officially turned cinema into a spectator's sport. Pathetic, and people actually go to see garbage like this! What is the future of cinema coming to? Please, do yourself a favor and STAY AWAY, FAR AWAY. It's for your own good, trust me. Even I could have done better than this, and I don't even know how to direct. But apparently, neither did these people. I wouldn't even give this--thing--the honor of calling it a movie. I'll stick with 'thing'.
1/10. If I could give a rating less than 0, I would. Maybe -10. Please, stick to the classics, like the Monty Python movies. THOSE are actually funny! Maybe the directors and writers of this film should open their eyes and stop writing things like this. Disgusting.
Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)
Kill Bill...and kill him good!
What a spectacular, dazzling piece of cinema genius! I had known about this film for years, and I regret that I waited so long to watch it! One of the first of its kind, taking samurai flicks, adding a hint of secret agent assassin into the mix, clash cultures between America and Japan, famous director Quentin Tarantino (Pulp Fiction), and this is the result.
The story revolves around a woman who is referred to as "The Bride" (her real name is not revealed in this movie) because the lethal hit-man (and hit-women) league known as "The Deadly Viper Assassination Squad" killed the pregnant former-assassin at her own wedding, led by Bill: the insane, yet mysterious leader of the Squad, which The Bride was once a part of. Instead of killing her like they thought, she instead went into a coma, not reemerging until 4 years later, when she vows for revenge for her and her unborn child, which she assumed had died.
So, The Bride makes her way down (or up, if you like) her hit-list, starting with the gorgeous yet deadly O-Ren Ishii (played by the dazzling Lucy Liu): a Japanese-American who took down almost the entire Yakuza gang in her ultimate quest for power. Slowly, she works way up the list, which continues in Kill Bill Volume 2, until the final showdown with her ex-boss and former lover, Bill.
The cast was stunning. Only Uma Thurman could've played the beautiful but deadly hit-woman who takes it upon herself to brutally slaughter every last one of her betrayers. Lucy Liu was fantastic. Beautiful, graceful, and exceptionally frightening in terms of swords. She pulled off the Japanese Goddess of Swords very well. Vivica A. Fox, who we first see as "Copperhead" (her real name was Vernita), isn't seen very much overall, but the way in which she is seen is exceptionally good. She has a great sense of humor and intelligence, and is the queen of surprises (see the kitchen scene for clarification).
The plot and story were divine. Only Quentin Tarantino, master of Pulp Fiction, could've crafted this wacky, martial-arts-gone-samurai movie, adding tributes to old slasher films, Japanese anime, and spy movies. I was so disappointed when it ended, I wanted it to keep going on, but I suppose that's what Volume 2 is for.
This movie certainly isn't for all audiences, as one person noted in their review. It is exceptionally bloody and gory, though it is often exaggerated so it really isn't that disgusting, and very graphically violent. The name suggests some type of gratuitous something or other, so it obviously isn't a film you would show to your kids. But if you love samurai movies, or any other films in general, then this is certainly one you don't want to miss. I can't wait to see Volume 2, and I hope Bill gets just what he deserves.
9/10, an instant classic!
Ash Wednesday (2002)
Well....
OK, it wasn't the best drama I've ever seen. But, it wasn't complete torture. I won't waste time discussing the plot, as it was relatively easy to follow. Edward Burns directed, wrote, and starred in this movie. What a chore. I give him points for his acting and for his incredible ability to multi-task, but he loses points for the repetition of the story. One user said that Burns's character spent most of the movie walking around NYC talking to people, and they were quite right. The movie took nearly 30 minutes to actually become "clear", and even then it was still vague.
Elijah Wood is my favorite actor, and he is a very talented one. However, he seems quite out of place here. Forgive me, Elijah. I mean no disrespect to him, but maybe Burns should have looked for someone slightly older. I can see why he wanted Wood, as Wood has an inner innocence about him, but he seemed as if his character were from a totally different family. Not his fault, I'm sure. And for those of you who keep saying that Wood plays the same character roles in all of his movies, I have one movie for you: Sin City. I rest my case. Perhaps Burns's should have cast a 25-year-old instead of a 20-year-old. (Yes, Wood was 20 when this movie was shot, not 17, as he appears.)
The ending was a total letdown. It was a very fatalistic approach, but it made the entire movie pointless! How could you go for 2 hours trying to establish that Burns's character has to save Wood's, and then just--bang!--take out your main character? It just doesn't work. I remember sitting there and going, "What? That's it?!" A good idea, but not for an ending to a movie like this.
I would like to see better movies from Burns in the future, as he is not a bad writer/actor/director, but maybe not another movie like this. He should stop with Mob movies. And the other movies I have starring Elijah Wood are much better ones (except Day Zero). My apologies.
6/10, for some choice moments. If you look, you may be able to pick them out.
Silent Hill (2006)
Blood-chilling
A modern twist on zombie films and suspense movies as well as its video game predecessor, Silent Hill is truly a disturbing movie, to put it simply. It seems more like a suspenseful ghost story instead of a flat-out horror film, but overall, it does what it set out to accomplish: to leave the viewer chilled to the bone and mortified.
The special effects were quite awe-inspiring, and were very true and accurate to the classic Konami video game style. During the night scenes, I felt as if I were within the video game itself. The mutated creatures were nothing short of disturbing. They were twisted, yet they retained designs and shapes that could have been (and were) human, adding a touch of reality to them, which movies (or video games) of this type must have if they're going to be convincing.
The set design as well was very striking. I enjoyed the way Silent Hill was portrayed as a quaint, innocent little town, but also as a ruined, blackened extension of hell. In the movie (and game), depending on the time of day, Silent Hill switched between the two appearances, but created a sense of dread in either state. I'm not sure whether much of the sets were digital or not, but they were very creepy either way.
Casting was very good, though I'm not sure what Sean Bean (who I like as an actor) was doing in this. I particularly liked the infamous, slimy, sickening leader of Silent Hill's "faith", which is best defined as a sick cult. That is perhaps what made the movie the most disturbing: how evil and disgusting this cult way of religion was, in how they take "purification" into their own hands. It was almost nauseating to watch, more than all of the blood and gore that splattered across the screen.
Now, why this film didn't get an 8 from me is because of the storyline. It isn't a bad storyline, but I spotted several gaping holes in the plot, such as when Alessa explains her story to Rose. She didn't say how Sharon tied into it at all, leaving non-gamers to guess. All they had to go on was the resemblance between Sharon and Alessa, which isn't enough to fill in the gap. Not everyone played the video game, unfortunately. Also, the ending is definitely confusing on all fronts. I'm not suggesting it be a happier ending (it's a "horror" movie!), but it definitely needed something that wasn't there for non-gamers. Clarification would have been nice, yet I am understand that the entire thing is supposed to be Alessa's doing, but clarification would have helped.
This is certainly NOT a film for kids, mainly because of the frightening nature of the entire story. There are several very graphic scenes as well, including one where a Silent survivor gets her entire skin ripped off and is left to bleed, and one where a police officer slowly gets burned alive. Language is not so much an issue in this film. Definitely not one to show to the kids, but certainly a good midnight ghost story.
7/10, a watchable movie overall, despite its confusing ending and sometimes gaping plot. The video game is amazing, and definitely something to check out.
Sin City (2005)
"Walk down the right back alley in Sin City, and you can find anything."
As I have previously stated, I am a comic book fan, and one of few girls to be so. I love blood, and violence, and gore, and fighting, and all that other stuff. I read by someone who commented on this movie that it was sexist against females, and the only people who could possibly enjoy this movie were males. To that, I say to you: I am a GIRL, and I enjoyed this movie.
Yes, there will be blood. Is that supposed to shock you? It shouldn't. Yes, there is violence. The title suggests that and more. But if you think to take a look at the comic book, the book has that too.You're not required to like it, or watch it. If you don't like violence, or blood, or gore, go watching something else. I rest my case.
I LOVED this movie. What a stunning display of cinematography! First of all, I love the stylized representation of the film in general. You feel as if you had actually been sucked into the comic book. I also love how Robert Rodriguez, who I am a fan of, chose to highlight certain colors to bring out the feel of the movie, such as red, blue and yellow. I also liked the way in which the movies were shot. It may surprise some, or perhaps not, to know that this entire movie is one of the first to be shot almost entirely on green screen with a digital film screening system. The backgrounds, the city...all digital. What an achievement. And for those who bought the Extended Version of this movie like I did, you can view the entire movie in green screen (fast-foward motion, by the way) to see how they achieved certain things in principal photography. Get the Extended Version, you won't be sorry. I wasn't. Yes, it was very violent. But so was Saw, and people enjoyed that. 90% of movies today have some amount of violence in them. But the violence, however overdone it may appear, is inevitable if you were to be shooting a comic book such as Sin City. The same amount of violence is present in the comic book as well. Check if you don't believe me. Yes, there was nudity. Perhaps that is where many girls got up and left the theater, or called it "sexist". As to me, I just sort of looked the other way and said to my boyfriend: "Those poor girls.They'll have all the perverted guys knowing them forever now." Newsflash to the same people who called this sexist and pornographic:
1. It is a comic book. What do you expect?
2. It is an R-rated movie. Of course there will be some risqué scenes it!
3. Pornography isn't shown in public movie theaters.
Just like the comic book, this movie has (4) stories:
1. "The Customer is Always Right": A hit-man (Josh Hartnett) is dispatched to kill a broad (Marley Shelton) who fears that she is in danger from someone else.
2. "The Hard Goodbye": A tough-guy (Mickey Rourke) wakes up to discover that the seductive, gorgeous woman he happened to pick up that night (Jamie King) has been silently murdered by a stealthy, cannibalistic serial killer (Elijah Wood), and tries to work his way down to the truth of it all.
3. "The Big Fat Kill": A barmaid (Brittany Murphy) runs into trouble with an ex (Benicio del Toro), and her new boyfriend (Clive Owen) helps prostitute Gail (Rosario Dawson) and fellow prostitutes fight mob-men in the alleyways of Sin City.
4. "That Yellow Bastard": Determined ex-cop (Bruce Willis) relives how he met the love of his life (Jessica Alba) by saving her from a rapist, and works hard to save her once again from a mutated, sadistic killer (Nick Stahl).
*: There is a minor scene at the end of the movie that was added specifically for the movie, featuring one traitorous (see "The Big Fat Kill" story) prostitute (Alexis Bledel) and the fate that befalls her from a certain hit-man (Josh Hartnett).
The cast that made up these stories were exceptional. What really took me by surprise was seeing Mickey Rourke as the perfect incarnation of Marv. Who knew Rourke could box and act? I also was really amazed by the fierceness and kick-ass fighting of the women in "The Big Fat Kill". That's right, the WOMEN were the best ass-kickers in the whole movie. Even the guys will agree. Still think this movie is a sexist film? This movie is certainly not a family film, but for those who can appreciate it, it's one hell of a ride.
9/10 stolen trench-coats. Take a tour of Sin City.
The Spirit (2008)
"My city screams."
I just saw this movie yesterday. Please note that before I went, as a Frank Miller comic book fan, I watched Sin City all the way through. Don't get me wrong, I'm a faithful comic book devotee and one of the few girls to be so, but I believe that this movie, while not bad (in the typical sense of the word), it generally could have used more.
It is clear that this movie was meant to be similar to Frank Miller's Sin City (directed by Robert Rodriguez), and is stylized the same way, by using a greyscale color scheme, and highlighting red, yellow, and some shades of blue. But that is where the similarities between the two end. Sin City had a remarkable cast (no favoritism here) of 10 or so very accomplished actors. Sin City's story was also well-written, well-adapted, and very faithful to the comic books. The Spirit's plot ran a little thin, and left a lot to be desired. The hero felt like both a goofball and a superhero at the same time, which was a little unusual after watching Bruce Willis and Mickey Rourke's headstrong determination in Sin City. The Spirit's hero may seem a little more everyday, but really makes you wonder: "Why? Look at Hartigan, Marv, or Dwight. Why not like them?"
The casting of this movie was very interesting. As this was NOT Sin City,and NOT directed by Robert Rodriguez, I did NOT bother to look for any "Rodriguez Typical Cast" members (think Josh Hartnett, among others. No complaints about him, however, as he is a good actor). But I do have this to say: Samuel L. Jackson as The Octopus. Wow. As great an actor as he is, and he really wasn't bad in this movie, but was this really his role? He didn't seem like a very serious villain, though maybe that is the fault of the writing and not his. I generally liked his humor in character, but it seemed as if he were never serious about anything. Are villains, besides The Joker, really like that? (Rhetorical Question)
Overall, loved-hated this movie. As a comic book fan, I loved the stylized approach that Mr. Miller took to this one just like in Sin City. The plot wasn't bad, but needed further explanation to the audience (as well as several things added or omitted). It wasn't a bad movie. Now, I hated it on the grounds that it was a little repetitive, didn't allow much time to absorb information, and the lack of seriousness of its villains. I couldn't take them seriously, unlike in Sin City, where the bad guys were sick and twisted. The plot was also somewhat hazy, though not too bad, as I mentioned already.
Overall, if you wish to see this movie, I would recommend renting it after its release on DVD. It really wasn't worth the $7 I paid to get in. But, I don't think you'll find it repulsive if you're looking for something to do on a Friday night. If you want something really mind-blowing, go watch Sin City. It is one of the best action movies there is. You'll see where (and from whom) Frank Miller took his stylized point of view.
7/10 red neckties. Nice try, guys, but there is only one Sin City.
Meet the Spartans (2008)
Ridiculous
Don't misunderstand me. I'm a fan of satire, and parodies alike. But this was absolutely RIDICULOUS. I love parodies and comedy, but this just about made a mockery of all of it. Parody movies rarely have a definite plot, but this one didn't even have an INdefinite one. Please, don't waste your money.
What really amazed me about the movie was that all the "censored" bits of nudity didn't get the film a well-deserved R-rating. I don't know who was in charge, but apparently someone missed something. Absolute rubbish.
1/10, and I don't even have a film standard to accompany this load. If you want to see a better satire movie, go and watch Robin Hood: Men in Tights. It's MUCH better than this.
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)
"I'd forgotten how I used to feel about you..."
I am not being biased (my forte lies in sci-fi, remember?) when I say that this is truly one of the sweetest and most powerful romantic comedies ever made, probably second to Titanic. It was romantic without being sappy (as I've said before will kill a movie) and believable without being vague (second time through, if you're confused). It's a traditional romantic comedy with a science twist. Overall, very nice.
Jim Carrey's casting was no surprise to me. Why wouldn't you cast the guy who can be serious and humorous in the same sitting (if you had an answer as to why not, I ignored you)? He's truly an exceptional actor who can pull off practically any role that he's given, and that includes pulling off some pretty melodramatic lines with style. Credit be to you, Mr. Carrey.
Kate Winslet is also very exceptional, known for her roles in beautifully romantic movies (think Titanic). But instead of playing the proper, upright Rose again, she's taken on Clementine: a snappy, yet surprisingly sweet, outgoing (young?) woman. And she pulled it off with brilliantly-colored hair. You always felt pity, admiration , and resent toward Clementine all at once (if that makes any sense to anyone), because of the impulsive nature of the character. Who better to play Clementine than Kate?
The supporting cast all as one were exceptional (again, no bias here). Kirsten Dunst took me by surprise as Mary: the responsible, yet irresponsible, young receptionist and Lacuna technician. Quite a different step from her Bring It On role, yet she does it in stride. Elijah Wood was just as convincing playing Patrick: another irresponsible Lacuna technician, who uses Carrey's character, Joel's, memories of Clementine to seduce her. Patrick's intentions were nice, but he went about it the wrong way, and his love affair (like everyone else's in the movie, except a special case) fell apart. Mark Ruffalo, who I hadn't seen anywhere up until now (was he in any other movies besides Eternal?) played Stan: the only responsible technician, and prolific lover (of a certain girl). Whether this was Mark's first movie or not, points go to him, and all of the supporting cast as well.
Credit also to the writers and directors, without whom this film would not have been possible. If you haven't seen the movie, please do. You won't be wasting any money.
9/10 hair color changes. And if you've seen this movie, there were quite a few of them. :)
The Blair Witch Project (1999)
Very Eerie, But Not Quite a Classic
This movie is overall very interesting. It would certainly fall into the horror genre, of course, but this is a different kind of horror movie.
The story follows several college kids into Maryland's Black Hills Forest as they try to make a documentary about a Maryland witchcraft legend. However, the students "go missing", and their film footage is found a year later. Not a bad story line.
The characters were very believable, considering that playing a movie like a true story isn't the easiest thing to do. The style of filming was, I think, what made the movie the most enjoyable. It was shot in the style of amateur-film-making, in that the quality was quite as sharp as "real" movies, and that the camera is bumped and shaken quite a bit. These factors made the story a little more believable, as horror movie plot lines are either believable or fake: there is no inbetween. I also love the absence of music throughout the movie, which added to the thrill. So, good characters, good concept, good style. That's what I can say about the movie that is positive.
Now, what I can say about the movie that isn't so positive is the story in general (not to be confused with the plot line). It was very hard to follow overall. Ideas and characteristics that should have been explained better were very vague, and things that should have been clear were confusing. It wasn't a STRAIGHT ride all the way through the movie (movies rarely are), but it throws you off track instead. Basically, the beginning was good and well-defined, the middle was confusing and vague.
The ending was about the best part of the movie. The instant the camera fell on that old, deserted, run-down house in the middle of the woods was definitely the high point. Then, it was an eerie, chilling roller- coaster ride to the very end, when Heather screams "Josh!", the camera falls to the ground, and all is silent. One really interesting thing about the plot is that you know the students died, but you don't know what killed them (yet it is, so people say, understood). It keeps viewers formulating their own ideas about what happened there, but it also leaves many very confused.
Overall, good movie, good characters, good concept, but not too good of a buildup. Nice try, though. I would say that this is a movie for fans of "traditional" horror, suspense movies, and the supernatural. Or, if you happen to be bored on Halloween afternoon and are waiting for the "slaughter" movies to begin. Overall, not a bad horror film.
7/10 bloody handprints. And if you happen to look at the house closely, there was a lot more than 10.
The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975)
"Let's do The Time Warp again!"
When I think of musicals, I immediately think of 'Grease': a romantic, progressive, light-hearted comedy that explains itself in one screening. Not that 'Grease' isn't bad, however. But, this film definitely redefines the "musical" category!
Tim Curry was sensational! How could you not give credit to such a hilarious (and certainly brave) actor like him? His performance was so sweet and funny that it's impossible not to like him, despite his character's dirty and sensual antics :) His transvestite performance was truly memorable. Susan Sarandon, who in my opinion isn't a bad actress, performed her role admirably as well. What really sold the movie, and made it truly enjoyable however, were Patricia Quinn and Richard O'Brien (forgive my spelling). Who better to play the crazy yet creepy Riff-Raff than the Rocky Horror creator himself! A wonderful touch, Mr. O'Brien! Patricia Quinn was an awesome Magenta, so creepy, yet sensational and wacky. She portrayed every kind of emotion imaginable for her character, from flirty to disgusted, and annoyed to outgoing. Those two have to be my favorite characters!
The music was great! I was singing "The Time Warp" for seven days afterward! It's one of the only musical numbers that actually teaches you the dance while you enjoy it (believe me, being in a musical is not as easy as it looks)! The Transylvanians were awesome! "Hot Patootie" (sung by the cool Meatloaf) was sweet and sexy, and a great song to sing to!
I will definitely go to future midnight screenings. Though its also good to own this musical masterpiece on DVD, as a previous member noted the rowdiness of audiences at midnight screenings. Mr. O'Brien, you have truly changed musicals forever! For those of you who HAVEN'T seen this movie yet:
"Come up to the lab, and see what's on the slab."
8/10 sweet transvestites! We WILL return to sweet Transylvania.
The Faculty (1998)
"They're here! The faculty..."
I'm not one for aliens taking over the Earth. My forte is Sci-Fi, but aliens never seemed all that believable when portrayed in movies. This one is, of course, an exception.
Robert Rodriguez salutes classic horror movies, throws sci-fi in the mix, and adds a touch of teen drama to it all. Together, you get "The Faculty".
Casting was exceptional. Not one actor in this movie was bad. I speak the truth. I liked it that Mr. Rodriguez used relatively young actors to portray
the teens in this movie. Each actor embraced their role, and became it. Even the adult cast was sensational! My only complaint (may others forgive me for saying it) was that Usher's role was played up quite a bit, despite the fact that his role is a little more than a cameo. Forgive me for saying so, Mr. Raymond. Credit must be given to Mr. Hartnett, Mr. Hatosy, Mr. Wood, Miss DuVall, Miss Harris, Miss Brewster, and the many other cast members who really made this film believable.
The alien portrayals were excellent! They were far from what was to be expected from a '90s film. Credit to the design team and director for that. The teen drama (and the imagery of typical high school life) were dead-on. Overall, this film is definitely one for the sci-fi/horror collection.
8/10 alien parasites. Great work, Mr. Rodriguez!
PARENTS NOTE: This movie is rated R. It contains frightening images, some drug use, gore/blood, strong language, and scenes of nudity. Discretion is advised if allowing your young children to see it.
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
"The crownless again shall be king..."
I confess to say that I did not see the first two LOTR films in theaters. The fact of the matter was that my sister was 6 years old and scared easily, so my father wouldn't take her. So, my father went on his own to see them. I did, however get to see Return of the King in theaters. I was entranced. I was 12 years old at the time, and I didn't understand the story. But I was captivated. When Pippin sang his song, I was in tears. At the very end, I was sobbing. The sense of beauty it had...I couldn't even describe it. So, I watched the first two movies respectively with my father. And now I was within Middle-Earth. I read the books the same month that I saw all three films. Simultaneously, in fact. That is my admiration story.
What can I say about this movie that won't fill a novel? Where do I start? I suppose with Peter Jackson. I was so struck to learn how these beautiful works of art, Tolkien's magnum opus, inspired him to want to take on such a daunting yet gratifying task. He saw more in those books than I had read from them, and I'm glad that a dedicated fan brought these jewels to screen. Thank you, Mr. Jackson! The cast? Absolutely beautiful. Their friendship is so apparent, so close, not faked as you see in many other movies. Not one actor in those three films were bad. Yes, you heard me. So those of you who said that the casting was terrible, let me say to you: "Not all those who wander are lost."
Elijah Wood, who is a very gifted and bright young man, has such an incredible beauty (inside and out) to portray such a conflicted and fatalistic character. His own striking idealism, innocence, and understanding was such that you fell in love with Frodo at first sight, but not to the point where he seemed weak. Elijah is Frodo incarnate, and anyone else would have ruined the role.
Sean Astin, another very bright young man, shows his warm wisdom as Samwise, as well as a courage the likes of which I have never seen before in any performance. He had such an aura of honesty and kindliness that it shone like a light on screen. His friendship with Frodo (Elijah respectively) is so obvious and true on-screen, and not a sappy, cheesy "Hollywood" special. Friendships that are too sappy (and fake) will kill a movie, but this one was so obviously real and strong that it touched we fans in such a deep way (for those who could appreciate it).
I can't say everything I would like to about these movies. The marriage of deep friendship, dedication, and beautiful, realistic special effects creates an entrancing epic that will be hard to rival by any movie. Those who negatively rated these movies, did you actually pay any attention to the screen as you watched the movie? For those who have never seen these movies, please, do. The deep bonds shared by these actors, all of them, are so beautifully shown, and the cast clearly underwent a lot of stress (For those who own the Extended Versions of these movies, you might hear some horror stories from Astin, Wood, Mortensen, Serkis, and more, if you listen to the documentaries/commentaries), but it is clear that they love their roles, and it shines through in their voices, their faces, and especially their acting.
I neglected to mention the efforts of the crew. Without them, over 5,000 people strong, these movies would not have been possible. They created Middle Earth in such way that it seemed possible to be a shadow of our past: a past world on Earth that faded away long before our time. Thanks be to them.
Yes, there are differences from the books. There always are, in any adaptation. I saw that some people commented about how weak a character they thought Frodo seemed compared to the book, because several moments in which he looks Evil in the face were shortened/changed in the film version. That isn't true. Not at all. True heroism means not only defending others, but accepting aid from others. True heroism means that one accepts that they can't do everything alone, and accepts the aid of those willing to give it. THAT is true heroism. Frodo shows that in every light, even if it isn't always obvious. You can see with much more than your eyes...
Overall, if these were the last movies I thought worthwhile enough to watch (I hope cinema doesn't become that bad), it would be fine by me. Thanks to all of the people who brought this to us, the LOTR fans. To my fellow fans, I say: "May it be a light for you in dark places, when all other lights go out."
10/10, and then some.