Reviews

51 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
Patience people, patience...
21 December 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I am writing this review mainly to refute those venomous posters on IMDB that displayed frustration with the movie's lack of clarity and dismissive storyline. Let me start by saying that The Force Awakens was less of a sequel and more of a second act in a larger story. I too was hoping for more answers after the enticing seventh episode (The Force Awakens) and was initially mildly disappointed when I left the theater with more questions than clarity. After digesting the movie for a couple days, I have come to the conclusion that we might just have to wait another couple years to learn more about some of the more mysterious characters and plot-points. No, we didn't learn a darn thing about Snoke, but that doesn't mean we won't in the final installment. No, the Knights of Ren were absent, but I also believe this will come to fruition. Taking on the Star Wars brand comes with tremendous responsibility, and Disney has done a remarkable job as chief caretaker since taking over in 2014. Much of the negativity from hardcore fanboys comes from an emotional perspective, and I can sympathize with that. However, it's important to trust the process. Things will flesh out and we will gain a better understanding of TFA after the Eposide 9 comes out in December of 2020. Think of it this way: You can't fully enjoy a piece of art until the entire picture has been painted. It's pretty much that simple. Now, as a movie, TFA was technically flawless. The visuals, transitions, battle/fight scenes and imagery were excellent. The acting was top-notch and the sound was, as always, inspiring and realistic. I was a little disappointed with Luke's character, and the milking scene was a little ridiculous, but I don't think he was portrayed as terribly as many people are saying. The movie dragged on a bit as well. Three different times I thought it was going to fade to black and roll credits only to have another climatic 10-minute scene. I'm not saying I'm upset with his, merely making an observation. I mean, the more Star Wars, the better, right? My biggest struggle as a fan is the fact that Luke and Han are now gone and Leia is on her way out as well. The Skywalker story has run its course and the ever-nostalgic Star Wars fans have to re-adjust and embrace the new generations of characters. It's going to take some time, but we'll get there.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Boyhood (I) (2014)
5/10
Ugh...
29 May 2015
Boyhood is a meandering film with utterly terrible acting. In fact, it (the acting) was so bad I felt like I was watching a low-grade adult film half the time. The ironic part was that when the main characters were young they felt more believable. After awhile, I found myself asking: "What am I watching? What is this?"

The gimmick alone gives this movie a 5, but actual plot, casting and pace are horrible, cliché and downright boring. I was disappointed with a film that paid so much attention to things like using the same actors over a 12-year span would completely ignore casting. The two central characters look NOTHING alike. They honestly try to make you believe they are biological siblings despite having completely different skin-tones, hair color and basic physical features. You will look at them and say: What? These two had a blonde-haired, blue- eyed mom and an Ethan Hawke dad?

The main character mumbles for half the movie and is actually quite depressing. How he scores a gorgeous girlfriend for a couple segments is beyond me...

Watch once, but that's all you'll need.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Way too sappy
26 April 2014
This movie didn't take long to get sappy and cheesy. It begins with a montage of Billy Chappel's (Kevin Cosner) life leading up to his final pitching performance in New York against the Yankees. Before the game, he finds out that the Tigers' beloved owner is selling the team and his girlfriend is moving to London. "There's a job there Billy. A good job. An editor's position." It gets worse. Before taking the field, he takes a whiff of his old glove and there it is, his first flashback to his childhood; playing ball in the back yard. As he's warming up in the bullpen before the game, his manager wants to start a young catcher, but Billy insists that his buddy Gus start instead. "If Gus doesn't play, I don't pitch." OK then. As the game rolls along, he flashes back to his romance with Kelly Preston and everything is just dandy. He's got a perfect game until, wait, what? The young prospect he met before the game that used to be his bat-boy comes to the plate... Only redeeming factor is the actual baseball action. Looks real enough and it was filmed in Yankee Stadium.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Shortest 3-hour film ever
7 April 2014
This was an incredibly riveting movie. It was something like three hours long, but never seemed to drag on. The major criticism of this film is it's graphic vulgarity. Quite simply, it's crazy, raunchy and over-the- top. But if you come in preparing your eyes for total and utter craziness, it's not so bad.

Beyond all the constant drugs and sex, is a complex main character (Jordan Belford played by Leo) with as many flaws as talents. In the end, it was his innate ability to motivate and sell that brought him to the top, but his demons that brought him down. Isn't this true for anyone? We all have our talents, but we all have our struggles. And no matter how much money and power you have, you can be brought down by your weaknesses. In Belford's case, it was drug-abuse and confused moral compass that ultimately crumbled his empire.

From what I understand, much of what happened in The Wolf of Wall Street stays true to his memoir of the same title. However, it can be debated how much of the details in the memoir actually happened considering how much he was under the influence of powerful drugs during his "peak" years. What cannot be debated is the millions and millions of dollars he and his company, Stratton and Oakmont, swindled form the pockets of naive investors. This story line alone keeps the movie steering forward with details of drugs and sex splashed in mainly for entertainment.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Wow
10 November 2013
It's been awhile since I have contributed to this site, but after watching the last 45 minutes of Trouble With the Curve, I felt compelled to log on and tell the world about this movie, because that's what it is; a movie. This is not a film. It is a Disney flick all the way. I thought the beginning was OK and the baseball seemed semi-realistic. But when the final stanza rolled around, it became unrealistic, predictable and sappy. Perhaps part of my dislike for this movie comes from the fact that I know a thing or two about the ins and outs of scouting professional sports, but even an amateur would be able to tell the ending of Trouble With the Curve was unrealistic and clunky. Of course everything turned out happy and the "bad guys" get fired or fail miserably. Do yourself a favor, skip this movie, especially if you're a baseball fan. You'll become annoyed with the end and bored with the middle.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Liked it, but don't love it. Humor is graphic and main character is weak
3 August 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I've tried really hard to "love" Orange is the New Black(ONB), but I just can't. Before I get too far, it should be noted that I haven't gotten through every episode available in Netflix, so my assessment could change. But for now, it's just a little better than decent to me. The aspect that turns me off the most about this program is the blatant cheating that goes on by the main character, Piper Chapman. You grow to like her character in the first 10 episodes or so, only to be completely crushed when she repeatedly (and graphically) cheats on her loving fiancé. She rationalizes this by calling it a survival tactic. I don't buy it. She's weak and unfaithful, and it bugs me. The humor is also a little too "out there" for me. I mean, does EVERY character need to engage is sexually explicit behavior? Also, the action can get a little far-fetched. In fact, there is little about ONB that could be considered "believable." I don't mind shows that stretch reality a little, but ONB goes too far sometimes in what they ask us to believe. Every, and I mean every, prison employee is corrupt in some manner. With all that said, ONB is original and well-acted for the most part. The storyline has depth and the characters are funny. This show delves into the back-story of even the most minor characters, adding an intriguing dimension. Would I recommend it? Yes. Would I guarantee that you're going to like it? Probably not.
17 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Wow.
9 February 2013
To say the acting in this movie was bad would be giving NO RETREAT, NO SURRENDER a huge complement. It was just about the worst I have ever seen, and I don't think it's even close. If you want a few laughs, put this one on -- it's as bad as it gets. Interaction between characters was a joke.

The fight scenes were slow and predictable and contained no serious action or authenticity. But the the downright awful acting takes the cake. Just over-the-top terrible. Unbelievable.

Van Dam doesn't show up until the middle of the film and plays a bad guy...what?
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4th and Forever (2011– )
3/10
Really bad. Really fake.
23 July 2011
Don't get fooled, this is not a genuine reality show. Interviews with the players are scripted and just sound awkward.

Most interactions off the field are simply laughable. Just wait for the scene when one of the players breaks up with his girlfriend. It's downright silly.

Also, I'm pretty sure the radio announcer for the games was put in post- production, making the play-by-play sound fabricated and hollow.

As I write this, I look up and see one of the players laughing when talking to his mom about a serious situation. Couldn't they just re-shoot the scene? Ridiculous.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good, not great
4 May 2011
This movie, like Die Hard, was one of the films I simply did not watch growing up. I was born in the era, but for some reason or another didn't find the urge to give in. That is until 2011.

Though I thought it was good, I'm not quite sure Terminator lived up to its reputation. I mean, the stop-motion special effects disappointed me and the lack of action in the beginning was a little off-putting. Also, the storyline seemed to stretch a little bit. But I guess that happens when you deal with a time travel in a movie. It takes a little extra concentration to get everything straight.

I did, however, enjoy most of the film. The action scenes were well-choreographed and the tension was high during the Terminators' ruthless massacre. The acting was above average and the dialog was nothing special, but good.

All-in-all, The Terminator wasn't a masterpiece but it was entertaining...and that's all you can ask for I guess. I hear the second installation released in 1991 is much better. And oh yeah, I've since seen Die Hard.
0 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Die Hard (1988)
7/10
That was fun
25 April 2011
I know, I know, it's crazy, but I just saw Die Hard for the first time yesterday...in the year 2011. I heard how awesome and action-packed it was, so I came in expecting a two-hour thrill ride. And that's exactly what I got. John McClane was a combination of McGyver and Rambo wrapped up in a muscular chain-smoking package. As for the plot, it was pretty good. It wasn't anything too heavy, or too simplistic. A group of bad guys infiltrate a high rise building where an exclusive party is being held, take hostage those inside, blow the brains out of the company's leader, make threats and basically buy time as the group's tech wizard breaks into the highly-secured and technologically advanced giant safe containing millions of dollars in bonds. Meanwhile, McLane -- a New York cop in LA visiting his wife -- sneaks around the building picking off one bad guy after another, eventually gaining communication with an unwitting cop on patrol named Al Powell. This connection to the outside world brings in the LAPD and eventually the FBI.

The only thing that annoyed me about this film was how the cops were portrayed. They were either too hard-headed (Chief Johnson played by Paul Gleason), too smart for patrol (Powell), or just plain old dumb (the dispatchers).
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Accepted (2006)
4/10
Unaccepted by me
21 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
There are a couple ways you can view Accepted:

A) A completely implausible raunchy comedy aimed at college-aged young adults looking for a few cheap laughs.

B) A satirical exploration of the higher education system in the United States.

Problem is, it tries to be both, and quite frankly, it falls short on both accounts.

First, I couldn't quite stretch my imagination far enough to buy into the idea of a bunch of college outcasts creating a bogus university from scratch. The sheer number of outlandish ideas this film asks you to believe is too vast to delve into. Second, this film is completely one-sided. It's a spit in the face of traditional higher education. Bartelby brings up some stimulating points during his final rah-rah speech in front of the approval board, but that does not change the fact that he committed a serious federal offense (fruad to the enth degree) and thought he could get away with it. And then, he does!!! It gets worse though. The accreditation board then approves the continuation of South Harmon Institute of Technology despite its complete lack of staff, facilities, formal guidance, etc.

And oh yeah, and he gets the girl in the end.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cheers (1982–1993)
5/10
Not my type of set up
21 April 2011
Cheers was a decent, wholesome comedy with predictable laughs. But that was it. It didn't seem to go anywhere. People just sat around a bar and jabbed about their lives as circumstances that surround the episode always seemed to happen near by. It was one set up after another. The cast was not relatable or convincing in my opinion. They just stood as characachers of real people. This technique is vital, but ineffective when it goes too far. I mean let's be serious, can someone who coached and played professional baseball for years be as dense as Coach? It goes way too far over the top. He is really, really, really dumb.

Don't even try to contrast Cheers with Seinfeld. In both sitcoms, nothing ever seems to happen. In Cheers, the jokes and humor are much more in your face while in Seinfeld, the laughs come more constant as the writers appreciate even the seemingly mundane and subtle humor of every day life.

Cheers was too cheesy and predictable for me, but you have to give credit. The show lasted for a long time and housed a pretty talented -- and equally eclectic -- cast. Woody got his start behind the bar and Kirsitie became established. I enjoyed Ted Danson's cool personality, but he was contrasted far too often by over-the-top annoying and ultra-dense characters like Carla (Rhea Perlman) or Coach (Nicholas Colasanto), respectively.
5 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Batman (1989)
7/10
A comic book come to life
20 April 2011
Action packed? Yes.

Fun? You got it.

Realistic? Who cares?

At first, I was going to tell you how disappointed with the original Batman, but then I remembered: It's a film based on a fantasy comic. It plays by a different set of rules. Sometimes no scientific explanation is required when it comes to certain plot points. For instance; the Joker's face. What's the deal with that? A botched surgery in a dingy basement? Sure. A chemical reaction? Why not. The point is, it doesn't matter.

I was also going to tell you how disappointed I was with the unrealistic violence, but then I remembered: It's PG-13…and for good reason. What would have been the point of making Batman 'Restricted' when most of the audience was in the 10-15 year-old age range? Sure, Batman appeals to all generations, but in order to bank the maximum amount of money at the box office, a PG-13 rating made the most sense. That means you're going to see plenty of violence, but little to no actual bloodshed. I thought the script and direction did a decent job dancing between the adult/underage audience with the chiefly dark atmosphere but rather tame dialogue and carnage.

The original Batman certainly isn't the best of the series, but it's a decent start and holds its own. The Tim Burton influence is acute and recognizable. The special effects are rather phenomenal for the time period as well. Watching the Batmobile's shield activate is quite astounding. It's hard to believe that effect was accomplished in such a crisp manner in 1989.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Extract (2009)
8/10
Sometimes it takes a second look
30 March 2011
The first time I watched Extract, I was left with very little reaction. I thought it was pretty funny, but nothing special. Scrolling through the stations a few days ago, I stopped at the beginning of this movie -- and since there really wasn't anything else on -- I figured I'd give it a second look.

And boy am I glad I did.

After watching it a second time, I was able to appreciate the indirect and intelligent humor I apparently missed the first time around. It's just that type of film. You're not going to get bombarded with too much over-the-top antics or gross out jokes (though there are some). No, the true nature of this film lies within the subtleties of the seemingly mundane conversations, especially between Jason Bateman (Joel) and Ben Affleck's (Dean) characters. The contrast between the two is almost sublime. Joel is an uptight, sexually frustrated business owner while Dean is a laid-back, petty drug-dealing bar tender. The two are best friends and interact a level that made me chuckle the whole time.

The plot starts rolling when Dean convinces Joel to send a male prostitute to his house and see if his wife -- played by the hilarious Kristen Wiig -- will cheat on him. This, in Dean's rationalization, would then grant Joel the freedom to pursue a hot new temp worker named Cindy (played by the flawless Mila Kunis).

If only it was that simple...

Overall, I this is a very funny movie, but I'll concede it may not be for everyone. At the very least, give it a second chance and see what you think.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Violent!
26 March 2011
This is a VERY violent motion picture. I've only caught glimpses, but the one scene I watched last night while cruising through the stations was quite disturbing.

Here is what I saw in a five minute sequence: A deadly assassin enters a gentleman's club and starts ruthlessly murdering everyone in the joint with gross and bloody results. His weapon of choice: A shotgun. Nude strippers are picked off left and right as limbs and body matter spray all over the club. In one part, he looks down at a stripper begging for her life only to blow her away with little regard. In another instance, a dead man is used as a human shield while another guy gets his entire arm blow off. Nothing is left to the imagination. In one case, slow motion is used just to accentuate the brutality of the killing.
3 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
30 for 30: The Fab Five (2011)
Season Unknown, Episode Unknown
8/10
A must see
14 March 2011
This documentary needed to be done. There is no denying the transcendent influence that the Fab Five have had on college basketball. They made baggy shorts and black socks cool. They embraced hip hop, trash talking and tattoos. They talked the talk, and more importantly, they walked the walk. It's quite astounding to comprehend what these guys accomplished on the floor at such a young age. During the '92 and '93 seasons, Michigan combined for more than 50 wins and made consecutive trips to the National Championship game -- all while relying almost exclusively on teenagers. In one particular regular season contest, 100% of the Wolverines' points were tallied by the ultra-talented freshman...amazing. Almost every college basketball fan would be able to name all Fab Five members with little effort, but most would struggle to name the starting rotation of the teams that beat them in consecutive national championship games. That's how popular these guys were/are.

One of the most interesting portions of the program was when Jalen Rose (executive producer) called black players that attended Duke "Uncle Toms," yet his running mate for two years, Chris Webber, considered Duke and even took an official visit to the campus. For some reason this contradiction was never exposed during the interview process. Despite this vexing omission, I thought the remainder of the dialogue was done quite well. The honesty from the players, especially when describing their thoughts on Christian Laettner, was candid, and if anything else, entertaining.

The final "Chapter" of this film explored the controversial relationship Rose and Webber had with a Detroit millionaire (his name escapes me at the moment). According to several sources, Webber and Rose were given monetary "gifts" from this man while in college. Under oath, Rose -- who apparently received far less cash than Webber -- admitted to his transgressions and has moved on from the incident. Webber, though, denied taking the $200,000 in question and was later charged with perjury and sentenced to hundreds of hours of community to service.

To this day, his stance hasn't changed on the matter and the Final Four banners from his two seasons in Ann Arbor remain rolled up in a dusty library basement.

SIDE NOTE: Chris Webber, Juwan Howard, Jalen Rose and Jimmy King were national top 15 recruits as seniors. Ray Jackson was Texas' top prep and ranked 48th. Even top-tier programs like Duke, North Carolina, Kansas, Kentucky and Ohio State rarely attract more than two top 20 recruits in a given class.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Zombieland (2009)
8/10
Really awesome
9 March 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Wow...an excellent Zombie flick with some serious gore, but even more laughs. And how about the happy ending? When was the last time you watched a blood-thirsty movie and left the theatre, or living room, feeling better than before you started the viewing? Zombieland's cast is about as good as you are going to assemble these days. The age range between the actors is so profound, yet each carries the film in their own unique way. The interaction between each is superb as they start out as enemies and finish as family. Sure, there were some gushy and predictable portions, but I didn't mind. The overall storyline was just too intriguing. I even enjoyed the ridiculous Bill Murray cameo.

Zombieland is much less a horror movie and much more a comedy. Sure, there are plenty of splatter moments to keep the gore geeks happy, but there are extended portions of the film that have nothing to do with killing zombies and much more to do with how humans may interact if indeed there was such a grim apocalypse.

I highly recommend this picture to anyone who enjoys a good laugh and isn't afraid of a little over-the-top gore.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dinosaurs (1991–1994)
Just starting watching
24 February 2011
I just caught the episode about the son taking "Thorniods" to gain muscle yesterday on YouTube, and I must say, I couldn't believe what I was seeing. Is this show serious?

For years I thought Dinosaurs was strictly a program for small children, but boy was I wrong. I mean, the producers had no trouble attacking such adult issues as drug abuse straight on.

It was entertaining, bizarre, interesting and cheesy all rolled up into a delightful 22 minute package. I look forward to catching more episodes online.

I also watched a behind the scenes look at how the program was made. Controlling the animatronic faces of the characters, while balancing the lines, directions and heavy suits is nothing less than astounding. Apparently the exact method was used to manipulate the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. It's really very complicated stuff.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Due Date (2010)
7/10
Best comedy since The Hangover.
23 February 2011
Due Date is a tale about a pair of strangers that meet on an airplane on their way from Atlanta to Los Angeles. Ethan, an aspiring actor with a rather peculiar personality, begins a conversation with a businessman named Peter while waiting for their plane to take off. Somehow the chat leads to the subject of "bombs," which immediately alerts the authorities. Peter is shot with a rubber bullet after being deemed a threat and put on the "no fly" list along with Ethan. Unfortunately for Peter, his wallet -- or so he believes -- is on an airplane flying over Kansas. The only way to get home before his wife's planned C-Section is by hitching a ride with Ethan.

The movie really takes off as soon as the pair rolls out of the airport parking lot. It would be too easy to give everything away, so I'm going to keep my description of what happens as "vaguely detailed" as possible.

With Ethan clutching the ashes of his recently deceased father, the pair catches themselves in a number of precarious, yet equally hilarious, circumstances. Not only do they get beat up by a paraplegic employee at a Quick Cash station, but they also find themselves in a serious car accident, apprehended by border authorities and baked out of their minds on potent marijuana. And that's just the half of it.

However, it's not the physical comedy that I enjoyed as much. The genuine dialogue between the two divergent characters was outstanding. The duo couldn't have been more opposite, yet mixed so well together. Robert Downey. Jr. was spot on in his role as the angry, up-tight, sarcastic cynic while Zach Galfianakis was superb as the innocent, slightly slow eccentric. The conversations they have while doped-up are simply epic. It was also extremely ironic that Downey, Jr. played the role of a character that "had never done a drug" in his life.

Point of advice: Before watching Due Date, throw all practicality out the window. This is a wild comedy...not a realistic melodrama. Though there was a few small sections of the film I could have done without, Due Date isn't one constant dirty joke simply waiting for a set up. No, there is a concrete plot line and verisimilitude within the dialogue.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Easy A (2010)
6/10
Easy B
22 February 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Ahh, nothing like a bunch of 20-somethings portraying characters 5 to 10 years their junior. Get past that, though, and there's actually a pretty decent movie that emerges.

Emma Stone is very talented as she plays the role of a chronically sarcastic teen who unintentionally initiates a rumor that she lost her "V-Card" to a community college student. Stone's character Olive has no other choice but to embrace her new reputation. Predictably, things slowly begin to snow ball and soon she is accepting payments from classmates to start rumors that they also had sex with her. And, of course, she falls in love with the hottest guy in the school. They kiss. The End. In the middle, she loses her best friend, befriends her enemy, de-friends her enemy and gets involved in a STD scandal involving her favorite teacher and the guidance counselor.

In the beginning, Olive declares that this isn't your typical "lost teen finds her way story (or something like)," but in reality, it is. No, the script doesn't play out like most teen movies, which is probably why it's rated so high on IMBb. The problem is; it ended like most teen movies. The anonymous main character -- who always seems to be as beautiful as anyone else in the gigantic high school -- suffers through trials and tribulations, learns a few harsh lessons along the way, and yes, gets the guy in the end.

Easy A initially contained enough foul language to receive an "R" rating, but apparently was cut down to appease the target audience (see Trivia), and you can tell. I guess I don't watch many movies from this genre anymore, but Easy A was pretty vulgar for PG-13. I mean, the film's predominant theme is underage sex...and inappropriate teacher-student relationships...and underage drinking...and religion.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Coyote (2007)
A strong Indi production
2 February 2011
When scrolling through the channels the other day, I came across this little gem. At first, I honestly wasn't all that interested, but I stuck with it...and boy am I glad I did.

Although it starts a tad slow, Coyote really heats up in the final 40 minutes or so, bringing everything together in divine detail. This film needed to be carried by the storyline and plot movement because the acting honestly wasn't all that great, but competent. Outside of his drunken tirade on the beach, Brian Peterson's performance as Steve stood out as the strongest. He was actually really funny in some parts.

This film certainly has an "independent" vibe to it, but that doesn't mean it's amateur. The lighting was sometimes a little off, but overall, the camera work was strong, and in some scenes, very strong. I would certainly recommend this picture to anyone who is interested in seeing something outside of the Hollywood box.

I missed the opening 20 minutes or so, but basically a couple guys decide to enter the business of human smuggling. Everything starts harmless enough as the pair transports dozens of Mexicans to the United States with relative ease. But things begin to erode little by little. When J. (played by Brett Spackman) is stopped at the border and the authorities find the compartment in which he has been smuggling humans with. Needless to say, that portion of the operation in immediately shut down. Their next option is to herd and transport via foot, which only gets them into a whole new set of dire circumstances. I won't give anything away, but like I said, the film's final act really takes off.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Buried (2010)
9/10
Powerful
25 January 2011
Buried is relentless and gripping. Initially, you find yourself hoping the character somehow manages to free himself. By the end, though, you could care less about the character as you begin to focus on yourself. You become entrapped. You don't want to character to be released, you want YOURSELF to be released. It's that powerful.

The battery life on your cell phone becomes your lifeline. If it runs out, you're done. Every conversation with the outside world is essential to your survival as you race against time. Even though you're rushed, you have to maintain your composure in order to enhance your chance of being freed. You can't spend too much time on the phone, but you can't spend too little. Information is the vital. Who do you call? What should you say? Should I just end it all with this razor sharp pocket knife?

Slow down.

Breath.

There's always a chance they're going to find you, or at least that's what they're telling you over the phone. You have a family. Hold onto the prospect of seeing them again and keep fighting.

This grim, claustrophobic atmosphere is achieved by a combination of powerful acting and effective lighting and camera angles. Ryan Reynolds reacts to his dyer circumstance with a gamut of emotions that can truly be appreciated by the viewer. Anger, resentment, sorrow, frustration and fear take over his body. Though pushed to the very precipice of his breaking point, he never gives up, even though it would have been so easy.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Grizzly Man (2005)
9/10
Sad character, astounding production
22 January 2011
The tragedy of Timothy Treadwell's tale is perhaps the fact that it likely took until his final moments on earth to realize that what he was doing was utterly selfish. It's a sad, sad story.

Living, he did not seem to understand the concrete balance between animal, nature and the superficial human world. He did not seem to grasp the notion that the gigantic brown bears he was "befriending" were not his friends at all. They were dangerous wild animals that needed to be treated with the utmost respect. No, Timothy treaded into their world and paid the ultimate price. He convinced himself that he was invincible living with these magnificent creatures, but as we all found out, he was not.

As for the film, it was downright brilliant. The editing must have taken months considering Treadwell generated almost 100 hours of footage. Then, to fuse it into a 103 minute production is astounding. Werner Herzog should be commended for his work on this chilling production.

Warning to parents: Timothy's archive footage features constant course language and extremely vulgar statements. Other than that, it would be more than suitable for anyone age 12 and up.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Good? Yeah, I guess
22 January 2011
I try and see movies before reading reviews on IMDb in order to allow myself to enter with an open mind. But for some reason, I didn't do that this time and went in expecting complete trash due to the horrible reviews spit out by the fans on this site. I guess I can see why some people didn't like it, but I guess I can also see why it's ranked a solid 6.0.

First, I love Steve Carrell, so keep that in mind as I review this title. Second, I usually enjoy re-makes, especially comedies.

Even though there were some serious themes and events, this movie was by no means plot driven. No, this movie was given life by well-timed humor. This isn't always a good thing, though, as you are bound to run into people who simply don't find the dialogue and characters funny. As I stated before, I find essentially all of Steve Carrell's work hilarious, so that helped get me through some of the bizarre portions of the film. I think there was a distinct limit as to how good this movie was going to be, and I believe they almost reached that maximum. Problem is, the writing tried to please too many types of people. There was just too many different types of humor and no underlining theme.
1 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ax 'Em (1992)
1/10
Amateur in every sense
18 January 2011
Shocking. Bizarre. Nonsense.

Those are the first three words that came to my head after watching this truly amateur production.

Shocking because this "film" was actually released to the general public and available in video stores around the nation.

Bizarre because of the storyline. A person kills his family and himself and then comes back from his grave 13 years later to exact revenge. On who? Himself? His dead family? His dead self? Nonsense because of the completely random dialogue and scenes. Why does the movie start at a random party and then jump to some dance completion at Morgan State University? Please don't try to answer that question.

Nonsense because there are four grammatical errors in the opening sequence explaining the events of the movie.

Nonsense because after one scene you can actually hear the director clearly say "cut." Nonsense because you cannot understand what the characters are saying unless they are three feet from the camera. And when you can hear them clearly, which is only about 24 percent of the time, its all Ebonics and curse words.

Think of the worst movie you have ever seen. Think Plan Nine from Outer Space. And then lower your standards. That's how horrible this movie is. It's in a completely alternate stratosphere than even the lowest F-grade movies you've seen. This picture honestly looks like a high school cinema class production that drags on for 70 minutes and I say that with 100 percent seriousness.

It deserves 0/10, but that's not possible, so I'm forced to give it 1/10. I am literally going to go back and change every movie I ever gave 1/10 and give it an extra star or two simply because even those awful pictures are 10 times better than this garbage.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed