5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Dinosaurs (1991–1994)
An original and funny early 90's sitcom.
5 October 2014
I'm going to echo what a lot of other reviewers are saying and just simply state that Dinosaurs was a very good TV show. I'll be honest, though, and say that in my opinion it's not particularly the most laugh-out-loud funny sitcom I've ever seen, and it doesn't have the same emotional impact as some other shows of a similar nature. For example - I've never felt quite the same emotional resonance as I did some some of the more sensitive-themed episodes of similar sitcoms, such as how much more I felt very sorry for Will Smith in several of the more emotional episodes of Fresh Prince (which overall was a very lighthearted and funny show as well), than I ever did for any of the Sinclair family members.

Still, the joy of this show is in the original setting and the creative spins they put on both major plot lines and all the minor details, references, and in-jokes. While the show's structure is pretty a standard family sitcom, it's SUPPOSED to be. Jim Henson himself wanted that. The fun comes in when the all-too-familiar sitcom tropes are given a prehistoric spin. The situations are fun, the characters are colorful, the prehistoric elements are clever and naturally integrated. Though I mentioned that it's not the funniest show I've ever seen, it's still quite high up there on the list.

Overall I'd give it a 9/10. Great, original programming. It features very awesome characters that are not just impressive in terms of the life-like properties of the puppets (just look at their facial expressions!) but also their personalities. The plot lines and little details are great, and though the show is a little corny at times, it's still quite funny and enjoyable.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Much deeper than you think...
7 November 2005
Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas is much more than people make it out to be. Sure, its funny; its interesting for drug enthusiasts; and its quite strange. But remember that it is based on the book by the late Hunter S. Thompson, a very satirical and often cynical writer. The book was a criticism of society, with different occurrences, objects, and even trips symbolic of the political and social turmoil of the era. Thompson was the founder of "Gonzo" journalism, and a great modern writer.

Director Terry Gilliam translates the book beautifully, which is a great feat for such a deep book. He retains many of the main ideas in the book, while condensing the novel into movie form, and many of the deep literary elements of the novel are still present in the movie. He also does this without making the movie completely boring. That said, some people WILL find the movie boring. However, I can say that you probably will find the movie interesting if: 1) you are a Hunter S. Thompson fan. 2) You are a patron of narcotics. or 3) You like deep movies, with meanings beyond simply making you laugh, or action movies.

I personally thought the movie was excellent. However it is not comparable to any other movie I have ever seen. For me this adds to how great I think the movie is. For others, however, this may leave you wondering 'what the f#&k?' I think this was one of the best movies ever made, based on one of the best books ever written, right up with the ranks of Faulkner, Miller, Camus, and the rest. I hope you find the movie just as enjoyable, and if you don't, don't blame me; it's not for everyone. But those who understand it will love it.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Pi (1998)
19 October 2005
This movie wasn't a thriller, really. It wasn't an action movie. It wasn't a horror movie. It wasn't an adventure. So what was it? It may fit some descriptions of each of these genres, yet it does not completely fill any of them. However, it does provoke thoughts. I can't back up that all of the mathematical stuff in the movie is correct, but it does make you think about some mathematical code for life, which many physicists and mathemeticians have been trying to find at least part of. The movie is very enjoyable and I highly recommend it to anyone who wants anything outside of the usual Hollywood mind-numbing fest.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Doom (2005)
Very Good For What It Is
19 October 2005
Despite what many others may say, this movie is VERY good for what it is: a mindless action movie.

I enjoyed the game itself very much and it really scared the **** out of me. I was expecting a horror movie, but i soon realized that it is an action movie. Well, what can you expect from an action movie other than lots of shooting and SOME suspense? If you think the movie is shallow, it is, but its supposed to be. Anyone who complains about the movie being a mindless shooting movie should realize that this is not the movie for them, so they should go watch one of their "emotional" movies if they want. However, if you need a break and just want your testosterone pumping so you can take a break from life and just be a manly man. If you don't like The Rock, then go watch a romance or comedy, this movie isn't for you. However, if you like the video game and like mindless action, this is the movie for you. Remember, not every movie has to have some deep meaning or evoke emotion, some movies are just for fun. This is one of them.
568 out of 938 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
best 'zombie' movie in years
14 August 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I thought this movie was EXCELLENT! There have been very few 'zombie' movies coming out in recent years that are worth the price of the movie ticket, but this movie goes above and beyond my expectations. Unlike many zombie movies, this movie is actually emotional. The suspense and focus of the movie is not based on the gore, but on the characters themselves. The character's feeling influence your own in some ways, and add to the suspense.

The cinematography was beautifully done, and some shots add to the suspense/horror without the aid of cheesy and outdated methods or corny music.

Some complain that the storyline is unoriginal or uninspired, but halfway through the movie the plot is reversed as the main characters' problems shift from the zombies to the barbaric soldiers holding them hostage. I agree, the whole virus thing has been done, but seriously, how many somewhat reasonable ways are there to bring about a worldwide zombie outbreak?? The reason for the zombies being there is not something new, but the rest of the plot is imaginative.

Also, critics may claim that some parts are unrealistic without thinking things through. Why would the Manchester fire drive the infected out if light attracts them? The infected can be killed by conventional means, so the smoke would suffocate them. Isn't it unrealistic that Cillian Murphy, upon realizing that the entire city is abandoned would be so calm? Well, not everyone would go into hysterics and start crying and screaming. Being scared doesn't always impair one's ability to think ahead, hence Cillian picking up Pepsi for later, realizing that if everything is abandoned he might get thirsty later. Why is Cillian able to walk the streets for hours without seeing a single zombie if everyone is infected? The zombies are afraid of light; as Selena and Mark said, they can travel only by day. So before making judgments people should think things through. Either way, this is a ZOMBIE movie, how can anyone really expect it to be extremely realistic?

I have heard people complain that the movie is boring. 28 Days Later is not a conventional zombie movie. That is what sets it apart. Some parts reflect the horror genre, and some reflect something other than the aspects of just a zombie movie. This is NOT another Dawn of the Dead. This is a great movie, but people need to realize that it is different, and must be appreciated for that. Sure, its not perfect, but it is as close to perfection as a zombie movie can get.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this