Reviews

22 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1/10
below average gore flick
6 February 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I wont spend time reviewing this garbage, other than to warn this is a far cry from the first one so don't get your hopes up. I will say there are some obvious fake reviews on here, trying in vain to hype this film. Trust me, no one registers an IMDb account just to review this straight to DVD crapfest unless they are involved in production somehow.

I would hope the fake review accounts would at least try to be convincing (10 of 10 stars? really?) instead of praising this as the best film since time began.

its a tad insulting, and it motivates lazy people like me to write and vote on the movie whereas otherwise I wouldn't bother.
13 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Scourge (2008)
1/10
pretty awful
19 July 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I thought this might turn out to be one of those gems you find in the B-movie horror selection, but I was wrong. Boy was I wrong. Good premise, good use of the budget available, not to shabby FX (minus some CG fire). Those are it's only strengths, and even that's being generous.

The acting isn't usually an issue for me in movies of this type, but when it's so bad it becomes distracting, well......I mean come on, the actors aren't even trying to say their lines with any conviction, regardless of how bad the script might be.

And yes, the dialog is horrible, completely unconvincing. Again, this isn't usually a problem in horror films except when it's so bad you can't ignore it.

There is a serious lack of direction in the film where you have scenes just kinda thrown in there that don't seem to do anything but provide a chance to tie the lead character to more murders, which after the second person dies is all but impossible except maybe in the mind of whomever wrote this script. Most horror films do rely on certain bad luck principles, but when you see how the photographer gets infected in front of dozens of people, only to realize no one seemed to notice a dead body come to life and infect him.....well, I wish I could say this was an exception to the weird coincidences of this movie, but it's not.

There's plenty more wrong with it, too much to list here. It seems that this movie was shot in two days, so skip it.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rise of the Undead (2005 Video)
1/10
No, it's not worth a peek
23 December 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I can't give it less than a star, I tried. At this moment, Im not sure if Im halfway through it or not, but I stopped actively paying attention around the time part of it was revealed to be a dream. Or not. Or maybe it was. I think viewers who posted a comment that didn't include the descriptions "horrible" or "awful" or "made me want to swallow a bullet" are probably being nice because it is an indie film. Don't listen to them, listen to me- there is no nudity in the movie, skip it. I needed ten lines to submit this warning, so I will also say that the goth girl that some users have described as "hot" is fat. She has fat elephant legs.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Don't believe the 10 star reviews people
6 April 2008
Warning: Spoilers
Honestly, click on the posters who submit the positive reviews for this film, it's the only film some of them ever commented on, and their accounts are pretty recently activated. While the possibility exists that this movie above all others is what prompted them to register an account here, it's more likely that they are involved with the film itself in some way and trying to trick others into seeing this movie.

Luckily, as if the quality of the film wasn't proof enough, most of the people involved in this production are pretty dull in the brains department and are easy to spot on here. "It touched my heart"? Give me a break.

This film isn't even so bad it's good, it's just bad. Uwe Boll has some stiff competition now from whoever made this pile o' crap.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cloverfield (2008)
1/10
take away the hype, and you have little left
20 January 2008
Warning: Spoilers
The marketing was so well done that it became a huge part of the film experience and made it enjoyable to many people who showed up on opening night (much like the Blair witch project). But without it, the film was pretty bland, not as original as some of the die hard fans are hyping it up to be. Im not sure why the "shaky cam" effect is considered a sign of brilliance and originality these days, when it's been done before and is mainly a tool for cost reduction, but oh well.

Bottom line- if a movie can't stand on it's own merit, then it isn't a very good movie to begin with. Wait for it on DVD if you're curious, otherwise skip it.
17 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
unbelievable ...
13 February 2007
Warning: Spoilers
...not that someone else is trying to cash in on the 9/11 conspiracism that runs rampant among people too lazy to research the matters for themselves, but it's mind boggling at how many people will just accept whatever internet video is hot at the moment at face value, no questions asked.

The film starts off by letting us know that the narrator/producer was a conservative Republican (why is this important?) and a demolition hobbyist (yep, thats what he calls himself). Because of the above qualifications, he knows the towers would not have been able to collapse unless someone planted explosives in them. Yep, the sound reasoning only gets more impressive from there as he explains his exhaustive research methods that consisted of surfing the internet and watching some movies. For a week. This certainly puts the hundreds of people with actual experience in these matters and the educational background necessary to understand the events to shame. This man managed to completely dismiss the hundreds of thousands of collective man hours of the industries leading experts in one week, by surfing the internet.

There is little "new" info or takes on already debunked nonsense in this home made vid, just regurgitated bumper sticker talking points. ("never before has a steel building collapsed due to fire", not only intentionally misleading but factually wrong).

What surprises me is in the wake of people being forced to face the reality of how factually inaccurate and intentionally misleading Loose Change and it's editions really were, these same people are now championing this similar video without skipping a beat. It's as if they learned nothing about thinking for themselves, and most likely never will.

Still, like loose change, this video has it's merits, especially as a study in mass paranoia and rumor regurgitation. I recommend watching it, as I did with loose change, and then seeing screw911mysteries as a companion piece. or don't, if you aren't really concerned with truth. But please, don't turn off your brains and just accept what someone says on an internet video as fact, look into it for yourself.
10 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Slither (2006)
7/10
Not bad
15 November 2006
Warning: Spoilers
It is what it is, and it accomplishes what it sets out to, something you can't say about many movies coming out lately.

The film is a mix between horror and comedy, it isn't one complete form or the other, but it does manage to blend well enough to keep you in suspense and then laughing at the absurdity of some of the events later on.

If you ever saw Night of the Creeps, you can clearly witness the large influence it had here, and it also was a horror/comedy so it's not surprising. You laugh at the funny parts, then hold your breath and get a little fearful at the scary parts, there is no conflict of direction in the film.

The biggest gripe seems to be the sexual references and implications (slugs that resemble penises going in mouths, tentacles penetrating women and impregnating them, etc) but while Im not going to suggest that this wasn't in the back of the directors mind, it in no way is the focus of the film or even over the top implied.

Horror fans from the 80's are probably the most likely to enjoy Slither, but others who enjoy well done FX and makeup, a good jump followed by a good laugh and an inability to "guess" who will die next- will find plenty to like about this film also.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
It really IS that good
14 September 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I recently saw this film, and after all of the hype it received, I was ready for the inevitable let down. No movie could be half as enjoyable as this one was made out to be.

I was wrong, and found myself genuinely disappointed when it ended at how it didn't last long enough, not often a complaint of mine.

Most of the plot is contained elsewhere in the comment section, so I won't clutter the pages anymore than to say it most certainly belongs in the IMDb top 250, maybe even top 100.

Best film I've seen in years.

Lives up to the expectations.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Poseidon Adventure (2005 TV Movie)
3/10
How many movies were ripped off here?
14 September 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Some films that aren't really that bad will receive a rating like this, not because they are horrible in relation to other films of the same rating or better, but because they had so much potential and really not much excuse for failing as a film.

This is one of those. A strong cast, a good (remake) concept, plenty of budget- all which leave the viewers with a nagging question, "why did it suck?"

It certainly had plenty going for it, which is the main reason I am so disappointed and feel that it deserves a rating of 3 or less. The entire movie is a montage of ripped off scenes from other big budget flicks, and it's almost as if the writers were deliberately trying to flip off the audience by implying they were too dumb to recognize the same scene/situational format from Armageddon, Titanic, hell- even finding Nemo!

Maybe they thought a remake didn't warrant a great script, or maybe they were in too much of a hurry to actually come up with their own so they decided "borrow" from other movies. Either way, it's the main reason I gave the movie such a low rating, as it was pretty insulting when the father acknowledges his daughters boyfriend is the one that has to go on a suicide mission to save them all, only to trick the boyfriend and go in his place, so that his daughter wouldn't lose the love of her life. (Gee, reminds me of a certain Bruce Willis/ Ben Affleck scene in Armageddon).

This movie has little to offer, other than watching a ship get knocked around and broken up, and some of the drowning scenes are indeed interesting, but overall it didn't deliver.

Skip it unless you enjoy made for TV movies.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Oh give me a break
8 September 2006
Warning: Spoilers
As most by now are aware, the makers of Loose Change aren't very credible or even professional, and their attempt at a thought provoking docudramacrapfest falls way short of the mark for anyone who can manage to think for themselves. In fact, one of the reasons we have more editions coming out is because almost every implication Loose Change made in any of it's installments has already been debunked and corrected.

Yes, as with almost every major historical event, conspiracies abound, and 9/11 is no exception. But while watching LC, in order to actually be moved by the presentation of selective 'facts' (I use facts very loosely) one has to be able to suspend thought and turn off the rational thinking process most of us go utilize in everyday life.

A quick internet search soundly refutes most of what Avery and his crew put forth as support of a conspiracy, and Avery knows this. He seems to be banking on his tactic of mudslinging (where he tosses as much crap at the wall as he can- hoping some of it sticks) to make up for his lack of any real evidence or proof of his theories. The idea is, if he can find enough seemingly supportive elements that suggest there was a conspiracy, it won't matter if the bulk of them are untrue, meaningless or downright deceptions on his part. His goal is to obfuscate and muddy the issues, hoping that his target audience is swayed by his massive list of anomalies or things that "don't add up". In truth, few of the questions raised in this video have any real merit, and those only because they can't be easily answered by individuals who don't posses degrees in structural engineering. The rest are easily answered, although you wouldn't know it by the way Avery asks them and alters his tone to imply that something wicked this way comes.

While most of us were amused and in some cases, laughingly entertained because the notion that someone, somewhere, actually started buying into the ideas presented in this video as fact, we have a hard time laughing at how much money Avery has already made off his sensationalism and blatant deceptions at the expense of the victims of 9/11 and their families. Although Avery was offering the video for free, he also sold over 10,000 copies, was given a nice stipend and somehow was given the green-light to make another movie with a much bigger budget.

While I would recommend this film for a critical thinking class when discussing the uses of propaganda at how manipulative some people can be, not to mention how gullible others are in their rush to condemn the government for everything bad thats ever happened, I cannot think of any other reason to watch it.
21 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Well, it could have been worse......
5 September 2006
Warning: Spoilers
......Im not sure how, but it could have been.

First, I never saw the original, so I am not even remotely upset that this was a remake that may or may not have done justice to the original. Of course, unless the original was as unconvincingly muddled through by the cast as this one, I don't see how it could have.

The entire film gives you the "first take impromptu " scene approach, where the actors aren't really trying to act at all, but merely reading through lines and getting their positions on stage correct. Yep, pretty bad.

The plot is.......well, about as forced as you can get, while somehow remaining completely implausible even to me, someone who can believe in werewolves if the movie is done well enough. Aside from showing Cages' character a video tape of them burning a little girl for witchcraft purposes, the residents of this island could not possibly hint at what they wanted him to think they were doing any more clearly, which makes the audience reach the conclusion that the policman Cage plays is supposed to be semi-retarded, as he can't seem to connect the dots at all.

I actually found myself wondering if the people on the island were getting at all pissy about how hard they had to try to spell out what they wanted the cop to think, to the point they are seen reading books on ritual sacrifice.

Skip this one.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dracula 3000 (2004)
1/10
Somebody owes me money
11 March 2006
I'm not sure who, but someone involved in this production-o-crap' needs to give me my 3 bucks back, and now that I think of it, I also want to be reimbursed for the beer I threw against the wall at the end of this ............this......thing. I'm not blaming it on the actors, they seem to realize this is really, really going to be a crappy 90 minutes they spend in front of you. I'm almost positive the captain (Starship Troopers, "Rico") tries to warn us by emphasizing his consonants in such a manner, that if you can play your DVD backwards it says something like :

"Save - yourself - from - this - crap! - Pour - bleach - into - your - eyes!"

Apparently, there is a whole planet of vampires in the future, but us earthlings despite having mastered intergalactic travel still rely on MP-5s and 9mm firearms as our main source of protection. In space. With DEBO. Really, that isn't a joke, DEBO from the movie "Friday" is in space, and he has to fight vampires.

There is a robot/android that passes as human on the crew also, and that info could not be more worthless or irrelevant to the plot. It does nothing but try to make this seem "futuristic", and take up time you could have spent google searching girls gone wild.

The ending is.......nowhere to be found. I really think the writer said to himself "man, this sucks, I need to stop before I defy the laws of the universe by making a script so bad it actually implodes the space time continuim". The credits role, everyone dies and DEBO implies that he will be making sweet DEBO love to the android who apparently used to be a sex-bot before he blows the ship up, thereby killing Dracula, who by the way, isn't really Dracula, just an alien in a salvation army priced disco suit.

Skip it folks, it ain't campy, it ain't so bad it's good, it's just bad. If you have seen it already, my sympathies. Feel free to join me in my quest for a refund.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Good God, Boll sets the bar for crap
11 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
There is only one way this film should be watched - a la mystery Science Theatre 3000 style. Yep, it's that bad. It's so bad, that it's almost funny without trying to be. But the fact that the director was going for "scare" instead of "hilarious laughter" in regards to the audience reaction he tried to invoke, it seems sorta sad when you watch the actors attempt to muddle through a plot less and reason lacking story. You can see it in their eyes, they know the film they are in is utter garbage, but they can't help it.

This was done by the now infamous Uwe Boll, who has quickly become the anti-Christ of directors. Which reminds me, if any of you want more punishment, go rent BloodRayne, his latest crap-fest.

A good sign of how awful a film fails with regards to the audience is not just when you start looking around the theatre, finding the strangers in near darkness munching on popcorn more entertaining than what you paid to see(sometimes called people watching), oh no. It's when you start "people watching" and realize that everyone in the theatre is now staring at you or someone else already, instead of the screen- their eyes desperately seeking out anything that might be slightly stimulating after failing to find anything of the sort coming from the projection room. Folks, skip this. The only way it's enjoyable is in a "Plan 9" movie type of way, so bad it's good. If you simply must see this waste of celluloid, then grab some pizza, a lot of beer and invite some friends over to play a drinking game. Every time the characters do something without it making any sense, down a beer. You'll be drunk in ten minutes.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ravenous (1999)
8/10
A truly guilty pleasure
3 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This film was taken out of theaters after 2 days where I was living at the time, so I had to wait for almost 3 years to see it. When the opportunity presented itself, I snatched it up knowing that my expectations were much too high to actually enjoy any film, no matter how good. But Ravenous delivers, and in a big way. There are no weak spots in this almost all-star cast, the writing is is sensible and the dialog smart. Is it a horror movie? In some ways. Is it gory? Oh yes. In fact, regardless of how much gore was used, you get the feeling that this may be one of the most gore-filled flicks since Braindead. Part of this is because the film actually translates and emphasizes every drop of blood so that it gets maximum effect, but not to the extent that it seems forced. There is also a great story with strong messages, but it almost takes a backseat to the acting and fx. It does what movies should do, be enjoyable and make you think about them after the fact. Is cannibalism wrong? What would you do if you had to choose life or death? Definitely a movie worth buying, but send the kids to bed before popping it in. Don't be surprised to find yourself talking about the hypothetical situations this work demands you think about.

It's normal.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
One of my favorite films of all time
2 March 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I'm biased, I grew up watching the cartoon in the 1980's, and when this movie came out it did something no other movie/cartoon had ever done: killed the main character 20 minutes into the show. Talk about gonads, that was risky! If you didn't grow up in the Transformer universe, I'm not sure how this movie will strike you. It was precisely what a theatrical release of a series should be : true to the characters, but better in budget and quality. Folks, it doesn't get better than this for Transformer fans, and since most of us own a copy of this anyway, and since I already stated how my opinion is so heavily influenced by the fact that I was avid TF fan, I don't know why I'm commenting on this other than to give respect where it's due. The animation can still be enjoyed today, and the voices are excellent. A big nod to this film and everyone who was involved.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
dark non-comedy
1 March 2006
This is a dark comedy, and I think a lot of the gripes that come from people center around the idea that they were going to see a regular comedy, which would make them understandably disappointed after watching it. Even as a dark comedy though, I found it lacking severely in humor and message. To be sure, there are some memorable scenes that deserve a nod, but as a whole I don't think the film accomplishes anything that it might have set out to do. After watching, you get the feeling most of the movie that was shot might have ended up on the cutting room floor and thats why this flick doesn't really make much sense.

Is it considered more of a "deep" movie? Sure. But that doesn't mean that if you don't appreciate it in it's entirety it is because you are incapable of "getting" it, rather you don't particular care for the way this flick comes across. Don't be surprised if you find this movie lacking in purpose or success and are labeled "shallow" or unable to appreciate true cinema. Just because a film is categorized as a complex piece of work doesn't mean it is above reproach or criticism. Far from it, our standards should be higher when judging a movie of this type.

It isn't laugh out loud funny, and only squeaks by as a dark comedy in the loosest sense. It appeals to a large number of people who battle depression everyday, as the main character seems to, but if you aren't hooked on Prozac you aren't likely to sympathize with the "poor main character who works 14 hours a week and makes 6 figures a year".

Yes, in his pursuit of what he thinks will solve all of his problems (a better job) he realizes what is really important to him. Or he doesn't. I forget, I was counting how many times he was hit with fast food and how old that became halfway through the film, despite the directors attempt to turn that fast food assaults into a deep metaphor for the way people live. Now THAT made me laugh.

It isn't a great movie, and you should feel free to say that if you want to without fearing that some will accuse you of being a shallow action-movie-junkie. I would recommend that you skip it, unless you have nothing else to do or watch. If you find yourself unable to get out of seeing it, or you just are curious, let me do you a favor: Turn it into a drinking game.

1 shot = hit with fast food, 2 shots = hit with liquid, 3 shots = the main character cusses

Enjoy.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
North Country (2005)
4/10
So-so
27 February 2006
Many people had completely different reactions to this film, so I'm afraid despite what you read in all of the comment section you will probably be best served to just rent it yourself. There are some films that you may not care for that much, but you can see how other people would, so to be fair I would recommend you spend the 3 bucks on renting this one and make up your own mind.

Not having anything else to do last weekend during a thunderstorm, my girlfriend and I picked this up and watched it. She was completely enthralled by the story ( a fictionalized account of a true story, whatever the hell that translates into). I was not impressed, and actually spent half the movie wondering what the big deal was every time they cued dramatic music or she had a sharp intake of breath (the sign that she had been harassed)and more importantly, when it would end.

The acting is great by everyone, and this flick was edited in such a way that you only find out later why getting called names might bother the main character so much but by that time I was already thinking about playing some dominoes and getting a beer.

I couldn't sympathize with the main character no matter how hard I (and the director) tried to make myself. Although well acted, almost all of the men are two-dimensional villains with no redeeming qualities and basically just generic stereotypes, hard to have any opinion on them as cardboard cutouts could have achieved the same level of realism and depth. I actually felt that the female lead was overreacting (apparently this is what the director wants some of the men to feel before they realize she has a history of rape and abuse and therefore should feel ashamed by their initial reaction) to most of the earlier stuff, and I kept wondering who was watching her damn kids while she went out every other night to a bar and got smashed, flirting with any and everything with a pulse. Overall, I was very unsympathetic even after her startling courtroom confession of rape, and I actually was laughing at the dramatic reversal of approval from her co-workers and family which took all of twenty seconds. But others have found this to be a very moving piece of cinema, my girlfriend included. So unfortunately, you will probably have to see it yourself, as it seems to be "loved it" or "felt it was a good way to pass some time before dominoes on a rainy day".
4 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ultimate Avengers (2006 Video)
9/10
Not bad at all
27 February 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I had reservations on buying this DVD, even though I enjoyed the Ultimate books. I didn't think it would translate very well to TV, but I was pleasantly surprised. This was well worth the 14.00 price tag, and my 6 year old even got into it and wanted to watch it again immediately after seeing it. I thought this was a fair reflection on the quality of the work, as she cannot sit through Justice League or Spiderman cartoons, she finds them boring. But this one held her attention, probably because the artwork was good, the story was complex with a lot of nods thrown to us old comic book fuddies and readers of the original Ultimate books while still being able to convey the story effectively and be very enjoyable to those who never got into the characters in other formats. It's rare for a project dealing with characters who have such a long history with many to be so well received by hardcore fans and people introduced to the Marvel Universe for the first time as well. It isn't an exact reproduction of the first Ultimate Avengers line, the story is very similar but the scenes, actions and character interactions are almost all different. I say that so you won't worry that you are watching the same panels/actions/lines/ of the comics, but rather a new take on the same story of origin in the Ultimates books. I am already looking forward to the next installment and I'm pretty sure that this is going to start at least a dozen or so animated movies with the Ultimates themes. If the quality of the first stays consistent for all of the future installments, this will be a very successful line. Go ahead and pick it up for 14 bucks, it's worth it.
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hellraiser: Hellworld (2005 Video)
2/10
I'll tear your wallet apart!
24 February 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I keep watching the sequels, hoping beyond hope that we might get back to somewhere along the first 4 or so. And I keep getting really upset that we don't. In fact, this film is so far removed, that that the "Pinhead" mythology is set as a backdrop to a crazy father and his need for revenge. Pinhead is just fiction in this film, and man, I mean film in the loosest sense of the word. It's a theme for a party, and about 35 minutes into this poop fest you pretty much figured out what the heck is going on, how it will end, and that you are seriously mad for still watching it. This movie just uses the name *** raiser to market an otherwise unremarkable and unoriginal plot. Skip it. Or have your friend watch it first, then get the cliff notes. You won't be missing anything, and when you die, you'll be very happy that you didn't waste 90 minutes on this god awful tripe.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
One of the best in years
23 February 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I think everyone else has covered pretty much all thats great about this film, so I will keep mine short and sweet. This is a fantastic movie, a biographical look at a man from a time that seems so tragic and depressing (it was the great depression, after all) but still makes you feel good and warm about all that was right with people back then. When going on welfare was worse than starving to death, when getting your face smashed in just so your kids could eat for another week wasn't much of a sacrifice, when a true underdog could do the impossible........if this movie doesn't make you feel something, you are probably already dead.

Rent it or buy it, it appeals to all demographics. Plenty of action for those Rocky fans, plenty of style for the Godfather crowd. Without a doubt, one of the best movies I've seen in years.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Venom (2005)
2/10
Uhg, this sucked
22 February 2006
I love all types of horror films, old/new, b-movie/blockbusters whatever, I love them. I just don't particularly care for ones that are as terrible as this one. It might appeal to some people, if you like knowing how the next hour will play out after seeing the first scene, go for it. If you don't mind sub-plots that add nothing to the overall story, then this is your kind of film. I wasn't expecting 2001: A space Odyssey, but it would have been nice to watch a movie whose best claim to quality wasn't that SOMEone who was SOMEway involved with Scream had SOMEthing to do with this garbage.

Overall, this thing is just coaster quality, and only if the beer you sit it on is domestic.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Date Movie (2006)
2/10
Wow, something crappy this way comes
22 February 2006
This won't be a long review, as this movie doesn't warrant much more than a warning not to waste your money on it. I'm not sure how a movie so god-awful can make it to screen, but my faith in the system has been shaken. The film isn't funny, I'm not sure if it tries to be or not, but it's not. It references other movies (Meet the Parents, When Harry met Sally etc.) but doesn't really spoof them. This was the biggest problem I believe, as it doesn't have any semblance of flow or sense. Random scenes pop up, trying to get a laugh by basically reenacting the scene, not exaggerating it or making fun of it. I managed to sit through House of the Dead, but this film actually made me angry it was so unfunny. Please skip it, have one of your friends go see it instead and then ask about it. If they don't knock your teeth out for setting them up to lose money and 90 minutes of their life, then you can go see it yourself.
181 out of 252 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed