Diodorino-Rotolo1 Reviews

Blue Velvet (1986)

The Ultimate Thriller! If you haven't seen Blue Velvet, you're missing out!

[10/10 · 26 June 2007]

By far one of the scariest movies I've ever seen, Blue Velvet continues to hold viewers in its grasp long of the credits roll by. Why? It is a masterpiece, pure and simple. We have interesting, well-developed characters, we have an evil, unforgettable villain (Frank Booth), lustful visuals, an amazing score, and a story like no other.

The film revolves around clean-cut young teenager Jefery Beamount, who discovers a human air lying in a grass field while returning home from visiting his father in hospital. As he follows the crime himself, he digs deeper into a lurid, terrifying underworld of his seemingly pristine All-American town.

If you can stomach the offbeat and eccentric, Blue Velvet is undoubtedly you're movie!

A Series of Unfortunate Events (2004)

Okay, but not great.

[6/10 · 14 October 2006]

What can I say? I don't want to criticize anything, but I don't really want to praise much either. The acting is of a high standard, but its placed in front of a backdrop from which there is something missing. Don't ask what.

The music is good, but it's placed behind that backdrop. The casting . . . that's probably the best of all, with good actor Emily Browning as Violet. Jim Carey did a good job at playing Count Olaf, and the fact that his portrayal of him is silly and childish is actually a good thing, he made me laugh a few times.

Now let me talk about that 'backdrop'. It's basically the general feel of the movie that is always hanging in the air (or rather on the screen) while you're watching it. There's something wrong with it. I don't know what. Perhaps it's just the chronological scale of it. I mean, in order to base one film on three books, they had to squeeze everything into a tiny amount of time, so the events of the book are all messed up.

But overall, I think that most people can enjoy this movie.

*LOOK OUT FOR SOME OF MY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE IMDb*

The War of the Worlds (1953)

An Instant Classic

[7/10 · 5 October 2006]

Okay, so it isn't exactly very faithful to the novel.

Okay, so the acting is questionable, and the forced love story between the characters Sylvia and Dr. Forrester is not very believable.

So what!

I think that 'The War of the Worlds' deserves a lot of praise, for not only being the first film adaption of the novel after forty-five years since it was first published, but for its great special effects. Although in our stupid world in which the computer dominates the special effects you see on screen, people would label the visuals in this film 'unconvincing', you still have to appreciate this film, which was made in a world where computers couldn't do squat for the film-making industry.

They were all done with miniatures, people!

I don't care what anybody thinks, I still think this is slightly better than Steven Spielberg's remake.

The Hindenburg (1975)

High-flying indeed!

[7/10 · 19 August 2006]

I think this movie is excellent.

When I first saw it on TV in late 2003, T'd been waiting to see it for almost a year. And I can tell you, I wasn't disappointed!

Right now, I've got it on tape, and I've almost worn out the sound from watching it so much.

The visuals were quite impressive for 1975, and I especially enjoyed the false newsreel at the beginning. The score was also quite nice, great addition to the background of the story.

The acting - amazing as well! George C. Scott truly lived up to my expectations. tHe supporting character actors and actresses were very good also. The movie's only fall-back is its historical accuracy.

But overall, if you can just endure the nonsense, you'll really be satisfied.

Once again,

Diodorino-Rotolo1

PS: Look out for some of my other reviews on the IMDb!

The Wizard of Oz (1939)

Excellent

[10/10 · 22 July 2006]

Three cheers for The Wizard of Oz!

'Hip, hip, hip, hurruh!'

'Hip, hip, hip, hurruh!'

'Hip, hip, hip, hurruh!'

This movie is so great I just had to put that in.

Anyway, like most people, I couldn't remember when I first saw it, or count how many times I've seen it. Who hasn't heard of it? Who dosen't just love it. 'The Wizard of Oz is basically the quintessential children's film. And most adults find it enchanting as well.

Judy Garland gives a great performance as Dorothy, and I also admire Jack Haley's portrayal of the Tin Woodsman.

Okay, so the special effects are not exactly up to today's standards, but the background visuals are still so beautiful, so viabrant, that it dosen't really matter.

*SPOILER BELOW*

The message of the movie is quite obvious. It's 'There's no place like home'. Bit of a cliché, but still works.

*THE SPOILER HAS PASSED*

What else can I say?

I would undoubtedly recommend The Wizard of Oz for both you and your children.

The Passion of the Christ (2004)

Gruesome and Almost Sickening

[2/10 · 22 July 2006]

This film is without a doubt, the most grotesque thing I have seen.

Being a Christian person, I gave it a two-star rating and not a one, but only because it shows us what Jesus did. But mark my words, if it wasn't for that, I would give it one star.

In the hours before I saw it, I was pretty exited about watching it. While I was watching it when it aired that night on television, I didn't cry at all*, but there were a few moments where I just had to look away to avoid being absolutely shocked.

I swear, I did not eat for at least fifteen hours after I watched the film. And it was still difficult to swallow food for at least twenty-four hours. Even now when I accidentally think about 'The Passion of the Christ' while eating, it puts me off.

This film is definitely not for everyone. If you are easily disgusted, I'm begging you not to see this.

*Unfortionatley, I find it hard to feel emotion while watching movies.

Yours Truly, Diodorino.Rotolo1

*LOOK OUT FOR SOME OTHER OF MY REVIEWS*

The Poseidon Adventure (2005 TV Movie)

Hurruh! Finally, a GOOD remake!

[6/10 · 14 July 2006]

Well firstly, I think this movie was actually pretty good. I don't know what these other people are going on about bad acting and stuff like that.

Second, I do admit that the storyline of a group of terrorists setting off bombs that capsize the ship a bit cheesy and paranoid, but besides that, I think you'll be able to endure it.

The 'Poseidon' in this version was absolutely splendid, with even a computer room and a bar.

This one isn't quite as good as the original, but I would still recommend it.

YOURS TRULY,

Diodorino-Rotolo1

(PS: That isn't my real name.)

Poseidon (2006)

Read this, and you'll know how bad this movie is!

[2/10 · 5 July 2006]

NOOOOO!!! This film was absolute trash! I see 'Poseidon' as a dire insult to the 1972 version. There are so many elements of it that are just left out! Where's the diologue? Where's the interplay between characters? Where's the flavour?!!!

The movie is about a ship called Poseidon, and is hit by a rogue wave. The ship capsizes, and it becomes a struggle for the passengers to get out of the unstable boat. At least the original one wasn't full of bulls**t! For example, the helium-filled balloons that are floating in the ballroom seem to change to normal air-filled balloons.

And it all happens so fast! I swear, only five minutes into the movie, Poseidon capsizes. There is no introduction for the characters, and throughout the movie, I didn't even know their fictional names!

And it is so predictable! Instantly when I saw that drunken cowboy walking over that makeshift bridge they made, I knew he was going to fall off. And he did! The guy gets crushed by an elevator - and I predicted that too! The ship sinks just after they get out - yes, you guessed it, I saw that coming as well.

Don't waste your time with this piece of garbage. Get the 1972 version.

Yours truly,

Diodorino-Rotolo1

The Da Vinci Code (2006)

A waste of Ron Howard talent

[2/10 · 7 June 2006]

This film is, without a doubt, one of the most confusing pieces of garbage it has ever been my dismay to witness.

Because I'm a fan of Tom Hanks, it's not easy for me to say that I just didn't like this film. Through it, there are moments where I thought things like: 'Wait a minute, isn't he supposed to be on their side?' and 'Why is he suddenly pointing a gun at him?'. And the plot line is just ludicrous. So did Jesus engage in sexual activities with Mary Maglidine? However, the film does have a few good bits, such as Hanks's character doing a presentation about symbols. Even though it's crap, I think you should still see it. But don't get me wrong, it does get a bit weird when the bad guy starts whipping himself.

PS: Tom gets a really bad hairstyle.