Reviews

29 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1/10
My childhood was murdered for a product rollout
17 November 2022
I remember being traumatized watching all my childhood toys get murdered on screen but it hit me harder as a grown up when I learned it was all because they wanted us to buy new toys so they had to kill off the old ones.

Absolutely astounding level of cold hearted greed. They showed no love for for their young fans or any respect for the characters they created.

They even ditched the most talented voice actors in the business in the process. The new characters they brought in weren't even modeled after actual cars but random futuristic hodge nonsense that they wouldn't have to pay royalties for.

Everything about this project was an abomination. I hope Jay Bakal and Tom Griffin got their actual cars keyed in real life.
3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Horribly empty story
16 September 2022
How shows with this big a budget get created with little more than a pitch meeting is shocking to me. Want a job in Hollywood, just appeal to your producers ego by inserting them into the story.

There was so much rich universe to explore but this gives nothing but skeleton characters and a bland watered down journey for them to traverse.

Did nobody care enough to see a completed script before this show got underway?

The characters have no depth. Their behavior is frequently absurd. The action is poorly edited and unbelievable. The sets are frequently small in contrast to vast CGI shots surrounding it. But most of it is just slow, dull, and unengaging.
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Book of Boba Fett (2021–2022)
8/10
Generally fun, but you see them making their first story line mistakes
11 February 2022
Warning: Spoilers
MAJOR SPOILERS: Positives: 1. Generally great visuals and atmosphere, an gives overall complete story.

2. Fun call backs and cameos from new and old characters that adds some depth to the Mandalorian universe.

Negatives: 1. As with Darth Vader, the backstory takes away much of what was great about the character of Boba Fett. The stoic badass Eastwood-eque character was at his most powerful in Empire when you knew the least about him. The prequals largely demolished the overall effect of both Vader and Fett. The Mandalorian is largely a complete recreation of who the Boba Fett character originally was. As a result, we already had this character in play and Boba Fett feels like either a redundancy or a completely unrelated and new character in the star wars universe.

2. The Character of Fett gets a fairly complete story arc which is nice but if any character in the series should have been written off as a result, it was him. His story is finished. The actor is aged. He should have been given a heroes death and pass the baton if that was essence of the story.

3. The introduction of Cad Bane is spectacularly good and disappointingly brief. I think the writers completely missed the mark here. Bane is easily the best unique characters to come out of the animated universe and to bring him in only to kill him after one and a half episodes was not only disappointing it was a huge mistake. Much like the death of Darth Maul, this was a character the story and fans had made an connection with and that we would have followed for years to come (imagine how much better the prequals would have been if Obi-Won as chasing and battling Darth Maul to avenge his master in the second film). Instead they had to introduce new villains and waste time trying to make us care about them just to fill the same role. I suspect this franchise will have to do the same, particularly if they are looking to anchor the next chapter around the Marshall and the cyborgs. People wanted to see more Bane instead will get more characters with less impact.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Joker (I) (2019)
10/10
Not sure this was meant to be a joker movie
5 October 2019
Fairly certain this project started our life as a remake of The King of Comedy until some assistant said, "you know if we just put Joaquin in clown makeup and called this 'The Joker' we would probably make another $500 million..."
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
How did this script get past storyboard?
22 December 2017
This movie reverses the entire story and character arcs from the first film. We didn't have time for this. How can you tell a trilogy that leads everything back to the start after the second chapter.

I think it is the consequence of most of the best gen-X storytellers coming from TV/Netflix world (Breaking Bad, Lost, Game of Thrones, etc). They have some really good ideas, twists, character journeys in their head. The downfall in this situation is that they are giving each creator a two hour window to do it. It doesn't work.

It is extremely hard to have a continuous storyline in a movie franchise, it is simply too long between films, and too brief telling. Its ok to give a wink to a past event or allow your characters to develop over time, but the majority of the most successful franchises (Indiana Jones, James Bond, etc) are just the same enjoyable characters having a new adventure. Any actual continuity is mostly in our heads.

This could have been a really great TV series. As a single film, its a jumbled mess. Too many climaxes, rollercoaster character arcs, and no time to enjoy any payoff we might have experienced along the way.

Feels like I just binge watched 8 episodes of a TV show.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cop Rock (1990)
1/10
Ridiculous and poorly done on top of it
10 September 2015
Hard to believe some of the other reviews. "Innovative...fresh...ahead of its time..." Idiots like this green lighted this crapfest.

If you like musicals, be my guest, but even for a musical it was terrible. The songs were lame, the acting was hammy, and the pace was completely abrupt.

It worked neither as a cop show nor as a musical and got worse when you combined them. About like trying to merge Arena League Football and Dance Wars. "They play football, but instead touchdowns they score points with a dance off!"

You can't blame people for not letting themselves go when you haven't the faintest idea where you are trying to take them.
5 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Why did they make a movie about Indiana Jones Sr?
4 August 2015
Basic reminder of who Indiana Jones is, since George Lucas seemed to forget...

1. Indiana Jones is NEVER OUT OF HIS ELEMENT. He knows every custom and culture, speaks seemingly every language and isn't intimidated by anyone. He's got friends in every seedy bar. He knows the truth behind every urban legend. Drop him anywhere on the planet and he'll adapt and survive.

Indy's Father is never in his element. He is socially awkward, even with his family. He doesn't intimidate anybody.

2. Indiana Jones is REMORSELESS. Indy has a code of honor to be sure, but make no mistake, he is a thief and a killer. He steals golden idols from ignorant natives, kills Nazis and pagans by the dozen, and has never lost a wink of sleep over it.

Indy's Father is remorseful is highly judgmental. He disapproves a murder and theft, and constantly reminds his son of this. If he kills anyone it is practically by accident.

3. Women THROW THEMSELVES at Indiana Jones. Whether you are talking his students, his colleague's daughters, his colleagues themselves, or random women he meets; women chase after Indiana Jones like giant boulders. Indy just hits it and quits it. There is no other way to say it. He ditched Marion twice. Once when she was a love lost teen, and again when she was apparently pregnant. You never heard of Willy Scott again, but he probably ditched her halfway to Delhi.

Women hit and quit Indy's father. He's not without his charm, but has no real sex appeal. The idea of young women chasing after him seems suspicious at best.

4. Indy DOESN'T NEED ANYONE. He is a loner. He has friends and sidekicks, but they are generally useless dead-weight he has to drag to safety.

Indy's father is a dead-weight. He is constantly putting his faith in the wrong people, and has to be drug to safety on the back of a motorcycle. Not useless to be sure, but you can't see him doing much without help.

Indiana Jones is Rick Blaine with a bullwhip.

Indy's father is John Steed with osteoporosis.

That's who was screen in this film. Harrison Ford was playing his dad from Last Crusade.
1 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Just Make Your Trailer George!
3 August 2015
Warning: Spoilers
15 years later this is still the most disappointing film on my list. I gave it 1 star, but my review focuses on what Lucas (almost) did right.

In my mind there are four franchises that transcend all the others: James Bond, Indiana Jones, Star Trek, and Star Wars.

Of these, Star Wars is the most difficult one to work with. It has numerous interconnected characters and story lines, and specific rules and events to work around. This is in stark contrast to Indiana Jones, Star Trek, and James Bond which are a series of independent stories. Few side characters are carried forward, and the overall objectives and enemies are every changing. Occasionally even the actors are replaced and nobody seems to mind. Even if you mess up the formula in these franchises and make a bad film, the fans forgive you and move on to the next one.

Star Wars doesn't offer that kind of flexibility. It was also the first of the franchises to attempt a prequel, which compounded the problem. From the very beginning (Episode Four) backs stories were referenced. There was clearly a collection of exciting events that had taken place which viewers wanted to know more about. Lucas even teased us with it, making the eventual reveal of the truth all the more effective.

But when it came to the prequels, Lucas took an existing problem and made it worse. With the viewers already knowing the eventual outcome, and existing characters involved, Lucas extended his obligations to include nearly the entire cast and plot lines from the original trilogy. Even characters like Chewy, C3PO, R2D2, and Boba Fett, were needlessly included.

Lucas mistakes in the prequels were many, but his excessive plot commitments to the old trilogy, made them uncorrectable going forward. He boxed himself into a corner with a story line that was both predictable and over-complicated for the next two films.

Personally, I never really liked the decision to anchor everything around Darth Vader. He'd already made too many modifications to that character as it was. Many great movies are anchored around mysterious villains. But that mystery gives the villain their power. Vader was at his most powerful in the opening scene of New Hope. We didn't know who he was, what he was, or what he wanted, but he scared the crap out of us. He clearly could not be messed with, and had powers that we had only begun to imagine. He was the Empire's bogey man. By the final scene of Jedi, Vader was a vulnerable and human character. He'd been robbed of all his emotional power, but it didn't really matter because the story was complete.

With the prequels, Lucas is trying to turn back time on that entire transformation. He wants to make Anakin lovable and endearing, and then freighting again. Even if such a re-transformation were possible, it was executed so poorly the audience was laughing by the end. Vader is a winy lunatic now, neither loved nor feared. It was a mistake and I don't think any writer could have corrected it.

But giving Lucas the benefit of the doubt in crafting the prequels as The Anakin Trilogy...let's look at the four things he (almost) did right.

1. The forbidden/doomed love aspect was very compelling...but it was absent from this first film. The fact that Padme was older than Anakin, and had no real connection to him from the start, made it all the more awkward when it was forced down our throats over the next two films. If anything, we leave the first film with Padme engaging in a motherly relationship with Anakin. How were supposed to come back from that? Lifeless dialogue and creepy moments aside, Lucas could have successfully rode this storyline to Anakin's downfall, but only he does so from the start.

2. Darth Maul was fantastic...but dead. Sure it was a recycled character, but it worked. Darth Maul was the Darth Vader of this film. He was a mysterious and sinister villain that the audience actually connected with. In fact he was probably the most memorable new character from the prequels. The problem was he is killed off, and that connection dies with him. Things were setup for a powerful revenge subplot between Obi-Won and Maul which could have carried the next two films. It also presented Anakin with a future vision of himself, a chance to witness how powerful the dark side really was, but this avenue is never explored. Bottom line, Maul's death set in motion a perpetual cycle of villains to be introduced over the next films, with lesser effect.

3. The Young Obi-Won. Obi-Won Kenobi was a very stoic character in the original trilogy, but he always carried this smirk which seemed to say, "son, if you only knew..." The splash of color on Obi-Won's character and past was probably the biggest thing fans craved from the original trilogy. Lucas flirted with this, but never really went with it. Obi-Won is just a supporting character engaged in a variety of minor side-plots. He loses some friends, kills a few bad guys, but in the end we don't know much more about him than we did before.

4. Give Us The Evil Empire! The trailer was great because it completely packed with sinister looking characters, epic space battles, screams of tragedy...exactly what we always thought rise of the empire must have looked like. What Lucas actually delivered was a fake empire, a fake death star, and tragic death of one guy we just met. The rise of the empire should have been so much more. The fact that it all amounted to a few legislative votes, trade disputes, and military projects was the most uninspired approach Lucas could have come up with. And he still took three films to do it.
0 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
The Most Underrated Bond Film
6 May 2014
In the ebb and flow of Bond series between serious and fun, this is the better of two serious Dalton films. If you are a fan of Craig era films I highly recommend this one. Where License to Kill leans towards more of a pure action film, this is a classic spy story and has a surprisingly intricate plot comparable to From Russia With Love.

While I enjoy the Moore era films as well, they are aging quite poorly and often look like virtual parodies of the series in retrospect. The Living Daylights on the other hand is aging rather well. It is features a believable plot and some of the most spectacular stunts of the analog age of Bond films. TLD also marks the end of the USSR era within the Bond franchise and I think the series would lose something with it.

Dalton's portrays a very deep and believable character. He is serious about his job, but clearly jaded by his past and conflicted about the motives and competence of those he is forced to work with. It meshes well with the bond girl choice of Kara, who presents a naive innocence virtually unseen in other bond girls, and who Dalton's bond is strongly drawn to try and protect.

People complain that Dalton wasn't enough fun, but overall I think this movie is a blast and compares favorably to the likes of Skyfall, which people generally praise.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Wow. What did anybody hate about this movie?
7 July 2013
If you loved the other ones, I see no reason to dislike this one at all. I thought it really refreshed the series and made the entire plot line deeper and clearer.

Full of action, tension, and clever twists.

I think people didn't like that the went a little heavy on the sci-fi plot angle and was heavy on special effects, but the series did that two films ago.

Great stunt work as you expect with every Bourne film.

Maybe people feel it is a little redundant with James Bond films these days, I don't know. But I hope they make a sequel.
5 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Bane had so much potential! I'm disappointed in where it went with him.
28 July 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Great movie, but nowhere near as good as #2. The Joker and Harvey Dent were such powerful characters, they made #2 what it was. This film was missing a character like that.

It was an interesting take on Bane. The voice was interesting. I would have gone with something more morphed and unnatural. The haughty accent took away Bane's potential to be truly frightening, but it also made him a bit more cerebral and human, which is what I think Nolan wanted. It definitely made him a more distinct character than just another half cyborg-vader type.

But Bane had so much potential. They built him up into a really cool villain. Rather than a brainless roid raging thug, he was built up into this evil neo-political sociopath...then he kind of just disappeared. He just sat there watching his little ant farm, you couldn't tell what he was wanting to happen. The final fight was a major letdown. All of the fights seemed a little like drunken brawls, just punching and broken ribs. But after all they had done to center the movie around Bane, they killed him off like he was just a sidekick henchman. He was too important for that. All of the good guys (Batman, Kyle, Blake, Gordon, Fox, Foley) were balanced out only by Bane, and he was pulling it off, but he needed to be "nuked" at the end. To just downplay him, kill him, and try and replace him with the weak Miranda character didn't work for me. Her objectives and evil side were never clear enough.

That was the hardest thing to accept: what did Bane/Miranda want? The original league of shadows was an anti-crime terrorist group. The goal was simply to destroy Gothom almost Punisher style. The Joker was an agent of chaos. His only goal was mayhem and destruction. Where did Bane/Miranda fit? They almost wanted them to be both, but it made no sense. What did they seek in letting Gothom exist for those 5 months? Was it a suicide mission? They never planned to escape the bomb. Why did they want to die with the city?

Overall I really liked it, but it could have been better. The size and scope of these films was truly epic, but it overwhelmed the characters in the end. Batman almost struggled to find his place within this film.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Pacific (2010)
1/10
Everyone should see it and nobody one should see it
20 December 2010
Loved band of brothers, but I'm guessing Tom Hanks heard that too many times. This whole series seemed to be made in the spirit of "if you loved band of brothers, you missed the point." Extremely violent, gory, heart wrenching, and depressing. 10 hours of mostly Omaha Beach from Saving Private Ryan. Made what the soldier's experienced in Band of Brothers look like Stripes.

Kind of falls into that Passion of the Christ category where I'm glad I saw it, won't watch it again, can't recommend it to friends, nor deter them away from it.

Very horrible chapter of history that has gone under-taught in schools. Great to see the sacrifices these men made brought into proper attention.

From a film standpoint it was poorly sewn together. The ties between the characters in the film are weak if present at all. None of the characters is very personally compelling or distinctive by comparison to BofB. They all kind of blend together amidst the hellish background noise. You forget who is who, who got killed, who went crazy, and if they were even known to the other characters.

You should feel obligated to watch it, but don't expect to enjoy it.
10 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
This film is the reason Star Trek went on to become what it has
4 January 2010
The original series was considered a mixed failure, with a small, loyal following.

The first film was considered more or less an odd-ball flop.

Even most of the actors were hesitant to pursue this idea any further.

BOTTOM LINE: THIS IS THE FILM THAT GAVE BIRTH THE NEXT 5 SEQUELS, 4 SPIN-OFF TV SHOWS, AND MULTIPLE OTHER FILMS.

Star Trek would have died off alongside Lost In Space if not for this film.

Virtually all Trek films that followed were trying to recapture the spirit spawned by this one.

Highly entertaining and fun. By far the most rewatchable off all the series films.

Ricardo Montalban and Shattner are two of the greatest over-actors of all time and they were given the perfect script to dIsplay themselves.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cliffhanger (1993)
1/10
Another Die-hard Ripoff
23 June 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I just can't get past what a ripoff of die-hard this movie was.

-Solitary hero visits his ex only to find a gang of international thieves have taken over her workplace in the process of a multi-million dollar heist.

-Villians kidnap the ex and her coworkers and use them to help recover their money.

-Old father-figure sage is executed by the lead villain.

-Hero takes it upon himself to take out team of thieves one at a time.

-Hero narrowly escapes with his life thanks to his wits and some death defying leaps.

-Throw in several major explosions and a helicopter crash and it ends with a final showdown with the hero and lead villain hanging from a sheer cliff.

-Eventually the villain plummets to his doom and the money rains down everywhere.

I'm surprised it didn't take place on Mount Nakatomi.
9 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Citizen Kane (1941)
8/10
Model T of Movies
23 June 2009
To argue that Citizen Kane is the greatest movie ever is like arguing that the Model T is the greatest car ever made. There was a day when it was true, but if you are arguing now, you are just being silly.

That isn't a knock against the Model T. If you see one driving down the road, it is certainly worth a look. But if you honestly ask yourself where it ranks on cars you'd like to have, it is pretty far down the list.

Film buffs want their art to have timeless capacity to it. It would be comforting to folks in Hollywood to know that Citizen Kane is being appreciated and enjoyed 400 years from now along the lines that the Mona Lisa is appreciated and enjoyed. But I don't see it happening.

This film will have some lasting historical value. But movies are valued much more on their storytelling than their artistic achievement. The story of Citizen Kane is only above average.
0 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rocky (1976)
8/10
Shocked this movie might drop out of the top 250
23 June 2009
I'm shocked that this film may drop out of the top 250. Kind of a similar story to Superman or Star Wars in that its reputation was spoiled by a bunch of cheesy sequels.

Had Rocky been a lone film it probably would rank above Raging Bull at #73.

Bottom line is this is one of the more (re)watchable movies ever made. Entertaining, exciting, and uplifting (and without the spoon-fed Hollywood ending the series is synonymous with).

Anybody who did hasn't been motivated to run around the block by this movie or its soundtrack must be paralyzed in body or spirit.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Coppola's finest work until Captain EO
31 July 2008
Easily on the short list of most overrated films of all time.

There were items of discussion brought up after this film so it wasn't a total loss but I didn't see how this is "the most honest account of the futility of war." A better description might be "The Most Schizophrenic Account of the Futility of War."

This film was an ambiguous fantasy and people were free to read into it any way they wanted.

Another word for it might be acid trip.

This film reaffirmed my belief that Coppola is the most overrated director of all time, but man he can assemble a cast.
23 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rear Window (1954)
7/10
Hated the ending
31 July 2008
Warning: Spoilers
****MAJOR SPOILER ALERTS****

This movie could have been about a 9 but they built it all up to the most stupid and predictable ending ever!

Where was the twist?

What was the message? Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean your neighbors aren't trying to kill you...? Really disappointing.

Hitchcock had it primed to deliver a powerful ending with Stewart's paranoia either destroying his own life (getting his girlfriend jailed, his best friend fired, and losing his own mind) and/or destroying his neighbor's life for no reason (getting him arrested for murder even though his wife was still alive, or killing him/suicide out of fear).

The era this film was made demanded a much more wholesome ending. As a result we were forced to accept that despite all logic and evidence to the contrary, the paranoid crackpot murder theory of a shut-in depressed photographer was dead right from the beginning.

This film should be remade with a much more intelligent and thought provoking ending.
37 out of 79 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Got a 10 from me
31 July 2008
It got a 10 from me.

Is it the #1 movie of all time? Hard to say but I think people are approaching the question all wrong.

Folks are really sensitive to whether or not The Dark Knight should replace The Godfather as #1 on IMDb.

It reminds me of a scene from the Simpsons where the barflies at Moe's are arguing non-sensibly.

"Mohammad Ali in his prime was way better than anti-lock breaks. OK, but what about Johnny Mathis versus Diet Pepsi?"

The Dark Knight and Godfather are almost incomparable films but both achieved exactly what they were striving for.

-Immortalized very different characters and actors.

-Tremendously enjoyable, on very different levels.

-Beautifully crafted, in very different ways.

-Will come to define their genres, very different genres.

BOTTOM LINE: YOU CAN RANK BOTH MOVIES 10 AND YOU ARE NOT INSULTING THE OTHER.

Thoughts I had after seeing this movie:

-I was prepared for how great a performance Heath Ledger was going to give but I was really blindsided Aaron Eckhart. The character of Harvey Dent will stick with you after the film as much as the Joker.

-Acting and script across the board was noticeably better.

-As much as Batman Begins attempts to bring the series into the scope of believability and realism, this one takes it another step further. No element of this film felt cartoonish or campy.

-I was pleased that the previews did not spoil the story (as I saw them probably 30 times). I don't think we were shown an image from the final third of the film.

-I was pleased that the filmmakers went the extra mile to tell the complete story. I was waiting for them to cut us off and finish with a "wait for the sequel" ending.

THIS IS A STAND ALONE FILM, WHICH IF ANYTHING, MAKES ME THE MOST COMFORTABLE GIVEING IT A 10.
9 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Outstanding.
10 June 2008
I watched this film 3 times back to back to back on a long flight and absolutely loved it. Most people I recommended it to came back lukewarm though.

Something to bear in mind is this is not an action film. Go into it expecting something more along the lines of Seven or Silence of the Lambs.

This film will leave a lot of questions in your mind and it won't spoon feed you the answers. You are expected to think and come up with some of your own conclusions. And you won't necessarily be happy with them (again I think this rubbed people wrong).

Overall though, this is just a great suspense-thriller with some of the best dialog I've heard in years. Anton Chigurh is easily a top 5 on screen villain.

It will keep you thinking with you for days if you let it.
3 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Completely worthless plot
22 May 2008
Warning: Spoilers
What made the resident evil series interesting is that it is the thinking man's zombie movie. It offered a typical sci-fi plot but it kept things based around certain rules, threw in some twists, and maintained at least reasonable premises.

This movie strays from having any remotely rational plot and feels no need to offer explanations when it does. As a result it is a huge disappointment if you slow up looking for anything more than hacking up zombies for 94 minutes.

(SPOILER ALERT) Here are just a few of the needlessly ridiculous premises you are asked to just accept without any further explanation...

1. T-virus has spread and essentially wiped out humanity. Surprisingly, this caused all plant life to die and the earth turned into a desert. Take that greenpeace!

2. Alice is now a jedi and can use the force to move rocks, bikes, and flaming gasoline at will.

3. Zombies are incapable of climbing the 8 foot chain link fence surrounding Umbrella headquarters, but can easily scale the Eifel Tower and with surprising stealth.

4. Olivera shoots a zombie which is clearly munching on LJ but thinks nothing of it. The entire group has apparently adopted a don't ask, don't tell policy regarding infection.

5. Zombies have been functioning without any actual need of food or water (according to doctors) and will continue to for, and I quote, "DECADES." No further explanation given.

6. Too much T-virus antidote turns you into an octopus.

7. After reading an incoherent diary in Utah, the group decides to drive to Alaska, but opts to gas up in....LAS VEGAS! (damn these Umbrella maps) Umbrella anticipates this move and has an ambush waiting at the exact casino they stop at.

8. Umbrella installed an on/off switch in Alice and cameras in her eyes but apparently did not find those things useful in tracking her the past 7 years or in confirming her identity when they spot her via satellite. Either that or Alice has no bars in rural Utah.

9. Umbrella is cloning Alice and finds the best way to extract her blood is through repeated unnecessary and exotic deaths. Unfortunately cloned blood isn't as 'magic' as regular blood and they only end up piling up Alice corpses in the back yard like lawn clippings.

10. Umbrella is developing a nation of domesticated zombies for use as Walmart photographers.

11. Umbrella is developing an army of extra angry zombies and goes to the trouble of putting them in matching uniforms.

12. In the event that society falls, mormon hillbillies will opt to lure innocent people into their lairs to feed their zombie dogs. Remember that then next time a missionary stops by your house.

13. Eating infected meat causes crows to get infected...but not really. It also causes them to go blind...but not really.

14. Zombies rule the earth and Umbrella is essentially trapped underground but the primary challenge the company is facing is the shortage of cheap labor.

15. Food, water and fuel are almost gone, humanity is vanished, zombies are everywhere but the primary challenge facing survivors is...Umbrella Corp.
45 out of 64 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Superman (1978)
10/10
This is the most under rated movie on my rankings list
15 October 2007
This movie is THE most underapprecated of all time. I think people are hesitant to endorse it because superhero films seem cheesy and it's original sequels were absolutely horrible. Horrible! But the fact is this movie has it all!

Great direction, check. Richard Donner is fantastic and nearly killed himself making this movie.

Great story/dialog, check. Mario Puzo of Godfather fame wrote an outstanding script for this film.

Great actors, check. Marlon Brando, Gene Hackman, Christopher Reeve, Glenn Ford, Ned Beatty, Jackie Cooper, and Terrence Stamp.

Great special effects, check. In the era of CGI it won't be appreciated, but the effects in this film were considered incredible at the time. And what is more, most were actually real! Christopher Reeve and Donner spent nearly six months after principle filming was completed just doing the flying sequences. They used the kitchen sink trying to make you believe a man could fly.

Great soundtrack, check. JOHN WILLIAMS AT HIS BEST!

What's not to like? I could watch this movie over and over again. Highly entertaining and fun.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Huge disappointment
14 October 2007
I am a huge Tarantino fan. Pulp Fiction and the Kill Bills are easily in my top 10 all time.

This movie sucked. The story is boring. The script lacks wit. The acting was subpar for the caliber of actors they rounded up.

It isn't an emotional crime drama. It isn't an exciting action movie. It definitely isn't a funny-cool dark comedy.

I don't know what it is, but it isn't as cool as it should be.

Give Quinton a pass as he was basically a first time director and enjoy his later work over and over again. But don't watch this one. It won't meet any expectations you have coming into it.
13 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Red Dragon (2002)
10/10
Best of the series
14 October 2007
This is one of the most underrated films I have ever seen. Absolutely riveting story. Outstanding performances by some outstanding actors top to bottom.

Hopkins, Norton, Fiennes are absolutely awesome in this. Harvey Keitel, Emily Watson, Mary-Louise Parker, and Phillip Seymore Hoffman also add some nice performances.

I think Hollywood didn't give enough acclaim to this movie because Brett Ratner is such a young and unproven director (and it closely follows the book), but he nailed this one.

If you haven't seen this and you enjoyed any of the others, do yourself a favor and watch it. Turn out the lights, take the phone off the hook and enjoy.

This is the most thrilling and entertaining of the four Lector films.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Goodfellas (1990)
1/10
Most overrated movie ever!
14 October 2007
Maybe I was so disappointed in this movie because I'd already seen the Godfathers and the Sopranos, but this movie couldn't have disappointed me more.

I don't even know where to begin. The plot was dull and predictable. I realize it is based on a true story, but it was still boring.

For the caliber of actors in it, I wasn't moved by any of the performances.

The pace was choppy. The final half hour felt like an entirely different film.

Very disappointing mob saga and one of the most overrated film of all time.
87 out of 219 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed