FountainPen Reviews

Reign of Fire (2002)

People of the world unite to fight the invading fire-breathing dragons!

[4/10 · 23 May 2018]

This post-apocalyptic thriller nonsense is about par for Matthew McConaughey, but way way substandard for Christian "American Psycho" Bale. And how Gerard Butler got pulled into the mix, I just do not know. It is a very odd combination for a silly movie, with barely passable fx. The words 'cheesy' and 'low budget' come to mind, and on that basis the flick doesn't disapppoint. If this sort of bottom-feeding genre is your thing, you might actually enjoy it. I cannot rate it higher than 4/10, and that's really stretching things, throwing in an extra point for Bale. Another reviewer, who agrees with my rating, referred to this movie as "Mad Max meets the Dragons".

Two decades hence, fire-breathing dragons (ha ha ha) have taken over our planet, and the few remaining pockets of human beings struggle to survive and combat the continuing threat. Honestly !

Yeah, we all know how people from different nations/religions/etc/etc will pull together to fight a common enemy, and that's what happens here. (yawn)

I had to chuckle at the reviewers who gave this movie 10 or 9... such as Margie8321 who said in July 2002:<"Reign of Fire" was a great!> Yes, that's exactly what she wrote, and she's reviewed the magnificent total of 6 movies! Wow!

The Woodsman (2004)

Well acted, important film, grim subject matter, for adults

[8/10 · 23 May 2018]

Definitely a movie that will get you thinking and pondering, as a convicted child moleseter, who has served his prison time, tries to start life anew, suffering the gamut of emotions and sensations. Kevin Bacon turns in a star performance in this very difficult role of a pedophile, a role that calls for many subtle displays of feeling, proper acting talent! Superbly done. All aspects of this picture click together so well, to produce a solid, valuable film. This is a real cinematic success, rarely seen these days, harks back to the 50s and 60s when sensitive themes were often tackled head-on by the studios, and not always with success. 2004's "The Woodsman" deserves a strong 8/10, almost 9/10.

Matchstick Men (2003)

Clever, well-conceived movie with an excellent plot and super acting !

[8/10 · 23 May 2018]

No spoliers here, nothing revealed, just my opinion that once again Nicolas Cage lifts a flick way up to enviable levels with his brilliant acting and interpretation of a character. Directors must find him so refreshing to hande. This is a clever film, a pleasure to watch, engrossin, entertaining, with smart dialogue. 8/10. This is a winner ~ watch it!

Kids (1995)

Meaningless, tawdry, dull, stupid rubbish. Don't waste your time.

[2/10 · 23 May 2018]

Awful, horrible piece of cinema. Who the hell thought up this flick? It is deeply insulting to the viewer. I can't recall when I've ever seen a more sleazy, nasty exploitive youngster "movie". It borders on pornography, frankly, and is inordinately demeaning to women. Give it a pass. I rate it 2/10 only because there are some films which are worse than this garbage. Btw, I can see that it will appeal to juveniles, especially 9 to 13 year old boys, as well as, presumably, dirty old men! Yecchhh.

Syriana (2005)

A waste of 2 hours and 8 minutes

[4/10 · 23 May 2018]

Clooney and Damon couldn't save this convoluted and perplexing flick. 4/10 is the most I can offer. Give it a miss unless you are an extremely dedicatd Damon and/or Clooney fan. The film gave me a headache and annoyed me greatly. Not good!

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (1981)

Mildly amusing nonsense, no depth, some lousy acting

[4/10 · 23 May 2018]

Sorry I cannot recommend this silly movie which tries to be a meaningful thingie but which fails utterly. There are some slightly tittilating segments, hence my 4/10 rating, but the flick is vastly over-rated, at least here on the IMdB.

Contraband (2012)

Lots of violence, but dull and boring overall

[3/10 · 22 May 2018]

I found watching this movie to be a very tedious, tiring chore. Cannot think of anything to recommend it, unless you are a big fan of Mark Wahlberg (which I am not, nor do I dislike him). Not recommended. 3/10. #

Made in Britain (1982 TV Movie)

Tim Roth shines in this disturbing but amusing film. Highly-recommended.

[9/10 · 20 May 2018]

Absolutely fascinating film. You have to wonder, though, how accurate it is, especially with regard to the staff, the social workers who deal with juvenile delinquents. Interesting how the main scoundrel in this pic, a white teenager (played brilliantly by Tim Roth) who spews racial hatred, immediately befriends a black teenage lad with whom he shares a bedroom in the detention centre. The film is totally fascinating, engrossing entertainment, but it is a tragedy because it deals with hugely serious problems in society, problems that ultimately affect us all, and which are still out of control. Highly-recommended. 9/10.

Piggy (I) (2012)

Nothing to recommend it, unless you enjoy puerile vengeance flicks...

[2/10 · 20 May 2018]

I rate "Piggy" 2/10 because there are some flicks that are considerably worse than this unfortunate attempt at movie-making. I've alerted for spoilers simply because I gave away the drive in this pic --- it is a vengeance movie, poorly executed, with piggy disguises being the only novel element introduced to the palette. Many scenes are dull, too long, scripting sadly lacking in power & drive. Overall, a dull, depressing flick that is quickly and easily forgotten. A shame.

Dog Soldiers (2002)

Yeah, worth a look. Some tense scenes but overall not overwhelming !

[7/10 · 20 May 2018]

A decent, competent attempt at adding to the werewolf genre, considering this is a very low-budget flick with no "name" actors. Just relax and go with the flow! Much of the movie is in almost darkness, so be prepared. I had some problems with the audio track from time to time, watched this on DVD, so could use subtitles as needed. Interesting scenery, clean cinematography. 5/10.

Ripper Street: I Need Light (2012) Season 1, Episode 1

Brilliant start to an immensely engrossing series.

[9/10 · 19 May 2018]

Once again the British show how they excel so magnificently at the genre. Great atmosphere, attention to the smallest details, historical accuracy, acting expertise by even the most minor roles, outstanding sets and scenery... wonderful ! An easy 9/10

Ripper Street: I Need Light (2012) Season 1, Episode 1

A winner! All the right imngredients for success.

[9/10 · 19 May 2018]

Immensely atmospheric start to an excellent series. The British show here how and why they excel at such productions. Highly recommended. 8/10

25th Hour (2002)

Vastly over-rated !

[5/10 · 19 May 2018]

Many of the very high ratings here for this flick are from neophyte filmgoers. For example, "irotas20" in September 2004 rated this 10/10, saying "Best movie I've ever seen". Hmmm... it is also the ONLY movie that "reviewer" has ever reviewed ! Ridiculous. I suspect that after discounting the bogus ratings, the actual figure will be my 5/10 or lower. This is an extremely uneven film, with some boring parts and a couple of mildly entertaining bits and one memorable long scene. Without Hoffman it would have been 2/10. #

Custer of the West (1967)

Robert Shaw ridiculously miscast, plus major historical errors

[3/10 · 19 May 2018]

Sorry, but Robert Shaw makes a silly caricature out of this flamboyant cavalry officer. The movie is not entertaining and full of historical boo-boos. Hardly worth watching at all, really. 3/10

The Buccaneers (1956–1957)

Jaunty, heady, swashbuckling adventure with a great Captain !

[10/10 · 19 May 2018]

Fabulous short-lived series from, it now seems, another era of television. Robert Shaw was ideal, perfect as Dan Tempest, the pirate-turned-gentleman, always with a cool turn of phrase and sly cunning. Everything was just-right in these exciting half-hour episodes, with the absence of blood & gore... but, remember, this was the 1950s! Long, long before cellphones, the Internet and music videos even. 10/10 for sure. NB: Yes, there was that memorable theme song, and it is well worth noting that The Buccaneers came from the same studio that gave us The Adventures of Robin Hood in 1960, with Richard Greene. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>See you later: I'm off a-roving !

Reign of Fire (2002)

Fire-breathing dragons vs the last of humanity !

[4/10 · 18 May 2018]

This post-apocalyptic thriller nonsense is about par for Matthew McConaughey, but way way substandard for Christian "American Psycho" Bale. And how Gerard Butler got pulled into the mix, I just do not know. It is a very odd combination for a silly movie, with barely passable fx. The words 'cheesy' and 'low budget' come to mind, and on that basis the flick doesn't disapppoint. If this sort of bottom-feeding genre is your thing, you might actually enjoy it. I cannot rate it higher than 4/10, and that's really stretching things, throwing in an extra point for Bale. Another reviewer, who agrees with my rating, referred to this movie as "Mad Max meets the Dragons".

Two decades hence, fire-breathing dragons (ha ha ha) have taken over our planet, and the few remaining pockets of human beings struggle to survive and combat the continuing threat. Honestly !

Yeah, we all know how people from different nations/religions/etc/etc will pull together to fight a common enemy, and that's what happens here. (yawn)

I had to chuckle at the reviewers who gave this movie 10 or 9... such as Margie8321 who said in July 2002:<"Reign of Fire" was a great!> Yes, that's exactly what she wrote, and she's reviewed the magnificent total of 6 movies! Wow!

Reign of Fire (2002)

Were they serious? I'm being VERY generous with my rating of 4/10

[4/10 · 17 May 2018]

This post-apocalyptic thriller nonsense is about par for Matthew McConaughey, but way way substandard for Christian "American Psycho" Bale. And how Gerard Butler got pulled into the mix, I just do not know. It is a very odd combination for a silly movie, with barely passable fx. The words 'cheesy' and 'low budget' come to mind, and on that basis the flick doesn't disapppoint. If this sort of nottom-feeding genre is your thing, you might actually enjoy it. I cannot rate it higher than 4/10, and that's really stretching things. Another reviewer, who agrees with my rating, referred to this movie as "Mad Max meets the Dragons".

Two decades hence, fire-breathing dragons (ha ha ha) have taken over our planet, and the few remaining pockets of human beings struggle to survive and combat the continuing threat. Honestly !

Yeah, we all know how people from different nations/religions/etc/etc will pull together to fight a common enemy, and that's what happens here. (yawn)

I had to chuckle at the reviewers who gave this movie 10 or 9... such as Margie8321 who says in July 2002:< Reign of Fire" was a great! Yes, that's exactly what she says, and she's reviewed the magnificent total of 6 movies! Wow!

Night Watch (2004)

Huh? What on earth is this about?

[3/10 · 17 May 2018]

Seems to be something about two types of beings in war with each other, but trying to maintain a truce of sorts. VERY difficult to follow, especially as I had to read subtitles (not being fluent in Russian). A very dark flick literally and figuratively, with some amusing actions scenes, but, overall, a DUD. 3/10.

Sherlock Holmes (2010 Video)

This is an insult to Holmes ! Don't waste a moment on it.

[1/10 · 17 May 2018]

Everything is wrong in this abysmal effort, starting with a ridiculously smartass, juvenile "Holmes". The high ratings must be from cast/crew members/friends/associates. I noted that one, rating the film 10/10, came from someone who has rated only two films here on IMdB. 1/10 for this gross insult to the Holmes genre. Avoid it. #

The Butterfly Effect 2 (2006)

WHY do "they" make crappy sequels ? Why oh why ??

[2/10 · 15 May 2018]

Here we go again, with a "sequel" that has so little in comon with the original that it should hang its head in shame !

Have a quick look at all the 1. 2, and 3 ratings. Of course, following a pattern I've noted time after time on IMdB, there are some 10s and 9s for a big flop of a film. Who are most (not all, let me add) of the "reviewers" who do this ?? Cast or crew members/friends? Kids? A little research shows that usually most "reviewers" doing this have reviewed only one, two or maybe five movies. The following 10/10 "review" for The Butterfly Effect 2 is from an IMdB member who has reviewed a grand total of two flicks! Here's the header: " 10/10 Better than I thought it would be imafan41118 October 2006 " There's precious little to recommend this motion picture... the music is dreary, the acting amateurish, plot (what plot?), cinematography fair at best, pacing dull, uneven, script duh!, effects meh!... you get the idea. The movie seems to have been put together by a bunch of smartypants juveniles who figure THEY know what's happening. Nope, they don't ! This is one to miss ~ at any time, in any time zone, in any universe. I rate it 2/10 because there are films that are worse. #

What Lies Beneath (2000)

Overly-long, worn plot, few surprises, an "OK" movie...

[6/10 · 13 May 2018]

Nothing truly special here. Pretty solid acting, though Harrison Ford's continual MUMBLING in hushed monotones became awfully tiring and annoying. I found I had to keep the subtitles on in order to catch everything he said. He was certainly playing the role very "low key". Clearly, this is a competent and expenisive (at US$20 million) Hollywood pic. The scenery is superb, sets wonderful, fine cinematography with remarkable attention to detail. Maybe too much screming ! This film should be at least 20 minutes shorter, imho. Many segments seemed to be purposely drawn-out, to the point pf irritation. "What Lies Beneath" qualifies easily as a good horror flick, with two top movie stars and an excellent supporting cast. The problem/s? The reason/s I couldn't give more than 6 stars? Primarily, the picture is too damn long, but also I felt there was a real lost opportunity to add more ingredients, a special "spark", in order to distinguish this effort from so many similar movies ~ to make it rise well above Exactly what these improvements might be, I cannot say, and obviously the producers, writers and director were unable to come up with ideas. Well worth seeing, especially if yo'ure a fan of the leads and of relatively "subtle", slow-moving horror pictures. 6/10.

Mosquito-Man (2013)

3/10, doesn't deserve more (from a fan of the genre)

[3/10 · 13 May 2018]

One of the very few other reviewers says: " 10/10 This movie is so cool it deserves a better rating than whats its gotten yo-520-86367413 December 2013 " Honestly! Who wrote that? A cast or crew member? A child? Note the poor English. That review was written by an IMdB member who has reviewed only five movies! This film has a few decent moments, is mildly entertaining, with fair fx, but does not merit more than 3 out of 10 overall. Don't bother with it unless you are a hard-core genre fan OR unless you really, truly have nothing better to do (smile!). 3/10

The Brotherhood 2: Young Warlocks (2001 Video)

bad bad bad

[1/10 · 13 May 2018]

Unless you want to see a group of partially clothed young lads who think they are the greatest, do not bother with this trash. The "actors" in this movie are the most UNappealing bunch of narcissistic jerks ever seen.

The Spirit (2008)

3/10 ~ sorry, the film tried hard but flopped.

[3/10 · 13 May 2018]

Don't waste your time, not even for Eva Mendes! I've watched & reviewed 1000s of movies... this one doesn't cut it ! 3/10

Blackwater Valley Exorcism (2006 Video)

There are some worse movies... but not many !

[2/10 · 13 May 2018]

I have watched, over several decades, thousands of motion pictures, have reviewed hundreds -- here and elsewhere. Horror is one of my favourite genres; movies centering on religion/vampires/zombies/ghosts/possession are of particular interest to me, so I was looking forward to this flick, with the enticing artwork cover! Disappointing is the word. There are a few indications that this could have been a film worthy of a 5, 6, or 7 rating, but, unhappily, 2/10 is all I can offer, owing to the many fails in the film. Yes, there are worse movies, but this has to place very low. My advice is not to waste any time at all on this. Best wishes! --->NB: "nickfischer_926" rated this film 10/10 in March 2007, saying "nice movie" I felt suspicious, so checked to see how many movies he'd rated... you guessed it! This is the only one! This follows a standard pattern, whereby truly lousy movies are given very high ratings by a few "reviewers" who have only ever "reviewed" one to five movies! Crew or cast member? A friend? What's the deal, I wonder? Very odd. Oh well! #