born-giantsfan Reviews

Bruce Lee's Deadly Kung Fu (1977)

Not a Bruce Lee Biopic

[4/10 · 26 November 2023]

This review is for BRUCE'S DEADLY KUNG FU aka BRUCE LEE'S SECRET. This is the one where he is a waiter at the beginning of the movies, 3 guys at a table hassle him and another employee, he pours lots of pepper on thier chicken, and a fight breaks out.

The movie is cheesy, the fight scenes mediocre, and the acting is poor. Add in many annoying characters such as the woman who owns the restaurant, the children of the shipyard owner, a very whiney kid, and buffoonish rivals and the film just drags on.

If you are looking for a biopic this is not it. No accurate information about Bruce Lee. It is basically a play on his name to sell a bad movie.

Strange Bargain (1949)

Decent and short B noir

[7/10 · 22 November 2023]

Fun, low budget noir that clocks in at just slightly over an hour. Typical suburban based noir where one bad decision leads to another which leads to trouble

Competent acting, a mellow but competent script with a number of plot twists is hampered only slightly by pedestrian cinematography and lighting. Given the short running time, they wrapped the story up neatly and squeezed it all in to make this an easy watch. The plot includes murder, suicide, implied corporate greed, insurance fraud, tough cops, a tough broad, a loving husband/father caught up in the mess, and all the typical characters.

Inspector Morse (1987–2000)

Quality British Television from the 80s & 90's

[9/10 · 3 November 2023]

Inspector Morse has all the characteristics of an excellent detective series - great writing and plot lines, character development that keeps you interested in the persons as well as the stories, talented acting, and a great background in the city of Oxford.

Based on a series of very good books by Colin Dexter, the screen writers allowed the Morse character to come alive through the acting skills of John Thaw. Through the series you learn more about Morse and his life, as well as that of his sidekick Lewis.

Morse, a man who enjoys his whisky and is unlucky in love in an understated way, is a character who you root for and know will solve the crime in the end - no matter what twists and turns he has to go through.

So spend some time with Morse, as well as the later prequel "Endeavour" (Morse's first name), and it will be time well spent.

Whiteout (2009)

Wasted Talent In What Could Have Been a Good Movie

[4/10 · 1 November 2023]

I really wanted to like this movie, but in the end it fell short. It was fun but disappointing. The storyline has many plot holes and is disjointed at times - to the point of distraction (at least for me). It is also very cliché oriented with stilted dialog that wasted (or didn't utilize) the talent of the actors. I felt they were walking though the movie with poor direction.

In general the high level premise is interesting - the team of scientists and a US-Marshall are in a remote location with a murderer(s) and possibly international intrigue, while running out of time due to a coming storm which accelerates departure of the team for the winter season (if they don't leave, they will be stuck there for 6 months). Throw in an early peak at Beckinsale's body, a found Russian plane with unknown cargo, another death, and the arrival of a new character, the story tries to keep you involved and anticipating the next surprise.

BUT - the many flaws along the way and the slow story progression in between the sudden action sequences mars the interest. So to keep the audience interested the director throws in (to morph a line from Mambo No 5) "a little bit of Carrie is all I need, a little bit of Kate is what I see".

The movie opens with the pilot & co-pilot of a Russian transport plane trying to hijack their own plane to steal the cargo - but these guys are the Laurel and Hardy of the Russian Air Force. They bungle it so badly that everyone gets shot, including the pilot, and the plane crashes in the Antarctic.

So before anyone starts to ask "Why was a plane first used in 1959 shown in a scene dated 1957" or "Why is a Russian transport plane with a range of 5000km flying over the middle of Antarctica (a place that is over 3000 Km from the nearest non-Antarctic land mass)?", we switch to a modern day scene where the text tells is that this is the most remote place on earth and the temperature is -50C. This is followed by an Animal House like scene where 5 men are "streaking" in only their briefs, which could raise further questions such as "If it is really -50C, wouldn't they be getting bronchial frostbite and their extremities start freezing right away?" So to avoid uncomfortable questions about male shrinkage at -50C, the director again quickly distracts us with the beautiful Kate Beck strips down to her skimpy tight fitting white undies, the camera pans her body and then focuses on her nicely shaped bum as she needlessly bends over to turn on the shower, and then shows her naked body through a frosted glass shower door. Blood flow is sufficiently restored to those frozen extremities and away from the brain to keep the audience from thinking to clearly for the rest of the movie - and BluRay sales of the movie sufficiently increased.

Now don't get me wrong, I will not complain about a scene with Kate in skimpy clothing. This scene, though, is clearly thrown in to distract most of the male (and some of female) audience from the meandering and flaw filled plot. For the rest of the movie, many watching are thinking "when is the sex scene coming, or at least semi-naked Kate again?" - spoiler alert, it doesn't happen. Instead we see her pretty much bundled up for the rest of the movie in a thick parka - though interestingly wearing no face coverings as she ventures out into weather cold enough that her hand instantly freezes to a metal door handle. A face, I might add, whose cheeks never turns red from exposure to the freezing cold and winds strong enough to blow a man into a metal pole hard enough to kill him. And every time she removes the hooded parka we see that same pretty face surrounded by perfectly brushed hair that is not in the least disturbed.

What bothers me even more is that this could have been an excellent suspense movie like others set in the north or south pole regions (see "Dirigible", "Virus", "The Thing", etc.). For all my comments about Kate's beauty, she is a very good actor (as are Gabriel Macht, Tom Skerritt, etc.) and their acting skills were not utilized here. The dialog kept telling us what they were doing, such as Carrie stating "Let's see who this is" as she was turning over the id card on the dead body. The many flaws in the plot like those mentioned above or others such as finding a plane buried under 25 feet of ice & snow in a place with some of the least amount of snowfall in the world, or the investigators assuming the cargo in the locked box was "nuclear Fuel" and radioactive when there was no radiation readings detected by the scientists for the last 50 years in a highly monitored region and there were no radiation warnings on the box or canisters (standard protocol in the 50's), etc.

So is this a fun movie to watch? Sure. Is it a good movie? Not in my opinion.

Edge of Tomorrow (2014)

Groundhog Day in an Alian War

[7/10 · 26 May 2023]

It is basically like Groundhog Day where a battle with aliens is repeated over and over and the main characters make more progress each day. Except in this case you learn the details of why the day repeats itself (as opposed to Groundhog Day where you never really learn why it occurs).

It is a fun action movie with lots of battles and a bit of a love backstory. Well, maybe its more of an attraction back story since they never even actually kiss.

If you are a Tom Cruse fan, this is a must watch.

For me, when I see a Tom Cruise movie I think "there is Tom Cruise playing this character." I'm not a huge fan, but I did enjoy this movie.

Moonfall (2022)

Just not worth your time

[2/10 · 18 October 2022]

If you want a movie filled with cringe worthy dialog, emotionless "emotional" scenes, little character development, ham-fisted acting, big name actors used for 1 scene, and scientifically flawed (very flawed) plot elements, then this movie is for you.

They try to check all the boxes with the characters - good looking leading man filled with angst, good looking strong leading woman who takes charge, a chubby goofy looking but brainy sidekick, young adults who are dissociated from the parent(s) and parents who need to win the back, young children in danger, government official who just want to blow everything up with nukes, etc etc.

I like cheesy B-moves and have fun with bad movies that develop a cult following. While there were some fun moments in Moonfall, there was just too much bad acting and error filled plots elements for me to enjoy this one.

Dark Desire (2020–2022)

Sexy soap opera like series with character flaws and plot holes

[5/10 · 5 August 2021]

Dark Desire is a sexy series with beautiful women and a sexy men caught up in drama and destruction of their own making with many twists and turns to give you a sore neck. It starts out strong but last too long and becomes less believable.

I watched this for 2 reasons, (1) I am learning Spanish and wanted something fun to watch to help me out, and (2) sex sells. I made it through the first season but often fast forwarding through parts. I often found that I didn't miss much if I jumped ahead a couple minutes.

The characters start out fine with some basic character development. But as the story continued I found myself caring about them all less and less. Some of the decisions they make or reactions are truly baffling, the sexy bad boy whines and cries, and tough guy manipulating stuff behind the scenes makes obvious mistakes, and the beautiful women fall into the same traps over and over again.

The two main woman are beautiful and the third is quite attractive. The men are good looking and in shape. So at least the sex scenes were good ;). And given that the two main women each slept with two different men and 2 of the main male characters each slept with 2 different women (the other male and female leads only slept with 1 person), there were plenty of sex scene flashbacks to dwell on.

I didn't find it confusing as others have written. If you follow along then most becomes clear towards the end. They leave a few things open - but they need to otherwise why would you watch season 2?

There were many things I had trouble with from a believable standpoint, especially with how the characters behaved and some of the dialog, but I will just highlight a few: First, the lead female character is not old enough to have a daughter in university. I guess technically she is (the actresses are 38 and 22) but it doesn't fit the storyline of the mother being a successful lawyer and professor and having a daughter early in her career.

Second, the main protagonist (Dario) passes himself off as a law student, which is believed by Alma and Leonardo, but there is no evidence of any legal education other than the 1 class he is attending that Alma teaches. And she knows he is a mechanic by trade because she repeatedly goes to his shop. Huh?

Third, (and here is a mid season spoiler), once she realizes Alma is stalking her and is a danger, she still goes to see him and once he kisses her she has sex with him. Now I have been in a couple of really hot romances in the past and can understand going back for another taste, but doing it after she learns a few of his secrets was a little much.

Finally, (Another mid season spoiler), after Dario sleeps with Alma's daughter Zoe (and after Zoe learns that he slept with her mom and that she was completely used), two remarkable things happen: 1. When Dario confronts Alms in a parking garage and he forcibly kisses her, after the first attempt to fight him off she gives in and kisses him back. This is the man that just screwed your 20 year old virgin daughter!

2. Zoe calls Dario and asks him to come over to the house to say her piece to Alma and Dario and then to leave them alone to "talk it out". Huh?

Anyway, it was fun for a while.

Not sure I will watch season 2.

The Crime of the Century (2021)

A Must Watch

[8/10 · 13 May 2021]

This is a must watch to better understand the inner working of "big pharma", big bushiness' relationship with our government leaders that continuously sell themselves to the highest bidder, and the dramatic negative impact this relationship has on the US citizens.

Not a lot of the information here is new knowledge having been reported on in the past by others, but this well done documentary puts it together in a way that clearly draws the line between greed and the ruin of many lives in this country.

As someone in a family affected by the opioid epidemic and had read much on the topic, there were even a few eye opening moments during the 2 episodes for me. In our family it started with Oxy being prescribed for simple back pain, something that a much less addictive pain killer would have addressed. This is exactly the wrong doing that has been called out. Oxy and other opioids have a place in medicine, but the over subscribing for mild ailments is what led many housewives, teenagers, etc to become addicted. The pushing of the drug by Purdue and others drug companies, the blatant skirting of regulations by the distributors, and lack of controls at pharmacies (even large corporate ones like CVS) allowed the epidemic to grow faster than any possible containment.

Why only 8 stars then? Because the second episode, in m opinion, spent too much time with some of the characters that were involved in the problem and almost reached a point where it seemed like they were trying to make us feel sorry for some of those that were "caught up" in the selling and pushing of an addictive drug that caused the deaths of so many. That part was a little too much for me.

That said the 2 part series is a must watch.

Crime Scene: The Vanishing at the Cecil Hotel (2021)

Started strong, but the "Internet Sleuths" lost me

[4/10 · 14 March 2021]

Interesting story about a young woman (Elisa Lam) from Canada who disappeared while staying at the Cecil Hotel / Stay Hotel in Los Angeles. This is a story which I was somewhat familiar with before. But while the 4 part series started off strong, it dragged on for too long as it slowly went off the rails. If I rated each episode on their own I would give them a 7, 5, 3, 2 - for an average of 4.25.

The first episode and part of the second were solid with good background, investigative journalism, and a good pace. But then the story line was taken over by "YouTubers" and "Internet Sleuths". The majority of the rest of the series was spent giving credence to the silly conspiracy theories and on-line rants by these people.

Don't get me wrong, I believe there is power in the collective looking at data and information. There are numerous examples of investigations furthered by someone on-line analyzing information. But in this case the took nuggets of information (some factual, some meaningless) and just went off on various conspiracy theories that were not based in fact.

A perfect example with the whole "Morbid" thread. In summary, Morbid is a death metal performer who posted a video he took of himself while staying at the Cecil Hotel. Some of the "Internet Sleuths" took this "fact" and the additional "fact" that he made music videos about death and accused him of killing Ms Lam. He was then hounded by thousands of people being called a murderer, etc. and this cyber-bullying led to a breakdown. But these so called sleuths didn't bother to spend 5 minutes on Google checking out his tour/concert history, or another 5 minutes looking at the details of the video to determine that: 1. he was at the Cecil hotel 1 YEAR before Ms Lam, and 2. he was in Mexico recording an album at the time of the murder

Sleuths follow clues and facts to arrive at conclusions. These people are just internet trolls that call themselves "Sleuths".

And about 1/2 of the series was spent on these people, their incorrect theories and false accusations, and their rants about how "we have a right to know the truth" - all the while not even caring about the family of Ms Lam who lost a daughter/sister.

The Old Guard (2020)

Charlize Shines as She Fights Her Way Through a Mediocre Movie

[6/10 · 11 September 2020]

I like Charlize Theron movies - not all of them mind you but most of them. I find her to be a talented actress who has thrown herself into roles from the beginning of her career as an actress ... though in the case of her first real movie role (2 Day in The Valley) she was getting thrown in her role (against a wall). While not all her performances are top notch, she is certainly above average. But after her somewhat muted and wooden characters in Prometheus and Snow White and the Huntsman, I was concerned she was being typecast as the stoic (maybe evil) leader, a type of role I don't think she is particularly best suited for.

So with her acting talents and her physical abilities I was keenly interested when she moved into the action movie genre with Atomic Blond. And while I enjoyed that movie and her acting, I found the action sequences poorly done - too many "bad guys" sort of standing there waiting to be shot/kicked/stabbed/punched like dazed punch drunk fighters instead of the trained officers or fighters they were supposed to be.

With that in mind I anticipated The Old Guard that would once again feature Ms Theron. What I found was much improved action sequenced and very good acting by Charlize (and a couple others in the movie) surrounded by a hole filled plot line, a mediocre formula based script with half baked dialog, and a strange soundtrack (at times I liked it and at times I found it distracting).

So on the positive side, the action sequenced have greatly improved over her prior movies and her acting was very good. Not sure if this is her training, the fact that she is now a producer and has more control, or they just hired better fight scene choreographers, but the fight sequences are defiantly more realistic looking. Charlize's portrayal of a worn out, tired, and fed up 3000 year warrior was very good. I truly saw her character vs Charlize playing a character (in contrast, in every Tom Cruise movie except Born On The Fourth of July I see Tom Cruise playing the character vs the character). I thought Kenzari and Marinelli were very good too. And the action sequences were spread out with attempts at story telling and character development, so it wasn't just another all-action movie.

Outside of that there was minimal character development, stereotypical rich bad guys who are willing to kill and destroy to make more money, and plot holes that must have been opened up by Andy's axe. The interludes of story-telling between the action sequences had good intentions, but as the movie went on the dialog degraded and a few of the characters became more annoying and less believable. And did I mention the silly unbelievable bad guy in all this? Some of the biggest plot holes occurred towards the end of the movie, so I won't describe them here. Suffice to say that as the movie went on the increasing plot holes, degrading dialog, and dialed up annoyance of the clichéd bad guy (Merrick) turned an excellent first 60 minutes into an average 2 hours that just felt disappointing at the end.

I hope the telegraphed sequel does a better job.

The Band's Visit (2007)

Fun Movie

[8/10 · 11 November 2017]

I first heard of this movie when reading a review of the new Broadway show by the same title (and based on the movie). Found it On Demand this weekend and we enjoyed watching it.

The characters were interesting and had some substance. The humor was subtle and enjoyable. The story-line was engaging and fun.

There are clearly cultural and language differences between the band and the residents of the town that lead to some awkward and humorous situations.

Note, the dialog is in at least 3 languages, so subtitles are needed.

I recommend this movie.

Banshee: The Truth About Unicorns (2014) Season 2, Episode 5

A Very Different Banshee

[7/10 · 16 September 2016]

This episode is certainly a departure from the regular Banshee formula of violence, sex, crime, and mayhem. Yes there is some violence and a brief bit of nudity, but the episode itself is more of an introspective look at "Lucas", Carrie, and Agent Racine.

This kind of departure is going to receive polarizing reviews - some will love it and some will hate it - as seen by other postings here. Which is it? it is both - the view of the different types of viewers of the show.

In my less-humble opinion, I enjoyed the departure. The fast paced act without thought behavior of Lucas can only go on for so long before he takes a step back and wonders if he is doing the right thing. And this episode is that break. We also learn why Racine has a hard-on for Rabbit.

From a directorial perspective it was a different way of handling the characters struggle with what to do. The mixture of fantasy/dream and reality kept you off guard and also enlightened us to the desires of Lucas an Carrie while externally they were more reserved. It was a nice break from the normal episode craziness to help understand a little bit more of the characters.

So yes, I liked it - not the best of all the episodes, but very good in a different way.

The violence and sex returns in the next episode.

Surface (2005–2006)

I Really Wanted to Like Surface ...

[5/10 · 7 September 2016]

Being a Lake Bell fan I have known about Surface but not watched it until now. I really wanted to like it - sci-fi, mysterious creatures, Lake Bell, etc. And while I am working my way through the series (at episode 9 now) there are enough problems that I can see why it didn't get picked up for a second season.

Overall it is a fun premise and a reasonably enjoyable show. There is family entertainment, strange creatures, mysterious sci-fi aspects, sinister government agents, good looking men and women, and "teenage" girls in bikinis (kudos for casting Leslie Fisher as Amber).

I would say that the biggest issue is the sub-par writing, followed by the low budget CGI, inconsistent editing and directing, and the occasional mediocre acting.

While I won't write any spoilers, I will mention a few plot points going forward.

The script writing is filled with many issues, I found it distracting. A perfect example is episode 4 which is filled with numerous inconsistencies, totally silly situations, and other significant problems.

For example, what is the purpose of Cirko's presentation at the beginning to to a room full of stereotypical clueless military generals and advisers when he really doesn't (or isn't allowed to) say anything about the discovery other than a few veiled warnings. Such a big assembly of the top brass for a ecological lesson? But a much bigger problem with the episode is the whole "stranded on a boat" section - when the creature pulses and fries all the electronics on the boat that Laura and Jackson "borrowed". This set of scenes demonstrates all the problems with the show and seems to be written just to get Lake Bell into a bikini and in the water (not that I am objecting to that).

Three of the significant issues with that selection of scenes are:

1.They find a whole pod of dead whales, but they don't see it until they are right up next to the 2 of them - even though when they walk back to the rear of the boat there are 3 in the water behind the boat (and the ones in front of the boat are no longer visible). A little more CGI and better editing would have caught all the visual discrepancies with the viewing (or lack of seeing) the dead whale pod.

2. the damage to the electronics caused by the pulse can't simply be fixed by cleaning some contacts and splitting the fused ignition wires. A pulse strong enough to cause sparks and smoke fried every bit of electronics on the boat, yet with a few hand tools they were able to get the boat running again. And the next morning they got the boat running just fine and all the electronics and computers on the boat were working well. The pulse would have shorted out all the IC's in the computer, fish finder, GPS tracker, etc.

3. The final repair of the "prop is busted" is a sheered prop/shaft key that need to be replaced - this is a mechanical failure which could be caused if the engine was running at load when the pulse occurred. Yet the boat was idling and dead in the water when the pulse hit. So this would not have occurred. And the whole fix was completely bogus.

The whole repair is badly set up to get Lake to strip down to her designer bikini (making it worth watching). The reason for her going in the water is because Jackson can't fit his hand into the area where the replacement of the sheered key needs to be done. But when Lake goes into the water to do the repair, all she does is fiddle with a bolt at the end of the shaft. There is no reaching into an area where a smaller hand is required and no replacing of any parts - no action validating the need for her to go into the water. Total inconsistency in the writing, directing, and editing.

I can put up with the silliness in the scene such as when Lake Bell is "documenting the creature" she is actually pointing the camera at a downward angle towards the boat controls, or when the pulse hits Lake falls over as if she were knocked over by an EMT pulse, or when they are sitting on the boat at night watching guard against this massive creature Lake is holding an oar (completely useless in this situation).

But the larger issues mentioned above are too off-pitting to ignore and show that the show was poorly done. With a little more CGI budget and a little bit better writing, directing, and editing - this show could have been a winner.

And I watched that scene multiple times just to make sure I caught all the details - it had nothing to do with Lake Bell in a red bikini.

One final issue in the episode that made me laugh - when Connelly takes his small boat out to the oil rig at night, he throws his anchor into the water. The anchor had about 20 feet of rope on it yet it was already determine that the water there was over 200 feet deep. A few minutes later the boat is seen being held in place by the anchor and rope where the rope is held away from the boat by the anchor - yet in 200 feet of water the anchor would be hanging straight down.

So in summary, a fun little series that will titillate, entice, and promise, but will fail to deliver.

Some Kind of Beautiful (II) (2014)

Producers were banking on Selma and Peirce

[4/10 · 22 June 2016]

This romantic comedy had lots of promise and failed on so many fronts.

The producers were clearly banking on people wanting to see the sexy stars (Pierce Brosnan, Salma Hayek, and Jessica Alba) to sell this movie. It sure would have helped if they had a decent script to go with it.

The dialog is silly and trite, the plot lines are very flawed, and the directing is poor. The scriptwriter and director were clearly following the textbook rom-com formula.

A good example of the flawed plot and characters is the drama caused Kate finding out that by Richard slept with Olivia. Kate got married and Richard married her and move to America with her to raise their child. SHe rewards this by cheating on him and telling him she has found another. He moves into the pool house and has to watch her with her boyfriend for 2 years. The entire time she treats him poorly and wants him to move on.

Then the half sister Olivia visits and Richard developed feelings for her and they sleep together. When Kate finds out she flips out, tells her sister to leave, refuses to go to Richards immigration interview knowing that it would cause him to get deported, separating Richard from their son who clearly loves him, and then refuses all communication with her sister. This is the woman that cheated on her husband and rubbed it in for 2 year. You would have thought she would have been miffed but not to this level of extreme behavior.

But the silly plot required this artificial drama to give the main character (Richard) an obstacle to overcome that in doing so would bring everyone back together. Very trite.

At least we get to see Jessica in her underwear and Salma's naked butt a few times.

Nurse (2013)

Strange Directing - Even for a Low Budget Film

[4/10 · 19 April 2016]

A lot of negative reviews here blame Paz, the lead actress. And while this is certainly not her best work, I have to blame the director for most of the failings of this film. The actors take the cues from the director - how he/she wants the scene played, the adjustments to dialog, the flow of the film, and all the other things that are wrong with this film.

This is a low budget slasher movie, but when there are major flaws in the screenplay and directing, even low budget slashers get boring. Texas Chain Saw was low budget, but they created a movie that didn't distract you with stupid stuff.

There are so many bizarre things and incoherent twists that the film is almost laughable. Just a few of the issues with the film are: 1. every guy in the movie is portrayed as morally inept - the Dr's are womanizers, the cops are leeches and sex starved, and all they guys in the clubs are married looking to cheat - even the "good boyfriend" doesn't stand by his girlfriend at the first sign of trouble and acts childish (revs his motorcycle when she is talking as says "I can't hear you")

2. the nudity is bazaar at best - ex Paz is shown in several scenes with only a bra on - nothing else. Either be naked or topless, but bottomless only? just strange

3. Other than the 2 main characters, all the other women are clueless and stupid. Nobody does background checks, worries about liability, etc. Even the Danni character has her moments - like she is convinced she was drugged with rohypnol, works at a hospital, but doesn't bother to get a blood test.

4. all the cops just stare at the women when they walk around (and have sex the witness/suspect)

5. all the security guards are idiots, even the armed ones are only there to get killed

6. and there are so many plot leaps and holes it is ridiculous - ex: how did Abby leave, change into a sexy dress, and get to the parking garage exit right as Dr Larry was leaving? And then how is it that she knows that when the car rolls back into the street it is going to get hit by a large truck and kill Dr Larry instead of a small car or motorcycle (or nothing) and thus not killing the DR and leaving him alive to implicate her. For a very prepared serial killer, she certainly left that one to chance.

As an example of the flaws, just look at the set of scenes where Abby take Danni out drinking and they end up in bed in Abby's apartment in the morning. So many issues/questions with this scene alone:

1. there is clearly a drug in Danni's drink yet she doesn't notice it, and oh btw, the remains of the powdered drug are left on the upper part of the glass - the opposite side that she drank from. Any sediment would settle on the side she drank from.

2. she is drugged, but clearly per the pictures taken participates in the sex and is having pleasure. If it was rohypnol, it is more paralyzing and the pictures don't line up with the story

3. The pictures show she has sex with a guy, but the pictures don't match Abby's bed - so where were they taken? And the guy was not there in the morning - so did they go somewhere else and have sex then go to Abby's where they had more sex (6 orgasms according to Abby)?

4. in the morning when they wake, Abby is naked and Danni has a top on. So after having girl on girl sex all night long (6 orgasms) while drunk and drugged, she is awake enough to request and put on something to sleep in while Abby stayed naked? Which she doesn't remember asking for or putting on since she was confused that she was even wearing it? Abby certainly would not have put it on here, she liked Danni naked.

5. And where were Danni's clothes in the morning? They were nowhere to be found and she had to borrow something from Abby. So did they have sex with they guy somewhere else, leave her clothes there, and go back to Abby's place naked?

6. and speaking of missing clothes, Abby gets up naked then puts on a bra and walks around bottomless - with full frontal nudity. Who does that? I have never seen a woman do that - it is either naked, topless, of bra and panties. And she does this 3 times in the movie. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the view, but strange. the character seems to like to "air things out" but keep her breasts covered? Is this a particular fetish of the director?

Anyway, you get the idea.

It is an entertaining romp that could have been so much better.

Rumpole of the Bailey (1978–1992)

Take a Step Back in Time and Enjoy

[8/10 · 11 February 2016]

Rumpole is an endearing character full of vim and vigor, as they say. despite his casual appearance and his well worn hat, he is a master of the courtroom and a defender of peoples rights to the end.

His little monologues in his mind are both entertaining and educational as he dispenses his thoughts as he walks to the Bailey or as he listens to the prosecutor drone on and on. His dry wit is at times so subtle that I occasionally back up the DVD to listen to his comments again. And I enjoy how most of the other characters don't seem to understand him.

While this show is a lesser known show outside the UK and the legal circles, it is worth sitting down and watching. You may find yourself doing the anti-binge watching as we do - doling out 1 episode at a time because we know there is only a limited number to be watched. We are into season 2 now.

Entourage (2015)

It is an extension of the show in almost every way - which is not all that good

[5/10 · 10 February 2016]

As many other reviewers have stated, if you liked the show you will like the movie. I think I have seen almost every episode of the show, so I liked it enough to watch those and to give the movie a shot. But it is more of a guilty pleasure than quality entertainment.

The characters are all about the same. - Vinnie is bipolar - at one moment he is totally self confident and then the next he asking his whiny friends for advice. He's just a lit richer since the show. - Drama hasn't grown or changed in any way - Eric is still a whiny wimp. Yes, he sleeps with a couple hot girls, but he interrupts sex with one to answer the phone because Sloan might be calling and he only sleeps with the other because he is on drugs - Turtle is the only one that has grown some in the time that has passed, but not much. Though he handles his money well. - and Ari is Ari - on therapy

There are lots of hot girls, a little bit of nudity, some partying, and the same old type of antics that were in the show.

The plot is thin, the "bad guy" financial people from Texas are lame, and the acting is about average.

And the only sex scenes in the movie are the two with Eric, one with Ari where his wife is clearly disinterested, and a totally contrived one with girl on girl action in the background.

So if you liked the show and it comes on your pay cable channel, go ahead and watch it. It isn't worth spending money to see it in the theater or ppv. And don't watch the edited version on an airplane (or when it comes on broadcast TV, too much is cut and it makes it even worse.

David Beckham: Into the Unknown (2014 TV Movie)

David's "Posh" Adventure

[2/10 · 18 January 2015]

I would wager that the script was written by David's publicist. It seems all about trying to show David as a loving husband, a caring person, and an adventurer. In the end it gave me the impression that he is fake, self-absorbed, and somewhat boring.

It starts basically with him telling Victoria how much he is going to miss her as he says goodbye. And 20 minutes in they are sitting in a hotel room as he puts out pictures of his family, reads a letter Victoria put in his suitcase, and he talks about how much he misses them.

Just a reminder - we are talking about David Beckham who, in case you lived under a rock for 15 years, has been traveling the world as a football (soccer) superstar with his various teams, often without his wife and family. During his 15 year marriage he played for Manchester United, Real Madrid, the LA Galaxy, AC Milan, and Paris Saint-Germain. So I believe he traveled a lot without his wife and kids. so to spend the first 25 minutes of a 105 minute movie mostly talking about how much he will miss them seems quite a bit ridiculous.

Oh, and Victoria's main concern for David on this trip - that his hair would frizz up in the humidity. Posh Spice speaks again.

30 minutes in they are still in the hotel room - haven't even gotten into the amazon, let alone "into the unknown". They eventually leave, ride motorcycles for a while, have the bikes shipped so they can ride on a boat for a bit (most of the time David talking about his motorbike - not the Amazon, the trip, or the scenery). Later, reconnected with the bikes, they ride some more on a muddy road, making a big deal of them not yet being on the main road. When the bikes break down they fish with some locals for lunch and David is proud that he helped them catch lunch - BTW, something that would not have happened had there not been a breakdown.

At night they play hand-held video games - I think Flappy Bird was Davids choice. David bemoaned about being a long way from home. They showed him calling home on a satellite phone several times - exciting TV. He saw a lightening bug and thought it was his phone lighting up. He complains about not being able to shower.

I think you get the picture.

Basically it is a movie about David Beckham being out of his element, but they show little of the element that he is in. They show a rich boy "roughing it" with motorcycles, a crew to take care of him, meals prepared for him, a satellite phone to call out when he wants, video games to relieve the boredom of being out of the city and in one of the most beautiful places in the world, etc.

When he finally gets deeper into the Amazon they meet up with a local tribe that hasn't heard of him. He is clearly "into the unknown" at that point.

And again, more about his family. I am sure he loves his wife and kids. But they made a big deal throughout the show of how much he missed them (even though he called them daily) during this epic adventure. BTW, did I tell you - the trip was only 1 week.

You would have thought he was in the Amazon for 2 months the way he carried on.

The World Is Not Enough (1999)

I don't understand the 9+ star reviews on here

[3/10 · 2 September 2014]

I really don't understand the large number of 9 and 10 star reviews here on IMDb for this movie. Having seen all of the bond films multiple times, this one may not be the worst, but it certainly is not the best.

After seeing this several times, my opinion has not changed. I (and many others) found the writing to be some of the most immature and juvenile of bond series of movies. The acting was spotty and the casting ill fated. The action scenes (outside the well done opening sequence) are poorly choreographed and cheesy looking. The male villain was ... tame and not very threatening. It just didn't do too much except deliver lots of action - poorly done action, but lots of it.

The shining part of the movie is Sophia Marceau playing the sexy victim/villain. she shines in the movie, and plays all the facets of her part well - childlike victim, sexual plaything, sexual predator, conniving bitch, and slightly insane maniacal killer. I do give Brosnan some credit, this is probably his best Bond film, but he was never right for the role. Denise Richards was in no way convincing as a scientist of any kind, let alone a nuclear physicist. No-one bought her in that role. Her acting was terrible and her wardrobe didn't help - walking around in a tank top and shorts almost the whole movie. I enjoyed the view but wasn't seeing the character - only her well displayed body.

A few of the many many examples of poor writing and directing:

• the banter from Christmas and Elektra about the other woman was ridiculous. I know women swoon for Bond, but as soon as Christmas sees Elektra she makes a comment about Bond sleeping with her. And it was the same the other way around. Here are two smart and powerful women (one who was clearly just using Bond) and they suddenly get all jealous at the sight of another beautiful woman? Totally out of character and poorly written.

• the list of "goofs" in this film must be the longest of any Bond film – this shows a very poor job of directing, writing, and editing. Continuity was very poor in many of the scenes. Yes there was lots going on, but that is no excuse for the switching of guns, body directions, and clothing, as well as injuries disappearing or moving, objects in rooms moving, and many other mistakes that are throughout the movie.

• the fight scene in the sub near the end was the ultimate in bad directing and choreography. When Renard knees Bond hurting him badly, his knee obviously goes next to Bond not into him. Throughout the movie punches and kicks clearly miss the target yet Renard is somehow knocked out briefly and Bond is later writhing in pain. And when they are choking each other with hands at the neck, they basically have a conversation … while being choked.

• The scenes of the fight at the caviar factory and it being being destroyed … where do you start. None of it looked remotely realistic. The helicopters carrying saws cutting through everything, while a cool idea, just looked so hokey. The way the buildings were cut, the way the car was cut in two, the saw chasing Brosnan down a pier, etc, etc. Every part of the scene was poorly done and looked silly. I know there is a comedic factor to these movies, but this belonged in the Peter Sellers spoof, not a real Bond movie.

I could go on and talk about all the scenes where Brosnans stunt double is clearly identified, other examples of really bad writing, and the horrible plot, but you get the idea.

There is a reason why:

• Denise Richards got the Razzies award that year - for Worst Supporting Actress.

• Rotten Tomatoes ranked this #21 of the 25 Bond Movies (right behind Die Another Day and Tomorrow Never Dies - two other Brosnan Bond movies)

• Both Rolling Stone and BuzzFeed rank it #20 out of 25

• Entertainment Weekly named Denise Richards the worst Bond girl of all time in 2008 (even worse than Tanya Robers in A View To A Kill)

• and EW ranked this the worst bond movie of all time (but that was before Quantum of Solace and Die Another Day which is now ranks lower).

I will say one more thing though, when M is captured and locked in the cell. I expected her to pull something out of her broach or a hairpin that she would use. I mean come-on, she runs the whole organization and she had nothing to work with and couldn't even pull a clock into the cell?

How to Make It in America (2010–2011)

Good show, but not "HBO Enough"

[7/10 · 1 August 2014]

I like "How to Make it" and think the writing is good and the acting is good. Yes, it could be better, but the first season (watching it On Demand) has kept me coming back. Bryan Greenburg, Victor Rasuk, and Lake Bell put in fine performances and I can see this as a real story line in New York. There is plenty of realism in the writing and acting.

It is not fair to compare this to Entourage, and I think those comparisons are partly why the show only lasted 2 seasons. People who were drawn to the show by this comparison and expectations of what the show would be like were disappointed. Entourage brought flashy people, a fantasy life in Hollywood, and lots of naked women, bare-chested fit men, and sex. It was a fantasy world with a few hints of reality.

"How to Make it ..." was more about reality and with no nudity and sex. So right there the majority of the Entourage audience started tuning out once they realized they weren't going to see Lake Bell, Florence Faivre, or anyone else naked. As superficial as it sounds, there are a number of people that watch the HBO shows because there is nudity. Without that, it's "just another show". They picked it up a bit in season 2 with a few nude shots - and the famous Lake Bell scene in Episode 3 that won her a Mr Skin award - to try to boost viewers. But by then it was too late, they lost a lot of the HBO viewers and ratings were down 25% in season 2.

So I think "How to Make it" didn't quite fit the bill of a paid cable channel show. If it were on a network, it might have fared better because the expectations of the audience would have been different - not lower (or higher) just different.

There are some ways where it did compare to Entourage, but that doesn't mean it was good. It was the typical up/down story line - things are going great, then disaster strikes. They work their way through it, things look good again, then something else goes terribly wrong. Then the first season ends on a high note to get you hooked for season 2 - where things go wrong again soon. That was the type of story line throughout Entourage which started turning people off after a few seasons - but the promise of hot naked women kept them coming back. As I stated above, without that lure, this type of story line got old fast and viewership dropped.

You can create drama in other ways then this constant up and down in every single episode (look at Boardwalk empire, Sopranos, Breaking Bad, etc.) but it seams that is the only way this production team knows how to operate.

So in the end, I liked the show and think Lake Bell is a beautiful and talented actress. I watched both seasons and would like to have seen more of it, but I think it just didn't have enough to keep a pay channel audience watching.

Scorcher (I) (2002)

Completely lame plot with plenty of bad acting to make it funny

[2/10 · 12 November 2012]

The plot lines in this movie are so bad, one would think this is a spoof. The redeeming factor is that the acting is just as bad so it really turns it into a comedy.

let me give you three examples.

First, Here is a critical mission to deliver 2 nuclear weapons to a site in LA, and it is "protected" by a small team in 1 truck and two jeeps. no backup, no eye-in-the-sky, no secondary communications, nothing. At one point they get stopped by the old "truck in the middle of the road" trick. They all get out and stand around when they are opened up on. These are elite soldiers on a critical mission to save the world? and they are stymied by a rogue team of bandits. And of course along for the ride is the cute scientist wearing stylish slacks and a cute sweater.

Second, there is a father/daughter team of scientists. She hates him because he was not around. And he speaks glowingly of her and her work - to the point that it is revealed that he funded her research. But several times during the movie when she disagrees with him on scientific findings, he completely dismisses and insults her. Then the plot tries to turn the moment when we sees she is right into a tear jerking scene of father/daughter love. It's a complete failure.

Third, one character hates the lead character so much that he continually jeopardizes the mission to save the world in order to make this one guy look bad.

Fourth, two characters take off in a jeep with the second nuke needed to save the world in search of the main characters daughter. They didn't think of leaving it with the main team when they left? Oh, that's right, it was needed to add a little more drama in the plot.

Fifth, when arming the nuclear weapon, the main character tells his daughter "you better step back." He's setting an arming device on a nuclear weapon and has her move 5 feet back? Oh, I see, that was needed for the bad guy to be able to grab her when he wasn't looking.

I guess that was 5 things. I could have gone on even longer, but I think you get the point.

Sappy speeches, bad character acting, typical inept politicians who can't make the right decisions and take all the credit when things go right, and a crazy serial killer in the mix who liked to threatens to burn a young woman but never seems to get around to actually doing anything.

The only suspense in the movie was what next stupid turn was the plot going to take. I have to admit, I was surprised at times - because the turns were so unbelievable and dumb.

The Deal (2005)

Basic Thriller with Poor Dialog

[4/10 · 22 October 2012]

It's a basic thriller with an OK plot, OK (at best) acting, and sometimes silly dialog.

Stereotypical characters:

• business people that want the deal done at all costs

• government official that don't care about the cost of getting oil

• Russian mobsters with bad accents and stupid actions

Poor acting:

• bad Russian accents

• stilted dialog and conversations

• no emotional attachment to any of the characters

• Christian Slater and Selma Blair have a few moments of decent acting, but even much of theirs is poor. Two scenes in particular standout - the scene where he pushes her away (breaks up with her) and the closing scene of the movie. Both bad.

Plot and Dialog:

• see the above mentioned scenes

• read the "quotes" section here on IMDb - you get a good sense of the silliness of some of the dialog

• plot is thin and the ending is anti-climactic

hmmm, maybe a 4 rating is being generous.

Prometheus (I) (2012)

Pick your tag line

[4/10 · 20 June 2012]

I really wanted to like this movie. I really like Alien, thought Aliens was a decent sequel, and have a serious celebrity crush on Charlize. But this one just didn't do it for me.

The acting was fine and there were some moments of very good acting (Fassbander in particular). The cinematography is at times stunning and the special effects are quite impressive. But the plot line and the dialog so completely underwhelmed that it ruined the movie for me.

Some people can overlook those faults and just enjoy the "make you jump/squirm in your seat" antics. But some of us can't.

That is why you see such a range of reviews and scores from both critics and fans. Even my local papers in the SF area had three quite different reviews of the same movie.

In summary my view is:

• there was no character development. I didn't give a hoot about any of the characters. to me they just seemed like dumb, unimaginative plot fillers for the aliens to eliminate. Even the surviving character(s) didn't really have a semblance of humanity.

• dialog was often childish, insipid, out of context or character, or just plain stupid.

• the plot had so many holes or inconsistencies it was distracting. Other reviewers have comments that people that complain about things being unexplained "just don't pick up on the clues". And while I often agree with that and myself love a good mystery or Hitchcock film, I found this movie's faults to be more with the inconsistency than the subtle clues.

For more detailed elements of these faults, other reviewers have covered them at length. So in summary I will point out few of the unused marketing tag lines that have been suggested for this movie:

• In the dark, no one can see your eyes roll

• in space, no one can hear you groan

• in the theater no one can hear your boredom

• in space no one can hear you snicker

Torque (2004)

Fun movie ruined by silly action shots

[2/10 · 1 February 2012]

This movie had promise - good looking men and women in tight leather outfits, fast bikes, lots of action, a fair amount of violence, a decent soundtrack, and actually a potential plot line. And it starts out OK.

But then about half way through the movie it seems as if another director took over (or maybe Joseph Kahn started smoking something funny). It appears to me that Kahn should have stuck to music videos and probably thought that the silly quick shots from MTV would carry over to a full length movie.

In the second half of the movie the action sequences start taking on a completely unrealistic aspect to them that wasn't present in the first half. In one example the FBI agents are driving a large SUV at over 100 MPH when they hit a construction site causing the SUV to fly through the air as it flips over. The next shot shows the SUV falling straight down as if it lost all of its forward momentum. IT falls onto another car, crushing both. and yet the FBI agents are completely unharmed.

Also, in the ending action scenes there are numerous shots that belong in The Matrix or another fantasy action movie, not this movie.

I am all for slightly exaggerated action sequences and bike riding, but the outlandish shots found in the second half of the movie are totally out of line with the "realistic" story line in the first half of the movie.

On top of that, the dialog is completely cheesy, also getting worse in the second half of the movie.

So maybe another director started the movie and Kahn finished it. I can think of no other reason for such a discrepancy, other than the notion that Kahn is completely out of his depth when attempting a full length movie. Taking a video directing mentality to the full screen rarely works, and this is a good example of that.

Eyes Wide Shut (1999)

Interesting and thought-provoking, but missing key elements

[31 October 2011]

I have read a lot of 9 or 10 star and 1 or 2 star reviews of "Eyes Wide Shut" and very few in the middle. This is clearly a polarizing film.

My view is that it is classic Kubrick - thought provoking, controversial, and visionary with good cinematography. But the movie lacks a couple if critical elements. The first being good acting.

Cruise has never been one of my favorites. There are only a few movies where I would praise his acting. Kidman is more of the opposite, mostly good acting with only a few stinker performances. This movie seemed to be on the bad acting scale for both of them. They looked uninspired and going-through-the-motions for most of the movie. Their scenes where they are upset or crying were completely unbelievable.

Another part of the movie that bothers me is the score. The gloomy score that repeats throughout the movie sounds like a more redundant rip-off of the Halloween score. And it is used way too much during the movie. The first few times it does a good job at setting the tone, but after that it's just repetitive and distracting.

In the whole, it is potentially a great movie that is undermined by a number of flaws (only two are mentioned here). It could have been so much more.

I have watched it several times, always hoping for more, seeing something new each time, but also feeling that it could have been much more.