Reviews

First, let me qualify that the cast is terrific and I love them in... Well, literally everything else they're in. I love the Russo Brothers. But there's not getting around that I was super bored watching this move, and wanted to just fast-forward through the interminable blowie-uppie scenes.

Long on style, short on substance. It maybe didn't help that I watched The Old Man right before this, which is the other way round.

I DO not get the hate this movie is getting. This is not Gandhi, this is not Stanley Kubrick - this ain't even Die Hard. What it is is an exciting and tense race against the clock thriller.

The pleasure of this movie is solving problems, with unexpected solutions that are unexpected, probably, only to those who don't make their living driving trucks. Implausible? Yes. But a lot of fun. Check it out.

Yes, this show ends after two seasons on a cliffhanger, but it is the best fiction that ever cast in that universe. Sensitive, sad, and tragic - over of my favorite shows ever.

What is going on here? The writing and the production values are terrible in season two, though it's still pulling the star power of season one. I hope they just put the terrible episodes early in the season.

Over long, poorly paced, and some disastrous creature design, especially in light of Cats. A lot of interesting ideas never quite properly developed, but four or five truly great weight to ten minute sequences... Mixed in among the other 140 minutes of runtime. You like it, you won't love it. It certainly won't derail WW 91, with Diana opening for Soundgarten.

I hate this movie. Make no mistake, you will care about the characters and what happens to them, and then the writer purposefully with betray that trust to make you feel horrible.

Enjoy Stranger Things instead - this movie certainly offers nothing you won't find a better version of there.

About the highest praise I can give this movie is that it surprised me after twenty one films to set it up. Three hours and you won't want it to end.

Impossible to predict, which is rare these days. Jeff Bridges is a BEAST, supported by an outstanding cast.

The film is told largely on a continuous shot style, which is compelling - but the enemy - Texans, more or less, is clueless, insular and insulting. Which is why you've never heard of this movie.

This show was just too hip for middle America... It is in fact an edgy, Dadaist style comedy animation show in the style of Futurama and the trippier episodes of The Simpsons.

It is clear that everyone in this movie worked extremely hard. Bruce Willis ALMOST saves this movie. His performance is fantastic, particularly in watching him agonizingly drawing a painful smile across his face. He and Albert Finney are, unfortunately, the only well cast actors in the movie.

I've not read the book; it may simply be that this was not possible to translate to film. A lot of interesting ideas fly around, but in the end, to quote the bard, it's sound and fury, signifying nothing.

I was utterly prepared to really like this film. A big fan of James Wong from both the X-Files and Space:A&B, this film is a disaster. Disaster is perhaps the wrong word as it seems to play out exactly as the film makers intended it, which I suppose is a different thing than a disaster. I will save you one torture I had to endure throughout the film: there is no twist. If you've seen the trailer, you know exactly what happens in the film! No Sixth Sense, no Usual Suspects, heck, not even an April Fool's Day (check it out for a much better Dead Teenager movie). This was the big disappointment of the movie.

This would not have necessarily doomed the movie if it had not been so dreadfully lacking in a sense of humour. In the post-Scream horror era, a dead teenager movie taking it seriously is bound to fail. This is not to say that every dt has to be a spoof now, but some tongue in cheek here and there would have greatly filled out the movie. Or perhaps to have lightened the sledgehammer with which the director drives home every single plot point in the movie...ugh. I wanted to punch this movie in the face by the time it was done.

The Big Kahuna, like most stage adaptions for film, places all of its chips on the quality of its dialogue. This is a welcome respite from the typical cinematic chum ("Don't you die on me!" "I'm too old for this sh*t"). Nevertheless, when you do that, you have to pursue the arguments made in the film to their logical conclusion. While it's difficult to discuss the final flaw in too much detail without giving away the ending, it suffices to say that there is a comparison of the Christian method of proselytizing (witnessing in the common parlance) to the salesmanship of the other characters. The problem with this is that the salesman don't seem to really give a damn about their product and how it affects the customer in contrast to the witness. This makes all of the difference.

And this is not a fatal problem, if this wouldn't necessarily occur to the character in the film, but the born again new guy stands toe to toe (rhetorically) with Kevin Spacey's war hardened sales veteran throughout the entire movie. When arguments fail to be made at the end, even the actor seems to be frustrated, as if truncated by the director.

While imperfect, Kevin Spacey's usual brilliance and Farinelli's standout performance, a polar opposite from his Can't Hardly Wait role, make this a definite step up from celluloid tripe also hitting the shelves the same week like Final Destination.

Supernova got trashed by the critics when it came out. And by no means should one expect 2001, or for that matter, even 2010. What does stand out in this movie is James Spader playing an ACTION HERO. Read it again, that's not a typo. Playing a steely eyed ice blooded pilot, he really pulls it off. The movie breaks absolutely no new ground, but it's good popcorn sci-fi.

Frankly, I'm surprised Spader was able to get cast in this role. I would have expected it to go to someone along the lines of Larry Fishburne, or perhaps Stellan Skarsgard for the more budget conscious (and don't talk to me about quality until you've seen the A-1 stinker Deep Blue Sea). He obviously buffed up tremendously from any other role he's had, and you forget the sniveling yuppie cast he inhabited in the 80's.

Check it out just for that reason.

I could compare this movie to a dozen badly made (though surely more cheaply made) sci-fi flicks (Meteor comes to mind), but the real comparison that I arrived at was to the crappy full motion video games that came out in the early 90's. You know the ones where you would bop the joystick right, then left, and maybe hit the action button? The whole movie proceeds in a series of sequences like this, except for a few treacly touchy feely scenes where the movie grinds to an utter halt. At least my ear drums had a chance to heal.

About halfway through the movie, the characters board a space shuttle to go in the space. At this point in the theater, I literally turned to my wife and said, "Well, maybe it will get better from here." No such luck. I will confess to being a science weenie, and it bugs me somewhat when sci-fi flicks play fast an loose with the facts. Nevertheless, effective storytelling gets me past that. Armageddon is an insult to the American movie-goer, almost as if some foreign movie company had typed up a script, saying all along "Who cares if we show grass on the asteroid (no joke)? Those stupid Americans won't know the difference!" Then the evil multinational corporation would run screen tests that would tell them they need more explosions and less dialog. Now that I think about it, I think a movie about the making of Armageddon would have made a better movie.

Listen, some bad movies are still fun, like Highlander, or Remo Williams...this movie has no joy in its heart. It is coldly cynical and corporate and dead. Please don't support it by renting it. If you're looking for a space disaster flick, rent any of the Alien films, or Deep Impact, or even the fairly lousy Event Horizon. EH missed it's target, but its heart was in the right place.

This is a truly wonderful, quiet picture. It runs up a goodly number of subplots without being muddled, and manages to make them pay off in the end. Will Jim earn the right to his father's farm? Will he win the respect of his fellow ranchers? These and about a half dozen other questions preside over most coming of age stories; what sets Snowy River apart is difficult to put one's finger upon. One certainly is the majesty of the Australian scenery, a supporting player in its own right. Respect certainly has to be paid to the considerable chemistry between Thornton and Burlinson (the leads). I don't know. In the end, perhaps its just like any other good character movie: it's that we care about the characters and we want them to be happy.

I rated this movie 10 out of 10, I heartily recommend this movie to anyone who's ever had to grow up too soon, fallen in love outside his station, or rode a horse.