Change Your Image
Dccra1
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
The Terminal List (2022)
Everybody was in on it.
I like a good old-fashioned revenge story as much as the next guy, but come on.... Did everybody have to be in on it?
The NCIS agent was in on it. The dude who trained him was in on it. His Captain was in on it. His Admiral was in on it. The Secretary of State was in on it. Even his best friend who helped him get revenge was in on it. That last one was the ultimate spoiler of the series.
They were ALL in on it.
To be fair, the FBI dude and the reporter wasn't in on it. But everybody else was.
As for the show itself, I like the premise. I liked episode 1 a lot. I'd give it an 8 or a 9... But the gap between episode 1 and 2 was so completely nonsensical. If they set him up as being unstable enough to kill his family, why did the NCIS agent (who was in on it) allow him to walk free? Why would the agent give the reporter doubts that Reese did it? How was he allowed to assault an Admiral (who was in on it) without being put in the brig? Why would the Secretary of State (who was in on it) be defending his assault on the Admiral? None of it makes sense.
Even if their prime objective was to kill him, why make it harder by allowing him to run around and prepare for war?
Pratt did prove to be a better actor than I thought.
The lighting of the series was terrible. It lulled me to sleep at times.
In the end, not a horrible series... but it doesn't deserve the raves many on this site are squawking about.
Star Wars: Episode IX - The Rise of Skywalker (2019)
Not bad, considering JJ had to clean up Rian Johnson's mess
Bottom line. Is it perfect? No. But JJ Abrams did a very good job considering he had to clean up Rian Johnson's mess and work with archived footage of the late great Carrie Fisher.
I know... I know... This is supposed to be a review of The Rise of Skywalker, not The Last Jedi, but there is no way to review this film fairly without acknowledging the clunker it had to follow.
Which brings us to the heated Star Wars debate. Do what the fans want? Or do what the critics (who crave for something "different" even if it's a bad different) want? Since I have primarily been more of a fan for over 40 years, my personal stance is that we probably would have had a near perfect trilogy if JJ had done all three movies.
IMHO, the haters of this film are livid because they're Johnson fanboys who apparently liked Leia flying through space, Luke being a whinny weakling who dies projecting his image, and Finn and Poe serving absolutely no purpose.
Which now brings me to my ONLY ***SPOILER**** in The Rise of Skywalker:
When describing The Last Jedi, the ghost of Luke says it best. "I WAS WRONG."
End of ***SPOILER****
TLJ aside, The Rise of Skywalker was indeed predictable at moments, but it looked and felt like Star Wars again, with the original cast giving it their final blessing.
Overall, I would have given it an 8, but because of all the angry "critics" giving it undeserving 1's, 2's, and 3's (something I didn't even do with TLJ), I upped it a notch to a 9.
May the force be with you!
Glass (2019)
Meh
As a fan of Unbreakable and (to a lesser extent) Split, I initially thought it an interesting idea to merge both stories into one sequel, but alas, this slow-paced M. Night Shyamalan film doesn't quite deliver.
While James McAvoy did shine in his reprieved role as The Horde, I was not impressed with the labored clover tattooed "secret society" premise that sprung up near the end. A society whose goal was to eliminate both hero and villain alike. Meh.
In addition, I found the supernatural elements of the prime characters more convincing than Anya Taylor-Joy's character... someone who managed to barely survive the murderous Beast persona, yet is now somehow sympathetic to him beyond reason. IMHO, it seemed forced because Shyamalan needed to make a surprising "triangle connection" or link of the secondary cast members at the end of the film. Meh.
Finally... I'm just gonna say it... Bruce Willis dying in a puddle of water was probably the most anti-climatic thing I've seen in ages. Meh to nth power.
Once again, a great idea... but poor execution. 4 stars for the effort.
Captain Fantastic (2016)
A pseudo intellectual Marxist fairy-tale
Captain Fantastic is nothing more than hypocritical pretentious closed-minded absolutist drivel primarily designed to demean Christians, and anyone else who doesn't buy into their Utopian Marxist/individualist mindset.
The movie spends a lot of time mocking "Christian fairy-tales" while actually being a concocted fable about how a schophantly devoted Noam Chomsky hippie and his mentally ill wife somehow managing to raise a super race of physically fit brainiac children who speak multiple languages without the hindrances of evil "capitalistic" technology or any help from the outside world. Talk about suspension of disbelief!
There are many things that perturbed me about this film, but the dad's practice of brutal honesty (from his perspective), even when it came down to his wife's suicide or a child asking about sex/rape, was quickly exposed as contradictional hooey when he fakes a heart attack in grocery store while his brood of super rugrats exponentially lied with him in order to rob the place. One could say, that in his world view, lies are only bad from within the cult, but near the end of the movie, he tells his oldest son not to lie to anyone. So... Maybe it's a Mao thing?
I almost sympathized with the part about "rescuing mom" from a burial against her wishes... but told my wife while we were watching it, "If they flush her ashes down the toilet I'm gonna kick the TV in." Needless to say, they flushed her down the toilet! With all of these amazing intellects, no one thought to say, "Hey, is it wrong to flush mom where fat Christians pee and poop?" Nope. One super brat said, "Bye mom," as she swirled away.
In the end, I gave this over-hyped tripe a 4 for good acting and cinematography... Oh wait! I almost forget. I knocked off a point for Viggo feeling the need to do a full frontal. While slightly amusing, it was utterly unnecessary... much like the entire movie.
King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017)
Wrote around the CGI while peppering it with a few Arthurian names...
I will start my review by saying those who say, "the only people who hated this film, are those who expected it to be true to the original tale," are partially correct. Seeing that we are NOT devoted Guy Ritchie fan boys or paid reviewers, we also tend to like well- written movies with character development and a little thing called a PLOT. We're kind of odd that way.
Yes. Five minutes in, which consisted of a convoluted mix of Lord of the Rings' Oliphants and Uther slaying his (what should have been) unborn grandson (or nephew) Mordred, I knew this was going to be a new and unimproved story some schmo wrote around the CGI while peppering it with a few Arthurian names. Even then, knowing it was not really an authentic King Arthur film, I was willing to see if there were any redeeming factors that would pleasantly surprise me...
Good acting? Nope. Charlie Hunnam was lifeless. Jude Law was... for lack of a better word... awful. David Beckham?!?!? What in the hell was he doing there? I'm also not sure why many of the lesser characters talked like modern day British street thugs with deep cockney accents. That made me cringe... and not in a good way... if there is a good way.
Direction? I guess that depends. If you like your King Arthur/fantasy movies more on the Lock Stock and Two Smoking Barrels side... with back and forth nonsensical fast-cutting clips and a dopey rewind shtick, then you might call it genius. If not. You may find this sloppy form of repetitive "artistic" tripe, which was unsuccessfully used as an attempt to gloss over a B-A-D bad script, extremely annoying.
In the end, if you have a low attention span, love the quicksand Guy Ritchie walks on, or work for Warner Bros, you will love this box office bomb. If none of the above, I suggest not wasting your time and re-watching John Boorman's Excalibur again.
A Dog's Purpose (2017)
I changed my 8 to a 9 in hope to counterbalance the manipulators...
Unlike some of the bad reviews, I actually saw the movie. It's not Citizen Kane, but was EXACTLY what it was advertised to be... an adorable sappy seesaw for dog lovers. It was well done. The dogs were great, and the story itself was both thoughtful and heart- wrenching. There were several times in the movie I looked back at my wife and two daughters sitting on the couch crying. I've never seen them react in unison this way to a movie. I almost grabbed my phone and took a picture of it :) Those who take issue with the movie's reincarnation premise should realize it was no secret going in, and, like many children's films, is designed to be fantastic in nature. Just accept it, and enjoy the ride.
The second part of my review is dedicated to those who disingenuously rate a film based on a phony PETA/TMZ created "scandal." At first I wondered why a movie this decent was getting a 6.6 average until I read the comments and investigated this bogus scandal. With 27 pages of reviews, you have to go back to pages 25 to 27 to get the most horrific critiques of this film... some screaming at PETA to "do their job." My immediate concern was "why isn't IMDb during their job? Since it's clear that many of these earlier reviews were VOTING based on an emotional overreaction to a fake scandal, and either didn't see the film, or watched the film with the "scandal" influencing their review, there should be some way to police these fake votes. IMHO, it does a disservice to those to rely on IMDb's credibility.
But until IMDb can figure something out... I changed my 8 to a 9 in hope to counterbalance the manipulators.
Kong: Skull Island (2017)
Kong: Suicidal Island
IMHO, if Hollywood if going to invest in a cast that consists of John Goodman, Samuel L. Jackson, John C. Reilly, and Loki, why not invest in some GOOD WRITING? Hmmm?
Skull Island is supposed to be a dangerous place, but 90% of the deaths in this movie were based on asinine decisions. When 14 military helicopters engage Kong, instead of acting like Kamikaze pilots, why didn't they retreat to a better tactical position? I can see a few getting destroyed... but ALL of them? Makes no sense.
Later... after Hank Marlow, a WWII fighter pilot stranded on the island for over 20 years (played by John C. Reilly -- who does provide comedic relief), warns everyone NOT to enter the skull creature graveyard, they ALL do anyway. And guess what? Surprise surprise! More suicide via stupidity!
While Kong looked good, and the vicious tall spider and pterodactyl scenes made the movie tolerable, scenes like Brie Larson's anti-war reporter out Rambo(ing) the soldiers made it laughable overall.
I do not see how Kong: Suicidal Island deserves more than a four.
The Man from Earth (2007)
Over-reaching pseudo-intellectual drivel
I confess that the initial premise was intriguing. What's not to like about a 14,000-year-old caveman who never ages and (with exception to his "original" Van Gogh) wasn't fond of worldly possessions, who gets the sudden impulse to share his secret with his friends? Not to mention, when would there be another chance for me to see an IMDb rating of "8" on a movie with the dude from "Greatest American Hero" in it? But it didn't take long for me to agree with another reviewer who said, "Curse you IMDb for tricking me into watching this film!" The 8 rating from those who drooled over this schmutz created the false ASSumption that it's one of the greatest movies of ALL time, but I soon learned that The Man From Earth is no more than over-reaching pseudo-intellectual drivel. Nonetheless, I watched as these has-been TV actors (and The Candyman) weaved this absurd tale with stereotypical caricatures who couldn't debate their way out of a wet paper bag. What started as a hypothetical game quickly turned into a loony who claimed he studied under THE Buduh for years... but then the little suspension of disbelief I had left went completely out the window after the caveman claimed to be Jesus Himself. I immediately said, "Ah ha! Now I know why this has an 8 rating!" Because it primarily catered to a demographic who relished seeing the mean (weak) "Christian" lady cry, squirm and lose her Faith. It angered me that it took almost an hour of my life before this disingenuous POS of a movie admitted it was politically charged. IMHO, I believe its sole purpose was (f)aith (believing the words of a kook who refused to provide physical evidence to back his claim) vs.Faith. If I'm wrong, with the bad acting, unrealistic interactions (no one tries to acquire evidence, a hair, fingerprint, something), and bad writing (the old man with the gun coincidentally being his son-in-law and dying of a heart attack), God only knows why anyone would swoon over this dreck.
Maya & Marty (2016)
It's All About Jiminy Glick Stupid!
As an SCTV fan who admired the comedic genius of Martin Short since his "Shower in a Briefcase" days, I knew I had to check this out, and it did not disappoint. Fully understanding that this is a variety show, I did not expect every skit to be a home-run-- and it wasn't. Some funny bits, some not so funny-- and I could personally do without the serious Broadway numbers. That said, I can not remember that last time I laughed at anything harder than Jiminy Glick's Larry David interview (Episode 1). It was 7+ minutes of pure Martin Short insanity. After that, I was hooked. I wanted more Jiminy Glick! Yes, Maya Rudolph is very talented and funny, Kenan Thompson can make you laugh with just a look, and Steve Martin saying, "I am currently traveling in Europe and can not attend" was comedy gold-- but it's all about Jiminy Glick stupid! Do I believe this show will last? Probably not because it doesn't cater to 12 year-olds, so I'll enjoy it while I can.
X-Men: Apocalypse (2016)
She did not deserve her memories back.
Since CIA agent Dr. Moira MacTaggart beat up the goon protecting the entrance, moved the rug, and left the piece of plywood open for the sun to come in and resurrect Apocalypse (something none of Apocalypse's minions could figure out), she is ultimately responsible for all of havoc caused in this movie.
X-Men: Apocalypse certainly has many other plot holes (as it appears that they wrote this movie in about 5 minutes), but nothing nearly as gaping... yet no one, not even the telepathic Professor X, acknowledges her folly (as well as Storm's and Magneto's direct murderous involvement going without guilt, justice and retribution), instead... Charles rewards Moira by giving back the memories he once took from her. LAME!
Just about ANYONE I know could have written a better way to resurrect Apocalypse, let alone write a better movie.
I gave it a 3 because I quite enjoyed the Quicksilver stuffs-- except when Mystique brought him up to stop Magneto by telling him that he is his son, but even with all the destruction going on, they changed their mind. Horrible writing.
Kingsman: The Secret Service (2014)
Where were the children?
Sorry... but the church massacre scene was ignorantly offensive as well as cowardly, and solely designed for anti-Christians, the evil wishful thinking, and mentally deranged.
When there were obvious leftist and anti-conservative blurbs and concepts contrived throughout by libby Utopian writers Jane Goldman & Matthew Vaugh (like the politician saying he doesn't care who dies because he is a "Republican," and the comment "I bet no one thanked you for that one," regarding the saving of Thatcher's life), maybe I should have saw it coming.
That said, if you are going to massacre an all white "hate" CHURCH full of stereotypical caricatures, I have to ask? Where were the children? Even a church as bad as Westboro (who pickets the funerals of soldiers) have kids... so why were they omitted from the slaughter? Why? Because the writers thought it would be cool to massacre a bunch of white holy rollers, but didn't have the balls to take it all the way. Cowards. Because if they took it all the way, there would be less cheering for this politically charged bloodthirsty scene, and it would be suggested that the posters who say this was "the best part of the movie" should seek mental help. I suggest that regardless.
I wonder if the writers for the sequel would have the courage to make a similar massacre scene in a black church, or a Mosque, which fundamentally agrees with white churches concerning homosexuality and abortion... I'd say not. The picture would never see the light of day. This scene was all about fulfilling a specific ignorant liberal fantasy.
The 40k+ numb-skulls who rated this movie a 10 must have had their moral compass replaced by a SIM card from Twentieth Century Fox! With the fight scenes, FX, and cinematography, I would have gave this movie a 5... but since this was probably one of last films Dylann Roof saw before he started his own killing spree, I gave it a 1.
Noah (2014)
I expect nothing less when you let a couple members of PETA rewrite the Bible
While I NEVER expect Scriptural accuracy when Hollywood does a Biblical film, I didn't expect it to be a complete rewrite.
Where do I begin? I can complain that ALL of Noah's sons really had wives -- or about Methuselah's flame sword, magical powers, possession of the "Eden seed" (whatever that is), and the fact that HE DID NOT PERISH IN THE FLOOD -- or the evil dude's (who didn't really kill Noah's dad, but did in the movie) bazooka... yes... a friggin' bazooka that took out a stone giant!!! OR that the evil dude (who didn't really kill Noah's dad, but did in the movie) making it into the Ark just so Hollyweird can have their predictable climatic ending (oy vey).
All of that is complete rubbish... but the stone giants... LOL!!!! The friggin' stone giants (or "fallen angels") that helped build and protect the Ark, was the most ridiculous thing I have seen in a movie in a very long time. I about peed myself when I saw the stone giant playing with the kids after Noah comes back from Methuselah's mountain!!! Obviously writers Darren Aronofsky and Ari Handel just got done watching the stone giant scene in the Hobbit and thought it would be cool to throw a bunch of them into the story of Noah! How quaint.
Finally, I believe Darren and Ari's greatest transgression was to hippie Noah into believing that he was only building the Ark to save the animals, and that ALL mankind, including his family, must die. But I expect nothing less when you let a couple members of PETA rewrite the Bible.
I gave the movie a 1 higher than 1 solely for the special FX.
Jagten (2012)
The Movie's Tagline Quickly Becomes An Understatement
Since I am currently trying to find movies on IMDb's top 250 list that also air on Netflix, my new endeavor has finally brought me to The Hunt, and it did not disappoint.
Mads Mikkelsen (TV's Hannibal) brilliantly plays a divorced teacher who, out of nowhere, is falsely accused of sexual misconduct with a child, and shortly thereafter the movie's tagline "The lie is spreading" quickly becomes an understatement!
Writer/Directer Thomas Vinterberg flawlessly creates a convincing a tale (based on a true story) portraying how fast a lie coupled with convolution, ignorance, and fear can turn someone's life completely upside-down, and forever stigmatize them.
Acting, cinematography, story... this film was great on many levels, and has you thinking many hours afterwards. A MUST see.
Mystic River (2003)
I felt like I was watching "Crimes and Misdemeanors" minus the Woody Allen humor!
I went into this movie with very high expectations... maybe too high? Expecting a masterpiece of some sort. Even before seeing Mystic River I was ready to score it a perfect 10 from all the hype and high marks given to it by the critics, but all I seemed to get was "just" a descent film... not awful... but not great... thus I was disappointed.
The following are "SPOILERS" if you continue reading:
I kept expecting more... more of what I'm not quite sure. Maybe a little more... ummm... GUILT from Sean Penn's character Jimmy. The grieving was there over his daughter's death, but how about the guilt that was "planted" by the movie? That he knew in some way he had something to do with her death?!?!? We do find out that this is true... that the son of a man he had killed years ago was responsible for his daughter's death, making him ultimately responsible. And to top it off, he ends up killing the wrong guy (Tim Robbins)to boot. Some guilt was expressed... but way too little. I felt like I was watching "Crimes and Misdemeanors" minus the Woody Allen humor! So to me the anti-climatic ending of the parade squashed all guilt of the character (and I'm sure that's what Eastwood intended with the story).
Clint did a fantastic job directing... there were a few really good haunting scenes like near the end of the movie when Jimmy and Sean (Sean and Kevin) were standing in the middle of the street remembering when David (Tim) was abducted.
All the acting was first class all the way...I especially enjoyed Laurence Fishburne's performance.
However, all in all I find Mystic River to be a very good but a very unsatisfying picture... and if that's the way it's supposed to leave you it deserves a 10, but until I know that for sure I'm sticking with the 7 I gave it!
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)
Jackson continues to thrive!
Peter Jackson's "The Two Towers" wastes very little time getting his audience awe stricken with just the opening scene! Jackson brings to life another part of the Lord of the Rings saga that was only mentioned in the books (there are some things that only can be achieved in movie-making, aka the imprisonment of Gandalf in FOTR).
Jackson continues to thrive in his recreation of Middle Earth... Rohan, Fanghorn and Helm's Deep seem to be pulled from the pages of Tolkien with nearly flawless effort, and the casting being equally yet hauntingly perfect. Brad Dourif "is" Wormtongue, and Miranda Otto and Bernard Hill are also stunningly believable as Eowyn and Theoden King.
Ian McKellen once again stands out, taking the role of Gandalf to another level, accompanied with outstanding performances by Viggo Mortensen, Elijah Wood, Sean Austin, Orlando Bloom, John Rhys-Davies, etc...I particularly enjoyed the character development of John Rhys-Davies's character Gimli (though I see some "critics" of the film did not).
The CGI characters like Gollem, Treebeard and the ents were also extremely believable to the point you forget that they were animations. Andy Serkis (the voice of Gollem) did a fantastic job portraying Smeagol's duality.
Without saying too much, the battle for Helm's Deep must be seen to believe!
There are a lot of "critics" or "Tolkien Purists" downplaying these films. I, myself have read the books on 4 occasions and still believe whole-heartily that Jackson's interpretation of Tolkien is as close as we're ever gonna get. Simply putting it, there are some things better in the book, yet (to the horror of the "purists") there are some things better in the movies! I personally didn't see eye to eye with everything Jackson did, however I'll save my criticizing for the thousands of horrible films out there that lack the same passion Jackson has put into these films.
10/10 ...and if I could, I'd give it an 11!("these go to 11"- SPINAL TAP)
New Rose Hotel (1998)
Did they just need a payday?
Although the acting was OK... I am tired of seeing big name actors like Christopher Walken and William Dafoe on the cover of B-movie video boxes, and it makes me wonder if this film was made to go directly to video or was it solely released in Japan? Were these once great actors completely hard up to do this movie? Did they just need a payday? Because is was bad bad bad!
It wasn't as bad as LAPD with Dennis Hopper (because not much is), but I still gave it a 1. After reading some of these reviews, I do not get those who believe that this style of movie-making is art because much like one of Spinal Tap's faux albums, my one word review for this film is "sh*tsandwich."
The Trip to Bountiful (1985)
"...it took a master at her craft..."
Geraldine Page in no doubt has to be one of the greatest actors ever! I do not say this lightly. Though I am not very familiar with her other performances, I am convinced that this is her greatest achievement. The role of Carrie Watts is an actors role, and not just any "ole" actor can transform themselves into, it took a master at her craft... Geraldine Page! Every emotion, action, facial expression was perfect... from her sinking spells, to being offered a sandwich by Thelma (Rebecca DeMornay), from her spats with Jessie Mae (Carlin Glynn), to remembering her first love, from her humorous dialogue getting her bus ticket, and to (one of the greatest scenes in acting ) her soul-wrenching plead to the sheriff (Richard Bradford) for him to let her go the 12 miles to Bountiful, "...understand me, suffering I don't mind, suffering I understand..."
To me this movie was great, but it isn't for everyone, not even those who "claim" they like good acting. The writing, direction, music, and of course the other actors were all wonderful compliments to Geraldine Page and her role of a lifetime! I gave it a 10.
Crimes and Misdemeanors (1989)
I would only be lying if I said I wasn't fascinated...
It was said that pompous TV producer Lester (Alan Alda) was producing a show that was examining both the liberal and conservative points of view, though being extremely slanted to the left... this is exactly what Woody Allen accomplishes in "Crimes and Misdemeanors," deliberately making those who believe in God with weak and misconceived arguments, while creating a form of demagoguery for those who zealously hold an agnostic position. Much like Judah's (Martin Landau) Aunt May (Anna Berger) who got Judah's religious father to choose God over the loaded question "God over truth?" Why are the good punished (like Woody's rabbi brother-in-law Ben played by Sam Waterston),while the wicked thrive? This seems to be the movie's question and Woody generously answers it for us...
Nonetheless, I find "Crimes and Misdemeanors" to be a great movie even though I did not agree with it's manipulative conclusions. I found it compelling to ponder these very popular atheistic ideologies, and the message that I found in this specific thought process (though I'm certain Woody intended it differently), was that it is easier to live with one's sins if we convince ourselves that God is dead. I know this is getting a little deep, but this movie claims to be deep, "...a film about humanity." This might explain why Woody Allen accepts this philosophy of convenience for himself, for his own lack of moral behavior with his step-daughter...I know...a cheap shot, but this does explain it to me.
All the performances were astounding! Landau, Alda, Farrow, Huston, Orbach, and even Woody himself were powerfully persuasive at their roles. The cinematography and editing were also nearly perfect.
My only fault with this film was it's obvious one-sidedness. This movie mentioned and bashed the Bible a lot, but never quoted it. If Judah's father was as knowledgeable as he was religious he might have quoted Psalm 73 to Aunt May... The Psalm of Asaph which is all about the prosperity of the wicked, and understanding their end!
I would only be lying if I said that I wasn't fascinated by this film...I gave it a 9.
Pleasantville (1998)
It was a "good" thing for Pleasantville....
It was a "good" thing for Pleasantville that Barney Fife (Don Knotts) gave that hokey remote (now there's a quality premise for ya) to the right teenagers... I mean, WOW! What if the remote got into the hands of kids that didn't believe in promiscuous sex? I actually know some kids who "still" hold conservative values (and believe it or not, they are happy, and I know this because they are in color!!!), and what if it got into their hands? I mean what a disaster this film would have been if Barney didn't send a girl who was willing to seduce a black and white character from an old TV show on the first night she's there, without even getting freaked-out about her strange new circumstances (which convinced me that she qualified for her first "gang-bang" video!!). Really, Pleasantville was very lucky because the remote wasn't even meant for her, even though she was the catalyst to the town "finding itself." Of course, David (Bud) is an excellent brother! Not concerning himself when his sister is tells him that she's had "all kinds of sex," but staying focused on ridding a 50's fantasyland of it's values, he learned in the end that no place is perfect while helping "poor" Pleasantville understand the power of "choice."
Just in case you haven't figured it out, this film disgusted me. Once again we are indulged by the minds of those who detest absolutes yet weave a tale framed in an "absolute" ideology! I commend Gary Ross, the book burning was a good touch. This movie was politically and socially motivated. "Absolutely" teaching that "Conservatism" is bad and "Liberalism" is good. Choice? I see Ross making a sequel... this time maybe having kids come from out of Pleasantville to the present, maybe getting suspended when they pray in school,or maybe getting blown away after being asked if they believe in God or not!!! This movie should have been about moral decay, not evolved enlightenment!
However, I did feel that the special effects as well as the acting was fantastic. That's why a gave it a 4... nope... that's right I gave it a 3. I took a point off just because it was rated too high! I stand alone here in the IMDb's user comments area, and I'm still in color!! How about that?
'night, Mother (1986)
It's all about acting here
For me, it's all about acting here! On the surface, 'Night Mother should be a movie that I detest. I don't normally care for manipulative story lines in film like we see here in Marsha Norman's tale of an intelligent, epileptic woman, void of hope and is bent on killing herself. I get the feeling Norman wants us to go beyond understanding her "point of view" to agreeing that she had the "right" point of view. Although not terminally ill, she decides that ending her life is her "choice," and the only way to end her despair and hopelessness (too bad they didn't have Prosac in 1986!). Although I don't agree with, what I believe (remember I said, what I believe)to be Norman's ultimate agenda, I find that she put together some very intriguing dialogue, and together with the great acting ability of Anne Bancroft and Sissy Spacek they created something you rarely see in movies today, developed characters! I liked it for the same reasons I like "All in the Family," the characters, the dialogue, and the acting, even though they are trying to "educate" us that the liberal way of thinking is right and anything else is well, Archie Bunker!(WOW!coincidence? "Norman" Lear, Marsha "Norman"? All right, maybe I'm getting a little carried away!) I only hoped that Bancroft's character might have suggested counseling or compel her on a spiritual level, but that probably would have defeated this movie's purpose. And with all that why did I give this movie a 9? Because it's all about acting here! 'Night Mother!
Stuart Saves His Family (1995)
They all must have been on crack!
I guess I'm not being very fair, and maybe I shouldn't comment on this film, because on the SSHF's "main detail" page where it says, "I have seen this movie and would like to comment on it" probably means that one should watch this movie in it's entirety in order to comment on it. I normally can handle the worst of movies until the end, but not this one! (I couldn't finish "It's Pat" either, sorry SNL!) Half way through it I realized that this rare occurrence of me having to stop the madness was necessary for my mental well being.
I can tell you how much I hated the premise, I can tell you how much this movie bored me, I can tell you how much I hated all the characters, especially Stuart's, but I'm not gonna do that! Instead, I want to focus on something that did interest me about this film, the IMDb's User rating and the demographics thereof. Maybe I was only slightly stunned to see that the IMDb's user rating for this film was 5.2 (it should have been at the very least a 2.2, and that's kind), but I think the demographics concerned me the most. It was hard to believe that males under 18 rated this movie a 9.2!, and I don't know what to think of the 33 persons that gave this movie a 10!, except that they all must have been on crack! There was hope for my demographic however, males 30-44 (I'm 32)gave it a 5. Personally, and I'm sure with no surprise, I gave it a big, thick 1! People, please, I implore you...put down the crackpipes!
The Grass Harp (1995)
Good acting... but something was missing
With an amazing cast this movie couldn't go wrong. Good acting, actually, great acting, and that's what keep me glued to the set, but for me, something was missing. I didn't connect with the story, and I know that's what brought these great actors together. I'm sorry, but I think this going against the grain thing is wearing thin. Why didn't they just leave town and sell the medicine on their own? I guess I'm too ignorant to understand the symbolism of the tree fort. If I had been a towns-person in this film I wouldn't be on the side of crabby sister Sissy, trying to chase them out of the tree, but I would be someone sitting at home saying, "why in the hell are they up there?" I gave it a 6.
Glory (1989)
"If it's on...I have to watch it!"
In simple words, a great movie, one of my favorites. I know people even say that about "Earnest goes to Camp", but what can I say? Except that this is no Earnest movie! Thank God! If it's on tv, "Glory" that is, I have to watch it, it's simply that compelling to me. I can find no weaknesses in this movie(though I'm sure some will/would contest it's historical accuracy, but who cares about that?), from the music to the cinematography, to Zwick's great vision to what I believe is to be the best performances of Broderick, Freeman, & Washington(that says a lot for Freeman & Washington, but as for Broderick this is much easier to say, unless someone out there thinks he deserves an "Oscar" for his rendition of "Inspector Gadget"?)and to a fantastic story of race, honor, and our country's history. Zwick made it difficult not to feel for these characters, difficult to leave without tears, and difficult to leave this film without a sense of pride. I gave it a 10!
Dead Poets Society (1989)
I didn't get it
Please forgive me, I didn't get it! I didn't understand why everyone swoons over this movie! When you read the reviews of this film (even from IMDb members)like, "this is the greatest movie I've ever seen!," it makes me wonder why I had to sit through it a second time just to see what I had to have missed! Nope, I still didn't get it! And I like Robin Williams! I liked Garp! I even liked him as that doctor in "Awakenings" who gave El Dopa to Robert DeNiro!
Maybe I understand all too well... maybe, just maybe the people who swoon over "Dead Poets"share this movie's ideologies. I happen to agree with a IMDb member's comments calling this movie "manipulative." Overall, Dead Poets Society is a movie that drowns in it's own hypocrisy when it attempts to educate it's viewers of their absolute definition of what is good and what is evil. I gave it a 1 out of 10!
Camp Nowhere (1994)
"If IMDb would let me submit a thousand votes, I would give a 1 every time!"
Horrible! Horrible! Horrible! And that's putting it lightly! What nerve! "Camp Nowhere" dares to hide under the guise that it is a comedy starring Christopher Lloyd! This is no more than a rebellious kiddie flick(gag!), with Lloyd making an occasional(lame)appearance! If IMDb would let me submit a thousand votes, I would give it a 1 every time! It was a thousand-fold awful!