Reviews

17 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
The Matrix (1999)
What a blast
23 September 1999
I can't wait to see this again! There is tons of energy, the special effects are stunning, and the story doesn't fall flat on its face either. There are lots of biblical parallels to pick up on. Each character that plays a major role in the movie is well developed. This movie is just plain great. 10/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Not like I remember high school
23 September 1999
Geez, this movie is sure made for teenagers (which I'm not). The only reason I watched it was because it happened to be on cable. I'd be upset if I'd actually payed money to rent it much less see in the theatre (of course I never had any intention of either). Pretty much every character in the movie is completely shallow and not believable, including Amanda and Preston, whom we're supposed to be rooting for. The only reason these two characters look good is because everybody else is so bad. I mean come on, one day she doesn't even know who he is, and then the next day meets him at the train station where the two start making out after only a couple of minutes of conversation? And the rampant sex, even amongst total strangers, at the graduation party? And the nerd has the girls drooling over him after singing karaoke to "Paradise City" by Guns 'n Roses? Gimme a break! Anyone who thinks this is a good film is either a) a Jennifer Love Hewitt fan or b) just hasn't developed any taste for decent film-making yet. Everything about this movie is catered directly to teens, and is quickly lost on anyone else.
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I loved it!
7 September 1999
This certainly is no "Toy Story" knock-off. Instead of being a sweet kid's story, it's a full-fledged good guys versus bad guys war, where many of the characters are toys. Tommy Lee Jones as Chip Hazard is great. The animation and special effects are superb, you can't even distinguish what's real from what's not. Of course there are plenty of unrealistic moments in the movie, but they don't detract from the enjoyment at all.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Very well done
7 September 1999
I enjoyed this movie quite a lot. Michael Douglas as Steven Taylor is absolutely brilliant and sinister, and the best aspect of this story is that you don't find out why he wants really wants his wife murdered until later in the movie. Gwyneth Paltrow as Emily Bradford Taylor is also a great character, because although she is having an affair with another man, she's prepared to come clean with her husband before he tries to have her murdered. She is also tough and resourceful enough to survive the attack, and then smart enough to put the pieces together afterward.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Edge (1997)
8/10
Great suspense
7 September 1999
This is a great movie. Charles (played by Anthony Hopkins) is a brilliant man with tons of theory but little practical experience. He is convinced that Bob, a photographer (played by Alec Baldwin) has "got it" for his gorgeous model wife, Mickey (who better than Elle MacPherson?). Well, the tension developing over the wife's affection is put on hold temporarily as the plane the two are flying in over the Alaska wilderness crashes. The two must work together to survive a man-eating grizzly which is hunting them first, then they can resolve their personal issues.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Switchback (1997)
8/10
I liked it!
2 September 1999
I liked just about every aspect of this movie. The local police aren't portrayed as a bunch of inbred idiots, the killer isn't portrayed as maniacal and impersonable, and the FBI agent isn't just a suit with all the personality of a tube of toothpaste. All of these combine to make a refreshing murder mystery/thriller. This isn't the classic "who dun it?" type of murder mystery; rather, it is more in the flavor of "Silence of the Lambs", where we discover who the killer is long before the end of the movie, and the suspense comes from anticipating the hero catching the villain.
33 out of 35 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Nothing less than superb
30 August 1999
This is definitely one of the best family movies of our time. Every single facet of it is well conceived, directed, and acted. I'm not even a Drew Barrymore fan and I can't recall having been so completely pleased with a film in recent history. To outline the plot, it's the old "Cinderella" story with some refreshing twists, and like I've already said, superbly done. See for yourself!

An unequivocal 10/10.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Waterboy (1998)
7/10
Another Adam Sandler vehicle
30 August 1999
Yes, this is another stupid Adam Sandler movie, which means you'll probably either love it or hate it. Here he plays a "hydration engineer" (a.k.a. Waterboy) for a college football team, until he loses his job because people can't stand him. He goes on to become the waterboy for the worst college football team in history, and as soon as the abuse starts the coach (played by Henry Winkler) tells him to stand up for himself. He then visualizes his aggression and tackles the quarterback, knocking him out cold. This is the basis for the rest of the movie. Totally stupid, but also hilarious. Like I said, if you like Adam Sandler you'll enjoy this; if you don't it will probably drive you out of the room.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Happy Gilmore (1996)
8/10
Totally hilarious
30 August 1999
Warning: if you can't stand Adam Sandler, don't watch this!

Okay, with that said, I must say that this is one of the funniest movies I've seen. I almost got muscle cramps a couple of times because I was laughing so hard! Adam Sandler plays Happy Gilmore, a wanna-be hockey player who can't skate and has no control, but he can kill the puck. His grandmother is about to lose the house his deceased grandfather built for her unless she can come up with a quarter million dollars in overdue income taxes. This leads Happy to his discovery that he is the best long-ball golfer in the world, and with a little coaching (from Carl "Apollo Creed" Weathers) he can turn pro. He does and there begins his hilarious journey toward saving Grandma's house.

As with his other movies, if you don't like Adam Sandler, then don't rent this. It will drive you insane. If you do like him, however, you'll have a hoot watching this one!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Oxygen (1999)
I liked it
27 August 1999
I think this is a pretty good movie. Basically, Maura Tierney plays a detective who has some very big personal problems to deal with and gets sucked into a kidnapping case only to become the last hope the victim has.

I especially like the way Maura is cast as the leading role. Refreshingly, she is a real woman with very real problems. Most people probably cannot relate with the specific issues she has to deal with, but the one thing I was left with when the movie was over was that she was 100% believable. She's not some kind of "super" human like every other star in a good-guy vs. bad-guy movie. She's just a smart detective who manages to stay alive.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Boogie Nights (1997)
6/10
Good film for bad content
27 August 1999
Although the lifestyles of the characters in this movie are deplorable, they are well portrayed. I'm not familiar with the 70's porn industry, but I can definitely see how that kind of self-gratifying life of debauchery would lead to bigger problems like drug addiction, depression, and desperation. The characters I enjoyed most were "Amber Waves" and "Buck Swope", because to me they were the most believable. They were the only two characters (besides "Colonel") with any redemptive value; namely, that there are unavoidable consequences for our actions and the life we choose for ourselves.

The one part that didn't fit at all for me was Rollergirl. She made no sense whatsoever. I guess she's supposed to be the Traci Lords equivalent -- a girl who drops out of high school for full-time sex. Okay, so what. Big deal, right? But what's up with the limo scene where Jack picks up a guy off the street to film having sex with Rollergirl in the backseat, and then when he doesn't do it right they get all upset, kick him out of the car and beat him senseless? "Don't you ever disrespect me!" Duh?! What's there to respect about her? She invited him into the car to have sex with her and then turns on him! I don't even know why they cast the part of Rollergirl at all, other than to see if Heather Graham would cave in and finally shed her clothes on film (which she did).

Well, enough ranting and raving. Overall, I thought the movie achieved its goal. The bad acting portrayed was just perfect, it really helped you get an idea of how shallow these movies really are. And just for a laugh, Dirk's incredible prosthetic at the end was worth the ticket price alone (no, it wasn't real).
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Not much to write about
25 August 1999
If you're hoping for some kind of Species-like movie because of the title, this ain't it. This is strictly adult entertainment. The premise is that two aliens (who appear human) are looking for their comrade (also human in appearance) who is busy "learning" all she can about erotic pleasure, and in the process they end up learning too. I don't think there is a single 5 minute segment with everyone's clothes on. I didn't feel that any of the actresses in this movie were particularly attractive, but they sure showed off what they had. If you want to see lots of full-frontal nudity and really fake looking simulated sex (an entire sex scene transpires where you can either explicitly see or tell that the guy doesn't even have an erection), then this movie is perfect for you. If want to see something that resembles real sex, then this is a waste of time.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
French Twist (1995)
Very disturbing
25 August 1999
This movie really disturbed me. It's insulting to think that a married woman with children would so readily entertain a lesbian love affair with a completely unattractive woman who stops by after her car breaks down. There doesn't seem to be any real intimacy between the two women or any character development as to why the wife would even consider such an affair in the first place. Everything about this movie is ridiculous, and though I waded through it to find out how things worked out in the end, the end was what was most disturbing of all! I won't completely ruin it for you, but let me just say that I was disgusted to see the homosexual direction it took. If you're a guy you might think two chicks "doing it" is cool, but after watching this movie you get a better taste of what a homosexual lifestyle is like and frankly, it's not a turn-on.

It was definitely provocative, but I couldn't enjoy it.
0 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Exit to Eden (1994)
7/10
Enjoyable
25 August 1999
This movie was silly, but that sure didn't keep me from enjoying it! It was fun and entertaining, and Dana Delany is to die for. The fact that she doesn't get naked every 5 seconds allows this movie to have somewhat of a plot and some character development as well, and keeps this movie from ending up boring or as just a cheap thrill. She does shed her clothes a couple of times, however, and it's worth it. She's gorgeous.
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
REALLY dumb
25 August 1999
This movie is incredibly stupid. Here's the plot: Melissa is going to lose her carwash if she doesn't come up with $4 million. No problem, though! A couple of her carwash girls will just seduce the execs at the local televangelism station into giving her a week of air time, and she'll advertise lingerie. Plain-old advertising doesn't get her anywhere, so she starts saucing it up with "active" modeling (sex). The phony sex in this movie is about the worst I've seen, and the only likeable character is Melissa herself. The only part of this entire movie even worth watching is the music video at the end where all of the girls take their tops off as they wash cars. By the way, not to spoil it for you, but this is also the only time during the movie you actually get to see Kristi Ducati's massive breasts, and even then they don't get their fair share of attention, thus making that aspect of the movie a major disappointment as well.

I recommend this movie if you're hard-up, have nothing better to do and it's on late-nite on television. Certainly don't waste your time or money renting it, because just about any other movie you could watch is guaranteed to have any or all of the following: a) better story b) better acting c) better sex
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Species II (1998)
Surprised it made the theaters
20 August 1999
I can't believe this made the big screen. This movie should have gone straight to tape, it is simply atrocious. Everything about this movie is bad; the acting (what little there is), the story (what little there is) and the special effects. The only thing it accomplishes is being a total gross-out. If you like steamy sex scenes to then see the woman get mutilated during childbirth, this movie is for you! Even if you only watched this movie to see Natasha H. get naked, you'll probably even be disappointed there! And the end where the aliens have sex is simply the stupidist I've seen. The special effects look like a cheap rip-off from Aliens and the way the male Species suffocates Eve with what looks like a phallic tentacle is beyond dumb.

I cannot recommend this movie to anyone.
8 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I enjoyed it, but it's not like the book
13 August 1999
I enjoyed this movie purely as an action, special f/x and gore-fest. However, besides the title there are about 2 main things this movie has in common with the book "Starship Troopers" by Robert A. Heinlein: the names of some of the characters, and the fact that it's about a war with the Bugs.

The book is primarily about the development of Johnnie Rico; the movie is mostly action. Obviously, to make an entertaining action movie, some of the character development must be traded for battle sequences, but regardless of this the movie fails to agree with the book on several major points. To point out all the discrepancies would take hours, but the glaring and unnecessary ones are:

* In the book, the M.I. (Mobile Infantry) are serious ass-kickers with powered armor, they drop in capsules, and they usually lay waste to the bugs with few casualties. This is the aspect where the movie lacked most. In the movie, they're more like a bunch of sheep being led to the slaughter.

* In the book, Carmen Ibanez is not Johnnie Rico's girlfriend (they're just friends), she's not the reason he joins the M.I., and there is also no competition for her affection. I think the idea behind her role in the film was that if you have someone as beautiful as Denise Richards to play Carmen Ibanez, you have to make her part in the story bigger. She also doesn't crash-land into bug territory at the end where she is saved by Rico, as in the movie. It would have been more true to the book to omit her part from the movie entirely.

* In the book, Carl does join military intelligence, but for electronics, not game strategy. And he isn't telepathic, and doesn't give Rico any insight about how to rescue Carmen either; rather he is killed before being commissioned.

* In the book, Dizzy Flores is a guy, not a beautiful woman pining for Rico's affection (I guess this would put a pretty big dent in Dina Meyer's part in the movie as well). In the book, nobody ever "has" Rico; the book has no sex at all. Wake up, Hollywood! The most that happens is that Carmen takes Johnnie on a single date while he is in O.C.S. The fact that Rico goes through O.C.S. to become an officer is completely omitted from the movie.

* In the book, retired Colonel DuBois was Johnnie's teacher of History and Moral Philosophy, not Lt. Rasczak.

* In the movie, both of Rico's parents are killed on Buenos Aires. In the book, Rico believes both of his parents are killed, but in fact only his mother is killed on Buenos Aires. His father actually joins the M.I. and is assigned to the "Roughnecks" where he reunites with Johnnie before he ultimately reunites with his son.

I think this is a good movie for the action genre, but it could have followed the book much more closely without losing anything. Rather, I think it would have gained more.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed