Reviews

Great Balls of Fire is the movie you show to someone you really, really hate. It is absolute torture of the highest rank and is probably used by minions of a foreign power to extract info from captured intelligence agents. I've enjoyed some of Dennis Quaid's performances in the past, but he goes totally over the top in this film. He doesn't so much cross the line, he pole vaults over it, then comes back to jump over and over again. He struts and mugs as if on some incredibly bad acid trip. It's one of those rare performances where you wish you could enter the film and beat the man within an inch of his life for doing something so truly awful. Was he desperate to win a Golden Raspberry or some other award for bad acting? That's the only conclusion I can come up with. Thank you Dennis, you gave us a bad performance for the ages. Where was the director to reign in this guy?

The opposite end of the extreme is Winona Ryder, she of the plastic features and plastic acting. I came across a review of her acting style that compared her to a wax dummy. That was of course an insult to wax dummies all over the earth, all of whom could have brough more humanity to the role of Jerry's underage cousin/wife. This brings up the film's mixed up message, that being it is 100% okay to marry your own cousin and have a child by the union. I fail to see what is so "okay" about that, but it looks as though Hollywood thinks that underage incest is hunky dory. Talk about "family values."

Another problem is the format. Is it a stright forward re telling of Lewis' life, or is it a musical? I'm not talking about the music, I'm talking about the truly weird scene where Jerry drives up to the school, starts to belt out a tune and everyone starts to dance like it was Broadway musical in search of a Tony. Fantasy and reality are thrown together in a mix that does not work. But who really cares? I don't. And neither should you. You can't get back the minutes of life you would waste on this film. So don't waste your time, it's too precious for something this misguided and poor.

I love Clive Barker, the man, his fiction, his first two films. He is an important figure for me. That's why it's going to be hard for me to write this review. Clive, don't take this personally, but Lord of Illusions is truly one of the worst motion pictures I have seen in quite some time. What in the world happened? Lord of Illusions has very little to do with the short story (The Last Illusion) that it is based on. It's basic premise is expanded upon in order to make the film run feature length. That would be no problem if the film were any good, but sadly it's not.

There is so much wrong with this movie. First of all, most of the cast is a walking disaster. Why Scott Bakula? This man whines his way through the whole film like a big baby. This is supposed to be a hard boiled, film noir detective? The man is a whiner. How on Earth did Quantum Leap last as long as it did with this reedy voiced non actor in the lead role? Famke Janssen should go back to modeling. She has the emotional range of a piece of ply wood. For that matter, ply wood could have done a better job and brought more sensuality to the role! And who in the world is the little weeny who plays Swann? The casting director does not earn his money with this film. The special effects are anything but special. The much hyped "Origami Man" effect is poorly integrated into the action and looks too much like a computer effect, which it is. But when it is all said and done, the vast majority of the blame lies on Clive Barker's shoulders. He was the visionary, the writer/director and he failed in his job. The screen play is a botched mess, the pace is plodding, the film is simply a failure on nearly every level. Clive, you can't blame studio interference this time. It's your fault. Plain and simple.

Even though I was let down by this film (to put it mildly), I still wish that Barker had not given up on making movies. Hellraiser and Nightbreed are wonderful, two out of three isn't bad, so give it another shot Clive. Just next time cast better people and work harder on the little details.

Bo Derek will not go down in history as a great actress. On the other hand, starting in the 1980s, actual acting talent seemed to be less and less of a required ability in Hollywood, so Bo could very well have gone onto bigger and better things after the big box office take of Blake Edwards' "10." That is if she hadn't allowed her husband, John Derek, to take over her career. Numerous Playboy spreads and bad movies like this one (this one in particular) directed by John destroyed what momentum she had and made her the butt of many a joke. In the 1980s it was assumed that you could put a certain personality in a certain movie and it would be box office gold. John figured that putting Bo in a movie wherein she was nude for much of the running time would make people flock to the theaters after the 10 hype. Maybe if the movie had been any good perhaps. This version of Tarzan has got to be the all time worst of the many iterpretations of Burrough's lord of the jungle, a slap in the face to character's book and film legacy. Tarzan is in fact an after thought as the film is primarily a vehicle for Bo's breasts and Richard Harris' wonderful over acting (remember, the pair had worked together in Orca). His scenery chewing helps you to stay awake during the boredom of it all and yes, the film is quite boring. Nothing really exciting happens and the few action scenes seem to have been shot by someone in a trance. Bo's body can only get you so far. Miles O'Keeffe who played Tarzan at least would go onto a long and enjoyable B movie career and Richard Harris can put this behind him after his recent acting triumphs, but Bo and John Derek never recovered from this fiasco and future collaborations between the two only served to show why his directing career and her acting career died in the first place.

And how did the orangutan get to Africa?

The original Flesh Gordon was a silly, campy take off on Flash Gordon and his serial compatriots. Flesh 1 was sophomoric to be sure, but the humour did work and the film is very entertaining. Not so the long delayed sequel that I recently purchased on DVD. As soon as I find a store that buys used DVDs, I will unload this piece of garbage. The director claimed that "political correctness" is what held the film's release up. After veiwing it I feel that it was shelved for so long due to the fact that it stinks, big time! The comedy in Flesh 2 is in such bad taste that it is not funny at all, it's just gross and offensive. It's all down hill after a promising "film within a film" opening, which itself is ruined by the antics of "King Dong" (bet the screen writers spent hours coming upon with that one). Speaking of bad comedy, I have to mention the Turd people, yes, Turd people. I feel really sorry for the folks playing these characters. I doubt that they put this film on their resumes. Mr. Hanky it's not. And couldn't they have cast better looking women in the parts of the Cosmic Cheerleaders? The ladies on view in these roles are dogs! And one is supposed to be an ex Playmate. I guess Heffner is going blind in his old age. At least the girl playing Dale is attractive as are the ladies in the opening sequence. The new guy playing Flesh was obviously chosen for his body rather than acting skills, which are nill. Another major problem is that the film has no sense of pace whatsoever. Even thought it's fairly short at 100 minutes or so, the film really drags and after awhile you wonder if it will ever end. This is what they made fast forward for.

The only nice touch is the return of the guy who played Wang the Perverted in the first film. And that's it. Please do not waste your time or money on this peice of dreck. It simply is one of the worst.

I read about Lurkers in the pages of "Fangoria Magazine." Always on the lookout for interesting horror films outside of the mainstream, I went down to a now defunct mom and pop video store not far from my home and rented Lurkers and a couple of other flicks. It was "get one free" day. Thank God for that fact as I would never, ever pay for Lurkers and you shouldn't either.

Lurkers is without doubt, the worst film ever made. It's not a "so bad it's good" deal but, "so bad it truly is a worthless peice of complete and total garbage that wasted film stock that could have been used on worthier projects" type of film. It's muddled script can't make up it's mind as to what it is. Is it a Horror film, a porno film (there are many gratuitous sex scenes, betraying the director's porno background), a tour of New York City (there is lots of padding featuring the main characters driving around the Big Apple), what is it? Who knows, certainly not the film makers. The film's pace drags on and on and on, seemingly with no end in sight. It's what the fast forward button was made for, trust me.

There is nothing, nothing even remotely entertaining about Lurkers. The gore, the naked women, nothing lives up this truly awful turkey. Do not waste your time trying to track down this film, it vanished for a reason. It's no good!

There were a great number of things to hate about the 1980s, the Reagan administration, Iran/Contra, "We are the World" and movies like this one, one of the projects that helped to kill Sylvester Stallone's career. At the time, Sly was the highest paid actor in Hollywood and he netted twelve million dollars for this film, a sum that raised eyebrows at the time, but is conservative in today's overblown price tags for celebrities. Still it's a shame he got all that money for a film about arm wrestling, yes, arm wrestling! Stallone is an arm wrestling trucker who wants to win the big tournament in order to prove himself to his son. I wonder how long the writers took coming up with this stroke of genius? I'd say less than two minutes. You wonder why in the world Sly wants the kid's love anyway, he's such a pompous, little brat. In other words the typical 1980s movie kid. You pray that Sly will run the snot nosed bratling over with his truck, this sadly doesn't happen. Sure would have made for a more interesting movie though.

Watch for the ridiculous "interview" segments that appear during the final tournament, little slices of life that allow us to see what makes the arm wrestlers tick. You'll get a chuckle out of them. Also look for pro wrestler Terry Funk in a small role as an evil bodyguard. These things might keep you awake.

Over the Top makes one wonder how Stallone ever made a comeback. If he could survive this dreck, then he may just yet come out of his current slump smelling like a rose.

I checked out Battlefield Earth a few nights ago on cable. I wonder now which version I saw. Reportedly the film was taken back and re edited after it's disastrous theatrical run in the hopes of improving it, that's why it was delayed on route to video, DVD and cable. One Internet critic swears that the re edit was in fact worse than the original theatrical cut. Either way though, Battlefield Earth cannot be salvaged. This film truly is one of the biggest fiascos to come down from the high mountain of Hollywood in this or any other century. I won't go into the many plot and logic problems, as they have been covered in great detail already. I will say that the film fails (at least for me anyway) due to the fact that nothing, and I mean nothing memorable, ever appears on the screen. Nothing sticks in your mind, it's like watching a blank tape or scrambled TV image. Nothing is there. Continuity is bad too. It seems that in some instances the director went straight to "C" while ignoring "A" and "B" all together. It's also hard to accept the Psychlos (or whatever they are called) for they are without doubt one of the goofiest looking alien races ever created, a cross between the Klingons, the Predators and Boris Karloff's Frankenstein, with none of the originality. You laugh at these so called villains, with their clod hopper boots (that several of the actors have difficulty moving around in) and over size cod peices. I doubt that humour was the intent, but a good laugh is what you get at the bad guys' exspense. The various human characters aren't much better. You can't get drawn in when the bad guys are silly and the human heroes do not elicit sympathy. I wish I had a dollar for everytime that Travolta yelled out "rat brain," though.

Thankfully the misguided talk of a sequel has dried up, but the fall out of this megaton turkey will linger for years to come. So beware America!

I grew up on the original Sesame Street back in the 1970s. It's a real shame to see how far the series has fallen from it's glory days, therefore I was very skeptical when I heard that the Children's Television Workshop was working on a new series. I figured it would be as poor as the Sesame Street has been for the last 15 years. I couldn't have been more wrong, Dragon Tales is an absolutely charming series that little ones and even their parents will enjoy greatly. Dragon Tales is filled to the bursting point with cute (yet in no way obnoxious) characters and lots of singing and dancing. I have to make a confession, I often times whistle the "Bet You Can" song when I mow the lawn!

Fans of the classic CGI series "Reboot," will get a kick out of hearing some very familiar voices. Kathleen Barr is on hand (I'm sure she sings some of the songs), as is Andrea Libman. But the most familiar voice is that of Shirley Millner, Hexadecimal herself as Doctor Boo Boo Gone. It's amazing to hear the same voice of crazy Hex coming out the mouth of the kindly old Doctor. She truly is a talented voice actress.

Dragon Tales proves that there may yet be hope for quality children's programming on television.

Between the Lions is one of those shows where it appears that you are not allowed to have an opinion about it or it's content. The series has gotten almost universal acclaim and anyone attempting to voice a differing opinion gets shouted down as someone who is against literacy. I'm not against literacy, far from it, but I am against bad television and Between the Lions is about as bad as it gets. Have the critics who praise this series actually taken the time to watch it? How on Earth can this thing teach children how to read? It might have a noble goal, but that goal is buried under tons of obnoxious characters and bad skits that really, really grate on one's nerves almost from the get go. And people wanted to drive Barney the Dinosaur off the air and leave this thing on?

PBS would be better suited to keep repeating Reading Rainbow ad nauseum as it is far superior to Between the Lions, for that matter why don't they repeat the Electric Company, a show that was both educational and very funny? These lions should be put on the endangered species list.

Several years ago, a once funny prop comedian got the idea to do a show in which he and and some puppet companions ripped on bad movies. This slender premise (based on something everyone does all the time. So much for it's fan's claims of originality) actually spawned a long lived TV series called Mystery Science Theater 3000, the zenith of which was this flop film. The target this time was "This Island Earth," a weak film to be sure, but one that many sci fi film fans swear is a classic, so much so that many of these fans were ready to place hits on the creators Mystery Science Theater. They needn't have bothered. No one saw this thing in it's original run. If you've seen the inane TV episodes, then you know what expect, except on a bigger scale, which isn't saying much.

Stop me if you heard this before, a group of alien races have been at war with each other for centuries, but they have to put aside their mutual racism and distrust in order to form an alliance to battle a powerful enemy previously thought to be myth. Did I mention that a few of the aliens are lizard like and some have weird accents? If you thought I was writing about Babylon 5, then you would be wrong. The show in question is a computer animated offering from Mainframe Entertainment called Shadow Raiders (or War Planets), the show that Babylon 5 should have been. Shadow Raiders was based on the toy line from Trendmasters called The War Planets, but the Canadian broadcasters did not like the use of the word "war" in the title, so the Canadian title became the less appropriate, yet much cooler Shadow Raiders and it is this title that the series is being released under in America on DVD by ADV Films. This company is guilty of releasing a ridiculous amount of execrable animated product from Japan, what the geeky fan faithful call "anime" (snicker, snicker), but thankfully they have branched out with Shadow Raiders, Mainframe's original (and most famous) work Reboot and the live action series Far Scape. The reasoning behind this seems to be "man can't live on bad product from Japan forever" and ADV needs to be applauded for placing Shadow Raiders in our hands. If you were like me, then you never saw Shadow Raiders in it's original run. It was on in my home town at a ridiculously early time slot on the weekend, I only blundered into an episode by accident after waking up at the crack of dawn and failing to get back to sleep. It's a shame really as like most Mainframe product, Shadow Raiders is a highly dramatic, mature work, probably the best thing Mainframe has ever done. It's a TV show that deserves to be seen, a sprawling epic Space Opera, with a wonderfully original look and magnificent animation. In fact it's epic feel is the type of thing that the foolish anime fans have been brainwashed into believing their silly fighting robot shows provide. They should certainly watch Shadow Raiders and see what true animated Science Fiction can achieve. Actually everyone should take a chance on this series, you'll be rewarded with strong storytelling and excellent characterization. You can't say that for much of what passes for entertainment these days and remember, Shadow Raiders is technically a children's show! If all shows (for children or otherwise) could be this mature, TV would not be the wasteland it is today.

At the very least, Shadow Raiders proves that a show based on a toy line does not have to be made to appeal to the lowest common denominator or be dumbed down in any way to a success. Get Shadow Raiders, you won't be disappointed.

Babylon 5 certainly had a magnificent first season, one that really raised the bar for TV Science Fiction. Problem was it was Hell in a handbasket after that. I don't think I've seen a series fall so far, so quick as Babylon 5 did. Pointless rip offs on equally pointless Star Trek situations, good actors replaced by poor ones and really, really lame comedy relief all worked together to sink the series from Season 2 until the end. If you want to see a series about a group of alien races banding together to battle an nearly unbeatable, nearly mythic enemy, then watch the Mainframe CGI show "Shadow Raiders," it's what B5 could have been. And don't get me started on the spin off movies.

Babylon 5, the little engine that could got derailed somewhere along the way.

As a big fan of the comic strip "Baby Blues," I anxiously awaited the long delayed TV adaptation. The wait was not worth it. Baby Blues the TV series was a case of taking a proven formula and mucking it up badly. The comic strip is one of the last strips in America that is actually funny, not so the now cancelled TV show. In an attempt to broaden the strip's scope, the producers added a tremendous amount of characters who never appeared in print, while ignoring the strip's far better background characters. Case in point is Nicole Sullivan's baby sitter. As one critic pointed out, "Does this woman have a contract to appear in every TV show known to man?" Go back to Mad TV Nicole, or better yet, just go away. Besides the poor supporting cast, the producers decided to reverse the time line of the strip so that it dealt with Darryl, Wanda and baby Zoe. Big mistake as the strip really hit it's stride when the second child, Hanmmie, was born, but it was par for the course with this show, just one big mistake after another. It was Baby Blues in name only. Had they actually stuck closer to the source material, then we would have had something. They didn't and neither did we. The comic strip lives on, the TV series is now a fading memory. As it should be. Note to Hollywood producers, if it's not broke, then don't fix it.

Movie studios and TV networks seem to love destroying a good book. Case in point is this horrible adaptation of Peter Benchley's "Beast" (no "the" here). I read the original work when it first came out. It gave me a few sleepless night fearing that a giant squid would appear in my room at any moment. Beast did for me what Jaws did to many people before it. I've since gone back and read it again several times. That's the mark of an enjoyable book. But the word enjoyable cannot be applied to the TV miniseries. Your hopes are raised in the first ten minutes where the miniseries really mirrors the book but it's all to hell in a handbasket after that. Characters are completely changed from what they were in the original work, characters who also never appeared in the book are invented for the show. William Petersen must take the award for the "worst case of miscasting in this or any other century" for his his portrayal of Whip Darling. Petersen apparently knew as much and it is obvious he is terribly umcomfortable in the role. It's a shame because in the right part (say, Manhunter), Petersen is magnificent. But The Beast is not about magnificence. Monster fans will also be disapointed in the terrible squid effects. The squid in the book was a true monster, vicious, destructive and huge, 120 feet or more. One gets the feeling of a Godzilla sized creature in the climax when it destroys Whip's boat. But in the TV adaptation we get a squid (or squids, another change from the source material)that is fake looking and not at all impressive. Maybe it's the small screen or the poor effects work or both, but the squid comes off as phony and unmenacing. It's a shame that John Carpenter, who made it known that he would have liked to have visualized the book, didn't get his chance to make the movie. A film done by him would have been far more interesting, exciting and above all scary.

It sadly didn't end here. Not long after this, Benchley's Beast follow up, White Shark, was turned into something called either Creature or Monster. It would have been better served to be called "garbage." And so would The Beast.

After reading about this film for years in magazines and reference books, I finally managed to track down it down some time ago at a local Blockbusters. I honestly didn't expect it to be good, but I had no idea how truly terrible it would turn out to be. There are a whole bunch of Jaws inspired cash ins out there for your perusal, the original Pirahna being the best, Up From The Depths being the absolute worst. What really gives this film it's claim to infamy is the astonoshingly bad comedy relief that pops up in the last half as all the goofy tourists head out to catch the killer fish. It's so bad that it actualy makes the work of Jim Carey and Adam Sandler look inspired. No mean feat to be sure. The great poster for the film gives you the impression that the creature will be an aquatic dinosaur or sea serpent. No such luck as all it is, is some kind of rare, deep sea fish brought to the upper surface via seismic activity. It's also not very impressive looking and the FX artist who created it regreted (years later in an interview in Fangoria) not having a good enough budget to craft a decent looking creature. One funny thing about the monster fish is that it shares a power that many other type of similar B movie monsters have, namely the ability to sneak right up on people despite being about 20 to 30 feet long. How do they do that? A week before NBC unveiled their terrible adaptation of Peter Benchly's "Beast," a local channel had the bright idea to air Up From The Depths. It's a tough call as to which is worse but I feel that "Up" gets the nod. File it under, "How not to do a Jaws cash in."

How long has Arnie lived here, 30 years? And he still can't speak coherent English. It seems he and the female lead are having a battle of the impenetrable accents. Arnie does nothing but lay on pathetic one liners one after the other. How could a good actor like Yahpet Kotto get mixed up in this mess?

A decent idea about violent entertainment being used to supress the masses is turned into just another ultra lame-0, macho posturing BS movie from the worst decade known to man. At least Richard Dawson is funny here, parodying his old Family Feud stint as the ultimate game show host. As one reviewer pointed put, you would be better served to watch Death Race 2000 which at least has a witty, blackly comical script.

Make no mistake, Reptilicus is a bad movie but it is one of the most enjoyable bad movies ever made. If you want substance, watch Apocalypse Now but if you want junk entertainment, watch Reptilicus. Give Ib Melchior and Syd Pink credit for at least coming up with an interesting idea of a regenerating monster. Problem is they don't use it to it's full potential and leave alot of questions unanswered. For instance, what about the tiny peice the one doctor cuts off and examines under a microscope? What happens to this peice or for that matter the original peices of skin found in the movie's opening? My best guess is that they kept them under ice a little more successfully this time. But how does one kill the creature? The filmmaker's obviously backed themselves into a corner with this one. Although Reptilicus is knocked out at the film's conclusion, he is not dead. General Grayson swears that the Proffesor can kill the creature if they get him immobilized but only a moment before the Proffesor admitted he had no idea how to kill Reptilicus. And why does Sven stick around for the whole movie? He isn't a scientist or military man and his romantic conquests of the Professor's two daughters don't go very far. It would have made far more sense if he had been the one to sacrifice himself at the end and not Grayson's second in command as Sven showed alot of guilt earlier about being the man who found the creature but this film is not about sense. Notice how the characters say the word "where" with great regularity, so much so that it becomes a running joke. And how about those effects? No men in costumes knocking over finely detailed miniature cities but an unweildy rod and string puppet that can barely knock over a cardboard representation of Coppenhagen. Although Repti's acid slime venom is a fairly plausible power (And well animated. The day glow slime is easily the film's best effect) it spews forth in a rather rude manner that makes one feel that the monster might have made good in X rated films. Speaking of the acid slime, we are told of it's effects, we never see them as acid scar makeup and burned out buildings would have taken too much money out of an already low budget.

Make sure you have a stomach distress bag ready for the sickening antics of Peterson the comedy relief handyman who likes electric eels and the "Tivoli Nights" song, sung by a woman with the tiniest waist this side of Vampira. Also remember that Reptilicus was a trailblazer in one respect. It was a pioneer in the "set up for a sequel that never happens" sweepstakes.

Grab a bag of popcorn and get ready to laugh. Reptilicus is wonderfully awful and deserves it's rank as one of the best of the bad.

In early 1976, Francis Ford Coppola and his film crew went into the Filipino jungle to begin filming what had been planned as the first Vietnam war film to be made in the post war period. It wasn't until late 1979 that the film was finally ready for release. In the interim it was beaten to the nation's screens by "The Deer Hunter" and "Coming Home." The trials and tribulations that Coppola's film faced on it's long march to completion are legendary and now part of the collective mythology of Hollywood. They included and were not limited to the replacing of leading man Harvey Keitel with Martin Sheen, problems with Marlon Brando, Sheen's near fatal heart attack, the constant rewriting of John Milius' script, the destruction of sets and the halting of filming after a series of deadly typhoons, monetary problems and of course the belief that Coppola might have been more than a little insane to tackle such a slipstream project. I mean it's not everyday that one attempts to adapt Joseph Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" while setting it in the Vietnam war. Apocalypse Now was gearing up to be one the biggest fiascos in the history of cinema. But all doubt was silenced in 1979 when the film was finally released. The pressure and problems made Coppola rise to the occasion. Apocalypse Now is bar none, the single finest motion picture ever made and will probably remain that way for many years to come.

Apocalyse Now is many different films rolled into one. It is first and foremost a war movie, it also falls into the sub category of the Vietnam war movie. Many people (myself included) feel the movie easily qualifies as a horror film as well. I also make the argument that it is also an anthology film as it features several different set pieces (or stories) with the journey up river serving as the linking story. Others see a time travel motif as the further the crew travels up river, the more primitive the surroundings become. By the time they arrive in Kurtz's camp they are a world from the high tech environment of the war and seem to have made a journey to an age past. Others see elements of the beach movie in the scenes with Kilgore and the Air Calvary. Scripter John Milius saw the story as a take on the "Odyssey," with Kilgore as the Cyclops and the Playboy Playmates as the Sirens. Coppola however wanted a more direct take take on "Heart of Darkness" and rewrote the script accordingly. See if you can find an early copy of the script to see Milius' vision. It would have made for a different movie and includes scenes cut from the finished print like the stealing of Kilgore's surfboard, the French plantation sequence and the second appearance of the Playboy Playmates.

From top to bottom, Apocalypse Now is a masterpiece with the final thirty minutes or so forming the greatest images ever recorded in the history of cinema. Brando's reading of "The Hollow Men," his explanation of what made him what he is today and Sheen's final appearance before the natives cement the film's claim to being the greatest of all time. I'm amazed that some people don't understand the ending. It's simple, Sheen has killed the native's "God" (Brando), therefore he is something greater than God. Note how the natives bow to him and present their weapons to him as he passes. This is emphasised by the use of the same lighting on Sheen that was used on Brando, the partial hiding of his face and so on. Sheen is now the new God of the tribesmen and that is why they don't turn on him, instead they bow down to him.

After this it was all downhill for Coppola. He made one fine and interesting movie in the experimental "Rumble Fish," but all else failed to live up to the promise of Apocalypse and the Godfather's I & II (then again how could one top Apocalypse?). He reached his nadir with the mind bogglingly awful "Dracula," and the nearly as bad "When Peggy Sue got Married." It truly is a shame but at least he can rest assured that in 1979 he created the greatest film ever made. That is nothing to be ashamed of.

Apocalypse Now is now and possibly forever, the greatest movie ever crafted. It will never be topped and probably never equaled. It simply is that good.

Ed Wood should have hit a home run but it didn't. It should have been so much better but it wasn't. That's not to say that ED Wood is a poor film, far from it but with a little better casting, it would have been near perfect. As it stands, the performances (and I use the term loosely) of Johnny Depp and Sarah Jessica Parker nearly ruin all that the film achieves. But let's look at the good. It was a very, very long time ago that someone who won an Oscar truly deserved it. Martin Landau deserved his Oscar for his incredible turn as Bela Lugosi. He was simply not playing a role in a film, he "was" Bela Lugosi. There are times that the makeup, cinematography and Landau's performance make you forget that that you are seeing Martin Landau. You are seeing him literally become the late horror star. Its one of the most remarkable feats in recent cinema history and truly deserving of the praise. It's an understatement to say Landau steals the film, he literally picks it up and carries it away with him. There is another stellar performance in the film, that of Patricia Arquete as Kathy. It's a warm, understated performance that was as deserving of an Oscar nomination as Landau's. Bill Murray is an always welcome presence and the casting of Jeffrey Jones as Criswell is pure brilliance. Those two always give their best no matter what film they appear in. Director Burton deserves much credit for his brave stance of filming the picture in Black and White, it simply would not have worked in color. Regretably, this descision is probably what killed the film at the box office but Burton truly showed he knew what he was doing. This is a movie that begged to shot that way and Burton delivered. Burton must also be given a major thumbs up for packing the movie with Ed Wood's real life hangers on in cameo roles as well as casting wrestling promoter Gene LaBell and exotic pianist Korla Pandit in small but noticeable parts. And lets' face it, who else could have played Tor Johnson but George Steele?

All in all the film would rank a solid 10 if it wasn't for the participation of Depp and Parker. Why is Tim Burton so enamored with this Johnny Depp? He has proven time and time again that he simply cannot act and in Ed Wood, he cannot act with a vengeance. Watch for his scenes near the end, instead of projecting wide eyed wonder as was called for, he projects the image of a madman about to go on a killing spree. A truly poor performance that almost ruins the film. Nearly as bad is Sarah Jessica Parker. Some see her as a very talented actress. I see her as a scenery chewing hack who is a major eye sore. And we can't forget that Burton's girlfriend Lisa Marie plays Vampira. A note to perspective and veteran directors, do not, under any circumstance cast your girlfriends in your movies. Marie is laughably bad. Martin Landau's fetching daughter, Juliet (who plays Loretta King) would have been a far more inspired choice for the role.

Make no mistake, Ed Wood is a good film but with some better casting in two of it's major roles, it could have been so much better. Still if you are a fan of the cross dressing director, you need to see this film. It certainly wasn't deserving of it's poor box office run Johnny Depp or not.

It's very hard to admit taking a liking to New York Ripper, possibly the most infamous of Fulci's post House by the Cemetery period. The film is so astonisingly sleazy that it literally defies description. As has been pointed out, it is Fulci's most extreme and misogynistic peice ever and features some of his most grotesque set peices. In fact, New York Ripper may be Fulci's goriest work ever but since it ranks so low on the totem pole with the fans, you never see articles prasing it's effects like you would with Zombie or City of the Living Dead. It is difficult to get worked up over scenes that so relish in the butchery of women. This isn't like the almost mystical gore of Fulci's other films. This violence is too real and hits to close to home. The murder of the young girl on the ferry and the repeated slashing of the main character's hooker girlfriend (why do all cops have hooker girlfriends?) are very unsettling. I'm sure this was the point but as I said, the violence here is too mean spirited. All this is perpetrated by a human villain who does have one ridiculous trait that really comes out of left field. No zombies, undead preists or immortal, mad scientists here but a human being who quacks like a duck. Yes, it's incredibly stupid but there is a rational explanation for his duck tinged accent, trust me. But even so it adds a peculiar feel to the precedings and does not sit at all well with everything else on view here. Anti female murders done by a cop baiting killer who talks like a cartoon character. That is something you don't see all the time.

Like a lot of Italian Giallo thrillers, Ripper has a great deal of red herrings. Not even the helpful psycho analyst is above suspicion as we see him perusing and eventually buying a gay men's magazine although it ultimatley comes as no great surprise who the real killer is. In Ripper's defense at least, Fulci does manage to come up with some nice touches. Building on the New York scenes of Zombie, Fulci here again makes the Big Apple look incredibly alien and foreign. This isn't the New York we know but an alien landscape that just can't be the real New York even though we know it is. Years before the morgue attendant who listens to music on his walkman while going about his gruesome task in Return of the Living Dead, Fulci gives us a forensic pathologist who does the exact same thing. But be warned, the disturbing sight of the little girl wasting away from lymphoma is an image that will haunt you for a long time. Its quite unpleasant.

Fulci again cameos here, this time as a police commisioner. It never ceases to amaze me how this little bespctacled fellow, who looks like your Grandfather was behind some of the most extreme Italian horror films ever, in particular this one. I don't believe that Fulci hated women as some have but New York Ripper gives the opposition fuel for their fire so to speak.

If you're a Fulci completist or slasher fan, then see it. All others, stay away.

A recent article in (I believe) USA Today named a critic's picks for top shows of the 1990s. As someone who despises mainstream movies and television, I laughed at every show picked. With the notable exception of one. "Arthur." Now there was a show the critic and I could agree on. Arthur features more intelligence, wit, humour and maturity than just about anything else out there and that includes prime time shows. Arthur is a rare children's series that can be enjoyed by both children and adults and truer words were never spoken. Arthur is not "dumbed down" in any way. It refuses to treat it's young audience with anything but respect for their intelligence and feelings. Problems are dealt with in a realistic manner and each of the characters has a distinct personality and come from diverse backgrounds. This is shown in several stories that do not focus on Arthur and his sister, DW (she steals the show by the way) but the supporting cast like Buster, Muffy and my favorite character, the tomboy Francine. Muffy is a rich priss, Francine and her family come from a working class background, the gluttonous Buster's parents are divorced, Sue Ellen and her family have travelled the world and the perceived bully, Binky Barnes, is anything but. The producers need to be commended in their effort to make every character a seperate individual and to give them stories in which they can shine.

I'm 28 and cannot miss an episode of this series. Arthur proves that children's shows can (and should) "grow up." TV wouldn't be such a vast wasteland if more shows (for children and grown ups) would take a lesson from Arthur. It really is "that good."

I grew up with the real Godzilla series and Ultraman. A childhood spent on these movies and shows proved one thing to me, Americans can't do stuff like this. Well, the American giant monster movie that calls itself Godzilla (not to mention the aborted American Ultraman series) proved my theory beyond a shadow of a doubt. Dean Devlin and Roland Emmerich succeded in botching one of the most successful movie formulas of all time. These two jokers claimed to be fans of the original movies but you wouldn't be able to tell it from this movie. It's bad enough that their monster doesn't act like the real deal but he doesn't even look like him either! Godzilla is one of the single most recognizable movie characters in the world but the filmmakers decided to use the tired old "we are Americans, we can do it better" argument. Well they're Americans all right and they gave us just about the lamest exscuse for a movie monster ever to be seen on the silver screen. The powerful Godzilla who plows through anything and everything in the real series is replaced with a goofy looking CGI beast who runs away from a fight like a coward. And don't get me started on Mathew Broderick. I can't think of anything more insulting to the collective intelligence of the human race that to cast this pathetic exscuse in movies. Bottom line is this, the Japanese and the Japanese alone make good giant monster movies. It's something no one else can do and the American movie proved it. Devlin and Emmerich finally got the critical and box office beating they deserved for Independence Day with their giant monster con job. At least one good thing came of this. Toho realized their mistake and decided to start making the films again themselves. Thank God for small miracles.

I won't go into all the inconsistencies that pad out this film's running time. Others have done a much better job of than I, so let's just say that yes, this film is truly awful. When will the American public quit falling for hype jobs like the one surrounding this film? Bottom line, anything and I mean anything starring Will Smith is automatically a candidate for the worst film of all time. Dean Devlin and Roland Emmerich got their comeuppance however. Two years later they made the American Godzilla film and took a well deserved beating for their efforts. Let's pray these two jokers will never bother us again. If not, then we may be in for something even worse than Independence Day, Independence day 2.

Long time fans of movie Science Fiction will be familiar with this film's troubled production history. Total Recall passed through the hands of a great number of actors, producers and directors and was given the title of "the greatest sci fi film never made." Well several years ago it did get made and the results were not worth the wait. What might have been a fairly decent sci fi peice is turned into just another macho posturing, B.S. movie chock full of incredibly lame one liners from star Arnorld Schwarzenegger. Total recall marked the downward slide of director Paul Verhoeven, a slide that reached it's depths (or heigths?) with the turkey of the decade, Showgirls. And let us not forget that this film is responsible for putting mega sleaze Sharon Stone on the map. As an aside, why does Hollywood continue to put this no talent in pictures since she hasn't had a hit since Verhoeven's other super stinker, Basic Instinct? At least Ronny Cox and Micheal Ironside are on hand and they easily walk away with the top acting honors. But then again when you're up against Scharzenneger and Stone, it's no contest. About the only good thing to come from Total Recall was the fact that Rob Bottin finally got a long overdue Oscar for his makeup effects. Even so, his work in Total Recall is nowhere near as good as his work on The Thing, the film he "should" have won an Oscar for. Let us all have some collective memory loss and forget Total Recall ever happened.