Reviews

15 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Star Trek: The Mark of Gideon (1969)
Season 3, Episode 16
2/10
Unwatchable
23 April 2024
One of the worst Star Trek Episodes, from the collection of Season 3 trash made in an effort to solidify the show's impending cancellation.

I have to laugh when I see ratings as high as 6 or more on this crapper.

If you're rating it that high, I have a question: Were there ANY bad Star Trek episodes in your estimation?

It's fine to be a Trekkie. I'm a bit of one myself, but some of the episodes (mostly late in Season 3) were just plain bad and this was one of them.

I'm sure Shatner loved it though. Many of the scenes featured him alone with a pretty girl. But the premise of this episode simply wasn't believable. .... Horrid, unwatchable viewing.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Wunderland (2018)
1/10
Great for insomnia
3 November 2023
Mediocre acting, boring script, and horrid special effects -- including phony snowflakes with the sun shining. It took me less than 10 minutes to realize I had been roped into a stinker and it only got worse from that point.

This movie isn't a patch to the "Battle of the Bulge" starring Henry Fonda and Robert Shaw, made in the mid-1960s. There's no comparison. In fact, it's a travesty to mention the two films in the same breath.

This is a low-budget attempt to make money on a well-known, famous battle. And in the end, all that was produced was an excellent tool to help people fall asleep. Any actor associated with this crap pot should be embarrassed.

What a joke.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Chastain is a wondrous talent
27 April 2023
I despised the Bakkers and the PTL club as a kid and had to force myself to watch this film.

But I'm glad I did.

Jessica Chastain delivers one of the most powerful performances that I've seen in recent memory. It's almost Streep-esque in its delivery of spot-on imitation and fearlessness. You forget you're watching Chastain and begin to believe you're watching the real Tammy Faye. Very few actors are capable of bringing us to that point, but Chastain managed.

Had Chastain dropped the ball with this role, it would have resulted in her being lampooned for years in the wake of the disaster. She had to know that going in, meaning this girl has balls of steel.

In the end, I came away seeing Tammy Faye in an entirely different light.

A tremendous, gutsy performance by one of our truly great actors.

Bravo!
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Harum Scarum (1965)
2/10
The worst of Elvis
8 August 2022
God Almighty this was bad.......geez.

The only reason I give it two stars is because I have to save room for Plan 9 from Outer Space at the bottom.

The dialogue is forced and hokey.

The sound is so bad, that many of the fight scenes are missing impact noises.

But above all else, it's supposed to be a comedy and you'll be lucky to laugh once.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Astonishingly bad
9 January 2022
I remember watching this as a little kid and liking it.

Now, some 50 years later, I decided to revisit it to see how it held up over time.

OMG ....this is astonishingly bad.

Disjointed, unfunny, with one scene after another filled with either shouting from the American characters, or gibberish from Peter Ustinov (or both).

One of the worst films ever made. Absolutely terrible.

And believe me, I wanted to like it.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
12 Angry Men (1957)
10/10
One of the best films ever made
18 May 2021
Warning: Spoilers
With no need for special effects, overly dramatic music, singing or dancing, this gem has stood the test of time.

There is very little about this motion picture that can become dated and ruin it.

It's pure dialogue -- well-acted and well-written dialogue.

But I must say, I disagree with the verdict. I keep coming back to the knife and the remarkable coincidence Fonda sold to his fellow jurors.

The odds of the defendant buying a unique knife, losing it and having his father stabbed by an unknown assailant with an identical knife are staggering. Fonda finding an identical knife at a pawn shop doesn't alter my thinking.

When you add this to the sworn testimony of the woman across the way, I couldn't vote for an acquittal.

I will say Fonda successfully got me to discount the testimony of the old man. His points there were valid and made sense.

Regardless....this film is a masterpiece.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Severely dated, unfunny
18 May 2021
Three women, portrayed as dim-witted blondes, lied to, cheated on and taken advantage of, by a slimy jerk played by Tony Curtis.

Toss in an unfunny Jerry Lewis and who could imagine this being a bomb?

If someone were to make a film this sexist today, they'd be crucified.

This is like a bad 60's sitcom that should have been cancelled and forgotten.

But someone decided to stretch this bad sitcom out to a painful hour and 42 minutes.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Used Cars (1980)
8/10
"Pointless? Profane? 80's attire?" .... Idiots
3 May 2021
When reading some of the negative reviews of this film, I nearly spit up my coffee.

This movie never took itself seriously, so why should you take it seriously?

When judging a movie, ask yourself one question: Did it achieve what it was intended for?

Regardless of quality, a horror film should scare you. An adventure should offer you thrills.. And a comedy -- even when it's a screwball comedy like "Used Cars" -- should make you laugh.

The long-winded Roger Ebert wannabes who are criticizing this movie seem to be comparing it to "Ben Hur," rather than simply examining it for what it is.

This is a silly film, intended to be exactly that -- silly. And in the midst of the silliness are two legitimately great performances from Jack Warden and Kurt Russell.

Focusing on things such as profanity (do you honestly believe there is no profanity in the sleazy world of used car dealerships?) .... Or the 80s hair and attire (it was made in the 80s and set in the 80s, what did you expect??? That's how they dressed!!) .... Focus on the actual purpose of the film: Making you laugh.

And I'll tell you right now without spoiling it: There are three or four scenes in this film that are nearly impossible not to laugh at -- even for people with no sense of humor.

For those of us with a sense of humor, it's funny from beginning to end. That's why I give this silly film a solid 8 out of 10. No, it's not Ben Hur. But it wasn't intended to be.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Surprisingly honest
28 June 2019
With the heavy British influence on this film, I'm surprised at the unapologetic look it takes at Field Marshall Bernard Law Montgomery's disaster. This was a military failure on a huge scale for British leadership, though Monty never admitted it and many British historians gloss over that fact. This is a quality film, with an all-star cast that spared no expense when it came to its combat scenes. A must-see for WWII film buffs.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Raging Bull (1980)
10/10
Total snub job by the Academy
25 June 2019
This is arguably the greatest sports film of all time. It's certainly the best boxing film ever made. Was it the best film of 1980? Not according to the Academy, which gave the nod to "Ordinary People." Nearly four decades later, Raging Bull holds an 8.2 rating here at the IMDB to Ordinary People's 7.8. Raging Bull is 95% among critics on the Tomato Meter and 93% among voters from the general public. Ordinary People is 91% on the Tomato Meter and 88 percent from the general public. Perhaps the most telling statistic here is the fact that more than 280,000 people have given a rating on this website for Raging Bull. Only 42,000 have registered a vote for Ordinary People. So which film was more memorable? The numbers don't lie. One film was an absolute classic. The other was a well-made, but in the long run, forgettable film. In boxing terms, the Academy's Best Picture decision was a fix -- an absolute travesty.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Poor, even by Elvis standards.
25 June 2019
How many outdoor scenes did Elvis require a double to stand in for him in this lame duck flick? Elvis riding bike? Stunt double. Elvis climbing a high dive? Stunt double. Elvis walking on the friggin beach? Stunt double. You can always spot the double, who was clearly older than Elvis at the time of filming. Any scene that has Elvis' back to the camera, isn't Elvis at all. Even for scenes that didn't require anything remotely dangerous. This movie is absolute crap, but at least the chicks were hot.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
History's Verdict: Patton (2013)
Season 1, Episode 10
1/10
The Brits still hate him
19 June 2019
Warning: Spoilers
A full hour of British hatred of one of America's top war heroes. It's almost as if Montgomery himself had written the script for it. I found it interesting that the "History's verdict" episode devoted to Monty glossed over his dismal failure in Operation Market Garden, not touching it until late in the show. But Patton's version OPENED and focused for several minutes on his failed raid on a German POW camp. Later, they mention his unremarkable performance at West Point, without giving him props for making it through the academy with dyslexia. Patton is given props for his tactical genius in Sicily and during the Battle of the Bulge (even the Brits couldn't gloss over that). But the close of the show, they quote noted leftest and Patton hater Dwight MacDonald on his negative views about the general....never mentioning MacDonald's politics.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Rookies (1972–1976)
3/10
Bad premise
5 March 2019
I'm surprised that a show based on rookie police officers lastest four years when technically, you're only a rookie for a year. Hip for its time. Totally dated now.
3 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Road House (1989)
8/10
If you're entertained, it's good
6 July 2014
Warning: Spoilers
For years, I insisted that this was a bad film which was accidentally entertaining. But after watching it several times and never tiring of it, I've changed my stance. This is actually a good film which was intentionally ridiculous. And once you accept that fact, you'll realize that it's actually a unique piece of film making. Half of the people reading this are thinking "Well, duh, what took you so long to realize this?" The other half are thinking "What an idiot. He actually thinks this piece of crap is a good film?" That alone is proof positive of the genius behind the motion picture. Even legendary film critic Roger Ebert admitted being entertained by this flick, but couldn't make up his mind on whether it was a parody or not. But the fact is, there is ample evidence that this film is pure satire. Exhibit A: The character known as "Tinker" was so laughable that viewing the film in anything other than a comedic light isn't possible. Exhibit B: Take one look at the scene where the bad guys are shooting at Dalton's approaching (and empty) Mercedes and try not to laugh. Watch how Pat (the fired bartender) handles his shotgun like Elvis Presley and tell me that's intended to ramp up the suspense. Sorry, but no way. That's funny and was meant to be funny. Exhibit C: The mere notion of a famous bouncer with a household name all but screams tongue-in-cheek. This film was intended to make you laugh and with me, it succeeded several times. I thereby rate it a solid eight, without shame.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Makes "Road House" look like "Ben Hur"
11 March 2014
Having been raised in Tucson, Arizona in the 60s and 70s it was neat to get a peek at my hometown and the way it used to look. But that's the only reason I was willing to endure one of the worst movies I've ever sat through. There are glimpses of Mount Lemmon from the back (probably shot in the Oracle area). Sabino Canyon is in quite a few scenes and it looks like some of it was filmed out on Houghton Road. The only reason I didn't rate it a "1" is because I was entertained by Tucson's old scenery. It's a good thing Namath could throw a football, or he'd have been holding a spatula somewhere. God, this was bad. And it has nothing to do with it being dated. This was horrid, even by 1970's standards.
4 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed