Reviews

7 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
2/10
Truly awful
24 July 2008
I cannot understand how that disgustingly crude, unfunny, unimaginative, often slow, rubbish warrants a 7.2. More like 2 at best and that is only for the nudity and Neil Patrick Harris (although there was far too much of him and wore thin).

This is the worst film I have had the misfortune to see in years. Anybody that compares it favourably to "You don't mess with the Zohan" needs to get a new brain because their current one is defective.

Any comparisons with early Cheech and Chong films are also inappropriate. While the characters(and actors Penn and Cho) of Kumar and Harold are OK, the writing is just plain abysmal and devoid of any real humour.
4 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Truly awful
7 July 2007
I am sorry to say that this film is indeed bad. It reminds me of a c-grade porn movie with one major difference: no porn.

The story and dialogue needs a complete overhaul. Maybe then the bad acting would not have been as noticeable. At the very least, the pacing should have been picked up.

While I accept that this had a low budget and the director did a good job visually given what little resources he had, he should have spent more time on the story or better yet, get someone else to write it. Many of the action scenes were just pointless.

It was a complete waste of my time.
18 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Pointless waste of time
20 August 2006
Perhaps if you grew up as a mushroom you might be shocked enough by the content of this film to think it is actually worth something.

It takes elements of King Charles I, Cromwell, the Restoration, Soviet Russia, the novel 1984 and various other things, mixes them together and makes a pointless story pretending to be something more.

It starts off OK but soon it becomes clear the writer has no real ideas of his own and is just loosely copying history.

Apart from Ralph Fiennes putting in a fine performance and some nice shots of the former Royal residence Brighton Pavilion, I was bored and felt I had lost 2 hours of my life.

The ending was the biggest disappointment as it really questions why I bothered to get that far.
17 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Alexander (2004)
3/10
Boring, disjointed and laboured.
1 July 2006
Some people seem to like this film because they claim it is historically accurate. That may be, but it is not entertaining.

It may be visually impressive but try turning off the picture and only listening to the sound and see how long you remain awake. The Irish accents do not help the boring dialogue.

While I was annoyed with the casting of Colin Farrell and Angelina Jolie as son and mother since they are the same age, I did think Jolie carried off her role. Colin Farrell was not up to it.

I found this Alexander to be weak and uninspiring. I saw no reason to risk my life for him. It was a chore to watch the film even once. People that watch it more than once must be very dedicated Stone fans.

This would have to be Stone's worst film. The controversy over bisexuality is being used as a smoke screen to cover the fact that this film is just plain bad.
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Day of Wrath (2006)
8/10
Interesting tense thriller
6 May 2006
After all the terrible movies Lambert has been in over the last 5 years or so, I had stopped watching his films. However, after a recommendation I sought out "Day of Wrath" and I was very glad I did.

This may only be a B grade movie but the story was great and was well supported by good acting and a mood inducing score.

I was kept involved right to the end and I liked the mystery with a historical base. A good action thriller with an undercurrent of conspiracy.

It was better than many big budget films I have seen lately and I hope it is an indication that Christopher Lambert is back to making good movies.
20 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Slow and boring.
25 August 2004
Everybody in the family that watched this agreed that if it had got much slower it would have stopped. Thoroughly over-rated.

The first half was not too bad with a few funny and interesting scenes but it deteriorated to the point where I became as bored as the 2 main characters. One of the very few films I was tempted to leave before finishing it.

The only redeeming feature was the excellent cinematography but that alone does not make a film.

If this is all Sophia Coppola is capable of she should give up.

One star out of five.
12 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Farscape (1999–2003)
Promises a little but delivers almost nothing.
27 February 2003
Another reviewer wrote that the acting is top notch. Maybe for children it is. Ben Browder in particular should think about another career.

It is a shame that the great concept behind the show and excellent special effects are spoiled by poor writing and overacting from Browder.

Even the unknown Australian support cast shame Browder.

Oh for what could have been. . .
8 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed