Change Your Image
danieljknight
I have a journal on religion, politics and a little about my life here: http://eternian.wordpress.com
Reviews
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013)
For a secular movie, it was overall well made
The beginning was boring, and the boyfriend's make up was too noticeable, I could see the blush. He looks too clean cut for a mine worker, as if the cliché that the audience wouldn't want to see exposed skin etc, but we don't want to see unrealistic make up, we don't want the movie interrupted because we're thinking, "Why does this guy look like he was modeling?" and realize we're still back in our boring lives.
The beginning is so boring that after having seen it once that I felt nothing when watching it again and actually went to go to sleep. I found the part where Catnip (I know...) freaked out and the music with it to be HIGHLY irritating. The guy she shot should have screamed out, instead he falls like a dummy.
The parts of the movie that made it least convincing were:
1) The bad makeup on Catnip's bf 2) Catnip and Baker Boy's unconvincing acting in a few parts, specifically the train convo - it happened too fast and was too clean, it sounded scripted and pretentious, not casual, or fearful, like someone might suddenly pop out somewhere and decide to shoot them. Catnip and Bread Boy were too confident. They didn't have butterflies in their stomach like you'd expect for poor ignorants too have, worrying in general, having nightmares of killing people or being hung etc, instead Catnip just has one hallucination and one bad nightmare, and a bad experience with a black guy being killed. Catnip wasn't convincing after going into the house behind her and upstairs and being distraught over the old black guy being killed. The part where Baker Boy dies and she gets distraught was convincing, but there was a hint of fake, maybe because the tone of her skin should have been a little more red and her eyes more red from crying and so on. So a bad make up / effects job there, or lack of it.
Some might think Catnip wasn't acting well or too forced in the scene where she's talking with the leader at home, but I think it's just right, since teens and a little older can become arrogant with some great successes, especially if they haven't had such experience before, they get puffed up.
3) There wasn't much engaging conflict between the opposing players, or character development, it was as if they were all hidden and the main enemy was special effects as one reviewer implied. They made a movie over two hours long yet you don't get to know anyone else but the usual characters. Kind of a let down. I was hoping to see Tree Girl more since she was so lively, but instead her appearances were fleeting. One reviewer was disappointed that he didn't feel like cheering anyone on because it was a bland movie, and looking back on it, I thought that too, because it was too brainy and too distracting looking at certain ugly characters, and you know who I am talking about if you watched the movie. I don't want to think: ugly woman, ugly nerd guy, weird nerd guy acting like a psychopath, I want to think, "pretty, but strange girl, likable nerdy guy".
4) It often sounds like characters calling Katness "Catnip", I say Catnip because that's what I first thought her name was and it seems easier on my mind to say than the awkward "Katness". What a stupid name. I'd accept it more if there was some story behind the name, like when she was a baby she'd say catnip as katness and so was named that, but no, that's just her name with no explanation.
5) Peeta's name is soooooooooo annoying. It's like being reminded of PETA and pita bread at the same time! I don't want to think of that crazy ole PETA liberal lady that head's PETA or mocker Bill Maher while watching an epic movie ugh, or pita bread - it's dry and it sucks!
6) Is this a movie or a book problem?: Why was there no talk of anyone having previously escaped into the woods? Why no, "Remember the legend of Tommy Bob, how he escaped and came back and told us there was another village far away, free from the tyranny? Let's see if we can find it? Or is it in the next movie we find out there's a barrier?
Now the good: The acting was very good on the part of Haymitch and Effie was spectacular. I never once thought "It's Woody" or it was a fleeting thought. I think they over did his hair though, making it so messy it was ugly. Elizabeth Banks should be right up there in popularity with Catnip in most popular actors, because she was a star actor in this movie, the part where she cries gets me, and I'm a guy. I cry with her... And this one pose she does in the movie is so adorable. Why she's down at about 66 in actorworld stardom I think has to do with age discrimination/bias among the younger folk, or perhaps transferring their anger at the elite over on to her in real life since she played one. I think perhaps the weakest link was Baker Boy (Peeta) (is that supposed to sound like Pita on purpose, as in pita bread?). His acting was seemingly wood and emotionless in the first movie and this one. It comes across as psychopathic or like he just doesn't care about life. If it's meant to convey that he's a depressed guy, I never saw it. Maybe it's his eye structure...
I agree with one review I read that the ending was too abrupt, there should have been at least some captivating musical point to it, it felt like someone cut the film roll all the sudden and you were like, what, what the hell happened?
The Avengers (2012)
The Best B Movie Ever!
What in the actual hell, 8.2 people, you gave it 8.2? UGH, UGH, UGH, UGH, UGH.
1. Nick Fury played by a weak voiced pip squeak whiny voiced guy? Forgot his name, yeah know he's famous, but all the way through: B MOVIE ACTING. Montel Williams acted better in that nuclear missile movie. Not that he woulda pulled that role off though.
2. I hate that damn CIA guy, whatever he is, the SHIELD moron, the cutesy white guy, his look doesn't match his personality in the movie in my opinion, and his acting was eh. Like idolizing Captain America? The hell for, so he did some stuff in the past long ago thanks to an experiment and for that he becomes an idol? He's still a moron, he's just on magic steroids witha special shield. OooooOoO.
3. How can Scarlett, whatever he character name is, be all calm and cool like a snake and blow up a hospital with people in it, but then when the Hulk fights her, they show this stupid scene of her doing a horribly fake shaking, hugging her knee, like she's scared, only her acting with the shaking is utterly kiddie like, terrible, not believable, and oh yeah so I was gonna say: how can she be scared all the sudden after being cool as a snake, actually more fearless since she was at the beginning of the movie being dropped from a huge height while tied up, but then when moron Hulk pops out she's shaking like a little baby?? HUH?! 4. Why did Thor suddenly act like he was out of breath when that dumb SHIELD agent I just mentioned got stabbed? That winds THOR? Fail.
5. Why is the guy playing Captain America A STIFF? Why when Thor slammed his shield did he get up and then do a slow robot turn? How stupid. And then when Iron Man mentions the red level, he does this stiff (and it happened to fast, bad directing) step back like he's just realized something profound, but it looks dumb.
6. So when Captain America jumps towards the lever, THEY MAKE A COMPUTER GENERATED VERSION OF HIM JUMPING. WHY? It looked dumb, like those stupid CG's of spiderman in the spiderman movies. Just dumb.
7. How the hell is the Hulk intelligent in this movie when he's supposed to be an angry retard? 8. Why is Thor always being a cry baby in this movie? Stupid, so shallow, bad directing.
9. How the hell is Thor able to be stabbed by a little blade when the hulk can't even make him bleed? Ooops? 10. What was with the fake "what happened?" sht at the end when Iron Man woke up? Damn that was so fake and pretentious and weak. "What, what happened, I can't remember directing a nuclear missile into a wormhole and going into outer space and being pushed out by the explosion, whu, whu?" Shut up.
11. Oh and damn how cheap was that when Scarlett got pinned by some metal rod thing and damn how could you not smell the director saying, "Oh, check out her ass"? UGH. STUPID. SHE'S ALREADY WEARING TIGHT PANTS MORON DIRECTOR, YET YOU DECIDED TO SAY, "CURVE UR ASS UP, IT'S FOR THE LITTLE BOYS" when her ass is already all over the movie in those tight pants? You cheap idiot.
12. Why is Hawkeye played by an oldish ugly guy with shtty acting skill? He was good in Hansel and Gretel, however it's spelled, but sucky in this movie. Who the hell's idea was it to do that gay scene where he crashes into the building window and goes "Ah, aaaah" when he landed on his back, like that was so profound and making this epic music to that. He shouldn't have even been in the movie his role was so pathetic and dumb.
The only guys in here whose acting was great was Iron Man and Loki. I never once thought Loki out of character, maybe for a split second, but that was just day dreaming, not cuz of his acting. And Pepper, who was way underused, was good, never think of her as "Gywneth" when she's acting.
And what the hell, Scarlett is being used in Age of Ultron? She sucks man, she's some pretentious fighter bitch, her ass is not that great, she's too short. You can't think of any better females to plug in that movie, you have to use her? Whoever is directing these movies is an idiot with bad taste. Sad such a great soundtrack was used for such a sht movie.
Iron Man Three (2013)
Excellent special effects, average cliché script, confused characters
I enjoyed the movie but felt let down as no doubt many have. What stood out the most to me was the missed opportunities to come up with some twists, including ones you'd think would have been used but were anti- climactic. Some parts made no sense to me being that they were contradictory.
Baffling fails:
When Stark's house was being pummeled, you'd expect to see Pepper and the botanist sliding around and grabbing on to things for their life, but strangely it's Tony mainly falling, and who falls. It seemed more logical that the girls would fall, and he'd rescue them, instead, weirdly, for no apparent explained reason, Jarvis shoots Tony out to seemingly the middle of no where far from the girls, leaving them at the mercy of more attacks or killed from some accident due to the compromised structure.
The latest iron man suit goes onto Pepper without apparent explanation at one point, and she's able to use the suit, yet later in the movie when Iron Patriot asks for a suit, Tony says "Sorry, they're all coded to me." Then how was Tony able to get the suit onto Pepper?! And how was another suit able to get onto the president if it comes on automatically and not manually? It seemed Tony was able to use mental control combined with verbal, but where was the verbal when he got it onto Pepper? Stupid. Also Pepper is taller than Stark, so how was the suit able to fit on her, does it have height adjustment!?
Another thing that was nonsensical was the regeneration of characters who lost limbs: in order for large amputations to be healed as was the case in the movie, you'd need matter for that, you can't just come up with the material for a new limb out of thin air, you'd have to eat or have at least the fat in your body necessary for such a healing. The same goes for the absurd healing powers shown for Wolverine in movies he was in. It would have made sense if the characters with the regeneration ability were shown immediately scarfing down some high calorie meals they had and drinking water to regenerate, but nope, just magic and hoping for a stupid dumbed down kiddy audience that entertains comic idiots and parents just hoping to shut their kids' whining for entertainment up for a few days.
Didn't like how the kid partner in the movie made a clearly pretentious adult comment-toned, "that's what they all say" when Tony asked him if he believed the bomb story too.
I also thought it curious that the bad guy (actually just realized how this looks like anti-conspiracy theorist propaganda in the movie while typing this) implies that terrorist front men like Bin Laden were merely puppets of the rich, yet in the movie, I forget who, said the President allowed some oil rich guys who spilled oil to get away without punishment, so, why then the big rescue of the president like he was someone worth saving if he was a villain himself? Why was instead the Vice President arrested, and WITHOUT EXPLANATION, only some implication that he was partnered with the Mandarin? I'm starting to hate this movie now that I type all this out. It would have been better if Stark said to the Pres after rescuing him, "Oh before you go, please, stop bailing out the rich, we have enough money to bail ourselves out."
Lost entertainment avenues: the botanist just gets shot dead, no saving herself at the last second by injecting herself with an overdose of her super formula, just, dead, at least seemingly. Hopefully she reappears later on mysteriously healed and with no powers in a later movie. And Pepper, after falling to her seeming death is out of the picture for too long in my opinion and was awkward in that you'd think if you fell into a big bonfire, you'd get up after your healing powers kicked in, and they should have right away, and ran out screaming, at least if you were Pepper. But no, she shows up at THE LAST SECOND so to speak, to rescue Tony. Come on. So she was on fire the whole time and didn't die? That's kinda unrealistic.
Also nonsensical was that one mean military girl with the burn marks: and why didn't her burn marks heal? After typing that it occurred to me it could have been because those were real burn marks, even if not, why didn't they heal, does the formula not work on scar tissue? I guess not.
I also did not like the pathetic over dramatic scenes where Tony is displaying soft post traumatic stress disorder and trying to make it come off as severe. It DID however look like the acting of a narcissist, and in a previous Iron Man he admitted to being one, so if the idea was to make Tony look like a typical narcissist drama queen, yeah, it works, but it seemed to me more like a poor script idea trying to come off as deep and later funny when he PTSDed out on the kid.
I want to give it an 8 for the kinda of pro teaparty "that terrorist bogeyman is just a stooge of the rich" comment, but with the Iron Patriot theme, and putting the president in an Iron Man suit, just looked like a movie about vanity over justice. I'm not saying it was actual propaganda, perhaps pandering to the government as usual to get some private funding for the next movie, or popular buzz from the Obama admin (which would alienate conservatives if was the plan), and can't since the Avengers movie showed rebellion against the government command to nuke Manhattan, which made the gov look stupid.
As a Christian, I'd give it a one for being godless.
Green Lantern (2011)
Narcissism Glorfied By Marvel Once Again (a tiny spoiler)
Like Thor, the director failed to recognize that a sociopathic person is not going to suddenly become good, and really, that's just common sense. Since when do people who've lived a self-centered life risking their and everyone else's life, who think they are an immortal god and go around beating everyone up, and so on, suddenly become good? Never. People are grow up and show no sign of a conscience stay that way. It's called psychopathy, or narcissism disorder (though narcissists have a twisted conscience). Whoever directed Iron Man understood psychology, because in the second iron man (a little spoiler, prepare), Iron Man admits to being a narcissist, and clearly the director was trying to show he was mentally ill. Now that's realism. But in Thor and Green Lantern you're given a psychopath or sociopath or narcissist who suddenly turns good. And it's bad to show movies like this to uninformed kids, because they can grow up as narcissists, thinking they can be evil all they want and be good any time they choose, or that there is good in evil people, or that you merely need to risk your life to be the good guy. Such portrayals can turn kids into narcissists if they actually believe that and have bad parents raising them. If the directors had shown Thor or Lantern as having grown up moral, but slowly becoming evil over time, or morally corrupt, or suddenly becoming bad, then you could realistically portray these people as going backwards to their better days and snapping out of it, but there are no such scenes in Green Lantern or Thor. Please Marvel, stop putting out this nonsense, you've been raising narcissists for decades now, and it's ruining this country and the rest of the world who buy into your beautiful nonsense and take such characters as idols to imitate.
Transformers: Dark of the Moon (2011)
Amazing Special Effects Ruined by Hectic Awfulness
For those who saw the previews and commercials, I'm guessing you were probably waiting for a mystery that would be cleverly be revealed during the middle of the show and make you think a little, instead, almost right from the start of the movie, the mystery behind the "dark side of the moon" and discovery of the ship is explained right away, and it really killed the excitement in me. To put it this way, I felt like, "That's what this is about? And you killed the mystery in one minute?" It was a very cliché movie on top of it, and Sam had developed into a cute-guy, hyper-stressed, young-adult with a cliché inferiority complex. When his parents came to meet him, it added to the painfulness of the movie, having to hear his mom's awful unfunny Hell-voiced little lectures and her usual sexual-innuendos, which I'm sure made a lot of kids and teens uncomfortable to watch, with or without their parents. They might has well have been tossing sex toys around and using full vulgarity, because the innuendos were so obvious. The movie was also fast and hectic, and a nonsensical slapstick weirdo ugly Asian co-worker was added to the hysteria (mostly unfunny hysteria). I really did not like the cliché mean, strict interviewer-bosses sam was meeting. From what was shown, you'd think all managers of companies were evil. The model-looking woman that replaced the original girlfriend was a really bad match up for Sam, she just didn't fit in the movie well. She looked like too much of a model and like a fish out of water. She looked and sounded like she belonged in Australia... hey wait a second, beautiful girl with Australian accent, why does that seem so familiar... And of course, there were the glorified government saviours of the citizenry, who mainly are the good guys. Of course there would never be anyone bad in the military, nope, all soldiers are good guys, and Leave it to Beaver was such an accurate show reflecting reality.
The movie was a tragedy in that there were incredible special effects seens, ones that were worthy of awards and for ground-breaking special effects setting a new bar to be surpassed, but it was mixed up with a few really funny parts, but also the incredible shallowness and narcissism of the main characters, mainly Sam, Optimus Lies and his cliché Australian moron transforming thugs (I don't even remember those two transforming!) and the Transformer Nimoy. There was also some grossness in the movie, with little mechanical repair-bugs moving around Megatrons' ugly uncool-looking body, which genuinely seemed like some nasty cockroaches, which unlike the ones in the Predators movie that ran around those weird aliens, WERE truly gross-looking. It was a very kid-appealing movie, and which unfortunately, has probably influenced many kids and adults into thinking that being a hyper, neurotic, insecure but self-centered impatient bipolar person is what to aim for in life if you want to be happy. To think that many millions of dollars went into that, and many more will be spent into spreading this cosmetically prettied up disease, is tormenting, to me at least.
eternian.wordpress.com
Warehouse 13 (2009)
What Little I Saw Did Enough
This is really shallow, silly, absurd, did I mention "shallow" show? This is just fanciful nonsense mixed with sci-fi stuff and is scatter brained with ridiculous humor that makes little sense. One example is where there is a sword fight, and after wards a male character starts making guesses about various things, and then says, "Holy Grail"? And the person he is talking to says nothing and the male character replies, "Yes" with confidence. I won't spoil it, but if you watch that part, it makes no sense and at the very least, is just dumb humor, nothing funny about it. It's like watching some stupid daytime teen high school comedy only mixed up with power ranger special effects and babble, but a little more mature and less hysterical and devoid of any hotties, no offense to the main female actor...
Stargate Universe (2009)
Needs time, more beautiful women, less whiplash
I agree with part of ladydoom001's review which didn't make much sense in the beginning, but this part did:
"SGU was a mash of Battlestar Galactica and Days of Our Lives.
New direction? More like lack of direction. Good camera-work? Closer to vomit-inducing cameraJERK."
I agree, I hateed the camera jerking. Is it really a good idea to make a new show, but then use an obvious rip off? I want to think of Stargate when watching Stargate, not Battle Whiplash Galatica.
There were some stupid stereotypes (yet another another angry black man - angry soldier, and another was a food server, might as well have said "slave" on his forehead) 2) neurotic white people (but not all, the leader is a border-line manic depressive and major eyesore, sorry man just being honest, i still love u tho....) 3) no offense to the cast: not exactly eye-pleasing (trying to be polite as possible), except for the mad scientist, teen scientist and the two above average girls, they all get on my nerves to look at, all. What makes more sense: to try and entertain people by giving them beautiful people to look at, or people you'd hardly pay attention to in a store except to avoid walking into them? Come on.
There are two above average beautiful women: Elyse (real name) and the blonde medic (who ridiculously is missing from the cast list here despite being a main character), but nothing to get me watch just over that. I didn't like Elyse at first, but after a while thought she was pretty hot.
Why are there still no holograms in Stargate? If they are ever used I don't remember, and that says it all since I've seen every episode and paid close attention. They're supposed to be on a super advanced ship (you can fig that out from the trailers), but no holograms?
The music in the first two shows was awesome, now its... I don't notice anything, it's dry. But I guess it would have been overkill to keep playing the big dramatic music, so, OK.
At least it wasn't totally atheistic like the previous Stargate shows, and thank God there was is no more kernel Shepherd. I got so sick of his whiny voice attitude and "look at me I just woke up" hair.
What really would have made this show great is if they had introduced a certain alien race into the mix, those cool grey ones from one of the parallel universes shown in SG Atlantis. If the producers want to consult me on some ideas that would make this show outstanding, feel free to pay me.
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009)
Confusing and Cliché
Dumb, painfully annoying, tainted by Darwinism, confusing, nonsensical, shallow. Sam's parents were unfunny and annoying as usual, though, sadly, were an accurate portrayal of how stupid many parents are. Figuring out who these "prehistoric" Decepticons were ruined the movie since I was always wondering. It was finally explained in a sloppy confusing way towards the end (a little late!). There was no explanation as to why they were hiding during the first movie. One of the ancient Decepticons, who seemed to be "Shockwave" (though was not named), tapped into a satellite. His whole role, respite looking very powerful, was controlling a satellite even though he had detachable transformers he could have used for that job. Also strange was that no one spoke to him.
Another confusing part was when one of the Decepticons was trying to acquire the larger of the fragments of the cube: when the soldiers showed up to investigate, it seemed like the shard was still in the case, at least to me, yet it got away with it apparently. A close up of the shard-holder should have been shown to make it clear it had been removed and for a dramatic effect.
Another stupid thing was when Megatron's leader, whatever his name was, oh yeah: Fallen One (really original eh?) tells the world something like, "Now you can see we can destroy your cities"... DUH?: Wasn't that obvious from the first movie, or were there not enough buildings and cars blown up and broken through with giant robots from outer space Mr. Fallen One? And the destruction wasn't greater than what was in the first movie with the initial volley from the Fallen One. What would have matched his statement is the destruction of half a city at least, not seeing a few buildings fall down on a café and other not so spectacular things.
More confusion was when the grandpa Blackbird bot was brought back to life with the little shard Sam had, but why did it seem to get totally absorbed by the grandpa B. bot? It would have also been helped if someone, before going to search for these ancient transformers, said, "They might not be in the same form as in these pictures (like the Model T Ford shown in one) since none was ever found, and instead one of them is in the form of a Blackbird jet. This Grandpa Blackbird, strangely, transported Sam and the others with him suddenly to another location (how!?). After they crashed, Blackbird / "Skyfire" gave them a bizarre explanation as to how he transported them, but his annoying accent made it too hard to understand him.
Yet another nutty thing was when the matrix was said to be a spiritual thing by one of the ancients in a vision of Sam, but why then did they say to stick it in Prime? And right after Sam screams and holds the Matrix up to stab it into Prime (and what got him to play drama queen like that instead of just getting on his hands and knees looking for a place to insert it? Obviously it was for dramatic effect though.) Another nutty part was when Megatron came back to life, upon doing so he went up through the water of course, but about as soon as he did that he is shown shooting up into space and instantly appearing... WHERE? It seems like he landed on the moon but instead it's some alien planet or moon, but how in the Hell in a few seconds did he end up there? So stupid.
It was a huge let down to see Devastator as vacuum beast rather than modeled after the one in the cartoon. It would have been much cooler for a giant lime-pastel green giant Decepticon engaged in battle and smashing away at the pyramid with his fist and shooting at it with his cannon, instead it was a a King Kong from outer space playing rip-the-bricks-with-my-bare-hands-and-vacuum-parasite-looking-mouth - that was more interesting ho hum effect than cool to me.
Near the end of the movie they are dropped off near him by the Decepticons, but though the reason should have been to scare him into giving up the matrix, instead the Decepticons that dropped them off didn't do much at all it seemed, and there was so much chaos I can't even remember what happened to them when Bumble Bee showed up. Megatron should have been given the parents, then went up to Sam using them as bait/leverage. I guess he was too busy fighting.
Megan Fox was made into a sadistic-humored slut, and nutty. Near the beginning of the movie she's in an absurd super-slut pose, which could have won her Miss Slut Universe. And near the end of the movie she seemed to have gone bi-polar for a few seconds as she hid in a shack, starting when she saw Sam scuffle away in fear to another side of the shack.
And what was with the, "Only a prime can defeat a prime" nonsense? Why would a prime only be able to defeat another? Magic! And why didn't Optimus warn the humans that that was true? What an oversight.
Worst of all, was the cliché dodo advice given by Sam when Mikaela asked him how he knew that the magic fairy dust the matrix pointlessly turned into would resurrect Optimus. Sam said, "Because I believe it.": Can you liberals and fake Christians stop telling the world that whatever you believe or want to do is the right thing to do? THAT "JUST FOLLOW YOUR HEART" is ever a good thing? Stop telling people to abandon reason! It was no different than how the elder Spock in Star Trek 2009 told his younger self to abandon logic. Ironically the horrible stupidity of Transformers 2 showed what a failure it is to just go with your heart (like greed) while leaving God and his commandments behind.
The Forgotten Ones (2009)
How can this have 4.5 stars? It should be 2
This movie was awful. The intro was cool, beginning was standard with a lame twist, and then it was just boring from then on. The monsters seemed cool at first but the way they acted was too human, but obviously that was the point because they are called a tribe or spoken of as humans. It was just so silly how one acted towards the end, it was like animals with a code of chivalry, so lame. It's like the director didn't know what direction to take these "people" in. The ending was utterly stupid, there is one lone survivor, and she just sits at the end of the beach, and minutes are wasted watching her sit there, seemed like minutes. At one point during the movie there was what appeared to be her dead bf, but it wasn't, BUT THEN WHERED THAT FRESH BODY COME FROM? And this many decades old tent was unbelievably still in tact, give me a break. There was just so many stupid things about this movie, it's not worth watching. And no, there were no hot girls, not to me.
Slaughter (2009)
Good acting bad ending
Disappointing ending, don't bother. 10 for the acting of the two mains, 1 for the cliché ending. The girls were pretty, acted well, and the movie was surprisingly entertaining despite the lack of action. It was a relax type movie with tension. I wouldn't watch it if you aren't into disappointments or silly endings like this one had.
Man, I can't post this comment without adding ten lines of text, come on, OK does this count? Ten lines ten lines. Reminds me of that nonsense from stupid teachers who tell you that you must put x amount of pages into your essay, as if there's always a lot to say and anything that's not rehash, and as if the more you say matters more than what you are saying.
What else... I wouldn't watch this movie with kids that's for sure, it was just gore and slaughter, it had other things that you wouldn't want your little kids dwelling on.
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (2008)
A Very Good Exposing of the Stupid Bigots that Evolutionists Are, Especially '(Macro-)evolutionary Scientists'
The fill was well made, entertaining, and clearly sincere. The fact that it has a low rating on IMDb shouldn't keep anyone from watching it as it's clearly from the outraged bigots that believe in macroevolution their deliberate ignorance, and whose reputations and lives they've staked on macroevolutionary theory. Sad.
The only major thing I didn't like about this movie was when Ben Stein left out parts of a text Darwin wrote, which, not surprisingly made it look like Darwin was being taken out of context, but he wasn't: http://djknight.livejournal.com/4746.html It would have been better to have quoted Darwin without leaving out those sentences, and then to explain why it was still an absurd comment that Darwin made. Then there never would have been all this controversy over it and claims that Ben made a misquote.
I have reply to a typically stupid rant from an evolutionist who made a so called "review" of this movie (egelman), which clearly is not, but rather his opinion on evolution being true and creationism false, I'll show how stupid these comments from evolutionists are, especially eagleman's: http://djknight.livejournal.com/9531.html
Update (2009): I read that Ben Stein took Darwin out of context / "misquoted" or left out important info Darwin said when reading something from one of Darwin's works. Yes, Ben did do that unfortuntealy, however what Darwin said that Ben left out, didn't help Darwin's case, it instead showed Darwin to be a greater hypocrite for acknowledging that evil existed, yet denying spiritual things, like God, existed. Darwin was contradicting himself. I speculate that Ben either purposely or agreed to leave out the extra comment from Darwin because no one was wise enough to explain how the additional comments from Darwin were no good, and could only sense a problem with them, so decided to just skip them rather than say, spend months getting no where for lack of spiritual understanding. It was clear that Ben and none of the ID theorists were big time theologians or expert in defense of Christianity, so it was no surprise they decided to leave those additional comments out of the picture.