Reviews

Nothing, really.

The comparisons to James Bond should end at the fast cars and fast women. James Bond would eat this guy for breakfast and still have room for a stack of pancakes. "Diabolik" stinks.

He's supposed to be the world's greatest thief, right? Well, it helps that the cops are idiots. In the opening sequence, Diabolik gasses a car, then steals it while the cops are gasping for air. Uh... if your car is gas-bombed, why are you getting OUT guys? The air inside was breathable!

Then, of course, there's the moral issue. Okay, I've cheered for the bad guy before, but I can't cheer for Diabolik. He's got a secret lair that has to have cost millions on its own. So he was either rich to begin with, or has stolen way more than he needs to have a fabulous lifestyle already. I enjoy escapist fantasy as much as the next guy, but Diabolik starts where most of us can't even dream of ending. The rest is just rubbing our noses in it. Remember, this is why people criticize Bill Gates. Diabolik might be flashier, but who ISN'T?

And whose lame-ass idea of a prank is laughing gas at a press conference? Maybe he's the world's greatest thief, but he's still in third grade? Like I said, he's no James Bond.

I'd rather re-watch "Vampirella" than sit through this yawner again.

This movie is BAD. Not 'funny' bad, or 'campy' bad, or even 'MST3K could salvage this' bad. It's just BAD.

When we first see the vampire, he's waking up after what turns out to be a 20-year (give or take) sleep. His fingernails have grown to incredible lengths (he snaps them off, OW!) but he's still clean-shaven. Nice eye for detail, guys.

By the end of the film, when a man's heart is jump-started by a car battery, two tire irons, and -- yes! -- a couple of jelly donuts, you're going to want to take a 20-year nap yourself. Or a 20-year shower.

This is the must-miss movie of the century.

But it was *fun*.

I just want to know one thing: In the first scene, the vampire hunters are at a supposedly abandoned building that they know is really filled with vampires. Why don't they just BLOW THE DAMNED THING UP? Or burn it down? Why the lengthy -- and incredibly dangerous -- foray *into* the nest, where the vampires can actually fight back? No wonder these guys get wiped out.

It started with three strikes. It was a comic book movie. It was a vampire movie. It was a *Wesley*Snipes* movie!! And not only didn't it stink to high heaven, it was actually GOOD! The perfect vehicle for Snipes; Blade has no personality anyway.

Yeah, there were some plot holes, but every vampire movie has THOSE. But there were good FX, some great action scenes, and a story. Not a great story... but a story nonetheless. Not many vampire films actually have one.

A lot of the worst 100 films have IMDb comments saying "see the MST3K version, or not at all." You can't even say that for this film. It was just *dull*. Okay, it was also stupid.

Like most superhero films, this one was troubled by the inability to make ANYTHING believable -- including the acting. No disrespect to the man, but any film where Ernest Borgnine is the best actor in it has a LOT of problems. 'Citizen Kane' needn't worry about losing its place as best movie in history.

If you sleep through this movie, you're clearly having a better time than the rest of us -- and doing what most of the cast did.

The Aztec demi-god alien-born superhero is as white as they come. He flies about as fast as a man can walk. And even though he can punch through walls, he can't wrestle a middle-aged overweight man out of a helicopter. But his costume shows he has the basic intelligence to dress himself.

This is a power most heroes and villains simply lack, and there should be some credit given for that.

Superman wears a costume that his mom made for him. Batman designed his costume to bear out the power-trip fantasy he developed when he was eight. Captain America's costume was designed by government committee. Puma Man's costume catches a lot of flack for being non-super-hero-ish, but it's the one I'd choose first.

Puma Man wears slacks and a pullover top. If it wasn't for the red satin lining of his cloak, he'd really be rather... inoffensive. He doesn't have to worry about a run in his tights, tripping over a cape, or being easily spotted at a distance of twelve miles.

Cut the guy a break. Yes, his powers are second-rate, and he can't fly as well as Ralph Hinkley. Yes, an Aztec priest shows him up in almost every scene, being more heroic than the guy who can lift a car. Yes, he was called "Easily Bamboozled Man" by MST3K, who also remarked that he'd probably lick the frozen flagpole TWICE.

But he's smart enough to have pockets.

The movie stinks, but the hero can carry cash. That's more than you can say for Green Lantern. (Most GLs got their costumes from a bunch of little old men who live alone without women, so you do occasionally see some stylishness there, if not much functionality.) I don't see why the slacks are considered dumb -- they're the only smart move in the whole picture.

Captain Simian is possibly the best cartoon ever aired, without exaggeration. It was funny, clever, well-drawn and well-animated, and had a stellar voice cast.

This series, which tragically lasted a mere 26 episodes, was the sort of cartoon that parents would have loved to watch with their kids. Sadly, neither generation knew the show existed. (In my area, the show bounced around the Saturday morning lineup, briefly moving to Sunday, and even changed networks. I had to search for it again and again.)

The show was funny on multiple levels. It was a cartoon about monkeys -- kids don't need much more than that -- but that was the lowest level of humor this show reached. It also made jokes that *only* the parents would get. There were references to "A Clockwork Orange" (Malcolm McDowell did one of the regular voices), a film noir episode that paid homage to "Maltese Falcon" and "Chinatown" beautifully, even an episode titled "Surf Monkeys Must Dive!" (named after a Troma film that NO child should ever see). The in-jokes went on and on.

On top of that, there was the simple irony that the main adversaries, Captain Simian and Lord Nebula, were voiced by Jerry Doyle and Michael Dorn -- the battle of the primetime Sci-Fi Security Chiefs -- Mister Garibaldi and Lt. Worf in a grudge match for control of the entire universe.

The show died its unfortunate death because the toys weren't selling well. (As I understand it, the toys weren't selling well because they were being dumped directly into the 3/$10 bin at the major chains, rather than being shelved.) If the toys don't sell, the show isn't seen as worthwhile.

It's still around in re-runs, but no one can say for how long. So watch it while you can.

You know you're in trouble when Roger Daltrey is the best actor in a film. You also know you're in trouble when the creators of the film make Vampirella's costume *more* concealing than it is in the comics. Here's a hint guys: we weren't watching for her acting talent.

"Vampirella" could have been good. They came pretty close to the original story of the comics of the late 60s/early 70s, which by itself is impressive. Unfortunately, they made the mistake of hiring actors from the Erik Estrada School of Fine Acting. I haven't seen that much deadpan since the last Steven Wright show.

My wife, a major Vampi fan, and a total vampire nut, fell asleep during this film. That, more than anything, should tell you how much of a waste of time this movie was. TRUST me.

Gargoyles is the only kids' show I've ever seen that contained this much continuity, introducing the concept that actions have consequences that can last more than 30 minutes. There were plot elements introduced in the first few episodes that became important as much as two full years later. You had to pay attention to this one.

When Disney bought ABC, they moved this show from the "Disney Afternoon" to the new Saturday morning line-up. However, they wanted to present it like a new show, so they re-titled it "The Goliath Chronicles." This confused a lot of fans, for a rather pointless reason. The show died that season, and I'm not surprised. Some ABC affiliates didn't carry it at all that year.

"Gargoyles" boasted a cast of voice talents that was truly beyond belief. For the Star Trek fan, the two main villains were Jonathan Frakes and Marina Sirtis, but it didn't end there. Voice talents from *every* Star Trek franchise were included: Avery Brooks, Kate Mulgrew, Nichelle Nichols, Brent Spiner, Michael Dorn, Colm Meany, and Levar Burton all contributed. Toss in other great voices like Tim Curry (I'd listen to him recite the phonebook!), Clancy Brown, David Warner and John Rhys-Davies, and you could enjoy this show with a busted picture tube.

And let us not forget: this show was educational. It drew on elements of folklore and cultures from every corner of the globe, including Scottish, Japanese, British, Irish, Chezch, Native American, South American, Greek, Norse, African, Australian... the only continent they didn't hit was Antarctica. The show demonstrated the consequenses of violence, intolerance and illiteracy, and made it entertaining enough for kids to enjoy it without feeling like they were being preached to.

This was a great show. Find the re-runs and watch them with your kids.

... This simply isn't "Dracula".

By naming it "Bram Stoker's Dracula" Coppola holds himself to a higher standard of faithfulness to the original book than any other version of the story, past or future. And he falls flat on his face.

"Dracula" was never a romance, nor was it intended to be. If Coppola wanted to make a vampire love story, he was more than welcome to do so. But not Dracula. Dracula was about conquest, and NOT the romantic sort. If Dracula falls in love, it blows the entire plot and subtext of the original. How does that qualify as faithful to the original story?

Yes, beautiful cinematography. Yes, great cast (with the obvious exception of Keanu Reeves, who couldn't act his way out of a wet paper bag). Yes, great costumes, score, yada yada.

NO, it was a LOUSY rendition of Dracula.

Anyone who doesn't get this movie must not have been tortured by "Heart of Darkness" in High School. Kurtz has gone native in the jungle, and the tale is of the intrepid party braving the unknown to retrieve him... er, her. Kurtz dies, gasping, "The horror... the horror."

"Apocalypse Now!" -- another movie based on 'Heart' -- was an incredibly powerful film. Better than the original book, in my estimation. 'Cannibal Women' is the opposite end of the spectrum... a total farce. And it's also better than the original.

So if you didn't like this movie, read "Heart of Darkness," then watch this again. It'll make more sense, and it'll certainly seem a heck of a lot funnier.

(Okay, after 'Heart' *anything* is funnier... but you get the idea.)