What is wrong with the producers of TV series, and films for that matter. Is the tabacco industry paying them for this? I turned the movie off at the second cigarette that came into view. Utterly disgusting to still make hidden advertisement for a product that ruins peoples lives. Also that was only a couple of minutes in, I had to endure no less than three porno graphic scenes in that short period of time. I am not talking about a kiss, or a "and then they went to bed" suggestion that has value with regards to the plot, no - orgasms, with all the sound that goes with them. Anyway, rated 1 for not being able to watch more than a few minutes and especially putting smoking people in a 2023 movie as if it a normal thing.
Reviews
34 Reviews
Crimes of the Future
(2022)
This is probably were the world is heading if the Woke movement wins.
2 March 2023
Seriously, this is the sickest movie I've seen in a long time. It is art however - as, for obvious reasons, the makers of the movie do not share the ideas and ideals of the characters in the movie. They are showing a world were a collective insanity reins. Where the unthinkable has become the new normal.
There are a few statements made about this new world, like that people do no longer feel pain, but that is just a necessity for the story that is being told be acceptable - that is, not unacceptable for other reasons than that society has embraced norms and values that are completely alien to our own.
There are a few statements made about this new world, like that people do no longer feel pain, but that is just a necessity for the story that is being told be acceptable - that is, not unacceptable for other reasons than that society has embraced norms and values that are completely alien to our own.
May I Be at Peace
(2018)
A serious movie about a serious problem.
25 November 2019
I watched this movie with interest. It is a movie, with characters and a plot, but for me it was mainly interesting as if it was a documentary. The movie was made by a teenage who went through this and therefore gives a genuine look inside a hospital were (mainly, in this case) anorexia is being treated. How is the day-to-day life for such children? Although informative, this movie is, in my opinion, in no way a propaganda movie for this treatment. Don't show it to your kid that you feel has similar problems. At best it may convince parents about just how serious and difficult the disease is. If you have, or know, a child with this problem then watching this movie might teach you that this is really a very difficult and serious condition that they can't recover from with professional help and for which the child is not to blame. Likewise, if you kid is bullying a child with this disease then maybe too could help them to understand; although I doubt that, bullies are sick themselves and probably need something more before they can change...
Troy
(2004)
One of the best movies I've ever seen.
16 August 2018
I saw this movie in 2004. So why write a review now, in 2018 you might ask? Well, because I suddenly realized that I was thinking in awe about this movie again, as I have done many times in the past. The sheer joy I feel, the adoration, the memory of experiencing the perfection of ... well, Brat Pitt. And no, I'm not in love with him that wouldn't be related to the movie. No, it is THIS movie and the performance he gives in this movie. The picture that is portrayed of the demi-God Achilles will always stay with me and I have to thanks Brat Pitt for doing that. What has stayed with me all those years are especially the fight scenes; the WAY he fights. The fact that he is so good at it that... well, no spoilers. I've always considered the requirements for a 10/10 to be: Everything has to be perfect: the story, the music, the special effects, the main character, hell - my requirements for a 10 has been that I need to fall in love with the main character, buy posters of the movie and go see it three times in a theatre; and I don't remember any of that... but if a movie manages it to make think about with strong emotions of thrill, still yearning for that same experience again as if it was a drug that I got addicted to after a single use FOURTEENS YEARS after I saw it... then it deserves a 10 too. Cheers Brat, you made it to my short list of "immortal" people.
Master piece
18 December 2012
Ever saw a movie that makes you look afterwards in the credits, who directed it, and who wrote the story? I did with this movie, and the same name turned up: John Hyams. Now, I have to admit that I expected some kind of B-movie, since Jean-Claude Van Damme is on the front cover (sorry Jean-Claude) but this turned out not to be a movie he wrote, or directed ;). He's just an actor with hardly a line to say. The main actor is Scott Adkins, he is pretty good in this movie. There's a rather complex story that had me guessing what it was all about for the larger part of the movie, but in the end it's all clear-- so that is not a problem for me. There is a lot of fighting in this movie, and especially GORE. My God, I never saw a movie with more hardcore gore then this one. I can take a lot, but this takes it to the next level lol. Often you see movies where you can just imagine the producers to sit around a table and say "Ok, we want this that action scene, lets get those actors.. and then think of a story". But that is not the case in the movie; no where I had even a little bit the feeling "Oh my God they are writing this into the story JUST so you have another fight scene". It's just a good story, with a lot of totally gruesome scenes that are show how much heart the people who made this movie have for detail. I was very impressed. So, much, that the next day I wrote this review on the IMDb, after years of silence.
Meet Dave
(2008)
Funny movie, carried by masterful acting of Eddie
28 July 2008
I'll admit it: it was the opening scenes, the first few minutes of seeing Eddy acting that hit a spot in my brain causing this movie to instantly become a classic in my mind. I can imagine many reasons for this NOT to happen to people: you can start to watch the movie with certain expectations, you can dislike Eddie Murphy (it's VERY hard to be funny in the eyes of people who dislike you), or you could be distracted at the moment this scene plays (hell, certain morons think it's OK to start a movie and then continue to talk and make "arrangements" (go to the bathroom, get snacks) and not fall silent and pay attention until well into the movie).
That being said-- to me, this happened. I thought that Eddy was being BRILLIANT and I certainly laughed out loud, in a Oh My God - I can't believe this - kind of way :).
I don't give an 'eight' very quickly (I think I give eights's by the time other people give a ten), but I have this list that dictates for me what rate I should give based on what it emotionally does to me. In this case I STILL think about the movie several days later and when I found myself wanting to see it again, if only to see those opening scenes... well, then it qualified as an 8. To me, the opening scenes had the same impact as the opening scenes of 'You don't mess with the Zohan', which also starts VERY strong in the humor department.
However, I'm not giving Zohan an eight... simply because in that case it's humor comes from the script. It isn't brilliant; it's "commercially" put together. It's funny, but I didn't get this respectful feeling for any actor, like Eddie deserves.
Is this movie for you? Well, I think you certainly shouldn't dislike Eddie Murphy for whatever reason; and you should not a problem with stories that aren't possible in real life (it is science-fiction after all, although not aiming at hardcore science fiction fans. There isn't much science at all. Don't expect to see a movie with special effects like superman or spiderman and also not a space opera like Star Wars. This movie is more in the league of sci-fi movies like "Honey I shrunk the kids". A feel-good family movie for all ages.
That being said-- to me, this happened. I thought that Eddy was being BRILLIANT and I certainly laughed out loud, in a Oh My God - I can't believe this - kind of way :).
I don't give an 'eight' very quickly (I think I give eights's by the time other people give a ten), but I have this list that dictates for me what rate I should give based on what it emotionally does to me. In this case I STILL think about the movie several days later and when I found myself wanting to see it again, if only to see those opening scenes... well, then it qualified as an 8. To me, the opening scenes had the same impact as the opening scenes of 'You don't mess with the Zohan', which also starts VERY strong in the humor department.
However, I'm not giving Zohan an eight... simply because in that case it's humor comes from the script. It isn't brilliant; it's "commercially" put together. It's funny, but I didn't get this respectful feeling for any actor, like Eddie deserves.
Is this movie for you? Well, I think you certainly shouldn't dislike Eddie Murphy for whatever reason; and you should not a problem with stories that aren't possible in real life (it is science-fiction after all, although not aiming at hardcore science fiction fans. There isn't much science at all. Don't expect to see a movie with special effects like superman or spiderman and also not a space opera like Star Wars. This movie is more in the league of sci-fi movies like "Honey I shrunk the kids". A feel-good family movie for all ages.
Love Is the Drug
(2006)
The is movie is NOT about a love triangle
11 June 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I watched this movie because the Plot summary on IMDb says it's about a love triangle. However, there is no such thing at ALL in this movie. It's about "teenagers" (the usual way too old actors) where one girl and one boy are inseparable. The have a mutual friend, but he is not involved in a relationship with either of them. These friends get to know another, rather shy boy, and when they hear he works at a pharmacy they use him to get drugs. In the end this has fatal consequences for one of the people involved, and the life of the shy boy is destroyed along with it.
Love triangle? Where?
I really, really hate to be this misinformed about a movie!
Love triangle? Where?
I really, really hate to be this misinformed about a movie!
Autism: The Musical
(2007)
Absolutely fabulous, adorable.
19 May 2008
Having autism myself, I really have been touched by this movie. I liked each and everyone of the children; I'd like to meet them and help them. Unfortunately that will not be possible (I guess). So, I'm going to write the following in the hope that some parents will read it, and help in that way.
What did strike me, often, is that these children are not understood. The parents love them very much (in most cases) and that is good; but they have no real clue what is going on in the minds of their child.
One of the parents said that she tries to 'crack open' a door to get her kid to develop. While I completely agree that lack of development will be the result of the kids shutting out others / the world around them, and living in their own world, often the shutting out has a reason and forcing yourself past that is harmful (or at least extremely stressful). I think that the right way to get these kids to learn something is to do that without force; thus, not for "5 minutes", but through getting them be interested. During the two months they worked on this project they have a learned a LOT, AND had fun doing it.
One of the main problems that people (especially the children) with autism have is dealing with incomplete information. Making a choice while the choice is not 100% obvious. Normal people constantly process incomplete information and just guess, or randomly make choices, drop in formation etc. They don't mind being inaccurate, illogical or even wrong. They prefer doing SOMETHING over taking more time to come to a decision, or even not do anything. A child with autism is aware of all the possibilities, consciously, at the same time-- and is not able to make choices-- to throw away data "randomly" for the sake of getting to a conclusion or decision.
Here are my takes on the respective children:
Henry is doing very well. The main thing he has to do is learn things about social interaction. Someone will have to teach him this like others learn to play a piano, he won't pick it up himself. At the very least he should start to realize that others cannot read his mind (you need to tell him that once (saying ANYTHING just ONCE is enough; even if the kids don't react, they heard you and they will process it in their own pace), just like he can't read the minds of others: therefore it is better to communicate about things that he and the one he is communicating with have in common: the surrounding world, instead of communicating about what he is thinking of. I know that the process of becoming interested in what moves OTHERS is very hard and a long road, but I believe he can be taught that putting time into listening to others and trying to understand THEIR thoughts can be rewarding in the end.
Neal has problems with formulating sentences. This is probably caused by not being able to throw away data (as I said before): thoughts are NOT words. You need to project the multidimensional "thought" space onto the "one dimensional" speech. This process is highly inaccurate and therefore impossible for him. More importantly however, his perception of the world around him is probably very unreal. The processing of his perceptions are distorted, not coherent. When the input can't be ordered and given a place, uncertainty about the perception translates to a feeling of de-realisation: the feeling that things around him do not relate to him as they do in fact. That is a direct reason (because it gives a lot of stress) to disconnect himself from that world: it is often easier to throw ALL data away, instead of making the decision about what to throw away and what not. I think that him not speaking is a direct result of his forced disconnection from the world (or at least, how he perceives it). He is still a normal, intelligent boy however, in there. And he will be very lonely without communication and understanding. It seems that the only person he every communicates with is his mother and that is NOT enough. Even more, she talks too much!!! Neal wants to tell you that he wishes you to be silent. Use less words, more like he does. "Listen" to him by observing him instead of talking an endless stream of words; that does not given him the feeling of contact. The contact, the true "togetherness" is one of emotional understanding; and that needs silence. Long silences will also give him time to find a way to express himself, a chance he doesn't get if you keep talking. Finally, you might want to consult a psychiatrist (or whatever is needed for this) and try a doses of Ritalin: it might help him to concentrate more and to filter better. Here's a story of another boy that needed Ritalin: at one point he told his mom, while brushing his teeth in the bathroom in front of a mirror: I have X-ray eyes! "What do you mean?" his mother asked. "Well, I can see the toothbrush and myself at the same time." His problem, she realized(!) was that he wasn't able to concentrate on one thing at a time: he saw EVERYTHING at once. They started with Ritalin and his condition improved a lot because now he could finally concentrate on one thing at a time for some period of time. Of course, it would just be an experiment and ultimately you'll have to ask Neal himself if he likes the effect or not.
Unfortunately, I had to remove the comments on the other kids because of IMDb's word limit (would have been nice to have known that up front).
What did strike me, often, is that these children are not understood. The parents love them very much (in most cases) and that is good; but they have no real clue what is going on in the minds of their child.
One of the parents said that she tries to 'crack open' a door to get her kid to develop. While I completely agree that lack of development will be the result of the kids shutting out others / the world around them, and living in their own world, often the shutting out has a reason and forcing yourself past that is harmful (or at least extremely stressful). I think that the right way to get these kids to learn something is to do that without force; thus, not for "5 minutes", but through getting them be interested. During the two months they worked on this project they have a learned a LOT, AND had fun doing it.
One of the main problems that people (especially the children) with autism have is dealing with incomplete information. Making a choice while the choice is not 100% obvious. Normal people constantly process incomplete information and just guess, or randomly make choices, drop in formation etc. They don't mind being inaccurate, illogical or even wrong. They prefer doing SOMETHING over taking more time to come to a decision, or even not do anything. A child with autism is aware of all the possibilities, consciously, at the same time-- and is not able to make choices-- to throw away data "randomly" for the sake of getting to a conclusion or decision.
Here are my takes on the respective children:
Henry is doing very well. The main thing he has to do is learn things about social interaction. Someone will have to teach him this like others learn to play a piano, he won't pick it up himself. At the very least he should start to realize that others cannot read his mind (you need to tell him that once (saying ANYTHING just ONCE is enough; even if the kids don't react, they heard you and they will process it in their own pace), just like he can't read the minds of others: therefore it is better to communicate about things that he and the one he is communicating with have in common: the surrounding world, instead of communicating about what he is thinking of. I know that the process of becoming interested in what moves OTHERS is very hard and a long road, but I believe he can be taught that putting time into listening to others and trying to understand THEIR thoughts can be rewarding in the end.
Neal has problems with formulating sentences. This is probably caused by not being able to throw away data (as I said before): thoughts are NOT words. You need to project the multidimensional "thought" space onto the "one dimensional" speech. This process is highly inaccurate and therefore impossible for him. More importantly however, his perception of the world around him is probably very unreal. The processing of his perceptions are distorted, not coherent. When the input can't be ordered and given a place, uncertainty about the perception translates to a feeling of de-realisation: the feeling that things around him do not relate to him as they do in fact. That is a direct reason (because it gives a lot of stress) to disconnect himself from that world: it is often easier to throw ALL data away, instead of making the decision about what to throw away and what not. I think that him not speaking is a direct result of his forced disconnection from the world (or at least, how he perceives it). He is still a normal, intelligent boy however, in there. And he will be very lonely without communication and understanding. It seems that the only person he every communicates with is his mother and that is NOT enough. Even more, she talks too much!!! Neal wants to tell you that he wishes you to be silent. Use less words, more like he does. "Listen" to him by observing him instead of talking an endless stream of words; that does not given him the feeling of contact. The contact, the true "togetherness" is one of emotional understanding; and that needs silence. Long silences will also give him time to find a way to express himself, a chance he doesn't get if you keep talking. Finally, you might want to consult a psychiatrist (or whatever is needed for this) and try a doses of Ritalin: it might help him to concentrate more and to filter better. Here's a story of another boy that needed Ritalin: at one point he told his mom, while brushing his teeth in the bathroom in front of a mirror: I have X-ray eyes! "What do you mean?" his mother asked. "Well, I can see the toothbrush and myself at the same time." His problem, she realized(!) was that he wasn't able to concentrate on one thing at a time: he saw EVERYTHING at once. They started with Ritalin and his condition improved a lot because now he could finally concentrate on one thing at a time for some period of time. Of course, it would just be an experiment and ultimately you'll have to ask Neal himself if he likes the effect or not.
Unfortunately, I had to remove the comments on the other kids because of IMDb's word limit (would have been nice to have known that up front).
Untraceable
(2008)
Disgusting movie. Please vote 1 to make a point.
17 April 2008
This movie is about a killer who shows the torture that ends in death life on the internet: the more people watch, the harder the victims are tortured.
Of course, millions of people log on and watch.
That concept isn't too bad, however, where this movie goes horribly wrong is that each torture is displayed and filmed in detail. You get to see it almost like the people in the movie that watch it over the net. So, WHAT THE F? People giving the movie a good rating are as SICK as people who log on to this site in the movie.
Movies like this should not be made. To make a clear statement, please do NOT watch this movie - but vote on it: give it a one. We have to stop this kind of sick movie making as soon as possible.
Of course, millions of people log on and watch.
That concept isn't too bad, however, where this movie goes horribly wrong is that each torture is displayed and filmed in detail. You get to see it almost like the people in the movie that watch it over the net. So, WHAT THE F? People giving the movie a good rating are as SICK as people who log on to this site in the movie.
Movies like this should not be made. To make a clear statement, please do NOT watch this movie - but vote on it: give it a one. We have to stop this kind of sick movie making as soon as possible.
CJ7
(2008)
Wow!
5 April 2008
This is a very good movie. I have laughed out loud and cried real tears, and that doesn't happen often! There are elements in the movie like in Shaolin Soccer, and it has some of Gremlins. Not everything that happens is possible (like in Shaolin Soccer), but that doesn't disturb the slightest, on the contrary, it's very funny. The young boy is a very good actor; amazingly so (he appears to be at most 10 years old). If anything is wrong with movie then it's that it's too short. I wish it was twice as long! I can highly recommend to watch this with children, but don't let them watch alone, as it contains a very sad scene that might need some hugging to get through.
Cloverfield
(2008)
What a waste of time and money
4 April 2008
Shaky, sick making, blurry images... the WHOLE freaking movie long. This could have been such a good movie. Why did they have to spoil it completely? Man, my room is still spinning and I feel sick. I couldn't bare to watch the screen. Sorry, sometimes I like the funfair but NOT for 84 minutes on a row thank you. The story is OK, I guess; and the sound is normal too (that is, it's stereo and strangely enough doesn't rotate around like the camera constantly does; apparently this portable cam was equipped with two hifi stereo microphones with gyroscopes or something to keep them in the same position). Unless you really, really enjoyed watching the Blair witch project, no NOT go to see this movie. And if you go, you'd be insane to accept any other seat that one in the far back.
Daddy Day Camp
(2007)
Family movie
9 January 2008
The movie starts off a bit like a slapstick, with humor more aimed at (very) young kids (although it didn't bother me that much; I'm still a child at heart). The second half of the movie is just good, when the plot picks up, evolving around a rivalry between two summer camps, intertwined with "lessons" about the father-son relationship. Despite that this movie is currently rated on average 1.7, I don't think that any child will be disappointed by it; they just don't vote on IMDb that young. If you want to hire a movie for your kid between 5 and 10 years old, don't be afraid to hire this one and I assure they'll have lots of fun and really feel good afterwards.
Zombie Wars
(2007 Video)
This movie is a factor of 2000 off.
7 January 2008
Warning: Spoilers
This movie has B-film written all over it. The acting isn't extremely bad, just not too good. I'm still amazed that I kept looking actually, and, believe it or not, that had to do with the plot. I DID want to know what was going on. Spoiler follows: What really breaks this movie however is the ending; the final explanation of why humans support this farm is off by a factor of 2000. Somewhere in the movie they say that about 5 humans were killed for food per day... And judging from the age of those who I saw, they certainly weren't killed before an average of 25. Thus, lets assume that 25 IS the average age, then the farm should contain 45625 humans... Sorry, but I only saw a hand full. It simply makes no sense whatsoever. Also, given that by far most of the population of the Earth are supposed to be zombies, and since they only eat people, there is no reason why this very small farm would ever keep zombies from attacking that "village" in great numbers anyway. The very pillars that this movie is based upon make no sense, and therefore the motivation of the zombies, nor that of the people in the village makes any sense. And where were the children? In a human-farm where people are grown for food, there should have been the same number of people of every age, even MORE of the young ones. But you see no child whatsoever?! Yet another "plot" that is nothing more than an insult to the spectator.
Razortooth
(2007 Video)
Stupid with a capital S.
4 January 2008
The first half of this movie is bearable. Although, some inconsistent things happen like people walking around, terror in their eyes, too afraid to look backwards, while nobody at that point has a clue about the existence of the creature. Once they learn about its existence, it turns out that each an every character has an IQ of around 20. If you really, REALLY want to be killed, then you might do what these people do, provided you are lobotomized first.
And if that stupidity (and believe me, it is NOT fun to watch-- it is the only reason that I think this movie is not watchable and deserves the 4 out of 10 that I give it-- it's pure, 100% annoyance that ruins all fun completely) isn't enough; there are other large inconsistencies that are simply impossible, but that apparently the director wants us to take for granted. This eel can bite a man in half in one scene of the movie, and it comes through the waste-pipe of a shower-bath in the next. In one scene it lifts up grown men, throwing them in trees-- and the eel is described to be pure muscle by this professor dude-- while in the end our hero wrestles with the creature, in the water no less(!), and keeps it under control with his bare arms. Yeah right. What an insult. Pure waste of time.
And if that stupidity (and believe me, it is NOT fun to watch-- it is the only reason that I think this movie is not watchable and deserves the 4 out of 10 that I give it-- it's pure, 100% annoyance that ruins all fun completely) isn't enough; there are other large inconsistencies that are simply impossible, but that apparently the director wants us to take for granted. This eel can bite a man in half in one scene of the movie, and it comes through the waste-pipe of a shower-bath in the next. In one scene it lifts up grown men, throwing them in trees-- and the eel is described to be pure muscle by this professor dude-- while in the end our hero wrestles with the creature, in the water no less(!), and keeps it under control with his bare arms. Yeah right. What an insult. Pure waste of time.
A Very Serious Person
(2006)
Coming of age?
2 January 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I liked this movie, but then again - I like all movies were a 13 y/o boy plays the lead, especially when the movie deal with homosexuality. So, I had high expectations when I started to watch this movie. Unfortunately, there turned out to be a great many things not as one would expect. I think I might have been put on the wrong foot by the IMDb plot summary: this is NOT a coming of age story. In a forum comment I had read that Gil, the 13 y/o boy, is gay-- but also that aspect isn't really worked out in any way. In the movie, at one point, Gil says "I am gay", light heartedly, as if it's the most normal thing on Earth. He does not have ANY problems with it, it seems. The reason he gives to think that he is gay is because he likes "pretty things", but when Jan asks him if he is attracted to other boys, Gil answers "I don't know," as if he had not given THAT aspect much thought yet. Basically, Gil is behaving like a VERY young child at times (especially in the pool scenes with Jan), more like 7 or 8 years old.
All in all, this makes the movie a rather unrealistic story. A 13-year-old boy who thinks he is gay either denies that, or at least has huge troubles with it, OR he already passed the point of accepting that he is sexually attracted to other boys, which would indicate a very MATURE boy-- with a mental age of closer to 18 instead of 7.
The above mentioned scene is all we get to see about this "coming of age" thing that the movie supposedly would be (so it is not). Gil is not struggling with sexual feelings at all. He is undoubtedly feminine, like the stereo-type gay hair-dresser type, and likes to fantasize about being a female actress, dress up in a dress, or put on make-up. Right. Although without doubt there are gay boys who like that, the number of movies where a gay boy is feminine by FAR exceeds the percentage of feminine gay boys in reality. I had hoped to finally see a movie with a gay boy who is, and acts, like a boy: boyish. But who nevertheless is attracted to some other boy. It is that ATTRACTION that starts the whole thing of confusion, that no sooner than after years of struggling ends with acceptation. This movie has little to do with reality therefore. This is not the typical young gay coming-of-age teen as they exist everywhere in this world. A disappointment thus.
I still give the movie a 7 -- because well,... Gil is cute, the topic is still my kind of topic, and that has to be rewarded somehow.
All in all, this makes the movie a rather unrealistic story. A 13-year-old boy who thinks he is gay either denies that, or at least has huge troubles with it, OR he already passed the point of accepting that he is sexually attracted to other boys, which would indicate a very MATURE boy-- with a mental age of closer to 18 instead of 7.
The above mentioned scene is all we get to see about this "coming of age" thing that the movie supposedly would be (so it is not). Gil is not struggling with sexual feelings at all. He is undoubtedly feminine, like the stereo-type gay hair-dresser type, and likes to fantasize about being a female actress, dress up in a dress, or put on make-up. Right. Although without doubt there are gay boys who like that, the number of movies where a gay boy is feminine by FAR exceeds the percentage of feminine gay boys in reality. I had hoped to finally see a movie with a gay boy who is, and acts, like a boy: boyish. But who nevertheless is attracted to some other boy. It is that ATTRACTION that starts the whole thing of confusion, that no sooner than after years of struggling ends with acceptation. This movie has little to do with reality therefore. This is not the typical young gay coming-of-age teen as they exist everywhere in this world. A disappointment thus.
I still give the movie a 7 -- because well,... Gil is cute, the topic is still my kind of topic, and that has to be rewarded somehow.
Tom and Jerry: A Nutcracker Tale
(2007 Video)
A horrible abuse of the Tommy & Jerry characters for an awful movie
12 November 2007
If you know the old cartoons of Tom and Jerry and expect something of that quality and characteristic humor, then you will be horribly disappointed. This movie has NOTHING to do with the known characters of Tom and Jerry. Even the way they are drawn is cheap and slightly wrong. The movie is clearly just and only using the names of two of the most famous animation characters of the past in the hopes to draw a large public, but isn't even TRYING to create the same characters.
Ever seen a boring animation series? This movie makes me think of the earliest of animation, like Mickey Mouse and the Steamboat. For a while you wonder why the story doesn't make sense, and then you spot the reason: the producers, no doubt in an attempt to save money, couldn't afford a music writer: what they did is buy a CD with some existing classical music and then created the movie AROUND it. Concentrating mostly on having the rhythm and high-lights in the music correspond with the rhythm of moments of action in the movie. The result is an artificial story line that seems to rotate around nothing. Okay, so they travel from spot A to spot B, that is plot, but the details of the travel is boring, boring and boring. Once you realize that every event is written into the movie solely due to the RANDOM fact the existing music is doing something you can't help but realize that your looking at some time-filler. I really couldn't finish watching this horribly boring movie. I watched until they got on some frozen river, no doubt only written conveniently into the plot because the music made them think of gliding motions, and then quickly jumped forwards through the movie, hoping to see a glimpse of the old Tom and Jerry, were Tom is trying to catch Jerry using evil genius and the weirdest of self-made equipment. Where both, Tom as well as Jerry regularly are deformed, for example splashed flat against a wall, or getting the shape of a cube after swallowing one the size of themselves, or losing all or most of their hair, only to be completely restored again the next scene.... but no, nothing of that in this cheap, boring animation, that has NOTHING to do with Tom & Jerry.
Ever seen a boring animation series? This movie makes me think of the earliest of animation, like Mickey Mouse and the Steamboat. For a while you wonder why the story doesn't make sense, and then you spot the reason: the producers, no doubt in an attempt to save money, couldn't afford a music writer: what they did is buy a CD with some existing classical music and then created the movie AROUND it. Concentrating mostly on having the rhythm and high-lights in the music correspond with the rhythm of moments of action in the movie. The result is an artificial story line that seems to rotate around nothing. Okay, so they travel from spot A to spot B, that is plot, but the details of the travel is boring, boring and boring. Once you realize that every event is written into the movie solely due to the RANDOM fact the existing music is doing something you can't help but realize that your looking at some time-filler. I really couldn't finish watching this horribly boring movie. I watched until they got on some frozen river, no doubt only written conveniently into the plot because the music made them think of gliding motions, and then quickly jumped forwards through the movie, hoping to see a glimpse of the old Tom and Jerry, were Tom is trying to catch Jerry using evil genius and the weirdest of self-made equipment. Where both, Tom as well as Jerry regularly are deformed, for example splashed flat against a wall, or getting the shape of a cube after swallowing one the size of themselves, or losing all or most of their hair, only to be completely restored again the next scene.... but no, nothing of that in this cheap, boring animation, that has NOTHING to do with Tom & Jerry.
Too disturbing
18 August 2007
This movie shows a boy being mentally abused by his mother, being dragged away from a possible good and normal life for no apparent reason than selfishness of the mother. Unlike the plot says, the mother is 23 at that moment. The boy is emerged in an adult world of sex and drugs, void of proper education or relationships with kids his own age. I love boys, and I couldn't watch this movie because of the abuse. I couldn't watch this boys life being destroyed. I kept asking myself: why isn't he seeing that his mother is a bitch and he doesn't belong with her? But that is not realistic. At seven (in the beginning) when your mother tells you lies like she does, he is helpless. Only at the end of the movie, after reading some more, I found out that this is based on a book based on the real life of the author. That makes the movie more bearable (you can think: well, it DID happen like that), but in fact only MORE painful. If you like boys, don't watch this movie. You won't like it. That being said, the acting of the boys was very good. If either reads this: thumbs up, you are great actors!
Trailer Park Boys: The Movie
(2006)
Boring, stupid, junk.
14 April 2007
It is very seldom that I can't manage to watch a movie till the end. In the case of this particular movie I got as far as one third, and I've been forcing me to get that far. The reason I went to see this movie is because someone on IMDb wrote that it contained humor of high level. Well, forget it. If your IQ is over 100 then DON'T go to see this movie. It's to puke. The acting is so bad that I can't speak about acting. The "humor" is nonexistent, unless you think that it's funny someone says the f-word three times in one sentence. I couldn't discover a story line during the first 1/3 of the movie either. All you get to see is a bunch of fat, ugly, retarded American men who think that it's normal to be criminal, anti-social and have no morals. Very, very, very sad. A pure waste of time and money.
Unaccompanied Minors
(2006)
Nice feel-good movie
5 April 2007
I just watched this movie and I really don't understand why people think this is a horrible movie. It's a good movie, I really enjoyed it! Sure, there isn't some complex plot with several twists; it's just a relaxed ride, a feel good movie. It's un-complex. As un-complex as children ARE. You remember how good live was when you were young? No worries (well, for most people that's true anyway ;). The things the kids in this movie do are things that you CAN only do when you are still young: the adults are going to forgive you. They are doing things that no adult could ever get away with, but that is exactly why it made me feel good: you just know that there won't be consequences; it's just pure adventure and fun.
I see a lot of B-movies lately; were the acting is REALLY REALLY bad. The kind of movies that I turn off half way, disgusted that I wasted my time with it. Imho, THAT are the kind of movies that should fill up the bottom 250 on IMDb. The acting in this movie however, is good! The kids put down some professional acting (not perfect, but in most cases that is totally to blame on the director-- the movie doesn't need it either, this isn't a "The Good Son (1993)") and the adults act as adults typically act in kids movies, nothing that annoyed me.
I think that any adult can enjoy this movie, if they keep an open mind, like children and still are enough of a kid in their heart to remember how (good) it was in their childhood.
Don't expect anything deep - just sit back and allow yourself to enjoy a while without worries.
I see a lot of B-movies lately; were the acting is REALLY REALLY bad. The kind of movies that I turn off half way, disgusted that I wasted my time with it. Imho, THAT are the kind of movies that should fill up the bottom 250 on IMDb. The acting in this movie however, is good! The kids put down some professional acting (not perfect, but in most cases that is totally to blame on the director-- the movie doesn't need it either, this isn't a "The Good Son (1993)") and the adults act as adults typically act in kids movies, nothing that annoyed me.
I think that any adult can enjoy this movie, if they keep an open mind, like children and still are enough of a kid in their heart to remember how (good) it was in their childhood.
Don't expect anything deep - just sit back and allow yourself to enjoy a while without worries.
Slipstream
(2005)
An enjoyable movie.
28 November 2006
I've read so many bad reviews about this movie that it's a wonder I still went to see it. But in the end, I just had to, because I'm an absolute science fiction lover- so I took the risk.
When the movie starts you immediately see that this is no B-movie. The special effects are of a high standard, the acting is like you may expect from Hollywood actors and the music is damn good. This movie could very well have played in theaters, in my humble opinion.
So, why do I give it a 7 and not an 8? I give an 8 only to movies that still make me think about them the next day; and when I feel that I have to recommend them to others in the confidence that they will like it too. The only reason, therefore, that this movie isn't an 8 is because I LIKED the movie - but I'll probably have forgotten about it tomorrow. The idea behind the movie: someone has a small device that can take them back in time a few minutes-- could have served for some master plot that gets more and more complex, with twists and Ooohs and Aaahs-- making you laugh out loud, thinking "Why didn't I think about that?" and "Can it get ANY more complex/genius?"... But instead, that doesn't happen. The movie doesn't really explore a new level of story line, only possible with time travel. Afterwards you have the satisfaction that you have when you just saw another good bank robbery movie, or a hijack movie. Fun, but no more than that. Still, I wish the reviews had been better; they might have made a TV series of this and I would have definitely enjoyed that.
When the movie starts you immediately see that this is no B-movie. The special effects are of a high standard, the acting is like you may expect from Hollywood actors and the music is damn good. This movie could very well have played in theaters, in my humble opinion.
So, why do I give it a 7 and not an 8? I give an 8 only to movies that still make me think about them the next day; and when I feel that I have to recommend them to others in the confidence that they will like it too. The only reason, therefore, that this movie isn't an 8 is because I LIKED the movie - but I'll probably have forgotten about it tomorrow. The idea behind the movie: someone has a small device that can take them back in time a few minutes-- could have served for some master plot that gets more and more complex, with twists and Ooohs and Aaahs-- making you laugh out loud, thinking "Why didn't I think about that?" and "Can it get ANY more complex/genius?"... But instead, that doesn't happen. The movie doesn't really explore a new level of story line, only possible with time travel. Afterwards you have the satisfaction that you have when you just saw another good bank robbery movie, or a hijack movie. Fun, but no more than that. Still, I wish the reviews had been better; they might have made a TV series of this and I would have definitely enjoyed that.
Mutation
(2006 Video)
Absolute waste of time
25 October 2006
Don't believe the "plot". This movie doesn't contain martial arts, nor does it contain any horror. The acting is so bad that it's unbearable to watch. A pure waste of time and money. There really isn't anything more to say about this movie... but IMDb demands that comments are at least ten lines - so here it goes: There is absolutely nothing interesting in the story either; I'm a great fan of science fiction - which is why I wanted to see this movie - but this movie has nothing to do with science fiction. In the beginning there is a "bad" guy (he doesn't talk, just stabs people that come near - much like a zombie - thank God he killed a few of the bad actors out of the movie, but unfortunately the remaining actors were at least as bad. Obviously, all victims do not only deserve to die for bad acting, but also for being extremely stupid. I constantly thought "right - if you do THAT, then you deserve to die - this is evolution at it's finest". Puke. Later he became a real zombie (inject "serum" wait 1 minute - OH, nothing is happening!?! - turn back to zombie - zombie gets up - KEEP turning back to zombie... Oh well, you get the idea. Now, the zombie doesn't change the way he "acts", he just gets some really bad/cheap bubbles taped to his head (that's the "mutation" you get), stabs a few more people and that's the movie.
12 and Holding
(2005)
Brilliant acting by 13 y/o (?) Conor Donovan, playing the 12 y/o twin's Rudy and Jacob Carges.
14 October 2006
You get to see it all: bravery, shyness, anger, despair, goofy grin, sadness, joy -- I've seen a LOT of adult actors who aren't capable of displaying such a variety of emotions, in such a natural way. Perhaps too natural: it seems he isn't credited for it anywhere: people don't even notice it as acting anymore. I have to say, I'm guilty of that too - it wasn't after I went back through the movie to make screen shots that I noticed just how rich his expressions and acting is. His performance of Jacob as troubled and shy boy can hardly be captured with a still-image; the emotions wash over his face - his eyes don't know whether to look at the ground or at the person he's talking to. You have see him acting to believe it. In fact, even then - his performance is SO perfect that I would have thought he would just BE like that if he hadn't ALSO played the role of his twin brother Rudy, who has a totally different personality. What greater compliment can Conor get then that I wasn't sure if Rudy was played by the SAME actor until after I saw that in the credits, at the end of the movie!
Moreover, although Jacob is supposed to be the 'ugly' one, as a result of a defacing birthmark on his face (being the cause of his different personality) -- I hardly even noticed Rudy: he wasn't beautiful in my eyes, while Jacob is very very beautiful. This can only be the result of Conors acting once again: you see his inner beauty, while his bratty twin brother spoils his looks with his arrogant behavior.
I hope to see a lot more movies from Conor, soon!
Moreover, although Jacob is supposed to be the 'ugly' one, as a result of a defacing birthmark on his face (being the cause of his different personality) -- I hardly even noticed Rudy: he wasn't beautiful in my eyes, while Jacob is very very beautiful. This can only be the result of Conors acting once again: you see his inner beauty, while his bratty twin brother spoils his looks with his arrogant behavior.
I hope to see a lot more movies from Conor, soon!
For a Lost Soldier
(1992)
Classic
5 April 2006
I do not quickly give a ten... and perhaps I shouldn't give this movie a ten if I'm honest, because normally I only gave a 10 when I love the music AND the story AND the special effects AND fall in love one of the main characters etc... in other words when the movie is totally perfect. On the other hand, I could say that I give a ten to a movie that really gets into my soul and causes me to still feel strong emotions a week later.
I suppose this movie, on my scale, is actually a 9. Nevertheless, it *deserves* a ten. It's one of a kind. I have the utmost respect for the people who made this movie, and the way they made it. I'd like to especially thank Maarten Smit for taking it upon him to do this role. Thank you Maarten, a LOT of people will respect you for this - more than you know.
A wonderful movie, a must see for everyone who knows that love isn't limited by age boundaries.
I suppose this movie, on my scale, is actually a 9. Nevertheless, it *deserves* a ten. It's one of a kind. I have the utmost respect for the people who made this movie, and the way they made it. I'd like to especially thank Maarten Smit for taking it upon him to do this role. Thank you Maarten, a LOT of people will respect you for this - more than you know.
A wonderful movie, a must see for everyone who knows that love isn't limited by age boundaries.
The Pink Panther
(2006)
Boring, boring, boring.
17 February 2006
This movie is proof that the previous inspector Clouseau movies were entirely carried by the genius of Peter Sellers. Having a different actor play the role of Clouseau could never work, unless the _exact_ way of behavior invented by Peter Sellers would have been copied. I would have thought that that would be impossible, if it weren't for the fact that I saw 'The Life and Death of Peter Sellers (2004)', a documentary about Peter Sellers, where Geoffrey Rush managed to put down his character in a near perfect imitation. Therefore we have to at least partly blame Steve Martin for the fact that each and every scene where he plays the clumsy inspector, no doubt with the intention to be funny, is an embarrassment to watch. If you never saw any previous pink panther movies, you might think this movie is funny; yet, don't waste your time on it. Watch the original with Peter Sellers and feel the pain in your stomach and jaws while tears are flowing down your cheeks from laughing, instead.
Birth
(2004)
Very impressive movie
9 April 2005
The subject of this movie, an adult 'returning' into a child's body, or getting a child's body, has always fascinated me. My main question in that case is always: how would I convince my family, my friends, that it is me, when it would happen to me? Because that is clearly the major problem in such a case. Unlike many other movies about adults becoming young again 'Birth' is a serious and, I'd say, realistic approach of this concept. As a viewer you, like the people in the movie itself, constantly wonder whether it is really the old Sean, or not. At least as fascinating to me is the adult-child relationship that (would) almost naturally come(s) forth if/when Anna believes the boy. This movie makes the existence of true love between a young boy (Sean appears as a 12 year old, even though they claim he is 10) and a grown up woman understandable, albeit from a weird kind of angle (he'd be her late husband), the idea of a relationship is still clearly of pedophile nature to Anna.
Finally, I want to remark that there are wonderful, long close-ups of faces in this movie, where things are happening solely through the facial expressions of the actors; at one moment (Anna in the theater) I understood something that could not have been brought anything better or more emotional than in this way -- wonderful!
Finally, I want to remark that there are wonderful, long close-ups of faces in this movie, where things are happening solely through the facial expressions of the actors; at one moment (Anna in the theater) I understood something that could not have been brought anything better or more emotional than in this way -- wonderful!
Tell Your Friends