ColdZro Reviews

Capturing the Light (2008 Video)

Had me, and then lost me.

[1/10 · 4 July 2019]

I was convinced of the veracity of Dorothy's claims at the beginning of the film, and I thought the experts were giving good analysis of her footage; but the later segment of the film threw all of that into doubt, for me.

(spoiler warning, if that matters, for a documentary) The interview with Dorothy's daughter, in the kitchen, with the light which they are all mystified by... They present it as an unexplained light outside the window, moving back and forth like the lights Dorothy filmed so many times. But it's clearly a reflection against a closed window. It moves opposite the camera. When the camera moves, the light moves. But the movement of the light is more perceptible and pronounced than the motion of the camera that's taking the shot, so I suppose it isn't immediately detectable to some people that the two are moving at the same time. But if you're using some discernment, it's so obvious... It's definitely a reflection. Anyone who has ever walked past a window or mirror should be able to see it for what it is. And yet they go on and on about it... And they bring in more experts to discuss whether or not it's CGI, and the entire family is mystified by it, and the film wants us to believe it's PROBABLY a UFO out the window. But since it's clearly not, it makes me wonder why they're pushing that idea at us for such a large segment of the film. Are they all really that foolish, or are they knowingly trying to deceive us? And whichever is the case, can we trust anything else in the documentary either? For me, it causes me to doubt even the first part of the film, of which I had previously been convinced.

So, watch it and judge for yourself. But always ask questions about whatever you see or hear. I do believe there are strange things in this world... But I also KNOW that there are people who want to convince you of things that aren't true. So always be open to possibilities...but don't just believe everything. And this, I don't believe.

Full Throttle (1995 TV Movie)

Rowan Atkinson makes this worth it.

[5/10 · 11 May 2003]

I bought this DVD on the erroneous assumption that it was a comedy. With Rowan Atkinson as the star, my first thought was of "Mr. Bean," "Black Adder" and most of his other terrific comedic roles. Not that Atkinson can't do drama, but because comedy is what I know him for. And even the picture on the cover of the DVD, with Atkinson looking, to me, like a villainous racer -- face and coveralls covered with dirt -- had me believing it was a comedy. I never even questioned it. But when I watched it I found that it is not a comedy at all. It's actually the true story of Sir Henry Birkin, a British race car driver of the 1920s and '30s. And it was fairly interesting. Probably would be of great interest to someone more familiar with Birkin. This was the first I've heard of him. But watching Rowan Atkinson is always a treat, whether he's going for laughs or playing it serious like he does here. So, this was not what I expected, but was enjoyable thanks to Atkinson. But for anyone looking strictly for comedy, this isn't the place to look. I probably wouldn't have commented on this, if not for the fact that no comment had been submitted for it. And if there had been one, that would've been helpful when I was making a decision to purchase the DVD. So, this is for you.

The Transporter (2002)

Short on plot -- BIG on action. What did you expect?

[8/10 · 13 October 2002]

Most of the movies I bother to comment on are the ones which people say they didn't like because the plot was weak...but if they're honest, most people should tell you that the thing about an Action movie trailer that gets their attention is the ACTION! But most people aren't honest. They wanna pretend that they went to the movie expecting a brilliantly-written story. Well, I got news for ya: Every action movie you see is going to have a weak plot! A Drama had darn well better have a strong plot, sure. But an Action movie -- 9 times out of 10 -- is going to have a weak plot! Why? Because when you see an Action movie trailer, you don't say, "wow, that sounds like a thought-provoking story." No, you say, "WHOA!! THAT MOVIE'S GONNA ROCK!!" So, as I've said many times before, let a movie be what it is. So okay, with that said, yes, the plot of The Transporter was like something from an episode of "The Rockford Files" stretched out to movie length. BUT, The Transporter is clearly (to anybody who's seen the trailer) an Action movie. If you had seen the movie's trailer, but didn't know it was an Action movie when you bought your ticket, then you're an idiot. Now, fast-paced, kick-butt action is the real reason you wanna go see an "ACTION" movie, correct?! I mean, that's why I went to see it! And I was not disappointed in the least! The action in this comes at you hard and heavy through the whole movie, barely stopping for a minute to catch its breath. Yeah, they did a few things that are highly implausible, but who freakin' cares! I see reality all day long! A little imagination never hurt anybody. Which is not to say that the whole movie is full of impossible stunts, but it does have its share. But my point is this: When I saw the trailer for The Transporter, I said, "Whoa!! That movie's gonna rock!" And what did I say as I walked out of the theater after seeing it? I said, "WHOA!! THAT MOVIE ROCKED!!" So did I get what I expected? Absolutely! Well, no...actually, the more I think about it, I didn't really get what I expected. I got more! I loved it! 9 out of 10.

Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever (2002)

Not heavy on plot, but satisfying on action.

[7/10 · 21 September 2002]

As I write this, the rating on this movie is rather low, and I think that's a bit unfair. I have to agree, the movie is pretty thin on plot, and I was able to point out some problems with the movie. But I must say that I still got what I expected from the movie, and that was action. The movie has some pretty cool action scenes, and I knew going in, that that's what I wanted to see. Maybe I'm just better than most people at evaluating a movie before seeing it, but I fully expected to get more stylish action sequences, and less plot. And I think that's just fine! I love a movie with a strong story, but sometimes it's okay to just watch a movie with nothin' but action. This movie is an action movie, and I say it does quite a respectable job of it. I rated it 7.

Miracle Mile (1988)

I canNOT believe this has so many positive comments!!

[1/10 · 10 February 2002]

I didn't intend to write a comment on this movie, but when I looked at the comments that are here, I was totally shocked to find so many people saying the movie is "great." I had to post this comment in an effort to balance things out just a little. I can only hope that it's some huge and elaborate practical joke that all these positive comments have been posted. Now, I must admit that I missed the first few minutes of the movie. Perhaps that would've made a difference. But I really don't think it would! I came in at a point early on, where Anthony Edwards is about to get some sleep, after which the power goes out and he wakes up late. Whatever happened before that may have been the most terrific piece of filmmaking ever, and maybe by missing that I missed the true "greatness" of the movie. But I highly doubt it.

Where I came in was, I believe, where the plot really starts. And I understood who was who quite well enough. The movie was a little odd, and quirky right from the start (where I came in,) but not SO odd that I couldn't stick with it. I stayed with the movie just because the concept of the movie was intriguing enough to keep me watching. But as the movie progressed it got weirder and weirder, and the writing got dumber and dumber!

I finally reached the "point of no return," where you finish the movie not because you're enjoying it, but because you've already invested so much time in it that you figure you might as well finish it off. The movie got increasingly bad all the way to the end. The characters did some of the most infuriatingly stupid things that I think I've ever seen. And I do mean STUPID. I want to say the acting was bad, but looking back I don't know that that's true. I think the primary actors were putting a lot into it, but the characters were so ridiculous, it made it seem that the acting was bad. Plus there was not enough character development to make some of the situations seem as natural as they maybe could have. So if I had to point to one thing as the reason this movie stinks, it'd be the writing. It was totally moronic. The acting by the primary stars wasn't the worst I've ever seen, but it wasn't great. The acting by every one else...well, let's just say it wasn't GOOD. I don't know if the movie was cheap to make, but I really hope it was, because it really looked it.

The movie was just all around bad. Battlefield Earth would be able to stand next to this one and hold its head up high. And Battlefield Earth was rotten. Again, I can only pray that all these positive comments about this movie are part of some huge prank. The only other way I can imagine that all the positive remarks got here is that the director of the movie is now unemployed and has all day to write and post new ones. Perhaps to trick people into buying the movie, so he can get some money for food. But let me end by WARNING all who have not seen the movie, but have read all the positive comments and are considering buying it: PLEASE, for your own sake, DO NOT buy Miracle Mile! If you feel you must see it, rent it first!! Or heck, wait for it to play on television; if you have to wait forever, you won't be missing anything! TRUST ME!

What's the Worst That Could Happen? (2001)

This movie is not as good as I thought it was gonna be.

[6/10 · 5 June 2001]

Danny DeVito is usually funnier. Martin Lawrence is usually more hilarious. It should've been a very funny movie. A rich guy and a common thief at war over a ring sounded funnier than it was. DeVito and Lawrence are a good comedy team, but I think the directing, and even the editing, messed this movie up. It was pieced together in a way that made things just slightly hard to follow, and which detracted from the humor. I'd say, see this movie on video. I'm not saying it's a bad movie -- it had some good laughs -- but it's not as good as I'd hoped. I voted a 6.

Quick Change (1990)

Don't miss out on this hilarious movie!

[9/10 · 14 May 2001]

This movie is really great. It's got a great cast, a very funny story, and some clever writing. But it's been so ignored; and I can't understand why! I never see it on TV, and it's not available on DVD; it's hardly ever mentioned anywhere! Every time I go buy DVDs, I look for this one, hoping that maybe this time it'll be there. It hasn't been so far, and it's always a let-down. It's a tremendously funny movie, which I'd love to have in my collection! And if you like to laugh, then you'd be doing yourself a favor to pick this one up! Especially if you're a fan of Murray or Quaid. But even if you're not, you couldn't watch this one and not laugh. As someone else commented, this is a shamefully "underrated gem."

So here's my plea to the people who decide such things: PUT QUICK CHANGE ON DVD!!! PLEASE! I WANT IT!

Gone in 60 Seconds (2000)

I liked the movie, but...

[7/10 · 16 June 2000]

Okay, let me start by saying I really did like the movie. But I have one complaint: A lot of folks are writing their comments and saying things like, "if you're looking for some great car chase scenes, this is your movie," and "can a lot of beautiful cars, in a lot of car chase scenes carry a movie? I think it can." Well, I think it could too -- very much so! I love fast cars, and watching a good car chase just warms my heart. But this movie, while very enjoyable, did not deliver what I expected in the car-chase department. I don't think most of the comment writers here really paid attention to the movie as a whole, with regard to the action elements. There really was not ALL that much action in the movie. I actually went to the movie BECAUSE I thought it would be full of car-chases; that was the real draw for me, because that's what the trailers lead you to believe the movie would be. ***SKIP AHEAD TO AVOID VERY SLIGHT SPOILER*** But there were really only two good car chases in the whole movie: the obligatory beginning, and ending chases. ***SPOILER END*** So, for that reason, I felt a little disappointed. Still, I did enjoy the chases that I did see -- some very exciting stuff, which was worth going to see. Oh, one more small gripe, which I'll direct to the movie-makers themselves: when you're filming a car-chase (or fight scene) back that camera off from the action just a tad. When the camera is right on top of the action, and things are moving so quickly, it makes it a bit difficult to determine exactly what is going on. If you're going to all that trouble to set up a big, elaborate car chase, and choreograph these extreme near-misses between vehicles, then back the camera up a little, and let us see it. Let me also say this, I'm not an old guy saying, "why don't ya slow that down a little; I can't see all that fast-movin' stuff." No, I'm 25 and I've grown up with all that MTV quick-cut, swift-camera-movement crap, and I'm telling you it's really freakin' annoying. And it's totally NOT effective in a car-chase scene where the driver's skill is supposed to be on display. Those shots of a super-sports-car slipping through a narrow gap while running through an intersection are just not very impressive when the camera is so close that you can't SEE the speed involved, and the driver's skill at maneuvering through that tiny space. I wanna SEE the stunt, not just know that there was one. This movie was not too bad about doing that, but it had a couple of moments where I would've liked to see a different angle on the stunts. Anyway, I liked the movie (even if it sounds like I didn't) and I gave it an 8. So, yeah, I'd recommend seeing it, but don't get the idea that it's an action-packed car-chase extravaganza. If ya want a really good car chase, check out Ronin (several awe-inspiring displays of driving skill,) Bullit (Steve McQueen in the first great car-chase in movie history,) and The Blues Brothers (yeah, that's right, The Blues Brothers; in a number of great chases. The ending chase has to be the most expensive car-chase ever. Great stuff.)

Being John Malkovich (1999)

I can't believe the high score this has.

[5/10 · 10 June 2000]

Okay, I wouldn't say that this movie was a TOTAL waste of time; it was somewhat amusing at times. But as I write this, the movie is listed as #25 in the Top 250 list. I have absolutely no idea how it can have a rating that high. It was nowhere NEAR that good. I've read several other comments here, and a lot of people say what an "original, and fresh" story it is. Yeah, it's original, but not GOOD. I like the premise, but I think they could have done something more interesting with it! I kept expecting something to HAPPEN, but nothing did. It seemed to just keep rolling along with no real point to it. It didn't really seem to have a message or a deep thought for us to ponder. It didn't even throw me any (interesting) plot twists to make me really care what was going on, or to make me care about what might happen to these characters next. I did laugh quite a bit, and I liked the 7 1/2 floor bit (especially the hilariously authentic-looking orientation tape explaining the reasons the floor existed.) But I didn't laugh SO much, or find anything about it interesting enough to ever want to see it again. And I certainly wouldn't give it "classic" status. It was really a let-down for me. I was really looking forward to seeing it, because I'd heard so many good things about it, and because the story idea sounded so "original, and fresh," but it was absolutely nowhere near what I'd hoped. I gave it a 4. If not for the few laughs it did have, I would've rated it much, much MUCH lower. It was not particularly clever, and as I said, I think the movie COULD HAVE been good if they had done something more with the premise.

Battlefield Earth (2000)

COMMENT SORTA CONTAINS SPOILERS. But trust me, it doesn't matter much.

[2/10 · 2 June 2000]

I've read a lot of the comments, and a lot of people have mentioned the scenes that were so obviously stolen from other movies. But for me, there was one scene in particular that stood out as having been, let's say "inspired" by another film: the slow-motion shot where Johnnie is avoiding shots fired by the Psychlos, and is running through a hail of dirt and debris. Was I the only person who thought of The Matrix, and the scene in the lobby, with Neo and Trinity running in slow-mo with broken pieces of marble flying everywhere? That was one cool scene in The Matrix, and I suppose the people on Battlefield Earth felt the same.

And another thing which I just HAVE to mention, even though many others already have, is the totally ludicrous "cavemen flying Harriers" thing. These cavemen have been without ANY kind of technology aside from "sticks and stones" technology, and yet they're able to learn how to, not only FLY these planes, but to DOGFIGHT with them, in one week's time! Okay, it takes a person more than a week's time to really learn how to drive a car well. An airplane -- I'm fairly certain -- is a little bit harder to learn than a car. Now, consider this as well: these aren't JUST airplanes, they're freakin' Harriers!! They can hover!! I would imagine that learning to fly and hover a Harrier would take quite a bit more time than learning to fly even a regular airplane! Now, I already have a headstart on these cavemen, because I can at least drive a car, and I at least have SOME understanding of basic airplane physics, and technologies. But if you were to tell me that I could teach myself to fly even the simplest airplane in a week's time, I'd tell you to lay off the booze, or whatever item you were smoking. There is no way in Hades that this makes sense, no matter how easily you can suspend your disbelief. I can let a lot of things go when I'm watching a movie, cause it's just a movie, but that was TOO much.

There was one thing I enjoyed about the movie, though, and that was Sabine Karsenti as Chrissy. My compliments, and thanks to the casting department. Excellent work.

Patch Adams (1998)

Robin Williams' usual

[7/10 · 8 February 2000]

This is pretty much like most of Robin Williams' other movies--a bit TOO sweet and too heavy in some spots--trying to jerk a tear or two, BUT I like a movie that makes you feel something. And it's also like many of his other movies, in that, it's FUNNY! I think that Robin Williams is great when he gets going. So, yeah, it's a bit overly dramatic at times, but you WILL laugh all along the way. I gave it a 7.

Bowfinger (1999)

A true side-splitting comedy

[8/10 · 29 January 2000]

I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. Steve Martin wrote it, and I think it's one of his best yet. Actually, it's been a while since I've seen a good, goofy comedy as funny as this. In it, Martin plays the type of character that he plays best, the sneaky con artist who manipulates everyone around him in order to accomplish his goals. And Eddie Murphy is the funniest that I've seen him in a while; playing a dual role, and doing an "awesome" job with both characters. This movie contains some of the most gut-wrenchingly funny scenes that I've seen in a long time. I say that because I found myself laughing so hard at some spots that my stomach hurt. And from what I heard, so did everyone else in the theater. If you want to see a good, crazy comedy, see Bowfinger!