Pinata: Survival Island aka Demon Island isn't as bad as most people think. The special effects indeed were exaggerated and took away from what the movie could've been without it but it definitely added some chilling and frightening moments. Also, the fact of a Pinata killing demon shouldn't be frowned and laughed upon- heck we had a killer doll with Chucky and at least the Pinata has a creative idea with the sins of the tribe's past. And to add to the film's pluses, the characters of the movie joked about the idea of a killer Pinata, even Tina (Jamie Pressly) so it's not like the Pinata killer was taken too seriously like Chucky and other murdering things were. The story is very original and believable. There is some cheese in it all but its all fun. I throughougly enjoyed my first viewing of this movie on DVD and I will definitely see it again. Jamie Pressly looks gorgeous and Nicholas Brendon (from Buffy) takes the main character role and plays it wonderfully. If there is to be a sequel, which there should be, I will be the first in line to buy the movie tickets at the theater.
Reviews
9 Reviews
Die Another Day
(2002)
Balloon gets big put pops
23 November 2002
Die Another Day is a very complex film. Just as the character James Bond, the movie changes from time to time- rather drastically. In the beginning to the middle, the movie was a true gem. I thought that the movie was indeed a great homage to the old Bond films of the past and deserved the "Bond 20" label or anniversary. The fencing sword battle was a classic action sequence that no doubtedly cannot be topped in any Bond film in a one on one confrontation. The only one on one battle that comes to mind was the 006-007 fight in "Goldeneye" but the sword battle was more bloodier and shockingly realistic. Then after that, the movie switched to Iceland and from there it went downhill and off into some fantasy world that no one can really describe. The Ice Palace which Gustav Graves owned was filmed beautifully and brings back memories of the lavish sets of classic villians but it was far too unrealistic. Invisible cars, laser beams, and DNA face-morphers were just far too much to swallow in a mere short period of time. Plus, dreadfully to say; many people think Bond movies are too slow-paced, but this movie was too fast-paced following the trip to Iceland. The camera working and so forth was a "XXX" kind of feeling which quite honestly, true Bond fans would not want to see. DAD became literally a teenager's delight and rather insulted the older Bond fans with its direction at the youth. Sure it was entertaining but definitely did not pack the same whallop as it did in the first hour. Taking a look at the technology it seems like old Bond movies. It is which those who forecast the future for technology up ahead. The virtual system is believable but the invisible car... I don't think so. The gadgets are good, as always, and the new Q couldn't of made a better entrance. In the movie, Bond didn't really have to use that much gadgetery, rather rely on himself which was good to see. As for the villains, Yao and Gustav Graves, including Colonel Moon all made wonderful bad guys. Probably the best ensemble. Gustav had the cockiness and suavity that can be matched by no other. He made a striking resemblence to the physical aspects of 006 and matched equally in Bond's skill, as you can tell in the sword sequence. Yao also had a good physical appearance and delivered some of the best memories of his looks and coldness. Another bad guy who I will not name was really good also who broke James' heart. Don't worry she will get the equal in return.
Overall, a decent Bond movie. Not the best of Brosnan's quadruple- it kind of pops and goes into a tailspin at the end. But the first half is worth your money.
6/10
Overall, a decent Bond movie. Not the best of Brosnan's quadruple- it kind of pops and goes into a tailspin at the end. But the first half is worth your money.
6/10
Dr. No
(1962)
Started the engine
23 November 2002
Dr. No is not a great film. However, it is known as simply the 1st Bond movie ever, and really started the Bond craze to the cinemas. In film quality, Dr. No probably hits the lowest of the low of the Bond movies- it is interesting, especially Urusula Andress coming out from the sea, but overall the movie is just too-slow paced (a 60s movie trademark) that doesn't really show what true Bond movies are about. It wasn't until Goldfinger that Bond reached new fantasy and seductive heights. Nonetheless, I recommend this to all Bond fans just to see how it all started.
6/10
6/10
MTV Presents: Videos That Don't Suck
(1998 TV Special)
Long but worthwhile
20 October 2002
MTV's Videos That Don't Suck lasted all day when it aired- but out of the whole time on MTV i didn't even change the channel. For one, the choices of music was good and had a good sense of variety and another this was a rare moment in which all of the original Buffy cast ganged together. Its obvious that this probably will never air again in any form, but it was a great show, lots of laughs especially from Nicholas Brendon who sported the best sense of humor of the cast. This presentation will forever be remembered as the real "Buffy" cast without their characters. That is something in which no show really can have, especially all day.
The Attic Expeditions
(2001)
A Haunting Masterpiece
14 July 2002
The Attic Expeditions is a great puzzling in depth movie, one that you must take a second look at after your first viewing. It is more of a thinking, mindful movie that gets you involved from the very first clip. Strong acting from Andras Jones and Seth Green really brought this movie out and into a classic horror/thriller movie. It is amazing to think that a psychotic murderer can meet his own wife in someone else's body... Speaking of, wonderful directing by first time director Jeremy Kasten who really shined throughout this somewhat awkard and twisted film. I recommend "The Attic Expeditions" to everyone- this is a firm example of what new movies will look like in the future- no more plot leading up story plotlines, but just piecing each clip together. This movie, besides Fight Club, is on my all time favorites and should be on yours too.
Fading Away
22 June 2002
This is a good movie... if you only watched it once. To make things simple, this is not a classic and does not (absolutely postively) deserve to be in the Star Wars trilogy. Sure, its better than 'The Phantom Menace' but what isn't? The characters were better used this time, thankfully, and Hayden Christensen did a wonderful portrayal of Anakin Skywalker which really balanced the otherwise tilting movie. A couple objections to the film... first, they should've shown more of Anakin's rampage on the raiders; i mean, not all in detail, but at least enough to make you cringe. Secondly, the romance between Anakin and Amidala just wasn't happenin'... i didn't feel the connection like I did with Leia and Solo in the original trilogies and I thought the two just didn't have chemistry. The main problem with this 'so called' love was that it based the whole movie on it when it only spanned a quartet of clips. At least with Leia and Solo, it wasn't hyped up and it just happened- if Lucas did not blow the love out of proportion maybe the movie might've been better. Nonetheless, nobody can forget Ewan McGregor's performance as Obi Wan also- who in my opinion was the cream of the crop here. Some shocking moments in this film that never really happened in any of the previous Star Wars films- i won't tell but has something to do with Jango Fett and Mace Windu. Definitely was creative and delivered quite well. Also, the final lightsaber sequence with Count Dooku... guess who came to the party? Yoda! I don't think Lucas intended on making the scene funny, but not one person in the theater the 1st time I saw it, did not laugh. I don't know how to make a critique on that except Lucas did something wrong there because I am confused whether its comical or normal. Anyways, the movie was alright but not something you would want sitting on a shelf beside the "Star Wars" or "Empire Strikes Back", that's for sure. Out of 10 stars, I give it a 6. Hopefully, the next film (Episode III) will bring out dorment "true" Star Wars fans like myself.
*yawn*
22 June 2002
Don't get me wrong, this isn't garbage. I mean you can watch this on Friday night and always be entertained in someway, but the fact of the matter is... its boring. This movie, as expected to popular belief, took itself way too seriously. Line after line, the script continued to describe the make believe world of Star Wars as if we actually cared about which planet was under Trade Federation control. The one great thing about Star Wars is the action and the excitement but this movie unfortunately dug too deep into politics and trade routes and just bored the heck out of you. Maybe if you were a senator, you might find this interesting.
The characters of Star Wars were hardly tweaked emotionally and showed no growth throughout the movie. Unlike Episode II, there was no mysterious character inside the Jedi's or any interesting traits about them. They were just Jedi's. When they showed Anakin the boy, it was made to make the viewers go like "That's Darth Vader, awww..." and that was basically all his usage, besides the horrid ending sequence with him flying the spacecraft around like a cowboy. Queen Amidala (Natalie Portman) looked like a talking statue for most of the movie, alas, getting into some action. What's up with her two different accents in the movie? The worst character by far though, that damaged the movie was Jar Jar Binks. The movie was as adult as it was, but adding Jar Jar Binks made it evident that this movie didn't know who to target, rather everyone. That's maybe why it did so well at the box office, i don't know. Overall, nothing special about this movie. I suggest watching this movie at night and drowse yourself with a lot of caffeine so you can stay awake. Yet again, when I was in the theater, not even a large coke and large popcorn could suffice me to stay awake... so watch out.
The characters of Star Wars were hardly tweaked emotionally and showed no growth throughout the movie. Unlike Episode II, there was no mysterious character inside the Jedi's or any interesting traits about them. They were just Jedi's. When they showed Anakin the boy, it was made to make the viewers go like "That's Darth Vader, awww..." and that was basically all his usage, besides the horrid ending sequence with him flying the spacecraft around like a cowboy. Queen Amidala (Natalie Portman) looked like a talking statue for most of the movie, alas, getting into some action. What's up with her two different accents in the movie? The worst character by far though, that damaged the movie was Jar Jar Binks. The movie was as adult as it was, but adding Jar Jar Binks made it evident that this movie didn't know who to target, rather everyone. That's maybe why it did so well at the box office, i don't know. Overall, nothing special about this movie. I suggest watching this movie at night and drowse yourself with a lot of caffeine so you can stay awake. Yet again, when I was in the theater, not even a large coke and large popcorn could suffice me to stay awake... so watch out.
Wow
22 June 2002
I am once again left speechless at the realm of Star Wars. The Empire Strikes Back was definitely an improvement of the original in many categories; especially action. Nobody could've pulled off most of the action scenes in Empire Strikes Back except George Lucas. Its intense, earthly feel is enough to amaze all your senses and send a chill down your back. The lightsaber battle between Luke and Darth Vader will always be a classic and will never be topped in one on one confrontations. As a whole of Star Wars, once again, the actors; Mark, Harrison, and Carrie delivered great performances that still today cannot be topped by any trio and shaped the movie into an even better film. Their chemistry kept the movie alive and full of energy needed for most of its pivotal scenes. Great job to Frank Oz, who made a funny appearance by Yoda look so real and to Mark Hamil, who also fed off Yoda just as good as Samuel L Jackson does in the new Star Wars films. All and all, 2nd best movie all-time of Star Wars, but *the* best in jaw openers and amazement- one must say to the intense galatic action... WOW. Out of 10 stars, a near perfect film with a 9.
All-time classic
22 June 2002
The best movie of the original Star Wars trilogy always gets better with me everytime i see it. The best thing about "Star Wars" is that, although its over 20 years old, it still does not fail to entertain. I can watch this for weeks and still not get tired of it. The whole cast and crew did a magnificent job and there really is no flaws in this movie despite the lightsaber sequence between Obi Wan and Darth Vader, which really if you have a good eye, just ain't lightsabers. :) This movie is the same thing to movies to Sci-Fi as Muhammed Ali to Boxing... it made it soooooo much better. Sci-Fi had been given a bad name before with the outrageously silly Star Trek and finally it had found its savior in Star Wars. Without a doubt, the best Sci-Fi film ever made has to be "Star Wars". I mean, it has everything what you need for a great film; comedy (R2-D2 and C3PO), intense action, drama, suspense, and contains unbelievable special effects for its time that no one had ever seen before. Even today if this film was released, there would be no problems. I actually like the hard-work artisan technology in the old films than I do with the new Star Wars films. Funny, isn't it? Kudos to Harrison Ford for his arrogant laughable self as Han Solo (which people actually credit him more than Indy), Mark Hamil, Carrie Fisher, and most especially Sir Alec Guiness who if Ewan McGregor aged, I could picture him looking exactly like that. Unbelievable film that should be ranked #1 in Imdb Top 250 without question. If you want quality, entertainment, durability, and fun... check out Star Wars and you won't be disappointed. Out of 10 stars, an easy 10.
Tell Your Friends