blackholepcs Reviews

Meet the Spartans (2008)

Better than In the Name of the King

[6/10 · 1 February 2008]

Not the best or funniest movie ever, but still made me laugh a few times. And it was definitely better than the steaming pile of cat barf that is In the Name of the King.

Which happens to be directed by a steaming pile of cat barf. With a dirty diaper in flames on top of it.

The Paris Hilton bits were a bit stupid, but the Leonidas character was just hilarious. The scenes with his son made me laugh the most. The whole Rocky thing was pretty lame, also.

All in all, it's not the worst movie ever, but could have been done a bit better.

In the Name of the King: A Dungeon Siege Tale (2007)

I can't believe how awful this is.

[1/10 · 1 February 2008]

Let me state for the record that I love movies, and I watch movies all the time. Fantasy, drama, horror, suspense, romance, sci-fi, you name it. This is one movie that I just couldn't watch all the way through. I knew this movie wasn't going to be that great, but man was I OVER-estimating this pile of crap.

Horrible, horrible directing to good actors makes, for one movie at least, horrible horrible actors. Ray Liota should have NEVER done this movie. Same for Statham. LeeLee, well, she's not really that great an actress in the first place, so...

John Rhys-Davies : I am saddened by your choice to be in this movie. You are one of my favorite actors, and you have just put the worst credit of your career into the books.

The music was just god awful. Same with the costumes, especially the goblin-wannabes. The most obvious rubber suits I've seen since black and white movies.

I don't normally comment on movies, but this one is just crap garbage. Uwe needs to be thrown out on his ass and black listed from EVER doing movies again. I mean, c'mon. How the hell do you bank roll the WORST director ever? Look at his history. Bomb after bomb after bomb. The deusche bag hasn't had a real money maker since, well, NEVER!

The Number 23 (2007)

Very excellent film, despite the reviews

[10/10 · 23 February 2007]

This movie was very well done. The acting was tight (though there are a few scenes that fall somewhat flat, as with any movie), the script was well written, and it is pretty spooky. This movie has great atmosphere, and Jim Carrey DOES show that he can be a GOOD serious/dramatic/non-slapstick actor.

I've never been a big fan of Virginia Madsen, but she plays her part pretty well, and is overall a credit to the film. Logan Lerman, who was excellent in Butterfly Effect, does a very good job in The Number 23, and is well on his way to becoming a big ticket actor.

I for one don't trust newspaper/television/magazine reviews of movies, because they tend to laud and tout and advertise and worship crap films with little or no story, horrible acting/directing/editing, and movies that are just plain boring as hell, even if the acting is good. They also despise/hate/put-down/trash movies that break molds on what they think an actor/director/producer SHOULD do. I think they only reason this movie is getting bad reviews is that the so-called reviewers are getting a case of diaper rash over Jim Carrey doing a non-Pet-Detecive-Almighty-Dumber-Liar movie.

If you like movies that have a plot, a storyline, good effects, great acting, excellent atmosphere, superb editing, great directing, great sound, and that is not full of itself or boring to the point of making Bridges of Madison County look like Die Hard, then go see this movie. Otherwise go stare at wet paint until it dries.