Reviews

19 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
uninteresting plot
4 December 1999
Uninteresting plot with a lot of confusion in the entire movie, i think the only thing that kept me from turning this movie off was the performance that Nathan Davis gave as Kane. Watch this movie for yourself and you may understand what i am saying
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
good sequel
4 December 1999
slow start, but it's a good sequel. I liked the idea of an 1800s preacher as the villain and an indian medicine man as the one trying to help out the Freeling family. Performance by Julian Beck was superb, very good for an actor who hasn't been in many movies.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Poltergeist (1982)
let me tell you
4 December 1999
Let me tell you, this movie had every nightmare that any child would have, clowns, ghosts, corpses, etc. This had everything and all the award winning special effects and details made this movie work. I don't usually rate movies, but i must rate this one a 10 on a 1 to 10 scale.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Give me a break
16 November 1999
Oh please, talk about a movie with no imagination, they should have stopped this movie after the first one, take my word for it, this cheap flick will make you ill just by how uninteresting the movie is. I cannot think of anything positive about this movie.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Good try
16 November 1999
OK, I admit it was a good try for a sequel, but there is one problem: have you ever noticed that 95% of the time when they make a sequel to a horror movie, the story usually has somebody getting out of an asylum, for example: the stepfather 2, the dentist 2, etc. Nice try for a sequel but I didn't think it panned out that well.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
really strange
16 November 1999
I could remark this movie as a strange and stupid cheap flick, there is so much mentioned about the ending but i will not get into that. The movie itself was actually a cheap, low-budget flick with some very unusual murders and silly moments in the movie. I could only think one actual good thing about this film, THE VIDEO IS OUT OF PRINT, THANK HEAVENS
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ridiculous but enjoyable
8 November 1999
This one was a little ridiculous but it was enjoyable, it had the motivation like the second one and Michael Myers appeared to move a little faster in this one. The thing that really screwed this one up was the thorn cult, if that had never been in the movie, the movie would have been alot better.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The best one in the series
8 November 1999
This one is the best one in the series because it had alot of action, suspense, drama, romance, and so much more, it had basically everything and George Wilbur's performance as Michael Myers was certainly done in a genius manner. It made me feel better about the Halloween movies after watching the third one.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
I must say
8 November 1999
I must say that this is possibly the best one in the entire series. the thing that made this one work was that it had bits and parts of comedy along with the slashing and they chose the correct actor to play Jason, if anybody saw the movie highway to hell, he played hellcop. This fifth sequel was entertaining, funny, gruesome, and the timing was right, to all the cast and crew i say way to go
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
What a waste
8 November 1999
What a waste of a film. This was more like the Scooby-Doo type of movie where Fred says "let's see who this really is, behind the Jason mask". For those who have not seen this could watch it for interest, but Ii must say that it was a waste of a film. If you pay close attention to the film, the killer practically gives himself away.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
I don't know
8 November 1999
Warning: Spoilers
I don't know how to respond to this movie, i don't know whether to say i like it or hate it. I like this movie because it had a break from the original idea, i bet John Carpenter just wanted to try something different. I hated the movie because it was stupid, corny, pointless, and full of ridiculous characters, the thing that really bugged me in this movie was that stupid song through the entire movie, if John Carpenter wants to make a movie about madmen, robots, and evil, let him write another sequel to the terminator and leave the halloween series exactly the way it was to begin with.
11 out of 47 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
not a bad idea
8 November 1999
Not a bad idea for a third installment in the series. This one was different because it was the only one in the series that was in 3D. It also consisted of a group of teenagers who wanted to party, but guess who was there with the cake. I can tell you that this one marked the territory of the hockey mask. The cast was made up of new comers that may not have lasted long in the movies.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
five years later
8 November 1999
Five years later, after the bloodbath at camp crystal lake, the legend of Jason Voorhees made its way to a sequel to the horrifying series. This one picks up where the predecessor left off. New people go to the camp training to be camp counselors, but apparently somebody got another idea and one by one they disappear. The cast wasn't bad and the movie itself wasn't bad either, you'd have to see for yourself.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
cleverly thought
8 November 1999
Cleverly thought up movie with the basic slasher feature. A summer camp re-opens after tragedies that happened in 1957, some years later a mysterious person stalks the camp, and the question is who is it? nobody knows. A chilling movie that will keep you going every step of the way, boring in some spots, but it will get you to keep watching.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
pointless
3 September 1999
You know what? This sequel was pointless but it turned out better that I thought it would. Terry O'Quinn is back and the rest of the cast is different. This sequel was actually thought up with no imagination, but it worked out well. I admit one thing, O'Quinn's performance was just as great in the original, and the rest of the cast was better than the original.
9 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
good movie
3 September 1999
Good movie, good cast and the title role is played brilliantly by Terry O'Quinn whose performance made this movie one of the best thrillers for the 1980's. Nothing original, just a good movie that deserved more than it got. The rest of the cast makes the movie interesting.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Hitchcock style movie
21 August 1999
This movie had its moments, but i actually enjoyed it. Hitchcock style film with an interesting plot. If you like hitchcock, you will like this. The cast is good with Kelly McGillis and Jeff Daniels very well casted and Mandy Patinkin is excellent in a rare role.
17 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Pete's Dragon (1977)
movie with a terrific story
21 August 1999
This movie is one of the best that i have seen that was made by the disney company. Parents who are not aware of this movie should be and their children should watch this movie for the entertainment and the magic that Disney has to offer.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Chicago Hope (1994–2000)
Chicago Hope is a very well made drama and it involves doctors looking out for the welfare of patients, it's a must see
20 January 1999
When Chicago Hope first came on the air in 1994, the cast was superb, it starred Adam Arkin, Mandy Patinkin and Hector Elizondo, what a shame that Mandy Patinkin Left. I really thought he made the show work out well and gave it humor and excitement. I hope he returns.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed