Reviews

18 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Fight Club (1999)
10/10
Best movie I ever saw
19 October 1999
I know it sounds cocky, but it's absolutely true. The violence is unfliching and some the scenes are rough and very hard to take, but it's worth the wait. The ending is the best ending I've ever had the unfortunate luck to have to sit through. The whole cast is amazing. Brad Pitt rocks, Edward Norton kicks so much ass, Helena Bonham Carter is terrific (as usual), Jared Leto is surprising (considering his dead-beat performance in "Urban Legend") and Meat Loaf is perfect as Bob. All in all, one of the best. Probably will be overlooked by the Oscars because of it's violent content.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Better than it deserves to be
13 October 1999
As I entered this film, I had it firmly established in my mind that I was going to enjoy this movie, but not like it, a la "I Still Know What You Did Last Summer". But boy was I surprised. The cinematography was perfect, the direction was effecient, the sound effects were very effective, and some of the acting was astonishing. Of course, there is stage actress Emily Bergl, who really made my jaw drop in many scenes, especially during her rampage. Dylan Bruno and Zachery Ty Bryan (surprise! he can act! what a shocker!) were believable as dumb-level jocks (aren't they all?). I saw this film twice in theaters, and then rented it on video. I've had it for two days now, and I've watched it five times. I didn't know that was Mena Suvari as Lisa. She was great in "American Beauty". She looked great in "American Pie". Anyways, I think that this film was highly underappreciated and overly lambasted. It only made about $20 million in theaters, which is pathetic, because something like "The Waterboy" cranked up $165 million, God knows how. Anyways, "The Rage: Carrie 2" is well worth a look.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Better than I thought it would be
9 October 1999
Everyone seems to hate this movie. I don't know why. It's not nearly as bad as some other of those pointless movies. The entire cast is excellent. Christina Ricci is really funny as a Brooklyn teen tramp, and Gaby Hoffman is unrecognizable under pounds of makeup. Paul Rudd is excellent as a foul-mouthed guy; a far cry from "The Opposite of Sex" and "Romeo and Juliet". Roger Ebert was whining about how no one seems to know how to smoke with flair. Who cares? He's a loser anyways, so we will just dismiss his opinion as unimportant, okay? Anyways, rent it if you have two hours to fill.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Scream 2 (1997)
10/10
What the... ?
9 October 1999
Are you people retarded or just plain stupid? "No likable characters", "no suspense", "poor performance by Neve Campbell"... What the hell are you people on? This is by far THE best horror sequel of all time. Much more solid than ever before, the horror genre reached it's peak with this film's release. Someone here wrote that the killers were not significant to the story.... Hum, did you even WATCH the movie, or did you just scan through it? The killers here were even more relevant than in the first one. Granted, it couldn't have happened without the first one, but darn... Also someone wrote that there is one death every five minutes. Were you drunk when you watched the movie? After the first ten minutes, there's not a death scene in over an hour. I loved the first one, and to try to top it was a little too much to ask for. But this movie gave one heck of a fight to try to do it, and I personally think it did in fact top it. The person who wrote that Wes Craven never has likable characters... You need to get those arrows out of your ass. Johnny Depp and Heather Langenkamp from "Nightmare on Elm Street"? Julie in "Wes Craven's New Nightmare"? Angela Bassett in "Vampire in Brooklyn"? And ALL the characters in "Scream" and "Scream 2"? Even the bitchy ones were rendered entertaining. I was left literally with my mouth wide open while reading your comments. You trash brilliant movies like this, and praise such idiotic, trashy and terrible films like "The Waterboy", "Big Daddy" and other complete and utter s***. I can't wait for "Scr3am", because they say it's more mature than the two others, which is just what this series needs; one more excellent entry to make this the best horror series in history. Praise Wes Craven, Kevin Williamson, Neve Campbell, and everybody else attached to either films.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
God-awful German/Italian movie
24 September 1999
This film is about a woman who misses her plane, and is forced to stay at a decayed hotel for a night. During her stay, she observes the mentally ill man staying in the room next to her's. Virtually devoid of intelligent filmmaking or writing, or any type of credible acting, this poorly dubbed movie starts off pointless and ends pointless. Plus, it's needlessly graphic. Whether or not you'll like this movie depends of your abilities to watch Bruce Robinson's scrotum for fifteen minutes nonstop.
23 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Complete and utter crap
16 September 1999
What a waste. I was hoping for this film to recreate the kind of claustrophobic terror that was the only reason to watch the first film, but instead, the entire film is an excuse for Jennifer Love Hewitt to show off her body. The plot is so pathetic it's not even worth mentionning; ditto for the script, characters, settings, acting, directing, production values... Brandy Norwood's "performance" here wasn't even worth the money it cost to the producers to fly her to L.A. for a meeting to ask her to star. Her dialogue doesn't make her character seem very stupid, but since she is, she makes everytihng and everyone around her look and act dumb, but once she's gone, they all seem smart. Only Matthew Settle brings any minimal charm to his character, but he does have a lot of the script's worst lines. The mentionned third entry in this series, once again featuring Ben Willis, will confirm this series the 1990s equivalent to "Friday the 13th"... People will be going to see these movies to see who gets mangled, and how badly, not for plot, suspense, character, etc... Grade: F
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Brutal...
16 September 1999
This was a brutal movie and a completely unfaithful adaptation of the Lois Duncan novel. But, despite it's flaws, I can still say I was intrigued by it and the overall effect had a lasting impression. The shocks were effeciently staged, as were the murders, but the plot was far too strained to maintain realism, while the acting was confused; neither actor seems to know how to portray their character, least of all Freddie Prinze Jr., whose entire performance is based on frowning and trying to look deep in thought. It's no wonder how he became an actor (his father is, after all, Freddie Prinze), but he could have used a few acting lessons. He's the teen set's equivalent to Keanu Reeves. The film itself, however, is watchable, but not a classic. Grade: B
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Donkey Skin (1970)
Exquisite and timeless
14 September 1999
I saw this film way back in 1987, but I still remember it. Not much information is given, so I'll enlighten you. It's about a poor young girl ("Cinderella" style), with whom a rich prince falls in love. As she bakes him a cake (on his demand), she puts her ring in it, so he'll know she likes him too. Then, she asks him for three dresses, one for summer time, one for autumn, and one for winter (if I remember correctly). Then, she asks him a final gift; the skin of the donkey who poohs coins and ensures the land's survival. The whole point of the movie is to find out whether or not he will win her and therefore bring his land to financial ruin. Brilliant story. When I was a kid, I thought it was a sequel to "Cinderella" or "Sleeping Beauty", and, indeed, that's what it feels like.
5 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Would-be satire
12 September 1999
This film begins as an account of two brutal serial killers who always leave one victim behind to tell the story of the rampage. But anything Oliver Stone had to say about it is lost with his completely inane (and insane) filmmaking style. Scenes shift from cartoon to black-and-white to color to slow-motion to brief cuts of countless television series and old horror movies back and forth, without ever interrupting the dialogue. Stone's attention to detail this time looks sick, like filming a live scorpion getting run over, or Tommy Lee Jones licking his lips, or a close-up of Robert Downey Jr's hand injury. The solid satire is not helped by the uncontrolled performance of Jones, Downey Jr, or Juliette Lewis. Only Woody Harrelson is credible. But I have to say sometimes Lewis is credible, cause when I see a movie with her, I just think of this perversity.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Stunning and funny
6 September 1999
Almost as zany as a John Waters film, but not quite. This one is sweet but then qets violent. Everything in this film fell properly into place. The ostracized elements, teen angst, jealousy, everything. Winona Ryder was stunningly beautiful.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Celebrity (1998)
One heck of a piece of...
5 September 1999
Just flat-out "annoying" is the only way to describe this new "comedy" from the master of overrated films like "Deconstructing Harry" and "Everyone Says I Love You" himself, Woody Allen. When I first heard of this film, I was glad to know that Allen himself wouldn't be on-screen, and that's what convinced me to rent this movie; I don't know, he just bugs me. Well, thanks for nothin', Allen. You cast Kenneth Branagh and told him to imitate your every movie. Beurk! Thanks for stealing nearly two hours of my life. I would have quit in disgust or fastforwarded (like I did for other ensemble work pieces like Robert Altman's 1994 fiasco "Ready to Wear") if I didn't like the cast. But even Leonardo DiCaprio couldn't save this trash. The sole redeeming value was Winona Ryder's bright performance as a perky extra in films. She's only in it for about a minute in the first hour or so, but she becomes progressively more important. She looked great, with her "Beetlejuice" hair. I think that might have have been an homage to "Beetlejuice", which was released ten years ago when "Celebrity" come out in theaters. Anyways, don't waste your time.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Mermaids (1990)
9/10
Well worth it
5 September 1999
I first saw this film in 1991, and thought it was pretty bad. but now, eight years later, I've matured. So I rented it again, and I thought it was very good. The photography was startling, the acting was overall excellent, but it would be fair to mention Winona Ryder and Christina Ricci as the standouts. The whole thing of Charlotte (Ryder) thinking she's pregnant was initially moronic, but became more and more convincing. Winona is perfect at portraying an embarrassed teenage girl. Well worth the time and money to watch it. Plus it hasn't dated much; it still looks very modern, even though it's set in the early sixties.
11 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
another hidden treasure
4 September 1999
Winona Ryder has a big collection of forgotten but first-rate movies, and this is no exception. The acting was really good, and the music on the soundtrack made it memorable. Well worth a look, and a second, and a third...
21 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Heathers (1988)
10/10
What a stunner
4 September 1999
I rented it cause of Winona Ryder. I wasn't excepting much. Wow, was I surprised! I saw it three times that night, and then I bought it. It's one my favorite films, and it made me like weird, dark, independent movies such as this. Watch it; it's well worth your time. Winona was terrific.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
light and fluffy
4 September 1999
Just like a Twinky. Momentarily yummy but with no real substance. The acting was good, but not good enough to keep interest. Winona Ryder was pretty good as Myra, but she did slip into "what am I doing here?" mode sometimes. But, it's good though.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Beetlejuice (1988)
Cool movie
4 September 1999
This was a pretty good movie. The bad special effects added much to the fun. Very entertaining; some of the performances are roller-coaster rides, such as Michael Keaton's as the title character. Winona Ryder was born to play Lydia.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Aliens (1986)
10/10
One of the best sci-fi sequels ever
4 September 1999
Sigourney Weaver's Oscar-nod as Best Actress for this was so accurate; her depiction of external and internal pain was right on the mark, her facial expressions were always vibrant and emotional. Oh, yeah. The movie's excellent too.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Alien (1979)
10/10
What a knockout
4 September 1999
This film I saw for the first time in 1989. I was only 6 years old. It frightened me unrecognizable. It still does. The whole concoction of the crew members being done off by a virtually unseen monster was terrific, and slathered with Ridley Scott's directorial style, it was relentless. Excellent film; still holds up today. The sequels are also excellent; I think this is the best science-fiction series ever, even better than the vastly overrated "Star Wars" series.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed