Skywalker02 Reviews

Daredevil (2003)

Good movie but it suffers from sequel-itus

[27 March 2003]

This is the latest Marvel comics Adaptation. After the success Spider-man, Marvel Comics films have more hope of being made but must now be compared to the standard that it has now set.

Daredevil is the story about Matt Murdock. Murdock was a kid raised in a rough part of New York called "Hells-Kitchen". After a tragic accident, Matt is rendered blind but develops his other scenes to more then compensate for the loss of his sight. His radar-sharp intuition ,and a latter streak of vengence, has Murdock to become a hero of the people. He's a trial lawyer by day and crime avenger by night.

Daredevil/Murdock is played by Oscar-winner Ben Afflack. His performance of the part is good but not spectacular. He is joined by "Alias" star Jennifer Garner. Even though she is not given a chance to stretch from her Alias role, she does handle herself well in the films more dynamic fight scenes. The films biggest scene stealler is rising star Colin Farrall. Farrall plays Daredevils arch nemesis "Bullseye". Bullseye is a psychotic, yet terminally accurate marksman. He never misses and can kill with anything from throwing-stars to (believe it or not) peanuts.

This film seems to handle the continuity of the comic-book well. Some fans my have issues with the fact that the character of the Kingpin is played by African-American actor Michael Clarke Duncun. Duncun delivers a top-notch performance of the comic-book bad-guy with style, dignity and class. As Duncun said himself ,this is a role that should not be looked at as a color ,in the hopes that that the racial barriers are lifted in Hollywood to open the door for more actors. (Fine words from a fine actor)

This film is darker and a bit more violent then Spider-man. It should be considered for viewers older and interested in a story with a harder edge then the afore mentioned film.

This film hits a home-run in its exposition to bring first-timers of the comic series up to speed. The biggest problem with this film is that it suffers one of the worst cases of sequel-itus this side of a B-rated horror movie. The film does not tie-up the events of the story loose enough to have some closure on the film in the event of no sequel, but makes all outcomes of the films major characters lay the tracks for the next installment. This film also looks like some of its aspects were lifted from other comic franchises (ala Batman, The Crow and Spider-man). The film does seem to fight hard to declare its own identity, but gets stuck in some areas of back-drop and plot-movement.

All in all, Daredevil was worth the ticket price to head out to the popcorn palace for some good action, better visuals and decent performances. After all, these days if a film can't at least accomplish that, then your better off waiting for it to come to video. But fair warning, the film will have you wanting more, weather you like it or not.

Star Trek: Nemesis (2002)

Dont' Be So Vain

[26 February 2003]

Am I the only person to notice that this was nothing more but a cheap rip-off of "The Wrath od Kahn"?

Well what is the story for the forth movie of the next generation crew of the Enterprise. It goes like this.

The Romulin sister race, the Remons, have formed a confederacy against the Romulin government (what does this sound like) The leader of this revolution is a genetic CLONE of Capt. Jean-Luc Picard. The confederates manage to do this by dissolving the Romulin REPUBLIC (getting warmer). So now the next target for the Remons, also led by the Remon VICROY (ding, ding, ding) is non-other then the crew of the Enterprise and earth. Okay, I take my first statement back. They're ripping off Wrath of Kahn and Attack of the Clones.

As we all know, if you can't be original, then at least have some good execution. Well this film had none to speak of. There is thirty minutes of banter between Picard and his evil clone Shinzon and then the rest is no different then the average dog-fight the you would see every Wednesday night a 9pm.

I would normally warn people about the spoilers that are about to come up, but this is for your own good to know. The climax of the movie is a re-hash of two for more superior Star Trek films. Riker throws down with the Viceroy in a fist-a-cuffs brawl straight out of "The Search for Spock" and Data sacrifices his batteries for the crew of the enterprise straight out of, well you get the idea. I guess the producers are use the outcome of this film to hold Data for ransom. You see the do want to insult everyones intelligence by milking the death of Data just to bring him back in another movie. How Shameless

I was recently watching a re-run of of the two-part episode "The Gambit" and I remembered when Star Trek was still awesome, but those days are sadly over.

Star Trek: Nemesis (2002)

This movie makes me feel like Simon Cowell. "That was absolutly horrible".

[23 January 2003]

So where do I start with what went wrong in this movie. First off ,I have to address that I am a fan of Star Trek. Normally films like this , with a large fanbase (Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, James Bond, Star Wars) will still manage to please the hardcore fans. Not here.

The story breaks down like this:

The Remons (the sister race of the Romulins that seem to have been completly unheard of for the last 30 some-odd years) are revolting against the Romulins. When they're done with them, they plan of taking out the Federation. This turn of events gets in the way of the Honeymoon plans for Cmdr. Riker and new bride Cmdr. Troi. The Enterprise crew go to investigate and Capt. Picard finds out that this Revolution is being lead by his genetic clone named Shinzon. The two have their banter for the next half hour and and the the rest of the film is the galactic dog-fight between the crew of the Enterprise and Shinzons' ship the Simitor.

There's a truck-load of problems with this movie that render it beyond redemption. First off, the film really flirts with disaster by throwing around terms like clone , republic and viceroy. (All bias aside) If you don't want to be accused of pimping off another space franchise, use less of it's frequent terms.

But the problems don't end there, not by a long-shot. Shinzon develops the hots for newly-wed Deanna Troi. It's never explained why. It would have made sence if there were more of an explaniation why, like he was attracted to her empathic abilities or something more obvious. Instead we are only lead to believe that there aren't any other women on Remus and that Shinzon is not into red-heads. We also never really know why Shinzon want's to destroy earth. It's stated that he sets out to destroy the Federation, but not why he plans to start with earth. He just hates earth for some reason and want's to destroy it.

The film goes for double trouble when we find out that Data has a clone of his own called B-4. This was the films attempt at comic relief ,but the result is as funny as the characters name. Not funny ,just lame. The film makes a hopeless attempt make a have Picard relate to the average movie watcher be showing him work his mo-jo in his own Federation-issued dune-bugger. This attempt also fails miserably by being just as esoteric as the rest of the film.

Now for the rest of the film. There was no mystery to where the events of this film were going. We all knew that Shinzon was going to lock-horns with Picard, but the film still needs to hammer out the useless banter between them before the fireworks. And what about those fireworks? They were nothing special. The space-battle in this movie was merely a K-mart version of the much more superior "Wrath of Kahn", in addition to everything else. It was just so painful to watch this film knowing that it as a bad version of ST2. There's nothing worse in movies then a bad remake.

I've noticed that many of the positive reviews of this film come from people who have not seen any previous Star Trek film. Here's a tip, go out to the video store and rent "Wrath of Kahn". Trust me, your opinion of this film will then be quite different.

I really think that the DEA should have camped outside of the theaters showing this movie. Because you would have to be out of your mind to say that this was a good movie. The average person would think that astronomical drop in ticket sales would be a hint of how bad this movie could be. There's no need to say that Lord of the Rings owned the box office because the wealth is still enough to be spread to movies like, Harry Potter, Die Another Day, Maid in Manhatton, and (believe it or not) Just Married. It is about to go down in franchise history as being the lowest grossing Star Trek movie. That's right, even less then the dreadful Star Trek V: The Final Frontier. So I guess it has gone where no Federation crew has gone before, straight down the tubes.

To sum up: Speaking as a film watcher - this film was terrible. Speaking as a Star Trek fan - this movie was horrible.

As far as even numbered films go - this movie was junk.

The Star Trek films have finally been run into the ground.

Signs (2002)

There's a monster in my closet, can i have a glass of water?

[3 August 2002]

I will refrain from saying anything about this movie to blow the thrills and handsome payoffs. Just see this movie. See it before someone ruins it for you. This film has tons of mystery, drama, suspense , comedy, family love and sheer terror. That's right, this film is so scary that it puts typical horror films with less plot, bad acting, no heart, and no logic, to complete and utter shame. Those slasher film-makers could take some notes on how to do a real scary movie. As for the performances, Mel Gibson is superb as always. Cherry Jones holds her own. I was especially pleased by the dynamic performance by Joaquin Phoenix. But the two children in this film steal the show as well as your heart, much like the way Haley Joe Osmont did in "The Sixth Sence."

So why are you still reading this review? Get out of the house NOW and see "SIGNS". It is, as far as I'm concerned, movie of the year.

3 for 3: M.Night, YOU RULE.

Tempest (1982)

The only magic in this film is Raul Julia

[21 June 2002]

The last time that I saw this was years ago, and I thought that I was too young to understand the themes of this movie. I just recently seen this movie again and now I realize that I wasn't naive, the movie was just bad.

Here's a breakdown of the story. John Cassavetes plays Phillup Dimitrius, an emotionally and spiritually burned-out casino designer for a rich Greek industrialist. Phillup feels empty inside because he marriage is crumbling from his wifes' longing for her old acting carrier, he's lost touch with his teenage daughter and can't stand his bosses health-ailing temper and brown-nosing cronies. To top things off, his two unhappy worlds come together in the worst way, when he finds out that his wife (Gena Rowlands) cheating with his boss.

Phillup decides to make a clean break from every (and I mean everything) by going off to the remote islands of Greece. He then goes crazy in a different way. Nothing could be better for Phil. He's indulgently happy with his daughter and new Gypsy-like new girlfriend (Susan Sarandon). Things are fine for him until his wife, along with Phil's old boss come in search of Phil ,to bring Phils' daughter Miranda (played by brat packer Molly Ringwald) home to New York.

I could not get over how boring this film is. The strange thing is this. This film was made twenty years ago. It had such potential for being a ground-breaking film. It told it's story out of continuity. This narrative aspect was what helped films like Pulp Fiction, Out of Sight and Memento become monster hits. The film also dealt with the theme of a successful businessman feeling empty inside, a theme used in films like Fight Club, American Beauty and Office Space. The film also had the early performances of Molly Ringwald and Susan Sarandon. The two of them get into a charming rendition of "Why do Fools Fall in Love".

None of these things can save this movie because they are all used in the most clumsy and boring way. The conversations in this film is just constant banter of Phil bickering with all of his associations. It takes far too long to get past the exposition to even hold ones interest. When the gang get to Greece the story goes from boring to drown-myself-in-the-lake boring. Phil gets far too self-indulgent to even make sence.

The climax of this film, the headlining storm, comes and goes. It practacly contributes nothing to the plot. There's even a usless scene where Phil trys to come off as if he's come to some kind of spiritual wisdom, by killing a goat and just comes off as being more arrogant and mentally disturbed.

The film tries to to add a sub-plot of Miranda forming a romance with the son of Phils' boss, played by Sam Robards. Sadly his presence is a electrifying as watching paint dry. Their relationship is even more predictable and tediously useless.

The only thing that keeps me from screaming is complete anguish and boredom is the winning performance of the late-great Raul Julia. Julia plays the local hermit Kalibanos. His character adds the only amount of scale to the story. He foils Cassavete wonderfully. He's crazy, but in the good way. He's eccentric. He gives the film little life by playing the claranette, singing to his goats and making advances to Miranda with his trinatron. This film would have been better if it got rid of half of the exposition, all of the useless banter between Phil and his wife and put more focus on Phil's relationship with Kalibanos. Sadly, the film overlooks this more entertaining plot-point.

To sum up, unless your going to use your DVD to jump to the moments with Raul Julia, don't bother wasting your time with this film.

Jason X (2001)

What keeps these movies going???

[10 June 2002]

Now I've seen it all

Jason in space. I guess Disneyland was closed and the Blair Witch took over his turf.

In this tenth entry in the ongoing horror series, Jason Vorhees is put into cryo-stasis and brought back into the 25th century. He's on a spaceship and gets back on track with his killing spree. What more is there to say? Oh, sorry, he gets an upgrade, ROBO-JASON. He can now play Windows 95 and DOS on his Hockey mask and his breathing is now in surround sound.

I will never figure out why there is still a demand for these films to keep getting made, other then to see if they can actually make it to # 13. Oh yeah, now that particular date no longer has any application to the film series. But then again it didn't matter in the first place since the date was just put in to be a selling point for the movie.

This film not only sports the played-out theme of the unstoppable, silent, slow walking slasher, but sports another played-out "there's a scary ,killer monster on our spaceship ,so let's blow it up and split!". When will sci-fi writers realize that there are other horror/sci-fi plots then the one from "Alien"?

So it seems that no one in the supposedly sophisticated science team is any smarter then the dim-witted co-eds from Camp Crystal Lake. All the same tactical mistakes are made by them like pre-marital sex, foolish curiosity , and now a new one. The thought of using Jasons' cell regeneration to turn a profit. Every last murder is seen a mile away, so it's quite predictable. Each death is treated with a manner of gory originality, whoopie.

The film uses the Sci-Fi motif to try to breath new life to the franchise, but there is nothing in this film that make the story more interesting, just more lethargic. There is even on scene where the film tries to be a joke on itself when one of the characters tries to distract Jason with a VR version of Camp Crystal Lake and a couple of Campers asking Jason if he wants to smoke pot and have premarital sex. What a Knee-slapper. And as for Jasons' "Upgrade", it happens in the last ten minutes of the film and he doesn't do much with it. He just looks like he belongs on "The Power Rangers".

I didn't expect much from this film, I wanted to try to get some idea to what the appeal of this film series is to the public, but I still don't understand why there is still a demand to see further installments about this terrorist.

The only thing that this film series seems to present is more and more creative and vulgar ways to kill one-dimensional characters. There are rules to Horror films and they have to have a logic to them. Jaws was the age old concept of Man vs Nature. Nightmare on Elm Street dealt with the complex theme of dreams. Scream explored teen copy-catters. Jason just seems to be a living contraction with legs and a hockey mask. He's brown, crusty, nothing kills him and he just seems to come out when teens are having un-safe sex.

This film is said to be the audition to see if the studio will go forth and make the supposed "Jason vs Freddy" movie. Even after getting the snott knocked out of him by Spider-man two weeks later, the studio says it's going to happen. I don't get it , I just don't get it. Indiana Jones, Superman, Batman and the Ghostbusters get the highest demand for a sequel and they don't get made. But Jason films seem to make the Energizer Bunny green with envy. A mystery never to be solved

To sum up, I don't think I need to warn anyone not to waste their money on Jason X cause his slow walking seems to be fast enough to get him to video.

Star Trek: Generations (1994)

To arrogantly go where no Star Trek film has gone before

[10 March 2002]

This is the film that proudly welcomes the crew of the starship Enterprise NCC-1701:D into the ranks of mainstream films. It is also what I'd like to refer to as the beginning of the end of the Star Trek franchise.

"Generations" opens up with the maiden voyage of the the Enterprise "B". The old heros of the previous starship Kirk, Scotty and Chekov come along to help send the new ship on her way. Just when things seem calm and just a tad bit depressing , a distress signal is sent and the crew of rookies are thrown into a rescue mission to save a group of alien exiles from immediate destruction from a temporal ribbon called "The Nexus." Kick & Co. have to take charge of the situation as the freshmen crew stumble their way through the mission. The end result is Kick sacrificing his life to save the crew and exiles. So far the first fifteen minutes of the film is awesome. Now the story flashes forward to the Crew of the Enterprise-D.

It seems that one of the survivors (Dr.Soran) of the nexus incident , seventy-eight years ago, is Hell-bent to getting back to the mysterious ribbon, even if it means wiping out a planets population.

The story pretty much drags on from there. In other places of the story, it makes crucially bad decisions in the narrative. This film give the impression the it wanted the new series to step out of the shadow of the original series. The attempt of making a name for itself came off more as biting the hand that feeds it.

The whole presence of Capt. James T. Kick seem more of a selling tactic rather then an important plot point. The main idea for having any of the members of the old crew join the new crew would be to honorably pass the torch. The other main reason for having Jim Kirk in this film is to see him in action on the bridge and to see how he compares and contrasts in leadership styles with Jean-Luc Picard on the bride. This did not happen. Kirk is never seen again in the film until the climactic final stand-off with Soran.

The pacing of this film is done quite lethargically. First-time film director, Dave Carson, snails his way through the exposition points about the Nexus with, not one, but two sappy and boring dream sequences in the nexus and and a long and annoying crash sequence of of the Enterprise on Veridian III that is so irritating, that it seriously rivals the boat crash in "Speed 2: Cruise control." To top it all of the obligatory Dog-fight sequence is a pitiful one, where the Enterprise obliterates a Kligon Bird of Prey with a single mesally shot. Yes the Enterprise "D" is destroyed in this film, but the shameless and heartless dismemberment doesn't end there. Data makes the life determining choice of putting the infamous emotion chip in his brain, and no longer is able to contribute his impartial and objective wisdom to Capt. Picard and Co. His main task is to now hold-up the other slow-points, as the films' comic relief. There is one good scene between Picard and Data in the staller cartography room, but that is all that Data's emotion chip is worth. And worst of all the legendary James Tiberious Kirk meets his unfortunate fate from the hands of Soran and the arrogant producers of the Star Trek franchise. Kirk assists Picard in thwarting Sorans plans at immortality and loses his life in the process, but not in an exciting and honorable fashion, but more of a shameless mishap that insults the legacy of the character. What the powers that be fail to realize is that the success of a franchise rests in the appeal of is characters. If the public likes the characters enough then they'll be inclined to see the story. By killing-off one of the most popular characters, you also kill-off the amount of fans in the process. It seems that they didn't learn from the previous event of Spocks' death in "The Wrath of Kahn" that triggered a enormous letter campaign to bring him back. But at least Spock was given an honorable service following his brave sacrifice while Kirk just gets covered up by some stones that Picard found. The producers of "The Transformers" also learned this lesson the hard way when they killed off their bold leader, which immediately destroyed the franchise, as well as the hopes of future films. The difference here is that the TV audience got seven years to warm up to Picard & Co. while Rodimus & Co. got only the first 30 minutes of the film.

So the film practically makes the audience feel like that little girl in the story as she carelessly gets carried away from her beloved teddy bear in the mist of disaster. If TNG truly wanted to step out of the shadow of the original series , it should have done so without all the shameless dismemberment. It could have been able to stand on it's own with the plot points about "The Nexus" and Data's emotion chip. The events of this film also put a hex on the future films in the series as well as the bogus, scape-goat superstition about ST films, saying that the odd numbered sequels are doomed to fail. Th next film is due out this thanksgiving, but no one seems to care. There was a time when ST films created quite the buzz, but it seems that Generations was the point of contingency where the fans just lost interest. This apparently is what happens when the people in charge don't have enough respect for a film franchise that ran strong for twelve years.

In shot, this film was trying to be another tragic chapter in the mythos that put everyones beloved characters in the worst possible situations and tested their strengths and spirits, much like Wrath of Kahn of The Empire Strikes Back. Unfortunately leave a bad taste in our mouths and an empty place in our hearts.

Blade (1998)

"Your one of them." "No, I'm something else"

[15 October 2001]

One of the few comic book adaptations that keeps it real to the comic.

Blade is based on the Marvel Comics series about "the Daywalker" (half Vamp, half human) and his fight against the Vampires that prey on humans.

In small terms, this movie rocks. It's got some kick-ass action sequences. Wesley Snipes shows the peak of his Martial Arts abilities and swordsmanship. The movie has equal parts of action, horror, comedy and mystery.

Fans of the comic may arque that Snipes doesn't look too much like Blade, but he delivers the goods. The film also has adecent supporting cast, with Kris Kristopherson, N'Bushe Wright and villianous scene stealer Stephon Dorf as Deakon Frost.

Be advised that this is a Vampire movie, so there are enormous amounts of blood-letting violence. There's even a rave party scene that would make Ann Rice drool over.

All in all this is a first-rate action extrodinare

The Twisted Tales of Felix the Cat (1995–1997)

Too Funny

[5 October 2001]

This is one of these over-looked animated gems. this show was nothing like ever other brainless hunk of junk version of Felix. This show was totally hilarious. The comedy was intelligent enough to be appreciated by adults. Nuff said.

Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back (2001)

Snooginz! Bonggg!

[29 August 2001]

For everyone who is a Die-Hard fan of the Jersey Trilogy, this is the ulitimate payoff.

This was probably the funniest movies I've seen in the longest time. It was armed to the teeth with comedy from start to finish. Furthermore, non-drug users (like myself) can still get the full punch of the comedy in this film.

(MINOR SPOILER ALERT)

Jay and Silent Bob go on a noble quest to stop a movie being made based on their comic book alter-egos, because everyone on the internet are trashing them left and right. That's the long and the short of the of the plot. The rest is filled up by the antics of Bluntman and Chronic and the colorful mess of character that they encounter.

In addition to the returning favorites from the universe of the Jersey trilogy mythos (Dante ,Randel ,Holden etc) the story is stocked with new additions to add to the motley crew. True that some of the jokes and inside refferences don't sell if you haven't seen "Clerk" ,"Mallrats" ,"Chasing Amy" or "Dogma" the average movie watcher can still find the movie funny as Hell. There's even a parody to "Raiders of the Lost Ark" that I don't think too many fans well notice.

This film does have crude humor, which is consistant to a tipical Jay and Silent Bob event, but the crudeness is tame by todays standards as opposed to a film like "American Pie" or "There's Something About Mary". No one who plans to see this film should be harping about it's blue humor.

No film is perfect, one of the problems with this film is the character that Chris Rock played. He's character was more annoying then funny. Even Jar Jar Binks pails by comparison.

Other then ,that this movie ROCKS! The paradies are awesome, the cameos are great and there's a psuedo-sequel that is so good, I couldn't even think to spill the beans.

The rather unique and modern love story between Jay and Justice was also a big plus with this movie.

I'm sure that Kevin Smith fans and new fans will love this ray of light in this lack-luster summer season.

The Transformers: The Movie (1986)

Destiny, you can not destroy my DESTINEY!!!

[14 August 2001]

In the late 60's there was a sci-fi show that had a small but devoted following. After three seasons, the show ended. By popular demand that same mythos was turned into a successful film series. Im speaking of the series Star Trek.

This is the same concept with "The Transformers". This ,much like Star Trek, was a sci-fi show that was influneced by the cold war. Most non-fans dont understand this. The the concept was ripe for a film, unfortunately, there should have been a extra six months to a year for promotion and post-production.

WARNING MAJOR SOPILER ALART

The film takes off where the show leaves behind. It's the year 2005. The Decepticons reclaim Cybertron and the Autobots have warmed up their welcome with the human population on earth. The biggest battle in the civil war between Autobots and Decepticons is underway when the unstoppable ,planet eating robot Unicron makes his way through the galaxy. Unicron is a physical representation of all the original sin, namly greed, pride, gluttony, sloth, wrath ,envy and lust. He is just this relentless eating machine. There is only one thing that can stop Unicron, and the Autobots have it. So Unicron manipulates the leader of the Decepticons to seek out and destory this mysterious force.

This is probably the only film that neatly blends Japannamie art with American style story telling and voicing. The action sequences are exciting, the musical score is ahead of it's time and the story (in light of it's weak plot structure and lifted themes) is good. The cast is top notch. Judd Nelson (Hot Rod)plays his most heroic character to date. Leonard Nimoy (Galvatron) out-does himself at the antonym of Mr.Spock and Orsen Welles (Unicron) is perfect in his final performance.

This film suffers from some fatal mistakes. All the original characters are killed off in the first 10 mins of the movie. The producers were making it obvious that they wanted to sell new toys. The film lost touch with it's fan-base, being too violent for the under 13 and to kidy for the over 13. Much of the film plays a little too loud at times. I will say that carrying a continuing story from a current series to the big screen (EX. "The X-files") is the most difficult to do. You have to update the new fan in a brief crash course while you please the die-hard fans by going the next level.

I had the honor of seeing this film on the big screen. I was an under-rated experience seeing all the dazzaling animated specticals on the screen.

All in all I give this film a good rating, being a worth attempt at a movie experience. The film is much more enjoyable to be seen on the big screen though, rather then on DVD.

Light It Up (1999)

"If this were Westchester, you'ed wait till the millenium"

[7 August 2001]

Someone finally tells the truth.

Light it Up is the story about a group of high school kids pushed to their very witts end. First they're given a learning facility with no heat and not enough text books, then the window breaks and brings in all the cold. When their burocratic principal ignores the complaint and leaves the class taught by prof. Knowles (played by Judd Nelson) but to continute the class at a warmer and more nourishing establishment.

When the principal finds out about the last minute field trip that he allowed, he suspends Mr.Knowles. Mr.Knolwes devoted students voice their discontent for these actions and the principle continues to throw his weight around by suspending the protesting students. When the few students grow in numbers, school policeman Dante Jackson handles things his way. To make a long story short (too late) Jacksons' prejudice judgements forces the students fordge the ultimate revolt and hold Jackson hostage in the school library.

This is a film that doesn't spare any expense to tell the truth about the urban school system and youth culture. The story is powerful, provacative, and true to life. It spotlights the students using sound judgement in the face of ignorent adults.

Usher Raymond gives his best performence to date, and Rosario Dawson shows her versital talent as a character that is far different from her Valerie Brown character in "Jossie and the PussyCats"

It is unfortunate that this film came out when it did, in the mist of the Colombin massacre, or it would have been received better by the public. My only problem with this film is that it took the "Kramer vs. Kramer" route in its epiloge. I felt that this story would have made more of a public statement had it ended without the last ten minutes, but the overall presentation was still good and the message was still there.

This is a film more for the adults interest then the teens, even though teens will be eager to see Usher and Dawson. The film does have a good deal of strong language, drug-use and urban themes that under 17 viewers will need to watch with their parents.

I give this film one of my highest acclaims. It is a must see.

Gone in 60 Seconds (2000)

The title of the movie must be talkng about my money and my interest.

[2 August 2001]

How bad can this movie be? Let's just say that the title was giving me a hint on what to do. Be gone in 60 seconds.

The is the story about Randy Raines, Played by (in a vain effort to cling to his youth the same way he's clinning to his hairline) Nicholas Cage. Rains is a retired car-jacker. He forced to come out of retirement after his brother ,played by Giovanni Rabisi, falls out of favor with his chop-shop boss. There ins't anymore to be explained about the plot, becuse it's that thin and thoughtless.

If it isn't bad enough that this is one of the most predictable films of all time, the movie is a shameless PG-13 rating, that glamourizes one of the most honorless trade skills of our society. Angelina Jolie really manages to sink this movie to the lowest common denomiator when she say "What do you think is better, having sex or sealing cars?" There are no interseting characters, no original ideas, and nothing the is appealing about this movie. The fact that it was able to gross 100 million at the box office is prabably because ticket prices are too high.

Before you even think about seeing this pretty piece of trash, I suggest going to see the real box office sensation "The Fast and the Furious" at a much more suitable choice.

Armageddon (1998)

The US govt. just asked us to save the world. Anybody wanna back out, now's the time. "You think we'll get hazard pay?"

[1 August 2001]

You either love this film, or you hate it. Some (like me) love this movie because it is an entertaining film that has a heart and doesn't let the effects put the drama and acting in the back-seat. Others hate this film because of all the scientific errors shown in it. As much as I can sympathize with those discontent viewers, I must humbly say "Shut-up and enjoy the movie"

This is the easiest plot to break down. Destroy a killer asteroid, before it kills all of us. The way to do this is to drop a nuke in the center of it. Nasa has no one experienced to pull this off. The man that Nasa was hired to do this is third generation oil driller Harry Stamper, played by Hollywoods' best blue-coller-everyman Bruce Willis. Harry calls to arms his personal team of drillers to make this happen, that include his most reluctent of choices, A.J. Frost, played by Ben Affleck.

Directer Micheal Bay and producer Jerry Brukheimer make all the right calls for this movie, reguarding the casting and astetic look and feel of this movie. There a golden rule to film making, and that is, if you can't make it look real then at least make it look good. I think that this film is the best example of that rule.

This was a big effects movie. With the growing amount of films that continute to stuff movies to the gills with visual effects, it's refreshing to see this film put it's main focus on it's unique band of characters. Armageddon seems like a story motivated by the events, but it is surly more of a character motivated story.

To sum up, try and forget all the compunctions that you have about the scientific inconsistencies about this film and enjoy.

Three to Tango (1999)

Gay? I'm not gay. I didn't............gay.

[25 July 2001]

This is one of the most all time under-rated films I've seen.

WARNING: SPOILER ALERT

This is the story of Oscar Novak (played brilliently by Mathew Perry). Oscar and his business partner Peter ( also played brilliently by the under-rated Oliver Platt) have to sell a do or renovation deal to the financially omnipotent tycoon Charles Newman (Dylan McDermott)

Newman falls under the misguided impression that Oscar is gay. This mis-information is the inside track that land the job that Oscar and Peter so desperatly need, because Newman needs someone to keep tabs on mistress Amy Post (played winningly and adorably by Neve Campbell).

Just when the situation couldn't get any more complicated for Oscar, he just happens to let the most inconvenient thing happen as he falls in love with Amy.

Mathew Perry gives one of his all-time best performances as Oscar Novak. Not only does he take his signiture Chandler Bing persona to the next level, but shows his dramatic and romantic side as well. Neve Campbell is so sweet in this role. She charms the heck out of the audience as well as Perry. The two make one of the most adorable onscreen couples.

The supporting cast does it's part too. Oliver Platt is priceless as Peter Steinberg, as he displays a flawless comedic performence whenever things get critical "Do you know what toilet paper feels like in EGYPT!" Dylan McDermont hits the nail on the head as the rich and powerful tycoon.

This is one of those movies that does get any less entertaining the more you watch it. The perfomances and blend of New York style Jazz music work perfectly. This film also doesn't do anything to frown on homosexuality. It doesn't try to make the sence of being gay freakish or wrong, but more so dwells on the difficulties of dealing with identity misconceptions and paranoia.

This film was 50% genuine comedy, 5% social statement , 45% warm-hearted romance and 100% entertainment.

This is one of my more highly recommended films of not only 1999, but ever. Just sit back, and enjoy. I would advise this as a rental, but it seems more like a keeper to me.

Event Horizon (1997)

Liberate Mae

[23 July 2001]

This movie was not what I expexted. I was gearing up for some boring, rip-off of "Alien". Boy was I in for a shock to the system. It takes a lot to scare me, this movie definatly came through. And it did it where horror seems to affect me the least, at home, on DVD in full day light.

This is the story about a rescue team that is seaching for the long last ship, the Event Horizon, after it vanished seven years earlier. The Event Horizon is an experimental ship that was developed to travel through space with advanced worm-hole technology, created by Dr. William Weir (Sam Neill). The crew is lead by Capt. Miller, played in a commanding performace by Laurance Fishburne. When the crew board the ship they unwittingly find out the horrors of what happened to the original crew first hand.

This film was scary as Hell. This mystery of the sinister force on the ship was part of what adds to the fear in this movie. The film also follows the standard rules of a horror movie and not give away too much of who is going make it out alive.

This film does suffer from some fundimental similarities to "Alien" but it's almost immpossible to make space-horror that is not. This film is also very brutal ,bloody, gorish and violent, so I'd advise not watching it if you are someone that doesn't handle well to violence.. But if your in for a good scare then, check this screamer out if you dare.

The Breaks (1999)

How can I help you my young..........Your white.

[16 July 2001]

All he has to do is come home with a carton of milk.

"The Breaks" was one of the funniest movies that I've seen in a long time. It's the story of Derrick King (Mitch Mullany). Derrick , is an Irish immagrant who is raised by a black family in Compton. Derricks' mother finally gets fed up with his behavior as a brainless, thoughtless ,sex-crazed slacker that she kicks him out of the house unless he can successfully come home with a quart of milk.

His holy quest for calcium, he runs into every kind of obstacle imaginable in the south central projects.

This film is laugh a minute. Done in the true spirit of films like "Friday" "CB-4" and "Don't Be a Menace to Society While Drinking Your Juice in the Hood" it keeps the lauphs comming. The film spoofs scenes from "Pulp Fiction" "Good Will Hunting" and "Good Times"

This is not a film for the squemish. Those who cringe at crude humor my not enjoy this film. For everyone else, rent it today, you wont be disappointed.

Throw Momma from the Train (1987)

"You Don't have a cousin Patty." "You lied to me!" "BONG!"

[16 July 2001]

For those that recall those lines, you also know how entertaining this film was.

What happens when you take Hitchcock style suspense and paranoia and mix it in with traditional ,theatrical style comedy. You get "Throw Mamma From the train.

This is the story about two guys with the same problem.

Larry Donner (played by Billy Crystal) is suffering from severe writters' block, brought on by the success of the novel that his Ex-wife (Make Milgrew) stole from him.

Owen Lift (played by Danny DeVito) is suffering from the ability to write because of his nasty, demanding, over-bearing mother (played by Ann Ramsey).

Larry, who is Owens' creative writing teacher, tries to advise him on the the fundamentals on writing a good murder novel. His one tactic is for Owen to see a Hitchcock film and understand the importance of motive and alibi. Owen takes the advise the wrong way and thinks that Larry wants him to participate in a criss-cross murder plot for the other. And the mayham begins.

Billy Crystral does some of his best work in this film as he goes through a rollercoaster of emotions from all the madness he endures.

Danny DeVito comes through, not only as the simpathetic Owen (who is quite distant from his popular Louie DePalma persona) but also as director. DeVito uses not only his keen understanding of comedy, but also some clever camera techniques.

Ann Ramsey is the quintessential mother from Hell. She's so mean and nasty that she makes you want to jump in and squeeze the life out of her yourself.

The film is also complimented by the Art Direction of Barry Sonninfeld (director of the Adams Family films) and a memerable musical score by David Newman.

"Throw Mamma From the Train" is slap-stick, suspense filled semi-classic that no fan of these talents should pass up.

The Black Hole (1979)

Disney guns for a "Star Wars", ends up with a "Space Balls"

[16 July 2001]

In 1979, Hollywood realized how marketable Sci-Fi can be, thanks to the sensation caused by George Lucas two years eariler.

Films like "Alien" ,"Moonraker" and "Star Trek: The Motion Picture" followed the growing demand for Good Sci-Fi.

Disney came up with "The Black Hole"

This is the story of an astronut crew who are searching for habitable planets. They are lead by the diligence of Capt. Dan Holland (played by Oscar Nommenee Robert Forester). In addition to the human crew members, the crew of the Palameno are aided by their own rendition of R2-D2, named V.I.N.C.E.N.T. (voiced by the immortal Roddy McDowall)

The crew realize why there is no life at that area of space. Because a vortex the size of Montana is swallowing everything there. When the Palamino ,narrowly escapes this black hole, they set down for repairs on the a ship that they have identified as a long last research vessal "The Cygnus".

To make a long story short (too late) the crew spend the rest of the movie trying to escape the Cygnus from it's relentless mad scientist (played by Maxamillion Shell) and his army or robot foot soldiers.

His key enforcer (ironically named "Maxamillion") is an intimadating metalic-red beast that reeks of a silent Darth Vader.

The film has the astronuts spend too much time debating what they should do about Reinhearts' doomed journey into the black hole. The film also plays more like a horror then a sci-fi adventure. The look and backdrop of the movie is not easy on the eyes. The costumes ,sets and even hair styles of this film leave something to be desired. The shoot-outs seem tame and uninvolving. The characters were kinda dull and flat. This situation may have worked better with a group of misfits , like the Rough-necks in "Armageddon"

The end of the film is somewhat cryptic and vauge, that seems to be leaning toward the memerable climax of "2001"

This film does have it's moments. Roddy McDowall has some good one-liners like "Too much Sunshine makes a desert" and "Are you here to annoy me?" "No sir, to educate you" Some of the visuals are hit and miss, but there is one scene when the team are running past a catwalk before it gets crushed by an asteroid. This sequence works well.

To sum up, Black Hole is tolerable, but no where near delectible as far as Sci-Fi goes. Disney did prove that they learned from their Sci-fi mistakes with their release of "Tron".

True Lies (1994)

If you can easily turn a blind eye to the outrageous racism of this film, then you might find it entertaining

[13 July 2001]

When this film was first promoted, it was billed as a James Bond parody with Arnold Schwarzenegger as the super-spy. The trailer has scenes of shoot-outs on ski slopes, Arnold in a tux and Tom Arnold being his amusing self. But this trailer was very misleading.

There's nothing more to refer to this film as then a shameless psuedo-propiganda film that only has two real goals: Resurect Arnold Schwarzeneggers' ailing action hero carrier and make James Cameron even more rich, at the expense of one of the most offensive racial stereo-types.

Arnold Schwarzenegger plays U.S govt. secret spy Harry Tasker. Yes Arnold, who is Austian, is representing America in this film. His current mission is to stop Crimson Geehad, English word for red with an Arabic word in the same title, from nuking America with a Russian nuclear warhead, bought from the Russian black market. So it seems now that renegade Arabs have the money to buy Russian nukes on the black market, I guess they saved up their coupons.

The Arabic spy in America is played by Tia Carrere, yes a Hawaiian Rock Star/vocalist is playing an Arabic spy in America. The main villian Salim Abu Aziz is played by actor Art Malik, yes a native from Pakistan is the obligatory Arab villian. There is nothing left out of his Arabic terrorits persona. We see him slap a woman, scream American and Arabic vulgarities, verbalise his hate for America and all it's citizens, use innocent bystanders as human sheilds, demand his treatening speeches be put on camera, refuse to let Taskers' wife go when Harry agrees to cooperate, and not have the slightest sence of humor when Harry says something funny or witty. Aziz is represented as such an unredeemable Arabic terrorist that he could make Sadaam Hussain want to take sensitivity classes with Stewart Smalley.

Let's not forget Aziz's forty theives. They are all unbathed, unshaven, ratty, gun-shooting ,screaming manics who are so shameless that they would destroy their own historical relics, just to smuggle in their nukes. It's never even made clear, what country the terrorists were from, if they were nationalist or counter-nationalists, what their immediate qualm was with the US government was, or what their demands were. All Cameron let the audience know about these particular terrorist were that they hated America and wanted to kill us all or die trying doing it. We don't even know how they were so well financed, reguardless that they looked like they couldn't even afford a shave, shower or a clean suit. This is "Old Testiment" style filming at it's very contradictive worst.

Directer Jim Cameron, a native born Canadian making a film about an American Super-spy, trys to supply the most minisule remnant of compensation to this nightmarish stigma by having the character Faisil, played by "Fail Safe" actor Grant Heslov. Faisil is supposidly the U.S. govnments' intelligence officer on Arabic terrorists, culture , and everything else Harry and Albert (Tom Arnold) need to know. Faisil seems like one of the most unconvetional inside opperatives for this situation, because it seems like he knows more about American idiosyncicies then he does Arabic idiosycicies from his opening scenes. In one point of the film Albert says to Harry "Dont worry Harry. We got a guy on the inside". At this point, you think that one of the terrorist will supprise the audience and redeem himself. Instead it turns out to be Faisil pretending to be a camera man who is called to appeal to Aziz's akilles heal, during one of his obligatory death treats.

Back to Arnold. This film can't seem to stroke his ego enough. We see Arnold, who got a cool 20 million for this movie, fire limitless rounds of amunition at the terrorists, fly a Harrior jet, commander an Air Force strike team, jump out of danger from a an explosion and go hand to hand without breaking a sweat, while having his shirt ripped in all the right places. When Arnold isnot out keeping the world safe from those scary Arabs, we see him at home, making light of his more importent domestic issues, like his detatched daugher stealing things from him and Albert when their back is turned like cash and cigarettes, just before she rides off with her over-aged boyfriends' motorcycle. Simultaneously, Harry does what he does best and bullies the man about to move in on his affectionately neglected wife, with everything in his Super-Spy access on the tax-payer dollar. When it is time to be romantic, Cameron and Schwarzenegger pull the ultimare department store crime, and shoplift the tango dance and music from "Scent of a Woman", even though Schwarzenegger (as romantic as isn't) doesn't even hold an unlit candle to Al Pachino from that signiture moment.

The climax events of this movie include things like Aziz kiddnap Harrys' daughter, put a blade to Helen Tasker throat (played by Scream Queen/ VoiceStream Jamie Lee Curtis) while Arnold saves the day, saying oneliners like "Your Fired" and "Hi Pumpkin". The climax is also topped off with one of Camerons' more deep-seeded fears of nuclear annialation, when Harry and Helen have their on-screen kiss.

Yes one could comment on the quality of film making in this film as far as action, stunts, special effects and comic relief, but as far as I'm concerned it would be the same as commenting on the quality of a decorative household centerpiece made in a sweat-shop by under-aged migrant workers. It's impossible to appreciate, knowing the at the expense of anothers' dignity and humanity.

This is not the same thing as seeing a film like the "Hot Shots" movies, because those film are don't in the spirit of comedy a good jest. It can also be said that lot's of film tend to seem offensive to those that are too sensitive, but since there are so few positive representations of Arabic culture, it's shameful piece of work. What boggles me more is who a film such as "The Phantom Menace" can be accused of having a racial stereotype, because the space alian Watto seems to have an Arabic accent and his only crime is over pricing his junkand this film is totally ignored for it's extremely racist representations. I've never read a single article about an act of racism from the influence of "Phantom Menace" and yet remember see a lot of Muslim kids get pucked on after seeing this film.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I'm giving this film my very first -10. I refuse to say anything positive about this film and refuse to see it's up coming sequel. I pity the next ethnic group that Cameron plans to mercelously slanderin the sequel is he doesn't go with Arabs again

There's only one thing that the self-proclaimed king of the world seems to get right with this undigestable collection of trype...the title, because it totally makes sense to me.

Before you pick this movie up from the Socialogical Science Fiction section at the video store, alow me to suggest a much more suitable solution: The underrated, under-seen George Clooney Mark Walberg Ice Cube film "THREE KINGS"

I'll say it three times so you wont forget: Three Kings Three Kings Three Kings

Superman II (1980)

"Man this is gonna be good!"

[13 July 2001]

If I only had one word to describe this movie it would be "Payoff"

It's been arqued for years now which film is better, this or the first film. I just like to think of them both as significantly good films.

(WARNING: MAJOR SPOILER ALERT. Do not read if you havent seen the film)

In this return of "The man of steel" ,Superman (again played brilliantly by Christopher Reeve)faces off against the same Three Kryptonians that his father enslaved for trying to rule Krypton. They are lead by General Zod, (executed flawlessly by Terence Stamp). Zod and his loyal associates (Vampy seductive Ursa and mindless, speechless giant Non) almost took over Krypton when they were mere mortals. Now that they have Super-human powers, they are practically unstoppable on Earth. Things get even more complicated when Superman chooses to give up his powers in order to have the only thing he has ever wanted. A normal life with Lois.

Just as the first film dealt with Supermans' complex difficulties of being Earths' hero and risk losing the people close to him, this film digs even deeper by turning things the other way. It explores Supermans' complexities of having the make the difficult decisions between personal happiness and public responsibility.

The on-screen chemisty between Superman and Lois (play dynamically well by Margot Kidder) is one of the best things showcased in ths film. The most memerable and emotionally poinent scene is at the end when Lois comes to terms letting Superman go.

This movie, as most movies, is not without it's flaws. The scene-stealing arch-villian Lex Luther (again handle gracfully by Gene Hackman) returns to do his dirty work. Unfortunatly, instead of getting to see that great screen presence that Hackman had brought to the first film. He's imbarrassing upstaged as soon as the Kryptonians arrive and reduced to the level of mild comic relief. This film also has some visual that don't age every well and are reduced by todays' standards. People seeing this film for the first time are surly to critizie the humble tehcniques used to create some of the key action sequences.

This film was originally directed by the man who made the first film a classic, Richard Donner. He left the projcet, do to create differences and the film was finished by "Three Musketeers" directer Richard Lester. Fortunatly ,much of Donners' signiture work still resides in the finished product.

Superman II should be a film school case study on the right way to make a sequel, because it is by far the best sequel ever made, tied with "The Empire Strikes Back". I would say "Godfather part II, but it's half prequel.

Explanation:

There is only one true reason to have a sequel, to finish telling the story that was started in the original, by expanding on the recurring character and not just to make more money.

In the first film, we the audience are fully introduced to Kalel and the more significant people in his life. That set the stage for the next act.

Here's where the film becomes a significant sequel: The audience gets the payoff of what would happen if Lois and Clark got together. We see what happens when the three Kryponian criminals escape the Phantom Zone. We see what happens when Superman is giving the chance to have a normal life as a mortal. All there questions we had after seeing the first film are answered in the most entertaining way.

To sum up, this is a must ,must see after seeing the first film.

Higher Learning (1995)

The most racist and most hate-promoting film since "Birth of a Nation"

[12 July 2001]

Yes, Birth of a Nation is mentioned in this review because both John Singleton and D.W. Griffith have a lot in common. They are both gifted film makers, who have evil politics. And he turns back the clock 99 years with the use "Old Testament" character representation in role reversal. These films have so much in common, I'm could believe that Higher Learning was formally titled "Birth of a Nation 2 You Too"

A breakdown of this plot is about three college students Malik (Omar Epps) Kristen (Kristy Swanson) and Remy (Micheal Rapaport)who come to college and get caught up in some galvanized cases of racial prejudice.

Every last character in this film is nothing more but a human stereo-type.

Malik Williams, beyond any possibility of deviation, is the good guy

Remy, who didn't even get a last name given to his character, is the out-numbered white kid from, brace yourself, a small country hick town in Idaho. Long story/short, his bullied treatment from Ice Cube and his Ghetto friends manipulate him to become a Nazi skinhead.

Kristen Conner is the helpless , confused ,ignorant , sympathetic , white girl.

If these character descriptions seem one-dimensional and flat, then I gave them too much depth.

Every negative/Angelo stereo type is depicted in this film. You have your date-raping, beer drinking frat boys, your Rodney King type ,night-stick clubbing ,campus security guards, your ignorant bystanders and lets not forget those obligatory Neo-Nazi Skinheads, who's sentences can't be finished without uttering "White Power!"

The members of the protagonist race, are educated, cultured, and heroicly good, without the slightest bit of ill will. One example is when the date-raping frat-boy calls Kristens' roommate a "black bitch" and he's gently convined to apologize by Ice Cube and his flock.

If that isn't enough ,Singleton tips the scales even deeper by executing a fight scene where 105 lb rapper Busta Rymes ,single handedly fights off two skin-heads while 6'4, 350lbs skin-head , played by former body-builder Andrew Bryniarski is beat to a pulp by a guy half his size.

Just when you think the odds can't get any more leveraged, the Skinheads strike back ,murdering the only passive individual to the end, and when Malick rushes to revenge this death, he is ambushed by (you guessed it) campus security in traditional Rodney King style.

The only solice that Singleton gives to the villainous race in this film is dream sequence ,love scene between Swanson and Jennifer Connelly, which Singleton more then likely put in to salivate at.

This film is as biased and one-sided as a game of see-saw between Marlin Brando and Calista Flockheart.

The closing of this film was a final conversation between the noble hero, Malik and some generic and ignorant member of the antagonistic race (who miraculously seemed to avoid those persuasive recruitments by the Nazi Skinheads) saying there's no hope for the races to get along I guess. It almost seems as if Singleton wants every Angelo who sees this film to drop down to their knees, crying: "God, why did you make me White?, Why?"

I recall seeing Lawrence Fishbure bring a refreshing presence to this film. "Peppermint?" His first line is "Welcome to the Real World" I was then reminded of his great presence in "The Matrix", and then it was all clear. Matrix is reality and Higher Learning is a far as you can get from reality as possible, because all issues in this film that relate to college life make you actually believe in things like jumping 100 ft between buildings and dodging bullets from agent Smith.

The very final moment of the film is the word "UNLEARN". Singleton finally said the right thing, because unlearning the last 2 hours of your life is exactly what one should do after seeing "Higher Learning"

I think I'll side with Delro Lindo, from "Get Shorty" in saying:

"I've seen better film on teeth."

Singleton can make no excuses for this ungodly concoction of smite, because he's proven that he can make a film that is true to life, heart-felt, moving, informative, well acted, inspiring and humanly meaningful (Boyz in the Hood).

Higher Learning should have it's own section in the video store: Sociological Science Fiction.

Before anyone considers renting this, overrated, over-hyped, overly racist propaganda (with Jim Camerons' "True Lies" running a close 2nd) let me suggest a much more significant alternative.

The underrated, under seen "American History X"

I'll say it three times so you wont forget: American History X American History X American History X

Down to Earth (2001)

Painfully Bad

[11 July 2001]

I usually don't post of a review of a movie unless it's underrated, but not in this case

Down to Earth is a remake of "Heaven Can't Wait" The main difference is, instead of a pro football player who dies and comes back as a millionaire, with the dream of being in the Superbowl, its an aspiring comedian Lance Barton (Chris Rock)who dreams of playing at the Apollo.

If there was one way to describe this movie, it would be a cheesy and cliche' version of the original. Just by watching the original versions, one can point out where the film makers made their mistakes.

The other problem with this film is that Chris Rock can't seem to pull off the delightful "fish out of water" personal that was so masterfully done by Eddie Murphy in films like "Trading Places" and "Beverly Hills Cop". When Murphy toys with expensive gadgets, he's fall out of your seat hilarious, when Chris Rock does it, he seems boring.

The story is also too disjointed. You don't seem to be reminded that Barton is an old millionaire until the actor is exposed in a few brief scenes. The movie would have been funnier if we constantly saw the old man acting like Chris Rock (Ex: Bill and Teds' Bogus Journey). The supporting cast is one dimentional, from there greedy stock holders, to the plotting wife.

There is nothing positive about this film, and it was not because of a lack of talent. Chris Rock showed his dramatic qualities in "New Jack City" and his comedic abilities in "Lethal Weapon 4"

Before thinking about seeing this film, rent the original versions along with Beverly Hills Cop instead.

Scary Movie 2 (2001)

We Lied

[10 July 2001]

As much as I here people say that this film was a disappointment, I though that this movie rocked. The highlights of this movie were the same highlights of the first film, and they come in the form of Ann Faris and Regina Hall.

In this day and age, comedies are dominated by mens roles, this film sported the some great comedic performences by two young actresses who

could have bright futures if the bad reviews of this movies does ruin their chances.

Some key segments to look for are the bedroom scene with Hall and Shawn Wayens and another segment when she says "Just kill her white ass so he don't come after me".

Ann Faris is so adorable and charming in her return to the role of Cindy Campbell. One of her best scenes is when she does her "Mad Cow and Drunken Monkey fighting moves" Another one of her best scenes is when Faris is in the fight with the crazed cat. "YOU WANT A PIECE OF ME!!!"

As much as most people are going to bash his movie, Faris and Hall save this movie with there priceless comedic talents.

Scary Movie 2 (2001)

We Lied

[10 July 2001]

As much as I here people say that this film was a disappointment, I though that this movie rocked. The highlights of this movie were the same highlights of the first film, and they come in the form of Ann Faris and Regina Hall.

In this day and age, comedies are dominated by mens roles, this film sported the some great comedic performences by two young actresses who

could have bright futures if the bad reviews of this movies does ruin their chances.

Some key segments to look for are the bedroom scene with Hall and Shawn Wayens and another segment when she says "Just kill her white ass so he don't come after me".

Ann Faris is so adorable and charming in her return to the role of Cindy Campbell. One of her best scenes is when she does her "Mad Cow and Drunken Monkey fighting moves"

As much as most people are going to bash his movie, Faris and Hall save this movie with there priceless comedic talents.