Change Your Image
pacmanfan4evr
Reviews
Daria (1997)
Perhaps the best written American cartoon ever
Considering multiple aspects, this is a wonderful show. Every character has a very specific personality, and most all of them actually develop as the show goes on. The humor can be dry, but is incredible if you actually get it. If you were expecting Beavis and Butthead, sorry, you will be disappointed. I've noticed that most of the negative comments talk about how Beavis and Butthead was so much better. I think it can be best said that you have to be able to appreciate intelligent humor to laugh at this. If you think, say, that Jackass is the greatest show ever, then you will most likely hate this.
However, if you like a humorous show that's incredibly well developed for a cartoon (the character development, themes, etc.), then you will enjoy this.
Cabin Fever (2002)
Not Quite What you Would Expect
If you are going to Cabin Fever to see one of the latest in a line of more intelligent, thinking horror movies, THINK AGAIN. While there are a few interesting points of social commentary in this film, it is REALLY meant to be the following:
A cheap, cheesy film, with sex, nudity, drinking and drugs, extremes of gore and violence, and some humor.
THIS is what the film is about. If you do not want to see this, don't go to see this movie, it's about these things, sorry.
And, it's rather well done, for what it is. It's a return to an old style of horror, that of the 80s, where they don't really try to make you think too much (we don't go in to the origins of the protagonist here, nor what exactly it does), and they just present you with some characters who show off their naughty parts, glorify the pollution of ones body, and then end up bloody. I was much reminded of older horror movies, and I did get a bit of a kick out of it.
In the way of social commentary, yes, there are things to think about. Major themes hit on are paranoia, our fear of the sick (very much akin to the leper of The Bible, if you are familiar with that story), and, my favorite as I am a camp counselor, just how much parents love to blame others for their childrens' problems.
So, in essence, don't expect to think to much, but you can at least get something out of this film, and I would advise seeing it, as it is interesting enough.
Freddy vs. Jason (2003)
A fine film, especially for fans
For the true, die-hard fans out there, this movie will be a welcome innovation. However, I would like to first cease some rumors floating around. Mind you, there are likely to be some intense spoilers.
1) Jason is a short wimpy pushover: No. Jason, rather than being a very straight forward charging maniac, is a bit more like Michael Meyers. He waits, he'll stand right in front of idiotic stoners for a bit, and then take them out big time, and keep coming no matter what. Also, for those who think he's gone down in size since Hodder, understand this: the guy playing Jason was a stand-in for Hodder! Their physical attributes are incredibly similiar.
2) Because of yadda-yadda reason, (fill in the blank) should win: No. The winner is decided for a particular reason. I'll explain this later.
3) There is not enough Freddy or Jason and too much of the other characters: Not really, but even then, when did ANY Freddy or Jason movie focus more on the bad guy than the running teens? Besides, these guys hide in the shadows a great deal just to scare the teens. Instead, I guess some people just want to see them run out and not try for scares at all, but just always be on screen in an endless, plotless, pointless killing spree that would disappoint all.
That said, this movie will be appreciated by any true fans of the series. There are a few problems with continuity (Jason has gone in the lake many a time with no hesitation, one has to be under 18 to have Freddy in their dreams, for example) but otherwise the film is solid and tries to hold it all together. An appearance from Betsy Palmer would have been greatly appreciated, but there is enough nostalgia in visual references and dialogue to make any fan appreciative.
If you have seen the other films, I suggest seeing at least the first in each series, and part three in the elm street series, as much is garndered from these two films.
And yes, the fight scene rocks. VERY much so.
So, that spoiler as to who wins: The good guy. Which of the two psychotic murderers is the good guy? Which one was drowned in a lake and thouroughly didn't deserve their fate, and then witnessed their mother's death? Which one was a dirty child murderer who was always evil, period? Regardless of his good lines, he's not at all good.
Ringu 0: Bâsudei (2000)
Very good, VERY depressing
If you are feeling bad, I advise you, DO NOT watch this movie. Wonderfully done, I think the best comment is anothers, in that this movie 'puts the prequels of star wars to color by numbers shame'. There is so much to this, it's just breathtaking. The shooting is done well, the acting is superb, and it puts Sadako in to a TOTALLY new light, and will really force you to think a bit more about Ring and it's sequels. It's difficult for me to put this in words, but trust me, this is very much a movie to see without fail. You will enjoy it greatly, though I promise you, you will be VERY depressed by it. Then again, if you expect a happy ending from a Ring movie, you haven't watched any of the others (and I do mean ANY, though some are bittersweet, none end truly happily)
The Ring (2002)
Not the original, but not bad
Many reviews I've read have put this down SERIOUSLY in comparison to it's original. Harsh reviews make this out to seem like a movie the likes of Blood Lake, The Sandman, or Jack-O (sad to say I've seen). It's NOT at all that bad, in fact, I rather enjoyed it. Let's go over a few things, shall we? Be prepared for lite spoilers.
Okay, it's true, this has more shock value and less suspense than the original, yes, it's an American remake, but that doesn't make it absolute and total crap (one person suggested waiting till it went to the dollar movies... what the hell were they watching?). There is still a good deal of suspense. The shocks even, I venture to say, add some scare value during the movie that the original lacked, yet it still builds suspense (though not as much as the original, as said).
Fine performances are put on by all, and the little boy didn't annoy me as much as I thought he would have. However, the character of Noah (played by someone I don't remember) was a weak link in the chain. He had no specific personality, in fact, he was rather dull, and wished for Takayama Ryuji to suddenly appear and help Rachel. Rachel, Naomi Watts, it shows that the chick in the movie CAN do something other than look up a few things (okay, okay, Reiko went in the well in the end, but she did little else). She I prefered to the original Asakawa Reiko. If only Noah were more like Ryuji... Our two children are interesting and creepy. But why did they cut Samara's greatest line ("Everyone will suffer.")? Sigh.
Contrary to popular belief, not EVERYTHING is explained from the video (fingers in box, maggots) and not all is explained regarding the little girl (Why DID the horses die? WAS it her?) among other things (why were they at the mountain place with the horses, and when? We KNOW Ikuma took Sadako there after the suicide. Wait... something explained in RING but not in THE RING. AGH!).
The ending... okay, the very end was SO much better in the original. However, the tv ending... well, certain things are creepier in the remake. And also, the deaths are much more interesting (and easier to explain, it's not a virus here... ugh, the virus idea... a point where THE RING is better).
Overall, see this movie, it's really damn good. Watch the original too. Sure, it's better, but this is not bad.