exusninja Reviews

Men at Work (1990)

WOW! Doesn't live up to "its so bad its good" as the norm with these types of flicks

[2/10 · 6 January 2010]

This movie is bad as we all knew it would be. Most times i usually love the bad 80s / early 90s trash-can comedy (haha no pun intended). I list Ski School, Career opportunities, Hot Shots, Summer School and many more made around this time. This even has the classic yet forgotten comedy of Dean Cameron (aka.. ski School section 8 instructor and Party Maniac for Summer School). But this movie is just to slow. It takes almost 30 min to get going and we have to sit through pointless dialog between to half-wits the Sheen boys (E&C). And yes i can hear the bloggers dieing to trash me with "obviously you don't watch 2 and 1/2 men). Well Charlie was not at the level he is now during this flick...not that he's anything worth watching now. Charlie only shines when his co-stars support him and Emilio isn't anymore than an overused wonder bra offering little support. Actually, this movie was written by Emilio and it shows. It has no real ending (come on Emilio, even the Ski School 2 writers barfed out an ending). No idea how any issue brought is solved, no hot babes, no swearing to lighten the bad plot, characters, acting... I'm now tired of this tirade. Just save your time and watch the movies i listed above. You'll enjoy them much more.

Paranormal Activity (2007)

Fell for it again a promise of being scared and ending up with motion sickness

[3/10 · 4 November 2009]

Truthfully this movie is pretty boring unless you absolutely believe this is a real record of paranormal activity. If you can imagine this is a true profiling of a daemon possession which is fully recorded and documented then maybe the movie is somewhat suspenseful in certain parts. But if you don't believe that the first really hardcore proof of the paranormal happened in 2006 resulting in a brutal murder and missing killer all of which is recorded and you just happened to be sleeping under a Rock while it was covered, then the movie fall flat on it's a$$. Basically it gives u motion sickness for like 1 1/2 hours then ends with two somewhat creepy end scenes which is why I gave it 1 stars

OK 1 star to katie (ps actress of the same name) who's acting is not bad. Reminds me of yes the Blair witch... Why b/c the girl has the stronger emotional fueled performance with the guys simply being single minded film enthusiasts who take their camera absolutely everywhere. I think this movie had what blair witch was lacking some physical manifestations but it did not deliver nearly enough suspense. I think b/c Micha kept conveniently leaving the camera (or taking the camera) with him during the suspense building scenes. Reminds me of the startling. Aka southpark "I'm so startled" episode

last star goes to the marketing department who cut the trailer and the luckiness of the limited release also like Blair witch aka show the people what the can"t get and the will beat a path to your door aka southpark cartmen builds an amusement park but you can't go

don't was ur time 3/10 maybe 4 when my nausea goes away (extra star to trying to make the most profit with a limited 15 k budget ... Someones walking around with 14 k dollars in his pocket)

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007)

Pirates 3 leaves a salty taste in your mouth

[5/10 · 30 May 2007]

This movie is neither terrible nor superb... Its close to being good...but a few things take away from making it a 7 or 8 out of 10. FIRST: Funny things #1. Giant Calisto looks like a Sam Raimi Titan from the Xena TV Show #2. Female empowered Swan "KING OF PIRATES" reminds me of the Aqua video My oh My...where the main female gets abused by the guys and then becomes there leader #3. Crazy Johnny Depp scene in the desert reminds me of a Twin Peaks moment.

Review Simply put the movie is way too long...there are too many pointless scenes that have little or nothing to advance the plot. The movie actually flows fairly well until the conclave of the brotheren. Then the movie seems to written by someone else. It starts to move in directions that just don't fit. Like all of a sudden Swan's developed relationship with Sparrow is forgotten, and revolves around Turner. But lets say its just to give people what they want (although i'm sure people would have rather scene Sparrow and Swan), in the middle of the LONGEST most DRAWN OUT and utterly CONFUSING fight scene they decide to get married. Pointless and unnecessary. Also Calisto and Davey Jones relationship is pointless. She's there simply to create the storm at the end. Many other things bother me about this movie...but that's enough negative stuff for now.

Fix these things and cut 45-60 minutes out the movie rates a 7.

And directors reading this: Length does not equal substance.

The Descent (2005)

No doubt this is one of the best of the year!

[8/10 · 4 January 2007]

The is the best horror movie i have seen since The Ring part 1.

It builds suspense and delivers with the gore and violence plus some of the scariest camera shots ever.

The main character in this movie really does the title justice as she descends into madness.

This movie is a must watch.

Definitely recommended.

Do not watch alone!

Do not watch in the dark!

Actually do all of this if you want to be scared witless.

Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby (2006)

OK...nothing else can be said...not anchorman...not old school...but similar

[5/10 · 3 September 2006]

This movie tries to resurrect the feelings of OLD SCHOOL and ANCHORMAN.

I realized something watching this movie...Will Ferrel needs a strong cast to support his overacting comedic performance.

Old school had vets V-Vaugh and L-Wilson that filled in the gaps of Will's one-dimensional character (its a Jim Carey and Adman Sandler in the making).

ANchorman has Steve Carrell and that crew and C-Applegate as a ying to his yang (does that make sense?)

But John C Riley (and i like him as a serious actor) just doesn't have that shinning breakthrough performance. Ali G (whatever his real name it) doesn't either...its just not one of his better characters. We saw the same this with Kicking and Screaming and ELF. When Ferrel is surrounded as a lead around non-comedic actors it doesn't always work.

Conclusion: You'll like this movie if u like NASCAR You'll like this movie if ur a Will Ferrel is a GOD Sheep Follower If you actually take the time to compare this movie to the above mentioned movies i think you'll just this the movie is OK, SMEH, worth only a ONE TIME WATCH.

The Shawshank Redemption (1994)

First 10 I have ever given out

[10/10 · 9 February 2006]

This is the best movie robbed of acclaim. I don't care what anyone says about Forest Gump. This movie is better in almost every category except music and maybe tied for movie of the year.

Tim Robbins acting is as good if not better than Hanks. I always have a problem with the simpleton character getting acting nods, as with the white trash and ghetto thug characters. I think most of us can all do the Gumpy Slow Hick voice ala Cleatus the Slacked Jawed Yokel (Simpsons).

I can't quite remember how many Oscars Gump stole from this GEM of a movie, but this movie blows me away on almost every level. The quite passion the Robbins portrays is surpassed by no one except maybe the Freeman sidekick character.

This movie was of course a short story made into a movie (S King i think) and because of what it delivers i truly believe it to be the best movie of 1994, and probably one of the top 3 movies of all time.

The Godfather (1972)

Actually 9.5...Godfather is Good at everything

[9/10 · 9 February 2006]

This is probably the best mob movie of all time which captures the old mob dramatics of the 1920-30s with the more business savvy mobs of the 1950-60s. It links the classic capones with the modern gambinos.

Al Pacino's finest silent work ever. With simple looks he envy's so much meaning. Brando at the best i have ever scene. The ensemble is absolutely amazing. This is the best of the 3, and miles above part 2 (which i like but don't think quite matches up this part 1 in anyway)

If you haven't watched this, rent the DVD and watch it this weekend. If you have and don't have the DVD collection, buy it.

IT is worth preserving this and having it in good quality.

When a Stranger Calls (2006)

When a strangers calls...don't pick up the phone

[5/10 · 9 February 2006]

The movie is clearly a remake of an older movie and it shows. The classic older movie style is pretty much preserved here. With the ending and use of shadow and sound over gore and violence. Nice attempt, only thing is i just could get into it. Too cheesy in the theatre maybe...too many people laughing about the chessey scenes.

Overall the babysitter is going to be the new it girl of 2006 and maybe her hot friend. Very little back story to the main villain which i absolutely loved. Always too much given away about a villain, with no real link to anyone in the story either.

This movie is mediocre at best...final conclusion.

Rent it if and only if all the movies you want to rent are already out, and there is no older movie you want to see.

King Kong (2005)

King Kong is...Its...to describe it best would be...Passable, Tolerable, Good Enough...but not Grrrrreat!

[3/10 · 20 December 2005]

This movie was basically (as my summary says) OK...but just that. It is definitely no LOTR. As someone else wrote...PJ (Peter Jackson) didn't have the 50 pages of scene description and dialog for every step taken by the characters in the story as in LOTR...and it shows.

Anyway here is my take:

Acting 7/10

Naomi Watts does her usually excellent job (i'm still not tired of her yet)...but she is starting to get unusually thin...i hope she doesn't go the way of the Kidman "Kurse" of losing weight, facial expression or overall sensuality after being the "it" woman in Hollywood....

Anyway almost all the actors do a good job EXCEPT the following:

JACK BLACK (I love your comedies man!...but this is the beginning, peak, and end of your dramatic acting career)...his acting of Carl Denham is just awful. I found myself thinking about the alter-ego he uses to sing his comedic songs. What a terrible casting decision.

Jamie Bell (Billy Elliot kid) was not that great either, but he didn't have much to work with.

Adienne Brody (AKA Hawk Man)...could've been replaced by anyone...again character limitations.

Presentation 4.5/10

This was really weak. The presentation (for me anyway) is the flow of the movie, the separate scenes (before skull island, on the boat, at skull island, and NY after skull island)...i thought before skull island, on the boat and after skull island were all very well done. Like 7/10s. But the Skull Island part (which is like 2hrs long) was terrible. It was terribly long, terribly overdone with excessive CG graphics (Kong was great though), terrible action scenes (to much dinosaur rampage, t-rex triple team, swamp "dune" like swampworms, giant grasshopper attacks, vampire bats attacks, monstrous mosquito bites, and it goes on and on and on). This one section ruins the whole movie. Because PJ impressed us so with LOTR, his use and rather unimpressive use of CG is even more disappointing. 2/10 for this section (By the way...for a good laugh look at how bad Darrow is done when Kong shakes her around...she looks like a plastic Barbie doll)

KONG/DARROW RELATIONSHIP:

This is another part of the movie people may rip on...only because the relationship is so funny at first. I actually though this was very well done. This i thought would have been the most difficult part of the movie sell for me...but the emotion of the relationship snuck up on me. Good job on this part. 8/10

Length (seperate section only cause i wanted to pull this and the Kong relationship out of presentation) 4.5/10 Too long, too much time fighting irrelevant bugs and dinosaurs on the island (spend some more time showing how the get Kong back to NY or how Darrow and Driscoll get out of the water away from Kong)

So thats my rant and my take. 6/10, unfortunately if i didn't pull out the Kong / Darrow relationship...this movie gets at 5/10 (that's what my friend gave it)...only thing that saves it for me.

Oh well...bigger isn't always better PJ. I hope someone does some of the other fantasy trilogies out there...there are more that LOTR.

Later every1

The Skeleton Key (2005)

Who oh who is doing that nasty HooDoo?

[4/10 · 8 September 2005]

I'm sorry this movie just doesn't cut the mustard, or in this case mustard seed soak with chicken feet.

This movie is the latest in psychological dramas that attempt to lead the watcher down one path and blow their mind away with an awesome ending. Of course, with most of these movies it is relying more on the ending and less on the actual flow, plot, and acting of the movie.

Acting:

The only one who is good in this movie is John Hurt (the older Ben) Gena Rowlands was just not as good as her Notebook performance. Kate Hudson, well her character just had too many holes...for this kind of movie.

This kind of movie relies entirely on building a relationship b/w the characters and the audience. So, for those who say a movie is a movie, just enjoy it...well that is what you have to look for. Like with the 6th sense characters, or Nicole Kidman in The Others.

Flow and PLot.

This movie is also very slow...mind you not as bad as The Village. Some of these thrillers get move so slowly (i.e. themes, imagery, music scores) i find peoples attention begin to wander.

Story is strong with a good historical foundation. A few erie scenes, but not enough. I thought the movie needed more development with the potential ghosts rather than the HooDoo crap...Perhaps it was difficult to fit into the story.

You know immediately that the deveraux wife is possessed (at least i did), but maybe with the children the bought from in the 60s, or the are the children themselves. But as soon as the Estate lawyer reappeared, i figured he was possessed. I kind of felt like a learned the secret to soon, and therefore the ending didn't really blow me away.

All in all, the movie is OK for a rental or cheap theater, but with so many of these kind of movies recently is was blasé. Its like watching a basketball player continually doing dunks from the free-throw line. We've seen it in the early 80s, we saw Jordan redefine it in the later 80s, we've seen it copied in the 90s...now its time to change it up. This movie just did not do that.

The Dukes of Hazzard (2005)

Honest opinion...

[6/10 · 6 August 2005]

I am 28 and watched the original series.

Honest quote, "whaddya wanna do tonight...oh i don't know, why don't we go see Dukes of Garbage?"

That's exactly what i thought about this movie when i read all the criticisms.

This movie is the next in a long line of classic TV sitcoms made to Movies. Not all can capture enough of the original series to make it reliable to the watcher. Take for instance I Spy, FatAlbert, and Bewitched (yet to see this one).

I think the Dukes actually does it. The only drawback is the modern day setting (but i think it still works since Harzard is redneck 1970's setting no matter what century we're in).

Sure the acting was nasty, and the accents were somewhat over done. But, i am the only one to remember the original show. Bo looked like a bleach bum surfer, and Luke looked like a Chips wannabe. Both fit the Pop Culture attitude, looks, and fashions of the time to a tee.

This version does the same. The producers also realized that Simpson would be the "weakest link" and addressed it as the should have. She was used more as eye candy that original Daisy was, and had less speaking scenes than i thought. But at least it wasn't the demolishing of a strong female character that happened with "Charlies Angles 2".

The top 3 things any fan should ask is: 1. Is the car true to the original 2. Are the chase scenes true... 3. Are the characters true...

Well, i think they deliver pretty well on the first 2. The 3rd, well not so much.

Those of you born post 1985, and missed the show, check it out before condemning the movie as "WORST MOVIE EVER". True fans that can't get over the differences b/w the original characters and these ones, just forget the movie, buy the DVD Seasons and remember the good IL' times.

Fantastic Four (I) (2005)

Popcorn Movie yes...Better than War of the Worlds yes....Good comic adaptation...no

[5/10 · 25 July 2005]

OK, little or no depth of emotion to the characters...but whatever Its a popcorn movie. Dr Doom pretty cool...just wished more Doom and more ending...

The movie seems to start almost at the end (as far as Doom's interaction)...the movie needed a lot more of that and less of establishing the Thing was p'd off, Torch was arrogant...etc.

By the way was there always a romance b/w Mr fantastic and invisible girl?

Overall, this movie is OK, but its no better (or worse) than Daredevil. Not the excitement of XMEN, not the Uniqueness of Hellboy, not the Hollywood buzz of Spidey or Batman. But is is better than war of the worlds (and the HULK, but that's a given)

Cinderella Man (2005)

The ROCKY of the new millennium

[8/10 · 8 June 2005]

This really gets an 8.5.

1970 = ROCKY 1980 = Raging Bull 1990 = Well there was...umm...Play it to the bone 2000 = Cinderella Man

Russell Crowe is excellent as a down on his luck boxer. Unfortunately he seems to still be in character (lol). The movie opened to low sales ($18M, 2M below minimum expectations), but it is definitely a movie worth seeing. The setting (as for most movies set in the depression-era) shows the gravity of the 1930's economy on the common man (and well off joe as well).

The scenes with the children and Renee Z (who i do not usually like) were heartbreaking. JJ Braddock's story is an amazing one indeed. His courage in the face of overwhelming odds was inspirational. Crowe's comes close to perfection getting 8.5, only because he is not the first to play this type of character.

The entire movie is stolen by Paul Giamatti, who plays the booky. He is of course why the movie goes from simply a boxing movie with great fight shots to an excellent boxing movie with great fights shots and believable characters. He brings the best out of both Crowe and Zellweger.

The man should absolutely be nominated for best supporting actor (at the Oscars, not just the GGlobes). He is the supporting actor you always see and say "I know that guy...what is his name?"

Notable Films: Singles, Negotiator, Duets, Confidence (see this movie)

PS. Did Max Baer actually fight with no defense and only hay-makers?

Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)

A decent end to a hyped trilogy

[2/10 · 21 May 2005]

I just saw this movie with a few friends. I'm a Sci-Fi fan, but not a star wars fanatic. After watching this movie, one a my friends quotes "This movie insulted me as an adult." I don't know exactly what that means, except maybe the is weak in its acting. The overall storyline is strong. It nicely concludes what was a very confusing and poorly acted Eps 1 & 2. THe CGI is crazy of the wall. Almost all the characters take a back seat except obi wan, anikan, yoda, and Palpotine. As it should be. I heard some comments on Pademe fall from a strong female character. We have to believe the woman has to be shown a blinded by love of a hateful man and she is there to serve one purpose (mother to the twins). Anikan's acting is terrible as usual, but Obi wan and the Empiror acting fill in his gaps. Lucas promised a much darker movie and he delivered. The story got so dark by the end, i questioned why parents would let their 4-6 year olds watch it.

The only thing i don't like is how he embraces the dark forces. The reasoning was not as strong as it should have been.

This movie stands as better then the first two. And the acting, while uninspiring is along the stands of Eps 4, 5, & 6. I think this movie will stand the test of time, and 5 out of the 6 should be part of your movie collection THe Phantom Menace...well we can't all be perfect.

Sin City (2005)

Its Sinful 2 miss SinCity

[8 April 2005]

When i first went to SinCity is had mixed feelings. While everything was unique and well done, i just had difficulty with so much black and white cinematography. On reflect, however the b&w does not take away from the film at all. The only way they could do this movie and no received an NC-17 rating was to do b&w with color edited killing scenes. Great number of star cameos, very much in the true Terrantino style (although he is only a guest director). Overall, this movie leaves you feeling satisfied.

I don't think this is for every one though. Lots of violence and brutality. As always, Bruce Willis gives an excellent performance (he doesn't get enough credit due to some poor action movie choices). Wanted more Alba and Murphy.

Only problem...didn't like the fact is was 4 separate stories with very weak linkages. I know its probably written like that, but it kind of takes the climax away leaving and return the main story, with the independent stories of Owen, Murphy, and others.

The Ring Two (2005)

Ring 2....Just 2 much....of nothing really

[5/10 · 24 March 2005]

I don't believe it when someone rates a movie 1/10 or 10/10. This should be reserved for the worst of the worst and best of the best. Truthfully, i thought this movie would blow compared to part 1. It was OK, predictable horror scenes, a lot of CGI rather than building suspense. The movie takes a twist, deviating from the VHS storyline of part 1. It had to, but what makes it poor, is how painfully slow it is. Story 7/10 - better than VHS Story explaining more of Samara 4/10 - tries to hard to use that reflection imagery of part 1 (bunch a non sensible images that barley relate to the story except for the fact they are in a hallway or on the floor..etc..) Acting 5/10 (as expected nothing special) Overall flow and what i call Audience Chemistry Effect (ACE) 2/10

Just doesn't keep the watchers interest long enough to get into it. To much like "THEY, DARKNESS FALLS, BOOGEYMEN" (look them up...probably the same rating)

Ray (I) (2004)

A good movie worthy of recognition

[6/10 · 5 February 2005]

Ray, didn't expect much, but was better than i thought. Like most biopics of people with long careers and even longer lives, the move spends too much time with the early years and not long enough aging RAY into the 80's and 90's. (i.e Ali) The movie draws you into the trial and tribulations of being both a black and blind man living in the 40-60's. But around the 1 1/2 hr mark, i feel the movie had already established his drug use, adultery, and isolation. I felt like saying get on with it. I hear a lot of talk about Jamie Foxx getting nominated for "TOKEN" awards. Well that maybe, i will pass judgement (as should all commentators on that subject) after watching the other nominees (also watch the Sideways and That Kevin Spacey movie as well) But the academy is great at awarding based on "theme years or year' of the woman, gay man, etc...) Denzel got shafted for the hurricane (winner crowe gladiator) while crowe got shafted for beautiful mind (denzel training day) The academy did it last year with Sean Penn for the character he developed ohh about 10 years ago (angry misunderstood rebel with a cause). But unless something major happens to push Dicaprio ahead, i think Mr Foxx has kissed enough buts to win.

Either way, RAY has lead me to take a look at this man's music (child of the 90's grunge era here), as with others. And isn't that the point.

Angels in America (2003)

This proves the Oscars award people rather story or film

[2 January 2005]

I have also maintained that movies today are based 90% on the actors acting the stories. Angels in America is a prime example.

Al Pacino powerful performance, albeit very much along the lines of Godfather III mixed with City Hall and Devils Advocate. But still worthy of an Oscar and GGlobe nod.

Everything else is overrated and annoying. Part one was slow and over-melodramatic...I thought many of the abstract scenes would be explained in part two...however everything gets more confusing and unbeareably slow...

However 21 Oscar nods...i think not If this gets 21 Oscar nods...the Spielberg's "TAKEN" should get more that 1 or 2 it got (i think it got at least 1). If you have the time to watch Angels' in America...save your time and sanity and watch Philidelphia. TAKEN is still a much better (although possibly not acted) mini-series...trust me.