Reviews

16 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
Entertaining 1980s flick starring Charles Bronson!!!
28 May 2016
Warning: Spoilers
This is quite an unusual movie, about a serial killer (Gene Davis) who strips naked before slashing beautiful women to death. These women rejected his advances and he lashes out by hurting them.

Only this time, his latest victim is the friend of the daughter (Lisa Eilbacher) of the very detective (Charles Bronson) who is investigating the murder.

Because the serial killer leaves no traces behind his murders, it is nearly impossible for Bronson to prove his guilt. Bronson goes to lawless means to get the serial killer, only to have the serial killer acquitted due to lack of evidence, and Bronson losing his job. Bronson continues harassing the free serial killer and tries to get him into trouble again, and the serial killer flips out and targets Ms Eilbacher.

It's a sleazy cop-action-slasher, with cameos from several 1980s babes, such as Kelly Preston and Ola Ray.

The final climax/ massacre is disturbing and not for kids.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Very good, solid superhero action/ thriller
4 April 2016
A modern, slick homage to superheros.

The plot is rather straight forward - Batman and Superman think that each other are causing more havoc than security to the world and fight out their differences.

The first hour is rather uneventful in terms of action, but explores Batman's origins and Superman's fame as a sort of a combating God-sent angel with powers and maximum strength.

The second hour consists of events occurring within a short period of time - the confrontation and fight between Batman and Superman, and the threat of destruction arising from unknown sources.

This film may not be Oscar material, but it's a cinema treat and definitely lives up to the hype.
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Fun and action paced, but a fairly ordinary action movie
13 June 2015
I am not familiar with the original Jurassic Park movies, so I would miss all the references to the originals in this movie.

That said, I saw this film with my sister and the cinema was quite occupied with movie goers. The hype about this movie is, thankfully, decent and doesn't give too much away so one can enjoy the movie.

The acting is ambitious and definitely holds your attention. The actors know how to switch from serious to comedy without much strain and there are hardly any cringe worthy moments from the acting.

The 3D effects are good - predictable but good. Enabling live actors to interact with dinosaurs is always a movie pleasure.

The "dinosaur attack" scenes are a bit violent and, sometimes, gruesome. I'd be cautious about bringing very young children to this movie.
5 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Popular fan fiction turned into an average but cute drama
6 March 2015
I give this film a 6 because maybe I'm biased. I have always read erotic fan fiction involving my favourite celebrities. I favour the writing skills of the authors and how they emotionally engage the (mostly female) audience.

I admit I never read the books of Fifty Shades Of Grey as I shun from overly hyped books.

However, through the hype of this film, I found out about the BDSM aspect of this sexy drama/romance and, being a red blooded female, was drawn to it. I also found the idea of an average but cute young woman being prayed upon by a perverted man sexy and exciting. Maybe I'm just weird.

The sex and nudity (mostly altered for the screen as the original content in the book is graphic) is nothing too explicit. I had seen hotter scenes in older erotic movies.

That said, Dakota Johnson makes a very lovely literature student, Anastasia Steele, changed into a sexual woman by perverted and mysterious Christian Gray (played by Jamie Dornan).

The problem is with Jamie Dornan, who could have made his Christian character more intimidating and cold but seemed to lack the motivation to do so. At least Dakota did a fine job of portraying a young, innocent woman who is romantically lured to the mysterious Christian.

An almost ordinary drama, but cute and highly watchable. It's worth the hype.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
A Christmas treat, as good as the first Home Alone movie
25 December 2014
I am not familiar with the original Home Alone, although this sequel is a pleasant family film.

The story is basic but with a twist: Kevin McCallister (Macaulay Culkin)is not left home alone for Christmas but manages to get to the airport with his family - only to board the wrong plane and fly to New York City, instead of Florida, where his family has retreated to. Kevin is overjoyed to have the world of New York City as his playground, and checks in the nice Plaza Hotel. However, Kevin is being watched closely by the suspicious hotel clerk (Tim Curry). In addition, the Wet Bandits (Joe Pesci & Daniel Stern) have broken out of prison and coincidentally end up in New York City, planning to rob a major toy store.

The humor in this film consists of over-the-top comical violence/slapstick but nonetheless not cruelly inappropriate for a kid's movie. Although the plot sounds like a carbon copy of the original Home Alone, the Christmas/holiday feel makes up for it. John William's score is more developed for this franchise, and more delightful and Disney-like. The setting of New York City and the Plaza hotel is incredible.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Spirit lifting and entertaining movie
15 April 2012
A funny film about a obsessive compulsive writer, Melvin Udall (Jack Nicholson), living in Manhattan who hurls racial, homophobic and personal insults at anybody who encounters him. His life changes one day when his gay neighbour is viciously attacked and his pet dog is given to Melvin to look after. Melvin grows to care and love through his caring of the dog, which opens doors of romance and life experience for him.

I saw this film years ago and found the performances of Helen Hunt, Greg Kennean and Cuba Gooding Jr stimulating and great.

The film is funny, thought provoking and sweet in a neurotic way, as it explores the depths of human insanity in relation to the search for romance.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3 Chains o' Gold (1994 Video)
7/10
Ahead of its time
25 April 2007
Warning: Spoilers
To me personally 'Purple Rain' (1984) didn't do it for me. Yes, it was a excellent promotional tool for Prince to reach a mainstream level, but the film was awful in a lot of ways - dull acting and a boring script. After watching this, I thought Prince only did this one film and nothing else, therefore my opinion of his acting abilities were narrow.

Then I heard of the movie 3 Chains o' Gold, made during the Diamonds and Pearls/Love symbol era, which, I believe, was Prince's most amazing time of his career up to that time. I actually liked his Diamonds and Pearls and Love Symbol albums respectively. This film is really confusing to follow at times. The music videos are intensely sexual. However Prince's acting is not too bad here, and surprise, he actually talks here.

The movie seems to drag on at times and it's only for the serious Prince collector.
8 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Reefer Madness '70
2 March 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Wow, this film was really weird. You can't take this one seriously at all.

To shift this film under one genre would be a pounding issue. It changes its' drift a lot, shifting between a teen drama/soap opera, musical, comedy and a dark, gory horror climax followed by a suddenly very "LIGHT" family-friendly epilogue? The story: a 3-girl rock band and its' manager/lead singer's boyfriend head to LA and meet eccrentic music promoter Z-man who promises them a life of super stardom. And such a life they get! While it all seems very exciting, the girls soon spiral into a whirlpool of pills, booze, and sleaze. All the misery and tradegy that arise eventually climax in one of the most outlandish, freaky and "out-there" finales ever committed on film.

I would be particularly selective with who you watch this with. This film isn't for the faint-hearted. Depicts drug abuse, occasional graphic violence, sexual activity and nudity.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Orlando (1992)
7/10
Better than what I expected!
25 December 2006
An entertaining slice provided by Sally Potter, Orlando, based on a Virginia Woolf adaptation, tells the story of an effeminate young nobleman in the 1600s who is blessed by Elizabeth 1 a life of eternal youth. Throughout the next 400 years, Orlando finds love, loses love, travels the continents, discovers his love of poetry, seizes control of various castles, and even changes sex! Tilda Swinton is a witty, charming actress, and she showcases her talents as a man (later a transsexual) with such graciousness, you look beyond the weirdness and admire the character for what he/she is. Billy Zane is a added bonus here, however he doesn't appear till the end of the film, and only for about five minutes total.

If you're a fan of anyone in the cast, of Virginia Woolf, or time travel, then this is for you!
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Osbournes (2002–2005)
8/10
Not bad
24 November 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Perhaps is the best reality sitcom out there, sans the hype that it generated back in 2002.

Prior to this show, I had never heard of Ozzy Osbourne or his wild antics... but one look at this guy (and the rest of his family) I knew this man has not had a stable life. Drug-induced, foul-mouthed, money-addicts sums it up for this family. I was annoyed, bemused and amused all at once by this family, especially Ozzy. As for the show itself, luckily thanks to its' gaudiness and some clever editing techniques, the first season managed to live up to the hype it generated and maintain novelty, and there was a fun, bubbly feeling about this season which is in dark contrast to the dark, moody, serious and unstimulated remainder seasons that followed after.

It was quite obvious from the start that the Osbournes cart was running on loose wheels, yet it managed to keep up its' appeal till at least to the very end of the first season. That is, the episodes of the first season were more interesting, the pace was fast, the people were more involved.

The premier episode dealt with the Osbournes moving into their new home in Beverly Hills and dealing with problems that arise in such a situation like Ozzy trying to get the TV working, wife Sharron finding valuable furniture damaged due to lousy packing, son Jack finding his sister's underwear in his stuff, and daughter Kelly almost burning the kitchen down. If the first day in a new home was that crazy, the days to follow could get worse.

The remainder of the episode deals with other situations, some normal, some not so normal, but all the while dealt with by the Osbournes in very peculiar ways:

  • noisy neighbors playing loud European dance music ; - untrained, spoiled rotten dogs mark too many territories around the mansion; - Ozzy starting on a new tour to promote his latest studio album - Jack and Kelly's partying/staying up habits spiraling out of control, not to forget their love-hate relationship and physical fighting - Jack being a total brat and slob, ordering junk food at 2am, causing mayhem at school camps, refusing to do anything about his over-sized hair and sweaty, worn-for-three-weeks clothes.


Yes, these are just few of the problems Ozzy and Sharron come across but all is forgiven and forgotten during the Christmas episode... or has it?

This show is worth at least one view if you haven't seen it. Avoid the seasons 2-4 like the plague (although Beauty And The Bert had some very cute moments in it and the only episode that leaves you in a soft gooey warm mood. No really!).
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Can't believe I'm the first one writing here
11 October 2006
This game was one of the first games I played as a youngster around the time computers were coming into people's homes for personal use. This game helped commence my passion of playing games.

Basically, Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson are assigned to solve bizarre cases and it's up to you as to how to go about solving the case. You have two backup sources - the Baker Street Regulars, a 'civilised collection of gentlemen and institutions' to help you with official documents, reports, etc, to guide you in your case. The other sources are the Baker Street IRregulars, a group of streetwise but well meaning orphans who you can use to visit suspects for you or to note anything that may be important to your search.

Peter Farley's portrayal of Sherlock Holmes is extremely watchable and Warren Green's portrayal of Dr. Watson is amusing and rather naive. The supporting cast, while not perfect, manage to keep up convincing performances and make you feel you actually are in good ole London.

What strikes me is how well this game looks - and feels - even 15 years after its' release. The feel of this game feels so new. You can play the mysteries over and over and know who killed who and why. Yet it has that funny feeling of originality. You just gotta come back playing more.

The only complaint I have about this game is the graphics. Even on my old pore-Windows computer (Apple, i think) the video scenes were blocky and the image was not clear. Squinting your eyes sorta helped though. This has not changed for Windows XP computers, sadly, although the DVD version of this game can act a very reliable substitute.

So the graphics is the only thing that has prevented me from giving this game full marks. Aside graphics, it's a brilliant mystery game with engaging characters, intriguing cases, an eerie music score and one of the best point-and-click games ever.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cape Fear (1962)
7/10
Every crime/thriller fan should see this film at least once.
30 July 2006
Warning: Spoilers
J. Lee Thompson's dark, disturbing pulp crime classic caused a stir in 1962 when it was released in cinemas. Not so due to people getting killed (actually only one character is seen killed on screen) - murder was, and still is, a common theme in film since the silent days. But rather to the film's explicit (for that time) approach to issues such as rape, stalking and child abductions.

Samuel Bowdon is a middle aged, well-to-do lawyer who has a loving family, consisting of wife Peggy (Polly Bergan, who is stunning on the eyes) and teenage daughter Nancy (Lori Martin). His normal, quietly blissful life is disturbed by the presence of a man he helped send to prison for an aggressive rape act. Enter Max Cady (a very mean looking Robert Mitchum), with intense eyes and a uncontrollable gravitation to women. He had just served his term, but is still angry that he had lost eight years to prison. At first, Bowdon doesn't think Cady would do anything to his family ("He's just been released from prison, he doesn't want to go back!"). However, things turn for the worst when it becomes clear Cady IS stalking his family but the law is powerless to stop him and he hasn't DONE anything to the family.

Cady pushes Bowdon's buttons by killing his dog, threatening his daughter Nancy with sexual abuse and beating up a teenage drifter to provide a "sample" of his plans for Nancy. The family then move to the isolated, moth-ridden Cape Fear swamp hoping to get away from Cady but Cady catches on and traps them there and aims to pounce on his prey...

A fairly straightforward thriller, it does have its' drawbacks. Aside Mitchum's great performance, the other characters are very wooden. Bowdon's wife and daughter have very little to do in this film and just seem to be used here as bait to keep the film going. Polly Bergan almost ruined a perfectly tense scene when she is attacked by Mitchum on a houseboat. Her panting was so annoying to listen to, I had the mute button in handy.

And what's with the 'perfect good family' thing? Did the writer think, "Oh, hey, the baddie's gonna steal the show. We need to make the point that he really is bad so we'll make the family all good and perfect. The audience will really connect with them because they're good! Great idea!" ... and behold the most ridiciously, unrealistic 'perfect' family in movie history.

However, the film is backed up by a wonderful score, terrific cinematography and a tense build up to the climax at the end (though that's not saying very much...). Everyone should see this film at least once. Recommended!
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Shining (1980)
10/10
Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeere's the Shining!
29 June 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This is truly one of the greatest horror films. Ironic in a way because horror movies are notorious for over-the-top gore and stomach-churning scenes which this film almost has none of such antics.

In fact this film is almost like a satire of such gory films, (eg. the scene where Jack wielding a axe looks like he's just about kill his wife until he's interrupted, losing interest and then walks away). This film must have been considered terrifying in 1980 although now, while it still maintains its' eeriness, Jack Nicholson's flamboyant performance may have some laughing.

What is unique about this film is that it makes you THINK, rather than presenting the answers to everything in front of you. The beauty of not knowing is what makes this films one of the truly eerie films of all time.

The plot sounds basic enough - a recovering alcoholic is hired to be the caretaker of a grand hotel, and takes his traumatized wife and child. Things go smoothly for a while... until Jack sees - or thinks he sees - ghosts of child murderers, naked femme fatales, sinister looking barmen and self-contained waiters. His son is in no better place, who keeps having weird, unsettling hallucinations about the hotel.

As the film progresses, Jack quickly becomes obnoxious, lazy, grouchy, intimidating, anti-social and withdrawn. He especially is obnoxious to his wife, Wendy, with whom he can not have a normal, loving relationship with, and acts intimidating towards his son, Danny, while saying he would never harm him or his mother.

For those looking for intelligent, well-crafted, solid, neat little horror films, check Stanely Kubrick's classic THE SHINING.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Law of Desire (1987)
6/10
Aim Low and You'll Be Disappointed Less
3 June 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I first saw snippets of this film ages ago and finally saw the whole film. Prior to watching this film, I've read countless hyped-up, mixed reviews over it. People say it's a great comedy, others say it's a kinky, perverted piece of work. I guess when this film was released in 1986, people didn't know what to make of it. And now after seeing this film, I don't blame them.

I watched this film originally expecting a thriller. It has some thriller elements in it, especially towards the end, but the main plot - a gay film director pursued by a psychopath - is often overshadowed by the quite inappropriate story of the director's "sister" and her struggle to raise an ex-lover's daughter.

You can see here a young Antonio Banderas as the 'baddie' of this film. Apparantely this was the first film where Antonio performs very hot sex scenes with another male actor.

So is the film good? Yes... only if you're a fan of any of the cast, or of the director, or of dark kinky Spainish films in general. What are the flaws?... well there aren't any that I can pick out. It's a decent film with decent directing. Nothing to get too excited over.

Perfect to watch on a quiet Saturday night.
6 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Not bad for a remake... it has its' moments
23 May 2006
This notorious adaptation of James M. Cain isn't as bad as some make it out to be. This film has a good blend of thriller, drama, romantic and crime.

Frank Chambers (Jack Nicholson) is a drifter working at a restaurant owned by Nick Paradacos and his young, sultry, beautiful wife Cora (Jessica Lange). Frank soon finds out that not all is well for the married couple; Nick is a self-indulged, drinking husband who looks at his wife as no more than a prize won, and Cora is a (too) hard-working woman who seeks for liberation outside her gloomy life. Fixtated on the sexy Cora, Frank gets the husband out of the house for a while so he can have his way with the wife. Cora succumbs to this passion and the two become lovers and plot a scheme to murder her husband.

Being made in the 1980s gave director Bob Rafelson the opportunity to capture the raw sexuality and violence that made the novel so shocking and appealing to a Depression-era audience. Nicholson's and Lange's sex scenes are raw, explicit and violent to say the least. While posing as a romantic-drama, it does have its thrilling action sequences, as in the scene of Frank, Cora and her husband driving around one late night...

Nicholson appears to be miscast as a romantic lead as I don't think he was meant for 'weak, sappy' roles but rather villanious roles. Still, he gives it his best shot, and makes a somewhat convincing performance as the streetwise, ever horny drifter. The one major complaint is Jessica Lange. While her good looks will understandably bring any man down to his knees, her ability to play a neglected, preyed housewife is lacking. Apparantely this film gives her a chance to yell and shout like a hyena on fire. Jessica Lange should have stuck to her first profession, modeling, and leave the acting opportunites for more talented ladies.

Overall, a fairly ordinary film with its' share of gratuitous sex scenes will get one through the weekend. Perfect to watch on a Sunday evening.
3 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
This one is NOT for kids
17 March 2006
I don't see what is the fuss over this dull forgettable movie. It's not cheery as with Karen Dotrice's next film Mary Poppins. There are far too many soppy moments in this film for kids, and even some adults, to handle.

Things bound to get people too emotional is the death of a cute cat (although she comes back to life) and after that death, the rejection of so many cute, adorable puppies and kittens looking for a home only to be rejected by a miserable girl.

That aside, it's also a very boring film. I hope people would put this one aside and focus on 1964's superior Disney feature Mary Poppins and not even acknowledged that anyone from the Mary Poppins casts was involved in this dark, morbid, sordid piece of forgettable slop.
1 out of 30 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed