Reviews

7 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Zoom (2006)
5/10
Watch with caution
3 December 2006
Warning: Spoilers
My boyfriend and I went to watch this movie because it was free and we figured it would be a mildly entertaining waste of 90 minutes...and that's exactly what we were in for.

It COULD have been a promising movie...well maybe not "promising", but decent. Yes, let's say decent. Unfortunately the whole movie was nothing but average. Now, there were parts that were laugh-out-loud funny, but they were VERY few and far between. Mostly you had dialogue that no one cared about, kids that filled specific "quotas", and a nonexistent plot.

Let me explain. Any CHILD that was taken to watch this could even tell that none of the adults were in this because they cared. It was one of two reasons, either so that they could show a movie that they were in to their young children who weren't old enough to see mommy and daddy (or grandpa) in anything else OR because they couldn't find any other work, but had a big enough name to MAYBE draw moviegoers (*cough cough* Chevy Chase *cough*). And the younger actors were only in it for exposure. There can be no way that any of the four besides Spencer Breslin will look back on this as one of the highlights of their career. --And one more thing. I do believe, nowadays Tim Allen can't make a movie WITHOUT Spencer Breslin. Which has to have contributed in part to his downfall, considering how unspectacular Spencer has been up to now (enough with the overacting please!). Anyway... Oh, and as for Kevin Zegers, BOTH my boyfriend and I walked out of that movie saying that he HAD to have owed someone a favor, because that is the ONLY reason that I can see that he needed to do that movie. The boy did NOT need the exposure and he certainly has no young'n's to impress. And really with his part being how it was, they could have cast any old early twenties, pretty boy. I mean really Kevin did fine with what he had, but he didn't have much. (Run boy! Run!)

But truthfully, I can't blame the actors for not caring with dialogue such as (*spoiler*), "Must save Connor!" (which was truly laughable...and not because it was supposed to be funny), who would?

And the plot? Wait, what? There was a plot? Oh, I thought this was just a Tim Allen promo. But seriously, the plot goes like this (possible *spoilers*): Once upon a time there were these superheroes, one goes bad and kills all but his brother and gets sent to another dimension because of it. Years later, he's coming back and is a threat to "all of the world" and so they must take a group of misfit "superhero-etts" and make them "good" enough to defeat him. And to do this they recruit the brother who is now old, worn out, and very reluctant. Hardship and sarcasm ensues.

And dear lord is the ending battle just perplexingly short. It makes it seem as if the whole time, the kids weren't needed and this "horribly bad guy" is just a little puppy that needs a hug. *shrug*

So really, not very good, though not the worst I've seen. There were a small handful of redeemingly funny bits, such as (*spoiler*) little Cindy in a bunny suit. No one (including my boyfriend) can deny that THAT was freakin' cute.

All in all, watch it if you wish, just know what you are getting yourself into.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Wow...just, wow (not in a good way mind you).
19 November 2006
I'm sorry, but I cannot really summarize my feelings more than to say that I was ready for this to be sort of bad, you know, in a so bad that it's hilariously funny sort of way, but I never knew that a movie could loop its way around again to just plain bad. And just to let you know, this is not the only zombie movie, or "remake" of a zombie movie that I've seen. --I guess I was just spoiled by the leetness of "Dawn of the Dead."

This movie IS a "remake" true, but the effects were so ill done, that except for times the actors were using something like a cellphone in a scene, you could have sworn this was made at the same time as the original. Which, seriously is not necessarily THAT bad, but really, come on... The "3D" could have been way more effectively utilized as well. Truly, if you KNOW you are making it 3D, you could do way cooler, and way more terrifying things than, "Ooh look! A Doobie!". *sigh*

But the "horrifying" zombies were the absolute least of this thing's problems. Oh yes, I AM speaking of the acting. Let me just first say, I think I lost about one IQ point per minute (maybe second) of watching these people try to act. Now, that's not that I'm saying that I thought this was supposed to be an Oscar worthy film. When I walked in, I knew I wasn't going to be enlightened. But dang! The crappy delivery of the "witty" lines that the script offered was the only thing in the whole movie that was worthy enough to make me gasp in horror. COME ON PEOPLE!! Absolutely everyone watching has fairly low expectations of you and yet you decide your mission in life is to lower them even further?!?! There was not ONE person in the entire cast (including the lead actress) that you could EVER feel for enough to root for THEM against the zombies. I myself, was cheering for the zombies. If they could have eaten everyone in the first 15 minutes, THAT would have been worthwhile.

I'm not going to say more because no more is needed. It was bad and that is it.

You can hate the review, or agree with everything. I don't truly care. I just wrote this because I needed somewhere to vent. I had already used up my boyfriend, who by the way agrees with me.
57 out of 74 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Absolutely Sumptuous!
9 January 2005
Let me just say that I have never seen the stage version of "The Phantom" and I knew almost nothing of the story so I had no assumptions going in.

From the moment they lifted up that old cracked chandelier and everything shifted back 50 years, all I could do was sit there with my jaw dropped in awe!

The movies colors are so vibrant! Everything just comes across as bigger than life and yet so human at the same time. -It was slightly "stagey", but it is based on a show, so I was expecting that. And it really only adds to the charm that the movie possesses.

The music was incredible! Every time they reprised "the phantom's song" I just got chills! And though the words to the songs are sometimes hard to hear, the story is still easily understood.

The fact that most of this cast is not well known only helps the movie. You aren't distracted by remnants of any other characters the actors have portrayed and you can just enjoy the story for what it is.

Emmy Rossum as "Christine" and Gerard Butler as "the Phantom" have such chemistry when they are together on screen that you almost fall in love with the phantom as well -even when you know that he had just done many ruthless unforgivable things. And Emmy has such a beautiful voice!

I knew it was going to be wonderful ten minutes in...and I fell in love with it, when I was so moved that I shed tears at the ending.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Scooby-Doo (2002)
10/10
Dead-on Scooby!
14 June 2002
Mathew Lillard is Perfect! You totally see him as Shaggy. The rest of the cast tries not to be upstaged very well, especially Cardellini. If I'd watched this as a regular film, I'd have to say that it was alright, but as a cartoon fan I'd say it embraces the Scooby Doo way. It's totally Zany, totally Mezmerizing, and totally Scooby.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Amélie (2001)
10/10
Just Fabulous
2 April 2002
I could have gotten into this movie for free, but I ended up paying the 6.50 for some reason. It was totally worth it. This movie was funny and involving. I found myself talking to the screen, luckily though, not too loud, in order to convince Amelie to go for it. Anyone who thinks subtitled foreign films aren't their style, should see this one and they may change their minds.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
lovely
23 October 2000
I thought that Moonlight and Valentino was a good film. The cast was terrific and brought life to the "talkiness" of the movie.

A widowed woman relies on her friends and a hot painter to get her through the rough time. Jon Bon Jovi is exciting in his first Big Screen role as "the painter". Good climax but it leaves you feeling like it's missing something.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Glory (1989)
10/10
Beautifully scripted, with a top notch cast
19 October 2000
I read that this movie was given four stars by several critics so I decided to check it out. I never cry at war movies because the action is so intense, but I just couldn't help it at the end of this one, it's just too moving. I do have to admit that I thought that Mathew Broderick would be a little off kilter, but he was emotionally on as the leader of the 54th. Denzel Washington and Morgan Freeman gave astounding performances as usual, and Cary Elwes,who in my opinion is not given enough credit as an actor, rises above the norm as Cabot Forbes.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed