Change Your Image
conkeestador
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Dune: Part Two (2024)
Arghhh
Almost 3 hours of boring girl boss love triangle garbage setting up yet another unnecessary sequel. If you aren't familiar with the book it may be better, but if you were hoping that the story would be close to what Frank Herbert wrote you're going to be sorely disappointed. It is a beautiful movie, but all the effort went into eye candy and awkwardly checking DEI boxes. The ending is cringe and several people walked out during the showing, especially after the 2 hour mark. I'm having a hard time believing all of the 10 ratings here are from real people. Now I remember why it's been so long since I wasted money at a theater...
Galaxina (1980)
3.4 stars? Did we see the same movie?
Don't believe any positive thing you've ever heard, read, or seen about this movie. This movie has not a single redeeming quality. Others have taken the time to write out a synopsis so I won't bother, but just think of the worst 1980 had to offer, formulaic sci-fi ripoff, cocaine-induced and you are exactly where the writers and producers were when this mess was hatched.
Dorothy Stratten was no actress, and had it not been for her unfortunate demise and the subsequent pity party, she would be lost in obscurity. Don't get me wrong, she was extremely attractive and possibly even a nice person, but we see so little, and fortunately hear even less of her in her role that Galaxina is just a waste of time. Okay, the role of emotionless robot that eventually teaches itself to speak was perfect for her (you'll know right away what I'm talking about when she does finally speak), but good god man, she's a Playboy Playmate, why does she never even come close to taking her clothes off? Isn't it bad enough that she's really only in about 40% of the movie, but seriously, not even a topless shower scene or at least some side boob? I've seen less clothes on women in public in extremist middle eastern countries.
I looked for this movie for many years and believe me I was quite let down when I finally watched it. It is actually one of the very few movies that I have actually trashed because it was taking up too much space.
Reveal the Path (2012)
Path To What?
This is a documentary about a group of sponsored cyclists that spout bits of drink-fueled wisdom, go to scenic places, ride expensive bikes, and wear expensive gear, all very pretentiously. It doesn't seem to really be about bicycling, but non-cyclists will not find anything of interest either. For comparison, if you liked "Ride The Divide", featuring some of the same cyclists, this will be a disappointment.
The production quality is OK and the scenery is pretty good but any footage that may contain anything interesting is missing. Many times we see the rider ride up to the camera's location and say something that makes you wish you'd seen where he'd been, but somehow the camera always misses the action. The characters involved are very easy to dislike and they don't even seem to get along with each other all that well. They are so very serious about what they say, but it's all just vapid nonsense. But then again, most athletes should not be allowed to speak on camera without a script, or they should stick to things they know, like lifting heavy things or how to go fast, definitely not philosophy.
Being a cyclist and sometime bike builder and having followed Matthew Lee's career, I was excited to see this show up on Netflix. What a bummer. I tried first to watch it with my wife. She turned it off after about ten minutes and I didn't complain. I tried again later in the evening to see if I could make sense of it. Nope, still doesn't work. Even being in the most relaxed receptive mood possible, and watching a documentary about something I immensely enjoy, Lee and the rest of the cyclists in this documentary only reveal the path to boredom.
Angel, Alien and UFO Encounters from Another Dimension (2012)
really?
The movie, as stated by an earlier reviewer, starts out like a badly produced infomercial. There is a guy, our narrator, who rambles on incoherently for a while about other dimensional beings and then he starts interviewing a guy that lives in New Orleans who has uncovered a dimension unseeable to the human eye. He explains that only when viewed through video do beings from this other dimension become recognizable. We are then treated to some of his video work - shots of cranes, helicopters, random lights, and other normal everyday things. All the while, I'm waiting for something 'other worldly' to appear, but it's just more and more video of the mundane with the narrator going on about all of this being proof that angels and aliens and whatnot walk the earth side by side with us.
First of all, I wasn't expecting much - just something to run in the background while I did other things. What I got was mind-boggling and stunningly bad in every way imagineable. Logic? Screw that. I couldn't believe what I was seeing, not the videos of cranes and helicopters and streetlights and other things seen everyday, but that someone could actually, with a straight face, make a movie about these things being manifestations of other-worldly entities or angels. I mean seriously, light shining through tree branches is proof that angels walk the earth? Admittedly, I didn't make it much past that, I was afraid my wife or kid would walk in and catch me watching it - it is that bad.
I agree with the other reviewer in that this is a good example of how anyone can be a filmmaker, even obviously insane people. If you must see it catch it on Netlix or Youtube, don't spend any money on it, you will without doubt regret it!
2-Headed Shark Attack (2012)
Kind of like the opposite of Citizen Kane
In the future, I believe this will be viewed as an influential film, created by some of the few true modern pioneers in this age of profit-driven no-risk cinema.
Just kidding, it's complete crap. Asylum movies are without exception uber-cheap crap. They make films solely made to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Sure, some will say that some of the most successful filmmakers of all time have done the same thing (Roger Corman, Uwe Boll, & Steven Spielberg for example) but these guys never fail to just simply fail. Budding film-makers take note, here's the condensed Asylum formula - get as many peripherally famous z-list celebrity people as you can afford together in one movie. Jerry O'Connell's brother, Hulk Hogan's daughter, Dennis Rodman's ex-wife, add a script written by a semi-retarded 12 year old, bad CGI, and inept direction and editing and there you have it! Brief synopsis: Attractive (mostly) semester-on-a-boat students are under the tutelage of professor Jerry O'Connell's brother who is in some kind of weird alluded to, but never happening, love triangle with his boat captain wife and Carmen Electra. They're all on board a badly CGI-damaged vessel that is sinking. The students and professor O'Connell take refuge on a soon-to-be-sinking island while his wife, the ship's captain, and totally inept crew try to fix the boat; and all the while Carmen Electra sunbathes, which wouldn't have been so bad 15 years ago.
Scenes of note: The ship's captain and Carmen Electra on the ship's bridge; I don't think two people with less talent have ever been paid to act. The dislike between the two is almost palpable and I don't attribute that to any kind of acting skill. The gratuitous three-way in the ocean that precedes deaths three through five is another noteworthy scene with plenty of nudity and two chicks making out. The end credits are pretty good too.
Director Christopher Ray... the combined IMDb user rating scores of all of the movies he has ever directed added together equal 8.8. He's directed six projects. That's an average user rating of 1.6 per project. Clearly, he's not in it for the art.
Carmen Electra, a little past her 'sell by' date, is top-billed in this movie. Why? It is painfully obvious what the producers were thinking. "So, we have $1000 bucks in the budget to pay the actors and Carmen Electra isn't doing anything and she said she'll be in the movie but she gets $800 per day now so we'll just be able to afford a day's worth of shooting random stuff with her in it and then figure it all out in editing." It was pretty funny that at least four people get eaten by the two-headed shark while she simply sunbathes in sweet oblivion.
I know, somebody out there is going to say something like 'art is subjective, just because you don't get it, doesn't mean it's not good'. To which I would say. "Ok, ya got me there. This IS the best 2-headed man eating shark movie ever!"
2012: Doomsday (2008)
We'll make it... or maybe not.
I'm a fan of bad movies. I have all of the MST3K movies I can get my hands on and I enjoy the hell out of 'em. They make me feel superior, even if I'm not.
Unless you've watched this movie you can't possibly understand how bad a bad movie can be. I've read some of the other reviews of this movie and I understand the reviewers' pain. It is impossible to describe something this bad. People say things like "I wish I could get back the 2 hours of my life it took to watch this" or "this crap was eye-popingly bad" or "oh, the humanity!". People who wrote about the holocaust probably experienced this kind of writer's block. The truly bad and horrible events in one's life are often difficult to put into words.
This movie is truly a crime against humanity and those responsible should be hunted to the ends of the earth for the heinousness of their acts.
Starsky & Hutch (2004)
A lesson to budding script writers
One SPOILER - maybe.
I must admit that I was not looking forward to viewing this movie. Normally, I don't appreciate it when Hollywood takes a perfectly good childhood memory and screws the hell out of it (see the recent Looney Tunes movie). However, I found it very funny in parts. It is not a truthful remake of the original Starsky & Hutch TV series in any way. The characters are inaccurate and way too 'over the top' but the movie is oddly entertaining in a stupid Three Stooges sort of way.
The 'lesson' that I alluded to in the title is that budding script writers should remember that at any point when faced with writer's block or a lack of originality one can always fall back on the 'lesbian kiss'. It is an instant +2 points in my movie scoring system for every instance of this kind of kink. I recognize the system is flawed as some of the better adult movies actually score 250 or more on a scale from 1 to 10 using this method. At any rate, in the case of this movie I was going to give it a 6 but Carmen Electra kisses another woman in one scene making the movie a solid 8.
Anyway, Stiller does a pretty good job. Wilson can't act but he does have some charm. Jason Bateman is very good in a supporting role and the rest of the cast is adequate (except for Snoop Dog who is no Antonio Fargas).
In short, I recommend this movie to completists of the work of George Cheung, those who are easily amused, or those who may want to see Carmen Electra kiss another woman.
Twister (1996)
He's in it for the science
This movie is completely absurd. It is a ridiculous love story set in 'tornado alley' in the Midwest. After reading some of the comments from my fellow 'reviewers' I see why this crapfest is rated so high. It is made to appeal to foreign markets and the young and/or stupid American market (a large market indeed).
In my opinion, the release of Twister in 1996 marked a turning point in Hollywood. It became apparent to movie makers that it really didn't matter if the dialogue was brainless or the plot was full of holes. It didn't matter if the actors could act or the script was convincing. What mattered was how loud and violent a movie could be. We in America love our violence and it translates well into any language. Since foreign markets make up a large percentage of a film's profits, it just makes sense to create long action sequences with as little conversation (or plot) as possible. In fact, Twister would have been improved had there been no discourse at all just people fleeing from the hundreds of tornado's that terrorize the American Midwest everyday. I can't wait for Twister 2. Maybe Carmen Electra and Ashton Kutcher will be in it and there will be a lesbian subplot.
In short, if you have a nice home theater with surround sound and would like to have your intelligence insulted, I recommend giving Twister a go. Otherwise stick to something cerebral like the recently remade Starsky & Hutch movie. Carmen Electra is in that and she kisses another woman. No corporate sell-outs here baby, it's all about the science.
The Lost Skeleton of Cadavra (2001)
Oh yeah, he's a scientist
`Betty, you know what this meteor could mean to science. It could mean actual advances in the field of science'. I laughed so hard my teeth hurt. Unfortunately, the world is full of knuckle dragging mouth breathers who are not capable of appreciating fine parody. If you are a knuckle dragging mouth breather (or a big Ashton Kutcher fan) you are going to hate this movie.
Be warned, there are gigantic plot holes. The acting is wooden to say the least. The special effects are not at all special and look like they could have been done by a 10 year old. All of the clichés are covered. The woman runs around in high heels and faints at the first sign of danger. There is an evil scientist, aliens (from another planet), a mutant, and a skeleton. And let's not forget Animala (rowrr). Made up of four woodland creatures, she steals the show. In short, it is an incredibly accurate and funny send-up of 50's drive-in movies.
I recommend it to those with a more advanced sense of humor.
Dragon Storm (2004)
Stop, Drop, and Roll anyone?
I rated it a 2 because the dragons were really not that bad. It would have been less than a 1 without CGI. I look forward to seeing some of that same dragon footage in some other low budget flick.
However, what this movie needed (besides some semblance of continuity, a script, and professional editing and direction) was some gratuitous sex and nudity. OK fine, you got to see half of one of the Princess' breasts in one scene but if you really want to be successful in the `dragons-from-outer-space-in-1190-Carpathia' genre you have to have eye candy. I know it had plenty of violence and it was `made for TV' but it's just kind of sad when you can see men being burned alive (the same men over and over in slow motion in this case) but no naked women. This movie could have easily been a 5 or 6 with some full frontal nudity and maybe even a 7 with some hot girl-on-girl action. At least it would have made the story a little more interesting if the Princess' love interest had been the girl with the catapult instead of the rather limp-wristed `huntsman' (did you see the way he held the bow?). What a waste of the budget to hire women like that and then cover them in those hideous costumes.
Also, I'm really trying to not be too critical but I would think with a little editing and sound work they could have gotten some of the actor's accents to match (with the exception of the obligatory Kung Fu Master of course).
Overall, I can't recommend this movie (it has to be at least a 3 before I will do that) but I did have a good time watching it. If you do decide to subject yourself to this movie I would recommend a sedative (like tequila) to dull the pain.
Cheaper by the Dozen (2003)
Steve Martin on autopilot...
This movie is, first of all, complete crap. It is truly a sign of the Apocalypse when Ashton Kutcher (in an uncredited role) is funnier than Steve Martin.
I wasn't really expecting much but the movie was eye-poppingly bad. The story is about a couple who have brought 12 children into the world and then decided to pursue personal goals. The script is poorly developed and does not make you feel for any of the characters. One of Steve Martin's lines - "Twelve kids later and we still got the heat." It really made me nauseous. I should have walked out at that point but I didn't want to embarrass my own kids.
No production values. The boom microphone drops into the shot no less than six times throughout the movie.
It was unintentionally funny in parts and completely unfunny in the supposed "comedic" bits. It was so bad it was not even entertaining in a bad way.
$20 and 2 hours I can never get back. It was.... I can't be bothered with this anymore. This movie was horribly terribly bad and you have been warned. The only reason to watch it is to drink heavily and throw stuff at the screen.
Bubba Ho-Tep (2002)
Truly classic film!
I've only seen two other Bruce Campbell films: "Evil Dead" and "Fargo", the more recent of which was made 7 years before this. The improvement is remarkable. At some time perhaps in the 1990s Bruce Campbell appears to have been given a charisma transplant; in "Bubba Ho-Tep", instead of coming across, woodenly, as a bit of a cad, he's a perfectly decent fellow, with all of the human impulses it's easiest to like and intelligence to boot. It's as though he's been taking lessons in civility and charm from Ashton Kutcher.
If the earlier comic sequences are not to be judged too harshly for merely marking time between the breath-taking action sequences and I concur, they should not be judged too harshly for this how much less should this one be judged harshly, with at least four sequences likely to get applause (all four DID get applause, at the screening I attended): the bit where Elvis talks about his erectile dysfunction (again, this is exactly the kind of thing Ashton Kutcher would do); the scene in which he gets 'lubed' (From now on I'll lube mah OWN crankshaft!'); the intricate scarab beetle scenes; and the superb (well acted as well as written) JFK scenes. Any one of these would be reason enough to dust an average film off and watch it at least once.
But this isn't an average film. One thing that this has in common with Campbell's other films is its desire to entertain at every moment. It's a light film, even a tongue in cheek one
yet we can feel for it, too. There's nothing unnatural or futile about the Mummy that threatens Elvis. In fact both JFK and Elvis are genuinely torn for perfectly legitimate reasons, and in fact, there's no way for them to resolve their difficulties except by simply choosing, which is why the sudden ending doesn't feel forced.
Both of my opposable digits are way up!
Dickie Roberts: Former Child Star (2003)
Overall I felt it was enjoyable but...
I gave it a 6 because it made me laugh out loud a couple times but the movie is not without some problems. The True Hollywood Stories parody was funny and the movie started off well but really drifted off after the adopted family came in. The real "former child stars" used in the movie were just not funny. They were kind of painful to watch actually (especially the poker scenes). I know Bonaduce and Feldman can be funny but I really didn't like the rest of those people when they were in their prime. Perhaps they would have been funnier if the script had been developed more.
I'll have to watch it again when I'm not blind drunk to be see if it makes me laugh without chemical assistance.