The Running Man

..it is.

It has to be said that this is one of the dumbest films Ive ever seen. Imunsure as to whether the director actually meant this to be a comedy orwhether the project really is that stupid, but nonthetheless the dialogueand plot twists are just so inane that you have to laugh outloud.

However, this is f*cking great. Theres something undeniably magnetic aboutwatching Arnie maul his way way through The Running Man, slicing, blowingand beating people up, spouting his absurd catch phrases even in a filmdevoid of plot. He is a very charasmatic guy I guess.

It shouldn’t BE entertaining, but it is.

The Running Man (1987) is a terrible adaptation of the great StephenKing novel. Ironically most of the movie is based upon the French filmPrize of Peril (which was based upon a novel written in the 60’s thatwas an obvious influence on the novel this movie is based upon).Several scenes from the Prize of Peril are basically re-enacted forthis film. But let’s get back to the movie The Running Man. Arnold S.plays an unwilling participate in this variation on "The Most DangerousGame" theme. Filled with bad acting and dialog (mostly from Arnold) andseveral implausible and phony set pieces, it’s just an average film.Unlike most of his earlier starring vehicles that made around Arnold,this one tries to hard. I enjoyed this movie when I was 13 years oldbut not anymore. I guess it’s target audience is for males between theages of 13 to 19. Terrible movie.

Not recommended.

Trashy looking and predictably fun Arnold vehicle based on a Stephen Kingnovel (which he wrote under the name Richard Bachman) has Arnold as a copturned into a scape goat for the government to pawn off the murder ofprotesting civilians who escapes prison, only to be recaptured and forcedtoplay the ultimate reality TV show - "The Running Man", in which he mustoutwit and overpower a group of sadistic killers called "stalkers" who arearmed with razor bladed hockey sticks, chainsaws, death rays and flamethrowers. Will he survive?

Professional Wrestler Jesse Ventura, who played one of Arnold’s soldiersin"Predator", plays the one "stalker" who wants to fight Arnold hand tohand.Ironically, both men later wound up in politics.

Dark lighting, a very 80s soundtrack and wardrobe, and ironically, a selfmocking Richard Dawson provides a better foil to Arnold than any of thestalkers do, at least in terms of his personality. Arnold is fun to watchasusual, and somehow he looks better with a beard. If this movie were beingmade now, it would be called a comment on reality TV and the lengthsnetworks will go to entertain the public, and in a way, it kind of wasthen.And like all women, Maria Conchita Alonso looks better with her hair down.

I’ve never really liked Arnie, he is a way too bad actor. Well, so I didn’thave any expectations to this movie. I got something really bad and that’sreally all there is.

In the year 2016, people enjoys the insanity TV shows that rolls 24 hours aday on TV. Arnie plays a ex-military that is accused for a murder on dozensof innocent people, something that’s all made up! Arnie escapes from theprison together with two friends and heads for safety. But he never getsthere, and soon he and his buddies (and a chick he met) is stars in thelunatic show called THE RUNNING MAN. In this show people must fight againstwild hunters…and anything goes!

Very silly movie! Either Arnie is fighting a really ugly Buzzsaw or heisfighting a irritatingly ugly Fireball, the movie never gets in any directionmore exciting or entertaining. The action scenes are all terribly bad made,and with some action this really doesn’t help the movie on its way.Schwarzenegger seems to be very un-focused, as in the most of his movies,and this just adds the famous Arnie twist into this idiotic movie! Althoughit’s better than Arnie’s HERCULES and CONAN, it’s so silly in the firstplace that it really just lays there cooking in a irritatingly bad heat. THERUNNING MAN is a typical look into the future with smoke everywhere, uglyclothes, a lots of trash around and dirty faces…that’s such a un-originaltheory!STARS: 1/5

Back in 1987, the concept of a society which enjoyed real-time relaysof people being recorded on a 24-hour a day basis, 7-days a week seemedan idea which was very unlikely to happen. As we know now, this conceptis now one of the most popular ever devised, with massive world-wideviewing figures for so-called "reality" television.

Ironic, then, that such a notion would form the basis for one of themost entertaining action films ever produced: The Running Man.

Based on the book by Stephen King, writing under a pen-name, TheRunning Man is inventive, funny, thrilling and rewarding.

Arnie puts into some of his best work, and the result is one of thefinest action films Hollywood has ever produced.

The music is perfectly suited to the material, and the gags arenote-perfect, especially the casting of the presenter of the show, whoin actuality presents the American version of Family Fortunes (or usedto).

The supporting cast are of a high caliber and all in all, the workshould serve as an example of how to get ideas across in a fun way.

10/10

I enjoyed Terminator films 1 and 2 simply because they were good fun.Personally, I prefer films with strong characters, good dialogue andplot, and good acting (Reservoir Dogs being my favourite film of alltime.) For this reason, as an avid fan of Stephen King, I have grown tolove some King films and hate others. In my opinion, the one thing thatStephen King does best of all is create the above criteria and put themall in a bloody good book. Therefore, all King books have the potentialto be made into bloody good films. And sometimes they are: take therecent Secret Window starring Johnny Depp. It was damn good. HOWEVER.Shameless crap such as The Running Man… It makes my anger-prone bloodboil. Arnold Schwarzenegger should never have entered the acting worldas far as I’m concerned. Why the hell is he so goddamn popular? Theman’s a damn bodybuilder with ZERO acting talent! So naturally I wasoutraged when I found they’d put him in a Stephen King flick. Actors inthese films need to be smart, witty and above all able to portray thecomplex characters that King so ingeniously creates. (Watch The GreenMile and you’ll understand.) Not only did they not select the rightactor, they fashioned the film to fit Arnie’s style! They filled itwith flashes and bangs and f*cking huge muscles. They had a no-brainedout-and-out hero-good-guy-hunk as the main character, who in the bookwas a flawed but persistent man desperately and madly struggling tosurvive. I reckon that the writers (who clearly have something againstStephen King) thought of a random story involving guns and heroicfuturistic violence, loosely attached it to a King book for somestrange reason, thus encorporating tacky one liners (Arnold’s reallypainful one-liner ‘I’ll be back’) and general sh*t film-making. Thepeople who like this film make me want to kill ‘Arnie’ with a spoon,then we’ll see who’s laughing. (Mwahahahahaaa.) (Joking. Minus one outof ten.)

"In the year 2017, the world economy has collapsed. The great freedomsof the United States are no longer, as the once great nation has sealedoff its borders and become a militarized police state, censoring allfilm, art, literature, and communications. Even so, a small resistanceforce led by two revolutionaries (Mick Fleetwood and Dweezil Zappa)manages to fight the oppression. With full control over the media, thegovernment attempts to quell the nation’s yearning for freedom bybroadcasting a number of game shows on which convicted criminals fightfor their lives. The most popular and sadistic of these programs is"The Running Man," hosted by Damon Killian (Richard Dawson). When apeaceful protest of starving citizen
s gathers in Bakersfield,California, a police officer named Ben Richards (’ArnoldSchwartzenegger’ ) is ordered to fire on the crowd, which he refuses todo. Subdued by the other officers, the attack is carried out, andRichards is framed for the murder of almost a hundred unarmedcivilians. Following a daring jail break months later, Richards iscaptured once again and forced to appear on "The Running Man" withthree other convicts (Yaphet Kotto, Marvin J. McIntyre, and MariaConchita Alonso). With their help, he fights his way through a cadre ofsadistic gladiators hunting them down through the ruins of a LosAngeles earthquake, but not promising Killian that he’ll return tosettle the score when the show’s host double-crosses him. In themeantime, the contestants must search through the ruins for theresistance in the hopes of finally broadcasting the truth about thegovernment."

This is a definite 80’s Action-Adventure movie as it has cheesy musicon the soundtrack,more one-liners than you can shake Arnie out and acompletely preposterous storyline that has holes in it that you candrive a truck through. And yet, despite all that, you enjoy the film asan up to 120 minutes where you can just sit and watch something non tootaxing. The fact that it has a great premise behind it that couldeasily be looked at again; has elements of both an old French moviecalled "Le Prix du danger" and a novel written by the Master ofMacabre, Stephen King under his pseudonym Richard Bachman. You then addin a true 80’s feel. Arnie is his usual self, tough but humorous (andsometimes hard to decipher), the female has all the elements that areneeded in the role given to her and both Weiss the geeky Intellect whois willing to sacrifice himself to help the Revolution and Laughlin thetough Black man who both help Arnie as he plays "The Running Man!"

One of the least Stephen King-esqest films of a Stephen King book thatI have ever seen (though that has both its good points and bad).Excellent dialogue from Ahnold who plays the usual arrogant protagonisthe exemplifies so well. Excellent prediction of the grim future as inreal life people move slowly towards it (watching things like Jacka**and other scandal-riddled reality TV shows). Highly unrealistic (thefemale skips trial and other due processes and is thrust into thebloody game with the tapes she pilfered) but humorously so.Disappointment on the part of the stalker Dynamo, who starts out asvery humorous and ends up leaving you pretty disgusted with him. All inall a fun film to watch if you’re in the mood for something outrageous.Be on the look out for the futuristic antithesis of my favourite TVshow (The Love Boat)!

Come on, it has what it takes!

Cool ambiance, cool music, cool plot, cool actors, and, most of all,the era sensation!

And, besides, it’s based on a Stephen King’s book!

Well, IMDb is asking me to fill out my comments with a minimum of 10lines, I don’t see the reason why, so I’m filling the text box withthese lines, hoping I could finally post it! I write this, just toclarify, it’s kinda silly, but I guess they want to avoid one-linedcomments that could otherwise waste space on their database.

Oh, wait, I think these "filling" lines are also a waste in theirdatabase!

If you want to see the worst Arnold movie, don't look further. Ihaven't read the book but the movie is really pathetic. There are a fewgood one-liners by the character played by Arnold but they aren't goodenough. Th whole fight sequences that happen during the The Running Manshow lacks coherence. The stalkers just keep popping up from here andthere while Arnold looks like he is getting a jogging practice.Everyone acts pathetically and so is the direction. Since the book isby Stephen King, I expect it to be of a decent standard and my guess isthat the movie makers messed it up. You also can't put the blame on theera, there are lots of other movies that are beautifully made duringthe late 80's like Predator. This one is just a shame!

read comments (0)

Three O’Clock High

Another movie that touched me in some way back when it was released. Iremember seeing it on HBO back in 1987 when it was released and I neversaw it again until August of 2005 on Cable and I recorded it on my DVR.The bottom line is that this movie had tremendous impact on a young kidwatching it compared to an adult. As a kid going through puberty andbeing in 5th or 6th grade at the time, I totally could relate to asituation like that occurring because when your young and still growingthere’s always a bigger fish out there looking to cause problems. Anykid in the 1987 who was in school def would have thought the movie wasdefinitely cool. In today’s world the movie is completely dated but youhave to put things in perspective and realize that back in 1987 thismovie rocked and was definitely cool to watch.

Tommy!!!!!!!!!! New Jersey

What a movie! So energetically and self-consciously conceived anddirected.My membership in the Casey Siemaszko fan club obviously started here. He’sgreat as the hypoglycemic Jerry Mitchell. So many classic moments thatmustbe remembered by more people! We must make as many new people as possibleaware of this movie. It is our duty as honorary employees of the studentstore to tell everyone to watch this movie on a daily basis. I personallyhave made a few of my friends into devoted fanatics of this film. Perhapsifwe are rabid enough in our push to make Jerry’s story known as one of thebest, most enjoyable teen films ever made we will reach enoughnon-believersto make a difference.

"Three o’ Clock High" is a semi teen classic that really does seem to gounnoticed by ’80’s aficionados. I love this movie and I think that youwilltoo as long as you give it a fair chance. Nowhere near as good as say,"TheBreakfast Club", but has the potential to be right up there with"Ferris…"

This single little cult hit is the perfect example of how using relativelyno-name actors (at the time) can result in negligible attention by thepublic. This movie was so well done and so extraordinarily filmed that itstands out as one of the most noticeably different movies of the 80s. Howironic that it was centered around such a childish plot. Did I say"childish"? Well even so, it successfully depicted its story in such a wayas to totally suck in the viewer and make them experience the life of Jerry.So here we end up being an actual part of the movie. As each event unfoldsto further foil the attempts of the star, we feel the pain and irony thatfollows. The effect is so well achieved that it somewhat distracts from ourability to laugh at him. It’s sort of happening to us as well. In any case,this is one of the best films made in the 80s and it’s just too much of ashame that it didn’t get the recognition it so obviously deserves.

This is a great high school flick and should be seen by all. It is a greatmovie. It is great how Buddy Revel is introduced as an unstoppablekillingmachine, who hates to be touched. He is a continuation student who isfearedby everybody and has never lost a fight. Jerry Mitchell, is assigned todoa welcome aboard piece on Buddy for the paper. He runs to the bathroom,andBuddy is right next to him. He forgets, about the touch thing and touchesBuddy. Jerry gets slammed into the mirror that cracks and gets challengedtoa fight. He spends the whole day trying to avoid the fight. He even ripsoff the student store, to pay the school bully, to take care of Buddy. Thebully gets his ass kicked, and Jerry is left on his own. But in the end,things start to go Jerry’s way…

this movie is great, ive seen it dozens of times and always enjoy the hellout of it. the cinematography is amazing no 2 ways about it. and ill bedamned if it isnt inspirational. woooooo dey jerry mitchell. how this movieisnt mentioned among the great movies of the 80s is beyondme.

This movie is absolutely brilliant! The whole movie is a launch pad for thefight scene in the end. I love the art of fight promotion. And this moviedoes it well.

The cinematography is awesome. The timing couldn’t be better. This beatsthe Molly Ringwald 80’s movies. They do an excellent job of capturing aREAL high school social atmosphere. Not just the jocks and the geeks. Butthe punks, the cheerleaders, the chess team, the preppies, and mostimportantly the many who don’t fit into groups. Out of all the high schoolmovies I’ve seen this one most resembles my high school.

This movie shows what just about all the different people think about BuddyRevelle. The camera floats by picking up on all the different clicksconversations.

The events leading up to the fight are perfect. Jerry does everything hepossibly can to avoid the inevitable. The best is when he pays the captainof the football team to fight Buddy at lunch and when he tries to getdetention by doing a vulgar book report in english.

This movie is very ironic and hilarious. The fight scene is the greatest.When Jerry walks to the parking lot the whole school is there. I laughedvery hard. But the scene the next day after the fight is done even better.

Give it a 11 out of 10. Absolutely no weaknesses in thismovie!

Although nothing more than a high-school version of "High Noon," "ThreeO’Clock High" is still an engaging, strange, even suspenseful comedy about ahapless nerd named Jerry Mitchell(Casey Siemasko, looking a little too oldfor the part) who manages to anger the most psychotic kid in school, theironically named Buddy Revell (Richard Tyson, a regular performer in theFarrelly Brothers’ films). Revell challenges Mitchell to a fight when "thebell rings at three o’clock," but chaos ensues in Mitchell’s attempts to getout of the situation.

One reviewer on this site (namely Michael Moore; I like to give credit wherecredit is due!) mentioned that "the cinematography is comedy in itself," andI applaud that comment because it couldn’t have been better said. The filmboasts strange camera angles, fast motion effects, and comedic use ofmelodramatic lighting (the film is similar in style to early episodes of themuch-missed Fox series "Parker Lewis Can’t Lose"). The film is well-paced,well-directed, funny, and best of all, different. Richard Tyson is veryeffective as the sadistic bully, Siemaszko is an engaging lead, and the castincludes early appearances from familiar faces Mitch Pileggi ("The X-Files,"and a total hoot here) and Yeardley Smith ("As Good as it Gets," not tomention the voice of Lisa Simpson). Even the music, mostly composed byfilm-scoring vets Tangerine Dream, is effective. Although there are a coupleof unnecessary subplots (the seduction of the English teacher and thego-nowhere flirting between Siemaszko and the Winona Ryder-wannabe), theydon’t harm the overall pacing if this strange, funny film. You may havemissed this one when it was first released in the 80’s; check it out NOW ifyou are a fan of the golden-era of teen comedies.

This movie is a gem. I saw this movie years later after its release and Iwas ashamed to see that I missed this brilliant movie when it came out. Thestory is about a guy called Jerry Mitchell being challenged to a fight by adangerous dudecalled Buddy Revell at three o’clock. If Jerry tries to split Buddy willtrack him down. Jerry still tries to avoid the fight. The whole movie isabsolutely wonderfully directed. Buddy Revell is really portrayed as amonster and it is absolutely funny to see how afraid people are of him whenhe is in the neighborhood. The fear that the persons have is so welldirected. The fear of Jerry is also hilarious. The humoris also good. If you like school comedies you will like this movie. Highlyrecommend. A big 10.

This is a great 80’s movie..one of the best, but not for the usualqualities of 80’s high scho
ol movies.

Usually, a typical 80’s teen classic will be popular because of itscampiness and its sentimental nature. But <Three O’clock High> isgreat because it actually *is* a well-directed, well-acted movie. It justhappens to take place in the 80’s.

Not that there’s anything Beetlegueuse-like freaky, you can still seesome Tim Burton influence in the original way in which this movie wasdirected. It has a lot of moments with genuine suspense, the kind where youholler after something happens- not out of fear but satisfaction. This isone of those flicks where you and your friends will applaud when a characterdoes something cool.

Oh…did I mention this movie is *HILARIOUS?* in many parts?! Just thefact that there is a bully at school that doesn’t want anybody to literallyeven touch him. Richard Tyson plays this part very well, just as the actorplaying Jerry Mitchell plays superbly.

One of my favourite scenes is the one where Jerry stands up and givesan oral book report, while smoking a cig. Funny as f*@k!

-Sep

read comments (0)

Tin Men

The premise of this black comedy is far from complex - A couple of salesmenget caught up in an escalatiung feud . So writer/director Barry Levinson isleft with the dillema of wondering what to do to fill up the running timeand wisely chooses to concentrate on the human drama . Ernest sits in adiner discussing BONANZA wondering who`s going to pay the bill and goes hometo his wife where he discusses picnics while BB sits in the office givingout advice to his collegues on how to make a fast buck . Thinking about itthis is a good movie to show to aliens who are interested in what it`s liketo be human* It`s not as crazy as it sounds after all everyone is motivatedby if not love then at least a need for a sexual partner , everyone ismotivated by greed , and alas everyone can be motivated by hate , withoutdoubt the most destructive impulse within the human condition

Levinson`s screenplay is very good especially if you`re entertaining Martians who are interested in film scripts as well as the human conditionbut I do wish he`d handed the script over to Martin Scorsese to direct .There`s nothing wrong with the performances of Richard Dreyfuss and DannyDevito but just imagine DeNiro as BB and Pesci as Ernest . Is that a sigh iheard you gasp at what might have been ? And let`s not forget Scorsese canmake an audience laugh out loud at the most tragic of circumstances , lookat TAXI DRIVER , MEAN STREETS and THE KING OF COMEDY , under Scorsese thispossibly would have been a classic . It`s also strange watching a movie madein 1987 , set in 1963 with The Fine Young Cannibals performing a song thatwas a hit in 1989

* Best movie involving the human condition ? PINK FLOYD`S- THE WALL

This is one of those movies that is extremely funny, well-acted,well-written, relevant, and irritating. So why am I so ambivalent about it?I can’t quite answer that. There’s something so totally off-kilter aboutthis story that it weighs the movie down somehow. It’s not the wackiness orthe dark humor, there’s an oppressive tone to this movie that doesn’t quitefit with the story.

That said, I loved Barbara Hershey in her role as DeVito’s unhappy wife.Shetranscends the ethos of the petty war between Dreyfuss and DeVito, and youcan really feel the humanity in her character.

this was a fun experience when i watched this movie! it was so much funfor me to check out a barry levinson film (diner, rain man, good morningvietnam, sleepers) that i have never seen before! this is a story abouttwomiddle aged men, who played by richard dreyfuss, and danny devitowonderfully, who unexepectedly meet up, when there car’s crash intoeachother. they soon, go to there own places meeting up with eachother,and,trying to deal with there mixed emotions of themselves, as they discoverwhat there doing with themselves. this film also includes funnyperformances by character actor Stanley Brock, and tv’s frasier’s JohnMahoney, who was in many films. this film, i wouldn’t say is a buddymovie,but, it’s very close to being a buddy movie. the complete opposite of one.this film was a wonderful comedy drama. with a very funny line when he isfighting with his wife, "i’m a free man!" throwing her stuff out thewindow!the biggest treat for me was seeing the wonderful 80’s band from england,Fine young cannibals, doing the musical score for the movie, and singingacouple of there hits, "as hard as it is" and "good thing" while makingthere fun scene in the movie. film’s story takes place in 1963. greatmovieif you love dreyfuss and devito.

TIN MEN (1987) **1/2 Richard Dreyfuss, Danny De Vito, Barbara Hershey,John Mahoney, Michael Tucker, Jackie Gayle, Seymour Cassel, MattCraven, Bruno Kirby. Second in filmmaker Barry Levinson’saffectionately nostalgic ‘Baltimore Trilogy – circa 1964, about twofeuding aluminum siding salesmen (the film’s title is their trade’snickname) Dreyfuss and De Vito in a grudge war after a fender benderinvolving their Cadillacs, leading to De Vito’s wife, Hershey, beingused as a sexual pawn in their immature fracas.

Fine period detail and production values, a game cast, and wittyrepartee especially by Gayle and his constant bewilderment on the tvseries ‘Bonanza’.

Director Barry Levinson returns to his beloved Baltimore with ‘Tim Men’, afilm about two salesmen at war in the early 1960s. Neither are veryattractive characters, but both are well drawn: the film contains a fair fewfunny lines (although few laugh out loud moments), and there’s a note ofpoignancy in the end. Yet overall the film is too stylised to work whollyas a character study and plotted (intentionally) with insufficient slicknessto work as a comedy thriller. The result is a low key exercise innostalgia, kept entertaining by (especially) Danny de Vito but hard toreally care about, by no means awful but more like a side story than themain event.

I agree with the commenters who appreciate this movie because of/inspite of its languid pace, hysterical digressions like the one in thecaption above, and lifelike mix of the ridiculous and the deeplyserious. Since I live on the set, I’m partial to the Baltimore scenesand the only-in-Baltimore scenes, those that have survived andespecially others, like Memorial Stadium (glimpsed in the background astwo tin men ring their new victim’s doorbell), that haven’t.

I’m not a particular fan of any of the players, and I never have likedBarbara Hershey, but they all fill their parts beautifully here -especially Danny DeVito, whose pitch-perfect Baltimore accent has neverbeen equaled on film, not even a Waters film. An 8.

These boys (which is what they are) even in this time frame, RichardDreyfuss and Dann DeVito (who usually are unbearable, even then) areAmerican saps, which makes this film quite enjoyable. Beside the greatplot, these two actors (who personally have been annoying since FAMEfell on their heads) give delightful and insightful performances ofAmerican males of the time and seem loose and into it. Levinson hadsome cool films and some junk, but this hits a bulls-eye with castingalong (including the under-rated Barbara Hershey) in a tale (with slidesupporting cast) that should have been made in the 70’s and beenappreciated.

A 7 out of 10. Best performance = Hershey, Dreyfuss, or DeVito.American Dream town all the way with the usual bumps and divots alongthe way while staying in the realm of comedy while people yell A LOT.This is a cool flick that doesn’t try to pander to (even the timeframe) politically correct morons or whatever. Well-written, directed,with great cast that doesn’t have answers for folks. It’s unique. Ifyou don’t get these people, you might need to watch TV more.

I love this movie. It’s one of my all time favorites.

Levinson’s use of music and arrested adolescent imagery (cars, diners,women, cars and more cars) is subtle and hilarious. The film looksgorgeous and has a sadness that hangs over it as we can literally seechange surrounding these men who refuse to be men. The home improvementcommission, the new car that is the Beetle, actually loving a woman…all of this is new and scary to Dreyfuss and Devito. Devito especiallyis funny in how obstinate he is in ignoring the change around him.

DeVito’s buddy who I think is played by the old comic Jackie Gayle isparticularly funny. "I can go for some Won Ton soup…"

It’s a wonderful movie. And the specifics are laugh out loud funny.This and Diner are the best of Levinson’s Baltimore movies.

I don’t expect my comments to help potential viewers appreciate or notthe performances of either Hershey, Dreyfuss or De Vito. My point isthat, as an auto historian with a penchant for older Cadillacs, themovie did more than satisfy my interest in the "old American iron".

The sets were realistic too; the opening scene was shot in theChesapeake Cadillac de
alership owned, at the time, by the brother of acar-collector friend. If any of you ever bought a car from adealership, you will enjoy the opening scenes and Dreyfuss’ reparteewith the car salesman.

Car lovers need to see this funny movie! Would-be con artists can alsolearn a few tricks from it.

A bit of weird film when I think about it, just about two guys having abit of a fight but not actually doing much except seeing each other.But this is quite an interesting comedy like film. Basically RichardDreyfuss as Bill 'BB' Babowsky and Danny DeVito as Ernest Tilleyaccidentally crash into each others cars. At first they both take itreally seriously a say to each other that they are going to pay,literally and in the fight sense. After a little while I think theykind of forget what happened and only keep seeing each other to talk.And that's pretty much it. But besides just a tiny bit of a pointlessplot it is a good film. Good!

read comments (0)

The Hidden

A good alien (Kyle MacLachlan, fresh from the excellent "Blue Velvet"and a few years away from his breakthrough role in "Twin Peaks"), alongwith a human detective is on the trail of a body-hopping fugitive alienin this great ’80’s sci-fi movie. Any true man would love thisrelatively low-budget movie. Many explosions, much gunfire and carchases. The story is very involving and it’s just a VERY fun film. Tothink that the Director of the atrocious "Nightmare on Elm Street 2"and the writer of the abysmal "Whacko" and "Operation Dumbo Drop" alsogave as this classic boggles the mind. Followed by a sequel that was sobad that it made "CHUD 2" look good.

My Grade: B

DVD Extras: both widescreen and fullscreen versions; Commentary by JackSholder and Tim Hunter; early effects footage; cast and crewfilmographies;Theatrical Trailer; and 3 Easter Eggs (Trailers for "OneNight Stand","Twin Peaks: Fire walk with me" and "Nightmare on ElmStreet 2")

Eye Candy: an extra or two gets topless

Quite disappointing but still a good horror/Science Fiction/actionmovie it was never boring and the two leads had great chemistrytogether and there is plenty of VERY bloody gunshot wounds and it iskind of a mix between The Terminator and Invasion Of The Body Snatchersit had a cool concept and a great story but i found this to be prettydisappointing still i liked it. This Body Snatcher has a thing for LoudHeavy metal music fast and expensive sport cars Weird. The script is abit uneven though and this isn’t really big on brains but it’s wellwritten. The Acting is very good Kyle MacLachlan is very good here hewas pretty mysterious and did fine here i liked him lots.Michael Nouriis just as good here these two partners reminded me Mel And Danny inthe Lethal Weapon films. he did fine here.Clu Gulager and Ed O’Rossboth do there jobs well. Overall well worth the watch but it’s a bitdisappointing *** out of 5 i will be seen the 2nd pretty soon.

The Hidden starts with black & white footage from a banks securitycamera as Jack DeVries (Chris Mulky) enters the bank, pulls a shotgunout & robs it. He makes his escape in a black Ferrari but Los Angelesfinest are hot on his tail as they speed through the streets,eventually DeVries is brought to a halt when the cops shoot his Ferrariup. DeVries gets out of the car & is repeatedly shot, the Ferrari blowsup. Lieutenant John Masterson (Clarence Felder) receives a visit fromFBI agent Lloyd Gallagher (Kyle MacLachlan) who is looking for asuspect & requires a partner for a few days, Masterson gives himDetective Tom Beck (Micheal Nouri) who tells him that he recognises hissuspect as Jack DeVries & he is lying in a hospital bed badly injured &will not make it through the night. Meanwhile at the hospital DeVrieshappens to have an alien inside him that can switch bodies, a patientnamed Jonathan Miller (William Boyett) in the next bed will do. Thealien switches bodies & starts yet another crime spree, he stealsanother Ferrari, beats a shopkeeper to death, kills some-more people &most seriously plays loud music in a restaurant on his radio annoyingeveryone in there. All of this criminal activity filters back to Beckwho is now told by Gallagher that their suspect is Miller. The aliencontinues to jump form body to body to evade detection, it becomesaware that an important Senator named Holt (John McCnn) who maybe thenext President is in town & the alien likes the idea of being Presidentof the United States…

Directed by Jack Sholder I thought The Hidden was a decent film. Thescript by Jim Kouf moves along at a nice pace & never becomes boring ordull as it mixes various genres including Sci-Fi, horror & action. Thealiens origins & motivations are left unclear & the taking over theSenator to become the next President sub plot feels like anafterthought that isn't really developed or used until the end but asthe characters say in the film itself the alien commits these acts ofviolence 'because he likes it' & I guess because he can, when you thinkabout it no other explanation is needed I suppose. The Ferrari carchase at the start is cool but the Ferrari never sustains any damage asit keeps hitting other cars, pedestrians & roadside objects but in thenext wide shot the Ferrari is almost brand new again, there are someglaring continuity flaws & errors in this sequence. The Hidden alsosuffers from the usual 80's action cliché where everyone is killed bythe baddie except the two heroes whom it can't seem to shoot unlikeeveryone else for some reason. There are a few gunfights, the alienonly makes two appearances & there isn't any explicit gore in TheHidden. I thought the ending was a bit sickly & overly happy, it feltlike something out of a Disney film! I would have liked to have seenmore of the stripper Brenda (Claudia Christian) who looked great in amini-skirt & thigh high boots as she posed with big guns & engaged infirefights. Technically The Hidden is good with nice production valueseven if some of the optical effects look a bit crap compared to todaysCGI & I thought the acting was pretty good as well especially Nouri asthe likable Beck. Overall I thought The Hidden was a good solid,entertaining film that was an enjoyable way to spend 90 odd minutes butseemed a little silly at times & the plot was a bit sparse when allsaid & done. Definitely worth a watch though.

Inspired by "Alien," "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," and "TheTerminator,""The Hidden" is an exciting action-packed sci-fi flick that never lets up.A burnt-out L.A. detective (Michael Nouri) teams up with a mysterious FBIagent (Kyle MacLachlan) to track down an alien that’s invading humans’bodies, causing them to go on murderous rampages and steal fancy cars.There’s also some funny moments; in one scene, MacLachlan chews on AlkaSeltzer tablets. My evaluation: *** out of ****.

The Hidden, Science Fiction Horror/Cop Drama

The Hidden is a horror film about an alien "criminal" that has ended upon earth running around a major city. The alien loves violence, crime,and apparently, cheesy 80's Power Metal. What a guy! But there's acatch! The alien hides inside the bodies of people–so you never knowwho he's gonna be! To make things fun, the ever-placid Kyle MacLachlanplays the other alien–the one hunting the criminal alien. He's teamedup with a street-tough cop who spends a lot of time thinking that theFBI agent-alien (MacLachlan) is merely some sort of lunatic.

Here's the breakdown:

The Good:

–Good acting and an interesting story, even if it was made to bring inthe big bucks–violence, fast cars, cheesy Metal–these are just someof the cliché's of the 80's–and the movie is chock full of them.

–Fairly realistic in it's execution, it's believable despite thecheesiness. The cop, Michael Nouri, behaves like one would expect.

–MacLachlan and Michael Nouri make a good team–Nouri is the perfectcounter for MacLachlan's generally stale demeanour–This is the onlyway I've ever seen this guy in movies!

–Rampant gun violence!

Didn't Hurt It, Didn't Help:

–The atmosphere is somewhat weak–almost the entire movie takes placein daylight.

–Aside from the constant screeching Power Metal, the rest of the musicis alright.

–Car chases–love 'em or hate 'em–here they are–but at least withcool cars.

–Decent cinematography.

–Pretty good special effects when we see them.

The Bad:

–I personally would've loved to see the alien a little more. But it's"hidden," so nuts to that.

–Some dialogue.

The Ugly:

–When we see what the good-guy alien looks like. Oooo! A creature madeof
light particles!!

Memorable Scene:

–The film's nice climax.

Acting: 8/10 , Story: 8/10 , Atmosphere: 5/10 , Cinematography: 6/10 ,Character Development: 8/10 , Special Effects/Make-up: 7/10 ,Nudity/Sexuality: 1/10 , Violence/Gore: 8/10 (lots of violence) ,Sets/Backgrounds: 7/10 , Dialogue: 8/10 , Music: 7/10 , Writing: 8/10 ,Direction: 8/10 ,

Cheesiness: 3/10 , Crappiness: 0/10

Overall: 8/10

Well, there you have it. The Hidden is a pretty good film, just lighton the gore and a pretty weak overall atmosphere. If you can get thefirst movie alone, go for it. Classic 80's science fiction horror–witha touch of cop drama.

www.ResidentHazard.com

In this super charged Alien/Cop thriller, an evil alien lands on earthone day & takes over the bodies of humans, thus enabling it to goaround & butcher, rob, kidnap, listen to heavy metal rock music & driveonly the best/Hottest of cars, hot on his trail is another alien, onlythis one is a good guy, who is after the alien to kill it after itkilled it’s family. Inhabiting the body of a detective, the alien seeksthe help of a "human" detective to help him catch & kill the alien,only the cop & the entire police force does not know it’s an alien thathas a nasty habit of jumping from one body to the next after it used up(A plot device later stolen for another New Line movie six years later,JASON GOES TO HELL) leaving behind a trail of bodies of both victims &it’s former host that it used to kill people in, what’s more bafflingto the cops, is the fact that the murders are being committed byseemingly normal everyday nice people, that as far as they know, justturned crazy, with the two cops in tow after him, this leads to severalshoot outs, chases & lots of alien slime & human take overs, becausethat’s what aliens in these types of movies do best! THE HIDDEN is afun movie for fans of this genre, the film never lets up for a second,there’s plenty of action to satisfy action fans & plenty of ScienceFiction stuff to please Sci-Fi fans, there’s also a great display ofgood acting on hand here & some superb special effects & direction, theplot is also crammed so there’s plenty to watch through out the filmsrunning time, a good time for anyone wanting a good Sci-Fi film towatch. Great fun all the way. Look for CLU GULAGER & ROBERT RUSTLERboth of whom appeared in New Line’s/Director JACK SHOLDER’S, ANIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET 2: FREDDY’S REVENGE. Followed by a direct tovideo sequel, THE HIDDEN 2

***1/2 stars

I saw this in the theater in its original release and was immediatelyreminded of Hal Clement’s early 60’s SciFi novel called "Needle". Samealien-cops-and-robbers-on-earth theme but the protagonist host is a youngboy and the setting is a remote Pacific island. Much more suspense andintrigue and originality (no alien weapons!) in the ‘original’ story.Thinkabout it - how does a boy and his gelatinous host smoke out the bad guy?The processes of deduction, reasoning, and elimination areinteresting.

The movie is fun and is, in some ways, a commentary on U.S. culture in thelate 20th century. My guess is that a movie based on the original storycould be a bigger hit than "The Hidden".

action/science fiction/comedy/horror/thriller/mystery/romanceeverything is in this movie it is so amazing. The greatest alien everis featured in this movie: a male alien who likes sick cars, hot women,big guns, loud rock and lots of money. the alien goes on a rampage justfor kicks and has plans to take over the earth. To stop him anotheralien poses as an F.B.I. agent and teams up with local police todestroy the alien. Plenty of action, awesome weaponry, awesome openingsequence with a bank robbery / car chase and a great story. Awesome guyflick and a great movie to just chill out and watch go rent it now youwill not be disappointed.

Police detective Tom Beck (Michael Nouri) is partnered with subtlystrange FBI agent Lloyd Gallagher (Kyle MacLachlan) as they go afterformerly placid ordinary people who are all of a sudden going onviolent - and I do mean VIOLENT - crime sprees. What’s really behindall of this? The less you know going in, the better!

A knockout of a thriller, this potent little gem crisscrosses thescience-fiction, horror, and buddy-cop action genres and does so inhigh style and with good humor. Some of those lines in the script areactually pretty good! Nouri and MacLachlan work reasonably welltogether, and are supported by a non-stop gallery of familiar characterfaces.

The special effects are just fine, although in terms of music Iactually liked the songs chosen more than the actual music score. Whatis especially effective is a brutal opening robbery scene that leads toa very intense high-speed car chase, one of the better ones that I’veseen.

This was director Jack Sholder’s impressive follow-up to his directionof "A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy’s Revenge".

If you’re looking for something good that you may have over-lookedbefore, I would definitely recommend this.

Written by screenwriter / producer / occasional director Jim Kouf,billed for whatever reason as Bob Hunt (he also used this alias for1982’s "The Boogens").

8/10

Referred to by some reviewers as a "cult" movie, this terrificlow-budget science fiction film would be more correctly called a"sleeper", a movie that was missed by the majority first time roundthen belatedly picked up an audience.

OK - that out of the way, THE HIDDEN is an entertaining mix of familiarelements and story ideas. The "alien jumps from body to body" has beendone before ("Wolf in the Fold" in the original STAR TREK series).Non-human cop hunts non-human criminal is also a staple of the genre.But these are not criticisms. It's been said that there are no newideas under the sun. It's what the writer does with them that counts.And here, writer Jim Kouf keeps everything boiling away …

Sure, the movie looks like it was made for TV, but I've always saidthat good ideas don't cost any more than bad. Watch out for BABYLON 5'sgorgeous Claudia Christian, just 23 when she made this, looking veryhard here as a downmarket stripper.

THE HIDDEN is a real "don't miss" science fiction actioner. Track itdown now!

read comments (0)

The Brave Little Toaster

When I was a kid, this used to be one of my favourite musical cartoonsfrom Walt Disney Pictures, although it was probably made for TV.Basically the house appliances are the main stars. They get bored andnotice the house they live in is for sale. Toaster decides to lead themall to go out and find their master. The other appliances include ahoover, Kirby; The Radio (Jon Lovitz); a blanket and Lampy. They gothrough quite a lot to find their master, e.g. some sort of park withanimals, a dark forest and storm, a river and a scary repairs man, butthey do eventually find him, or rather he finds them in a junk yard,after going to his house. Also starring Phil Hartman as the AirConditioner, and the Hanging Lamp. It was nominated an Emmy forOutstanding Animated Program, and a Sundance Film Festival Grand JuryPrize (Dramatic). At the time, and after seeing it again, a goodcartoon!

Really a good, underappreciated gem to be honest, I liked its quest, itsdark side, the ‘Incredible Journey’ of Household appliances could Not havebeen done better, I think. My nephews have watched this and love it. Gottalike the vacuum cleaner and the scenes in the woods.

*** outta ****

If I could choose just one word to describe this entire movie, it wouldhave to be "weird". "The Brave Little Toaster" is probably not the bestrecommendation for viewers of any age. Once you’ve watched it for thefirst time and you are at a very mature stage, you will be ready foryears of therapy! It’s not all bad, though. The only weird part aboutit is just seeing appliances come to life and have personalities oftheir own. The story mainly focuses on six specific appliances leftbehind at a country house (who all happen to be guys; not one female).They decide to go on a journey to find their owners. One of them, anair conditioner, didn’t go with them since he was attached to a wall.The team consisted of a bright (yet easily annoyed) lamp, a comical andannoying radio, a short-tempered vacuum cleaner who’s oblivious toreality, a cuddly blanket (probably the best representation of ayoungster), and their leader, a courageous toaster. The strong pointsand weak points of these characters are both equal in a lot of ways.Now for the things I liked about this movie. Now that I look back atit, a lot of great actors worked on this movie. Many could probablyeasily recognize the voices of Jon Lovitz, Phil Hartman, and of course,Thurl Ravenscoft. I also enjoyed the songs on this movie. You gottaadmit, the songs on this movie are really cool songs; well, this moviecame out in the 80’s, so one would very likely expect it to have songswith very high-tech styles. It kinda sucks that I’m not able to findthose songs anywhere. Despite the cast and the songs, the movie isstill overall weird; then again, the movie did come out in the 80’s,and I guess a lot of people were drunk around that time. Yeah, that mayhave something to do with it. My suggestion, if you ever get an urge towatch this movie, watch it for the songs; those are really the bestpart of the movie. That’s pretty much all I gotta say about it.

A name like the brave little toaster might throw you off at first, butthismovie turns out to be a surprisingly sweet tale of growing up and movingon.

I have seen this movie almost a countless number of times, and each time itis just as good. Seeing this movie from the time I was just a couple yearsold, I was able to relate to the idea that inanimate objects can come tolife. Growing up I often had this similar idea that my stuffed animalsoften spoke to each other when I was no looking, and that they possessedminds of their own. This movie, showing the exact same idea was a big hitfor me.

This movie is very different from the average Disney film. Most Disneyfilms possess an element of evil which causes some minor conflict throughoutthe plot and a major resolution of the conflict at the end, which is oftenshort-lived most of the time. This movie has an overall goal, where theappliances wish to find their master who they have not seen in years. However each step of the way, they face danger and peril, both from theforces of nature, other appliances, people, animals and just anything thatcan go wrong.

Many of the scenes and themes presented in the film are often dark and coldhearted. This animated film is similar to big Hollywood films, where thereis some problem that the characters must face in each and every scene. Forthis reason the movie very exciting, and holds your interest verywell.

There is also great character development where each character is given itsown unique personality. The stern vacuum, the cowardly blanket, the loudand allusive radio, the ’shining’ personality of the lamp, and of course the’brave’ little toaster.

After several occasions where the appliances just miss and pass by themaster, at the end there is finally a happy reunion of the master with theappliances. Every element of this film makes it a great must see kids film. Even seeing it now when I am grown up, I still love and feel for thecharacters and I cannot wait to see what happens next.

Maybe the best feature cartoon EVER! I finally saw BLT for the firsttimetoday. I’m twenty years old, and I enjoyed every second of it. Althoughithas a concept that sounds like it would only appeal to children (5 oldappliances trek from the long abandoned summer home where they live tofindtheir owner’s new home), the film has more than enough to entertainadultstoo.

The characters are very rich, and all develop in fairly deep ways thatyoungkids probably wouldn’t even notice. Their dialog is also incrediblyfunny,especially John Lovitz’s as the witty radio, as they trade barbs andinsults. Most gripping though is the movie’s dark tone, set by theacerbiccharacters’ tenuous friendships and dangerous struggles. If they werepeople, instead of appliances, this would probably be a horror movie.Butthankfully they are appliances, gives the movie a fun angle by setting itinthe secret life of electronic devices. This is especially creative inToaster’s creepy nightmare about forks and bathtubs.

There’s music too, but it’s not an important part of BLT. The songs anddance sequences are forgettable compared to 90s Disney films, but they doentertain and set some great mood.

BLT really isn’t a kids cartoon. I can imagine that it’s colorful andmusical enough that children could enjoy it, but they probably won’tappreciate a lot of its humor and mood (and very young kids might even bescared by it). So suck it up and go walk into the kids section at yournearest rental place and make sure you see this movie.

Good movie, especially if you are under 8. If you are forced to watch it 20times a day because your evil in-laws bought the movie for your kids, thentake heart, you aren’t alone. It seems that Disney and Buena Vista realizethis fact, so they try to make it fun for adults too. I spent the first1,000 viewings trying to figure out all of the voices. Pay attention, ifyou are easily fooled, you would SWEAR that Jack Nicholson was the voice forthe Air Conditioner. Overall, a cute movie that is great for thekids.

The Brave Little Toaster was definitely the king of animation beforeTarzanby Disney came out. I loved how the toaster was so nice to the otherappliances. If you wondering about the title of this comment, you wouldhave to watch the end credits in the Brave Little Toaster!

I am a young man now, I first saw this movie when I was 4 and it first cameout in theatres… I grew up watching this movie, and I still love it today.I do think that some of the scenes aren’t appropriate for children like manyothers have said, and while I respect their opinions, I can’t stand peoplewho blanket their kids, sugarcoat the world and then say "okay, here’s thelease to your apartment, your car keys, and 4 years of tuition, have f
un outthere". Kids must be exposed to these sorts of things at a younger age, sothey can understand them, trust me it’s worse for a kid to find out aboutdeath from a classmate, than it is from a movie about toasters. I ampositive there is symbolism and social commentary in here somewhere, and I’mworking on just what they’re poking fun at… It’s good to hear old PhilHartman’s voice. anyways, I grew up on this movie (as well as Ghostbusters),and I think it’s definitely something that every toddler should own, it’salso got some great songs in there that adults will know.All in all this is one of the best family films to watch with your kidsbecause of it’s mature themes and jokes, butit’s childish appeal. It’s funto watch it again as a young adult and pick up on the jokes I missedbefore…

Three and a Half Stars

This movie is a parable of the Lord. It is about humanity and thedehumanizing effects of technology. It also teaches great lessons aboutthenature of love, compassion, and courage. If you haven’t seen it, then Ienvy you, for you can still experience it for the first time. If you haveseen it, then I am confident you are a better person because of it. Atouching, funny, unique movie.

read comments (0)

Suspect

I’m surprised that the comments on this title are generally favourable. Iwent to see the film when it was originally on release, just because LiamNeeson is in it. I think it was his first Hollywood film, but he’d donesomeexcellent TV work in the UK before that. Though his character is thesuspectof the title, he has a disappointingly small role.

I found the film completely risible, for two reasons. First, there’sCher. Ican’t think of another actor who’s so irritating to watch. She seemscompletely out of place beside the likes of Neeson and Dennis Quaid.Second,and more importantly, the plot is preposterous. Cher’s character, adefencelawyer, cooperates with Quaid’s, a juror, to investigate the case she’strying. Reputable lawyers do not communicate with individual jurorsoutsidethe courtroom. Ever. Even a disreputable lawyer would do so for one ofonlytwo reasons: bribery or intimidation. The courtroom unmasking of the realkiller was way over the top and added to the impression that the wholeaffair was not to be taken seriously.

This is no Grisham that much is for sure, well maybe a bad one (there arenot many though, but it kinda levels a bad Grisham). I mean everything isOKin this movie and the only thing that actually helped this film get over a5out of 10 was the ending. I mean no great ending like A Time to Kill oranything but still some suspense some emotions. Just made it a tag betterthan OK.

6 out of 10

Cher plays a tireless, put-upon defense attorney who’s handed aseemingly winless case, the murder trial of a homeless man (LiamNeeson) who also happens to be deaf and mute. With the aid of a trusty,nosy juror (Dennis Quaid), she solves the crime. The film is set inWashington, D.C., so you know there are machinations and duplicity andsuch, so it’s really a question of whether Cher and company can makethe twists and turns seem plausible. (Hint: Not especially.) Stuck in ahigh-pressure, dead-end job as public defender, Kathleen Riley ishanded a thankless assignment - defend a homeless man accused ofkilling a young woman. Physical evidence is on the side of theprosecutor, but her client insists he’s innocent. A concerned jurordecides to help her out, illegally. What follows in an intricate web ofdeceit and such that’s a basic carbon copy of most legal thrillers.

Cher’s not bad, although she would fare far better the following yearwith Moonstruck. There is one scene in which she’s carjacked (early inthe film, nonincidental to the plot) and cries out a very stilted andunbelievable EEK! Seriously, it sounded like a pretend-yell, as in"Eek, help, I’m being attacked by a killer beagle!" Even so, Cher wasappealing and acceptable in the lead role.

Dennis Quaid was good as well, although his character wasn’t exactlydeep. First of all, I can’t imagine anyone making a concerted effort toaid a lawyer in a case in which he or she is a juror - unless the jurorhas a vested interest in doing so. Second, the chemistry between Quaidand Cher was barely palpable - they looked like they’d be morecomfortable playing siblings. Third, Quaid’s character manages to showup at all the right times, sometimes incredibly so. Made it all thatmuch tougher to swallow.

Rounding out the notables in the cast are Joe Mantegna as theprosecutor and John Mahoney in a great role as the presiding judge.

Suspect would have been a winner if the writing had been a littletighter. I think movies in which there’s a strong female lead who’sabout to nab the bad guys but OH NO they’re meaner and tougher and shegoes to pieces. You know what I mean? You rarely see female leads thatare strong emotionally, intellectually, and physically.

This story had so many holes in it you could drive an oil tankerthrough each of them.

Cher wore black leather in court as a defense attorney? The suspect isdeaf and dumb, but Cher talks to him constantly? The suspect overpowersseveral policeman before he is subdued. But then Cher goes into hiscell alone to talk to him? The suspect hits her, but then she continuesbeing around him? What a wreck of a movie.

At various points the dialogue was so bad it must have been written bya graduate of a junior high school creative writing class.

In the middle of jury selection Cher has a lengthy tete a tete withprospective juror Quaid?

In cross examinations the lawyers don't ask questions but speak indeclarative sentences constantly?

How can you take a movie seriously with so many preposterous moments init?

Interesting film with a very good acting, as usual, of Cher. She is able tosing well and to act in a very relaxed manner as if she was the person sheis interpreting. In this case she is the defender of a deaf-mute man,ex-soldier in Vietnam war (Liam Neeson), who is accused of murdering a ladywho was closed to high level politicians. The fact is that a member of jury(Dennis Quaid) noticed that something wrong in the process from the verybeginning and also felt in love with the defender, so he tried to help hersecretly. At the end they both discovered that the same judge of the processwas guilty and involved in killing the lady. Once the film is finished itinformed that everything here is fictitious, it may be like that, but theplot of the film is possible to happen in real life anywhere.

This production was a well-done piece of work. Solid performances by allthecast, especially Cher and Quaid, flow throughout the film. There wassufficient suspense and mystery to keep my attention, and the attractionbetween Cher’s and Quaid’s characters adds another dimension to thisqualitymovie. I was especially impressed by Cher’s abilities and attractiveness inthis suspense yarn; I should view more of her works. This film wasentertaining and thoughtful, with a cohesive plot and very believablecharacters, set in the reality of the nation’s Capitol. An 8 out of10.

Twists, turns and an unforgettable finish are the main attractions inthisclever little courtroom drama. Cher is defending a deaf mute man (LiamNeeson) who is accused of murdering a judge and his secretary, but thecaseis not near as simple as it appears. Dennis Quaid helps out Cher andJohnMahoney is along for the ride as the judge trying the case. Some smartmoments from the screenplay and adequate direction make "Suspect" asuccessoverall. 4 stars out of 5.

Starring Cher and Dennis Quaid, Suspect is probably one of my mostwatchedmovies. It portrays to the viewer the state of the justice system andthecriminal justice administration system. It shows that there a peoplethatwhen overworked, still care about their jobs and the people they dealwithon a day to day basis. This is all set alongside a murder in which ahomeless man is being accused of. In going after the truth it can onlyleadto one thing… I reccomend that you consider renting or buying thismovie.It is a great one for the family to watch!

Can we say go Cher? In this low budget film Cher plays an overworkedpublicdefender that is given a high work load instead of her year vacation. Intheimpossible case ahead of her, she is defending a homeless mute convictedofmurder. Dennis Quaid is a Lobbist that has his own problems, but is calledto jury duty. In the first scenes of this movie you can tell that Cherneedsmore than a day off, she needs a man. This impossible case seems to getworse as witnesses seem to murdered, and juror Dennis Quaid illegallyhelpsCher with her case. This is a wonderful edge of your seat movie with acertin twist that will totally make you want more!

i came upon this flick on TV a few years back. having never heard ofit, i just figured it was one of cher’s missteps to further establish a"serious" movie career. cher as a lawyer? please. but, i decided togive it a try.

i must say it was a pleasant surprise. there are a few subplots thatintertwine each other an
d the main plot, the acting was good and therewere enough twists to keep in interesting, without too many to make itdifficult to follow. it could have used some touches to fix the pacingand the court case from the 60s that links everything together couldhave been fleshed out a bit more and a bit sooner. but, in all, themovie offers plenty of suspense and a very interesting story.

honestly, this movie has become one of my personal favs. give it alook.

read comments (0)

Summer School

Although Summer School is your classic 80’s teen movie, I don’t see anyangst in it. It’s simply a goof off movie that has its moments and for themost part is funny. In terms of regular movies, it gets a 7. In terms of80smovies, I say 8 of 10.

Hey, I was bored this morning, and being a Sunday, movies were on. So, Iflipped around a bit and found this movie beginning. I figured I would giveit a chance, at least for five minutes, and I found myself watching thewhole thing. I loved this movie! The characters were so cool (especiallyChainsaw and his buddy, "Two thumbs up."), and being a high school kid, Icould identify with some stuff, mostly knowing someone like the teacher inthe movie. The acting isn’t great, but what do you expect? All that mattersis that it works very well for the movie, and I recommend this toabsoloutely anybody.

This movie would never win any Academy Awards, but it was entertaining inmany places. I turned on the TV and it happened to be on. I watched itfora minute, planning on changing channels. I ended up watching the wholething. I felt good and didn’t feel like I had wasted the time, which ismore than I can say after watching a lot of other movies. A harmless,clever at times, feel good piece of escapism.

This movie was a perfect example of an underrated film. This had prefectcomedy,and camera views were not bad. It was one of the best 80’s movies Ihave ever seen. It was soo good i really don’t have much to say about it.Itwas a very good movie I rate it a well deserved 7/10.

Summer School the reason kids get good grades. No one wants to spend theirsummer in a classroom, but in this movie it tells you the chronicles of kidssurviving it. Freddy Shoop is the fun gym teacher who is dying to go to Hawaii with hisgirlfriend. When the principal scams him in to staying to teach RemedialEnglish you know who the class clown will be. The kids prove to be reallycool, and with the phrase "You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours" the kidsattempt to learn this stuff. Each student gets their own personal wish.

Memorable characters were Chainsaw and Dave, Mr. Shoop, Pam and the viceprincipal. Great but not memorable characters were the nerd, Denise andstripper.But at the bottom with the pregnant girl, who actually gives birth duringher test. The jock and Robin (I can’t stand Kirstie Allie). *******

Don’t get me wrong. I think that this is a funny and amusing movie.I’ve seen it several times over the years. The major thing that bothersme though is at the beginning of the movie when the summer school classis first assembled, there are nearly 25-30 students in the classroom.In other words the class is almost full. Where did all the students go?When the "favors" are being passed out for the students to study, thenumber of students is greatly reduced. There are maybe 10 people thattake the final tests.–Not counting the guy that went to the bathroomfor six weeks. I looked over other reviews and nobody seems to noticethe absence of the people that were there at the beginning of themovie. Also, no mention is made in the movie as to where the otherswent. I like the movie and think that it is a joy to watch but that’san observation that I notice every time I watch it.

Summer School is maybe in my top teen of most watched movies. It’s moreentertaining than Sixteen Candles, Pretty in Pink. It’s maybe in the topfiveof the most entertaining teen movies of the 80’s! It’s a very fun,andfunnymovie. I give this movie *** out of ****

It’s really a fun movie to watch, it deserves a higher rating than it hasgotten here. It has all the classic ’80s style characters, the surfer girl,the loosery funny cool dudes, the geek, the jock, the authority figure youhate and the cool teacher everyone likes…

This movie doesn’t seem to be as remembered as other 80s films….like mostof John Hughes’ work (which is also excellent)but I actually place this movie higher than ‘16 Candles’ and ‘Pretty inPink’. I put it up there with ‘The Breakfast Club’ , ‘Ferris Buellers DayOff’ ’some kind of wonderful’ and another one of my less popular 80s favs."Back to the Beach".

Craven0r@aol.com

Very good way to make a basic low budget high school comedy.It all comestogether here with good performances and script.Take note that the classclowns "Chainsaw" and his partner were probably the inspiration for "Billand Ted" which hit big two years later.This is a very under rated film butlet me be one to tell you that movie is one of the best comedies of alltime.It is a great classic,simple as it is becouse it delivers what itpromises with a little extra spirit.I highly recommend this movie to allfans of Harmon and Alley and to all fans of the comedygenre……

I’m not a big fan of comedies, or romances, or, romantic comedies. ButI had a chance to catch this on television last weekend, and I enjoyedit as much as when I first saw it.

Yes, it was utterly predictable (which is why I usually don’t watchromantic comedies). But it had something that so many comedies,particularly the newer ones, don’t — heart — what with how the maincharacter (the under-rated Mark Harmon) and his students helped eachother grow up. And it was clever and funny without being dirty orvulgar — it has not a smidgen of the potty humor that infects morerecent offerings. And there was no sex, but it showed a young singlepregnant girl making the mature choice to have her baby adopted. If youlike this movie, or this kind of movie, try also the originalMeatballs, a similar story with the fabulous Bill Murray in the lead.

read comments (0)

Sien nui yau wan

Wasn’t quite sure what to expect with this one, outside of the uniformpositive reviews I’ve read. Turns out, I could have never imagined thismovie, because it’s very close to "The Bride with White Hair" in beingoperatic and dealing with the fantastic. This walks a fine line betweenbeing a farce, a comedy, and just plain good old fashion ghost storytelling. There’s nothing scary about it, that’s not the theme, it’sreally mostly a love story dealing with a bumbling guy who encounters abeautiful ghost, who is in a lot of trouble with other ghosts. So themain theme is the guy trying to save the beautiful ghost. This alsotakes place in ancient China, with wild outlandish Kung Fu exhibitions,and a trip to hell (more or less). Some of the stop-action ghosts arepretty cool, and the visual effects are top rate all the way. I couldwatch this genre of Chinese movies all day, because they are highlyentertaining, great visuals, and pretty much tongue-in-cheek. And I’mlooking forward to watching the first sequel of this movie also. Highlyrecommended.

A Chinese Ghost Story stars the late, great Leslie Cheung as Ling ChoiSin, a penniless tax collector who decides to spend the night at adeserted temple, where he meets and falls for a beautiful woman calledTsing (Joey Wang). When Ling discovers that Tsing is actually a ghostwho has been forced to seduce victims for an evil tree spirit who feedson 'chi' (life force), he decides to try and free the girl by givingher remains a proper burial. Enlisting the help of Swordsman Yin (Wuma), a crazy Taoist monk, Ling successfully defeats the tree spirit,but must also do battle in hell against the evil Lord Black, to whomTsing is due to be wed.

The first Hong Kong film that I saw which wasn't purely martial artsaction, A Chinese Ghost Story opened my eyes to the incredible world ofAsian fantasy horror, a magical realm inhabited by beautiful femaleghosts, bumbling innocent heroes, sword wielding Taoist monks,monstrous spirits, and dark lords of the underworld; I instantly fellin love with the film's exuberance, energy, humour, inventiveness andvisual excellence.

Two decades later, and this amazing movie still remains one of thefinest examples of its genre that I have seen—a sumptuous, breathtakingmasterpiece that brilliantly blends horror, comedy, fantasy andromance. With superb direction from Siu-Tung Ching, excellent editingfrom David Wu, stunning cinematography, and a whole slew of imaginativespecial effects (including a humongous killer tongue, a many tentacledmonster, and multiple flying heads!), A Chinese Ghost Story is acompletely unforgettable and thoroughly enjoyable experience from startto finish.

If there is a movie to be called perfect then this is it. So bad it wasn’tintended to be that way. But superb anyway… Go find it somewhere.Whatever you do… Do not miss it!!!

I saw this movie by a fluke when cruising the tv channels & saw the trailersfor it. WOW!!!!!! It was funny; it was a great love story! the specialeffects were remarkable - I really loved the tree demon’s tongue! thosewho’ve seen the movie will know what I mean; it did build up a sense ofexpectation, especially in the temple with all the ‘things’ lurking there;it was a road story; and it had a happy ending. Most people I know,unfortunately for them, give up on foreign films with subtitles, but Ireckon that’s what helps make these types of movies so good - in this filmthey didn’t distract at all, mainly because you could work out most of theplot without them. It certainly started me off looking out for the sametype of Chinese/ Hong Kong movies - movies with a sense of humour as well asall the kung fu eg Jackie Chan, etc.

There’s never a dull moment in this movie. Wonderful visuals, good actors,and a classical story of the fight of good and evil. Mostly very funny,sometimes even scary. A true classic, a movie everybody shouldsee.

A mix of comedy, romance, music(?!), action and horror. A knockout. Thisis one of the reasons people rave about Hong Kong cinema. If you’re lookingfor something totally original, look no further. Entertainment at it’speak.

Just read the original story which is written by Pu in 18th century.Strikingly, the movie despict the original spirit very well, though theplotwas modified tremendously. The film language, the rhythm, the specialeffectare all from hollywood, but still there is a chinese core. It is amazinghowHark Tsui managed to combine them together. The result is purebeauty.

Although there were bad special effects, I think that without good specialeffects the movie was better. Made in the 1980’s this film is really good.It is funny, but sad at the very end. The storyline is the best I haveeverseen. The actors and actresses did very well in the movie. This is one ofthe movies that people in Hong Kong should do more of today.

A fantastic film. If you enjoy the Hong Kong action adventure film genreand are in the mood for a light comedy with some outrageously sillyeffectsthen this film is a definite must see! I cannot recommend this filmhighlyenough. Please remember to check your brain at the door when you watchthisfilm though.

I have seen some (HK-)Movies, but this is the best.This movie contains an interesting story and some, in connection with thistime (1987), amazing fights.For Fantasy-fans, this movie is especially recommended.

read comments (0)

RoboCop

Boy is this film rubbish. If you want a robots film you will not findone that is worse.It's just a piece of rubbish on the ground.

The story is so dumb and it goes on forever before it ends. It's astory about a cop who is shot all over the place but still doesn't die,and then he's turned into a robot. See what I mean? This is such arubbish story. He goes after the man who killed him and tries to killhim back.

This will make you feel so miserable, like coming home to find yourhouse burgled. All the actors look weird and they are too old. The copsin the movie look more like salesmen. The special effects are rubbishwhich means that when they happen in the movie it makes you point andlaugh at how rubbish they are. If they had made more effort to makethem look better the film would have been better.

The startling success of this movie which led to second part, thirdpart, and a fourth TV one so a TV series and another TV series butanimated ! actually had a justification which was mainly the violenceand its exaggerator representation by the shooting's angles, roughediting, crackbrained special effects and too many excessive explosions! That came from the script itself as a real foolish violence,imitating the one in the video games after doubling it many times, andthe movie just made it in such an originality did for action movieswhat Madonna did for the pop ! where the first geminated the idiotviolence in the low pointless (B) action movies maybe 10 times what thesecond did with the elements of sexiness in modern singing and dancing.

Yes, we must admit that this movie preceded its time in making thatwhole of hubbub hurly-burly noisy nasty live cartoon action and in bigproduction too. BUT in so flat hollow way, even with the satire aboutthe government's criminality (which is a cinematic tradition from theearly 1970s). Because simply its vehemence exterminated any kind ofserious concept nor whatever deep view, especially when it has beenpresented in a tinge or banter touch as TV's news and all of the addsin it about cheap violent toys ! with repeating it in rhythmical way tothe end of the movie.. the very movie which confirmed all the time thatit's a real cheap violent toy in itself, having no difference exceptfor its too much violence, extravagance and pretension !

Moreover that specific antipathetic insufferable spirit all the time..and I think it's not coming from the cold mechanical cadence of thetitle's character only but also from the personality of the director(whom I didn't see one fine work for him till now !?) plus his ownconfession (in a documentary about the making) that at the time of 1987he didn't know any English !! Therefore he handled the work, soeverybody, through translator and with great nervousness and outburst;I see how that pervaded to all the crew and the movie ! so I understandfinally the secret of all the hysterical atmosphere and that burningrhythm.. It's Paul Verhoeven ladies and gentlemen !

Pardon me. I'm just talking about the unbelievable mass success of(RopoCop) not its fall as for me ! So the remaining of the success'sreasons would be abbreviated in the appearance of the sturdy metallichero (literally !) to have a Ropo-Dirty Harry or his inbred developmentin the sci-fi genre after 15 years of its first emerging. The onlydifference is that inspector Harry was more human, while RoboCop ismuch ridiculous of course even if we look at him as the good copy of(Darth Vader) ! Over and above RoboCop was one of the first icy rigidheroes (as a machine not like Arnie from the same era) who you love tocombine and incorporate with to immerse yourself in his violence, sinkinto its roughness' flooding to live the solidity and forget all thefeelings which make us too weak, falling in love, and having that humanyet cruel wounds without that super ability to revenge, or doing thisservice to the society in the same time by blowing up our annoyingfoes. Honestly who needs more ?!!

Despite my opinion about him, RopoCop by his strong influence and hugeaffectivity at the late 1980s was a "vogue" by all means in thepop-culture and also just a noticeable indicator which proved clearlythe lasting direct proportion between the violence of reality and theviolence in art, whereas the first comes always first and naturally theart of any nation is a mirror of its state.

But here it's that kind of violence which seduces the kids and aimingat the teens' money to the extent that the movie's confrontation of theviolent toys, inane media or the rotten high authority (governments orcompanies) becomes totally nothing at the end ! particularly with thatrepeating adds about the toys which I think after all it was not asatire inasmuch as a real add about itself ! Because the message ofthose very adds is related to the movie's own involvement in the cheappastime not in the social commentary or the high thoughts !

Though it's some icon in the history of the American culture but ittells you much about the Americans themselves in one era, having someeffects at the next era (Judge Dredd for little instance !). So to allthe ones who are like me seeing that Mr. Ropo Cop is one hell of astupid odious hero and all of his works were goofy ludicrous movies orshows.. Please bear it ! Because there are millions who think not ! andyou know what ? I respect them all.. as long as the haters of Madonnarespect me for loving some of her work.

Why I always laugh whenever I remember the last line Call Me Murphy ?!

The first movie of the popular "RoboCop" series is considered to be thebest of them and a masterpiece of science fiction. While it is reallyoriginal and has strong message, it is too gory (and I say this being ahorror-fan), chaotic and unpleasant to watch. The main character,RoboCop is very interesting and the villain is really ghastly andmemorable, but the bad robot looks very stupid and the film is fullwith scenes of sadistic violence, which made it tough to watch. Unlikethe sequels, the first RoboCop is considered to be a "serious scifi",but it’s neither good nor as enjoyable as the best movie in the cyborggenre - The Terminator.

I guess I’m going to be the outcast here and say this movie was a majordisappointment in just about every category. I watched the Criterionversion, OOP and therefore expensive, and simply don’t get it. Whatqualifies this to be nominated for Oscars? If this one claims Oscars,then there is simply no award that would do justice to ‘TheTerminator’.

OK, let me not compare this to any other movie. How does it weigh onits own? The dialogue - agonizingly flaky and juvenile. The FX - blasé.The storyline - predictable to the end. The acting - remarkablyunremarkable.

To its credit, there were about 5 minutes of film that stood apart fromthe rest. The ‘robot demo’ at the executive meeting, and Murphy’sbloody demise. The savagery in both cases was well captured and made apoint. Everything else was script-out-of-a-can, acting-out-of-a-can,plot-out-of-a-can, etc. For e.g., how does Robocop prove itsbattle-worthiness on the mean streets? By foiling a convenience storeholdup and a rape. These 2 scenes were so tired and clichéd - they’restandard procedure in just about every cop and robber movie ever made.

There’s a lot of discussion and appreciation in these forums about the’humanity’ of Robocop. OK, so he forgets his folks, but figures outtheir/his address from a computer and wanders through his abandoned oldhouse, and is programmatically unable to enforce the law on hiscreators. I’m sorry, but for me, that’s hardly a portrait in humanity.C’mon folks, if you look real hard for something, you’ll likely wind upimagining its there. If it had the least shred of humanity, forexample, it wouldn’t go letting loose its guns for target practice whenits partner (who rescued it, btw) is sleeping just a few feet away,dog-t
ired.

The ending was completely predictable and unworthy of any subsequentcontemplation. Its hard to not compare this unworthy conclusion to areal one-of-a-kind classic - The Terminator. The conclusion there wasnothing but humanity, as best a machine could manifest. It was aconclusion that made me reflect, and feel, and imagine, long after themovie was over.

In closing - I am not saying that this was a lousy movie - For it’stime (1987) it was OK. I am saying that this is a vastly over-hypedmovie that simply does not do justice to the accolades it has gathered.It is as good a movie as Tango and Cash, or Black Rain, or Dirty Harry.There is much better scifi out there - like the Alien series, TheTerminator, The Matrix, Donnie Darko, etc., and what the heck - evenDisney’s Tron.

That Criterion picked this to represent a high point of scifi cinematicaccomplishment - is simply unfathomable. This gesture is not just amatter of conferring unwarranted and unworthy credit, it isadditionally an affront to the real giants of scifi that have carvedtheir names forever in cinema, our hearts, and our consciousness.

I saw "Robocop" on TV for the first time in 1990,and I actually enjoyedit even tho I was just a teenager.I liked the action and theviolence,and Robocop himself looked cooler than everything…so what’snot to like about this sci-fi action?First of all,the Verhoeventouch:the Dutch director loves the extreme violence and Robocop doesn’tmake exception..I actually have no problem with violence in movies,itcould be funny as hell and also a sign of style.John Woo in his bestChinese days directed some of the best action movies I’ve ever seen,andthey all had oceans of blood in em.But Verhoeven is different,hisrepresentation of violence is pure splatter and gratuitous.You canalmost see the smile of his face when he represents the ultra-violentMurphy’s execution by Clarence and his men.And then we see brainssplattered,eyes ripped off,a guy obliterated by a malfunctioningprototype and so on.So this is the first problem,the over thetop,gratuitous violence. The second problem is the crappy stop motion.Idon’t know why they used a horribly animated ED-209 instead of areal-size thing,but the scenes in which we see it,it looks hilarious.Third thing:not so much and not so good action.Don’t get mewrong,Verhoeven is capable of filming some good action-Total Recallover all-,but this movie needed more and better scenes because it hassuch a cool character. Peter Weller does a good job although we mostlysee him with his iron mask on,but it must have been a pain to wear thatsuit.Good supporting characters and a always great Kurtwood Smith whoportrays the ruthless crime lord Clarence Butticker-so brave that hethinks he could go hand to hand with Robocop,and obviously fails withone eye less.The soundtrack is great,nothing to say about it.

Last word:Robocop is a good movie,it has a good screenplay and it’sentertaining,but leaves a lot to be desired.Cut off the flick all thethings I mentioned above and you will have a great action sci-fidrama.If only they gave it to a different director…..

Sorry to say that RoboCop just didn't do it for me. If they were tryingto be over the top and ridiculous, they failed. The film was kind ofslow and to be completely honest, boring. It wasn't too silly, althoughthe humor seemed kind of…blunt. The acting is fine, although somecharacters only succeed in being annoying. The effects are fine for the80s, but the action is not very entertaining.

I was just underwhelmed. I know that "The Terminator" is a verydifferent sort of film, but as far as Cyborgs go, the movie and thecharacter Terminator are a hell of a lot cooler and better.

Anyway, enough of my ranting. Maybe I missed something, since many seemto like this film a lot. I personally didn't. 3/10, I would avoid.

I would recomend this movie to people but not all.The reason thismovieisn’t great is it is very very gory.It also has a lot of drug use and

other stuff.But other then those things it is a good action film.I wouldgive this a 6.5 out of ten and recomend it to action fans butbewarned it is a gory film.

ROBOCOP (1987) ***1/2 Peter Weller, Nancy Allen, Ronny Cox, KurtwoodSmith, Dan O’ Herlihy. Sci-fi actioner from director Paul Verhoevenpaints a nifty portrait of the future set for a world of violence,corporate take overs and lastly a gang of murderous thugs who kill aDetroit policeman and used as the force’s special projects group petproject of assembling a law enforcement cyborg (Weller in a humdingerof a role) to serve and protect the public good. Sly satire with a dashof comic book non-chalant gore makes a diverting entertaining flick.Best line: after baddie Smith disables human-for-the-moment Weller thefallen officer retorts "Buddy… I think you’re slime!"

I don’t mind violence…but the Robocop Director’s Cut is mindboggling. Murphy’s death is violent enough in the released version.In the X, it is very disturbing. It made me want to jump into thescreen and punish those guys in the most horrific ways just to letthem know how FUBAR they really were. For die-hard Robo fans,do not waste the $35-$40 it costs just to be grossed out. TheR-rated version is fine just the way it is. It is also so bad, that afterKurtwood Smith and Ray Wise (Clarence and Leon) saw thescreening, they said that they pleaded with Paul Verhoeven to toneit down since they didn’t want to be forever linked as the psychokillers in Robocop. It took awhile; but luckily for their career sakesthey have gone on to do other stand-out performances thatsometimes for the regular film-TV viewer, they don’t automaticallyassociate them as the former.

i was just wondering if RoboCop everfelt sexual longing for women.anyone care to respond?if there is a part where he displays (i’ll even allow references from theless-enjoyable sequels) such a characteristic, tell me where it is,becausei certainly missed it.

another funny thing i noticed is that the actor who plays Joe Cox is namedJesse Goins.add an ‘r’ after the ‘G’ and what does it spell? i thought that washumorous.

read comments (0)

Revenge of the Nerds II: Nerds in Paradise

As with many sequels, this one is, alas, a definite step down from theoriginal Nerds film. The nerds are back, for the most part, theoriginals, but the story is written so differently from the first. Thisfilm attempts to be a bit more humorous than the first, but it fallsflat. The humor is this one is the lowbrow type of humor so commontoday. It is either sophomoric sexual innuendo, slapstick orscatological in nature and it’s just not funny. I loved the first flickand, expecting this not to be quite as good, was nonetheless quitedisappointed in it. The story line in this is also somewhat similar tothe first film and didn’t seem very original to me. The acting is justas good as it was in the original film but the writing and storylineare just not up to par with the original, so not even decent acting cansave it. A 5 only.

"Revenge of the Nerds II: Nerds in Paradise" oddly enough, pulls out somememorable moments. Such as when they find a bunch of old army tanks, etc.Booger (Curtis Armstrong) yellin’ out "WE GOT BUSH!" is f’n hilarious.Although, the storyline is pretty much the same. The nerds arrive in ahotel, the manager doesn’t want them there because they are "nerds", sotheygotta stay in some cheap "hotel" with chickens runnin’ ’round wild.Probablythe worst thing about this movie is that, the "nerd" to first stand-up for"nerd persecution" in Gilbert (Anthony Edwards) has a small role. I can’treally say I can recommend jus’ goin’ out to BLOCKBUSTER or HollywoodVideoand renting this, but it’s obviously a perfect time waster. Umm, I guessitpulls off a solid six.

The 1984 comedy 'Revenge of the Nerds' was a hit in it's time and hashad a much deserved following for decades. It's no surprise that asequel, let alone 3, was produced a few years later. Though it didn'tdo nearly as well as it's predecessor, this sequel is still a fun wayto kill an hour and a half.

Pros: A funny 'Star Wars' style opening. A still very appealingoriginal cast and some great newcomers. Some good humor and sight gags.Plenty of beautiful Florida scenery. A quick pace. The datedness addsto the overall fun and feel of the movie. Like the original there'splenty memorable scenes.

Cons: Some of the humor falls flat. The plot is pretty thin. They tryto recreate some things from the original, for example the musicperformance, but with lesser results.

Final thoughts: None of the sequels to the original 'Nerds' film willever be mistaken for comedy gems, but you could certainly do muchworse. At least they didn't make as many sequels as were made to'Police Academy.'

My rating: 3/5

Revenge of the Nerds 2: Nerds in Paradise is a horrible sequel. Theonly redeeming qualities is the sound track featuring Pseudo Echo'scover of "Funky Town", and .38 Special's "Take Me Back To Paradise".And though it was fun and somewhat nostalgic to see our favorite nerdsagain, the script was just awful, and the plot exceedingly thin.

This was clearly made for the sake of making the studio money. I hadthought that it was a rushed sequel, as the script was so bad. However,this film was put out three years after the original, allowing forplenty of time for a quality plot and script to be developed. Like itscontemporaries such as the Police Academy series, this sequel just letsthe audience down and was unfortunately continued after this horribletrain wreck.

Revenge of the Nerds II (1987) was a useless sequel. There was noreason (except for monetary motives) for this movie to have ever beenmade. First of all they have obviously ran out of ideas, secondly onlya third of the cast was available and last but not least they made itinto a P.G. movie. Why on earth would you try and market a raunchycomedy as a P.G. movie. Well, this didn’t make any money. Not only didthe product stink but it did like wise at the box office.

A bad movie that shouldn’t have been made in the first place. Not onlythe film-makers didn’t learn the first time around, two moremade-for-t.v. sequels were produced during the 90’s (I guess FOX didn’tlearn from that abortion Omen IV). Not worth watching (unless you are aHUGE Revenge of the Nerds fan). Take my word, ignore this one.

Bad movie.

I love the first revenge of the nerds. The second one isnot nearly as good as the first one, but still prettygood. The nerds are still funny in this movie. Booger isonce again the funniest of them all. The second one isalso entertaining at times. They could’ve make this moviebetter if they would’ve kept the nerds at Adam’s college,but the second one is still watchable, and funny. I giverevenge of the nerds II: nerds in paradise **1/2 out of****

The other day I bought the "Atomic Wedgie" edition of the Revenge ofthe Nerds movies, it was pretty cheap so I figured what the heck tohave the sequels too, you know? So I watched Revenge of the Nerds II:Nerds in Paradise this morning and I remember it's harsh rating onIMDb, so I was kinda scared about this not being a good movie. Butactually I found myself enjoying it, sure compared to the first Revengeof the Nerds film, naturally you'll be disappointed, but if youseparate it, I think you might find yourself laughing too. Our favoritenerds are back and they are now in tropical paradise facing the jocksonce again.

Lewis and the boys are going to Florida to represent their charter withthe conference of all charters. They start off the trip very well, butonce they get to the hotel, they are kicked out by the Alpha jocks andmocked constantly. But they hang tough, but the Alpha's are not goingdown, so they frame the boys and try to make sure that they cannot beat the big conference so that they can be expelled from all the othercharters. But the nerds have had enough and are going to make sure thatthe Alpha's go down once and for all.

Now guaranteed, this wasn't the first Revenge of the Nerds, but Revengeof the Nerds II: Nerds in Paradise was still a lot of fun to watch. Theboys are still a lot of fun to watch, I just loved how Ogre kept saying"nerds!" every time they would walk into a room, he was such a funaddition for the story. I really liked this sequel and I think peoplejust need to cut it a break. Like I said, if you compare it to thefirst film, you'll be disappointed, but if you just have an open mind,I think you're going to get a few laughs.

6/10

Revenge of the Nerds II: Nerds in Paradise isn’t as good as the first filmmainly because the film wasn’t rated R. Robert Caradine is back in properform as Lewis his character really grows this time. Curtis Armstrong asBooger steals the sequel he’s funnier here in some scenes then in thefirst.If the film had been rated R and had nudity then it could have been goodasthe first but the PG-13 rating is what maily hurts thefilm.

A terribly silly but awfully amusing little sequel, it may be a touchpredictable, and it is missing Thomas Newman’s excellent theme song,but having the same likable characters on hand helps it to be equallyas fun as the first film. Some of the jokes are really hilarious, andarguably I would say that it is funnier than the first film. I wouldnot definitely call it better, but it is certainly at least on the samelevel, with an interesting charm radiating from the nerdy characters.And there is another song to take the place of Tom Newman’s ditty: anamusing little number called "No on Fifteen". The film seems to get alot of negative feedback, but I cannot agree - it may not be a greatfilm, like the first, but it is by all means amusing, like the first.

It must be 10 years since I watched this movie. I just finishedwatching it 10 minutes ago and even though it is a pretty bad sequel,it brings back som
e fond memories…and like a song, movies, no matterhow good or bad, can at least do that.

It's not a bad try, but really the jokes seem half hearted and there'snothing very good in the script.

I realised while watching this again after all these years that I musthave seen it heaps of times when I was younger. Lines came to me and itall looked so familiar.

Those were the days…when a glimpse of Sunny laying on the beach inher white bikini were a joy. She looks very pretty. I never realisedCourtney Thorne Smith went on to do Melrose place and Ally McBeal andother stuff. Probably because I never watched any of those shows.

Anyway, good memories from a movie that wasn't very good, but had someof the legendary old cast members from the original.

The sequel is like trying to remember a beautiful dream in the morning.It's nothing like the original dream, but for a little while, when youcan almost remember, it feels alright.

I miss those days

read comments (0)