The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie

I am a huge fan of Spongebob Squarepants. The cartoon series ishilarious, my wife enjoys it, and so does my three-year old daughter.So, when I rented the movie, I was expecting some of the same innocent,albeit dumb/silly humor that makes the show such a hit. I’m sorry tosay that this is definitely NOT a movie I would want to own, let aloneallow my daughter to watch. There are so many references to death andevil sea monsters with great gaping mouths full of fangs that it makesme wonder…"What the HECK were they thinking?" This is SpongebobSquarepants on LSD. The basic plot, by the way, is Plankton, in hisendless quest to obtain the sacred Krabby Patty formula, finally comesup with one that seems flawless and unstoppable: he steals KingNeptune’s crown, sells it to a mystery person in the wastelands of amuch-feared place called Shell City, and blames the whole thing on Mr.Krabbs. It starts out nice enough, but my distaste for it began whenNeptune starts threatening to kill Mr. Krabbs if his crown isn’treturned, and the movie gets even worse when Spongebob and Patrick, whogo on a quest to get the crown and save Spongebob’s beloved boss,finally get to Shell City and encounter creatures that would scare anyyoung child: great sea monsters with giant, gaping mouths filled withfangs and red glaring eyes, danger at every turn, seedy bars where, ifyou’re not tough enough, you’ll get the living crap pummeled out ofyou. Where’s the friendly humor? Where’s the sly wit and thesomewhat-harmless humor? It’s like the movie starts out well enough andthen takes a sudden dive into dark humor and violence that’s highlyinappropriate for this kind of a movie. I myself did not care for it atall. There’s a lot of crap out there I refuse to let my daughter watchnow or ever, ESPECIALLY all this stupid Digimon/Pokemon/Yugi-Oh junk!While I don’t care if she watches the Spongebob cartoons, I will mostdefinitely NOT let her watch this movie. People who say this movie isgeared towards young kids perhaps don’t care how much violence anddepictions of death and evil their kids watch. I thought this moviecould have been a LOT better without near-constant threats ofdeath,pain, punishment and becoming mindless slaves by a miniatureHitler-wannabe (namely, Plankton). Watch it if you want, but I wasterribly, terribly disappointed by it.

SpongeBob Squarepants The Movie(2004) I like the cartoon. When I heardabout a movie being made, I thought that should be great.

What went wrong?

This is not what I expected at all. This is a extremely boring flick. Ikept on waiting for some good humor. None. I wanted a good plot. Nope.I wanted a fun ride. Nothing. All I got was nothing. This is themovie?!? I could not believe this. Even Patrick is not funny, andthat's saying something. The "humor" is just lame gags that have nocharm of the series. The adult humor is missing. The scenes with DavidHasselhoff have to be the most forced scenes ever. I was stunned on howunfunny those scenes were. How desperate. The movie gets far to sappy,and my biggest complaint: Of all the characters the show has, none ofthem were used at all. NONE. They are all at the beginning of the moviethen gone. Only Spongebob and Patrick are here. No Squidward, no Sandy,no Mr.Krabs, Not even Mermaid Man and Barnacle Boy! For shame.

The Last Word: Beyond disappointing. Spongebob was a funny series. Thisflick did not deliver at all. What's really bad, this could have been agood movie. But the jokes were lame to desperate, and the movie gotreally boring at many times. The creative genius must have taken avacation, because none of that was here.

(May be A Spoiler)I was forced against my will to see this movie when ilost a bet to my cousin……ugh big mistake.This movie was soSenseless.Worst hour and a half of my life.The plot was senseless andthe jokes sucked big time.You can't get worst than this..After themovie I had to watch a good movie.I hate the TV show and I hated themovie even more. Listen to the facts. 1.A snail that meows. 2.Anoctopus that plays the flute. 3.A starfish living under a rock. 4.Asponge that wears cardboard pants 5.Pineapples rot under the sea6.Squirrels do not live underwater with fish bowls on their head..It isnot using your imagination wisely.Bottom line I hate sponge bob squarepants….

Spongebob the Movie, based on the retarded cartoon, it featuresspongebob and Patrick searching for the King Neptune's missing crown,it was stupid, unfunny, idiotic, crappy. Box office was low, and theyreally need their heads in the game because their making some craplately.

This is about spongebob wants a manager promotion or whatever it is,that this new diner whatever, but failed, meanwhile, Plankton wantsrevenge to Mr. Krabs to steal that formula, to activate Plan (Z) toconquer the world, wow, ain't that exciting, Now spongbob is tryingto…..zzzzzzzzzzzzzz, I give up, This movie sucks, this is just bad asthe original cartoon, Seriously, this movie has the cheesiest linesI've ever seen, Same boring characters with lame physics.

Let me say this, right here.. If you're an idiot that likes Spongebob,then this is the movie for you, But if you're an anime lover who hatesSpongebob, then Beyblade is for you.

A horrible cartoon, that turned into one of the worst excuses of themovie like this!!!!!!! I just don't like it as much anyways.

Bottom Line: it sucked

SPONGEBOB THE MOVIE 0/10

The 1st half of the film was kinda funny actually. Other then that,this film was terrible. Scarlette Johanson may be hot, but was terribleas Mindy the mermaid and very annoying. The film had a bit of "racey"scenes to it such as Sponge and Pat getting drunk off ice cream,getting tortured, riding on the back of a hairy 50 yr. old DavidHasselhouf, and Patrick dancing around is hooker boots and fishnets.The 2nd half of the film was SO strange and nothing like the show. Theother characters such as Sandy, Gary, Squidward, and Mr. Krabbs werehardly in it. Sandy only said 2 words and Squidward and Krabb’s screentime was about 5-10 min. all together. I also noticed if you listenclosely, Mr. Krabbs whispers to SpongeBob "You’re making a completejackass outta yourself." Some of the humor was very SpongeBob, yet somewasn’t. I was surprised this was even a kids movie. A couple ofchuckles from a few things couldn’t save the film. I watched SpongeBobever since it came on the air in 1999. I stopped watching it in 2003.I’ve seen the film when it came out in theaters (cause all the girlswanted to see it cause they thought SB was SO cute lol). This is moreof a second look. I also hated the "Being a kid is cool!" message.Don’t bother with this film…..total trash.

I adore the Spongebob TV series. That, I suppose, is why I was sodisappointed.

This movie has retained absolutely none of the things that made theshow so swell. The plot is boring. The dialogue is cringeworthy. Thereare way too many unnecessary cameos. They didn’t even have the sameNeptune (or Atlantis, for that matter).

I do admit, there were some amusing bits. Patrick had a few funny linesand the entire scene with David Hasselhoff was worth several guffaws.Unfortunately, the movie relies too much on crude toilet humor andcharacters with exactly one joke stretched too far (for instance, itwas noted several times how bald Neptune was; while this was okay atfirst, it got tired very quickly).

Several of the smaller children in the audience seemed to enjoy itthough. And I suppose that’s who the movie is largely aimed at. So, ifyou have your own little ones, you may want to take them to see it.Bring a book and a booklight for yourself though. Or better yet, waitfor it to come out on DVD and go rent it at Blockbuster. At least youcan escape from that.

Perhaps I’m being a bit unfair because I had such high hopes for thismovie.

Probably, but nobody credible ever sai
d that life was fair.

Final Verdict: (Barely) 2 out of 5

I’ve always enjoyed watching Sponge Bob when I get a chance. I wouldn’tsay that I’ve ever gone out of my way to catch an episode, but if it’son and I don’t have anything else to do, I’ll watch. But there is alimit to how much Sponge Bob I can endure at any one time. Trying tostretch Sponge Bob into a feature length movie just doesn’t work allthat well. Sure, there are a few gags here and there that are funny,but the underlying plot holding the thing together isn’t involving. Itgoes on far too long.

I realize that I’m probably not in Sponge Bob’s target audience, but itdidn’t work for my son either. After 45 minutes or so, he was ready toturn it off as well. He left the room and I watched the final part ofthe movie alone, in silence, without caring much about what happened.

You would think practically cornering the children’s market in the lastfew years would make Nickelodeon, owned by Viacom, happy enough butapparently sustained competition from The Disney Channel and CartoonNetwork may have forced, at least in recent years, more into conqueringthe movie industry as well. The venture didn’t start off so hot – theirfirst two films, Harriet the Spy and Good Burger failed to gross morethen a combined $55 million domestically but The Rugrats Movie and its$100 million plus run at the box office fixed all that. Ever since thenits been a rocky-road for the production company, with some good –Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius and Rugrats in Paris – but plenty of bad –Hey Arnold! The Movie and Rugrats Gone Wild – as well. It was giventhat with the latest Nicktoon craze, Spongebob Squarepants, would comea movie adaptation of the cartoon series but with the tremendousdrop-off for the Rugrats franchise, if one even wants to go as far asto call it that, the pressure will really be on the series’ creators toproduce a box office behemoth to match the anticipated hype.

The story follows the misadventures of an immature young sponge as hegoes out on a great quest to prove his manhood. The day in the sun hasfinally arrived for Spongebob Squarepants, the absorbent and yellow andporous sponge of Bikini Bottom, who works as a fry-cook for the KrustyKrab fast-food restaurant. With the opening of the Krusty Krab 2 rightnext door to the original fast-food location, Spongebob is easilyexpected to receive the position of manager having received theEmployee of the Month Award three years running. Much to his surprise,Mr. Krabs gives the promotion to Squidward, the dull and tone-deafcashier of the Krusty Krab. Questioned by a distraught Spongebob, Mr.Krabs replies that he simply couldn’t give a position of suchresponsibility to a kid. Next door, Plankton, rival to Mr. Krabs andowner of the Chum Bucket, the failed competitor of the Krusty Krab, hasenacted his devious plan to steal King Neptune’s crown, frame Mr. Krabsand pilfer the secret recipe of the Krabby Patty in order to rule theundersea world. Even after losing out on the promotion of his dreams,Spongebob makes a deal with King Neptune to venture out to Shell Cityand retrieve the crown within six days or else Mr. Krabs will beexecuted. Spongebob, along with his best friend Patrick Star, must raceagainst time, as well as their childish antics – singing the GoofyGoober song, having a bubble party, etc. – in order to retrieve thecrown and save Bikini Bottom from the tiny grasp of the evil Plankton.The story for The Spongebob Squarepants Movie should not be of concernconsidering its primary audience will be gullible little children whowill sit through anything as long as it is either loud or makes a crudefarting noise, in certain cases both apply. And when it comes to olderadults dragged into watching this disaster in action, don’t waste thetime of day contemplating the film’s plot, because there is none, atleast nothing you or anyone with a shred of common sense would give ahoot about. Seriously, the creators of the television series suspendedwork on regular episodes for this? One could have only hopes that theywere simply kidding around when they did that but, alas, what a waste!

And here’s a rarity – an animated feature where cameo voice-over byfamous Hollywood actors and actresses mean diddly-squat, as thesituation should be. Say what you want about her brilliant performancesin Lost in Translation and Girl with the Pearl Earring but ScarlettJohansson’s voice-over feels way over in this film and doesn’t workhere at all. In fact, why even bring in a star such as herself in atall? Any normal teenage girl’s voice would have served just as well,possibly even better, then Johansson, and probably would have freed upsome cash as well. The character itself is a problem as well. Often,Mindy comes off as this whiny ‘peace and love’ hippie – granted theking is executing people for insane reasons but her explanations areway too dragged out to be taken too seriously. In true life, noteveryone is as good or ‘compassionate’ as she would want everyone tobelieve, but perhaps that’s digging too much into the subject matter.Quiet, or else you’ll miss Alec Baldwin’s completely unnecessary cameoas Dennis, the aquatic hit-man sent by Plankton to whack Patrick andSpongebob on their way to retrieving Neptune’s crown. The character isonly seen briefly, and heard even less then that. He honestly doesn’tcontribute anything to moving the story along and seems forced intocertain aspects of the storyline. And let’s not even get into thepositively confusing, and, at moments, down right disturbing finalesequence on the back of David Hasselhoff – as has been said before, youdon’t want to know. And Jeffrey Tambor as the voice of King Neptune,ruler of the seas, works practically well except for the fact that thefilmmakers rely too heavily on the character’s ‘one-trick pony’ gag,specially his baldness, to get laughs. Yes, he’s bald, we get it! Thefirst time may have been cute but as they repetitively use the gag overand over again, it gets real old real fast.

Overall, it is an absolute travesty to think that the savior oftraditional animation, a genre that just a few short months ago was onthe brink of extinction, is none other then the idiotic slop known asThe Spongebob Squarepants Movie – Walt Disney must be banging his headhard on a wall up in heaven right about now. The Spongebob SquarepantsMovie should be labeled an abomination and a disgrace by anyone thatwould consider themselves a true fan of the cartoon series, let alone asense of decency and respect to animation in general. The materialbecomes so asinine at times that it literally borders on the psychotic,specifically, someone beyond the stupor age of seven would have tomentally ill to find this ‘nautical nonsense’ the least bitentertaining. True, the movie does not give off the feeling as if thecreators slapped together three thirty-minute episodes, as has been thecommon trend amongst the cartoon series making the leap to the bigscreen. If that were the case then the film would have been somewhathumorous – that is nowhere near the situation audiences are faced withthis living tragedy. As would be expected, the cries from the hardcoreSpongebob fan base – honestly, do these people ever have lives of theirown – will be, ‘But it’s only a family film, so what harm could it doto give it at least a decent passing grade’ – and that’s what you calla logical excuse? Come back when you’ve advanced beyond the first dayclass syllabus for Introduction to Philosophy at any college campus.What if every critic gave a passing grade to every kiddy flick thatcame along simply for the fact that few, if any, reviews have a longterm impact on the feature’s primary audience, let alone how studiosproduce, or in some minds, manufacture, these features? Then how wouldextraordinary art studios such as Pixar, and to a lesser extent PDI,stand out as the true elitists of the animation genre? With suchincognizant comments such as that there’s no wonder why so much slop iscongesting movie theaters toda
y, especially in the area of familyentertainment, if it can technically be called that.

My Rating: ** ½ out of 5 (Grade: D+)

In this animated ocean adventure SpongeBob SquarePants has to recoverking Neptune’s stolen crown in order to save his boss, who’s beenframed for the theft. With him on the perilous journey is his starfishbuddy Patrick. To complicate matters, they’re also being pursued by adangerous hit-man.

I guess that most people who choose to see this film do so becausethey’re fans of the show, or parents of kids who are fans of the show.The world of SpongeBob and friends is so surreal that you probablyeither love it or hate it. I’ve only seen short bits of the show, butthey were bizarre, and entertaining enough to make me want to see it.

Is it a kid’s film? Well, sure. The story is basically about how it’sOK to be a kid, but there’s also enough stuff to keep older viewersinterested as well. Every single character is so slow/moronic/dumb thatyou can’t help loving them. The animation is far from glossy - morelike South Park than Toy Story - so perhaps it’s best viewed on TV.But, it works.

It’s always funnier watching people (or sea creatures) who don’t knowthey’re being funny, than those who desperately try to entertain. Thefilm’s biggest problems comes in the last third when things start todrag a bit. The inclusion of live action (i.e. real people) feels a bitout of place. It sort of breaks the illusion, but at least we get tosee the Hasselhoff…

All in all, nothing spectacular, and the subject matter will probablyalienate many unfamiliar viewers, but for those who love the show, I’msure it’s a treat. [5/10]

Incredibly Bad. I personally am a great fan of SpongeBob SquarePantsand it is a hilarious cartoon for both adults and kids alike. But thisfilm just turned the whole thing into a joke. It was not entertainingat all and obviously made for little toddlers who didn't even haveSpongeBob in their childhoods! Very poor and SpongeBob's voice is toosqueaky! Hasselhoff's cameo is put in for no apparent reasons and ruinsthe whole thing. Also for some reason Patrick and Spongebob are part ofgoofy goobers? This has never been mentioned in the cartoon thereforeshould not have been in the film. Overall, incredibly disappointing asthe story was very poor which would be alright had there been manyfunny jokes throughout the whole film but the film consisted of poorjokes and probably not the original series writers

read comments (0)

The Terminal

"The Terminal" tells of an Eastern European man on a personal mission(Hanks) who becomes stuck in a NYC airport terminal because he doesn’thave the proper papers to enter the US and cannot return to his home ashis country suffered a coup while he was en route. Given it’s pedigree,this film is a dud. Too long at 2 hours, full of filler and commercialproduct impressions, and very predictable throughout, "The Terminal"tries to build a story around the Hanks character including wooing aflight attendant (Zeta-Jones) while bathing in a public restroom,eating at BURGER KING, buying a HUGO BOSS suit, and carrying around hisprecious PLANTERS DRY ROASTED PEANUTS can, etc. With yawns from thecritics and a lukewarm reception by the public, "The Terminal" isfodder for fans only. (C+)

Definitely one of Spielberg’s lesser efforts, one that might play at the 2AM slot on TCM when he dies. One wonders why he took this project; it seemsmore like something Robert Zemeckis might knock off. There are a couple ofmoments of such amazingly poor writing that you wonder if Spielberg, or evenTom Hanks, even read that page of the script. However, most of the film is adecent human comedy. A man from a made-up Eastern European country lands atJFK airport and finds out that his government has been overthrown. Hispassport and visa are unacceptable, and no one knows what to do with him.The head of the airport (Stanley Tucci) orders him to wait in the airportwhile they figure something out, only they never do. Hanks becomes apermanent resident there, becomes friends with most of the little people whowork in the airport, and even courts a pretty flight attendant whom he runsinto now and then (Catherine Zeta-Jones). It’s all pretty fun, and even attimes quite romantic (there’s also a subplot where Hanks helps a young fooddelivery man win the heart of a woman on the airport security staff that iskind of sweet). I also like the way the film celebrates the melting pot thatmakes up America. It’s a nice picture in a time of ever-rising insularity.Yet there are so many bits holding the film back. The screenplay reallyneeded some editing. Hanks carries around a peanut jar through the wholemovie. We are told fairly early that it does not contain peanuts, and so theaudience knows that a big surprise is coming. When we actually find out,it’s quite lame, and, metaphorically, this part of the film just doesn’twork. And, strangely, there’s this one character who works a lot towardsbringing the movie down a peg or two. The character of Gupta seems to ruinthe movie. His backstory is melodramatic and not fit for this story, he’s aparanoid, sadistic jerk (he is the janitor, and he washes the floors just sopeople will slip on them), and he provides the movie with the silliest deusex machina imaginable. That’s not to mention the actor, Kumar Pallana, is ahorrible actor. This film is actually inspired by the true story of anIranian man who became stranded at a Parisian airport after his briefcase,which contained his passport and everything he owned, was stolen. Theoriginal story is much more interesting than The Terminal. A movie hasalready been made in France about it, but it hasn’t been seen much outsideof that country. I think the real story would make a great film.7/10.

Whenever I’m watching a movie like "The Terminal", and all I can do is shakemy head and roll my eyes while most of the audience laughs and claps, Ialways wonder if I’m just being a grump. Then I remember that, no, I don’tconsider myself a cynic, so it’s something wrong with the movie. And boy, isthere a lot wrong with this movie.

The first 30-40 minutes are actually quite good. Tom Hanks plays ViktorNavorski, an immigrant from a fictional Eastern European country namedKrakohzia who finds himself with an invalid passport upon his arrival in NewYork, and since he cannot set foot on America soil without a workingpassport, he is confined to the airport for an indeterminate time period.Hanks is, of course, great, and the swooping camerawork that follows himthrough the gigantic terminal with all the flashing lights, fast food andsouvenir stores is excellent. We can feel Viktor’s confusion andhelplessness, and the hints he picks up about how to make life in an airportmore tolerable are amusing.

Then the movie begins to wander, aimlessly. Lame subplots are brought in topass the time, like Viktor playing matchmaker for a friendly airportemployee (Diego Luna) and a predictably tough-on-the-outside,tender-on-the-inside INS agent (Zoe Saldana). This subplot is weak to beginwith, then is dropped entirely for nearly an hour before wrapping up in anauseatingly cutesy way.

That’s the other major problem: the sappiness. Spielberg’s always been eagerto lay on the sappiness in many of his films, and it really kills "TheTerminal". A very good and intelligent film could have been made with thisstory and cast (which also includes Catherine Zeta-Jones, Stanley Tucci, ChiMcBride and Kumar Pallana), but after the promising beginning it heads rightinto sappy, cliched, unrealistic nonsense.

Interestingly, it’s loosely based on the true story of Iranian refugeeMerhan Nasseri’s experiences at France’s Charles De Gaulle airport. I’mguessing that’s VERY loosely. That is, unless Nasseri became a working classhero for the staff, had fun foiling the fussy jerk in head of security(Tucci) and had a starry-eyed romance with a flaky stewardess (Zeta-Jones)complete with cornball speeches in front of a gleaming, hand-made waterfountain.

Yeah yeah, I know it’s supposed to be whimsical. I still say there’s a bigdifference between whimsy (which requires intelligence and a light touch)and a movie like "The Terminal" which irritatingly condescends to theaudience by turning what could have been a fascinating film into apandering, phony, mush-fest.

Hanks and Zeta-Jones are both quite good, but the movie itself is a hugewaste of time. After the overrated "Catch Me If You Can" and this mess,maybe Spielberg should stay away from comedy.

Spoilers herein.

If you are an American filmmaker, you live a life registered in Americanstorytelling. And that registration falls into one of two camps, each of which defined their owntype of American novel.

One camp was invented by Melville. His notion of the world was rooted in theBible-as-allegory. He set out to create literature - a uniquely American literature -that had broad, complex sweeps of allegory. It was only incidentally about people and alwayssteeped in some great machine that represented the world. In `Moby-Dick’ that world wasthe world of whaling and whalers.

The tapestry may be complex, but the allegory is clear and distinct. Theauthor takes this allegory very seriously and expects the reader to as well.

The other great stream of America storytelling is from Mark Twain. He tellstwo stories: the story itself and a story about the story. There are always two narrative levels.This is also uniquely American, especially the nature of humor in the metanarrative. It isimmediately based on Austen though the particular notion has roots in Cervantes and Shakespeare.This `twoness’ is why Twain chose his name. Twain’s aura was of the same colors that wouldrevolutionize the world of introspection with Freud and Darwin.

Why do I mention this? Because nearly all worthwhile films these days are inthe `Twain` tradition of storytelling and has been since the `new wave’ of the sixties.This `American’ notion has spun all sorts of cool varieties, which I am surveying in a bookunder the rubric of `folding.’

Its just the way it is: to be considered a serious filmmaker, you have toinnovate, to invent or twist some way of folding or introspection or reflection. Spielberg is asimple man who makes simple films, films that are to rest of the film world as productwrappers are to art.

Having made enough money, he’s been trying to make `important’ films so thatsome day he j
ust might be remembered as someone not unintelligent and unaware of filmideas. He’s tried on a few suits, from Kubrick’s folding to historical reflections. Ineach case they seem merely copied and he knows it.

Some years back he tried a real new wave film: `Close Encounters’ and evenfeatured Truffaut as the one who `spoke the language.’ A couple years ago with Hankshe tried the old folding game of a story about a guy who fabricates stories. Flat. Oldshoes.

Here he tries a Melville, a serious, straight ahead allegory. Presumably hethought his audience would be ready for a complex tone poem about what it might mean tobe on the threshold of America. The model of the world in this case is the terminal.All sorts of little symbolic episodes are woven in, and one big one: the importance of getting a`real’ image, a signature, to go with a false image (a photograph). This is mirrored by hishaving to get a stamp himself. The very contrast that this blunt agenda of collectingautographs has with the ad hoc nature of the Jazz involved is stark allegory - as stark as thestasis of waiting in a place that everyone else passes through.

Well, as allegory for the masses, it works I suppose. But as film, well itis just another copy.

Tom Hanks gets to do Chaplin’s Trampwalk.

Ted’s Evaluation — 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with thispart of your life.

The main purpose of the terminal is to make Liberals feel good aboutloathing the Department of Homeland Security as a symbol of the USgovernment. And so, director Spielberg endeavors to create atwilight-zone like environment where poor Tom Hanks is trapped as acitizen without a country by evil and ambitious Deputy HomelandSecurity Director Stanley Tucci. The movie can’t even stay true to itsown premise for 15 minutes. Tom Hanks is introduced to us as aKhrakozian tourist who can’t wait to indulge in popular NYC culture,but is so ill prepared he speaks no English at all. Stanley Tucci tellsus He can’t grant asylum to this man who lost his country mid-flightbecause Krakozia is too small and unimportant to America, yet CNN isshowing footage of the government coup every five minutes, etc., etc.People are nasty to Hanks throughout the movie’s first half for noreason at all, and we are treated to many different camera anglesfocusing on really hopeless expressions on Tom Hanks’ face. I could goon, but I’ve lost interest — just as I did in this terrible film.

We have seen 28 movies thus far this year and this one is the very best ofthe year todate. Certainly worthy of Academy Award nominations for themovie, Spielberg and Hanks.

Only Spielberg could make a movie like this, filmed entirely at the airportthat he built completely from scratch including all the stores. Tom Hanks isspectacular in this movie while barely speaking english for the entiremovie. Catherine Zeta is simply wonderful and gorgeous as usual. Thesupporting cast of Chi Mc Bride, Stanely Tucci and the others is perfect. Acan’t miss film that can be seen by the entire family. You will laughhysterically and cry and have a great time. The entire audience stood andapplauded as the credits rolled by.

There is not better testament to a movie when the people in the audiencereact like that. Don’t miss it. Kudos to Spielberg and Hanks andeveryone who made and wrote this movie.

As a longtime Spielberg fan, I admit I had high expectations. I was notdisappointed. It was easily one of his best, up there with "Catch Me IfYou Can."

I’d rather not over-analyze "The Terminal". This is a movie aboutpeople. Nothing historic, no sci-fi, no special effects, no dinosaurs,and no political statements. I laughed. I cried. I left the theatrethinking. It was a simple, yet powerfully effective movie.

Hanks proves once again why he is one of the top 5 best actors on theplanet. Jones was absolutely convincing as the beautiful and charming,yet ultimately insecure love interest.

It was one of the funniest things I’ve seen in a long time. It has verypoignant moments, which were, IMO, not "sappy" in the least (as I’veheard other reviewers lament). The poignant moments were appropriateand realistic. People in this movie responded to the various situationsjust as you and I would.

I saw only two criticisms I could make of Spielberg’s direction for theentire movie. 1) I saw a jump cut in the scene 2) The first timeHenley’s character did the juggling at the table scene, it wasuproarious — people were in tears; the second time it was mildlyfunny, the third time, it was a bit annoying. A good joke was taintedby overuse. Oh, and maybe a third — I could see how flight attendantsmight be offended by some pretty strong stereotypes and overgeneralizations. (*sigh* why do we always have to come back topolitical correctness?) …pretty picky criticisms, though. Everythingelse was perfection. 9 out of 10.

First of all I have to confess that I am deeply in love with most ofMr. Spielberg’s movies and therefore I was expecting something reallyspecial from this movie, plus with Tom Hanks in the main role. Butunfortunately it turned out a complete disappointment!! The whole storyis so not real, artificial… The Hank’s character is a 100% nice personwith no bad sides, kinda ‘angel’. As for the woman character, performedby Zeta-Jones, this character is absolutely predictable and the moviewouldn’t lose anything without her! She’s only appears so the movie islonger and even more typical, predictable, sticky, sweet, serialHollywood-made movie, the one that never lasts, nobody is gonna watchit even in 10 years!! Nobody will remember it. It so happens thatlately, the movies that are made by great directors, with great actorsturn out to be ‘much ado about nothing’!!! And those movies, thatnobody expects to be good – are really nice and you wish to watch itover and over again!

Most unexpected…..

First of all I have to confess that I am deeply in love with most ofMr. Spielberg’s movies and therefore I was expecting something reallyspecial from this movie, plus with Tom Hanks in the main role. Butunfortunately it turned out a complete disappointment!! The whole storyis so not real, artificial… The Hank’s character is a 100% nice personwith no bad sides, kinda ‘angel’. As for the woman character, performedby Zeta-Jones, this character is absolutely predictable and the moviewouldn’t lose anything without her! She’s only appears so the movie islonger and even more typical, predictable, sticky, sweet, serialHollywood-made movie, the one that never lasts, nobody is gonna watchit even in 10 years!! Nobody will remember it. It so happens thatlately, the movies that are made by great directors, with great actorsturn out to be ‘much ado about nothing’!!! And those movies, thatnobody expects to be good – are really nice and you wish to watch itover and over again!

Terminal is by far the funniest movie I’ve watched this year. Firstwhen my friend ask me if I wanted to watch it with him, I was a bitdisliked, because I thought, a film that is during 2 hours just in oneairport would be boring, but as the film began I started to realizethat it wasn’t so. Steven Spielberg is a genius and Tom Hanks acting isbrilliant. The hole situation, that Viktor Navorski(Tom Hanks) can’tescape the airport and all the friendships he starts to get out or tomake his and friends life more simple are just funny as hell. Terminalis the perfect survival-guide, if you once stuck in a airport.

Everybody who loves great funny movies, should watch this one, TomHanks at its finest!!! 8/10 stars rating

read comments (0)

The Woodsman

I was so disappointed by this movie, more so than I have been with anyother movie in the past few years. It seems like it was made just tomake a movie, there’s really no point to it. The subject matter isdisturbing, and nothing makes you feel any better about it through tothe end. It’s one of those movies that you hope it will have a goodending so that you didn’t just waste two hours of your time, but thisone does not deliver at all. This is a rotten tomato of a film. Enoughof Kevin Bacon and Kyra Sedgwick. There is just no redeeming quality tothe subject matter.

The Woodsman gets a double thumbs down in my book, with all due respectto Siskel and Ebert.

I thought "The Woodsman" was okay. The acting was very good all around,especially Kevin Bacon. The story is weak but interesting. There were afew small surprises along the way. Nothing major. Don’t expect tears orany laughs, just good acting. The ending was a disappointment to me. Iexpected something to happen (along the lines of "Taxi Driver"), butvery little does. I’d recommend watching this on HBO. It’s not worthnine bucks to see on the big screen. A very low budget movie thatcouldn’t have taken more than a week to write the screenplay. It’s onlyeighty minutes long. It would be very easy to add another thirty pagesto the script. There were a lot of questions left unanswered.

A very difficult subject, and in this case not particularly wellhandled! Is the film asking do we feel sorry for criminals? Shouldcriminals be given a second chance? Can a criminal be reformed? (Mostpeople would agree that a criminal can be reformed and if the debt tosociety has been repaid then a criminal should get a secondchance)…… OR are we feeling sorry for paedophiles? Shouldpaedophiles be given a second chance? Can paedophiles be reformed? NOWAY!! As the police man says "I don’t know why we let freaks like youout on the streets, we only have to catch you again!" According to somesources telling a paedophile that he must not have sex with kids islike telling a normal person he cannot have sex with his/herboyfriend/girlfriend. So why does this film attempt to get the audienceto side with the paedophile? At every stage of the film I just keptthinking "Yeah, but he is a paedophile, so he gets what he deserves",thus making the film very unbelievable!!

I know, this movie was made for no money and was a "brave" choice byall involved. But the ending is just way too tidy, and Hollywood.

So let’s review. A molester is released after 12 years in prison. Hetries to reclaim his life, in his town, with his family, with his oldjob? Why would he want to go back to where everyone rejects him?Everybody there should already know (or would know within hours) abouthis crime. A 46 year old ex-convict gets a job on an assembly line,lives in a one-bedroom apartment and takes the bus…and he gets KYRASEDGWICK to fall for him?!?!! And he comes to grips with his crime whenhe sees a young victim cry, knowing that she is already in the clutchesof a molester? MOLESTERS GET OFF ON THEIR VICTIMS CRYING! He let thisgirl go away, but she is going off to get molested by her father; howdoes that story end? Then, he takes out some street justice on anothermolester. (Mystic River, anyone?)

Story parallels are made about sexual lifestyles, at one point notingKyra Sedgwick’s character is a sometime lesbian so therefore there mustbe some sympatico feeling with a child molester. She is just lonely andoutcast for being different; she’s not a convicted criminal. BenjaminBratt’s character hints at an attraction to his 12 year-old daughter,and the viewer is supposed to think he is hypocrite for judging Bacon.

Another cheap Hollywood shortcut is Ben Bratt’s character playing therace card. He appreciates Bacon’s support during courtship of hissister, saying "none of the family wanted the brown boy down thestreet." Implying that Bacon’s family was racist, but Bacon is moreenlightened. So we ‘know’ that Bacon’s family is bad, just likemolesting is bad. Thanks for the lesson.

There is a big difference between having a desire, and ACTING on thatcriminal desire. This movie is trying to say that this molester is justlike all of us. Uh, I don’t think so.

i thought the woodsman was a disturbing film and should have been givena higher certificate rating, whilst i was watching the film i felt sickthat someone could produce a film like that the bit that made me feelthe most disturbed was when the man played by Kevin bacon asked thegirl Robyn to sit on his knees then when she was crying saying her dadasked her that and he said " does your dad move your legs in weirdways" i found that utterly disturbing and sick. my college classmatesalso found this film disturbing however Kevin bacon played the part ofa paedophile very well as an actor if i was to have done that i don’tthink i could have.

STAR RATING:*****Unmissable****Very Good***Okay**You Could Go Out For AMeal Instead*Avoid At All Costs

Walter (Kevin Bacon) is a convicted paedophile who has just finished atwelve year prison sentence for sexually assaulting two young girls.Having survived the horrors of prison and having re-payed his debt tosociety, all he wants now is to settle into a quiet existence workingin a lumber-yard. However he gets a little more out of this than hebargained for when he starts up a relationship with hard-faced Vickie(Kyra Sedgwick). But his biggest mistake was spurning the advances ofcolleague Mary-Kay (Eve) who starts digging into his past and makingpeople aware of it. Whilst all this is going on, he notices a guy hecalls Candy (Kevin Rice) making unusual advances towards boys in hislocal play-ground. And, of course, it takes one to know one.

Despite the amount of awards this film appears to have won,it's onlyenjoyed a very limited showing in UK cinemas.I can only assume,mostlogically,that the heavy,emotive subject matter would be too much forsome to cope with,and,thus.

The biggest problem for me with The Woodsman was that I simply didn'tfind it that shocking. The material had the potential to shock meimmensely, but the presentation of the film really fu*ks it up and letsit down. The soundtrack is out of place for a film of it's sort, andjollies the proceedings along a little too merrily. The film does havesome glimmering moments of shock value (not least of which when Candy'sapparent abduction of a child is played out to the calling ofcommentators at a baseball game!) but it just doesn't come together andwork as a whole.

Bacon gives a credible (at times, very good) lead performance, butthere's a disappointing lack of depth to his character. It would havebeen nice if we'd learned a bit more about his background and hismotivations behind becoming a paedophile (i.e., learning whether or nothe suffered any abuse himself in his childhood.) In the supportingcast, Sedgwick convinces as a hard-faced,hard-lined woman with her ownsurvival guide for life, but probably most notable of all is Mos Defwho gives an unnerving turn as a police officer who pops up from timeto time round Walter's house to give him grillings. Rice has a chillingair of mystery to him as we never hear him speak, only see him fromafar, and in his final, chilling scene he really hits a hard note.Benjamin Bratt as Walter's brother in law hits fairly hard himself, butEve just sort of waddles to the back of the proceedings in hersupporting role, despite the major significance of it.

In the films favour, it's short so it makes the characters more easy tokeep track of and absorb. But likewise, it possibly doesn't give themenough room to breathe and make them truly as compelling as they couldhave been.

This is a fairly well-made effort to bring a tough subject matter tothe screen, but the one or two bum notes it hits really stop it frombeing as truly hard-hitting and
horrific as it could have been. ***

Although the subject matter was not one I would favor in a film, both thewriting and directing were outstanding and I found it very easy to followexactly where they intended the audience to go. Kyra and Walter are bothvery believable 3 dimensional characters but Walter was particularlymesmerizing to watch. I find it a treat just to watch Kevin perform. I amglad his career has stood the test of time and enabled him to continue tomake many memorable roles

I have yet to see this movie, thought I am anxiously awaiting for it’srelease in my area. I’ve read tons and tons of great reviews on themovie, but nearly each and everyone has some critical remark regardingfirst-time director Nicole Kassell. I don’t understand. They say shehas "fallen victim" to "first-time director syndrome". Do they expecther first film to be that of the work of Clint Eastwood or something?It’s ridiculous. From the sound of it, she’s directed an outstandingfilm, perhaps even better than those of more experienced directors.

Everyone must try something once, and I think it very insulting forthese "Critics" to remark that way simply because this is her firstfilm. The majority of these "critics" are news journalists - NOT filmdirectors such as Kassell, and I wonder how they can pervasivelydisperse these comments when she has obviously accumulated moreknowledge in the area of expertise.

They comment, some of them snidely (those who gave the movie a badreview), about her first-time directing. Is there not a first-time foreverything? Does she get a chance? Where do great directors start? Theydon’t pop out of nowhere having already completed hundreds of films.

Before I start my comment on the actual movie, I just want to say thatI read some of the other comments and wanted to make some correctionson some of the comments I read.

Kevin Bacon’s character isn’t a "convicted pedophile".

Last I heard, being a pedophile was not illegal, just as beingheterosexual, gay or lesbian is not illegal.

Kevin’s character is a convicted "sex offender" who has been releasedfrom prison after 12 years and has to get his life back in order, justas all ex-cons have to do upon they’re release.

The movie shows just how hard a convicted sex offender, or any ex-con,has after they have done their time and try to build a new life upontheir release.

It’s especially harder for sex offenders, even the ones convicted ofsex crimes involving "minors".

The movie honestly shows how "people attracted to minors" are treated(and how they would not be treated) in the current society we live in.The message that "not all pedophiles are child molesters" rings thru asthe story evolves.

ALthough "Walter" says he went to prison for "molesting" several girls,he said he never hurt any of them, which tells me that maybe he wasn’texactly "molesting" them since no harm was involved, but he never goesinto detail about "how" he he had sexual relations them.

The other pedophile in the movie that "Walter" discovers, well,apparently "was"the type of person that "would" molest.

At any rate, I think Kevin Bacon and the others involved with thismovie handled a delicate subject matter relatively nicely.

"The Woodsman" takes the audience into the life of a working classpedophile following his release from prison. The film centers on Baconas a man tormented by his perverse desires while struggling to carveout a life for himself in an unforgiving society. A brave film whichreceived good marks from critics and public, "The Woodsman" takes noposition, has no agenda, and answers none of the many questions itasks. It simply provides a sense of what life as a pedophile might belike and that’s saying a lot. Those who expect a typical story arc maybe disappointed by the morose moodiness of this open-ended downer flickwhile those who don’t mind lingering in a world of aberrant psychologymay find it an interesting experience. (B)

read comments (0)

The Perfect Score

For those of us in higher education, this movie rings true. The humoris not juvenile, but it is very funny. The characters are played verywell by the actors. (Great casting. These are not super staractors—not yet.) The Director also does a great job. It also providesa good life lesson and those taking (or those who have taken) thevarious standardized tests will see that others feel as they do. Thismovie will be appreciated by those going through the standardized testanxiety well into the future. This movie should do well(if promoted) onDVD as most future audiences will know the pressure that doing well onthese types of tests entails. Overall I thought the premise was veryoriginal and was happily surprised by the quality of the movie andcast.

I bought this movie awhile after it came out and I am so glad I did!The movie is about a group of high school teens who are in completelydifferent social and financial circles who come together to steal theSAT answers.

It starts out with them all mad about their scores and trying to findsome way to get into the schools they dream of. Then they come togetherto formulate a plan. They don't get along and repeatedly annoy eachother. Then when Kyle (Chris Evans) puts what their futeure and dreamscan become they cooperate and carry out their plan.

There are the traditional characters. The Valad Victorian, the stoner,the jock, the rich lonely girl, and the two average guys. Whileromances may seem cheesy and overused the relationships that formbetween Kyle and Anna and Matty and Franchesca are interesting and drawyou in.

Then when their plan goes awry and the cops show up Matty takes thefall saving Franchesca. She bails him out and they all meet in themorning to get copies of the answers. That is where they discover theyactually like who they are and don't need the answers to succeed. Againsounds totally cheesy but it was good.

Overall this movie is one of the great teen movies. Teens from 13-19will love this movie. I recommend it.

I rented this movie last night, hoping for some laughs. The cover says"The Breakfast Club meets Oceans Eleven." Those are two of my favoritemovies and I am utterly appalled that someone tried to compare eitherof those to The Perfect Score. Sure, they tried to make it like thosefilms, I actually think they used some of the same music as Ocean’sEleven, but they failed miserably. The film consists of six verydifferent teens, who all need the answers to the SAT’s for differentreasons. While the film has a few great actors, the cheesy andunintelligent script makes even Scarlett Johansson (spelling?) lookbad. The film is narrated by a so-called stoner, who sounds morementally challenged than stoned. The only time I actually laughed inthe entire film was when they played "Because I Got High…" Thecharacters make very stupid decisions and the movie is a constant drag.The all too happy ending does not surprise, just disappoints and makesyou wonder why on earth you just watched this movie. For those who aresaying this movie is a great "teen flick" I heartily disagree. I am ateen and the only thing this movie did for me was make me feelembarrassed to be associated with people like this. This long, cheesy,dull movie is not worth even a rental…unless you are looking forsomething to put you to sleep at night.

I’ve been looking at many posts in the forum’s and this film has beengiven lots of negative comments. I think "The Perfect Score" was afantastic film. It contains humor, action and some deeper moments whichI think helped this film to be an interesting and great watch. I waskept entertained, didn’t look at how long there was until the end andenjoyed the lightheartedness of this film.

I certainly don’t recommend this film to people who only appreciatefilms for how they’re made or who made them. However, if you are in themood for a relaxing, comical film that keeps you entertained and happy,then see this film.

Frankly, the only allure in watching this film was Scarlett Johansson,a young actress that has some amazing body of work in her short yearsin front of the camera. The film, as directed by Brian Roberts, seemsto indicate a real problem in this country about scholastic achievementand the concept of education as we know it.

"The Perfect Score" is a comedy, after all. We are not to take anythingin it seriously, but the problem with Marc Hyman and Jon Zack’s screenplay, seems to be telling us that cheating on the SAT test, in thiscase, is perfectly OK, as long as you don’t get caught! For that, weare given six students that do anything possible to get to see the testand copy its answers. If these same students would spend all theirenergies the way they’re supposed to, preparing and cramming for thatimportant exam, or even employing a tutor to help with difficultsubjects, they would at least have the satisfaction of achievingsomething on their own merits, rather than relying on a criminalactivity.

The film offers a cop out solution just to justify these worthlesscharacters that one hopes don’t inspire would-be-cheaters to emulateany time soon.

I saw this movie on the plane and I can honestly say it did not help to makethe long flight seem any shorter. In essence, it is a very good waste ofsome talented actors. It seemed too long, even at its time of only 90minutes. First of all, Erika Christenzen, the very talented actor of"Traffic" is completely wasted in this drivel. She is reduced to thestraight "A" student, over achiever who decides she has had enough of beingso perfect; therefore she decides to rebel. Wow, how many times has thishappened in movies? Too many times to count. The laughs are few and farbetween. This plot has been rehashed a thousand times. "The Perfect Score"is pointless and boring. I only enjoyed one scene that involved an iratemother disciplining the pot head friend of her son. This one scene had someheart and laughs because it involved a motherly connection to a young manwhose mother has died. Beyond this somewhat redeeming factor, there is notmuch else is this waste of a film. Watch "Bubble Boy" or "Jay and SilentBob Strike Back" instead. Then you will have laughs aplenty!!

2/5

Given its universal and topical premise, this film had the potential to bescathing, pointed and funny. Instead, it meanders along at an excruciatinglydull pace with little humor, no thrills and nothing really to say.

The only inexplicable question is what is Scarlett Johansson doing in thisawful mess? She’s one of the finest young actresses working today and she isso much better than this dreadful material. She is the best thing in thisfilm. The two or three passable moments in this film belong toher.

The rest of the cast simply goes through the motions. The characters are allconventional; clichés we’ve seen in countless other teen movies - thestoner, the athlete, the rebel, the studious girl, the best friend - well,you get the idea.

There’s nothing even remotely funny or novel about this film. You keepwaiting for something, anything, original, but it neverhappens.

"The Perfect Score" only reinforces how good the teen films "Fast Times atRidgemont High" and "The Sure Thing" really are.

In this caper film for numbskulls, a group of amoral teenage stereotypesdevises an elaborate plot to break into a security building to steal somevaluable merchandise. Is it the Hope Diamond they’re after? A fortune ingold? Secret plans to take over the world? Front row seats to a BritneySpears concert? Heavens no. The target for this motley band of adolescentheisters turns out to be far more prosaic - the answers to the SAT exam. Iguess it never occurred to these test-challenged youngsters that if theyspent half the time, energy a
nd brainpower cracking the books as they doworking out this preposterous scheme, they might actually earn fairly decentscores on the test, and wouldn’t risk ending up in prison for their efforts. But then you wouldn’t have a movie – though, frankly, a film showing peoplestudying mind-bending word analogies would probably be more interesting than`The Perfect Score.’ (Come to think of it, `Spellbound’ did somethingsimilar to that, albeit with spelling rather than synonyms).

The attempts at humanizing the characters are as predictable and corny asthe fantasy sequences all of the participants envision as they contemplatetheir roles in the plot. Of course, the movie loses its nerve at the endand comes out foursquare in favor of honesty and decency as the way to fame,fortune and happiness.

Hopefully the actors involved in this disposable piffle will move ontobigger and better things in their careers (Scarlett Johansson certainly has)- because, in the world of movie superstardom, no one’s scoring a 1600 here.

I went into this movie expecting something very boring and usual,however I was presently surprised. I’d highlight recommend this movie.I have read a lot of people saying this movie was awful, and boring,and drab, and the plot was not realistic. I don’t think many peoplehave looked behind the ‘Kid breaking into a building to steal a test’aspect of it. I think if you look a little deeper than just the surfaceof this movie then you will find the raw essence of 80% of teenagefrustration in this day and age. This movie addressed very very wellthe attitude that teenagers take towards Standardized Testing. Not onlythat but it also shows quite well that although in high school thereare many different stereotypes and social clichés, people are stillhuman. It shows that everyone can work together towards a common goalif they try, if they put there emotions and prejudiced aside. I thinkthat this movie shows something that everyone can learn from, thatpeople are just people and although we may dislike each others ways, weare all stuck together on this earth so we may as well make the most ofit.

(Ps, comparing this movie to an amazing American pop culture movie like’The Breakfast club’ is a really silly thing to do. The movies are intwo totally different leagues and shouldn’t be compared. If you do goto see this movie, do not go in with a breakfast club expectation, itwill ruin the movie for you.)

(PPs, on my quest of the best movies of all time, this one falls short.A great movie none the less.)

SPOILERS Every once in a while, MTV release music driven films designedfor a teen audience. Whilst occasionally they are tolerable, oftenthey’re awful. The one surprising theme involving the MTV collectiontends to be the presence of a major movie star in an early role. In"The Perfect Score", MTV have once again managed to create a mediocreteen film which gets better as it progresses, but will remain known foran appearance by then sensation Scarlett Johansson.

For whatever different reasons, a group of students are all on courseto fail their SAT exams. Two of them, Kyle and Matty (Chris Evans andBryan Greenberg), decide that the only way to fulfil their goals inlife is to recruit the other failing students (including Johansson’srich girl) to help them steal the results in preparation for the exam.

The selection of MTV movies are never expected to be anything special.Often they are weak stories with immature performances and for thefirst half of "The Perfect Score", the pattern remains true. Ultimatelythough the story is saved partly by improving acting during the filmand a daft performance by an unknown called Leonardo Nam as a stonedcomputer genius. Whilst not enough to fully redeem the early garbage,they do help to drag the film away from the doldrums of patheticembarrassment and into the tolerable realm of dodgy teen flick.

Perhaps the one great irony about this film is how Miss Johansson mightfeel about it now. Released in the same year as "Lost In Translation"and "Girl with a Pearl Earring", this feature showed her in acompletely different style of role and might arguably have lowered herin the opinion of certain critics. The performance itself is notparticularly bad by Johansson and she does look very beautiful at timesduring the film, but considering the time of release, she couldprobably have done with avoiding "The Perfect Score".

Despite all of the traditional flaws with MTV movies, "The PerfectScore" does redeem itself later on. At the same time though, for solong into the film, the plot and characters are weak and infuriatingwith little really going for them. It takes a lot of hard work to watchthis film, but towards the end, it becomes more enjoyable. Not a goodfilm, but not the worst ever either.

read comments (0)

The Libertine

I cannot believe how awful a movie this was, I left after an hour, Ikept waiting for it to get better and it didn’t WHAT A WASTE OF TIME. Ihope that Johnny Depp doesn’t keep making such horrible movies, thisand Willie Wonka were AWFUL. I went to it because I’m a big Depp fan,and I like movies set in the time period that The Libertine but I’mvery very very disappointed and mad that my boyfriend and I wasted notonly an hour of our time but $18.50 on that piece of crap. awful moviewaste of time horrible movie waste of time awful movie waste of timeawful movie waste of time horrible movie waste of time awful moviewaste of time awful movie waste of time horrible movie waste of timeawful movie waste of time awful movie waste of time horrible moviewaste of time awful movie waste of time

I would not have seen this movie except it was a last-minutespontaneous choice while on a second date with a ravishing green-eyedbeauty. I appreciated the attention to detail in this film and theperformances were excellent, but I have a feeling if I hadn’t beeninnocently exchanging delicious G-rated hand, arm and leg caresses frommy incredibly sexy date, I would have committed suicide watching thisgrim, muddy, gory, visceral, depressing film. So watch only with awoman (or man!) that is getting you hot under the collar and it will begreat. And in case you’re wondering, no, I didn’t get lucky that nightbut I felt so good during that movie I could have cared less.

I am an avid Johnny Depp fan, and I believe Mr. Depp can do no wrong.But trust me, this movie is just plain wrong! Yeah, yeah…the actingwas good. But what of the story? I should have taken the 99.9% emptytheater as a hint…but no, I stayed and watched because I was hopingthe movie would eventually redeem itself. I was mistaken…and therewent two hours of my life.

I’m glad SOME viewers out there actually enjoyed it, but as for me…Istill can’t figure out how these films ever make it to the big screen.It’s probably a movie people will feel passionately about eitherway–you’ll love it or you’ll hate it. I’m of the latter, obviously.

Reasons not to watch this film: 1. So boring and pointless, you’ll wantto stick a fork in your eyeball.

2. Long, monotonous dialogue. You just wish you could fast-forwardthrough it.

3. You wait, and you THINK you know the point of the movie, and thenyou’re mistaken when it takes a weird turn.

4. Grotesque, ugly, disgusting, and dark. Don’t get me wrong, I love agood, dark film. But, this one just didn’t do it.

All I can say is: I’m amazed I didn’t fall into a deep coma by themovie’s end. Christ!

Oh my word! I have not seen a more awful movie - except perhaps "Toys"with Robin Williams and Shelly Duval. At least that one had a plot!

Yes, Johnny showed his depth as an actor. He is a wonderful actor, butto take part in such a bad movie is disappointing.

It was rambling with only a few parts that followed each other. Thestory of Rochester and his wife, was so broken up, it was as if theytossed her in there just to remind us he was married

To me (and my 5 friends that saw it with me) the movie seemed to comeupon Rochester halfway through his story. Expecting the audience toalready know Rochester’s history

I’m sorry the movie was so awful We weren’t sure what to expect, butthat wasn’t it

This is one of those movies where there is nothing wrong with theacting, it’s just that the story stinks.

I will have to admit that I wanted to go see Mrs. Henderson Presentsbut I let my oldest daughter (she’s 18) talk me into going to thismovie. In contrast, my daughter loved the movie.

I did finally get to see Mrs. Henderson Presents. Excellent movie. Amust see.

The Livertine (bad joke!) may be a true story, but it wasn’t one Iwanted to see. If I want to watch self destructive alcoholics I’ll goto a family reunion.

The best thing in the movie was the performance by Samanta Morton. Ihad to go to IMDb to find out where I had seen her before.It was inMinority Report. She was the only thing in that movie that was worthwatching.

Being an avid Johnny Depp fan I had expected this movie to be at leastgood. However, much to my dismay it was horrible. I am still at a lossfor words to describe this film and am trying to reestablish myadmiration for Depp. The only good part of the movie was a midgetriding on a hugantic penis and the other humorous sexual references. Inall, I am disappointed that the movie was made and would highly suggestwatching, I don’t know, Gili with Benifer or possibly even Showgirls. Iam scared for life and am seeking therapy. The story in and of itselfwas decent. The grossness of the movie and hilarity on the other handwere not so good.

Very well made a film, unfortunately says nothing, and it is full ofstereotypes. Considering the unusual camera work and the well craftedstage design, it is a shame that the story does not live up to what ithas promised from the beginning. There are many good things about thefilm except the film itself… To this day it is a fact that onlyPasolini is capable of making a film like this and survive… goodeffort though…

My favourite sentence …there are only two types of people who dislikeyour work, the stupid and the envious… the stupid will eventuallylike it, the envious will never like it…

wow. Depp has always been great but here he’s the very essence of themovie. for those who think he’s not amazing, wait until you see this.It must be released. If it’s not released worldwide everyone who hasn’tseen it has missed out. very pleasing. dun more makes an assuringdirectorial debut. Morton was great but DeeP is the movie. HE’SJUSTGREAT IN IT. everyone whose seen it has loved it so its great. I’mhappy for them. Go DeeP. Keep soaring I think he made the movieeverything it is.aaaaaaaaawwwwwwwwwweeeeeeeesssssssooooooommmmmmeeeeeee. you’ll like itif you like good things and even if you don’t you’ll still like. can’twait for depp’s first Oscar.

If you’ve ever wondered what it was like to mix together episodes of"Dynasty" and "Fame" with funny costumes and an after-school-specialabout "drinking," this is your movie. You also get sophomoric cameraeffects, tween dialogue, very very very bad editing, neglected plotand, and flat salaciousness. The sad part was, the actors were tryingto do a good job. There were a couple of minutes where Depp and Mortongot it together. But, I think the filmmakers really dropped the ball onthis one. I didn’t find it entertaining on any level. There are somebad movies that can be bearable — Charlie and the Chocolate Factorywas one recent bad Depp vehicle that had the charm of the colors andthe costumes. But this movie had no redeeming qualities.

This movie started slow, and never picked up. It dragged its feet fornearly 2 hours of blah blah blahing about sex and brothels. Yes, it mayhave been true to life, but it was so seedy, and dull people around usin the theatre were falling asleep and walking out within the first 20minutes of the film. Even the colors were dull and dirty, and the filmquality was even grainy and uninteresting. I suggest seeing it if youare really into John Wilmot, but I was disappointed with Johnny Depp’sperformance. It wasn’t the caliber that he usually puts out in a film.I thought the trailer looked interesting- but apparently that was theonly part of this film that was. *yawn*

read comments (0)

The Hillz

This movie changed my life. Paris was so amazing in it. I mean, the waythat she expressed her emotions after the tragedy involving Todd, wasso believable, I cried. Every time I watch this movie, I end up intears and my boyfriend has to carry me to bed because I just get sowrapped up in it. The cast is amazing. I cannot believe that this wasthe first movie for almost everyone involved. Well done, well done.I've learned so much from the characters and their progress throughoutthe movie. I mean, Steve 5 was not only the most attractive male I haveever laid eyes upon, he also made me rethink wanting to go to college.I mean, why not just hang around with your friends that are making adecent living selling drugs? The people portrayed in this movie may belooked down upon by fellow citizens, but who are they to judge?

I picked this movie up for 10 bucks at Target, having no idea what thismovie was about. But it seemed cool and Paris Hilton is in it. Ofcourse, she’s the farthest thing from a decent actress, but I can’tdeny that she’s gorgeous. However, Paris shouldn’t be your number onereason to checking out this movie, since she only has about a 20-minutesupporting role. Naturally, since she’s the only cast member with morethan a shred of popularity, they’re gonna use her as a marketing ploy.The rest of the cast, however, is good for the most part. James DeBellois somewhat of a known actor, having been in movies like "Swimfan,""Detroit Rock City" and "Scary Movie 2." The only actor, besides Paris,whose performance was kind of weak was the main character/protagonist.But even his acting was decent. Normally, I complain about the shakycamera-work I see in a lot of these independent films, but in this filmI felt it was necessary–due to the trippy, chaotic nature of thestory. I wouldn’t dare compare "The Hillz" to "A Clockwork Orange"(like the synopsis on the back of DVD cover does), but it’s hard tocompare any movie to Kubrick’s masterpiece. I’m sure some may describethis as an all-white, West-coast version of Larry Clark’s "Kids." I,for one, wasn’t a fan of that overrated mess of a movie. "The Hillz"doesn’t glorify the behavior of its characters. If someone chooses toemulate the behavior of the young people in this movie, that showswhere their morals are at. I think of the film as a sharp, bitingcommentary on the lives of hedonistic youths in L.A. and how it can bedifficult to abandon a group of friends, no matter how deviant theyhappen to be. One thing’s for sure: the movie never has a dull moment.There are also nice moments of humor, like when the main characterfantasizes about Paris Hilton’s character saying dirty things to himevery time he has sex with another girl. If there’s one thing I have tocriticize, the ending is pretty rushed. I was left with an "is thatall" feeling.

LOL I give this movie an 8 out of 10 if you want something to laugh at.I bought The Hillz only because Paris Hilton was in it, although shedidn't have a huge role.

This is the funnest movie to watch if you are high. I wish the guyswould stop picking on Ahkmel so much LOL, but that makes the moviefunnier.

I hope the writers were not planning something serious when theydecided to make this movie. Come on, how could a bunch of spoiled richbrats from Beverly Hills decide to go around killing everybody withoutanyone noticing/caring??? The plot is so unrealistic, which adds to thehumor. It is supposed to be a thriller, but I'd say it's definitely acomedy.

I have made some of my friends watch it, and they all thought it wasfunny but incredibly stupid. HAHA LOVES IT!!!

Great for an indie. Raw. None of the special effects of todays films.Refreshing! Too many remakes out there now. Not enough authenticscripts being passed around these days. Jason Shaw is quite good inthis film; making the transition form modeling smooth. Paris…,well,what can I say, she’s Paris. Lots of great actors in the film. Niceedge and hopefully another one will come our way again. I hope thisdirector keeps them coming!Great for an indie. Raw. None of the specialeffects of todays films. Refreshing! Too many remakes out there now.Not enough authentic scripts being passed around these days. Jason Shawis quite good in this film; making the transition form modeling smooth.Paris…,well, what can I say, she’s Paris. Lots of great actors in thefilm. Nice edge and hopefully another one will come our way again. Ihope this director keeps them coming!Great for an indie. Raw. None ofthe special effects of todays films. Refreshing! Too many remakes outthere now. Not enough authentic scripts being passed around these days.Jason Shaw is quite good in this film; making the transition formmodeling smooth. Paris…,well, what can I say, she’s Paris. Lots ofgreat actors in the film. Nice edge and hopefully another one will comeour way again. I hope this director keeps them coming!

The Hillz is a great movie! not a movie to watch with your family but amovie to sit back and watch with friends. Even though the swearing is alittle too much it shows what gang life really is. It showed me whatlife is really like in a gang and how much drugs can take over yourlife. Also, The Hillz showed me that not all gang members are bad. theymay be total jerks but once you get to know them they are nice. Likehow T feels really bad about the death of Seb and is actually sensitiveinstead of the jerk he is around other people. This movie isn't just amovie about a gang its a movie about love, which can attract attentionto female viewers. The love connection between Heather Smith and Steve5 was a nail biter! I know i was wanting them to be together from thestart because it would change Steve a lot. I recommend this movie toanybody within reason. It teaches a lot about gangs and is in all agreat movie.

The Hillz Is Kinda Funny But Its Weird I Don't Get It Needs A BetterPlot. All I Get About It Is He Kinds A Gun And Kills People And TheMovie Never Told You Why Or Nothing. I Would Not Waste Your Money On ItIf I Was You But Thats Just Me. To Pay For A Movie I Want It To FunnyWhat The Movie It Not That Funny But The Funnyist Was OK. 2 I Want TheMovie To Make Sense And This Movie Did Not Make Sense. 3 I Want TheActing To Be Good What Is Was Not Very Good In The Movie. 4 I Want TheMovie To Be Enjoyable So I Can Sit There And Watch The Movie I Don'tWant To Be Hoping I Was Not Watching It. And Thats Why I Disliked ThisMovie.

Well, the film has some actors that I've seen in a few other places, Iwas surprised to see Paris Hilton in this and fairly disturbed by it,she can't act and she's not very attractive. She could have easily beenreplaced with a less-known actress with a better level of talent, thosearen't hard to find compared to her. Anyhow, this isn't about a rant onParis.

The film's storyline is reasonably good, and for the low-budget thecamera was put to pretty strong use. The acting was pretty mediocre,but most of these kids were performing in one of their first movies soits understandable. It's a movie that, even if you're not a drug-useror anything like it, you can probably identify with it.

This is primarily a low-level drama, and not a comedy. It's gotrealistic comedic value, just every day jokes and laughs, but nothingout there just to make the audience laugh.

This is a good movie to watch if you have nothing better to do, butit's nothing I'd recommend buying or anything.

I would have to say that the "Hillz" wasn't that bad as I was expectingI was on a full face of ya-yo but still the movie wasn't that bad, yeathe acting was pretty terrible but the only main shining light wasDuffy, yes he was very over dramatic, but still he was the only thingthat saved this movie from being a complete bomb, the only thing th
at ididn't enjoy was just that every f'ing white boy from the suburbscarried a gun, are u kidding me, I'm from the suburbs and i don't carrya gun, nor do i shot anything that moves, still though it wasn't thatbad not as good as havoc which i actually enjoyed, trust me i am amovie lover, but i mean honestly the movie wasn't that bad, drink alittle drank and do a little drug, and waste some time with yourfriends and u won't be that disappointed, peace one love. -Wolford

Well I must say I'm not a big fan of movies like how some people are tonotice the holes in the movie. I did notice how the two kids wereinvited to their friends funeral even tho his dad said they couldn'thang with him no more. I noticed the acting wasn't too greateither(well when Paris Hilton got slapped n she said I loved you Todd,that just sucked.) But Overall it wasn't as bad as some people make itto be. And yes this is the same movie that you people saw. Thestoryline just kept me interested, making me want to see what happensnext. One night I was bored n flipped the channel and saw this andwatched it. The way the actors talked made it interesting, and in someparts this movie had humor in it. "Hey B!itch want another?" forexample, I was thinking that was funny, even tho it is immature but itmade me laugh. I loved Steve 5, especially how he narrated the movie.It made me want to hug him whenever he said he knew he was better thenJJ n that gang. But I hated how he ruined his life by hanging with themagain, even dying from it(that ending p*ssed me off too) Even tho Ithought how the heck are they gonna kill some dude in the middle of theday and no cops are on their @ss, its just a movie. Unrealisic sh*tlike that is gonna happen. Now I must say some of you people say onlyposers n such like this movie, well I'm not a poser. In fact this moviewas probably made for teens to teach them what drugs n being in gangscan do to someone and how bad it really is…I think that was themessage of this movie. I give it 7 out of 10, I loved the storyline anda few characters, even Heather(Paris's Character) even tho she was ab!Itch to Steve she didn't like the losers and didn't want him involvedwith them. I think she should have broken up with that d!ck Todd andgot with Steve. I loved Steve the best out of them all, but he wasstupid for messing his life up, and that got him killed(another messagemaybe?)

Come on, people. This is a comedy and intended as a comedy. It is aseries of ever-increasing incongruous events. Just the premise, about abunch of bored, rich, spoiled high school grads from Beverly Hills whodecide to become gangstas should tip you off. Anyone who judges this asa serious movie and was disappointed as a result might have also beendisappointed that The Producers and Springtime for Hitler was not awell-done serious dramatic treatment of Adolph Hitler and WWII. Ofcourse Paris Hilton seemed like a stuck-up stoned materialistic airheadb*#ch in this film. That's precisely the role she was playing and thecharacter she portrayed. Everyone in this film was stoned and gotfurther and further stoned as things progressed. The fact that peoplewere shooting each other in the face in broad daylight on the street orat parties and murdering at the slightest whim and then acting asthough nothing had happened was wildly funny. The scenes where agroupie of the Beverly Hills gang sleeps with one of them to try to gethim to murder her rival cheerleader in high school (with her mother'scomplete approval) is so over the top funny that you cannot take thisseriously and at that point should have had a clue that this is acomedy. This is not the greatest comedy I've ever seen and I would giveit a 7 out of 10, but it was INTENDED TO BE FUNNY and has to be judgedas a hilarious over-the-top comedy, not as serious drama. This washilarious and I'd love to see it again.

read comments (0)

The Girl Next Door

THE GIRL NEXT DOOR (2004) *1/2 Emile Hirsch, Elisha Cuthbert, TimothyOlyphant, James Remar, Chris Marquette, Paul Dano, Timothy Bottoms,Donna Bullock. Morally and emotionally bankrupt inept Gen.Y update of’Risky Business’ meets ‘Something Wild’ with none of those film’s wit,imagination, talent, creativity and oh, yeah, humor and heart. Crassand ugly from the get go with Hirsch as a high school senior attemptingto make his last year memorable by hooking up with the comely Cuthbert,a neighbor’s house sitter who turns out to be a porn star (!) Natch thecrude sophomoric humor kicks in with barely any true laughs to begained except for Olyphant’s (feeling his inner Liotta here)goofy/creepy showing as her sleazy producer mixing things up.

Truly awful. (Dir: Luke Greenfield)

"The Girl Next Door" is one long series of excuses for serving up hugehelpings of sex in an apparent attempt to separate the tween/teen malefrom the price of admission. This very unromantic lol free comedy tellsof an about-to-grad HS student body prez who falls for the housesitting babe next door and then learns she’s a porn star and sets aboutto save her from herself so she can be the person she really wants tobe. (Ahem) Hirsch makes a suitable centerpiece while Cuthbert providesthe babe-a-licious eye candy as this lame comedy only a teen could lovekerchunks though huge gulps of sex obsessed filler. Scoffed at by thecritics with poor marks from mature adults, this flick is fodder forteens chock full of shameful subliminals, T&A, and sex talk. Aguaranteed winner for teen males and their bimbos and a loser for allothers. (C)

Matthew (Emile Hirsch) is a nerdy nobody who can’t think of anythinghe’ll fondly remember from high school after he graduates. That isuntil former porn star, Danielle ("24"’s Elisha Cuthbert) shows up asthe new girl next door.Things get complicated (as these films are proneto do) when her former porn manager comes calling to get her back. Thisadolescent male fantasy suffers from way too much music on thesoundtrack (nearly every scene of the film is scored with a late ’80’sor early ’90’s tune with the purpose to substitute for any trueemotional feeling), a insincere undeserved sentimentality thatpermeates through the film, and a surprising lack of laughs. While theacting is fair enough and the film is watchable, it still lacks anymemorability and will be forgotten after a while. Still, it remains astep up for the Director and writers, if a step down for much of thecast.

My Grade: C-

Generally pointless, often asinine, sporadic rip-off of 80'sconservative/yuppie wet dream flick, Risky Business finds theenterprising teens moving from using women as prostitutes to get intocollege to using women in porno videos to get into college. Ahh, to beyoung, affluent, white and American! The storyline is largelyfar-fetched as are the irritatingly clichéd characterizations whichinclude the clueless and zany parents, clueless and irritatingteachers, horny and supposedly funny friends and a squeaky clean"looking for love only" leading man.

Barely saving the film from its smirking self awareness (it seems tothink it has a clever script) and gross commodity fetish politics arethe curiously charming and sexy performances of the two leads, handsomeEmile Hirsh and gorgeous Elisha Cuthbert. Both of them really should belending their talents elsewhere as should the always dependable heelTimothy Olyphant (standing in for Guido the Killer pimp from RiskyBusiness). They keep you interested in the nonsense unfolding which ismore than this cheap, self important and finally vulgar teen comedydeserves.

A word to those who think that excessive use of 1980's music (whichtruly most of these characters wouldn't know) and using key plotdevices from Risky Business are somehow HOMAGE to 80's teen films…it's not homage.. it's called RIP OFF or as they say in L.A. a"re-imaginging of a hit".

In spite of the leads charms, neither her curves or his handsomebackside can save this tiresome rubbish.

This movie was horrible. Simple as that. The only reason I wanted towatch it was because of Elisha Cuthbert. I figured she's really hot sowhat the hell. Boy was I wrong. Not only was the plot written for threeyear olds, there are many holes in the plot that even three year oldswould look at and say 'Come on man, how stupid do you think I am?' Thestory revolves around some loser who has an ex-pornstar move in nextdoor. He's a real loser but she treats him nice and shows him the 'coollife.' He screws up with her but does everything he can to get herback, including drive across the country in a few hours, and somehowentering an adult film festival with his two 17 year old friends aswell. Not only that, but he was in charge of 25 thousand bucks for hisschool and he manages to lose it in a completely unrealistic and stupidway.

In the end, they film a porno with two porn stars in school at the sametime of the prom. Then a porn director convinces the main character'sparents and his principal that he is actually a teacher at the kid'sschool (gee, how'd he convince the principal?) and tries to screw themain character over. Cue the crappy ending, main character says a coolline about how he's just 'chillin' or some such bullcrap, and themovie's over.

The only redeeming quality in the movie was his best friend Eli, andhow funny he was. But that's it. Horrible movie.

I went to a sneak preview showing of this movie on Friday night and whileTHE GIRL NEXT GIRL isn’t a perfect flick, it is certainly better than theaverage R-rated teen fare these days. What makes it better is the undeniabledifferentness of the movie. It doesn’t seem to be a particular genre. Itmixes comedy and drama so I guess it could be considered a comedy/drama, butthe mix is so uneven that saying the movie is a comedy/drama doesn’t seem tobe the right label for it. While normally unevenness in movies makes meangry at the screen, I didn’t mind the unevenness here.

Regardless of whatever genre it was supposed to fall under, the movie workedfor me. It had its flaws, but overall it worked, mainly due to the talentedcast and great supply of laughs in addition to the rather effective dramaticscenes. THE GIRL NEXT DOOR may not be as entertaining as Luke Greenfield’slast movie, THE ANIMAL, but it still delivers the goods and will probablyend up on my best movies of 2004 list later this year.

This movie uses a very familiar formula. A somewhat older, daring, andattractive person moves in next door to a high school "innocent", andthey each help pull the other a bit more towards the middle. Here theinnocent is a boy, Matty played by Emile Hirsch, who is smaller thanthe tough high school boys, who apparently has no girl friends, and isa math whiz who plans to attend Georgetown the next year. ElishaCuthbert plays Danielle who moves in next door. When Matty finds outthat she has no ‘boyfriend’ he gets interested. However, as we knowfrom the movie trailers, Danielle is a young porn star, a fact thatdoesn’t escape Matty’s friend Eli (Chris Marquette, ‘Adam’ of Joan ofArcadia) for long, because Eli’s past time is watching porn.

My favorite character was Kelly, played by Timothy Olyphant. Kellyshows up one day, Matty thinks he might be an old boyfriend, but hereally is Danielle’s "producer". He talks her into going with him to LVfor a porn industry show, she goes figuring she can’t realisticallyescape her past. But Matty follows her, fights for her, she eventuallyleaves the industry for good.

Most SPOILERS are in the following comments. There is a side story of a$25,000 fund Matty was amassing for a young "genius" to be allowed tocome to America for studies, in a questionable twist Kelly steals themoney so Matty has to come up with a quick
fund raising scheme. Duringthe school prom he recruits the help of a couple of porn stars and hisfriends, we the audience thinks he is making a porn movie. In realityhe is making a sex-education film, and he sells it for enough toreplace the stolen $25,000, a loss he mentally writes off as the priceto get Danielle out of her industry.

While the overall story has a positive ring to it, the style of themovie was often in poor taste. For example, the character Eli wasobsessed with sex, and his dialog was often inappropriate in public,even in this sort of movie. It just seems that they were too oftengoing for the shock value instead of trusting the inherent goodness ofthe story.

On an aside, I enjoyed Timothy Bottoms as Matty’s dad, Mr. Kidman. Heplayed it very low key, in contrast to the character he played, as thePresident, in the short-lived TV series, "That’s My Bush."

Couldn't believe this nothing of a movie is rated so high.. i mean6.8??? What the Hell??. OK i know that Elisha Cuthbert is really hotand all but seriously .. this movie is a waste of time; there aremillion other Teen Movies which are far better than this piece ofgarbage..this movie sucks big time.. trust me the only reason its ratedso high is because of Elisha Cuthbert.. (only high point in her careerwas Popular Mechanics for Kids) "Plot revolves around a geeky teen …. and his girl next door(Cuthbert) turns out the hot girl is aPornstar and is messed up in a lot of sh*t.. what follows next is noteven worth mentioning….."

Its neither funny nor romantic.. a total dull Seriously if you haveeven a little sense, you wouldn't wanna watch this movie… Personallywould have given it a zero..

Come on guys! Let’s face it! We have always had a crush with the girlnext door! It has always been a guilty pleasure, but in so peculiar wayit has been a lust for life! Come on, you peeping Toms! Expressyourself! You know you have! "The girl next door" has to rank as the #1object of desire for the master of your domain. You get my thrift!Those girls next door sure did "cum" in handy! Anyway, the film "TheGirl Next Door" is really like your "girl next door" herself: it’s ajollity guilty pleasure! Emile Hirsch stars as Matthew Kidman, anouveau riche high school senior who must execute an eloquent speech inorder to get a Georgetown University scholarship. However, for this"George" hopeful "Bush" gets in the way. The luscious Elisha Cuthbertco-stars as Danielle, who else but the girl next door. Matthew fallsfor Danielle (no doubt). Even though I like the sound of Danielle fallsfor Joel better (even rhymes). I almost forgot to mention the TripleXXX files aspect of the story: Danielle is porn to be alive! Yea, sheis a reincarnation of "Roller Girl". She is a porn star!!! Anyway,havoc occurs when the simpleton Matthew is faced with challengingsituations after he founds out the naked truth about Danielle. The restof the story is just fun film popcorn entertainment, even though somemore things might be popping after you see the beauty of ElishaCuthbert. "The Girl Next Door" will not change your life but alwaysremember "like a good neighbor, porn star is there". **** Good

Another cheesy, misguided, misogynistic so called teen fantasy movieabout nothing. What starts out as an intriguing premise, quickly turnsinto a downward spiral of bad plotting when they actually remove thelove interest from the storyline half way through the movie and turnthe film into a conflict between an innocent kid and some bad pornproducers. Huh? It would've been a whole lot better if they kept theGIRL involved. What kind of romantic comedy loses track of one of thelove interests for 20 minutes? The only saving grace of any of it isTimothy Olyphant's wry and funny portrayal of a shrewd business man inthe wrong business.

read comments (0)

Shark Tale

First, I can see why people may feel the need to criticize the story ofthis movie. After all, it’s been done a few thousand times. Keeping inmind that a young child has probably only seen the story played out afew dozen times, though, I can let that slide.

What I would inform parents about, however, is that this roughly seemsto be a hip-hop culture flick as much as a children’s flick. Themusical turns are to that culture, as are most pop culture references.A number of children in the theatre when I attended did not seeminterested in the characters. My guess is that they couldn’t identifywith the characters, or understand some of their behaviours, becausethey don’t share the cultural experiences. While I support diversity ina film’s characters, it really only works when children can empathizewith the bulk of the characters.

And is it necessary to put images of seemingly stoned rastafarians in achildren’s movie? It seems to me that, as is the case with many Disneyand other animated efforts in the past 70 years, only supports racialstereotypes.

Overall, though, the story is simple and may have a valuable lesson forthe child who is actually able to stay with the film to the end. Thereare just too many obstacles to arriving at the end, regardless of howvisually appealing the film may be. Take care.

The Pixar computer animated classic "Finding Nemo" found itself a poolof box office euphoria. Since "Finding Nemo" were "the fisher kings" ofthe box office last year, Dreamworks decided to go fishing for some oftheir own dough and develop their own fishy animated story. I introduceyou "Shark Tale". Audiences also took the bait on "Shark Tale" byrounding up satisfactory box office coin. However, it did not reach thedeep sea pockets of Nemo. "Shark Tale" stars Lenny the tiburon (voicedby Jack Black) as a gentle sharkey lacking the fury of his fellowsharkanians. In other words, he is no sharkey’s machine! I guess Lennydoes not fit in the school of sharks. The situation does not "boat" Imean bode well with Don Lino, Lenny’s shark daddy (voiced by RobertDeniro). Don Lino wishes Lenny was a bone shark instead of a loneshark. Next, I introduce Oscar the hyper bling-bling fish (voiced byWill Smith). Even though Smith will not receive any Oscar nominationsfor his voice-over of Oscar, it is still deserving of a goldfishstatuette instead of the aforementioned goldman statuette. Oscar ischatty, manipulative, and debonaire. Angie the pescada (voiced by ReneeZellweger) is in love with the big "O" and would give her left gill forhim. She wants to have Oscar at below! Then we come to Lisa (voiced byAngelina Jolie) who is the fish girl interrupted who is trying toprevent from Oscar & Angie from hooking up. However, Lisa wants Oscarfor his bills and not for his gills. Through some unforeseencircumstances, Oscar is recognized as "the shark slayer" because ofLenny’s generous antics. Shark Tale’s relentless puns was the prominentfeature why you should deep into "Shark Tale" at your own risk! ****Good

A poor urban guy by a series of chance occurrences becomes rich andfamous, only to face an identity crisis which brings him back to hisurban roots. Throw in a love interest, a few homie punchlines and WillSmith and you essentially have an episode of the wildly successfulFresh Prince of Bel Air TV Show. But this is no TV show, you just paidto watch Dreamwork’s take on Disney’s Finding Nemo. The comparisonswill undoubtedly arise between these two underwater computer animatedmovies, and it’s safe to say that Nemo blows this Shark out of thewater.

Let me get straight to the gripes. The cool factor of being underwateris that the dynamics of underwater locomotion. Let’s face it, even IanThorpe isn’t all that graceful with his splashing around in the watercompared to a fish. And this is the source of my first gripe, these"fish" tend to just FLY around with no illusion of underwater movement.They could have been airborne humans. And they have HANDS! And theybuild building underwater with glass, bricks, concrete, asphalt, metal,and elevators! WHY does a fish need an ELEVATOR?? It’s supposed to be acoral reef! And the Whale Wash uses suds and jets of water! That justdoesn’t make any sense.

OK logical gaps are usually explained away as "suspension of belief" solet’s look past that and get to the characters. I find it an odd choicethat when depicting fish, that they look more like humans and less likefish. They have arms and legs that are supposed to be fins. And theirfaces! Really that fish’s face looks exactly like Will Smith includingthe crazy ears. Did they do this just to get away from being too muchlike that other fish movie? However, I do give kudos to the sharks andthe 2 reggae jellyfish guys. They look awesome.

Now where this movie truly falls apart is the story. There’s no reasonwhy we should like Mr. Smith. He’s a user, a poser and only at thebrink of his best friend being killed does he "take action" … whichof course works out marvelously netting him even more fame and fortune.Honestly, this whole "Shark Slayer" thing was just a terrible plotdevice. Terrible. There’s just none of the zing in this show. No magic,no charm. It just plunges through it’s inane story to the end, notlooking back to see if anyone really cares. This is a wrecking ball ofcomputer animated movies.

Now that’s not to say that this film has no redeeming qualities. Kidswould love it as my wife did. For me the movie was saved by some greatsupporting characters. Jack Black plays a genuinely lovable vegetarianshark in dolphin drag. Robert De Niro’s mafia kingpin shark washilarious, bringing to mind his comedy shtick from Meet the Parents.Simply great. Finally the two jellyfish guys, Doug E. Doug and ZiggyMarley, are spot on funny. Off the wall and well thought out. If onlythe rest of the movie could reproduce hilarity of these guys.

Really this movie could have been so much better. Shame on youDreamworks for trying to cash in on an animated underwater movie that’sjust like Nemo but not. All the big name voice actors in Hollywoodcan’t save this one. Something smells fishy here, throw this one back.

I actually went to see this when I was on holiday in Lyon andunfortunately it was in French so I didn’t understand the majority ofit. My French teacher suggested that I should see it to improve myFrench. So basically there’s not much point in you reading this commentanyway. But still.. I did think that it was better than Finding Nemo.

It has a much better story-line and I did laugh out loud at some of thethings. My favourite character was the vegetarian shark If you likedFinding Nemo then you’ll probably enjoy Shark Tale. Even though theplot is different they are the same kind of idea. Animated seacreatures.. quite sweet really. It’s an excellent family film.

Great celebrity cast. Creative ideas. This film would leave youlaughing on the floor. Keep your eyes peeled for the credits. Frombeginning to end. You laugh your guts out. There are plenty of jokesboth people young and old would get. But this film would make it to theOscars. It wold get nominated. Besides this film makes THE SPONGEBOBSQUAREPANTS MOVIE look like a flop. If you enjoy this film, you’llenjoy THE INCREDIBLES. There is one scene where they show the city andthere was a sushi bar and the fish clerk was heaving out an angry groanbecause he was not making enough money, and if older viewers get thejoke, it is canabalism! lol Recomneded for the whole family. Keep youreyes peeled for some pop culture references!

it’d be impossible for me to say anything negative about the filmvisually, as the animation is stunning. however, the experience seemslike watching one thing and simultaneously listening to the actors inthe studio. somehow, the vocal performances of a lot of the cast
(except jack black, angelina jolie and renee zelwegger) didn’t fit withthe images consistently. further, the script is horrendously cliché.while there are plenty of funny moments, most of the story line hasbeen done (and often done better) in previous kids’ movies. i would,however, still suggest a viewing to anyone who wants to see somespectacular animation or who just enjoys lighthearted children’s fare.

I do not see why anyone would not like this movie. It was so funny Ialmost wet myself the first time I saw it.

One thing I loved about this movie was the fact that all the fishlooked like the person in real life.

The movie was simply hysterical. The whole concept of the mafia asRobert De Niro was so funny. This movie will be enjoyed by kids andadults.

Jack Black and Robert De Niro were so funny. Jack Black did a fantasticjob playing the vegetarian nice shark. The whole movie was justfantastic and I loved it. 10 stars!

This is so funny! It’s about this fish named Oscar(will smith). Heis……shall we say a lazy bum(lol) And he is a liar. He works at thewhale wash and he owes his boss 5000 clams and just as he is going togive them to him……..He bets it on a horse! Unfortanally the horseloses and he is in real trouble. Anyway the other central character isa shark named Lenny(jack black). He is a vegetarian and because of thishe is an outcast….much to the dismay of his father don lino(Robert DeNero).He finally gets fed up with Lenny and trys to make him eat a cutelittle shrimp.Of course Lenny just cant and sets the shrimp free.Thisis the last straw for lino and he orders his other son Frankie(Michaelimperioli)to take him out and "show him the ropes"…………see themovie for the rest. Well anyway its a really good movie and i think youwould enjoy it.

I was not a huge fan of FINDING NEMO, though when compared to this filmit is definitely a superior film. That's because while NEMO was a muchsimpler story and designed more for little kids, SHARK TALE was ratherdark and grim, plus I didn't appreciate all the "with it" hip-hopreferences or inclusion of Robert De Niro as the boss shark. If I wantto see De Niro, I might watch GOODFELLAS or RAGING BULL and I can't seewhy such an adult actor is given a role in what should have been apurely kids' film. Nothing new or memorable here–just a pale imitationof NEMO with some heavy-handed touches. The charm just isn't apparentand I can't see a compelling reason to seek out this film, though it isan agreeable enough time-passer.

I really had big expectations before this movie came out. Afterall itwas made by DreamWorks which gave us both installations of Shrek andtherefor if nothing else, I expected it to be funny.

OK, I’m not going to argue about the animation, because probably mostof you saw what computer cgi animation looks like… the main problemwith this movie is that it wants to be Ice Age cross Shrek crossFinding Nemo, but in the end it fails as it turns out that people whomade Shark Tale are probably the same ones as those from Beauty and theBeast. I mean, you can’t make an impression just by terrific animation.

The plot is … well in one word… ridiculous. No, wait… there is noplot. Something happens and it ends. Be yourself. Don’t lie. Get richquick. Be somebody. etc. etc. Obviously DreamWorks fellas think thatrenaming Katie Couric into Katie Current and GAP into GUP is suppose tobe the highlight of this messy ocean story. Ha ha, to die for.

You can expect lots of pointless singing and plot less storyline. Butyou might enjoy the Vegetarian Shark, which actually brings a bit ofthe humor into this boring and extremely short movie.

read comments (0)

Surviving Christmas

The movie got terrible reviews, but I like Ben Affleck so I went to seeit and was glad I did. The movie was so much better than I thought itwould be. There were a few awkward moments, mainly around the son ofthe family that is "rented" by Ben’s character. But other than that,the movie was funny and moved with a quick jolly pace. Plus, it’s aChristmas movie, so it had cheery cinematography and and a score withnice classical Christmas music.

Ben Affleck’s comedy timing and character reminded me a lot of JerseyGirl. I loved the chemistry between him and Christina Applegate. Ifyou’re a Ben Affleck fan, I think you’ll like the movie. But if you’renot, you may not like the unnecessary raunchiness and it may be worthonly the price of a rental.

People, give this movie a chance! Stop listening to critics or makingassumptions until you have seen the film for yourself.

I totally enjoyed this movie. First of all, it is refreshing to see amovie that does not contain the "f" word in every other sentence. Idon’t recall much profanity at all. Second, there aren’t any grotesquescenes; no one get slaughtered. I realize these eliments seem to bewhat gets a movie to the Oscars now a days. But this is a totallyentertaining film. The scenery is beautiful and puts you in theChristmas spirit. And lets face reality folks, this is what a lot ofreal Christmases are like.

Let’s stop criticizing Ben because of J-Lo. He is a great actor and heis still young. He will be around for along time; a lot longer than someof the critics.

A sweet little movie. Affleck delightful by the end; earlier prettygrating and a little selfish. A good character study, though. The girlwith the Cartier bracelet let me down at the end, though. I didn’texpect her to get all bratty and say "I’m gonna keep this bracelet" (orsomething like that). Alicia had her head on straight. I figured Benand family would be friends by the end of the movie, and I was right.Doo Dah and understudy were very good and very funny. The dad hittingBen over the head with the snow shovel was priceless. A weak part, Ifelt, was when Ben (Drew) told Alicia he really had no parents, andabout what had happened to them. Ah well, a delightful respite at ourlocal discount theatre.

Yet another new Xmas movie.

Affleck pays a family to let him stay in their house over Xmas.

This movie is rather similar to last year’s Dickie Roberts. Affleckseems to play the same ego-centric character in all of his movies.Rather silly and predictable story with the daughter disliking our heroand then falling for his few charms. Even the visiting girlfriend’sfamily raise no laughs. Only one good scene: the appearance of themother on an adult website.

Surviving Christmas is another weak festive movie.

COME ON! I mean sure, Affleck gave one of his worst performances, andthe storyline was pretty weird but who cares, it was funny! You justneed to loosen up and enjoy the flick, thats what I did when I saw itand I laughed my ass off. So lighten up, go a little easier on Ben, andstop talking like James Gandolfini should just be type cast as agangster.I give this *** stars out of ****.

Note:Why is that just because Ben did Gigli everyone thinks he’s one ofthe worst actors in Hollywood?Remember the brilliant Changing Lanes?Thehilarious Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back?The wonderfully clever ChasingAmy? etc etc

Surviving Christmas isn’t as awful as everyone is saying. I completelyenjoyed it so much that I bought the DVD. Christmas with the Kranks washorrible compared to this so I hope people seeing all the negativecomments on this movie will give THIS ONE a try. I don’t think theywill be disappointed.

Although Ben won’t be up for an Oscar for this performance, it was thebest film I’d seen him in, in years and his performance gave me lots oflaughs. Christina Applegate was adorable and her parents were just ahoot to watch especially her dad. If the movie had been released inDecember instead of October I think more people would have been in the"mood" to watch and enjoy it. I am a huge fan of Christmas movies andthis one will be one I watch every year with my family.

I took my 10yr old son and 15 yr old daughter, and we all loved themovie. I will be buying it on video. I think people are slamming themovie based on political disagreements, or the J- Lo thing. The moviewas very funny!! We all laughed out loud, and left talking about buyingor seeing it again. It had all the Christmas hoopla, romance, and lotsof laughs. It left you leaving happy, and looking forward tocelebrating Christmas. You can’t ask for much more in a movie. I almostmissed out because of unfair comments about this movie, but a clip on atalk show made me want to see it. So glad I saw the clip! Go see it youwon’t be disappointed:) Christina Applegate and Ben Affleck were great,and the Dad on this movie was too. I didn’t recognize him fromanything, but he was a perfect match for the part.

Having a Christmas movie in the middle of October is like going fishingin a lake with no fish. Unless you don’t want to catch a fish, having aChristmas movie in October would be OK. Call me crazy, but this was agood movie. The script has its ups and downs, but then again, the moviedidn’t have a completed script. Still, this was not the reason themovie did so bad. If it premiered in December, the movie would havebeen the #1 comedy at the cinema that week. The American people were tobusy watching the Red Sox and debating who to vote for for President.Plus, nobody wants to watch a movie about Christmas, two weeks beforeHalloween. Overall, Surviving Christmas (which should have been titled:Buying Christmas) is a nice Christmas comedy, that should be attheaters in December.

First of all, after seeing the trailer and reading the scathing reviewsout there, I went into this not expecting much more than "brainmode=off" comedy. I was surprised to find much more there.

This movie really struck me in how much it connects with actual familytogetherness - in that there rarely is any. Families try and hashthings out the best they can, but growing apart and getting on eachother’s nerves is simply reality. Since the holidays are without adoubt sensory overload, it can either make families come together ordrift apart like no other time of the year.

Ben Affleck pulls off a fairly decent job as Drew. There wasn’t muchthere behind the cocky smile, but he pulled off the role nicely.

The real pleasure here was James Gandolfini and Catherine O’Hara.Gandolfini was great as a gruff tow-truck driver with a cuddly warmside burning deep down. And I loved O’Hara as the depressed,under-appreciated mom.

Really, I had only two issues with this movie - one was the incredibly1-dimensional character of the son, Brian. Either have some developmentof some kind or cut the character out. As it was, he was nothing morethan a chronic masturbator for the entire movie, save the last twominutes. The other issue I had was the opening montage - it was cute,but the last image of a grandma putting her head in the oven was justtoo dark and depressing.

Other than that, I give this movie high praise. A true depiction offamily (at least, as I knew it), with a delightful and warm ending.Classic holiday movie that I will watch with regularity in the years tocome.

to put you in the Christmas mood! I absolutely loved it and anyone whodoesn’t is such a Scrooge!

Now I know for certain that many people dislike this movie just becauseAffleck portrays the lead character (Drew), but come on! I’m not hisbiggest fan and I still found it funny, heartfelt and totallyenjoyable. Yes, it might be that my reaction is based on the fact thatI looove this season of the year, but just try to imagine that otherfactors played a part; the casting of all ch
aracters was nearperfection, you can easily characterize yourself with the dysfunctionalfamily and in addition the movie was infused with a comedy both lightand dark.

read comments (0)

Suspect Zero

So, how to describe a movie such as this ?

I guess the only other movie I can compare it to would be "Hearts InAtlantis", since both movies are roughly about the same thing: thegovernment using psychics for "remote viewing" purposes and one of thepeople they’re using gets away.

The twist with "Suspect Zero", though, is that THIS remote viewer turnsinto a vigilante and goes hunting down serial killers. I had tosympathize with the guy in a lot of ways, because his gift was tearinghim up inside and he just wanted it all to go away.

I’ll definitely be adding this movie to my DVD collection.

I have not seen Ben Kingsley in a bad movie and this certainly is notthe first one. As usual he enhances every character he plays. I thoughtthe movie had all the makings of a great thriller - suspense, twist,good acting, uncertainty,bit of romance,and scare factor. It is anunusual serial killer movie with a very unusual serial killer withunusual serial killer victims. It is not predictable and if it were abook you would not be able to put it down. In fact if you were watchingit on D.V.D. you would wait for the end to go for a bathroom break. Iloved it, what more can I say. As far as the other actors -the F.B.I.agent and his ex girlfriend, he’s o.k. she’s average. Ben Kingsleyheads the cast everybody else comes second - literally.

When I first saw the trailer for Suspect Zero I thought, "That lookslike it could be awesome." Well, it’s definitely entertaining, butunfortunately it doesn’t exactly evoke my awe. What’s disappointing isthat there’s a lot of potential here that is just never fulfilled. Themovie kept me interested and intrigued, but I kept waiting for theknockout punch that sadly never came.

It’s hard to talk about the movie without giving *something* away, butI promise to give away even less than the trailer does. What you needto know is that Aaron "Butt Chin" Eckhart is relocated (thanks to alittle vigilante police work) to New Mexico and put on the case of asuspected serial killer. His ex-girlfriend, Carrie-Anne Moss, is sentto help him with the investigation. Ben Kingsley is a weird,bald-headed dude who is able to use "remote viewing" to find serialkillers. For those of you in Palm Beach, that means he has psychicpowers and can visualize killings and where they take place. He thentransfers his mental images to paper. The problem is that he can’t turnoff his psychic powers, and it’s starting to eat away at him. I thinkwe’ve all been there.

What’s Kingsley up to? We find out part of that answer very early, butthere’s something else going on that we’re not sure about. Kingsley hasa theory regarding "Suspect Zero." It’s his belief that there has to bea serial killer out there who might not ever be caught because heleaves no pattern, no clues. For some reason, Eckhart acts like this istantamount to cloning Jesus. He seems to think it is just absolutelyimpossible. Come on, is it really that hard to fathom? There are plentyof unsolved murders. Could some of them possibly be unsolved becausethey’re committed by serial killers who leave no clues or pattern?That’s not really that radical of a theory, is it? Eckhart acts likeit’s more likely that Corey Feldman will have a big screen hit again.

So the story convinces us to wonder whether or not there is a SuspectZero. Could it be Kingsley? Or will his remote viewing lead them toSuspect Zero? And just how many movie critics will use bad puns like,"Suspect zero? More like Suspect ZERO STARS"?

Beware; this is the type of movie that requires your full attention. Ifyou start to let your mind wander and think about how funny my reviewsare and how you feel the need to send me money for all my hard work,then you’re likely to get lost in the story. If you’re just looking forsome mindless entertainment, then it’s best that you not lay your moneydown for this one.

As far as the acting goes, well, it’s adequate. Carrie-Anne Moss reallyisn’t given much to do here except cash an easy paycheck. Herrelationship with Eckhart isn’t fleshed out enough for us to care oneway or another. And while I might not be rushing to the video store tostart renting Aaron Eckhart movies, he does a pretty good job. BenKingsley is the strongest performer; he does a great job of convincingthe viewer that he’s at his wit’s end.

You’re also likely to be disappointed if you’re expecting a non-stopthrill ride. Like I said, it’s a solid thriller, but the movie’s paceis pretty deliberate. For some of you that will equate to "slow." Theatmosphere is dark, and a huge feeling of tension and unease fills theair. Trust me, you’re not gonna find yourself smiling or whistling muchat the proceedings. But the climax is probably the biggestdisappointment.

To its credit, it doesn’t resort to a litany of obvious red herrings,but I was really hoping for a powerful twist or revelation. Somethingunexpected as in The Usual Suspects. Or give me something reallyshocking like Seven. Throw me for a loop and make me go, "Ohhhhhhhhhh!"Didn’t happen.

What did happen is I was given enough thrills and guesswork to keep myinterest for 100 minutes. Personally, I think the movie should’vefocused more on Suspect Zero. Instead, we’re pretty much given adefinition and then the focus switches to the remote viewing. I muchprefer it when you’ve got a serial killer matching wits with thosechasing him.

Being good is fine and dandy I suppose, but man, it was so close tobeing *really* good. It just didn’t have that "specialty pitch."

THE GIST:

If you’re in the mood for a thriller, then Suspect Zero will keep yourinterest just as long as you realize this isn’t gonna turn the thrillergenre upside down. If you’re on the fence with this one, then catch amatinée or just wait until it’s at a second-run theater. Keep in mind:the shorter your attention span, the less likely you are to enjoy it.

Suspect Zero, is the story of a man who was trained by the governmentto track down serial killers using remote viewing. A sort of spiritual,mental, art form, where one uses their mind to find someone based onwhat they have recorded on that person in all of their senses. BenKingsley, plays such a remote viewer in this suspense, mysterythriller.

O’Ryan was top secret, the project was called Icarus. This is all real,true stuff. Ed Games a real life remote viewer was the technicalconsultant on this film. Immediately… interest is peaked.

Remote viewing has always been an interesting subject to me, especiallysince I use it nearly every day. I on the other hand, always found thegift to be rather obscure, on the fringe of the social strata, trulyout there. I mean, I would think of someone I loved, my girlfriend,perhaps, and know exactly where they were, what she was doing, what wasgoing on around her - I would call her up and be right, every time. Itgot to the point, I knew when she left concerts, etc… I thought itwas amazing, and yet at the same time, I thought it was normal that Icould tune into her, because well, we had a deep connection.

It wasn’t for years that I actually connected what I was doing, withwhat is formally known as "remote viewing", my friends and I simplythought it was a unique gift, but not anything tangible.

So, going into this movie, my curiosity again, was peaked.

I do like the actors involved, and though some may be upset at theseeming correlation between this gift and mental illness, I am bipolar,and think it’s very possible that with the mental illness in my ownlife, I have also been attuned to other things through my ownuniqueness. So, I was not offended, I find certain truth to that. Whatsome people prove with science, others prove with faith, likewise, whatsome call mental illness, others call a gift. Sometimes a reality ismulti-faceted I suppose.

Suspect Zero starts out strong, the plot weaves
nicely, never givingaway too much or too little, there’s cohesion. The directing does feela little like a SE7EN, or something I’ve seen before… but I can letthat go for now.

The manner in which O Ryan uses the sound tape with the wordassociation, and drawing, is very interesting too, he is keeping thechannel open, and letting whatever comes out, on whichever level itcomes out on intellectually, and capturing it with the writing tool, Ifound that very interesting, and I’m sure that was part of Ed Game’steachings, as that’s how I do a lot of my writing, and viewing, and Inever consulted anyone about it, except maybe my best friends.

One thing, Carrie Anne-Moss was sadly very annoying in this film andsadly so stereotyped by The Matrix I could imagine how impossible itmust be to stay in character after that, maybe if she did movies thatweren’t dark, something to contrast the movies she is stereotyped byshe could break the mold, kind of like Bruce Willis did by going fromDie Hard to 5th Element to The Whole 9 and 10 Yards.

Personally, if I were going to attempt a remote viewing session, Iwould use meditation, breath, not static on a tape recorder, that seemskind of weird.. but I guess use whatever works for you, and this typeof remote viewing is also highly concentrated, and long duration, whilemine were relatively short, used just to see where a loved one was,when I missed them… so ya kinda different.

When O’Ryan talks about remote viewing, "when you get it right, you getit all" referring to all your senses get input from the experience -that’s actually not the difficult part, the difficult part issustaining the experience.

I know what it’s like to "plug-in" to people I love, but I’ve nevertried it in this capacity - it sounds truly frightening. At first Ithought it took love even for the connection to be made, but now that Ithink about it, it takes will, not love, and so perhaps these types ofviewing are possible, with the sustainability if one really trained theskill.

One would think that if O’Ryan had been tracking this guy for so longhe would have killed him long ago, why wait for Mac to finish it? Whyis Mac even involved in O’Ryan’s plans? Killing is no stranger toO’Ryan.. so why?

The movie does seem to start on strong footing, but as the storyunwinds, it seems to unravel, and start to fray, until it is just amess. Overall I would say it was a intriguing premise, decently acted,and directed, but too short at a running time of 94 minutes.

There are a few scares, chemistry, and directing that works reallywell, if only the film were a little longer.

An interesting premise, as we see O’Ryan overwrought with what he hasseen in his viewing sessions, but I wish they had spent a little moretime showing how he was effected by his viewings throughout the courseof the film, so the general audience could empathize with him better.

Overall I give it a 6.5.

This film is frighteningly captivating. Amazing performances by theentire cast, but Ben Kingsley in particular. His characterization ispure brilliance. The plot is incredibly suspenseful–one is never sureuntil the end of the film what is going to happen next. And even theend leaves the door ajar is a wonderful (and creepy!) way. Thesoundtrack weaves perfectly in and out of the dialog to spectaculareffect. The film drew me in so emotionally that I left feeling as if Ihad personally witnessed the events of the film rather than simply seenthem portrayed by actors and filmmakers on the screen. I highlyrecommend seeing this film, but take a friend or loved one with whomyou can rant after leaving the theater.

When I found out who "helped" with the consultation for the subject ofremote viewing, I then realized what had happened to the movie.

It was great how remote viewing seemed validated, but then again remoteviewing took on the ominous aspects of mind control which is not remoteviewing. The projects involving mind control and remote viewing are twodifferent projects which I would love to explain to Major Ed Damespersonally. The profiling of remote viewers was interesting. They werepeople who suffered migraine headaches and were borderline psychotic.Definitely not appreciated Ed and far from true.

I have been in both projects by the way…mind control and remoteviewing so I know what I am talking about. My husband loved the movie.

I’m maybe 30 minutes into this movie right now and it is awful. I wishI could turn it off but I have to finish every movie I watch. Ignorewhat the other user said. The plot is clichéd, dialogue awful, actingonly so so if that. Its a shame to see kingsley who is a great actor inthis movie alongside the others. Even with the greatest actors in theworld this movie could not survive. I can’t believe NM a state which igrew up in would put up money for this. If you haven’t seen Silence ofthe Lambs yet watch that. It definitely borrows from a lot of films.Please don’t waste your time and money on this movie it’s definitely acavalcade.

The film is based upon the idea that the FBI's long discredited 'remoteviewing' experiments of the 1970s and 1980s were actually successfuland drove some of its participating agents insane. One of them,Benjamin O'Ryan (Ben Kingsley) is now, himself a serial killer, albeita serial killer of serial killers, whom he tracks down by connecting tothe images of their crimes in his head, acting as the CharlesBronsonian Avenging Angel (see Death Wish and its sequels) of the film.The film is about his attempts to recruit and groom a replacement namedThomas Mackelway (Aaron Eckhart), from the FBI, as he tracks down aserial killer he terms Suspect Zero, because he has figured out the wayto avoid detection is to, unlike most serial killers, constantly changehis modus operandi. The first half of the film, where Mackelway isinvestigating O'Ryan's crimes, is outstanding, with very believableportraits of the two men- far more so than, say, in a film like Heat.O'Ryan taunts Mackelway by fax, to the point where he turns to….anex-lover, conveniently reassigned by the FBI, from Dallas, to assistMackelway in his new digs in the Albuquerque, New Mexico office…. Thisfilm is about on par with the flawed but daring Shadow Of The Vampire,but Merhige needs to take on more realistic and adult projects, to flexhis directorial chops, lest (especially with his initialized 'first'name) he merely ends up the B film version of M. Night Shyamalan. Thatdirector's bad enough, do we really need a shadow of him?

SUSPECT ZERO (2004) ** Ben Kingsley, Aaron Eckhart, Carrie-Anne Moss,Harry J. Lennix, Kevin Chamberlin, Chloe Russell, Nicole DeHuff,William Mapother. (Dir: E. Elias Merhige)

‘Se7en’ – ‘Silence of the Lambs’ = ‘Zero’

Trying to make a serial killer film, a sub genre that appears to haveovertaken the unstoppable killing machine teen slasher (think Jason orFreddy) that took horror films to another level, must be likeattempting to build a snowman in July: not much fun and pointless sinceit’s damn near impossible to perfect an impossibility.

Take the case of this unique perspective to a 15 minutes-of-fame andticking category : a serial killer killing serial killers! OK now tryto convince me for nearly two hours of my time why I should care? Wellit was a good idea.

Anyway the premise of the latest style over substance take on it ishaving a disgraced FBI profiler named Mackelway (Eckhart) beingreassigned to the desert of New Mexico when he finds the dullness onlyadding to his current state of blinding migraines (he chomps on aspirinlike Chiclets) until a ghastly murder is found at the border –literally – with some follow up faxes sent directly to him. It seems aformer specialty agent, O’Ryan (Sir Ben acting up a storm), who wasassigned to a shadowy sect project entitled Icarus (read: getting tooclose to the sun; burning &
#150; foreshadowing of things to come) wherehighly intelligent applicants were able to ’see’ the minds of serialkillers at work and transcribing their thoughts into para psychologicalscribblings in charcoal pencil that would lead them to their quarry.Apparently it has affected O’Ryan to the point of obsession and causinghim to act as a rogue executioner of the filth he was assigned tolocate. What happens next is a series of murders of murderers that leada grisly wake to some serious soul searching for one Agent Mackelway.To complicate matters his former partner – and ex-lover – Agent Kulok(Moss) has been called in to help him and his new prickly bossCharelton (Lennix also late of the ‘Matrix’ flicks) crack the case wideopen.

I admit it seems a tad outrageous that someone could psychicallyforecast an upcoming crime however it is set in fiction and there was acool ‘X-Files’ episode ‘Unruhe’ that had a similar story but itinvolved Polaroids instead of sketchings. Regardless you have to givethe creative team an A for effort yet the screenplay by Zak Penn andBilly Ray is a Luke-warm reheating of ‘Se7en’ with Kingsley as anersatz John Doe serving up justice with a nasty slicing off of thevictims’ eyelids to show what he sees they see and the ‘Silence of theLambs’ backbiting of its federal peacekeepers at odds with what theycannot.

Eckhart seems wasted of his talent in a somewhat muted turn – he shouldbe more tortured if that is what his character is implied to be andMoss is undeniably sleepwalking her way through the film no thanks tobad lighting making one of the screen’s most lovely women lookdownright homely. Kingsley has proven to be a very versatile actornotably ditching his Gandhi peace for sinister doings in ‘Sexy Beast’ afew years ago and here he makes the most of his deeply troubled psychicwarrior with a few moments of glass sharp scares.

Director Merhige a relative newcomer employs the usual shaky camerawork with some interesting visual courtesy of his ace cinematographerMichael Chapman with its desaturated colors and vibrantly dark momentsthat underlie the terror at hand. Too bad it couldn’t shed it in a moreintriguing light.

A strong director performance, a good plot, with a brilliant premise.fair performance from the lead actors. Ben Kingsley is as expected ofhim. Eckhart was a little over the top, but working his way steadilytowards a career top. We will always be unfair to Anne Moss till sheeither gets another one or we forget about "Matrix". Photography wasgood, with some new upside and over angle shots, editing supported thestory and the style, but some times too much of the same shot.

A very good thriller overall.

P.s. to the director, you can’t have 50 graves all freshly closed atthe same time!

A. Zayed

read comments (0)