Posted on 12/02/13 09:11 PM
If there is anything that Jason Takes Manhattan has taught me, it's how full of bottom feeder material the entire franchise is.
I mean really, this is not only the worst Friday the 13th movie of the entire franchise, but it's also the most laughable. It lacks tons of logic, is completely incompetent, & I have no idea what the hell the director was doing throughout the movie.
I sat through every Friday the 13th movie during AMC's marathon of the franchise (I wanted to watch The Walking Dead, but this crap was on & there was also nothing else to watch during then before we got a DVR so I could watch the better stuff), & they are all the same crap (I missed one, though). So I'm just wondering how is it that this franchise has some following & adoring fans. Yes, Jason is rather kick-ass, but he isn't that great to begin with, in fact he's just a simple-minded buffoon, just like his movies.
As I said, all of the movies in the franchise are the same plot formula & script, & they all just get worse with every installment (except for the Bay reboot which was slightly better than them, but nothing too great to say the least). We get a cast of nobody's & no-one-cares-about characters. The main character & the side character are introduced, & there, the rest of the characters will obviously get brutally killed by Jason, & the plot just remains the same.
But Jason Takes Manhattan not only repeats everything I just said, but it also just does them worse & it almost feels like some parody of the franchise.
Firstly, the good majority of the film doesn't even take place in Manhattan, but some shitty cruise ship. Secondly, the characters in here are all half-witted imbeciles; not to mention that the main character has some fear of water (oh how hilarious it is that she had a room beneath the ship). And thirdly, the film's execution is a joke. One big hilarious joke.
There is no directing, no style, no substance, no quality cameras, no listenable dialogue, no characters, no brains, & no fun. How this movie even managed to be cooked up & released into theaters is beyond me (though it hilariously flopped).
Posted on 11/19/13 07:46 PM
The only starving there is are the STARVING kids in Africa, & these fucktards are still getting money to make these so-called 'movies'!
And after the success of "Vampires Sucks" thanks to all the idiots who paid to go see it, Seltzer & Freidberg will still continue their brain damaging assaults of this garbage.
And go ahead, try & throw in the "You're taking a movie that only tries to get cheap laughs too seriously" or "Grow up & get a freakin' sense of humor!!!!1111!!" cards at me; it will only tell me that the people who are actually trying to defend these guys & their atrocious films are nothing but absolute retards.
Posted on 11/17/13 09:59 PM
The fact that Grown Ups 2 owned this spectacular movie in the box office tells me how many absolute idiots there are in the world.
Posted on 10/11/13 01:29 AM
Moral of the story: Go batshit insane & then try to commit suicide when your boyfriend leaves you.
I FORCED myself to say this movie was actually good & better than the first one...it worked. But man was I wrong rewatching this again. I feel like I should shoot myself for saying such a thing.
Sorry I keep reviewing this movie so much, there is just always something I find to add on this review that i missed or remembered. This has to be my most updated review in my page.
Now, before I continue on, let it be clear that I like the Twilight movies, they aren't THAT bad (this one was), & just because I like them doesn't invalidate my opinion or automatically give you a reason to thumb down or even mean that these are the only movies I have watched; no, I've watched plenty more movies than these, & far better. So, don't give me that crap. And one more thing, just because I like these movies does not automatically mean you have to treat me like these are the only films or series I ever liked. You want to know what some truly shitty movies are that deserve the hate these movies have? How's about you watch "You don't mess With the Zohan" or "The Haunting of Molly Heartly" or "The Happening".
Now, the major problem I had with this movie was how BORING it was. Not to mention slow, poorly dialogued, & predictably plotted. However, while the acting still wasn't too good, it was still better than the first one, as well as the action, & special effects. But it's not worth noting, so you're better off watching the first one than this.
Plot/Story: Pretty much like in the first one, there really isn't a plot or story, but unlike this one, I had some reasons to like the first one. Now, the movie as a whole is just boring, really, really boring. Why is that? Well, it's directed by Chris Weitz, the guy who directed "The Golden Compass", one of the most boring movies ever made. And it is also predictable. You know from the moment one thing happens, the next one can already be seen from a mile away. There isn't one part of this movie that is not predictable.
But this movie can also be described as a stripper movie (more on that later below).
Characters: The characters in here pretty much became assholes in this movie than in the first one (despite Edward still being an asshole in the first one). Let's face one thing, Jacob was pretty much the only reason this movie was made, mainly because Jacob (Taylor Lautner) spent 97% of the time without his shirt. Hey Jacob, how's about you become a male stripper? I'm sure you'll make twice as much money stripping for the girls than this movie made in the box office. Or better yet, I'm sure any of the raging zombie Twilight fangirls will do anything for you to let them touch your abs.
As for Edward, dear Neptune, the fact that he left Bella over something HE DIDN'T DO not only makes him a douchebag, but an idiot as well. I don't hate Pattinson, but his character just pisses me off. Edward can also be described as a human condom! He'll protect Bella from anything! Well, except for now.
Bella Swan in here pretty much turns emo & boring, & she also loses her fucking mind. She can't handle Edward being away so she goes batshit insane & does the craziest shit no normal/sane teenage girl would possibly do when their loved one leaves them, from seeing visions of Edward everywhere she goes to actually taking a ride with a random biker; she practically almost kills herself too. So the message in this movie for the girls is, that if your man dumps you, you should commit suicide.
By far I have to say the only character I really liked in this movie was Alice.
As for the other Native guys or werewolves, here is what I meant from the above statement about this movie being a stripper film: Just like Jacob, you spotted these werewolf guys shirtless 97% of the time (I think). Then there are the Volturi, all boring, lame characters. I expected them to be pretty cool, but they were just annoying, & boring as hell with some truly mind numbing words coming out of their mouths.
And lemme just say that all in all, Edward & Jacob are gay for each other.
Cast/Acting: While I do like Stewart, & I loved Pattinson's role in "Harry Potter & the Goblet of Fire", the acting in here was terrible. Better than the first one, but still horrible. Kristen had the same face throughout the whole movie, whether she smiled or was sad. Pattinson looked constipated, pretty much it for him. And I guess I could say that Taylor Lautner was a good choice to play Jacob, but his performance was just boring, & he didn't look like he was taking himself seriously.
Now, before I continue on the the next category, this movie acting sucked, & so did Twilight's, but they are NOT THE WORST ACTED MOVIES EVER. There are plenty of other movies out there with acting far worse than this one. It's not hard to believe. And the same goes for the main actors; Kristen Stewart & Robert Pattinson are not terrible actors, same somewhat goes for Taylor Lautner. Just because these are the only movies you have seen these actors in doesn't automatically make them some of the worst ever like some of the idiots on this page make them out to be. I thought Rooney Mara was a shitty actress, simply because of her dreadful, plank acting in that abomination remake of "A Nightmare on Elm Street", but I thought otherwise when I saw how wonderful she was in "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo".
If you seriously think Stewart is a horrible actress simply because this is the only movie you've watched her in, then you're an idiot. She was in other, far better movies, where she gives far better performances; like Panic Room, Adventureland, Zathura, Breaking Dawn Part 1 & 2, The Runaways, The Yellow Handkerchief, & Speak. When Stewart gives a performance, she GIVES a performance The same goes for Pattinson, he was in Harry Potter & the Goblet of Fire, & Order of the Phoenix, both amazing movies he gave great performances in. And while he hasn't been in many good movies since those two like Kristen has, at least when he tries, he tries & gives it his best. To say Pattinson or Stewart can't act simply based off anti-Twilight bullshit would be the equivalent of saying that you think a certain actor is shitty at acting just because you don't like him/her. If all of you anti-Twilighters seriously HATE the main actors just because they were in Twilight or simply because they played the characters you hated in the books then I seriously feel a massive amount of pity for you. If you want to know what a truly terrible actor/actress is, then how's about you watch any movies with Tara Reid, &/or Ashton Kutcher. I'll take Stewart & Pattinson as actors over Jessica Alba, Eva Mendez, Ashton Kutcher, & Tara Reid any day.
Special Effects: Anyone that honestly thought that the CGI wolves in here were one of the worst effects ever needs some serious help. I'm not saying that they were amazing, but the CGI in here wasn't terrible; it wasn't great, but not terrible. I've seen better CGI wolves (Van Helsing), but anyone that honestly compares good or bad special effects to this movie's effects needs a life & needs to know what bad special effects are. You want to see some bad special effects, then watch The "Core".
As for the makeup, umm...when the hell did the makeup on the vampires go so wrong? What the hell was the director thinking when he made the vampires, especially Edward, so damn white that he looked like he was wearing lipstick? I don't know, I really don't know. The first movie had the vampires simply pale, & looked as if they were just wearing a bit of chap stick; at least there they had the vampire-like quality to the paleness. But in this one, I swear I could have confused Edward or any of the male vampires as a tranny.
Chemistry: I don't really care for Edward & Bella's chemistry in this one, it was so dull & boring that I honestly think that seeing some chemistry between Edward & Jacob would have had more life into it.
Dialogue: Wow, just wow. Now before I go on, I'm going to point out that this movie's dialogue was so bad & boring, that I almost fell asleep to it. No joke, & while this is one of the worst dialogue I have ever heard, trust me, this movie's dialogue is far better compared to the dialogue in "Crossroads" & "The Adventures of Sharkboy & Lavagirl".
"They run...real fast!"
Direction: *Face palm* Do I really have to tell you guys about this...actually, do you even WANT me to tell you about the direction in this movie? Chris Weitz is such a BORING director with a very BORING directing style! Baz Lurhmann & Christopher Nolan have more of a thrilling directing style compared to Weitz! Now I will say that while I don't really like Nolan, & his movies are well written & executed, his style is just so blue & boring to me. But anyways, yeah, the directing style to this movie is just by far one of the most boring styles I have ever seen.
Style (OMG new category!!! :D): Each Twilight movie had a very different designing style, & this one's style wasn't too bad. The first one had an admittedly emo, blue, & somewhat dark style to it. This one has a very fantasy look to it but also rather historical-looking. The third one was dark & grim, & action-packed. And as for the last one, it has a very surreal, gothic, fantasy, & even soap-opera style to it. However, this one is the weakest of the styles. A stylish fantasy look doesn't cover up the rest of the flaws it has.
Soundtrack/Score: Man oh man, I expected the soundtrack to this movie to be as good or better than the first movie's soundtrack, but wow, was I proven wrong yet again. The music in this movie is just as boring as the film itself. No song in this movie was worth my time listening to, & isn't worth putting in my iPod for that matter as well. Hell the songs in here barely fit the movie's boring style. All the other installments of this franchise have some kick-ass soundtracks to them, & even if you don't like the movies you can't deny that they know what they're doing with the music, but this one right here is just bad. It's unbelievable that something could go so wrong in a soundtrack for these movies.
Now the score is a different thing. I loved the score to this movie. No more than Carter Burwell's score for "Twilight", but wow, it is probably the best feature or the only redeeming feature about this movie. Pretty much it for that.
How true it is to it's source: Now, I read the books, or at least the first three (more on that in a bit), & I have to say I did not like them. They sucked in other words, but oh, I'd rather force myself to read them over & over again than to ever force myself to even grab Eragon & flip the first handful of pages to it &/or watch the movie ever again. Yeah, Eragon the book & movie were that much worse. Now, while I pretty much forgot what the book to this one was like after a while, & as well as the third one, I have to say that this movie, out of the three, has to be the one that stood the closest to the book, but unlike in the first one, this movie didn't really improve much on anything. Om fact, that's where the main problem to the film lied; keeping it far too loyal to the book.
What made me like the first one more was how Catherine Hardwicke actually IMPROVED the many flaws the first book had: such as fleshing out Bella by making her character more like a normal high school girl & removing how much she talked about Edward's beauty 75% of the time, & adding variety to the vampires (I.E. making Laurent black & not white). This one on the other hand, didn't, & only made it ten times more boring. Now, as I stated above, I read the first three books; the first one was nothing too special, the second one was boring & forgettable, & I completely forgot the third one, so, I can't compare it much to the third movie. Now, I DID get to the fourth book, Breaking Dawn, however, I closed it at a certain point & returned it to the library. Why? Because it was getting really fucking creepy.
Now, I will compliment the books on one thing, they have very pretty covers, & they would look very nice on my shelves simply for how nice they look. Ugh, it's so unfair how such beautiful covers like the books have are wasted on such crappy stories. Same goes for the movies, the movies may not be as great as other films I've watched, but they undeniably have very, very pretty posters that look nice on anyone's walls, & very funky soundtracks (except for this one's).
And you know what, I'll point this out, I give thumbs down to positive & negative reviews that are terribly written. People who give this movie a 0%-10% or a 60%-100 without writing any good reasons to why deserve & get a thumbs down from me, & from anyone else. I HAVE given thumbs up to positive & negative reviews because people wrote good reviews on them & had their fine reasons, unlike others who just write "BESTEST MOVIE EVAR!!!", "OMG I lubvD this SO maUCXH!!!!!!!!!!1!!!11111!1!1!111!!!" or "Gay movie is gay like a gay porn video & sucks so much dick like them!!1", "WORST movie ever made int eh history of man kind!!!!" But just to clarify things, I have given thumbs up to negative reviews more often than I have to positive or poorly written ones, or even thumbs down.
So, this movie was boring, & not even great. In fact, I'm in a huge fight with my head whether this movie is on the 'movies only good to waste time on' or 'movies you should watch only if you never want almost 2 hours of your life back' kind of movies. All I can say is that this movie is pretty much 4 hours I'll never get back. Yes, I watched it twice, the first time was to finally watch it since I didn't see it in theaters, at that time, I was forcing myself to say I liked it & was better than the first one. And the second time was with my siblings, we all got so bored that they were doing something else, & I struggled to watch it that time. It's not one of the worst movies I have ever seen, but it sure was bad. But if I WERE to add it onto a list of the worst films I have ever seen, it would possibly be the last one on the list or before the last one. I actually regret buying the movie. I should have bought Twilight on Blu-Ray instead, because at least the first movie was able to entertain me. This one, was just unbearable.
If anything, this was a completely worthless installment of the franchise. And I'm not saying this because I didn't like it & because it was bad, but because the whole movie does not progress at all from the first one. If anything, it only drags on countless hours & doesn't accomplish anything. The movie was mainly supposed to be how Victoria was after Bella, but it drags on so endlessly & she does nothing but be there to be annoying. So if anything, you can skip this movie not only to save yourself time & life, but because it will not affect what you will watcher later; it does not connect the movies at all. You can just watch Eclipse or Breaking Dawn Part 1-2 after watching Twilight & trust me, you did not miss a SINGLE thing from skipping the second installment. Trust me, it's that big of a waste of time. This movie bears no connection to the other movies.
Now, I'm pretty sure I'm going to get thumbed down & hated for the next set of paragraphs, but oh well, the truth hurts;
The vampires & wolves in this movies are still what they are, WOLVES & VAMPIRES. There is no such thing as a 'real vampire' or 'real werewolf'. In case you haven't noticed, vampires were never blood-sucking demons in the first place. Before Bram Stoker changed vampires, vampires were originally creatures who fed on energy. And also, the sparkling vampires idea isn't terrible or stupid, I made my own vampires in my art sparkle (but I had that idea way before I ever heard about Twilight). There are far more idiotic vampires out there in the world of vampireology than Twilight's vampires. I would know, because I love vampires & study the many different kinds there are in the world; & I can tell you right now that there are far more ridiculous vampires than Twilight's (feel free to ask me to name a few for you).
It sickens me to see how ignorant Twilight haters just think they know what a 'real vampire/werewolf' & 'real movie' is because they've watched Nosferatu, the Wolfman, Bram Stoker's Dracula, And American Werewolf in London, The Lost Boys, & so on. But the sad truth is, they don't know what the hell they're talking about, & they're just as bad as the fantards. I don't care how much you hated both Twilight & it's vampires/werewolves or give a rat's ass who you are; can it! There is no such thing as a real vampire or real werewolf or real movies. So don't come by giving me your "real vampires" bullshit. And all of this is coming from someone who grew up watching "The Lost Boys", "Bram Stoker's Dracula", & "Sleepwalkers" (movies I still love to this day).
Ok, I get it, & so does anyone who doesn't like these movies that has sanity in their brain, you hate the Twilight movies, there, move on with your fucking life. They may be bad (to you), but they aren't Battlefield Earth, Ghost Rider, The Last Airbender, or even The Happening. They may have been awful movies to you, but you know what? They didn't give you AIDS. So stop acting like a bunch of incompetent, 1-IQ morons & grow up.
I'm a completely reasonable person, but when I see someone who hates these movies stating asinine crap like "Even The Room, Bloodrayne, & Battlfield Earth are nowhere near as bad as these movies. And to the fans, FUCK YOU, you have MENTAL PROBLEMS!" then that's where I draw the line. Again, I don't care how much you hated these movies or who the hell you are, these movies are not the worst film ever made. That's the sad truth & it may as well be a fact. "The acting is the worst out there!!!" The acting is shit, yes, but the acting in Battlefield Earth, Bloodrayne, & The Room is worse. "It has some of the worst dialogue ever!" Read what I said previously. I can go on for hours calling out on the bullshit the haters of this franchise has (trust me, & I'm being nice by calling their excuses "bullshit") but pointing out every flaw & excuse they have would give me a stroke of how bad they are.
One thing that bothers me, is why the hell was Eclipse nominated for Razzies, & won one which it shouldn't have, but this one didn't, & deserved to get nominated? Another thing that bothers me, is how the hell do the top critics give this movie a 42% (top critic wise), but yet Breaking Dawn Part 1 gets a 21% critic-wise?
And the last paragraph, The Twilight Saga are not the worst series of movies ever made, let alone worst vampire movies as well. I have seen far worse series of movies (such as the Friedberg & Seltzer movies) than these. And anyone that thinks these movies are the worst series, let alone vampire series, ever made is beyond help. You want to know what vampire movies are actually shit compared or not to the Twilight movies? Then go watch Bloodrayne, Dracula 3000, &/or even Queen of the Damned. And anyone that goes by comparing EVERYTHING to Twilight &/or saying "Not as bad as Twilight!" or "It's still better than Twilight!" or anything of similarity loses all credibility. I'm not kidding. Again, I don't give a rat's ass who the hell you are, you compare anything to Twilight or say any of the things I previously stated, you lose all credibility. It's that simple. Yes, there are movies that you CAN compare to Twilight, but not EVERYTHING needs to be compared to them. I've even seen morons comparing Twilight to Repo! The Genetic Opera! I love the first & third Twilight movies, but I hate seeing everyone compare EVERYTHING to them, & I also love way more movies than these, hell Harry Potter I something I adore one hundred times more than this & are TEN TIMES BETTER. Feel free to say I have terrible taste in films after what you just read, I'll only know I was further right.
Posted on 10/07/13 06:21 PM
This movie's existence is why terrorists hate us.
Full review soon.
Posted on 9/21/13 01:13 AM
"Howl's Moving Castle" was originally my personal favorite Ghibli film until I watched "The Secret World of Arrietty".
Arrietty is a marvelous, & refreshing animated film that just warms my heart every time watch it.
Posted on 9/21/13 01:07 AM
Do you really wanna know how bad this movie is? "A Haunted Mansion" is comedy gold when compared to this (and that's saying something, because A Haunted Mansion was awful as well). I kid you not; this movie was really that bad. A Haunted Mansion managed to get a handful of laughs out of me (which I still feel guilty for); this movie didn't even crack a smirk on me. Do you really need to know more?
We could have rented "Epic" or "Pain & Gain" (I definitely would have picked Epic), but since the majority of the kids picked this (also, my little brother liked this movie, that's all you need to know seeing that he's the guy who also likes Epic Movie & Grown Ups).
I sat through every agonizing minute of this film, & I asked myself "WHY?!" with every random "gag" that was thrown at us (which was every 15-25 seconds) & not once did I even show the slightest hint of a smirk. It was painful to sit through. How painful? Epic Movie painful!
I can't even properly think how I can write down what I went through sitting through this crap! It's just BAD. BAD! I seriously didn't think that a Scary Movie movie could have stooped down to the level of a Seltzer & Friedberg movie.
There are numerous pacing problems, terrible acting (even for what it was going for), jokes that are nothing more than pop culture gags that were clearly done in reference from Seltzer & Friedberg films, tons of inconsistencies, lack of logic or even brains, & some of the most awful casting choices I have ever seen (Ashley Tisdale? Seriously?)
Also, RT, ask your editors to check the damn page here, the cast listed has actors that were never present throughout any of the movie.
Posted on 9/21/13 01:06 AM
If you love the original animated series that this so called 'adaption' is based on, like I do, then avoid it at any cost. I am not kidding you. You're better off watching the weakest/worst episode of Avatar the Last Airbender over & over & over again for an entire day, & it would still be far less agonizing than watching this horrible excuse for a movie.
I adore the original show, I really do, & to this day I'm still a huge fan of it, but this movie BUTCHERED the show, & practically almost ruined the show for me. It frankly has NOTHING to do with the original show other than the characters, & that's it. Oh, but the characters almost aren't from the show either, because a lot of their names aren't even pronounced right (Aang's name is pronounced Ong, seriously).
The script is horrible, the story is rushed, cut, poorly written & makes no sense, a plot that isn't there, laughable dialogue, & mediocre, lifeless characters. Katara makes Bella Swan look useful! And don't even get me started on the inconsistencies. The water tribe is the whitest water tribe that has ever been seen! Who the hell ever told Shayamalan that the water tribe was pale as hell? Did he even pay attention to the show that he apparently clearly stated that he & his daughter adored? Because clearly something went wrong in his brain if he made such sever changes.
I recall getting in an argument with some moron who adored this movie & thought critics had something up their asses (yet they said that the Kill Bill movies were the biggest abomination to cinema ever) because they despised this movie, they particularly got really aggressive when someone pointed out how the water tribe color change & Sokka's change of character were a terrible move. I don't give a barnacle about those idiot critics, but that doesn't mean I don't see how they DO point out flaws & virtues to a film. But the question here is, is the change of skin color of the water tribe really that bad of a move? The answer is obviously, yes!
I don't know what that person was talking about (trust me, arguing every single flaw that movie had with said person who liked said movie was the most aggravating waste of time I ever had seeing how dim & empty brained they were; it was not worth it as they pretended they had all the right answers to it) as they clearly have no knowledge of the show (even though they said they had watched it completely 3 times) & no brain to actually reason with, but yes, the skin color changing of the water tribe was a terrible move, as the tribe has always been depicted as dark skinned; frankly every water tribe has always been dark skinned, & to say making them white was not a big deal is like saying that Cars ripping off Doc Hollywood's storyline note from note is not that big of a deal.
But trust me, the pale-white water tribe is the least of this movie's problems.
The special effects are the only redeeming factor of the movie (for what it's worth). But as gorgeous as they are, a lot of them are also inconsistent. The fire-bending in this movie is shit, utter shit. Not only must the fire-benders grab fire in order to bend it, but the bending happens a few seconds after the swing their arms, & a lot of the times the coordination of the bending is far off.
We then get the length of the film, which is the worst part. The film packs in a shit-load of hours worth of first book material into less than 2 hours. That's not just bad writing, but also bad directing in general. What happened Shaymalan, did you forget how to write? How can one possibly not bother to make this movie at least 4 hours long or at least split it into two parts for the first book, I will never know.
Then we get the casting choices. Aang, is the ONLY actor in this movie that looks similar to the original character, but that's using the term very loosely. Dev Patel is NOT Zuko; Dev Patel is perfectly suited to play Sokka, NOT Jackson Rathbone (who shouldn't even have been considered as a joke). I'm not saying this as a fan, but because it's true; Dev Patel is practically the twin lookalike of Sokka. I don't even wanna get to the other actors.
The performances, while not technically bad, are just lifeless & show no soul. To be frank, the actors in here almost took their roles far too seriously, & gave some solid acting that just misses the point of the original show. The show managed to mix fun, action, & seriousness altogether, but this movie missed that, & instead replaced with with nothing but an over-serious mood.
Final summation, this adaption sucks, ass, & is one of the worst TV-adapted movies that has ever been made. A show as amazing as Avatar that could seriously have been genius & well done in the big screen was turned into nothing but horse shit, & it is just painful to think about. This is one of those movies that should really be rebooted, & FAST! I'll even take Tim Burton for the job, because I'm pretty sure he'll do a far more fantastic job than what Shayamalan did & bothered to have kept it closer to the source like he's done with Charlie & the Chocolate Factory, & Sweeney Todd(not that he's a bad director, oh no, but a movie like this would not be his style is all).
If you're a fan of the cartoon, you will not like this, clearly, & I find it impossible that anyone outside of the fanbase & critics could even like it regardless, because it's really that bad. If you call this a good movie, then you need help. If you're a fan of the show, but still call this a good movie or just as good as the show, then you either A) did NOT watch the show correctly or even the same show, B) are trolling, or C) a complete idiot.
Posted on 9/13/13 09:12 PM
Alfonso Cuaron's name on this was all I needed to read. MUST SEE!
Posted on 9/03/13 12:25 AM
The consensus pretty much said everything I wanted to say, but it forgot to add that this is one of the very few good movies Lohan has been in. The best thing is, it actually represents & reminds many of the people they met & knew from school.