carl jessieson's Movie Ratings - Rotten Tomatoes

Movie Ratings and Reviews

Modern Times
Modern Times(1936)

I love these black and white, old classics! Why does it seem like they did more with their films when they had less technology available to them? They don't have that ~Hollywood Magic~ that does their effects for them, it was all camera tricks and carefully strategized, one-chance-to-get-the-shot filmmaking and it is beyond impressive.

I enjoyed watching this! Full of cool and clever special effects and plenty of moments to make you laugh. Chaplin did such a good job of creating such a silly little character. The story was creative and fascinating, with imaginative concepts and energetic cinematography. It was a fun watch for sure. Delightfully absurd, yet it did give voice to the woes of unemployment and the voracious appetite of capitalism at the price of some disposable human equipment. Silliness with a sting. I recommend it!


Bye love you

Rebel Without a Cause

I was really excited about this one because of how iconic James Dean is and because I had never seen something with him in it before, and honestly, I was disappointed. I was really annoyed throughout the entire movie. I read a little bit more about the movie afterward and it enlightened me to the film's strengths that gave it "classic" status, which helped a little bit, but I can't ignore the fact that this was a really annoying movie.

I don't usually pay too much attention to film titles, but this one truly says it all. Bunch of angry suburban kids causing mischief for no reason, essentially. I get that there was an element of emotional neglect from adults, which fueled their teenage debauchery, but it played out like a bunch of spoiled white kids messing everything up for everyone else because they didn't know how to deal with their problems. It's a real issue, this painful separation between generations, but this movie was so melodramatic about it. I hate to compare negatives (because a negative is a negative and that's that), but there are a multitude of other more important, more devastatingly horrible issues out there. I don't expect every movie to tackle an societal problem, I get that some movies are just fun, but if they wanted to make a drama about a problem, they should have picked something else. I just didn't care. I didn't feel bad for these kids.

It was so dramatic, the story was weak, a vessel for the studio to make money off of Dean more than anything. That's like every Zac Efron movie. Not much substance, but with an exceptionally attractive male displaying both strength and sensitivity- it's a formula to make profit. That's why I'm surprised this is a classic. Seems like something a 1950s Teen Nick might put out for a quick buck or something. The story-telling was bizarre, also. They tried to do some kind of "let's get this story started and fill in the blanks of his past later," which I've seen work many times, but it just didn't work here. I felt like I came into a movie halfway through, too many details merely implied, too many rapid jumps in story/relationships, just made it frustratingly mysterious for no reason. Pacing was so strange. Starts out ominous and tense, then after bad things happen, it gets light-hearted and silly.

The only things I really enjoyed were the aesthetics, and I'm not sure how much credit they should get for that considering the ~aesthetics~ I enjoyed so much were just how things looked back then. I also did see the spark that has made James Dean so legendary despite his short career/life. His acting was over-the-top, in my opinion, at some points, but he really did have something about him that was fascinating.

Such a bizarre film to me. By the time it was over I had more questions than I had answers and that is enormously frustrating. I really, really didn't like it but I'm so confused that I didn't enjoy such a widely beloved film so I might try to give it a viewing again but I highly doubt it.


Bye love you

The Wizard of Oz

I love watching the classics and actually seeing every reason it's a classic in the first place. Some classics make me question the sanity of the people who made them, but luckily The Wizard of Oz deserves its title.

No need for an extensive review, honestly. Everything was great. The performances were wonderful, the story was brilliantly adapted, and the music was just delightful. So many iconic images, moments, and words, a whimsical fantasy land, special effects (COLOR!) that had audiences in 1939 screaming and cheering. Such a fun watch, I can't get over it. I highly recommend you let yourself experience this beautiful film. I can't wait to watch it with my grandkids someday.


Bye love you

It Happened One Night

I enter every movie viewing with energy and delight, and this time was no different, but by the time that thing was over I was angry. I am shocked that this is a classic and won so many awards- shocked, to an extent. I'm aware that society was ~different~ back then but I can't just ignore the blatant sexism prevalent in films from this time. In the same way that a racist movie would infuriate me beyond my ability to ignore for entertainment's sake, the disgusting misogyny in this film made it nearly unbearable. People say, "it was a different time!" but I don't care. It's disgusting now, it was disgusting back then, and no art/entertainment gets a pardon just because it was a hit when it came out.
Despite this film having a female lead, she was nothing but a plot device. How the main character could make a total of ONE decision of her own within the span of an entire feature film is truly beyond me. Summaries of the film cushion the plot with things like, "she agrees to help him if he keeps her secret" but in actuality this was a woman on the run from a controlling father who was threatened with violence into giving that sleazy reporter a story or else he would give her up to that controlling father. Literally romanticized Stockholm's Syndrome. This is described as a romance movie but there was nothing romantic about it. This is a movie about men wanting a woman to do what they want instead of what she wants. The word "demented" popped into my mind multiple times while watching in reaction to things these men would do to her.

The characters were really annoying, all of them. The things that were supposed to be romantic were just gross. There must be a million ways to make a story about a runaway heiress, you know? It's an interesting premise but it was executed incredibly poorly, with totally unlikeable characters and multiple disturbing dynamics in play. Plot holes so enormous even the male lead's gigantic head would get lost in them. Professional appearance, decent sound, standard cinematography- not a particularly artistic film. Weak story, poorly told, no character development besides developing them from strangers to creepy, controlling jerks. I hope no bizarre situation occurs in which I am ever forced to watch this again.


Bye love you

Citizen Kane
Citizen Kane(1941)

Hate to agree with the pretentious, boring film students who basically worship their copy of Citizen Kane (and rebuke every other classic or new film) I used to go to school with, but this is truly one of the greatest films ever made. I've watched it a handful of times and it never fails to stun me.

Everything about this movie is perfect, it'd be a waste of time to list all the characteristics of this film that make it the legend it is- but I'm just gonna waste a little. Welles was so gifted. The cinematography is beautiful the whole way through. Fantastic use of lights and shadows. He was so artistic with his techniques, every scene was planned down to each detail. And the variety! Wow, so many different techniques with Welles' touch on them. His style is like visual candy, and every shot is sweet.

All performances were excellent! Amazing they all came from the same place, and this was the first film for all of them. I was especially blown away by Welles, of course, considering he created one of the most iconic characters in film history. His performance was spectacular, from 25 year old Kane to old Kane, brilliant. The make-up applied to age the characters was so impressive. It looked better than some of the make-up work I see these days even. The character development was impeccable. The script was great. Good dialog, never lags, was always interesting. The non-chronological format was expertly executed, the transitions passing through years, transitions from flashback to present- seamless every time.

There is nothing about this movie that I don't like. Such a monumental achievement, it's such a shame that Orson Welles had so many problems with the film industry. Can't imagine what he'd have left behind had the studios let him have total control. Anyway, obviously I strongly recommend this film and love having it in my own collection.


Bye love you

La Grande illusion (Grand Illusion)

I really, truly enjoyed this film. I wasn't expecting to because war-related movies aren't particularly my thing, but this isn't really about war. To me, it was a film about humanity, and it delivered its message with such grace. The story was solid and made for a really pleasant experience. I caught myself wondering how the heck the filmmaker made me want them to escape almost as much as they wanted it, and that's awesome.

The acting was excellent. It seemed effortless for them to be these characters, and I've never felt that before when watching a movie. The main character was my favorite, for sure. Handsome in a non-traditional way, and there was something about him that was so mysterious- a combination of cool, tough, fearless, but sensitive. The characters were so genuine. Great performances all around. The respect with which they all treated one another was beautiful, despite the captives/captors dynamic. Not a romance movie but the minor bit of love was surprisingly touching. Not sudden, "I can't live without you!" love like I've seen in a lot of old classics, but gradual, sweet, believable love.

It was a simple, tragic, sweet story. No ground-breaking cinematography, but definitely beautiful. Great establishing shots. The director did a great job of giving the viewer an understanding of the time, the setting, how things worked in the camp, everything. Really smooth and nice panning shots. It's not an especially fast, thrilling story, but it definitely doesn't lag or make you look at the clock either. I enjoyed it the whole way through. No wasting time with unnecessary or redundant scenes or dialog.

I loved this movie, honestly. I definitely recommend it and I'm happy to have it in my collection.


Bye love you

King Kong
King Kong(1933)

What a movie! I'm not discrediting its merit as a classic, but I have to say that I am shocked that a movie this incredibly sexist is so beloved in the hearts of film buffs. It was dripping with misogyny within the first ten minutes, the male characters insulted women as often as they could, yet were so arrogantly entitled to them?? It was bizarre. The men are rude and ignorant of common decency, and the one female character is oblivious, with her head in the damn clouds the whole time. The men are so transparent but she never catches on. The grossest exchange was when a man said, "I love you" to a woman, and she replies, flattered and giddy, "but you hate women!!" to which he so eloquently says, "well you're not women." ???????? That pissed me off. It was like this nasty romanticism of misogyny. "I hate women but I love you, a woman" is not cute, or sweet, or romantic. He was trying to play her like she was the one, the one woman who he didn't hate, and that was supposed to be sweet? It's not even possible and it's certainly not romantic.

I could go on but I don't want to get worked up. I just can't get over how unlikeable everyone was. The one female was just a dumb, damsel in distress, plot device, and all the men were pushy white guys who think they can do whatever they want to anyone they want to GET what they want. They were so unbelievably arrogant, like they were all right all the time, knew everything about everything- except that was never true. Deceitful, exploitive, greedy egomaniacs. And there was no character development whatsoever. No one was accountable for their actions, no one learned anything, no one improved and no one became more evil. No change. The character is the same from their first scene to their last. With one enoooormous exception. Haha.

There were things that I did enjoy, don't worry, haha. The story is still exciting despite the pieces of garbage humans in it. Absolutely legendary special effects. The first time we see Kong on screen gave me goosebumps! It was awesome. Try to imagine yourself in the theater in 1933 seeing this stuff, utterly amazed (in between giggles). The special effects KILLED IT back then but they are wildly adorable now, even reminded me a little bit of Beetlejuice somehow. The special effects aren't perfect obviously, but they're still very impressive for their time and the way that they did it no doubt took so, so, so much work and planning to become the final product. Awesome, awesome creative shots. The planning, the animating, getting these actors to act with something that wasn't there, a tremendous endeavor. The screaming is hilarious, man, it had me cackling. Kong was cute as hell and I love him. The sets are colossal! Awesome hair and make-up. The final scene is legendary and worth the viewing for sure. It is truly a masterpiece on its own- the editing, the sound, the POV shots of the airplanes, so incredible.

Overall, it was just too frustrating to enjoy. Awful characters doing awful things? Not fun. Greed and misogyny? Not fun. Exploitation of women and wildlife for financial gain? Not fun.
It was fascinating and exciting, but its cons outweighed its pros, in my opinion. I doubt I'll watch again.


Bye love you

Grand Hotel
Grand Hotel(1932)

Not super impressed with this one. It had its moments but ultimately I can't honestly say that I enjoyed the film.

I guess the importance of this film is that it was the first film to have many main characters with their stories intersecting (seemingly Garry Marshall's recent obsession, with a holiday twist). I absolutely adore that type of filmmaking, so long as the connections make sense and aren't predictable. It worked for this film and I liked that a lot. Another major accomplishment of this film was how it was so star-studded, with a bunch of big actors working together. These two characteristics that made the film a classic were somewhat lost on me because I'm used to them in modern cinema, and better executed at that.

Good subtle character development in the beginning. Less subtle later, but still good. The dialog was very good. Good writing. The performances were great. Still, the story moved too slowly for me and I do need to be at least a little bit invested in the characters to actually care what they do or what happens to them, and I was not invested. I didn't find anyone particularly likable, with maybe a couple exceptions, but overall, I was turned off by how manipulative everything was. The motive behind nearly every action was personal gain at another's expense, and that's gross. Not a fun watch for me, to be honest. I was bored and I was just waiting for it to be over about halfway through. I don't want to watch it again and I don't want to own it ever.


Bye love you


First of all, I just love this movie. It blows me away every time I watch it. Filled with awesome shots and angles, and the special effects are just outstanding. So many facets of this film shocked me just because I did not expect them to be in a film from this time. The techniques and styles that I thought were more modern, results of decades of filmmaking, are actually born from this time. The models of the city, the machines, everything, was spectacular. The sets were so grand and stylized, absolutely stunning. The style of this film is breathtaking. This is my favorite film of the Expressionist era. Characteristics of other Expressionist films that I felt were too dramatic were just right in Metropolis. The acting was just right, not TOO overdramatic. There were still moments of arms flailing, eyes bulging, and random, intimate, somewhat forceful embraces, but generally the performances were perfect. I love the way the underground workers performed so uniformly in their exhaustion, despair, and hope, waning hope. Maria's performance was particularly stellar to me. The make-up, the hair, use of lights and shadows, and the set design indicative of Expressionism were all excellent.

A stellar story! Noticed a couple impossibly fast jumps in plot but that's something I'm seeing in every film I watch from this era. Definitely a movie with a message. Don't 100% agree with the overall moral of the film, but I was pleased by a lot of the films bits of wisdom and poetry. I think this is an incredibly important film on class differences and separation, and the exploitation of the lower class by CEOs with fat wallets and cold hearts- still applicable and hugely important in 2015. The conclusion was more tame and dreamy than it should have been, in my opinion. Nonetheless, it was an incredibly innovative and creative way to show a cultural issue. The first true science fiction epic, made in a medium that was relatively new- wow, this was an enormous endeavor and it was handled like a real visionary. Imagine taking a relatively new art form and doing things so innovative that they're still used and still impressive one hundred years later! The imagination of this filmmaker is absolutely astonishing. I am so impressed with the artistry of this film. The metaphorical sequences were a huge treat, oh man, I love that stuff. The scene with the statue of the seven sins is definitely going on my list of favorite film scenes ever. No doubt. The score is so exciting and ominous, powerful and epic, very good at conveying at setting the mood and conveying the feelings of the characters/moment.

Such an important story, told in such an amazing way- allegorical, but universally applicable, a voice for the people against injustice, a portrait of greed and corruption, the seemingly subjective value of human life, and the price some must pay, sacrificing their lives and dissolving into sweat and dirt for the benefit of the undeserving, unappreciative upper class. Truly an amazing cinematic feat.


Bye love you

The Bride of Frankenstein

A fantastic sequel! I was impressed by the voiceover narration and the scenes from the original being included. Really good way to start out a sequel. It had a strong story! Although I do find the title to be a little misleading, but that doesn't really matter, I guess. One thing that I, and every other horror film viewer, know is that horror movies are notorious for having characters who, in their terrorized state, make the worst decisions possible- and this film is no exception. There were so many characters who were constantly making stupid mistakes and causing unnecessary harm to others/themselves. And they never learn." New information? Bad outcome? Who cares! Let's do the same thing over again!" That was a little frustrating, but what can ya do? *shrugging emoji*

Fascinating characters, new and old. Great character development with the monster. Amazing effects!! AMAZING, can't believe what they managed to do in 1935. Really impressed by their creativity and innovation in story-telling techniques. Great angles, a wide variety, including some very Beautiful, elaborate sets, and impressive props. A great score complementing the film, wow.

Super creepy, thrilling, and very entertaining. Gotta suspend your disbelief many times regarding the mortality of the characters. I'm sure it was just due to a more modest audience's standards, but to a viewer in 2015, the violence is silly. Any deliberate killing was done with minimal effort and in a way that obviously wouldn't actually kill anyone, but when serious injuries occur they heal rapidly, miraculously.

Definitely a good watch. I recommend it. Don't know if I'll ever watch it again and or own it, but it's a fun one!


Bye love you


Definitely deserves its title as a classic! What a fun monster movie, and an important one considering it was among the first of its kind.
The whole thing was great. Amazing production design- the sets are amazing, props are creepy, and the setting is perfect. The special effects are creative and effective, occasionally silly but they did great for what they had. The cinematography was well done also. The variety of shooting techniques/angles utilized exceeds those of my recent viewings of films from around this time. The use of light and shadows was impeccable, felt its influence permeate the mood of every single scene. It's so....put-together-looking. Every detail was considered, and it's clear a lot of work went into this film!
The performances were excellent all around. Dr. Frankenstein was the ideal mad scientist. Not excessively bananas, like ridiculously so- just the right amount. Intelligent, handsome, proper young man who just happens to have freaky ambitions when it comes to his career, or his legacy more appropriately. The monster was also brilliantly performed. Outstanding.
DOPE reveal of the monster. What an iconic moment. I can't imagine what it felt like to be in a theater watching this in 1931, wow. The movie also features some bomb symbolism, adds a few layers to the cake. Great hair, make-up, and costumes. Appropriate for the era, and creepy at the same time.
The story-telling was good! The script certainly didn't waste any time, in good and bad ways. There were points where the plot progressed too quickly/nonsensically (i.e. characters make enormous assumptions based on fragments of information, wholeheartedly invest themselves in them and their plans of action in response, and are correct somehow), but generally it was paced well. I recommend it. I'm sure I'll watch it again someday but I'm not in a rush to add it to my collection.
Bye love you

Der Blaue Engel (The Blue Angel)

I enjoyed this film a lot. It had good character establishment/development, good acting besides some over-obviousness at some points (which was characteristic of films in this era, so can't knock it too much). There was a multitude of great shots, creative angles, and innovative choices in editing- far more than I expected in a film from this time. The sound was clear and the lighting was impeccable. It was the most clean/professional-looking film thus far on my watchlist.
The characters were very, very interesting. Lola Lola was hot and so was her attitude. Great performance by her, for sure, but the professor was truly outstanding. The range of emotions his character went through was so expansive, and so excellently portrayed. Great performances all around.
The story was good, absolutely. Interesting, sexy, exciting, scary, tragic, and imperfect, of course. One thing I'm still adjusting to with watching old films is how insanely fast people fall in love??? It's like they have one good exchange and then they're embracing each other, grasping each other's biceps firmly with this abrupt burst of passion and commitment, touching noses. No one falls in love that fast. I don't know if their standards were different in real life back then or if they just hadn't worked out how to tell a story where love grows gradually instead of shooting up into the sky. It felt a little bit like lazy story-telling, but only on the romance level. The rest of it had normal pacing, for the most part. It had its slow, boring moments, but it wasn't too bad. I guess the pacing was kinda weird, rather uneven. The professor's change in character was gradual, foreshadowed, and it made sense- but other developments I found were much too abrupt, without explanation.
Anyway, I liked this film a lot. I do recommend it for a viewing. The conclusion was great, mildly disturbing. I wouldn't mind watching it again someday but I don't feel a need to include it in my collection anytime soon.
Bye love you

Battleship Potemkin

I'm not going to lie, I did not enjoy this. I appreciate the importance of the film and the enormous steps it took for early cinema but wow, I was so excited for it to be over. Obviously the context of the film is incredibly important, and it is vital to note that this is a propaganda film. That being said, there aren't really characters. It's like there were just two: the people and the soldiers. The stair scene is just as legendary as it is hailed to be. Halfway through it I noticed my jaw was dropped open as much as possible. I've been watching early films lately and I must say that the violence is shocking. It's not especially graphic or even realistically performed, but the reasons they have to start fighting and the quickness of it was jarring. These soldiers just gunning down civilians was incredibly disturbing and I can't believe that that is a thing that happened, and continues to happen. There were a lot of creative angles and techniques used, absolutely. Just the way the story was told left me guessing a lot. Wasn't a lot of build-up to action, it was just suddenly inaction to action- and since I didn't know what was going on all the time, it was really confusing. Just not a format I'm used to, but I'm working on it.

There were so many points where I was like "okay, I GET IT" like so many repetitive shots and close-ups held for far too long. There were a lot of shots that should have been cut shorter because it would continue on even after the characters were mostly out of frame. There was one scene where two people walk away and the scene keeps going until all we can see is their ankles and I was like, "ok, what do these ankles symbolize" Just kidding, haha, I mean I can't knock this film too much because it's truly an important part of the foundation of modern cinema, and these guys were out there with nothing but ideas and some film equipment. They didn't have film schools, they didn't have movies to watch and study, they didn't have books about filmmaking. I do appreciate this movie's contribution to film but I did not have a good time watching this film. The story didn't do it for me and the shooting style was extremely frustrating to watch. The stair scene is worth a viewing, but I don't intend to watch this again. Not sure why any government would endorse/pay for this, but I'll never pretend to understand Russia.

Did I enjoy it? No
Do I ever want to see it again? No
Do I ever want to include it in my own collection? No

Bye love you
-Jessie Carlson

Nosferatu, a Symphony of Horror (Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens) (Nosferatu the Vampire)

Nosferatu is a 1922 German film directed by F.W. Murnau, written by Henrik Galeen, and starring Max Schreck, Gustav von Wangenheim, and Greta Schröder.

Liked it, didn't love it. There are so many times during horror films when I think of a smarter plan of action than the characters did, and this movie was just the same. I totally understand that it is a classic, and it definitely deserves to be. It's important to note the time this movie came from while critiquing it. Things in the film that may seem amateur now were ground-breaking back then.
The film unfolded in a somewhat confusing manner. Something I've noticed about watching these earlier films is that the pacing is strange. It will be moving incredibly slow and/or including scenes that weren't really necessary, and then things that should take a long time happen in a snap with no explanation. I know that's vague but when watching, be prepared for seemingly random behavior stemming from somewhat ambiguous motives. I thought I was having difficulty suspending disbelief, but you can only blame it on that so many times before you have to accept that the film just isn't filling in all the blanks.
It was successful in creeping me out, that's for sure. Interesting enough but I did find myself ready for it to be over a while before it actually was. It has awesome special effects for 1922. There were interesting, creative angles. It is a classic for a reason, definitely, and I'll recommend it, I guess.

Bechdel test: 0/1
Did not pass. Only one female character and her sole reason for existence was to worry about her husband and be in utter despair.

Did I enjoy it? 1/1
Do I ever want to see it again? I would watch it again, yes.

Do I ever want to include it in my own collection? It's already included but I don't think I would intend to buy it if it wasn't.

Bye love you
-Jessie Carlson

The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (Das Cabinet des Dr. Caligari)

The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari is a 1920 German film directed by Robert Wiene, written by Carl Mayer and Hans Janowitz, and starring Werner Krauss, Conrad Veidt, and Friedrich Feher - about a creepy old man and his freaky fair sideshow and the mysterious murders taking place during their presence.

Direction: 2/2
Very strong direction. The director was very in control and thorough with his actors performances and setting the mood for the story. The sets are absolutely amazing, in a bizarre way. The colors, the shapes of the doors, buildings, windows, etc., the make-up, the behavior, was all so peculiar and well done. It definitely kept my attention.

Acting: 2/2
Extremely dramatic. I would consider it too dramatic but I don't want to knock points off for different styles in different eras. It worked for this film, for sure. It was laughable at some points but it's a silent film so I understand that they had to be creative with communicating through their bodies. Dr. Caligari and Cesare were acted perfectly. They were so creepy and weird. They did a great job.

Screenwriting: 1/2
It's a silent film so really all I can do is comment on the story, rather than the dialogue. The story itself was a trip. Creative, different, interesting. I really enjoyed this film. I was glad to find that it still spooked me despite being from a different time, from a different country, and honestly, because I just don't get spooked too easily. Definitely a fan of the story. I have to say though that if a movie constantly makes me think "Why did you do that?? You should have --" then in my opinion, it could have been better. There were many times where the characters did things that were straight up stupid or just completely puzzling.

Cinematography: 2/2
Good!! Gotta keep in mind that this was made during the very early years of cinema and the cinematography was either of their own invention or a technique borrowed from fellow film pioneers.

Bechdel test: 0/1
Did not pass. The only female character was Francis's romantic interest and her only role was to be the prize and the dame in distress.

Did I enjoy it? 1/1
I sure did! Definitely recommend it!

Do I ever want or need to see it again? Yes, I would want to watch again.
Do I ever want or need to include it in my own collection? Yes, I own it happily.

Bye love you
-jessie carlson


This was a confusing, yet highly important, one to watch. I have to say that I haven't watched a silent film in a long time so adjusting to the many, many differences was a struggle. I found the captions to be really lacking in clarity. I appreciate the beauty of their writing but I'm not really trying to decode poetry when watching a silent epic, you know? It's not even that, really, it was the constant introduction of new names without describing who they were or what the hell their problem was. I was under the impression that the captions would describe what was about to happen, but really they just introduced it, which meant that I understood a bit of what was happening before their mouths kept moving and their arms started flailing and fights started happening and I was lost again. I definitely wish I had a historian in my room just quietly explaining where these ancient cities were and why everyone was so upset all the time. I could Google it while watching but I have a strict rule against touching my phone while a movie is on. Try to read up on the context surrounding the story before watching if you can.

Anyway, the sets were grand even by today's standards and that impressed me a lot. Even the special effects they utilized were outstanding, because at that time in cinema, they weren't special effects as much as they were visual tricks that the filmmakers had to figure out and pioneer on their own essentially. I really liked the Maciste character and I wasn't surprised to find that he was extremely popular when this movie came out, too. The naked children everywhere and live birds flying around a set that is actively crumbling and in flames was bananas! It made me wonder how many people/animals died on sets back before there were regulations. The story had many complexities to it and that was cool. It definitely deserves it's title as an epic. It is not an easy watch, but it is a worthwhile one. No doubt it was piloted by a strong plot. I agree with the many others who have said that this is a must-see for people who truly love film. I definitely recommend it and am happy to have it in my movie collection.

Step Brothers

Step Brothers is another collaboration between Will Ferrell and director Adam McKay. It's about two immature, middle-aged men who become step brothers when their parents marry. It was everything I expected it to be.

It's the same Ferrell/McKay humor, but with different characters, settings, and jokes. If you don't like that immature, dirty, stupid humor, then of course you're not going to like it. I, however, enjoy that kind of humor, so I had a really good time with this movie. It's the same kind of stuff that earned Anchorman and Talladega Nights spots in my DVD collection. The characters are what most of us secretly wish we could be: immature, with no responsibilities, and taken care of. The humor is similar: they make the jokes we all wish we could make but have the good sense not to.

Ferrell carried this movie for me. I prefer his style to John C. Reilly's, but they were both really entertaining. The film knows what it is, and if you know that too, you'll have a much better time with it. Don't go into this movie expecting wit or smart humor. It is honestly funny because it's so stupid and ridiculous.

I had a good time with this film. I laughed out loud plenty, so I definitely recommend it. I would buy it, but it's not a priority. You know, if I saw it for 5 bucks in a bin somewhere, used or new, I might pick it up. Enjoy. :)

Resident Evil: Degeneration

Welp, my friend bought this at a used DVD store for 3 bucks, and I wasn't in the mood to think, so I watched it with her. This is an animated (very much like video games) film directed by Makoto Kamiya about zombies and the corporations responsible for the spreading infections.

I really love zombie movies. I love watching ordinary people turn into crazy warriors and attack with bats. It's good fun. Unfortunately, this film did not have enough zombies. The zombies were only in it for a little while, and I was really disappointed. It wasn't gory like zombie movies should be, it wasn't exciting. It focused too much on the company making the vaccine and then this ridiculous other virus they have. Zombies are believable to me, from a cinematic perspective, but this other virus, was absurd. I lost the very little remaining interest in the film when it was introduced. Maybe just watch the first half, that's average. The second half is what really earns the rot.

The only thing I liked about the movie was also, at times, another factor that made it awful. The animation was interesting sometimes, beautiful, in a way. It was very nice to look at. But then other times, it was just stupid. The people were emotionless, the mouths didn't match with their words all the time (but maybe it was made for a different language on the audio track), and the action was annoyingly impossible. The zombies were okay, and the people looked good when they weren't talking or trying to show feelings, but for most of the film, I was pissed off at how bad it was.

The script...oh, the script! Terrible. Cheesy, action, meaningless crap. You know it's a bad film when the main character has to explain everything that happened and why to another main character, as a breeze flows through their hair and they squint into a beautiful valley. They said stupid things, they asked stupid questions, they were stupid. I know I'm using the same adjective over and over, I know that's not creative, but neither was this movie. It was just stupid.

The characters were all annoying. Every single one was a cliche. There was the brave, handsome hero, the sassy, skilled "hot" chick, the stupid, emotional "hot" chick, the big tough guy who just likes to fight about everything, the helpless child, the greedy, evil politician, the tricky Brit (I dunno if that's actually a cliche though..). There was no innovation here, no creativity. Everything in this movie was something you've seen elsewhere. It is a complete waste of time.

I recommend this if you're a little boy. In that case, it will be your favorite movie. Other than that, no. Don't watch it ever. I never will again.

The Social Network

First of all, I know this is probably the 439th movie review you've read for this movie and you highly doubt that this one will offer anything new, so I really, really appreciate you reading anyway. I don't think I have anything new to offer either, I just felt compelled to write about it. Anyway, thanks again. :)

We've all gone into the theater and sat in front of the screen that in mere moments would soon be displaying the most talked about, most anticipated film of the year. I'm sure plenty of you were crying as the previews began before Avatar, Inception, or Toy Story 3. But, also, we've all felt our smiles slowly melt into frowns, our excitement dwindle into boredom, and our disappointment envelop our being as that popular film turned out to be nothing but explosions and big names (Transformers 2, anyone?). I'm proud to say that The Social Network is a film that deserves every kind word said about it. It was everything I was hoping it would be.

The movie had a quick pace that really energized me. It inspired me in a way. It encourages some of the main principles of the American dream: be the best, do it like no one has done it before, get rich. It had a few good lessons, yes, but Fincher's not preaching to you at all. It was a very interesting film, even though it did contain a lot of things that would usually be boring, like website coding, business strategies, and legal dealings. It was entertaining the entire time. The music, the editing, the script all worked together to make an excellent, riveting film.

David Fincher solidified his title as my favorite director. I was already amazed by Seven, pumped up by Fight Club, and in love with Benjamin Button. Everything about this film was perfect to me. I honestly didn't notice a mistake. When I first heard a movie was being made about a guy making a website, I thought, "Okay, here comes the most boring movie ever." and then I saw Fincher was going to direct, and I thought, "Okay, here comes the best movie of the year." Haha. His shots were beautifully composed, his actors were excellent, the dialogue was impeccable, the transitions were smooth, the humor was smart.

It was great. I completely recommend it, and I hope to buy it someday. :)

Do the Right Thing

Spike Lee's Do the Right Thing is a film depicting racial struggles between whites, blacks, hispanics, and Asians, on a particularly hot day in a New York neighborhood. This was my first time watching a Spike Lee piece, so I wasn't sure what to expect. I didn't even know what it was about because I didn't read the summary on the DVD case. They tell me too much and I like to not know what's going to happen, you know? Yeah.

Wow. I was very impressed with this film. I really have not seen anything like it. Sure, I've seen a bunch of films about racism, but never like this one. Usually they "point the finger," usually they come out and just say, "This is ____'s fault!" But this film didn't. It was told with equalizing grace. Lee managed to say that all of these colors contributed to the tension between them, that it was their shared duty to create a peaceful environment. It showed people causing problems with each other, and it showed them getting along. It was a very balanced film.

I love Lee's energy. Not as his character, but through the environment he captured on film. The world is so colorful, and the colors so vivid! And his camera angles? Ahh! There's such a variety and each one enhances the scene it's capturing. It's very entertaining to watch, and very lively. It's funny, it's tragic, it's annoying, it's frustrating, it's great. It really got a reaction out of me and everyone I watched it with. That's good cinema.

I didn't grow up in New York, so I can't really say if the characters represent New Yorkers accurately, but they reinforced the perception I already had of them. They seemed really convincing to me. They were always yelling. Haha. It was really funny. The acting was very good. I thought everyone did a pretty good job. The weakest performance I noted was by Spike Lee himself as Mookie. He was good most of the time, but at points when he needed to express sadness, he just looked apathetic and bored. The girl who played his sister was flat to me, but she was all right. Everyone else performed nicely.

I thought the emotional components of this film were perfect. There was just enough, in my opinion, and it was presented beautifully. There are very profound points in the film, where it's almost as if the characters are reading poetry. Sometimes that can be a distracting technique in communicating an idea, but Lee executed it very well.

Some might say it's cliche, but I disagree. I've seen stories depicting racism, I've seen stories with similar characters, but I have never seen this message said this way. I thought it was very deep, beautiful, poignant. I was very impressed. I really recommend it, and I hope to own it someday!

Night of the Living Dead

I had always heard of this film, heard it was an amazing classic, so when it came on free one day I decided to check it out. I'm not sure if the "classic" is only the original or if the remake qualifies for that title as well, but I thought it was good! The 1990 Tom Savini-directed version follows a young woman who goes to visit her mother's grave with her brother but is attacked by a zombie and seeks refuge in a house with other uninfected humans.

The graphics are pretty good for the '90s! I was cringing a lot. This movie really scared me, not in the way where it's hard to go to sleep, but I was scared for the people in the film. The characters were good. You could tell whether Savini intended for you to like the character or not, which is nice. I like when you either favor or dislike a character in a horror film because the feelings you have about them directly influence how the movie makes you feel: you're happy when your beloved character survives and stoked when the one you hate gets his head bitten off, or you're bummed when your favorite dies and your least favorite walks away with nothing but a scratch. I just love when movies make me feel something, even for just a little while, and this film succeeds.

There aren't any especially beautiful shots. I didn't notice any spectacular cinematography, but I still really enjoyed it. The zombies are great. I love how they walk, I love their appearances, I love how they attack. This movie is a great zombie flick! Completely satisfying in its genre. I laughed, I got angry, I got frustrated, I celebrated (not really, but I got stoked a few times :P). The script is pretty good, it fits the genre and the style. There's a character you hate (you'll know which one) and his lines are incredibly ridiculous! Seriously, I wouldn't be surprised if he got his insults from a kindergarten playground. I didn't really blame the film, because it's a zombie film and from the '90s, I thought I'd let it go. Like, I'm not expecting an Oscar-nominated script, you know? Haha.

So, yeah, I loved this movie a lot. It's everything a zombie movie should be. I may or may not buy it, I dunno, but I would love to watch it a few more times in my future. It's good stuff! I recommend it.


I used to watch this movie all the time when I was little. I hadn't seen it for probably 12 years when I saw it on TV and decided to watch it. I really can't think of another time in my life where I have been flooded with memories. For all these years, I've had all these images floating around my head and I had no idea where they came from, and then I watched this movie and I found that they were all from it. I must have watched it a hundred times when I was a tiny tot, haha.

All right, to the review. This is a Steven Spielberg film following a grown-up Peter Pan, who works as a lawyer and completely forgot about his life in Neverland. He is pushed back into his childhood when Captain Hook, hungry for a rematch, kidnaps his kids and holds them ransom. I think it's a really cute, original idea. I never wondered anything beyond the Peter Pan fairytale, so it was cool to see someone else's vision of what happened.

It's a movie aimed to be another Spielberg blockbuster; therefore, it's full of jokes designed to satisfy a large audience and overflowing with enough cheesiness to make your tears taste like Gouda. It tries to appeal to a large audience, and that's it's biggest downfall, I think. It seems like the only funny jokes are the ones where it didn't seem like they were trying to get you to laugh. I liked that though, I love hidden gold.

The actors were pretty good. I didn't hate Williams' character. I didn't like him so much either, but I didn't feel the same way I did about him in RV. Most of the child actors were awful, but I don't mean for that to sound as bad as it does. Usually I can't stand child actors, usually I think they all suck, but some of the Lost Boys were adorable and acted like real kids, instead of cute little robots. I laughed a lot during this movie, and most of the time it was because of those little boys. They're funny.

I'm certainly not saying this is the best movie ever, or Spielberg's gem, but it has a special quality to it that I'm not sure I can describe. It has all the qualities of a movie I'd hate, but somehow I love it. Why is that? Just nostalgia? I don't know. Maybe it's the message, maybe it captures my hatred of becoming an adult and losing all powers of imagination. I love the moral of the film, it's cheesy, yes, but delicious. I hate to sound like a sentimental grandma, but I feel like this film contains a lot of that "movie magic" that makes cinema so special. It's a cute movie, it's a feel-good thing. It's full of creativity and happiness, family and love. Nice things. I'm definitely gonna buy it some day and watch it with my kids over and over. I love it. I recommend it. :)

I Think We're Alone Now

I Think We're Alone Now is a documentary by Sean Donnelly about two mentally-disturbed individuals obsessed with '80s popstar Tiffany. This is one of the most interesting documentaries I have ever heard of. I almost bought it at Salzer's as soon as I read it because I was so intrigued, but it was like $28 for some weird reason and I only had $6. :(

I finally got to see it and I was not let down. It was just as interesting as I thought it would be, possibly even more, in fact. I thought I was just going to witness the infatuation of one middle aged man, but I actually got to meet a 31 year-old hermaphrodite who saw Tiffany in a vision she had during a coma and now believes she's "the one." Damn. I could not look away from this movie. I was exhausted, but I never turned it off. It is completely fascinating. It's funny, but you feel bad for laughing because it's most likely at something weird that one of the stalkers says. I don't like laughing at them but their thoughts are so unbelievable. I never got the impression that Donnelly was making this film so that we could laugh at these people, it was never like that. I think the purpose of the film is more to show people who these stalkers are, to see their reasoning and understand their disease. I don't think they're sick monsters, they're just lonely.

My problem with it was that it didn't flow smoothly. It was a pretty choppy film. You'd be watching, and then randomly it would switch to the middle-aged man, then randomly back to Kelly, the hermaphrodite. It was all over the place bouncy, staccato. It was still enjoyable though.

It's a very emotional film. It's tragic to see these people, outcasts of average society, believe wholeheartedly that they can capture the heart of a celebrity. They have no doubt that if Tiffany just had a conversation with them, that they could convince her to marry them and live together. It's bizarre. It's so crazy to see these mental illnesses in action. I was flabbergasted by almost everything they said. They really live in a delusion, and it's really amazing to witness. Tiffany is actually in the film a lot too, and it's interesting to see how she handles them. She's very sweet.

I do recommend this film. It's a great watch, incredibly difficult to put your attention elsewhere as it plays on your screen. I may buy it someday, for an occasional re-watch to make me laugh and feel thankful for my sanity, but it's not a priority. It's only about an hour long so even if you don't like it, you won't feel too bad about the time spent with it. It was thoroughly enjoyable.

See No Evil
See No Evil(2006)

This film, by Gregory Dark, is about a group of juvenile delinquents who clean an abandoned hotel harboring a gigantic, murderous psychopath who enjoys killing people and taking out their eyeballs. Sound fun? It isn't.

I feel like it has a pretty interesting premise. It takes the whole cliche of homicidal religious fanatics and teams it up with a group of kids getting into trouble. It's an all right idea, but it has disappointing execution. The actors are terrible. Not only the young actors, but the older ones as well. I wasn't expecting much out of this film when I saw it was a WWE production though, to be honest. I can't think of anyone who I think did a good job acting. Seriously, no one comes to mind. That's terrible. The dialogue was stupid. It was just really lame, C movie material. It was pretty predictable. It was gory, yeah, but I was pretty bored. I wasn't ever scared; however, I was clenching my fists in frustration often. It's one of those movies where the characters are completely oblivious to everything that's going on and just make stupid mistakes. It's annoying.

There's one thing I liked about this movie and it is the cinematography. Things were well lit, there were nice angles, beautiful shots. It's a nice looking movie sometimes. Too bad it didn't have any substance.

I watched this movie a couple years ago and hated it. I thought maybe I just had no taste back then and I might like it now, but no. It's still awful. I definitely don't recommend it. I certainly will not be buying it ever or watching it again.


Notorious is a biographical film about the rapper Notorious, how he came to fame, and his death. It's pretty educational regarding his life, I learned a lot of things I didn't know.

Something that really bothers me about movies based on real life is when the characters don't look anything like who they're supposed to be. The only person who really looked like who they were supposed to was Notorious, but everyone else was confusing. A lot of the time I was just waiting for someone to call somebody else by their names before I knew what was going on. That was really frustrating for me.

Another thing I've heard is that it doesn't capture the amazing personality of Notorious, and I kind of understand. It does capture a little bit of it though, for sure. The film didn't really make me understand how he became so famous and loved so fast. It tried to say it, but it was way too vague and quick about it. There was too much focus on his love life and not enough on his career, in my opinion.

The plot was interesting. It's made even more interesting because it's true. I liked the story-telling techniques by the director, but I feel like he could have done better. There were some things that needed more explaining, and some things that needed less. It's all right.

The music is great, but of course, only if you like rap. If not, you probably won't have a good time. I really love Biggie's style and I think he was really skilled, so I really enjoyed watching the parts when he was rapping. It has a great soundtrack.

Main point, I liked this film. It had beautiful shots and a nice style. It captured the streets of New York and the dangers of the gangster life. I'm not saying it's the best one ever, but it was a little better than decent. I recommend it for a rent or to borrow from a buddy, but I probably won't be buying it soon. I'm not sure though...I did really like it.


Oh my goodness, terrible. My friend and I tried to pick a movie to watch that we wouldn't have to get into, wouldn't have to think much about, and we picked the right one. This one has pretty much requires no intelligence to understand. Everything is made obvious to you, even the things that are meant to be "implied." There are stares that go on for way too long, as if you couldn't get the meaning in the first second of it. I was kind of insulted watching this film, thinking, "Man, they must really expect the viewers to have no cognitive abilities." I understand that movies aimed toward the child demographic need to be a little more forward than films for old folks, but come on. There are plenty of kids movies that don't make average-minded people feel like geniuses, take Wall-E. Most of that movie doesn't even have substantial dialogue and kids love it! This movie is just a huge failure.

It's a comedy, but I laughed one time. Once. And the only reason I laughed was because of how funny it looked and how impossible it was. Almost everything that happens in this film is completely unlikely. I had a hard time getting into it because everytime I almost did, something happened that could never really happen. Yeah, I get that one of the best things about the art of film is the freedom to make impossible things happen, but it's supposed to be a film relating to the "average" family, it's supposed to be a caricature of real life. I guess, in a way, it succeeded in that respect, because caricatures are exaggerated versions of the truth, but it exaggerates too much. I didn't like anyone in the family. I guess the son was all right, but the rest were terrible. They were just a bunch of jerks. The daughter who is supposed to be the typical grumpy teen, is just a hateful witch. I couldn't stand her. Anybody with a kid that awful would send them away or something. She was terrible. But the weird thing was, in one cheesy second, she'd be an angel. And then another second would pass and she'd be spitting acid on her poor father again. She was some kind of crazy, bipolar dragon.

One good thing was the establishment of the Gornicke family. It's not that they're lovable, but they're developed. The combination of their backstory and their unorthodox antics makes an interesting, entertaining piece of the film. At a couple points, I actually felt bad for them. I think that was a success, to make me sympathize with people that annoyed me. That was good.

Other than that, no. Don't watch it. I don't recommend it, not even for kids. Go watch Wall-E.

The Graduate
The Graduate(1967)

First of all, I completely understand why this film is a classic. It's the story of a young college graduate, uncertain about his future, beginning an affair with a tempting older, married woman. It's an interesting plot, a dirty one. That's what makes it so interesting.

Dustin Hoffman does a great job playing the character of Benjamin. All of his mannerisms, his words, his facial expressions work together to create a young college graduate perfect for this film. Bancroft is excellent in her role as well, as a seductive, bitter housewife. I really believe every actor did a great job in his or her role, I was impressed.

Another thing I really loved about the movie is the soundtrack. I wouldn't say I'm particularly a fan of Simon and Garfunkel, but after seeing this movie, I'm considering purchasing some of their music. The way it complemented the scenes, the mood it set, was extraordinary. I really loved it. I always think it's cool when movies have just one artist making the soundtrack, because their sound becomes synonymous with the message of the film somehow. Everytime I hear a song from a movie, I really want to go watch that movie, and I feel like that's what's going to happen anytime I hear some Simon and Garfunkel. I'm looking forward to it, it was really great. :)

The plot is really interesting. I thought the film was only about this affair, but it evolved into more than that. It evolved into a love story, and I really was not expecting that. The only weird thing to me was how quickly and easily things happened or were resolved. Some characters seem to get a little crazy and obsessive by the end, but maybe that's just the portrait of love Nichols was going for. Hah.

There are a lot of good scenes and filming techniques that make this movie a huge joy to watch. I was entertained the whole time. I definitely recommend it and would love to add it to my collection someday. :)

Annie Hall
Annie Hall(1977)

Before this film, I had never watched a Woody Allen film. After watching it, however, I can say I will definitely want to watch more in the future.

When I first read the plot of the film I thought, ?Okay, that?s boring.? It?s really not an especially innovative idea, but its presentation is very original. It?s the story of the rise and fall of two New Yorkers? relationship. What made it a step above other romantic comedies is definitely the script. It is hilarious, it develops the characters successfully, it is 100% entertaining.

Woody Allen is incredibly funny. I love his sense of humor, I love how ?neurotic? he is. I was laughing so so much during this movie. He brilliantly portrays his character, as does Keaton portray hers. I was very impressed with this film and hope to watch it many more times in my life. I want to buy it soon, and I really recommend it. It is very good.

School of Rock

Full of energy. Charming. Jack Black plays a loveable loser who secretly takes a substitute teaching job in his roommate?s name and then gets overly-ambitious dreams inspired by the student?s musical abilities. It?s a cute movie, with a pretty unlikely plot, but if you overlook that, you?ll have a good time. It has a satisfying conclusion, albeit somewhat cheesy. It?s a feel good movie though. You?ll feel nice after watching it.

The acting is good by Black and Cusack, but you know how kids act. They?re average, sometimes really bad, but I wasn?t surprised. It?s pretty rare that I?m impressed with a kid actor. :/

It?s a really funny movie, I laughed out loud quite a few times. I had a really fun time watching it and I own it happily. I definitely recommend it. It?s got a cute message.


This is an Australian film following the day in the life of several high school students, a day concluding with a suicide. It?s very engaging. The whole film you?re wondering which one is going to be the one to end his or her life, you?re looking for signs. The ending is not disappointing, in my opinion.

I loved this movie. The acting could have been a little bit better, but most of the actors were very good. The dialogue was good, the techniques in filming were good. The ?twists? were somewhat predictable, unfortunately, but they still entertained me. If you?re one to want twists to blow your mind, this will disappoint you.

The ending is debated highly. Some say it doesn?t make sense. I can completely understand why someone would say that, although I completely disagree. I see the meaning in the film, whether intended as I interpreted or a product of my own mind, haha. I was very satisfied with the ending, it made sense to me immediately.

A lot of people compare this to Gus van Sant?s Elephant because of the technique van Sant used, where often the same scene can be present several times in the movie from different perspectives. People criticize the movie because they think the director was pretty much just copying Elephant with a different twist, but the director acknowledged van Sant?s idea and meant to imitate it in a respectful display of admiration. I personally prefer people to come up with their own ideas, but I don?t think it?s an awful thing to want to replicate something someone else did as long as you give them their credit. Another thing people do, because of this shared technique, is compare the two. I suggest refraining from that and watching each film on its own terms. To be thinking ?Elephant did it better.? or ?I understood things more in 2:37.? is unfair to yourself the whole time. They?re both interesting, good films. Elephant is more artsy, more intended to be subject of self-interpretation. 2:37 is uses documentary-like confessionals which set up better character development. That?s the main difference between the two. Which one you?ll like more depends upon whether you like to think about things in your own way or like to have a lot of the details filled in for you. Anyway, I recommend both.

I would definitely buy this movie.


This is one of those films where several different stories are weaved together, and fortunately, it?s one of those films that does it well. Four stories: a couple vacationing in Morocco deal with tragedy, a maid battles between responsibility and personal needs, young boys make a mistake and are too afraid to come clean, and a deaf-mute in Japan deals with peer pressure and the death of her mother. These are the most bare summaries I can give, because I don?t want to give too much away, but I promise this is a really interesting movie. It?s very good. Definitely worth your time.

Because of the four different stories, there?s a lot going on and there aren?t really any boring points. I remember being interested the whole time, and I really liked it.

The first time I watched the movie, I didn?t put subtitles on. I thought they would come on automatically, and since they didn?t, I thought it was a brave move by the filmmakers, an attempt to make the viewers interpret the plot according to facial expressions, body language, and intensity of vocalization?abstract, film student things like that. Hah. I was wrong. You need subtitles. It?s definitely better with them. :P

This film is very visually pleasing. The cinematographer did a really great job. Pretty much every scene is beautiful, and every landscape shot is gorgeous. The dialogue is very good. It helps the story, it helps the viewer?s understanding of the character, and it?s well written. The acting is good. There was no one I really had a problem with, no one really destroyed the illusion, so that was great for sure.

It?s a very good movie and I like it a lot, but for some reason, I didn?t love it immediately. Maybe I need to watch it a couple more times or something, ponder it further, I don?t know. There?s something keeping me from loving it and wanting to buy it as soon as I can. Nonetheless, I recommend it. It?s a good film.


I?m not really into old films or Westerns, but this one was surprisingly interesting to me. A bunch of strangers are taking a stagecoach together through the West, despite threats of an Apache attack.

It has really great character development. Everyone starts out as some kind of stereotypical Western character, but by the end of the film, almost all of them are changed or revealed as something other than what we thought they were. I thought that was great. It does it very well. They don?t just change in a cheesy way, and the audience is sitting there like, ?What? That was easy.? No, it really made sense that they were enhanced by their shared experience.

I completely understand why it is a classic and known as pretty much the best Western ever. It displays the era very truthfully, including the racial tension and the treatment of women. It shows whites vs. Indians. It shows how rich women are treated, vs. how prostitutes are treated. It?s a very interesting piece. It takes generic characters and makes them feel original.

I am not in a rush to buy this, but I would like to. I think it would make really good studying material for anyone hoping to enter the business. It is a great film and I definitely recommend it.


A young, purity-loving teen has teeth in her vagina. That?s pretty much all you need to know. It?s such an interesting premise! I remember the first time that I even heard of this movie, I was completely fascinated. I wanted to see it sooo bad!

Honestly, though, it was disappointing. It should have been thrilling, intriguing, amazing! But it wasn?t. It?s such a bummer, because they had a such a cool idea, and then it just fell flat. See, it should be crazy when she bites with her downstairs teeth, but it was awkward and kinda boring. The director?s presentation of their shock and horror is laughable and embarrassing. It ruins the whole scene. A few times throughout the film I wasn?t sure if it was trying to be a teen comedy, or if it was trying to be a scary movie with occasional jokes. I still don?t know what it was trying to be. The only times that I got what I was expecting was when they showed the results of her biting, you know, the bloody pelvic areas and the penis lying on the ground. Haha, it sounds gross, and it is, but it?s funny too.

The acting was almost good, but just not quite. I understand that the main girl won a prestigious award for her performance, but I?m not sure if I agree with that. In some scenes I can understand why she would deserve it, but in others, no way. It seems like bad direction for every actor to almost be good in their parts but not completely. I dunno, it didn?t help the film. Somehow, despite not having good actors, there was pretty good character development. I could predict what characters were going to do and I could understand why they were doing it without needing any explanation. The story was simple. No complex changes, no surprises. It?s very easy to follow.

They used a nice camera and had some nice shots, but it wasn?t enough to save the film. Ultimately, it was a huge disappointment. It could have been a lot better than it was.

I could watch it again if I had no other option, but I really doubt I will feel the need or want to do so. I?m definitely not going to buy it.

Live Freaky! Die Freaky!

This was a horrible film. Thank goodness it was short or I would feel long-lasting regret over spending significant time on it. It?s about Charles Manson and his ?family,? and how they come to murder the pregnant actress and her friends.

The only reason that I laughed during it is actually a bad reason to laugh at a film, so it doesn?t really deserve points. There were plenty of times when the director tried to get me to laugh, but every time I sat silently. I only laughed because it?s a poorly done claymation. Some of the scenes were absolutely ridiculous! I can?t believe they even put them in the final project. They are so funny because they are so awful! Haha. I laughed at the movie, not its jokes, because honestly, the jokes were twisted. There are a few different types of twisted humor: there?s twisted humor that?s funny, and there?s twisted humor that goes too far and is just disturbing. This movie has the latter. It has so much of it that I was getting tired by the end of the film. It was never funny, and as the movie kept going it became less disturbing, so it was just there, taking up time. I was bored, and frankly, annoyed that these characters were still on my screen. It is a short movie, but it felt long because it?s just so damn not funny. It tries too hard, and it fails.

I am going to give the movie a 10% because it actually had one good thing about it. When the scenes weren?t absurdly sloppy, they were actually visually fascinating. The director used good colors, unique angles, and really kinda just trips the viewer out. During a couple of the scenes, I couldn?t look away because the director?s techniques were so interesting. I appreciate his work for those scenes, but the rest of the movie is so bad that I almost forgot his good points.

It?s dialogue is original, yes, but it?s not funny. It tries too hard and just ends up disgusting and pathetic. If I had any affiliation to this film, I would change my name and pretend like I had no idea what it was. It?s really that awful. It?s a portrait of the horror of the human mind, that?s for sure. It has one good point that is overshadowed by its many failures. I would never buy this movie. I would never even watch it again. Waste of time.

Grizzly Man
Grizzly Man(2005)

In summary, it?s a documentary following the summers spent in the Alaskan wilderness by Timothy Treadwell. Treadwell is an energetic, sensitive guy who is out there alone, observing and interacting with the bears. His hope is to show people that bears are beautiful creatures, instead of dangerous beasts. The result is a highly emotional and disturbing introduction to a man, whether you like him or not, that you would want to meet.

I?ve never seen a documentary by Werner Herzog, but after seeing this, I would love to. He presented this story brilliantly, giving the viewer just enough information. By the conclusion of the film, I really felt like I knew Treadwell. This is because Herzog included footage shot by Treadwell himself; he was out there alone (ehh..) with a camera, and the camera turns into a confessional kinda thing, which makes the movie that much more effective.

I get why there?s so much debate over personal feelings regarding Timothy Treadwell. One side sees him as this environmental wacko and the other side sees him as a funny, caring guy. I personally felt that although his mission was too much, he was a good guy. The cool thing about Grizzly Man, though, is that whether you like him or not, it?s a great documentary.

It?s educational, it?s incredibly interesting, it?s emotional when it needs to be, but not too much, it?s very funny, and it?s a beautiful portrait of this man and the bears. It?s a really great film. I definitely recommend it, and I want to buy it for sure.

Hotel Rwanda
Hotel Rwanda(2004)

Incredible. Amazing. Tragic. Beautiful. Inspiring. Terrifying. Heart-breaking. This movie is everything. Visceral in every way. I was infuriated at how difficult it was for these people to get help. I was saddened through the genocide. I was happy because of how they stuck together. Seriously, just every emotion a person can have, I had while watching this movie.

It is a masterpiece. It is a raw portrait of the conflict in Rwanda in the 1990s, of the people who went through every day of it in fear. There is nothing wrong with this film. The only thing that I don?t like about it is the fact that everything in it is true and happened. I hate the cruelty of man, but I love the perseverance of the human spirit.

The score of this movie is brilliant. It tells you what?s coming. It forces you to be sad, or happy, whatever, when it?s the time. You can?t watch a sad scene in this film, hear the music, and not be saddened. It complements the movie perfectly. It?s a lot of orchestra, violins predominantly, and an African song sung by children. It?s chilling. It?s absolutely beautiful.

I cried several times during this film. Not just little tears rolling down my cheeks, no, I was crying out loud. It will tear you up. I have never struggled so much to get through a movie. When the case warned of disturbing images, I knew what was coming, you know, corpses strewn about, young and old. I didn?t think it was going to impact me as it did. I can?t believe this really happened. I can?t believe the world didn?t care.

The acting was excellent. There was only one person who I felt wasn?t fully embodying the part, but I let it go because the rest of the movie was devastating enough.

Put yourself in the place of these people. Don?t watch the movie passively. Imagine being there, sleeping on the floor of hallways surrounded by strangers, crying children and babies, permitted to eat only a fraction of what you ate before and unable to bathe regularly. Imagine not being able to close your eyes for fear that when you open them again there will be a gun in your face. Imagine not wanting to turn your back on your family because when you turn around they may not be there. Let this movie change you.

I own this movie and I am extremely proud to. It is one of the most incredible cinematic documentations of true life that I have ever witnessed. I definitely recommend it.

Don?t forget this movie after the credits start rolling. Don?t forget it after a day. Remember these people. Remember them when you hear of more tragedies, and help. Send money, send yourself. This should never happen again.


By today?s standards, the murder scenes are laughable, but I know that back in 1960, this movie was terrifying.

Alfred Hitchcock is definitely a master. The way that he used music and editing made some scenes really frightening to me. I feel like the music was the most effective way that Hitchcock got into my head and stressed me out. Even in some scenes where nothing was happen, that music came on and I was scared. I was grabbing onto my friend and biting my fingers. The night after I watched this, I had to lock my door, check my bathroom for a hidden creep, and think of happy things until I fell asleep. It left a lasting impression on me, definitely. The conclusion is insane! It is a freaky film.

The actors were great, minus the murder scenes. They were calm when they had to be, scared when they had to be, and creepy as hell when they had to be. I will never see the remake of this film, because I really doubt that anybody could ever fulfill these roles better than Perkins and Leigh did.

Hitchcock really knows which angles to use, what editing techniques work, all the things that make this a good movie. The content is scary, the form is excellent. I completely understand why this film is iconic, why it has been brought up so often in society. This is the movie that made motels kind of creepy places, I bet.

I would buy this movie, sure. It?s recommended. It?s great studying material for a budding filmmaker, so it should be in my collection sometime soon. : )


I went into this movie pretty stoked. I usually like Angelina Jolie movies. I was expecting some good action and an interesting plot. I was not disappointed, but I wasn?t impressed either.

The plot was entertaining. I liked the idea of it, and I was interested the whole time. I don?t recall any particularly down periods of the film where I just wanted things to pick up. Some points seemed difficult to believe, but I tried anyway.

I thought Angelina Jolie was great. I actually liked her character and how she portrayed her. She did an excellent job jumping off of stuff, climbing walls, and shooting guns. There was an emotional scene where she looked very vulnerable. It was good.

I turned off my brain for this movie. I wasn?t trying to figure out who the bad guy was, I wasn?t trying to predict anything. In doing this, I experienced several fairly satisfying shocks. The friend I saw the movie with said that she knew what was going happen before it did, so I guess it was predictable. I dunno. :/ Turning off my brain worked for me.

I wouldn?t buy this movie, but I may rent it some time in the future. I think it?s a pretty good action film. Not amazing, but not bad. It?s recommended for an exciting movie night, but not recommended for an intellectually inspiring movie night.

Zack and Miri Make a Porno

Way too much dirty nasty references to sex for me, way too much boobage The only thing I laughed at was the comedy not involving sex of any kind, which is unfortunate considering the entire movie is about sex. That?s my own problem, I guess. Why did I even watch this?

I found that the best thing about the movie was not the comedy, but the interaction between Zack and Miri. The whole thing involving them was really adorable to me, very well-established. They?re good pals. The film is about these two friends who live together and can?t pay the bills, so they decide to make a porn to make some quick cash. I love them. Their whole thing was tops. The sex humor just did not appeal to me at all. If you like vulgar jokes then you will absolutely love this film. If I could take this movie and edit it, I would take out the nasty stuff and then only have the stuff between Zack and Miri?but then there really wouldn?t be a movie, so I actually wouldn?t do that.

So I?ll rate it not according to my own preferences, but according to what I believe are the important ingredients to a comedy. There was an excellent emotional aspect of the film that is rare in most comedies, or forced and false-feeling. I?m giving it a 6/10 because it had good jokes occasionally and great characters, but it had too much nastiness and too many jokes that didn?t make me laugh audibly. I feel like this is one of those movies that you?ll really love if you?re not thinking and if you have a basic, immature sense of humor. I hope I don?t offend anyone by that. : ( Pretty much the only things I liked were Zack and Miri?s thing (earning 4/10) plus Zack?s co-worker from the coffee shop (earning 2/10).

Interesting to watch, yes; but would I buy it? No. If a friend owned it or rented it and suggested we watch it, I would check to see if they had any better options first, but if they didn?t have any, I would watch it with them. It?s not the worst movie I?ve ever seen. I?d watch it again only to see Zack and Miri.

Back to the Future

My brother owns the trilogy so when I visited him I sat down and watched the whole thing. Honestly, an excellent use of my time.

I loved the story. It had a very interesting plot fueled by original and entertaining characters. To sum it up, a kid gets sent to the past on an unplanned trip via a time machine constructed by his eccentric inventor friend. I don?t want to give away any more than that. This is truly one of the best films to come from the ?80s. It?s colorful, exciting, funny, and filled with a gold mine of amazing ?80s lines. The music went with the film perfectly, of course, just fun music when it was a good time, and music to work up the audience when stress was needed. Director Zemeckis did a great job. I could watch this movie again and again. It had no low points, no slowing down. It was genuinely interesting the entire way through.

My only problem is one prevalent in many films: overactive coincidence. Sometimes the conflicts were resolved way too easily, and I felt really unsatisfied. Maybe I was taking it too seriously, maybe I was expecting too much, I don?t know, but a few moments of the film I was disappointed. No worries though, because the greatness of the film made me forget the hiccups. I still thing it?s a super fun ride.

This is a perfect movie for family movie night, or hanging out with friends, anything. I can?t think of a scenario where viewers wouldn?t have a good time watching this movie, except for stuffy, boring people who have no imagination who perhaps just came from a funeral, or something like that?but you probably shouldn?t be watching any movies with people just coming from such a sad event, and you probably shouldn?t be hanging out with boring people anyway?so yeah, I stand by what I said. No scenario exists where you will not like this movie. I plan on buying it sometime when I get the cash.

Role Models
Role Models(2008)

It was really vulgar. I feel guilty for liking it.

Character development was wonderful. You got a really good picture of everybody. The story was good. A couple of guys get in trouble with the law and get 150 hours of community service. They choose to complete it by becoming mentors to a couple of kids, but from the first line of the film, you know that they are not fit to be role models. Enter shenanigans. It?s entertaining.

Jane Finch played the funniest character in the movie, to me. She is really, really hilarious. I got excited every time she came on the screen. She is the funniest lady. She?s up there with Kristen Wiig.

I hate movies where kids cuss. I just feel bad for that kid?s parents and worried for that kid?s future. I also hate movies where stuff goes really wrong and then it?s all resolved ridiculously easily. This film had both of those things and that?s why its rating is what it is.

I don?t think I would buy this, but if a friend had it I would borrow it occasionally. It?s a good comedy.

Sky High
Sky High(2005)

This is a good happy movie. It cheers me up. I love any movie with superheroes.

Usually I don?t like movies with young kids, teenagers and such, (The Butterfly Effect, for example) because the actors are terrible, try too hard, ruin the illusion. Sky High, however, had excellent casting because I liked every young actor. I was impressed.

The graphics are fun. It?s very colorful. It had a lot of action, good stuff for a Disney movie. It had a recurring comic book theme that made the movie really pop. It was interesting the whole way through. The director utilized old school superhero movie techniques, the dramatic zooming into faces, and cameras tilted, stuff like that. It?s a really entertaining film to watch. It?s very original. It has good dialogue and it?s actually really funny. It has great humor, not stupid kid stuff or anything. An adult could easily enjoy this film, and of course, so could the kids.

The plot is easy to follow and fun. The son of the best superheroes in the world is starting high school, a special one for kids with super powers. The problem is, he doesn?t have super powers. It?s a great story, with great characters. I liked everybody. Not really, like I would hang out with them, but I thought the characters were well-established and although some were evil in the film, they still were good characters. It also has a stellar soundtrack that complements every scene splendidly. I have no problem with this film.

Watch it if you want to have a good time. I own it and I?m very glad to. I watch it whenever I need a happy colorful movie to lift my spirits, and it works every time.

The Wrestler
The Wrestler(2008)

I heard about this movie on TV and it looked great. I?m not into wrestling whatsoever, but the beautiful thing about this movie is that it?s not really about wrestling. It?s more profound than that. It?s pretty much about a guy who has one thing in his life: wrestling. And he?s great at it. But fast forward 20 years later, he?s obviously older and losing his ability to participate in his passion. This is a truly gorgeous film, where the protagonist is also the antagonist. He?s just trying to find something to life for. It?s tragic, but somehow inspiring. It?s an eloquent statement on life after fame.

Mickey Rourke is great in this role. I haven?t seen any other work of his but I really want to say it?s the best performance of his career. I won?t, of course, because I?m too uneducated to say such a thing, but I will say that he was amazing. He truly embodied the character. His walk, his posture, his facial expressions, his delivery of dialogue is all so real. I feel like if I see Rourke in another film I?ll just be thinking, ?He?s a wrestler. What?s he doing here?? Sometimes I buy movies just for one amazing performance, and if you?re the type to do this too, then buy it for his portrayal. It is excellent. I really felt for the guy.

The story is wonderful, and the director?s way of telling it is completely effective. He used interesting techniques, great angles. I?m very interested in other work by this director. The music is perfect for the film. I love any movie with ?80s rock ballads. Every actor did a great job in their role. I don?t have anybody to complain about.

I have to buy this movie. It?s an obligation. I think it should be in every movie collection. I believe it?s fit to be studying material for anyone aiming to enter the business. I really loved it.

The Other Guys

I like Will Ferrel. I like Mark Wahlberg.

I liked that it had a pretty good plot. Most comedies I?ve seen don?t seem to have a believable plot. The action was pretty insane at times, like absolutely impossible. Definitely messed up the reality aspect of the film for me. I didn?t like that.

But of course, the action wasn?t the sole aim of the director. It is meant for the comedy genre, and I think it succeeded. It was funny. I especially liked Will Ferrel?s character. He was really cute. I kinda related him to Steve Carell?s Barry of Dinner for Schmucks. Both nerdy, socially awkward little fellows that are adorable. He worked pretty well with Mark Wahlberg?s tough guy character.

It didn?t amaze me. It?s not the best comedy I?ve seen ever, or of recent times, but I?ll be honest, when it comes to comedies, I like really stupid stuff. Like Anchorman and Talladega Nights kind of humor. I think this movie was a step up from that, maybe a bit less stupid and ridiculous.

So yeah, I laughed out loud. I had a good time. I would buy this, if there were no other movies I loved more around, hah. But still, I think it was enjoyable. I would like having it in my DVD collection.

The Machinist

I was really excited to see this movie because I heard so much about how dangerously skinny Christian Bale got for the role. I thought if he was willing to risk his health for this, it must be an amazing film. Unfortunately, I was disappointed.

I was disappointed in the plot, not Bale?s performance. He was excellent. He was a creepy, scummy, mysterious guy with a secret, sleeping with a prostitute, getting coffee from the same waitress every night, and working at a dark, dirty factory. I got his character, I felt it. I didn?t feel like I knew him (which is one of my favorite things about movie characters), but that was the point. I felt the director was very successful in this. I wanted to know what his deal was. I longed to find out what the heck was his problem. Bale?s facial expressions and actions provoked this need in me. That?s great.

The plot is my problem. This is a movie that tries desperately to be some kind of complex thriller, where the conclusion pieces everything together and the viewer feels like they?ve just witnessed some incredible puzzle be ripped apart and put back together. It fails. It?s confusing, it?s not cohesive. It doesn?t really feel like it fits together. It?s like putting that puzzle together with pieces from another puzzle. The ending was incredibly unsatisfying to me. The movie tries to have some metaphorical pieces, I think, but they go unnoticed. They just add to the confusion. I would like the story if it didn?t so hard to shock you, twist up your perception of the whole situation at the end. It would have had a better impact if it was more simple. I like thinkers, don?t get me wrong. I just cannot stand movies that try to fit that description and fail.

This is an okay movie that is almost great. It?s kinda tragic, I think, how close the director was to having gold, but then having plastic instead. I didn?t buy this movie but I think I would have regretted it if I had. I?m not going to buy it. If a friend wanted to watch this movie with me, I wouldn?t mind, but I wouldn?t spend anything on it.

Stay Alive
Stay Alive(2006)

Plot: If you die in this freaky videogame filled with dead teenage girls, you die the same way in real life.

It?s a creepy idea, for sure. It?s an all right movie. It?s not bad, but it?s not amazing. I was scared a couple times, but not terrified like other movies have made me. I?ve seen this movie a few times and it?s not one I think of often. You know how sometimes you?ll be going through your life, working, hanging out with friends, whatever, and a movie you really liked popped into your head out of nowhere? And you smiled just thinking about it? Yeah, well that never happens to me with this movie. Haha.

I didn?t feel attached to any of the characters. They weren?t awful or anything like that, but I just didn?t care about them. I think a horror movie is good when I?m sad that someone is dying. You know, because if you saw someone die in a crazy, gory way in real life, you would freak out, you would be torn up. So a movie that shows you that death but didn?t make it feel real enough, didn?t show you the humanity of the victim, is inadequate. It doesn?t serve its purpose, and that?s a shame. The lead character was boring. I don?t have much to say about him. Actually, okay, I did care about two people. There?s the love interest of the main character who is almost well-established. You won?t feel like you know her, but you?ll have a pretty good idea, and you?ll like her. The other one I liked was played by Frankie Muniz, and the whole time I was thinking about Malcolm in the Middle, so I had no choice to like him. That?s not really a boast-able victory by the director, but a semi-victory by the casting department.

It?s an average movie, with an average plot, average characters, and average graphics. I get that the villains were supposed to look like they came straight out of a videogame, but I feel like if in the videogame, they were modeled after real dead girls, they should be real in real life, you know? But whatever. I wouldn?t recommend buying this, but if you want to borrow it from a friend or have a free trial of some rental service, go for it.

Say Anything...

I bought this movie after hearing many times about its famous boom box scene, and I do not regret it at all. It?s a lovely film with a simple plot and sincere characters. It?s one of the classic ?80s films that should never be forgotten.

I believe the best thing about this movie is the lead character, Lloyd Dobbler. I love him; he is the sweetest movie character that comes to my mind right now. He was so well-established?John Cusack did a really spectacular job portraying him. If Lloyd were real I would love to date him. I know for sure I would not like this movie without him.

His lover in the film, however, was not so impressive. I didn?t really like her too much, but it seems like her interactions with other characters in the story and the descriptions of those who knew her were meant to show her as a like-able presence. To me, this is a failure. I thought she was boring, confusing at times, and annoying. I just didn?t like her. I believe she is the only problem with the film, and I think she is what?s keeping me from making the jump from liking this movie to loving it. Too bad.

Another aspect of this film that I really liked were the extra characters, like Lloyd?s friends and fellow high school graduates at the house party. They were really funny to me, and much more interesting to watch than Diane Court. His friend?s obsession with Joe was really fun, haha. I loved it.

The plot is simple- it?s mainly the blossoming love between two teenagers and seeing if it will survive through the devastating drama of finding out a beloved father could be criminal. It?s cute, easy to follow. The music is great, peppy ?80s. I liked the dialogue, mainly just Lloyd?s though. Everything he said felt so genuine and sweet. I loved every time he talked.

So pretty much, I really like this movie a lot. Very rarely do I see a film where I wish I could date someone in it, but this is definitely one. It?s a really sweet movie, a date movie perhaps. Enjoy : )

Mr. & Mrs. Smith

This is a daaaamn fun movie! Heh. To all the critics, yes, there are a lot of explosions, gunfire, unrealistic battles, plenty of times where you think "they MUST have been hit by a bullet by now..there is noo effin way...", and over-dramatized violence, but there's plenty of good stuff too that should not be ignored.

Probably the best part about this movie is the couple. I know it's been said before, but it's so true that I'm gonna repeat: Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie have incredible chemistry. It's no wonder they're still together today. Even when the movie couple, John and Jane Smith, where in their "off period" of marriage, you could feel something between the two. They are an amazing screen couple, they work incredibly well together. Their dialogue is just right...when one says something to the other, it's smooth and real. And of course, Pitt and Jolie are both extremely attractive, so they're fun to watch. Haha.

The plot is all right..nothing extraordinary. It's a typical action movie plot, simple enough to leave plenty of room for the battle shots and violence. Nothing special. The dialogue wasn't bad, it wasn't lame action movie words. No stupid puns or anything. There was really nice cinematography, some shots that really were stunning. Usually the emotional aspect of action movies is dense and easy, cliche and boring, but I liked it in this movie. You could tell that they really loved each other, yet at the same time were committed to their jobs. You could feel the conflict.

I own this movie and I'm glad I do. It's a good time. I recommend it.


Oh man. Dogville.

Initially, I was completely confused. I thought it was some weird introduction, establishing some kind of idea that I needed to reflect upon throughout the film, but then what confused me stayed, and stayed, and stayed...and as the movie commenced, it didn't confuse me anymore. I got that it was a statement on the nature of small towns. I thought it was a really profound idea, and it only made me love the movie more. It was a huge risk by director Lars von Trier, but it really worked. He has my respect, for sure.

The only thing I wasn't too fond of was the narration. Nope. Some old guy that's not even a character in the film? Just a random person? Yeah, I could have gone without that. I mean, it kinda helped establish the tone, the simple country living setting, but I still didn't like it. I would have gotten that tone anyway.

The story was brilliant, unlike anything I have ever seen before. The movie had some slow pieces, but I didn't mind. It established the characters and the situation, and then the second half of the movie really, really picked up. von Trier used some really great techniques in shooting this film. I was incessantly impressed. It is truly a beautiful portrait of human nature. It's sad, it's delightful, it breeds hope, it satisfies the need for vengeance, it provokes thought.

Ahh, what a beatiful film. I own this and I'm really happy that I do. I definitely recommend it. But keep in mind, this can definitely be described as "unique" or "experimental filmmaking". It took a bit to get used to it, but it's possible. Enjoy.

Running With Scissors

Awful. This was horrible. A huge disappointment.

I don't know if I can even write how bummed I am about this. I really, really loved the book and was incredibly stoked when I found out there was a movie.

Let's do some comparisons: the movie was boring, the book was intriguing. The characters in the movie were ridiculous, rigid, as if they were trying to be exactly what the book said they were without any of the spirit that they had in the book. The conflicts in the book were enticing, made you hunger for more, the conflicts in the movie felt like a messy waste of time. I couldn't even feel anything while watching this movie, not a thing but disappointment, while the feelings evoked during reading were addicting and rendered me unable to close the book. Honestly, I'm not qualified to make this review, because I didn't even finish the movie. That's how awful it was. I left.

One thing good about this movie that makes this one scene worth watching: Gwyneth Paltrow. Honestly, usually she's forgettable. I don't often care much for her, but in this one scene, I can't help it. If you're gonna watch this movie, look out for Paltrow in the scene where she's cooking stew. I could not look away. Her acting in this scene is absolutely remarkable. I truly have a lot more respect for her than I did before. Right as I'm writing this, I can only name one other movie where I've seen her..but I doubt I'll ever be able to forget this scene.

Don't watch the movie, ever. Go read the book. Augusten Burroughs is an amazing story-teller, Ryan Murphy is not.

Dinner for Schmucks

I went into this movie with high expectations, and I was not disappointed.

Paul Rudd is okay. He's cute, he has funny facial expressions, a nice voice. He was funny, yeah. But the real star of this movie is only Steve Carell. Oh my goodness, I cannot believe someone can be so hilarious. He had his character, Barry, completely mastered. Brilliant! Barry is this adorable, little geeky guy that is completely socially inept, and Carell acted out every single one. I forgot about every other role that I saw him play. I really lost the actor in this character, which is sometimes difficult to find in a comedy these days when most characters are generic.

I laughed non-stop for most of the movie. When I wasn't laughing, it was because it was a serious moment. First of all, the jokes were great. They were new and made me laugh embarrassingly loud in the theater. I had a great time watching this movie. The emotional side of the film, however, was a bit much. It was okay for Barry's situation, like it was understandable and at a good amount, but for Paul Rudd's character, it was too much for me. I didn't like his situation; it was just too familiar, I've seen it before in other movies. That was the only disappointment in the movie. Maybe it's just me though, but I very rarely like the conflicts in comedies. They all seem the same and they seem like they only erupt from oversensitive, supporting characters that I don't want to hear from. It is probably just me, because of the mindset I have when I approach the movie. I go in expecting just a bunch of laughs, so when something serious happens I don't want it. That's my own problem.

So, yep. I loved this movie. I thought it was extremely funny, I liked the story. I loved Barry and most other characters. I laughed a LOT and I left the theater smiling. On the drive home, scenes from the movie popped up in my head and I laughed about them all over again. I will definitely buy this movie, no doubt. It's a really good time.


I love David Fincher, I really do. I have never been disappointed by a film he made.

I only heard a negative review about this movie, so in watching it I was a little skeptical. The bad review basically criticized its length, but I only believe that could be a problem if the viewer is not lending their full attention to the film. Yes, it's long-but yes, it's high quality stuff, so it doesn't matter. It's genuinely interesting. Not only does it show the legitimate processes of detectives in pursuit of a serial killer, but it shows the lives behind the pursuit. It shows the children of, the marriages of the police officers and the reporters. It gives insight to an aspect of crime that you can't find in real life unless you're a police officer or a reporter yourself. The characters, based upon real people, are just that: real. It's refreshing. There was not one actor that I was disappointed in, not one person presenting amateur acting to disrupt the illusion.

The plot was interesting, of course, as all films searching for a serial killer are. It was frustrating at the same time, not knowing who it was, but that's characteristic of all films in this genre. Not a complaint, just an observation. It wasn't tiring, it didn't drag on. Although there were frequent disappointments in the story (not in the telling, just the actual happening), but I didn't feel them because Fincher is so good. The way that he told this story was brilliant. This is not a waste of 2+ hours, this is full of information regarding a true and unsolved crime. It's actually educational.

Visually, it was beautiful. Fincher got beautiful shots, beautiful angles, beautiful colors, as always. Even if you don't like the actors, the story, the dialogue, you can still like the movie because it's just really nice to look at. Fincher also controls which emotions he wants to evoke, which is great. He's successful in it. If he wants to get you scared, he will. If he wants you to laugh, be disappointed, frustrated, he will. He is excellent.

I was very satisfied with this film. It was informative, interesting, disturbing, and the conclusion wasn't awful or anything. It was a good ending, honestly. I want to buy this movie.

Hannibal Rising

Honestly, I was shocked to see how low the ratings are for this movie. I was actually really impressed with the film and how it played out. It had the suspense of the rest of the Hannibal films, yet in a new direction, in a haunting way. It's really creepy to witness the origin of a monster. It stuck with me. It's cool to connect the mannerisms, thoughts, and actions of the elder Hannibal with the developing Hannibal.

The actor, Ulliel, who plays the young Hannibal is excellent. He really scared me. Sometimes the faces he made gave me chills. His dialogue and presentation of such was frightening. He's a really cute guy, but he scared the hell out of me. I was kinda confused about the point of the Li Gong's character's involvement in Hannibal's life. Were they lovers or just close because they both suffered immense tragedy? I think it was the latter, but I'm not sure. The emotional side of the movie was prevalent and strong. There was a huge theme of tragedy throughout the film that truly reached me. It's weird, because you know that everything Hannibal does in this movie is wrong, yet at the same time you understand a little why he had the compulsion to do it. It had a really interesting plot that was enjoyable to view.

It had the gore of the other Hannibal films, it had the complex torture scenes. It had the creepy villains and the terrifying dialogue..all the ingredients of the other films that made them so delicious. ;) I think it was a great movie. I really want to buy it.

Red Dragon
Red Dragon(2002)

Watched this the other night...honestly, filled me with that fright that compels one to check under the bed and in the closet- but in a good way!

I loved this movie..I thought it was excellent. First off, the character of Hannibal was just as chilling as ever, just as scary. There's a scene where Hopkins looked almost straight into the camera, and his face alone scared the hell out of me. Truly intelligent casting, expert. Norton is great as well, as always. Hoffman played a character who successfully evoked a genuine dislike from me..I really could not stand him. The Red Dragon, played by Fiennes, was established well, from finding out about his first crime to when he finally came on screen. He was freaky, but somehow managed to get the audience to sympathize with him, which is excellent acting and dialogue. Impressive.

The direction was great. The scenes, the dialogue, the acting, everything was high quality. If I made this myself, I'd be pretty damn proud of myself. Most scenes had terrific composition, they were just wonderful to look at. Great cinematography. The plot was intriguing, smart, interesting, scary. I was never bored, never confused. There was a good amount of emotion in the film, some of it was relatable, like family love and such, and some of it was sickening, like child abuse. There wasn't too much or too little, there was a great balance.

I'm definitely gonna buy this movie when I have the dough. I got a kick out of it and I'd like to see it again.

The Butterfly Effect

The first time I watched this movie, I loved it. I watched it over and over, gave it a 10/10 whenever I could.
But last night, I watched it more closely and I gotta change my score. I'd give it an 8/10 now. The story, I believe, is incredible. I think it's very original, it fits together very well, it's interesting for almost the whole movie.

My only problems are that towards the end, maybe the last 20-30 minutes of the movie, it lost my attention. I was kinda just waiting for something exciting to happen again, waiting for it to perk up. The entire rest of the movie was very interesting for me though, and I loved it. My other biggest problem is the acting. I feel like the only ones who did pretty good were the adult actors. The kids and the teenagers, however, were horrible. I'm sorry, but they just lost me. They really messed it up I think. The directors should have pulled more out of them.

Other than that, the plot is great, the music is excellent. The dialogue is good. The camera movements and the effects were very interesting and cool looking. I had a good time watching this movie.

I bought it and I watch it from time to time. I dunno if I would recommend it for purchase though. It scratches a certain kinda movie itch you may get occasionally, a sort of slightly better than mediocre craving. It's not mind-blowing, it won't change your life. It could make you think differently for a little while after you see it, but not much else. I think it's a pretty good movie. I like it.


THIS MOVIE IS INCREDIBLE. Oh my goodness. I heard all my friends talking about it, so as soon as I got the chance, I went and saw it. I was obviously not disappointed.

It has such a weird plot, weird in a good way. It?s interesting, original, genius. The whole time I was thinking, ?Wow, what mastermind conceived this??? And when I saw it was Christopher Nolan, he moved up a lot on my list of favorite directors. What a smart guy. Anyway, the plot is so complex I don?t even think I can give a one sentence summary. There were some points in the movie where I had no idea what was happening, but I attribute that to my sleep deprivation. You need to be pretty alert to catch this movie, you need to be smart. I was sitting in front of some people who did not fit this criteria and they were asking questions the whole time. Don?t be like that. Don?t be those people.

This is a movie where the beginning puzzles you completely. You have no idea who anyone is, what they?re doing, why they?re doing it, and then as the movie progresses, things just click in your head. I love that feeling, that ?ohhhhhhhhhhh!? feeling. It?s satisfying.

It was visually stunning, one of the most beautiful movies I have ever seen. There?s a large portion of the movie where the characters are in a place with no gravity, and it was awe-inspiring. It is definitely one of my favorite scenes of all time. The effects that were done digitally, the CGI, were great. I usually can?t stand them because they look so obviously fake, but that?s not how this movie was. The CGI was actually very beautiful. This movie also had slow motion, which I love. Not overdone, perfect.

The characters were great. There was nobody I hated or wished would die. Leonarda DiCaprio was excellent, as he was in Shutter Island. When I saw Ellen Page in the commercials, I thought that was peculiar casting, but I actually enjoyed her character and how she portrayed her. The cast was excellent.

Definitely, definitely, see this movie! Probably twice. You will not be disappointed. Buy it when you get the chance! Heads up, the ending will make you stop breathing, will make you clench your fists so tight that you have indentations in your flesh from your fingernails. Interpret it your own way. That?s really all you can do.

Black Snake Moan

I believe this movie is excellent. I have nothing to complain about. The characters are so well established that they feel real. I felt like I truly understood them although I in no way could relate to them (not a complaint, of course. They?re just incredibly different than I am), which shows great character development.

The actors were great. I can?t think of one I had a problem with. Samuel L. Jackson was great in his character, really convincing. I haven?t seen many films with Christina Ricci, but now I want to. She was terrific. I couldn?t even imagine playing the role she did. Incredible! Justin Timberlake?well, I was kind of skeptical about him, as I am with all music to actor crossovers, but I wasn?t disappointed. He seemed really sincere. I felt his plight. I felt his love.

The romance of the movie was perfect. Not too much, not too little, and best of all, not cheesy disgusting. It was actually a treat to watch the relationships develop. I laughed a lot in this movie, I definitely enjoy the sense of humor this film has. The drama was certainly felt. I knew when it was a serious time, and when it was, I could pay attention. It was not overdone. I love movies that have slow motion occasionally, and this one did. It was executed perfectly, made me get into scenes more without messing up the flow. The music of the soundtrack is mainly Blues. It enhances the Southern feel of the movie and sets the tone very well.

The plot was interesting. It doesn?t remind me of any other film I?ve seen, and I love that. It?s original. It?s basically a bitter, pained, religious man trying to help a beaten nymphomaniac he found on the road outside his house. I try to keep to a one sentence plot description because I don?t want to give too much away.

So yeah, I definitely recommend this movie for a watch. I own it, and I?m proud to. It?s a great movie.

Despicable Me

This movie is excellent. It's funny, it's original, it's cute, it kept my attention the whole time. I never thought to myself "Wow, this a kid's movie and I feel stupid for being here." Hah. I had a really great time going to see this movie. I was really excited that it kept the attention of the kids around me (although there weren't very many, ironically), because usually in kid's movies I'm distracted by their little voices talking through their boredom. I could tell everyone in the theater loved it.

The characters were great. Their personalities were well-established. The settings were brilliant, creative and eccentric as every one should be in a child's movie. I would love to live where they live in this movie. The minions are adorable and hilarious. Pretty much everything they did made me laugh. The actors doing the voices are great! Usually I try to figure out who does what voice in animated movies, but I was so absorbed in this story that I didn't even care. The music was really great. It set a certain tone to the movie that I hadn't experienced before in another animated film. I would buy the soundtrack if I wasn't broke. :P

This is an honest review and has nothing to do with the fact that I am incredibly stoked to own a cool new pair of 3D glasses, although it did make me really happy. Do yourself a favor and keep in mind that this is a movie mainly directed toward a child's taste. You will enjoy the movie sooo much more if you don't analyze the possibility of certain things in the film actually being able to exist. Go to this movie and pretend you're a kid again. :) I didn't pay for my ticket but if I had to, I would not have regretted it.