Reviews

This film is simply brilliant. Absolutely original, a love

story/romantic comedy with not one cliché'. Every moment is so

new that it makes you wonder how someone came up with something so original in a time when movies are just variations on

the same over-used formula.

Everything is in the details and this film proves it. This movie is so

rich in detail and character that it doesn't need to beg to be

watched more than once, it charms you into wanting to seeing it

again.

I'm not a fan of the romantic comedy genre in general and yet there

isn't a single moment in this film I didn't like.

I think the director/co-writer has been working his way up to

something like this. It seems to be a completely undiluted vision. I only hope he has more to give us, because this one is going to

be hard to top.

It's no surprise that the Academy once again didn't have a clue

when they not only didn't nominate this for the main best picture

category but it didn't even win best foreign film. Why was Crouching tiger Hidden Dragon nominated the year

before in the main best picture category and not this in 2001?

I love dark depressing films and yet this film is so great that it

makes its way into my list of favorites. it is the epitome of a feel

good movie, without being cheap or sugary. Pure fun.

Exactly what movies should do. It makes you think. It makes you

happy. It makes you forget your troubles for two hours and renews

your faith (temporarily) in humanity. What more could you ask for?

Well maybe accurate subtitles. The just released DVD has fairly inaccurate subtitles. I counted a

least five mistakes in the English subtitles. For example, Amelie

phones Nino and tells him to turn to page 56 (or something to the

effect) but the subtitle reads "turn to Page St" What the hell does that mean? Another is there are numerous references to Lady Diana's death. The grocer is talking about the alcohol level in the driver of her car

when it crashed. However the subtitles read. "The trucker had an

alcohol level of ..." Now we have no idea that they are talking about Diana's chauffeur,

you can clearly hear the grocer saying chauffeur. Chauffeur is not

trucker in English. The meaning of that line is lost. unless you

know a little French. Unfortunately, my French is not good enough

to pick out all the other possible mistranslations. It's very

disheartening to suspect you might be missing more because

some dumb ass translator wasn't doing their job right. French is

an easy language to translate into English. It's not like Japanese

or Russian. So why the errors?

Who knows. Maybe so they can re-release a better version later

and make everyone buy it again.

Anyways. great film. Still worth buying on DVD.

How could such an accomplished screenwriter, a man who wrote such classics as Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, etc. be so singularly responsible for such an aggravatingly awful movie?

I don't think anyone will know. Perhaps the joke is on all of us and Paul Schrader is laughing at our reactions. Maybe he set out to make the worst movie he possibly could and in that it is a triumph.

This movie is offensively bad. It will make you mad. A waste of talent, money, time, effort and thought on everyone's part.

There is so much wrong with the Grinch...but primarily it's just boring and unnecessary and that is the main feeling that kept coming up while I was sitting in the theater, watching this expensive experiment, waiting for it to find a point or direction. Did it want to be funny? Yes, most certainly so. Was it? It was about as funny as it looks, which is to say...not very funny...unless Jim Carrey squeezing everything he can out of a seriously not funny script...is funny. Whose brilliant idea was it to use a script penned by a team whose last effort yielded the disaster that is Wild Wild West? Come on. If you start with a bad script, which this definitely is, when do you ever get good movie? Seems like they purposely didn't write any jokes, figuring Jim Carrey would just improvise....It doesn't work well...actually not at all. One or two laughs...okay maybe three or four...But they aren't big ones.

Howard stretches and stretches and stretches the story out....like it needed to be 1 hour 45 min. How about 1 hour 15...it could of been a nice short well paced movie and that was what you were hoping for the whole time.

Unfortunately, the movie suffers the most from being just plain boring....everything good is buried under bad filler. The best parts are when it takes literally from the book...with Anthony Hopkins's narration and Jim Carrey's responses...although they never use it to it's full potential and it's too little too late. Another problem is the Whos...they're just obnoxious...you want the Grinch to ruin it for them. You want him to eat a couple maybe! You want someone to smack them in their ignorant and not so wholesome heads! Also there is this stupid subplot about what is Christmas...is it commercialism?...Hypocritical trash coming from a movie who has more tie-ins than most movies this year. Other questions that come up while watching (not after), which is a really bad sign:

Why is the Grinch talking like that?

Why is the Grinch manic?

Why isn't the dog funnier?

Why isn't the Grinch funnier?

Why do the whos look like that?

Why are they so annoying?

Why does it look like they stole the Flinstones' set?

Why is my foot itching?

Am I still watching this?

Is it over?

I wonder how much this cost?

Why is Molly Shannon in this?

Why isn't she funny?

Why oh why did they do this?

Really so many other directions could of been taken and they chose no real direction at all. They touched on some. They teased you a bit but never followed any good ideas through. Well maybe half-ass spastic zannyness...they followed that through in spades, which was not what Dr. Suess was ever about. Suess seemed to be about dignified fantasy based on very real morals. Not Jim Carrey playing a bipolar fur ball, in Universal backlot heaven. Which leads to production design. The production design teeters between really good and god-awful. Whoville being a backlot seems to take most of the blame.

The only winner here is Rick Baker's makeup...which sometimes is downright scary...it carries the movie. Ron Howard really needs to find his own personality. He is always imitating someone else. First Spielberg with Backdraft, then Cameron with Apollo, and now Burton with this. Should of left it alone. A story you all know and loved done perfectly as a cartoon which is probably why you'll spend the whole time picturing the cartoon and that great curly Chuck Jones smile that they gave the Grinch and of course the unforgetable voice of Karloff.

Stop messing with stories we all love. Try thinking up something more original. If you want to pay tribute or homage to the stories you love, follow Burton's cue with Nightmare Before Christmas. A very original tribute to the stop-motion holiday specials...and look he didn't have to ruin a classic did he.

Although Burton himself seems to be losing track of this idea. Sleepy Hollow... and now Planet of the Apes.

I'm sure most people will hate this movie. Most people in the theater were grumbling on their way out.

However, I thought it was refreshingly understated and intelligent. Which given it's subject matter makes it near brilliant. It's about super heroes and comic books but it's far too slow and subtle to be a comic-book movie, yet it is laid out like one and everything is a reference to a living comic book.

It really is a unique movie. It takes the exact opposite approach to the subject matter and the core of the plot than you would expect and in result a bizarre kinetic energy is created. It flips on itself back and forth, causing infinite reflection.

It has some faults but its merits far outweigh any shortcomings.

The photography sometimes is a little heavy handed. The color scheme as a plot device, as in the Sixth Sense is a bit obvious but still cool.

Some may argue the ending leaves a lot to desired, but I think that was the point and fits perfectly with the theme of comic books.

I recommend it only if you are willing to be patient, open-minded, and you understand the comic book genre (which most people do).

Definitely not as overt as the Sixth Sense. It is much more understated. Where as the subtleties in Sixth Sense made it great. This is all about subtlety.

I'm pleased this wasn't just another Sixth Sense. I applaud the writer/director/producer's brave effort. Sure he could of done the same thing again, but he didn't and the movie will probably been seen as a failure because of it.

Not bad. Had some good potential and looks great for a shoestring budget (or so they claim).

However, the dialogue is awful. Is it supposed to be? Kind of but it is delivered awfully. If the actor's were better then they could pull off the "bad " lines. Should of studied the master Bruce Campbell.

The kid is painfully obnoxious. Is he supposed to be? Maybe, but bad acting couldn't pull that concept off.

The story line is great. They do go in and out of abandoning it or rather not paying as much attention to it as they should.

A lot of stuff doesn't make sense plot wise and the movie does drag.

However it's a student film and it looks very impressive so some slack must be cut.

One thing would of helped. No dialogue. Nothing anyone says in this movie helps the plot or is interesting or even funny. IN fact the movie can be completely understood without dialogue. Too bad us Americans probably wouldn't be able to deal with a movie without dialogue...Gasp.

All in all some great ideas with some great production values and some shaky execution.

This movie is a big giant mess of "who cares". The characters have nothing likeable about them. Nothing is new. Nothing original. Nothing Surprising. Conversations went on forever about nothing. You wished everyone would get shot. You know a movie is bad when you squirm in your seat waiting for it to end and finding yourself groaning every time another conversation seems to be lumbering on screen.

It was a completely worthless movie.

I kept waiting for the "TNT" station identification or something.

Not even a good video rental.

Just shows that Usual Suspects was mostly Bryan Singer's talent and not Mcquarrie's.

I read somewhere that He wanted to do something different and all the exec's bugged him to do another crime/drama.

He should of stuck with his convictions because this sucks.

Or maybe this is a joke on them. He made a bad movie to shut them up.

Avoid this movie. Nothing worthwhile. Nothing. The Butch Cassidy references are the nails on this movie's coffin. To allude to such a superior film just shows how bad this one is.

This has got to be the worst movie ever.

Three sequels that have taken a good premise and wrung all the life out of it.

This is the final embarrassment that is Highlander.

The first movie was great. I was one of the few people that saw it in the theatre. Expecting nothing and getting something very maverick and original.

The sequels all sucked. This one is the icing on that rotten bile filled cake.

The only purpose this movie will serve is for you and your friends to sit around and make fun of.

I wish I had those two hours back. I could of been doing so many more exciting things like clipping my toenails.

Every once and a while someone feels the need to do an homage to Hitchcock. All they end up doing is proving he was the master and imitations can't come close.

But in all fairness this isn't a straight forward Hitch rip off. This is trying to be Sixth Sense as well. Not that they deserve any credit for this because in making it try to be these two things they ruined the movie. Or rather ruined its potential. Instead of a great mystery thriller with some authentic chills. We are left with a slow and obvious thriller with minor chills. The only scares come from those stupid "no one there-then suddenly standing right behind" kind of scares. Which is the absolutely cheapest kind of scare.

Some of the ideas in the end were good. But it was too little too late. And they make the rest of the movie seem unnecessary. Of course Zemeckis has to bring out the CGI in the end. Completely not needed CGI. Waste of millions of dollars in effects. The music quite literally is the b****rd child of North by Northwest and Psycho.

They just should of decided what the film was going to be...Hitchcock homage...or Sixth Sense rip-off. It didn't do either very well.

Bottom line. A little boring. Not very original. Very forgettable. The star power keeps it going.

Polanski spends all of it's time being an almost B-Genre horror suspense movie then decides to try tag on a philosophical tinge at the end with the ambiguous ending.

The ending really is pitiful. I have seen movies that leave things up to the viewer, that are based on individual interpretation but this is just weak.

The whole movie is a rather simple mystery but you go along because you expect something else. You wait for it to get complicated or throw you a new twist. But it doesn't. You know everything five minutes before it happens.

The performances and the beautiful photography keep it going...barely.

But the movie is obvious and just plain adolescent. It doesn't explore any kind of religious ideas. It doesn't offer anything scary and it sure doesn't give you anything new as a suspense film.

It only offers an interesting lead character and that's it.

You wait and you wait for an explanation of why everything is so simple and obvious. It never comes.

And the more you think about the ending the more it seems like the screenplay was written by two high school kids. Or worse two grade schoolers.

Could of been good. Should of been good.

Polanski has done some great films. And some really bad ones. ("Pirates" anyone?) This is probably his laziest film.

Why on earth did everyone involved agree to do this after reading the abysmal story is just as puzzling as the ending.

Oh yeah and Dubois did some horrible CGI work on this. I've seen better special effects on Star Trek.

If the fake backgrounds while driving were an homage to Hitchcock then he should of done them with a bad bluescreen instead of expensive CGI.

Ugh...what a waste. Hopefully someone will see all theses bad reviews and save themselves two hours and watch something else.

You were warned.

This is without a doubt Mel Gibson's finest offering. He will never direct or act in anything better. Which is a shame. Since I'm sure he'll be in a lot more movies. And each one seems to be another step down.

At least he will always have this.

Braveheart is perfect in almost every way. There is just so much passion put into this movie that you cannot help being caught up in it. The story is never boring. The characters are all fleshed out nicely. The romance is believable and touching. The music is moving. Great action pieces.

There isn't much you can say about this movie other than it's perfect.

Maybe it's better if Gibson doesn't direct anything else. Maybe he realized that this was as good as he gets.

Costner hasn't yet learned that lesson I think.

I'm sorry you can't make a movie this close to another movie and not have them compared. I first want to say that this is a pretty good movie. However, it has major flaws and just for being so similar to such a classic and beloved movie it has to be extra good in all areas...and it's not.

One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest is better for the following reasons: Jack Nicholson in his prime. (There is nothing better than Jack back when he cared about acting) Milos Forman-superior director. Manigold- heavy handed. More dramatic story. Violent loser gets thrown in Asylum. Triumph of the spirit? Girl Interrupted- Lazy upperclass girl gets pushed into a tame mental health resort. Triumph of psychotherapy?

So basically it is of course a lesser movie. Watch Cuckoo's Nest again and you'll see why.

Angelie Jolie is good but you don't like her. If that was the point then fine. However, I also didn't like Whine-ona Ryder. So who is left to like? I gotta like someone. Cause why watch a movie about unlikeable people. I liked the Cabbie. I like some of the other resort guests. Whoopie Goldberg was kinda good. Soooooooo. Not enough. Too much lazy girl angst.

Still a pretty good movie.

Plot? Acting? Direction? Writing? Who cares as long as sexy Leo is shirtless. That alone probably sold this movie. Sad, but true. The fact that Mathew Perry's younger better looking lost brother takes off his shirt is enough to get a studio to waste millions of dollars.

Yeah sure Leo can act. But not here. Here he is playing himself. A big dull jerk. He should stop partying and get back to sharpening those acting chops.

The movie: It blows. It starts out good. But lots of movies start out good. It's easy to start a movie in the right direction. But this one beaches itself early and sits there flopping like a dying fish for the rest of the movie.

Do we want to be Fight Club? Lord of the Flies? Apocolypse Now? Midnight Express? What do we want to be cause we sure aren't original. The premise is too old to be original so it would of been better to pick an angle and go all the way with it.

If you want to go do the paradise turns to hell thing then do it. Don't stop halfway and decide to throw in a whole bunch of other junk.

Danny Boyle is a good director, I like most all of his other stuff. I even like A Life Less Ordinary. Which leads me to believe most of it can be blamed on Leo. Once Leo is involved you got unneeded clout and pressure. Will it be something the 14 girls can watch? Will they like it? Will they see it over and over? Danny Boyle and Leo seem to be such and odd pair. Leo used to be Danny Boyle material until Titanic (What's Eating gilbert Grape, Basketball Diaries). Then he was big studio property. He's no longer edgy just cocky.

Anyways. I wonder if this would of been better with Ewan Macgregor in the lead. Probably since Ewan is infinitely more likeable. There were some parts I liked. Like him killing the shark. Only because I hate sharks and I would love to be able to kill one if I was attacked. The music is good. The scenery is good but not incredible enough to spawn that type of devotion the characters have towards it.

Major problem was nobody was likeable. Except the French Guy. The only one who was a decent human being. The rest were arrogant obnoxious selfish cruel hipsters hiding from their yuppy fates.

Yet another reminder we are all flawed and bad people.

My response to this annoying trend in films: I watch movies to escape. I don't need to be reminded that people suck. I know they suck. Show me idealized heroes. So me people with character, integrity. So me tragedies. But make the hero have at least one really good quality please. These qualities don't need to be limited to Disney oversimplified portrayals.

This is a terrible review. It's all over the place.

Kinda like the movie.

Skip this movie unless you're a 14 year old girl (who probabaly has already seen it) Rent Lord of the Flies instead. Either version; the old B+W is better though.

Unlike Dean Devlin and Roland Emerich (who are coincidently making a film about spiders;big spiders) Frank Marshal and Kathleen Kennedy are the authorized Spielberg rip-off, having spent many years as producers of Spielberg productions. Unfortunately, they decided to try doing movies on their own and this is the silly result.

Where as Spielberg movies are high concept films done with a lot of flash and style. The Marshal Kennedy films are low concept with some flash and borrowed, left-over style. Film making by the book only. Arachnophobia is far better than Congo; their next effort but that isn't saying much. The movie is bland and incredibly forgettable. Why? Not much happens. You can get all the subtlety and nuances from this one line description:

Big Amazonian spider hitches a ride to small town U.S.A and gives birth to infestation of killer spiders.

That's what happens. That's all.

No attempt to add any complexities. Or rather there are sad attempts that fail miserably and end up feeling like no attempt at all. Nothing is funny here. It could of been and should of been. All this plays on is the basic fears of spiders. Big whoop. If your scared of spiders you won't wanna watch this. So who is this movie for? People who aren't scared of spiders? If so there is little to keep us interested. There is a lot of talk from the Spider expert telling how scary it is. But who cares. It's a bunch of spiders. Granted a whole lot of them. Whoooooooooooo cares. The giant infestation of insect movies were better in the seventies. That's where they should stay. Look out moths! Look out worms! Look out roaches!

Just doesn't sound scary.

Shaft is just pure fun. Nothing serious. Nothing profound. Just a fun,violent movie where the hero prevails and the bad guys get theirs. What carries this whole movie is Samuel Jackson. He is having so much fun being Shaft that you can't resist going along with him.

Some good action and some great lines from Shaft.

Jeffery Wright is great.

Christain Bale is perfectly despicable. He makes your skin crawl he's so obnoxious.

A couple faults-The look of the film sometimes changes and looks low budget. But it doesn't detract too much from the overall experience. Second Busta Rhymes is kind of annoying. I wanted him to be good. I expected him to be good. But he wasn't. He kept reverting to an almost Peter Lorre sidekick impression, instead of just being himself.

Still great summer fun. Go for the opening credits alone and to see Samuel Jackson saying "It's my duty to please the booty"

I went in expecting a bad movie. I was surprised. It was actually good. Not great. But it had this feeling of not wanting to be great. Or at least not trying to be great, just fun and tightly done. Which it was. The movie is really focused on Wolverine, which is good; I guess they recognized that Wolverine is most people's favorite X-Man. Rogue would be the second banana I guess. She doesn't get to do much but she is the key everyone is after.

Some very well-done super hero fight scenes. The strong point of the movie. They are really handled well. Some good special effects. Although they don't make a movie they are used well here.

The story trucks along at a brisk pace. A little too brisk in some points. But you are never left too long to think about how silly it all is.

Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen are great together. Hugh Jackman carries the movie.

It's greatest fault is it feels like it has been over-edited. It is very streamlined and it leaves with the feeling that they could have taken another half an hour and it would of been great.

This was a nice attempt at something but it is too pretentious and boring to rise above it's low budget trappings. The use of virtual sets almost works but at some points it fails miserably. They made good use of the small budget I guess. I just wish the story and most of the acting was better. There are a lot of parts where you see what they were aiming for and it would of been great if they actually hit those marks but they don't. Confusing and unbelievable story. Bad DVD transfer too. It doesn't take much for me to watch a movie in one sitting. This I had to shut off. It was too boring. I can do slow movies. But just make them appealing in some aspect. Visually, story-wise, acting, etc. This was lacking in all departments so it never added up to an engrossing experience. Maybe the film maker's next attempt will be better.

This is one of my favorite movies and my favorite Luc Besson film.

Fifth Element is really good but it has some major flaws (Namely Chris Tucker's character), Big Blue is beautiful but Rosanna Arquette is obnoxious and there isn't much to it, La Femme Nikita is great but it is really hard to like the main character, The Messenger is just a bad movie (All because of Milla Jovovich's awful performance), Subway was a little too abstract to be great, I haven't seen Le Dernier Combat (Although I would really like to get a copy of it. Hopefully with the release of Big Blue, Subway and the uncut version of Leon it will be possible to see it soon).

Professional- It takes multiple viewings to really appreciate it's subtleties, which most people would deny it has. But once you get past the explosive action, which apon multiple viewings you realize there really isn't much action you'll see that it is mostly about the relationship between Leon and Matilda.

And this is where the subtleties come into play. So I suggest watching it a few more times to appreciate just how well-crafted and well-played these characters are.

Jean Reno is perfect in this film and Natalie Portman is so good it's scary. (Considering she's so young)

Gary Oldman is of course Gary Oldman. He's ferociously great as the over the top crooked cop.

Danny Aiello is good as Leon's sort of slimey boss.

Just a great original story, great acting, and great action.

And it doesn't have the cheesey happy ending that pollutes most movies now.

It's not the best movie in the world but for the reasons above and some other unknown reasons it has become one of my favorites. I'm waiting in great anticipation and slight frustration for the un-cut DVD out in August. Great anticipation: the extra 24 minutes. Frustration: I already own the US version on DVD and I don't like having to buy another. They do this on purpose and I think it's really shady of them to not tell you that another version is coming out when they release the original. Although this did come out on DVD a while ago and they probably didn't know they would release another version.

But judging by how the uncut version is a best-seller already and isn't coming out till August 15th. I would say I'm not the only one who felt the bite on this one.

I saw this during the eighties when it originally came out and thought it was terrific and scary. However, this movie does not hold up at all. It's not just the technological advancements in special effects that makes this movie so dated, after all movies like "The Thing" and "The Exorcist" came out before this. A scary movie is scary no matter when it came out.

This movie is just silly. The president's fear of nuclear war is treated so brazenly that it doesn't hold up now that the Day After decade is over. The story is so brisk in the extreme nothing is giving time to develop. Only the ideas are presented and not explored. Quaid and Sydow are good but even they can't save this movie. The dialog is very stilted at parts. Christopher Plummer is just silly, not menacing. Tommy Ray isn't scary any more. The snake man looks so rubbery and stupid that I can't believe I was ever scared of it in the first place. They did a terrible job with it. The transformation effects are now laughable. They didn't have to be. Kate Capshaw is awful (she always was; maybe that's one of the reasons you don't see her in much anymore now that she is married to Spielberg).

This is just not that strong a movie and time has not been kind to it. I thought it was great when I was 10 but it just isn't scary or fun. Awful music by Maurice Jarre. Not because it is an electronic eighties keyboard soundtrack like Jerry Goldsmith's Runaway. No this is just bad and it sounds bad on this DVD. No themes develop and even the chase music is boring. Very weak. Similar genre movies from the eighties that hold up and you might want to check out instead: Twilight Zone the Movie, Gremlins, Poltergeist, Brainstorm, Fright Night.

DVD-This DVD is also not very good either. The picture quality is very crisp most of the time. There is some wavering in some scenes. The special effects unfortunately don't benefit from all that detail in picture quality. The worst part is the sound. It comes in DTS and Dolby Digital. It is hardly 5.1 like the box advertises. Occasionally you get some weak directional effects. But for I would say 80% of the movie everything is in the center speaker.

The best thing about this DVD is the menus. They were a pleasant surprise. The movie and this DVD were not.

Perfect Storm is pretty good. Very intense but ultimately pointless.

To clarify: All movies are pointless but this movie leaves you with the feeling of why did the film makers feel the need to tell you about this story. It's epic sized movie but there is no epic theme. No triumph of the will, triumph of the spirit, no against all odds and no point. So they dies at sea. Big whoop. There have been thousands and thousands of men who died at sea; on a boat; because of storms. Wow. Big deal.

What's ridiculous about this one was the fact that no one survived, so they have no idea what really happened on the boat. If you are gonna be making half the movie up. Just make the whole thing up and make one of them survive. I mean, I'm all about unhappy endings. Cause most happy endings aren't justified and just tagged on. But this one was really screaming for at least one person to survive. To make that whole journey with them and then have them die, for what? Nothing. They didn't get the fish back and no one survived. Not for honor. Not for proving they were better fisherman. And it wasn't like they made it out to be one of those don't mess with nature movies. The captain was supposed to be some great captain, yet he failed.

So was it a simple tragedy story? Who cares. Saving Private Ryan was a tragedy; They all died for Private Ryan. Little bit of a point. Makes all the difference. I didn't sit through all that water for them all to die. Another thing that was incredibly heavy handed was that lame bit of voice over at the end by Mark Wahlberg. When he is talking to his girlfriend. And then they superimpose her over the waves. Cheeeeeeeeesey. Take a look at "Glory" at the very end when Mathew Broderick has to lead his men into certain death, he takes a moment to look out over the ocean. He doesn't say anything, but just the look conveys all the fear, anguish, and loneliness of what he has to do. Not some cheesey voice-over and superimposed girlfriend. Bad. Sledgehammer. Then again Wolfgang Peterson is a sledgehammer director.

Get Shorty humor wannabe. This movie is awful just for the simple reason that you can see what they are trying to do but it never quite gets there. It is almost funny. It is almost clever. It is almost good. It could even be almost great. But it never comes close to these things.

It takes about ten minutes for you to figure out whats going on. Then the rest of the movie is waiting for it to happen. Waiting in boredom. Waiting in vain.

Oliver Platt is the best thing here and he still seems out of place.

Liam Neeson is embarrassingly bad. Sandra Bullock should be billed a cameo.

Awful. No wonder it was gone from the theaters in a flash.

Another great performance by Cusack who has perfected roles like this. The writing is excellent and the rest of the cast is perfect. Just a small great movie. I wish there were more like this. I enjoyed it thoroughly. If you are a Cusack fan you'll love this.

I had no expectations going into this. I was very pleasantly surprised. Just a very well-done simple movie. Cusack and Thorton are really good. Nothing too ground-breaking. Subtle and original. Characters are nicely developed. Worth a rent.

Okay I went into this thinking it was going to be some British Tarantino rip-off, which it basically is. However, it is so much fun and there are so many twists and turns that you don't care. The characters are all well written, believable, and likeable. You forget the Tarantino similarities very quickly and it soon surpasses any comparisons and becomes it's own movie. Very well done. Great tongue in cheek feel. Never takes itself too seriously. The writer/director is definitely someone to keep and eye on.

This movie rocks; This movie is great; The best movie of the decade- All of which I would be saying if I had an IQ of three and actually liked getting kicked in the head with a steel toed boot.

Nothing about this movie is good. Well the special effects were okay, but everything else is so offensively bad that the chance of the effects saving this movie is about as plausible as the plot.

I'm sorry but Michael Bay is the anti-christ of cinema. I would have rather watched "Batman and Robin" twice than sit through 30 minutes of this piece of junk.

You know the scene in Clockwork Orange where they re-educate Alex with drugs, music and those ultra-violent visuals. Well this movie works just as well. I still feel ill thinking about it.

It's like that annoying drunk guy at a bar who smells and is yelling bad jokes in your face. The one you would give anything for just for him to shut up, but you can't leave cause you want to see his butt thrown out of the bar, which is bound to happen at any point.

This is cinema for the lowest common denominator.

And of course you have morons defending it by saying it's not trying to be anything but entertainment; lighten up; this isn't a merchant ivory pic; it's just $8 worth of fun, etc.

Great I'm all for simple mindless fun. But you still need plausibility and story and acting so you can believe. If you don't care about the characters then what is the use of showing me one of them sacrificing himself for another. If it had any of these things (even slightly), then it would of be fun.

This movie is like some child telling you some improvised story with action figures: "And then the Tonka truck guys go into space...and then they land on the ass-teroid...and then they drive around it and almost float away...and they have to put a bomb in a hole..wait wait I forgot the part about the drills...they have these big drills...and then the guy cries...and then the bomb goes booooooooosh. And he saves the world. And the guy kisses the girl whose daddy cried."

I'm just wondering how much they paid the Criterion Collection company to make a special addition DVD of this heaping pile of junk.