Reviews

As most movies The Witches fails to be better than the book on which it is based.

In second grade my teacher read my class Roald Dahl's "James and the Giant Peach"- we all were charmed by it and like most of my class, I too went out to the nearest book stores and libraries to read the other books of Roald Dahl. The Witches is one of my favorites of his works, although I haven't read it for quite a while. As for the movie. The casting is so-so. Anjelica Huston, though is superb as the Grand High Witch. Not really as how I imagined the Grand High Witch when I first read the book, but nevertheless she pulls it off very well. The effects were brilliant. the mice were realistic, as were the transformations and the 'real' face of The Grand High Witch. The biggest disappointmant though was the ending. I felt that the books ending was much more fitting. The ending here was simply the "happily ever after" type ending, but then again keep in mind it's a children's movie. But like Roald Dahl said "there's no such thing as a good witch". The Witches is an enjoyable movie, though and parents won't mind watching it with their children, because let's face it: books like The BFG, The Witches and James and the Giant Peach may all say ages 8-12 on the back but they can be enjoyed by anyone of any age.

It's a real shame because "Private Benjamin" had good potential, and everyone involved meant well but...

Well, I did laugh- the scenes where Goldie is in basic training in the military are funny, amusing and fun but the moment basic training ends and Goldie goes to France, it becomes long and boring with not a single laugh to offer. The last half an hour or so were completely pointless. The writers should have crossed out this awful romance plot and just continued with the fun humor- the movie should have been about Goldie in the military and that would have been fun- what this movie should have been- pure fun. The ending just leaves a bad impression, which is a shame since Goldie (who also took the part of executive producer) meant very well. It seems this is only the first draft. At fault are the writers, who produced many fun moments and then just lost all ideas.

As I was flicking through channels one night I just caught the beginning of a film. It was probably the names of Swoozie Kurtz and Meat Loaf that made me go 'what the heck, I'll watch'. The acting is not superb, but the film doesn't demand great acting. The script isn't brilliant, but the film doesn't demand a great script. Taj Mahal (an interesting name) is the highlight as latenight radio host Dix Mayal. A few gory scenes but interesting to see how the night progresses.

I was about to go to sleep while I flicked through the channels one last time and happened to catch the beginning of "The Long Kiss Goodnight"- perhaps I missed the first minute or two. But I remembered I had marked the movie to watch and thought what the heck- I'll watch. I can honestly say that I really enjoyed those two hours. The scene with the truck was definitely fun, and at the same time terrifying (as you know the purpose of the truck and who's in it, I won't spoil it for anyone). The humor was great too, and the acting of the four leads (Davis, Jackson, Zima and Bierko) was quite enjoyable- as is this entire film.

I can take Beverly Hills 90210. I can watch Dawson's Creek if I'm bored. Heck, I can even stand Melrose Place. But Grosse Pointe is truly one of the most pathetic shows I have seen. Look at the cast- let's see: you've got the pretty, the beautiful, the handsome, the cute, the very pretty. Hmmm? It is funny how teenagers think these people are good actors. Yes, yes- I once too adored all these shows. I once too thought the cast of Buffy were brilliant actors. Luckily I grew out of that stage. All these reviewers will too, eventually. Grosse Pointe is your typical teenage TV show, with a cast of noneother but pretty people. Well, that's what the majority of teen audiences are after. I personally cannot stand this teen culture.

"December" started off pretty well, but the acting seemed to be too soapie and fake. But somehow the second half was just so much more beautiful. By the second half you're already in the movie and know the characters, but the acting just got so much better. The best acting came from Wil Wheaton, though still not his "Stand by Me" standards, which I doubt as an adult he will be able to accomplish. Jason London (not to be confused with his twin Jeremy- known from "Party of Five") also gave one of the best performances in the film. He was quiet and knew his character. But Brian Krause (you might know him as Leo from "Charmed") was just a tad on the soap side. I found it interesting how the movie progressed. At first only Tim wants to enlist, then others for their own reasons decide as well. And I was happy with the way it ended- not to sappy, not to expected. Kind of "happy ending" but you know that tragedy or loneliness can come to these people's lives. It was interesting to see how each boy debated whether to go, the conversations, the outcomes. It was all very real and believable.

OH MY GOD!!! My 5-year-old-sister and 10-year-old-brother rented this from the DVD place. I think I like Jack the Ripper and Ted Bundy more than the creators of this movie, if you can call it that. I didn't watch it, if I did I probably would have committed suicide sometime during the first ten minutes but it was playing on the background and I got to see a few minutes or so. Talk about bad! The plot of this movie was a bunch of kids saving the world from a computer-virus-mon, or whatever. The animation- I have no idea how people call it great. Basically one big constant giant headache. At least there's something about Pokemon, that I dunno- it's cuter. 'Course it's still a load of trash too. All this Japanese mon-ending stuff is generated towards one cause and one cause only--- money, money, money.

Parents beware!!! If it ends with 'mon' it's gonna end with aspirin pills and a psychiatrist.

For me, it's hard to rate movies with a perfect 10. I don't think there ever was a movie that was 100 percent perfect with no flaws what-so-ever, but few come close and "Waking Ned" is one of them. It's a change from all the Hollywood Shmollywood c**p out there. You can tell it's no big budget Blockbuster movie with trillions of dollars wasted on special effects. No pointless sex, no DiCaprio-Sarah-Michelle look-a-likes cast for their looks, and not every other word is the F word. It's a sweet charming film which I doubt America could ever make.

You can tell you're in for a good movie already from the beginning, which really got me laughing. I'm not going to go on and on about the plot because I'm sure you know it by now. The idea is magnificent, the humour is Irish-British and very funny, a witty script, witty dialogues, witty twists. But most of all- real characters and magnificent acting. Not just the brilliant main characters, the whole lot of Tully Moore It's amazing, it was like watching real people. It was so great that time just flew by and I was so upset that it was going to end. I wanted more. And when I went into Ian Bannen's filmography and saw that he had passed away it got to me a bit.

"Waking Ned" is a touching charming brilliant funny well-written well-acted movie. Worth a rent from the video store and even worth taping if it comes on TV. Movies likes this are hard to come by.

I don't think "Who's Line" can be compared with "Seinfeld" or "Friends", they're all great comedies... but different. "Who's Line" is a fresh improv-comedy and it's hilarious. I've never seen the British version so I can't compare (although I have seen the completely moronic and idiotic Israeli version). Wayne Brady is truly a one-man act. I love it when he sings to some girl from the audience (forgive me for not remembering the name of the game. Brad Sherwood isn't bad at this game either). Ryan Stiles and Colin Mochrie are definitely a duo. It's amazing how funny they can be together. Then of course there are some other recurring contestants like Brad Sherwood, Greg Proops and Chip Esten. The women don't seem to be as successful on this show as the guys, although I do like Karen Maruyama. People, I see mentioned Josie Lawrence but even if I have seen her on the show I'm afraid I don't remember her. Laura Hall (on the keyboards, I believe) is always an upbeaty person and I really like her. In Israel we're behind on every possible television show so I still haven't seen any episodes with Robin Williams but I'm looking forward to (even though ever since he complained about his salary on 'Aladdin' I think less of him). I like Props, Hoe-down... well I can't remember the names of all the games but "Who's Line" is very well done and very entertaining and I don't think people understand just how hard it is to stand in front of a live audience plus millions of viewers at home and try to make up something funny and most the people on this show do a great job at it.

"Histeria!" has both it's share of funny moments and it's share of um... less funny moments. I do like it's parody of history and how it makes fun of it. But I do think that it's audience is not that that it's intended for. Adults will understand the jokes much more than children. I especially like The Oldest Woman in the World. Cute show.

...just like the person before me said: this show has sophisticated humor. I mean South Park, come on. How many times can you laugh at "Oh My God they killed Kenny!". South Park is ok. But Bob and Margaret is way way better and much funnier. Of course I don't expect you yanks to understand it. British humor is way different than American humor. This show is full of sarcasm and wit. Realistic characters. It's a great social parody and it doesn't need potty humor to get laughs. I laugh much harder watching Bob and Margaret than South Park. The animation and humor is brilliantly thought out... I personally think it would be a crime to take this off the air. It is one of the few animated shows made for adults that has class.

How people can call this movie 'horrible' or rate it with 1 star is really beyond me. If ever a movie has captured the cruelty and inhumanity of the holocaust this is it. Horrifying scenes such as a woman being shot to death for construction mistakes that weren't her fault, a man taken out to be killed but the gun won't fire and has to hear the officer try to see what the problem is so that he can shoot. And so many many more scenes that will stay in your mind for a long long time.

I didn't cry in this movie. I haven't cried in a movie since I was a kid. But this movie had a huge impact on me that when I went to sleep the night I saw this movie the images kept rolling in my mind (quite like the impact the botched execution scene in The Green Mile had on me).

I saw a review before me (a few pages back) which said that Israeli people are probably the most aware about the Holocaust. But I don't believe that's true. At least not to the younger generation. One of the huge mistake people make (including many many Israelis) is that the Holocaust was only against Jews. I personally find it a disgrace that the Holocaust Memorial Day in Israel and the famed Holocaust Museum in Israel "Yad Va Shem" refer only to the figure 6,000,000. When over 11,000,000 people fell victim to the crimes of the Nazis. But hey I'm rambling here. I think this movie definitely captures the torture that the Holocaust victims had to go through.

The movie is in black and white, with only one girl in a red dress who is shown trying to save her life from the Nazis by hiding under a bed. We later see this same girl's body taken to be burned- showing us that she obviously didn't survive. That got to me most. I don't think much of Steven Spielberg as a person. In fact I don't even think that much of him as a director but he did a magnificent job on this movie. I'm, sure that it will become one of the most well remembered movies of all time. People know the figures, the numbers, the years but to see it for yourself just makes you feel so happy that you were not a Jew/Gypsy/Black/Homosexual/Deformed/Handicaped/Left-Handed/Communist, etc. at that time. I think everyone should see this movie.

Although I think it is the most powerful movie ever made, and deserves the number one spot on the IMDb top 250 (over The Godfather, and The Shawshank Redemption) it's not a movie I would see multiple times. Perhaps once a year when it's shown on Holocaust Memorial Day, and even that can be to much. It's the type of movie that it's enough to see once and sticks in your mind. 10/10.

60 years after "Fantasia" comes the sequel (about time, eh?)- "Fantasia 2000". The first Fantasia was a bit s l o w, and this one is a bit fast. Perhaps if they ever attempt a third they'll be able to time it better. But still "Fantasia 2000" is quite a sensation (though I might be a tad exaggerating here). I definitely think it's more re-watchable than "Fantasia".

We start off with Beethoven's "Symphony No. 5". The animation for this scene was quite splendid, and right on time. Then we continue with Steve Martin- funny as always presenting Itzhak Perlman who then presents Respighi's "Pines of Rome". The animation really gives you a fresh and cool feeling, and it was, again, very well done- although one can get tired of it on multiple viewing. Next up Quincy Jones presents George Gershwin's "Rhapsody in Blue"- my favorite segment on "Fantasia 2000". Besides the wonderful music the animation is humorous and highly re-watchable. I've always loved New York and this segment is not only funny, but in a way quite dramatic too as it tells the story of a little girl who quite unfortunately has been separated from her parents but reunites with them when she's almost run-over by every car in NY, a out-of-work man, a man with work but who's true love is music, and a childlike rich man with a spoiled wife (who spoils her dog too much). Then Bette Midler shows us some of the animations that weren't chosen to be in "Fantasia 2000". As she said- here they are... there they go. And finally a success! And quite a success I might add. As she presents Dmitri Shostakovich's "Piano Concerto No. 2, Allegro, Opus 102". The animation for this segment shows the classic Hans Christian Anderson story of "The Steadfast Tin Soldier", which is a really beautiful segment, showing how, of course, our hero tries to fight a mean Jack-in-the-box who tries to hit on the girl who just isn't interested (not in the Jack-in-the-box anyway). And once this breathtaking segment is over James Earl Jones (who did the voice of Mufasa in Disney's highest grossing film "The Lion King") presents to us a segment based on the age old question "What happens if you give a yo-yo to a flock of flamingoes?"- a very very humoristic, yet short segment presented to the music of Camille Saint-Saens' "The Carnival of the Animals". Which is followed by comedy/magic team Penn and Teller who present the classic "Fantasia" segment- Paul Dukas' "The Sorcerer's Apprentice", and the part of the apprentice played by none-other than Mickey Mouse... a true classic and interesting segment. James Levine, conductor of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra then presents Edward Elgar's "Pomp and Circumstance", with the humorous spin-off of the Biblical story of Noah's Ark, or shall I say Donald's Ark... where Donald and Daisy seem to keep missing each other and think that the fate of their loved one is doomed (but hey, it's Disney so there will be a happy ending). And finally Angela Lansbury (who else but Mrs. Pots from "Beauty and the Beast") finishes our Fantasiastic journey with Igor Stravinsky's "The Firebird Suite" which shows the story of life, death and renewal... beautiful animation.

All in all this Fantasia is much different from the first, and like all modern Disney movies focuses a lot more on humor. But it's still a very enjoyable journey, which can be enjoyed for generations. Beautiful music and beautiful animation.

First of all Jennifer Love Hewitt can't act. If it weren't for her looks she'd be telling people about the weekly specials. And I don't even find her to be very attractive. She also doesn't seem to have a very intelligent mind- things were going great for her on Party of Five, but nooooo-- she has to have her own series.

And the other characters aren't that great too. Jonathan Schaech (does he expect us to pronounce that?!) is highly annoying. He's been in some good movies in which he was annoying too. Then there's Diego Serrano, who plays JB. He's even more annoying than Jonathan Schaech. And there's Gina Ravera who plays, Joss- also annoying.

Jennifer Garner plays Romy Sullivan, notice how she too has good looks. Of course she's a zillion times prettier than Jennie Love. She's ok, I can bear her but she can sometimes get on my nerves. And- Pauley Perrette, who is a much better actress than all the former. There's just something about her character which I like. And finally- Patrick Fabien, who is relatively ok.

But, I was not surprised when Time of Your Life got cancelled, I hope Jennifer Love learned something from it.

Pathetic!

When this show is on, similar to what Joey from "Friends" once said: I want to rip my arm off just to have something to throw at the TV screen. My younger siblings like it--- but, even though it is a "kiddie show", it is still one of the worst out there.

It amazes me. Every year hundreds and hundreds of pilots are sent to television networks around the world and somehow they usually manage to choose the worst.

I don't even think it's educational for kids. One episode (one of the few I had to go through the torture of seeing because the computer and the TV are in the same room), anyway as I was saying- one of the episodes quietly suggested violence (but in the end the pathetic looking kid colored in purple just took down the bullies pants)- gee, what a great idea.

Do your kids (and yourself) a huge favor, if you happen to catch kids with horrible acting, one of them purple- change channels- immediately!

I would just like to correct my comment (below), in which I said I was looking forward to finding out who Alex was because she is played by Heather McAdam, who I liked as Cat on the show "Sisters". At that time the IMDb credited the role of Alex to Heather McAdam, however upon re-visiting the "Third Watch" page I noticed that the role was now credited to Amy Carlson (who I have never heard of before). Either way I am still looking forward to the future episodes of "Third Watch".

I've never been a fan of wrestling but when it comes to clay-mation it can be quite amusing. What I love most are the little inside jokes about the 'celebrities' fighting. Sure sometimes the animation or voice don't exactly fit the celebrity or doesn't look/sound like the 'celeb' but still it's a humorous very enjoyable television show. I'd watch it over professional wrestling any day.

I love Pop Up Video. What really can you say about it? It's simply facts popping up in bubbles through out video clips. There are facts about the singer/band and then facts that don't really have anything to do with the singer/band but can somehow be linked to the lyrics or to something in the video clip. I won't use Pop Up Video as a reliable source of information but it sure is entertaining.

What a bad movie this is- bad, I say. The idea is unoriginal. The acting, well it's OK- nothing special. I won't complain about how long the opening credits were because the music was very good. But I'm not commenting on a soundtrack, now am I? I'm a bit disappointed in Katie Holmes, she can do better and choose better movies to work on. She doesn't realize that she's wasting all her talent on idiotic teen movies which won't be remembered in ten years time. "Go" was definitely her best work yet. All in all I regret ever renting this movie. Disturbing. Period.

Quality television this ain't, but it's still well worth a watch. Is it real? Who the hell knows! My guess is that most stories are real, but exaggerated. Either way Ricki is a great host. She knows the limits. She can have sassy spicy sexy (and other words beginning with S) shows. And she can also have sweet sentimental tear-jerking shows. She's one cool gal and I'm sure she's changed many peoples lives (for the better that is). Well worth a watch if you've got nothing to do and want to have a little bit of fun which doesn't involve much thinking.

Well, I am a teenager commenting on a video which says "ages 1-4" on the cover!

How do I even know about it? Well my 2 year-old cousin has it on videotape. Now obviously it isn't intended for mature audiences. It doesn't have a plot. The movie shows bits of toys, puppets, young children, etc to the tunes of classical music. At this age (1-4) children register sounds they hear in their mind and start developing a proper memory (though I'm no doctor). My cousin is fascinated by it and by other videos like it (Baby Shakespeare, Baby Mozart, Baby Einstein...) It's very entertaining for young children, and it's a tape parents won't mind having on loud volume as the classical soundtrack is quite beautiful. Highly recommended for young children.