Change Your Image
a-little-squeek
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Star Trek: First Frontier (2020)
terrible
The production values on this debacle are so bad that I considered adding the word "terrible" after each of the things I am about to mention.... effects, story line, dialogue, costuming, makeup AND THE ACTORS ! ... it surprises me that there are so many (crappy) movies made that I've never heard of with low skill, wooden "ACTORS" in them.... I've seen this A LOT on streaming channels.... why don't the costumes fit right?, why do all the men need to shave? ... why is there a person running around with a white christmas tinsel wig on that has horns sticking out of it?....
The Martian (2015)
Everyone from Mars loved this movie
I like Matt Damon in almost every movie I've seen him in. This whole movie plays like the middle of a story. There's no initial plot or character development or effective "button up" at the end. I compare it (somewhat) to "Cast Away" with Tom Hanks. It seemed to most folks that I discussed "CA" with that Hanks' isolation on the island dominated too much of the film. In reality, his isolation on the island took up roughly only about 40% of the running time...the rest of the time was devoted to character and plot build up and wind down. That process was woefully missing in "The Martian". Additionally, the "rescue ship" in "The Martian" had a gym with too much equipment and a huge conference room, both with high ceilings and seemingly constructed with no concern for space or weight considerations. Didn't seem logical to me.
To me, numerous elements in the execution of the whole project just didn't ring true, even by a stretch, the last 20 minutes or so in particular. Don't want to create a spoiler here so I won't go into detail.
Unless it's a film by Clint Eastwood, usually when they make a movie like this or "Gravity" with Sandra Bullock, I kind of expect that they're not going to kill off the star. So it boils down to wondering throughout the film how they're going to keep the star alive and create a happy ending.
I gave it a 5 because I enjoy Matt Damon and the execution of some of the concepts relating to his survival, but in my view, the plot needed way more refinement and development.
Jurassic World (2015)
Enough already
I'm hoping that this will be the final sequel in the franchise. For my taste, it has outlived it's interest level. The film plays like "look what we can do now with CGI and the concept of genetic manipulation". It was boring, trite, predictable and overly contrived. Story line lacked dynamic appeal. Acting sub par. The CGI was good but one would expect it to be given advancements in technology to date. Over all a disappointment and in my view, the worst installment in the series even surpassing Jurassic Park 2 for that spot. I guess that it wold be a reasonable rental for a$1.50 at Redbox if your're having trouble with insomnia or if you're looking to complete the viewing of the whole franchise. Beyond that I think it would be fair to say that this film fell far short of my expectations.
Gone Girl (2014)
Be Gone.....Girl.........
Reasonable plot development that builds in intensity throughout, with strange and interesting elements added and developed as the movie progresses.....culminating in a crap ending. I don't care about book comparisons because a film should stand on it's own merit. Neil Patrick Harris is a bright spot in this whole effort and it surprised me that he was so good. As an actor, unless he's portraying a cigar store Indian, Ben Affleck should stick to directing....which he's pretty good at. Rosamund Pike was good but it is not an Oscar winning performance. Others in "cameo" supporting roles were just OK. It gets pretty intense and somewhat gory as the plot unfolds and I found the film to be overly long, unnecessarily.
The Maze Runner (2014)
un a MAZE ing............
Look...it's the middle of a trilogy. There's no initial plot development, there's no definitive ending. There are many "invisible" characters who never get developed and you can easily figure out that they're not going to make it to the end of the movie. The one and only girl gets put in with the large group of guys that have been there for years...I wonder how that will work out for her! Prediction: the sequel will add more guesswork as to the plot why's and wherefores and the third installment will be a prequel which will finally give insight to the over all story line. yawwwn.... This movie made me feel like it's a retread of an old tire. I guess that there are no new ideas coming out of Hollywood these days. Just the same old stuff, plot tweaked, with new CGI, repackaged and dished out to the public. I won't be eagerly anticipating the next installment.
X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)
X ... crement
I really wanted to like this movie and excitedly anticipated it's release. Saw it in 3-D for $14. Huge disappointment. VERY poor plot, poorly executed. Personally, I've seen enough of Jennifer Lawrence. For my taste, she's over rated and over exposed and I much preferred Rebecca Romijn in the Mystique role. I was disappointed in much the same way as the replacement of Katie Holmes with Maggie Gyllenhaal in the Batman franchise. Ellen Page annoys me. I must have missed something ... how did Dr. X come back from the dead ? Wolverine is starting to show some grey FINALLY ... isn't he a couple hundred years old ? but he looks more ripped than he has in years! I wouldn't recommend not seeing it, but it fell FAR short of my expectations. Big $14. disappointment.
The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
The Batman is back !!
Great action-packed movie from beginning to end. Enjoyment factor easily surpasses the first two installments of the franchise. Almost all of the familiar characters, portrayed by the original actors, are back and they are all better developed. The Bat Cave is back, the mansion rebuilt (finally) and the gadgets abound. It's engrossing, good dialog, great screenplay, lots of heroics and some good plot twists. 2 hours 40 minutes flew by like it was only 90 minutes and there didn't seem to be any wasted energy or low spots throughout the film. The plot unfolded in a logical and dynamic manner. There have been a number of flaws pointed out by other reviews (haters) at this venue but I don't think that it's fair to over criticize. I enjoyed it for what it is, a decent final chapter to a trilogy which is based on a comic book hero. I saw it on a huge screen featuring the new Sony digital projection and sound system in stadium seating. It was epic and worth the price of admission. Action films don't get much better than this. See it.
The Grey (2011)
....un-good.....
Liam Neeson could make the reading of a deli menu sound like Shakespeare and I feel badly that he got caught up in this stinkeroo of a movie. It's slow with, as you might guess, punctuations of wolf attacks as a bunch of plane crash survivors aimlessly wander around a frozen landscape anticipating getting attacked and eaten by wolves. I had to restrain myself from throwing something at the TV because of the ending. As I said, I like Liam but his talents and execution are no where near formidable enough to rescue this film at any level. I gave it one star for Liam alone, the rest of the film should be in the negative digits. Don't waste your time and rental money on this one....you've been warned.
A much better pick would be "The Edge" which is similarly themed and stars Anthony Hopkins and Alec Baldwin. It is enjoyable all the way through and has a FAR better payoff at the end.
Men in Black³ (2012)
Wait for the DVD
I like the principals in this movie Will Smith, Josh Brolin, etc., they're good in just about everything they've ever been involved in. It just feels like over-sequelitis in this third go around of the Men in Black franchise. In my opinion, each succesive installment has become less interesting. The story line here is lame, particularly the last 20 minutes or so. I saw it in 3-D and the effects are good but I would expect them to be GREAT given the very high cost of admission. Some of the continuity from the previous two MIB films has been altered and that kind of annoyed me. If I had it to do over again I would probably have preferred to wait for it to come to Redbox and rent it for a buck. That's about all it's worth.
The Avengers (2012)
Action Fans Rejoice.....
Yeah...it is an action packed flick from beginning to end. The interweaving of all the Marvel characters was done in a coherent way and I truly feel as though I got my money's worth out of it. Samuel L. Jackson is an amazing actor and if you think about all the roles he's executed so well, it boggles the mind. This is not to diminish the performances of all the other names who appear in this film. Robert Downey, by far, has the best lines and his delivery is always spot on. The CGI effects are great, flawless and awesome. Plot, screenplay and performances...grade B. I was a big fan of Marvel as a kid and the whole package stays true to the printed genre. Mark Ruffalo was a good pick for the latest Hulk incarnation. Gweneth Paltrow and Scarlett Johansson turn in fine performances and look hhhhotttt!............
I know that it's just a movie, one must suspend reality and have buy-in, and I don't want to be hypercritical but.....1) I would expect that Hulk & Thor would be uninjured in their battles and even Ironman has his suit to protect him...but the other three characters, after all, are really just HUMAN, right? Though enhanced human in some way, shape or form, they just aren't in the same class of "super" hero as the previously mentioned three. In fact, they aren't "super" at all. I would think that each of them, in succession, would have been squashed by something thrown at them by one of the warriors from another planet. 2) The "suiting-up" process for Ironman is starting to become a little silly and I didn't like the shape change of the power plant in the middle of his chest from a circle to a triangle. 3) The Hulk goes from a mindless...well...HULK, to a character who then helps "the team"...pick pick pick......
After you see it I'm sure you'll agree that this movie is definitely NOT an 8.8 as movies go...but the ratings system at this venue has ALWAYS been flawed. If you don't read too much into it, it's pretty solid entertainment especially if you're an action fan, Marvel fan, or a fan of any of the actors involved and worth seeing on the big screen ....especially because the sound systems seem to have been upgraded in recent times...........but I wouldn't pay more than matinée price.
P.S.....there is an additional "snippet" of movie inserted into the credit roll so don't exit too quickly......
The only thing that really ticked me off was the $7. price tag for a MEDIUM popcorn !?....get real, people........... .
I rate it 7
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (2011)
Gary Oldman...one of my favorite actors....
....is wasted in this drivel. This movie is as dry as a popcorn fart. If you can follow what's going on, I guess you must be from England. Was this how things really were during the Cold War?....it's no wonder the world is all messed up. After it was over I had to ask myself "who gives a rat's arse?" That's how they say "ass" in England. And it's what you'll feel like after watching this.... IF you can make it all the way through it.
Without giving anything away (like it would really matter) here's my impression.... there are English people in this flick, so you will need an "English to English" translator to understand what the heck they're saying...and there are Russians, couple of Americans, some other nationalities I couldn't identify. A guy gets shot in the back. You get to see that a few times in flashback. A hot woman is seen through a window having sex with someone who's not her husband....they don't show any good parts 'tho....then the husband kicks her "arse". She gets shot later. Blah Blah Blah Blah....
......it was a "bloody" waste of time.....
Priest (2011)
QUICK....administer extreme unction ...........
ugh...."Hives" full of vampires, Jedi priests jumping around kicking butt with crosses tattooed on their foreheads, no background development, a plot and dialog that made me feel like I was spending time suffering in purgatory....1,000 years worth. Aren't there any better projects available for Paul Bettany and Carl Urban....two talented actors I've enjoyed in numerous other movies, whose talents are wasted here. This is the second time I've seen Bettany as a priest....and he was way better at it in 'DaVinci Code'. How can they even keep a straight face when delivering the cheezy dialog. It is ponderous and tedious to watch and I couldn't wait for it to be over. I paid $1 to rent this at Redbox and can't say that I think it was even worth that.
I Am Number Four (2011)
more like a pile of number two
....maybe not a big steaming pile but a pile nonetheless....it plays more like a made for TV movie than something one would pay ten bucks in the theater to see. I wrote checks and paid my bills while I was watching it. It's really a teen-geared movie with the shmoe-tagonist repeatedly evading his pursuers from another planet while contemporary music plays in the back ground. The hunters are big and weird looking and STRONG, and have some of the best lines in the movie. They blow up when they're killed. Everything else turns into dust and blows away after dying. Saves on a lot of messy cleanup after battles are over. The prey has a guardian, Timothy Olyphant(?) whose acting talents are pretty much wasted in this, and he also has some super powers to protect himself. It's mildly interesting/entertaining with half way decent effects and if you get it at Redbox like I did for a buck, you'll have paid exactly what I think it is worth.
True Grit (2010)
.....Truly Gritty.......
I'm a big fan of the Coens and this latest entry does not disappoint. Fabulous visuals, dialog, music, acting, screen play and directing makes this a winner across the board. If you are a fan of classic western fare this should be a must see for you. Star power abounds throughout with the highest grade to Jeff Bridges who adds yet another notch to his butt stock of acting diversity. "The Dude" is truly an American icon with a body of work that puts him in a class with the likes of DeNiro, Hoffman, Pacino and few others. No high power ending in this film, but it is consistent with the Coen's style and the film in general. I saw it on its opening day as well as later at the $2. theater and thoroughly enjoyed it both times. Good show, see it ! ......8.5
Inception (2010)
.....shaboom, shaboom....life is but a dream.......
Strong performances across the board, from Christopher Nolan's direction, to the actors, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt shines...there are LOTS OF EXPLANATIONS...how the dream levels work, expansion of time, construction of dreamscapes, yadda yadda yadda...the effects are top notch but I'm not much of a fan of "dream" movies...something weird happens and someone wakes up...and then I'll realize that "oh yeah....the guy was just having a dream...." ...and Bobby Ewing WASN'T REALLY KILLED !....grrrrr ......read "deus ex machina".....all in all it was pretty good, though....and I'll rent it and see it again just to enjoy the enjoyable aspects of it....but I DON'T agree that it is the masterpiece that it has been rated to be.....
So I woke up this morning and wondered if I had really gone to the movies last night to see "Inception"...and I firmly grabbed hold of my favorite little toy and realized that I WAS awake and I HAD NOT really seen it....but then, I REALLY woke up and realized that I had........MAYBE.....
Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008)
What the HE**, boy !?
I barely made it through the whole thing. $9. for this!? To say that it had decent CGI as a main point of enjoyment for this film would be ridiculous. This type of film DEMANDS great CGI and so the statement would be moot.
del Toro's hand-print is all over this project and, relative to the characters and scenes, it has a similar look, and feel, as 'Pan's Labyrinth', a weird foreign film which I didn't care for.
Ron Perlman is annoying in the role......as was the carry over thing with the cats. Red's big, rubber hand, while somewhat amusing and necessary for the plot continuity, is still just a BIG RUBBER HAND! Selma Blair's 'Liz Sherman' bursting into flame every once in a while, seemingly randomly, seems contrived.
I'll make this short..... I found it to be mediocre at best. If you like the genre, director, or the main character, rent it as a DVD..... don't waste your gas money to see it, more expensively, in the theater.
The Incredible Hulk (2008)
a "Hulk" Hogan biography would have been more entertaining.....
CGI effects are good, and what you would expect them to be to date, better than the original Hulk film due to technological progress. That's about the most positive thing that I can say about this film.
The bridging between action scenes progressed very slowly. The plot failed to interest me and therefore did not hold my attention. Edward Norton, a fine actor, should have declined the starring role. Liv Tyler needs to get some acting lessons, ASAP, her pretty face will not carry her through forever. William Hurt as the nefarious general, good actor, his talents wasted here. Tim Roth, in my view the best actor in this whole project, seems miscast as the human version of Hulk's nemesis.
Just how many bullets and rockets are going to be fired by the military before they figure out that they have no effect on the Hulk or his nemesis?? I guess the oxymoron 'military intelligence' holds true here. Despite the 'havoc' scenes in this film, plot, screenplay, execution fell well short of my expectations. I don't think that it was better or worse than the first Hulk film, just different.
I went to see this at the budget $2. theater and I'm glad that I did, particularly after the disappointment of Hellboy 2 which I saw at the expensive, fancy theater this past week. This will be a halfway decent DVD rental for those who enjoy the genre.
The Dark Knight (2008)
Cesar Romero would have been proud...................
The motorcycle is cool, but it's really the only significant new equipment added. We don't get to see Bruce, or anyone else, tinkering in the night, working to produce or perfect new technological additions. The improved Batsuit is pulled out of a file drawer !? A 60's style wall of T.V. screens is supposed to represent some sort of city-wide sonar tracking technology....or some such gobbledygook....I couldn't buy into it. Gone is the basement of 'Wayne Tower' with its hidden stockpile of technical goodies near-ready for Bruce/Batman to incorporate into his battle against evildoers. Gone is the Batcave since the Wayne mansion is under re-construction (?)......with all his billions you'd think Bruce Wayne would have hired people who could get the job done WITHIN THREE YEARS! I wondered if the construction crew will have to clean up all that guano in the cave prior to occupancy. We don't get to see the construction site.....that might have been nice as a contribution to continuity from the first movie. I missed those kinds of detail aspects.
This is a darker, more foreboding version, and the story line is more in keeping with the way the comic book character has evolved over the decades. There's no doubt that Heath Ledger produces the best Joker portrayal to date, but it certainly is not an Oscar-worthy performance. Other characters are consistent with what you know about them from 'Batman Begins'. Not enough Morgan Freeman, though, and 'Alfred' has evolved into a sort of Zen guide for Bruce Wayne. His few appearances are punctuated by allegorical far eastern life lesson statements. The Harvey Dent/ Two-face character felt like an extraneous addition, although I think that I was probably supposed to feel as though he was central to the plot development.......somehow, I didn't........ Maggie Gyllenthall(?) looks homely, seems miscast in her role and turns in a forgettable performance.
I noticed that the reviews of this film, at this venue, are almost ALL highly favorable, and that these favorable reviews come attached with a high level of 'useful' designations from the readers; the bad reviews mostly have 'not useful' attached to them. This tells me that no matter what is said about this movie, people will want to go out and see for themselves. Certainly, it's decent entertainment but it does NOT deserve a 9.7 rating.
Personally, I found it somewhat enjoyable, although not as much as 'Batman Begins'. Perhaps it was the 'newness' of the previous film where we get to see the background behind Bruce Wayne's evolution as Batman, overlapped along parallel lines with the integration of supporting characters, places and equipment. In this most recent installment we have all that already in place.
Anyhow, it was pretty good, and you'll all go to see it regardless of what I or anyone else has to say about it....... I rate it 6 ...........
Cloverfield (2008)
Heads Up !
If you enjoy "found footage" movies and liked 'Blair Witch Project' you will probably enjoy this too. Unfortunately, both films left me wanting.
Cloverfield starts out VERY slowly and kills about the first half hour on feeble development of plot and characters. As the story unfolds, interest begins to mount, but I found myself already getting antsy by then. Farther along, the few glimpses of the threat are pretty cool and there is attempt to heighten the scary factor throughout by keeping the threat pretty much out of sight, kind of like what Spielberg did in 'Jaws', except this film fails at it. The camera work is jittery and amateurish, as it is intended to be. It is, supposedly, recorded with a hand held camera by, variably, different people in a circle of acquaintances who started out the evening attending a party when all heck broke loose. The ending is predictable and abrupt.
I'm glad I got to see it for free, but sad that I wasted the time on it. If I had it to do over again......I'd pass.............
Iron Man (2008)
Gold and Titanium Alloy Man......
....................................just doesn't sound quite right.
Jon Faverau scores a hit with this latest Marvel adaptation. Much like the initial entries of Spiderman, X-Men and MAYBE even Fantastic Four, the production values in this latest sci-fi/comic adaptation are tight and worth the exorbitant admission price. Story line, screen play and script are all good and well executed. Glad to see that 'Marvel' has created it's own production company. I think that this can only help in delivering projects which are truer to original concept, both now and in the future. This movie is one to see in the fancy theater, particularly if it has a giant screen and great sound system.
The integration of topical events into the story line provides a credible backdrop to the milieu. The plot was interesting and flowed well, although credibility must be suspended during certain parts..... but hey, it IS a movie and I had no problem buying into the story. CGI technology keeps getting better and better and this film takes full advantage of that.
Robert Downey is very good as Tony Stark and I must admit that I've never been a huge Downey fan, but he pulls it off as the somewhat arrogant, wise cracking genius billionaire wunderkind. I've got new respect for him. Jeff Bridges displays versatility with his portrayal of the corporate baddie, Obadiah(?) Stane....he is impressive in this role. In my view, he has elevated himself to the next level of acting credibility AND capability...BRAVO,'DUDE'! Gwyneth Paltro, as Pepper Potts, looks pretty but is bland and forgettable in her portrayal of Tony Stark's assistant. A better casting choice would have helped here. Batman's 'Alfred' she is not. Jon Faverau and Stan Lee are seen in very brief cameo....cool !
There's no cussing, nudity or overt sex in this film. There is, however, lots of action, effects and stuff blowing up. I found it to be a satisfying experience. I just hope the sequels will not disappoint, as they have with so many similar franchises.......I rate it 8.5.........
There Will Be Blood (2007)
There will be......DANIEL......
.....and he's the main reason I gave this film a 7.5. He puts a lot of heart and soul into his roles and this one is no exception. From beginning to end he exudes a dominant strength that IS this film. I can't think of any other actor working today that could have done a better job. The film itself is 'grimy', sparse, and feels real, the era portrayed with precision and attention to detail. The movie is well written and dialog is delivered with plausibility. Screenplay is workable and character interplay quite believable. I can't rate it higher, because overall it just left me feeling hollow, as though I had witnessed an exercise in futility, kind of a bummer.
I think you may enjoy it as a rental if you enjoy a well made period piece, with top notch acting.................
National Treasure: Book of Secrets (2007)
Let's KEEP it a secret.............
Why can't producers and studios just leave well enough alone? I enjoyed the first installment of this concept and I must admit that I have watched "Natonal Treasure" almost every time it comes to a hi-def T.V. channel. I'm glad that I went to see "Book of Secrets" at the $2. theater 'cause if I had paid $8. full price, or even $4.50 for a DVD rental, I'd have been VERY unhappy. The plot is terrible and poorly executed. The performances seems stilted and strained, with the actors pretty much walking through their roles. This is particularly frustrating since the film has some of my favorite actors in it. Ed Harris' formidable talents, in particular, sadly, are wasted. There are quite a few extremely implausible scenes, and I KNOW it's just a MOVIE but they made me shake my head in disheartened disbelief. I'm not sure that I can even recommend this as a decent rental it's just that disappointing.
I Am Legend (2007)
...Will Smith's da man............
Will Smith is very good in this movie and he really knows how to pick his projects. It's mostly just HIM this time around and he does a fine job as the (nearly) sole survivor of a cataclysmic biological event, who is beginning to succumb to his inescapable loneliness. He has really grown in his craft. The stark New York City setting is great as is the back story, told in flash back form. The unfolding of the story was pretty much what I had expected, remembering the Charlton Heston version, and it has been updated with modern CGI effects. Over all I think it was pretty good, however, NOT worth the regular $8.50 admission price, but I would highly RECOMMEND it as a decent DVD rental, or budget theater outing.
The Mist (2007)
Not to be 'MIST' as a DVD rental
This was a good sci-fi flick that had some pretty decent startles to it. The plot development was good and the relationship evolution of the 'stranded' town folk was a typical example of the "Lord of the Flies" syndrome. Parts of it are a bit slow but these parts are punctuated by scary jolts. I was intrigued by the premise, as it came to light, particularly because of what I've been reading about 'String Theory' as well as 'Dark Matter' at Wikipedia. Some aspects of the film kind of reminded me of "Eight Legged Freaks". If you have a phobia about bugs you might want to pass on this one. The acting was passable and the ending had a nice twist to it. I don't know that it was worth the $8.50 I paid to see it in the theater, but I definitely RECOMMEND it as a DVD rental, or wait 'till it comes to the budget theater.
The Golden Compass (2007)
Golden Com...PASS
I only rated it this highly because of the superior CGI, and the associated scenery, which is fabulous. How people could seriously be concerned about their children being exposed to anti-religion themes supposedly contained in this film is beyond me. I think that all the hoo-ha on this subject was generated to get more people into the theater to see what all the fuss was about. Firstly, I am an adult, and I could barely follow the plot. I guess the allegory was lost on me. Secondly, this is not a film that I would recommend for children because of a number of violent scenes in it. The female child lead grated on me after about twenty minutes. I was VERY antsy in my seat after the first hour and was tempted to walk, but decided to see how it all played out. By the time it was over I felt deflated and exhausted. No I didn't read the book, nor do I care to. I think comparisons of movies to books and vice versa is ridiculous. Each should stand on its own merit. This movie stands shakily. I'm sorry I spent the money on it, even though Nicole Kidman looked great.