Reviews

I'm writing this review in 2023, where there's plenty of streaming subscriptions available. (I only subscribe to Netflix and AppleTV+ so far.) & also in the social media age, YouTube and TikTok are the go-to websites & apps for videos. "World's Funniest Videos: Top 10 Countdown," which is on Laff, a channel I don't pay for, is a sad, moldy relic of a TV show about funny videos. First of all, to compare this to the vast availability of online videos, where people can just type in "cute puppies" or "prank fails," the difference between online videos & this series is that the TV show bleeps out cussing & is narrated by Mark DeCarlo, the guy from "Studs" & "Jimmy Neutron." Also the show's videos don't get social media attention meaning the TV show owns it & doesn't pay royalties to those who submitted the videos. Compare that to the videos on TBD, another free channel, where the videos on that network's shows like "Best of the Week" can be licensed, meaning I think those videos' owners get royalties. Second, to compare this to other notable video shows like "America's Funniest Home Videos" & "Funniest Pets & People" (also seen on Laff), this show pales in comparison. At least AFHV had funny, charismatic, & memorable hosts from the late Bob Saget to Tom Bergeron to Alfonso Ribeiro (who's actually a good host & "Carlton" is even more fun to watch on the game show "Catch 21" but I digress). Oh and also at least on AFHV those videos have a shot at $20,000 or $100,000. On "World's Funniest Videos," it's only a mere countdown of ten videos showing the same damn gag where what separates the #1 video from the other nine is it's only shown once. And keep in mind the producers & writers of this show, who presumably have Bachelor's degrees, worked long and hard to sort out what makes the ten funniest videos of, well funny zipline mishaps, not to mention the animators who presumably have Bachelor's in fine arts, who made the cartoon scenes, notably of dogs that lack movable limbs and women with small bosoms, that ain't on par with Pixar or Illumination. Oh also I'm perplexed at the title where I can't really tell if they're really the "world's funniest videos" & assume they're mostly American videos & maybe one from Asia like one elephant video. At least on "Funniest Pets & People" I might identify the "international" video by looking at the date & see that one made on August 13, 2001 is 13/8/2001. (8/13/2001 in US), & while this show had Mark DeCarlo, "Funniest Pets & People" had Rob Paulsen, a more respected voice-over actor w/ a long filmography who was on "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles" & "Animaniacs." I also must point out the worst thing & the most annoying feature about the show is the "Remember That Time?" video, where DeCarlo uses a Southern accent that either sounds as strong as a Mississippian one episode or as tepid as a rural Ohioan the next. I'm guessing he evokes the "Hey Vern" commercials done by Jim Varney by saying "Hey Earl! Remember that time when...?" This also means the subject of this video has to be a male, whether he actually is named Earl or is probably Sean. The worst usage of the "Hey Earl" video is during a video of an old lady sweeping the sidewalk or something and the video was actually longer than a typical commercial break. So in conclusion, "World's Funniest Videos: Top 10 Countdown" is not a show worth paying for, & even if it's on my streaming subscriptions, I'm not gonna watch an episode. & if I do bother to watch it on TV, I'd likely watch it (on muting) while multitasking, like if I'm looking at other screens like using my phone or laptop to check sports scores or Facebook. Hell, I'd probably watch the show while I'm vacuuming.

I bought the DVD & praise Colin Firth for collecting his Academy Award portraying King George VI. As a man w/ a speech impediment, I empathized with Firth's character & the king's assistant Lionel Logue, who had an unconventional yet effective method of speech therapy. Without naming names or even dates, it's a hell of a burden for any person who's a monarch or some sorta world leader to present themselves to the public. But do keep in mind the name & date to acknowledge in "The King's Speech" is King George VI, who during the mid-20th century, particularly when Great Britain would enter World War II, did less of the dirty work as the king of England than the UK's prime minister, Winston Churchill (although Neville Chamberlin, Churchill's predecessor, was in charge during the film's setting and as history dictates, was less helpful than Winston). I'm also reminded of the scene where the royal family witnesses on media a certain man in Germany who was more eloquent and won over the people (clearly Adolf), thus urging King George (or I think Albert before he's crowned) to be more presentable to the Britons and whoever would become the Allies in the Second World War. Incidentally I think it's good that there is a film about the man who was king during Churchill's time, assuming there's been enough books & films about that prime minister of Great Britain but not the king during his administration (not to mention enough media about King George IV's successor, the currently reigning Queen Elizabeth II, as portrayed in the TV show "The Crown"). Anyway, Colin Firth & Geoffrey Rush worked wonders with their characters in a film that collected 4 Oscars on a dozen nominations, and again as someone with a stammer, this true story of a British king is very inspirational & uplifting.

I just tuned in Netflix for the hell of it. & I ain't really into contemporary Xmas movies or TV shows. But this was surprisingly very entertaining. I was kinda hoping Rudolph would participate in the reindeer games, but I think his red nose would be a plot shortcut.

I discovered this film on Netflix; I subscribed because I wanted to see the new "Mystery Science Theater 3000" episodes. & since I watch that show, that means I enjoy B-movies as much as the next eccentric film-watcher. This is perhaps the most sloppily filmed since since "Manos: The Hands of Fate." (Incidentally that film remains the only movie from MST3K to remain on the Bottom Rated List as for some damn reason many others that appeared on the show became unranked.) Anyway, I'm familiar w/ the disaster plot: a scientist tells the world's top leaders & scientists a global disaster, such as the oceans rising, is coming. They don't believe him. Then they do when the catastrophe kills 'em along with many extras and destroy world landmarks with SFX. & the scientist leads a ragtag bunch of misfit survivors to stop the disaster with scientific gobbledygook that's backed up with more SFX before the disaster goes full circle. The film has bad transitions such as showing one character on the boat one scene & then he's on dry land the next. In fact, the film doesn't show many scenes where the boat's passengers disembark properly. Also the cast is completely unrecognizable. Maybe that's a benefit so I wouldn't lambaste certain actors. (For example, I saw the equally awful "Fire Twister." It starred Casper Van Dien and featured the guy who played Frank on "Murphy Brown." Thus I feel bad Casper Van Dien & the guy who played Frank Fontana did that stupid movie (or Joe Regalbuto). I do feel bad for the organization NOAA for allowing their likeness in "Oceans Rising". They usually don't get noticed until hurricane season when they give bizarre names to storms, usually in the A-L section. I know less people named Beryl, Hortense, or Ethan than I do a Steve, Rachel, or Tom; a hurricane season would have to reach twenty storms to get to Tropical Storm Tom.) In conclusion, "Oceans Rising" is rife with poor special effects and editing mistakes that it's hard to pull away and check your phone, or if you're like me, trying to finish this review. In fact as I finish this sentence I already am watching the motion picture a second time today.

As I'm typing this, I discovered the movie on the terrestrial channel Charge TV at 2 a.m. I Googled "Hercules Against Karate" & read a recap from one person who disliked it. To call this "mindless kung fu action" is an understatement. There's embarrassing stereotypical portrayals of Asians whose names have unfunny puns. One notable scene includes a bar fight scene where two Americans fight football fans. Even though the scene takes place in Sydney, Australia, (If you didn't watch the beginning of the movie, you likely missed seeing the town's famous bridge & opera house and wouldn't be sure if the scene's in Sydney.) the Italian crew thought it'd be a funny & innovative idea to have the brawlers use American, not Australian football tactics. Also when I watch on TV some movie from the '60s-'90s that has an Italian crew, I'd assume Bud Spencer would be in it, like "Superfantagenio" (which I saw on the MOVIES! channel as "Aladdin"). But I can't recognize the lead actor here, but maybe it's better I recognize nobody. I already had the bad movie experience of watching "The Counselor" which Brad Pitt was in but the star, among many, was Michael Fassbender. Anyway back to this movie. There's a really bad proportion of comedy to action scenes, as in there's way too much slapstick which is intended for yuks but I'm just cringing silently. You'd think films this crappy would appear on Netflix or even YouTube. But I think anybody who worked on "Hercules Against Karate" or in media knows better to put it on the Internet, & somehow it finds its way in a rabbit-ear channel. In conclusion, two thumbs down, & I better go to bed.

I watched this, meaning I yielded to the many promos on the Spanish-language network UniMás. But I think the commercials had shown all of the good parts, because what I was watching was an unpleasant experience. Now, as a "Mystery Science Theater 3000" fan, I rate "Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning" a star higher than most films that were on that show (or on "RiffTrax") because there was some professionalism in the making of the film (despite the fact it's a straight-to-DVD movie). As a kid, I grew up w/ the original TV series on my television although chances are my parents were watching, so I wasn't really a fan. & I had no interest in watching the cinematic remake starring Johnny Knoxville, Sean William Scott, & Jessica Simpson. But this prequel just was too juvenile for my taste. None of the lead actors were recognizable, not even April Scott as Daisy Duke. How ruined was her film career after that? Not even appearances in commercials? I did notice the guy from "Rocketman," the villain from "Happy Gilmore," & Willie Nelson. I assume getting high (or drunk) was no offense during filming; I had to wonder who WASN'T under the influence among the cast & crew. I would guess the actresses; beer or pot might contain a few calories or gluten that would damage their nubile figures & get cut from the movie, even the elderly-by-this-film's-standards Sherilyn Finn. Also, this movie does fit the standards of watching it on TV in Spanish; whatever resembled a plot was a mere excuse for car chases. So in conclusion, "Dukes of Hazzard: The Beginning" is trashy for an un-devoted fan like me. For the true Duke fans, this is a real abomination & must be avoided entirely.

I'm beginning to curse UniMás (formerly TeleFutura) as well as SyFy for such awful films like "Magma: Volcanic Disaster." But UniMás could be doing me a favor in dissuading me from cable, since Syfy also shows reality programming alongside bad TV movies. This movie uses CGI perhaps to emphasize it's a 90s/00s film as opposed to black-and- white or 70s/80s disaster films better enjoyed on "Mystery Science Theater 3000." (As a MSTie I couldn't help but think of "Lost Continent" of which shaking the camera was essential to the cinematography.) But I must also point out the computer graphics were rather excessive. How humorous when the magna's victims died just by covering 'em! Not only that, but the submarines & even some infernos were computer- generated. Talk about lazy or low-budget filmmaking when you can't show real pyrotechnics or marine footage or perhaps a bigger make-up department to portray burn victims. Of course, "Magma" follows the template of disaster cinema: natural disasters get outta control. Experts exclaim the sky is falling. The government scoffs. But once we see more CGI carnage, they suggest nuclear warfare. It works. The end. The only recognizable name was Amy Jo Johnson (Mighty Morphin Power Rangers). She looks like Jennifer Garner or Hilary Swank, so she'll come in handy after the last two laugh & hang up upon being approached to do "Magma." (Incidentally did Garner do the same when she did "Arthur"?) & of course there was the subplot of the lead scientist hoping to reconcile w/ his park ranger wife. In the times I had to watch those parts when I wasn't playing the Wii U or tweeting, I was hoping Xander would schtup the Pink Power Ranger. Yeah, I learned Johnson's character was into some other dude but she sure shared a lotta screen time w/ the lead scientist. In conclusion, "Magma: Volcanic Disaster" was good background entertainment, something to have on the TV while doing other stuff.

I remember watching this in syndication; I think it was on my ABC affiliate in Bakersfield on late night weekends. I remember lead actress Catherine Oxenberg played the title role in a Princess Di TV movie biography. & Alison Armitage was incredibly hot & I'd anticipate a scene she'd wear a bikini. Shockingly her photo doesn't turn up here at IMDb.com. Don't y'all remember her appearance on "Seinfeld" as Dr. Watley's dental hygienist? Anyway, "Acapulco H.E.A.T." was a nice action drama w/ a setting & cast as exotic as that of "CSI: Miami." But as long as it was hidden away in "Saturday Night Live"'s time slot, I should take pride in being one of the show's few & (slightly) faithful viewers.

I should note that "Dragon Wars: D-Wars" showed some very pricey CGI, which were somewhat better than other sci-fi films on UniMás (previously TeleFutura). But the good graphics will be my only positive remark about this South Korean import (that I saw in Spanish - quite the international experience). I assumed this movie was based on a comic book, but either way, this film might've been overlooked in the multiplexes chock-full of movies adapted from every comic book except "Archie." (I'm sure there'll be one; the TV movie from over a decade ago where Archie & friends grow up ain't worth braggin' about.) But back to the dragon movie. Again the graphics were good & those monsters would've made some pretty cool toys. But the story of a journalist accompanying a poor, tortured young lady on a wild adventure 'cause she's the reason for those dragons terrorizing Los Angeles seems silly & necessary only to display those kickass dragons. Surprisingly, there are some familiar faces who aren't lead actors: Craig Robinson, Retta, & Billy Gardell. They now appear respectively in "The Office," "Parks & Recreation," & "Mike & Molly." In conclusion, "Dragon Wars: D-Wars" is best watched on TV w/ the volume turned up when the cool scenes are on. But anytime you see scenes with dialogue such as the suits trying to deal w/ this dragon disaster, adjourn to the kitchen or bathroom, but leave the television on when the monsters return.

Just how does the THIS channel find such cinematic crap? I'm wondering if the films in Universal Studios that got destroyed in the fire were any better, & if not, it could be a blessing. But back to "Iron Monkey II." Normally I see substandard kung fu or marital arts films on Spanish-language stations like Telefutura or Telemundo. Somehow I discovered "Iron Monkey 2" on THIS, & unfortunately had to hear the ridiculous English dubbing. The action scenes were decent in comparison to better or worse martial arts movies. Certainly the foley artist has quick ears & quick hands on the buttons. & not a single actor could be recognized, not even the white actors. But this lackluster film was meant to be stumbled upon while channel-surfing, not to be rented or downloaded and seen on a big screen or computer.

Before I got to watch this movie voluntarily, I rated it two stars based on one syndicated review in my newspaper when it was in theaters who gave it no stars. So when did I watch this? On Sunday morning at 4 A.M. I took Lunesta but kinda delayed its work so that I could watch the movie, with the sound on. Normally I watch movies on muting if I'm only channel-surfing, not, like, preparing to watch it. (Example: "Oh! This film will be on in a few hours!") I thought I was gonna subject myself to poor dialogue that's comparable to what settles at the Bottom 100. Turns out, whatever Martin Short, Charles Grodin, Mary Steenburgen, & the others were saying weren't really that bad. "Clifford" wasn't the first "bad seed" movie & won't be the last, but it sure ain't the best or one of the 25 best. Short's eponymous character actually wasn't likable. I guess it's easy to hate such a character when the kid is played by an adult as opposed to real kids such as in "Problem Child." Again, this comedy may suck, but not to the point that you lose your faith in religion. It's just another bad movie that's only suitable to watch on TV at the same hours as infomercials & reruns of sitcoms canceled at least seven years ago.

Since I don't have cable & there ain't any good shows on Wed., I was watching Telefutura. I learned from watchin' the opening the movie was called "Air Force Two," which I seriously doubt was a sequel to the Harrison Ford film. Only as I found the film's page here on IMDb have I learned that Mariel Hemingway was playing a lesbian. When I was watching the movie, I wouldn't notice it as it just appeared to be another shoot-'em-up, mindless action film w/ Spanish dubbing. & yep, once I also found out that those reviewing this movie were Austrians, I must've been the only non-Hispanic American watching it. & I also thought this movie was made in the 80s/90s, not 2006! R U kiddin'? A movie where the bad guys are jungle insurgents a la Iran-Contra/ Sandinistas/ Manuel Noriega? & made while the War on Terrorism's in progress? Well, that could explain why "In Her Line of Fire" didn't come to a theater near me or other Americans. The film was such a blatant throwback to those "Rambo" or "Die Hard" flics. Even if this film is available here in the U.S., I ain't sure if I can find it in the "bargain bin" at Costco or Target. Besides, this is the type of film that Telefutura would air on a Wednesday, as opposed to a Sunday night, which would draw more viewers. That's why I saw more promos for "Spider-Man 2" when it was on Telefutura on that Sunday night. This is for sure a film you will likely stumble upon when nothing good's on TV, & not a movie you "prepare" for by w8n' for it 2 start, watch it w/ others & have a snack.

I am actually watching this garbage on MyNetworkTV on a Sat. night. Yep, that's what we Bakersfield viewers got stiffed with with our ex-UPN affiliate; the cable-only WB affiliate became CW. "Landslide" looks to be as memorable as "10.5" or "10.5: Apocalypse." I should point out that there's only one major landslide; the rest is pretty much a imitation of "The Posideon Adventure" except w/ soil. & I wasn't paying 2 much attention, but did the trapped guys have enough oxygen to survive during the film? There's only one notable washed-up thespian on this movie, nee Alexandra Paul, the most streamlined female lifeguard on "Baywatch." Damn, I wish I coulda been a screenwriter for a natural disaster TV pick. I'd b stinkin' rich! (sort of) As of now, it's 9:32, so about ¾'s of the movie have passed, & those damn guys are still trapped. & there's a guy preparing some TNT or whatever. I think he's preparing another landslide or something. Also I've got the TV on mute since I don't like listening to the dialogue. & I didn't even know there was a inside joke about Cindy Sheehan in "Landslide"; guess the writers managed to read a newspaper while preparing this crap.