Reviews

This has to be the dumbest Bond movie yet. I saw this idiotic mess because I'd gone into the final Twilight movie in hopes of picking up some preteen action. Unfortunately I went in at the point where its theatrical run was coming to a close and all that could be found were the fattest dregs of its fan base; the kind of people who seem to have shotgun blasts of "backne". There were some hot girls there too, but they had their parents with them.. or their parents had mace... I can't remember... all I know is that I ended up beating off and crying in isolation to one of the worst movies I'd ever beaten off during (next to Skyfall later that night). I mean, I hadn't seen any of the other Twilight films, but I knew going into it that it was going to be terrible, but instead it was just horrendous. Watching Trash Humpers again for the eighth time would have seemed relaxing and pleasant compared to this arrant display of mental retardation splashed across the screen like a vomiting dog. Though there was one good part in "Twilight Breaking Dawn Part 2." While fumbling for the zipper on my pants I found a pack of matches in my pocket that had some broad with boobs on it. Totally awesome. The movie ended so I decided to sneak into Skyfall and try to pick up some old ladies, hopefully widows. The night ended again with disappointment. You'd think that they'd make a good movie what with it being the 23rd in a franchise, or at least do something different... But no, it was just like the rest. Bond wins and undergoes no changes whatsoever as a character. The same old spunk tortured out of Fleming's dead dick, tarnishing the legacy with repeated mediocrity... I've never even seen any of the other Bond movies.

Finally, a film that knows what it's audience wants! I went into this picture back in '78 when it was released and it was mere minutes after entering that I was walking right back out the theatre doors, and not in a security guards arms either. Here's how it happened, I was in my seat just as the film was starting and it began with some old man in a cloak and some candles or something, I don't really know because I was focusing on taking my pants off without the usher noticing. Then bam! Right on the screen a naked woman is tied to a table with her sweater-hogs hanging right out! Then the old dude starts groping her, and just when I thought it couldn't get any better that cinematic genius, Carlos Puerto, gave the audience a close- up of her smooth naked "cat". Instantly gratified I finished all over the seat in front of me and made my way for the lobby where I ate 5 bags of candy corn then went home to sleep. I would have stayed for the rest of the film, but with an intro that spectacular there's no way they could have topped it. In the end I only have three words to say about Satan's Blood: What. A. Masterpiece.

I've had enough of this inter-species romance in family films. Before Avatar I thought the line would have been drawn at Turner and Hooch. You know what he was really doing with that dog, that's why he gave it beer. But anyway, this movie is worse than mashing my pud with a handful of sandpaper, not just because of the fact that there's a skinny dipping scene that has no nudity and teases you like Avatar but worse because even though you do wanna see the blue monkey lady's nipples you know they aren't real anyway then you end up spilling popcorn and Mike and Ike's into your bare lap then get kicked out of the theatre for indecent exposure and screaming, rather than now where it would be have edgy and raw to show everything, but also because the film is totally unrealistic. It says it's about a wimpy kid, and even though, true, the butthole kid is a total wimp, he succeeds in the end. I thought this was gonna be something real, where the dweeb gets pounded by jocks for 90 minutes, but nope, just another one of Hollywood's should-be abortions. It was also morally reprehensible for the director to make a film wherein it is implied the hero rapes his dog throughout the film off camera, as if that's a quality to be commended.

I went to see this in theatres, and I never even made it to the movie. I understand that there are now commercials before movies, but this is really getting out of hand. Yeah, I get it, with Techron. I don't know how celebrities get roped into this crap. Vin Diesel wasn't even in this one. After what seemed like 112 minutes, the light came up and everyone left, so I assumed it was an intermission. I went into the lobby to get a refill of Cracker Jacks, then they wouldn't let me back in for the movie. Security pummeled me with truncheons when I refused to leave without having seen a movie. I'll never go to a Famous Players again! I wish I had rented Drive Angry. Oh well.

Many people who review this have called it a slasher movie. This is entirely inaccurate, because the killer does not stab or slash his victims to death, he DESTROYS them. It's sort of like wrestle-maniac, in that the killer is maniacal, and Destroys his victims only using his bare hands along with novelty weapons akin to steel chairs used in wrestling. The movie itself licks ass, but within the retarded plot are enough bizarre, hilarious and awesome scenes to make it worth walking. Rent it with a bottle of malt liquor and some pork rinds, scrape the sticky lint coating off of your VCR, and get ready for some low quality junk with brief flashes of greatness (and breasts) between long awkward stretches of crappy videotape.

Best appreciated with one hand on the fast forward button to shorten the rough sections with no boobs or Alzado.

So I bought this movie on VHS in a one dollar bargain bin when VHS'were being taken over by DVDs' and I can honestly say I could have put that dollar to better use. For example, I could have had it broken for quarters and bought some gum. Not only would it be have been tastier, but it would keep me entertained far longer than this piece of trash. Here's what my experience of watching this movie was like: I had just gotten home with the VHS clenched in my dirty hands, where I promptly took off all my clothes knowing that Jamie Lee Curtis would be on my TV screen in a matter of minutes, after all, she was pretty hot in Halloween (which didn't suck like the god awful remake did). But soon I found she was nowhere to be seen, the only clear protagonists were this unshaven guy who looked like a broke-a$$ Keanu Reaves, and this other vaguely effeminate looking man. I was already 50 minutes in and The only clear female character was this one chick who wore a baggy sweater and wasn't Jamie Lee Curtis. I had to make due with her if you know what I mean. So eventually the movie ended and Jamie Lee Curtis was credited as the character Kit, which made no sense, Kit was a man. The thought eventually crossed my mind when I was grasping desperately for answers, that perhaps Jamie Lee Curtis was playing the male character Kit like how Eddie Murphy played that fat woman in Norbit. I mulled over this deviant thought for a bit then determined that the advertisers had either made a horrible mistake, or they just lied to sell this movie. I eventually decided that that Jamie Lee Curtis' participation in this movie was fictitious for two reasons. First is that Jamie Lee Curtis is too much of one of those upper class society type actress' to cross dress for a laugh. Second is that the producers would need to stick her name on this crap in order to at least brake even in the box office. I mean seriously, this movie was awful, I noticed how awful it was the second time I watched it (the first time I was just on a wild goose hunt for Jamie Lee Curtis to appear on the screen). Even the tagline is a lie, it says 'Earth is in for a shock.' this couldn't be more untrue to the movie, it only takes place on a boat, and also the whole problem with the virus is taken care of at the end, how the F*** is that a shock to the earth?!!It's just a terrible mess of a knock-off of John Carpenters The Thing, which is a classic. basically it's about a robot alien that infects people and builds itself together with human and robot parts. Like a action Sci-Fi twist on the Asian masterpiece Tetsuo. Sounds awesome, Right? Wrong! This movie sucks beyond all belief, there aren't even any redeeming factors like Nudity, Good looking special effects, Jamie Lee Curtis, Graphic Mutilation Scenes, and so on. Also the end blows a$$. Overall it was a bigger disappointment than when my friend told me John Getz was signing autographs at the Mcdonalds across the street, and then I found out he wasn't even there.

Wow, is there a movie that John Travolta doesn't dance in? And why isn't Robin Williams dead yet? These are questions I seem to be asking myself time and time again, every time I go to see one of these antiques splayed across the screen like a fresh kill on the hunt for mediocrity. Also, why is it the director or producer or whoever made the decision, choose to cast Travolta? he charges like one hundred million dollars per movie because he has to pay his scientology bills or something like that. They could've saved that money to write a BETTER GODDAMN SCRIPT!!! The end can be seen a mile away, Travolta and Williams don't close the deal, nope, instead they be there for the kids. Oh big surprise, in Liar Liar, Jim Carey loses his job at the law firm or whatever, to be there for his son. Or like every other family drama. Why doesn't it show the part where they end up in the poor house because of those stupid kids? What do they know about the real world? Nothing! At least Liar Liar had a good story. But what I really want to see is the gritty reality to these situations, like if instead Robin Williams not only closed the deal and ignored his kids, but then cheated on his wife with Travolta, then sold the kids into the Taiwanese sex trade. It would be raw, gritty, and true to real life. It's time for these whiny kids to bite the bullet and find out the truth, nothing goes their way, because they're just stupid children who watch too many stupid movies. I grieve for the future of America's children, raised in a state of semi-retardation from all of this crap pumped into their heads!

Alright, I went to this theatre in Colorado in order to watch a monster movie. Unfortunately I saw this, but it was not all bad. There was some pretty good scenes, with this evil lady being a jerk to her daughter-in-law. I guess that's why she's a monster. Then I got kicked out of the theatre for indecent exposure. I kept asking them for some water. I was so dehydrated. They said that they would call the police if I didn't pull my pants up. Then I went home and wrote this review. That was over five years ago, and I still remember monster-in-law whenever I touch myself. Mostly because of the tazer scars. This was easily the worst time I've ever had in a theatre, but it wasn't all the movie's fault. I was sweating profusely, and this girl with shorts sitting next to me kept looking at me, alarmed, whenever bumped her leg with my elbow, which was about 12 times per second. Then her mom saw me and screamed and that's when it was all over.

This movie was a total waste of three hours of time I could of put to better use watching porn and be less ashamed I watched it afterwards. I found myself hoping for that blue chick to get naked, but instead there I am sitting in the theatre with an erection and nothing to do with it. There wasn't even a point where I could relieve myself and stand up to get popcorn to make the movie slightly bearable to sit through. I was p**sed! From all the quarter-second nip-slips, I could have sworn they would throw me something I could use. The reason I had to desperately hope for nudity through this movie is because its story was unoriginal and packed with stupid gimmicks to make people ignore the bad writing. Also all its characters were one dimensional and very uninspired making me not care about them whatsoever. The main characters 'dramatic decision' he had to make has been used so many times before, and was so poorly executed that you know what choice he's going to make the second you see the options he has. Also the CGI sucked because they over-emphasized it being so-called 'State-of-the-Art' CGI, so I knew for sure it was fake, I couldn't believe or enjoy it. Overall, I would rather watch a man pulling up old carpeting than this Hollywood garbage.

So... What I'm getting is there's this Dominatrix running around with a cape, funny ears, and a husky/scary/arousing voice. Who also beats up guys in parking garages, but none of them got aroused, so the story didn't go anywhere. She probably should have whipped them. also there was this rich guy who it showed a lot, but he didn't really have anything to do with the story. It was strange. But on the other hand there is that buxom green haired lady who gets beat by the Dominatrix and then dresses up as a nurse. I'd buy that for a dollar. Anyday. I think the Dominatrix probably should have got slightly naked, she's got some big pecs if you know what I mean and I would have liked to find out if the carpet matched the drapes. Like, That's the stuff I would bump into on the street "by accident". That Gordon guy had a moustache that made me wonder... But I digress, there was a lot of teasing, without any climactic moments of trepidating fulfillment, or masochistic zeal. I was appalled, disappointed, and, finally, ashamed. It almost makes you wonder how director Christopher Nolan even thought he was making an erotic film.

I watched this movie under the influence that it would be good. I don't get it. Is this supposed to be entertaining? The plot was totally pointless. Here's what happens: Some kid goes to a boat and finds this dog and then his stepfather says he can't keep it. Then there is a bear, and it's after the stepfather, but the dog comes to save him. Then it gets rabies and the boy freezes to death. How did that happen? I though this was about a boat? There was only one in the beginning. My friend later explained to me that I fell asleep and had a dream that was more interesting than this movie. That sort of explains why instead of credits I just got shoved by the usher and told to leave the theatre. Oh well, it was a long time ago.