Reviews

Antonio Sabato, Jr. is possibly the worst actor of his generation. And his acting "skills" are put to good use in this terrible adaptation of the beloved Edgar Rice Burroughs novel, "A Princess of Mars."

Obviously bad acting, with a cast of the worst Soap Opera actors and middle-age porn stars money can rent, special effects that were done on a TRS-80, and Martian masks that your 3rd grader made in art class.

Yes, it's terrible. On the other hand, some people like terrible movies, and Asylum must be doing something right because they're still in business. My auntie thinks the Sharknado films are hilarious, and, if nothing else, their films do keep terrible actors like Sabato from turning to gay porn, and former porn actresses from ending up in legit movies. AND, I guess Asylum does give would-be directors a chance to recognize they're not cut out to direct, so there's that, too. So, if you have no expectations, and laughing along with terrible movies is your thing, who am I to discourage you?

My original review is below, and I must admit, I was completely wrong about this show. I had some free time and scoured Netflix for something to watch, and I decided to give Dark Matter another look. I binged all 39 episodes. It's really good, which just goes to show that you shouldn't judge a series by its first episode.

Original Rating: * * * (3 stars) Original Headline: Not worth your time

The spaceship is a clone of the Nostromo - even the interior set. The characters are black & white copies of the beloved crew of Serenity. The plot and awkward, cheesy, lifeless dialogue is at about the level of the worst episodes (of which there are MANY) of the throw-away sci-fi series Andromeda. Melissa O'Neil is very easy on the eyes, but that can't save this dog of a show.

In order for this to be published here on IMDb, the review needs to have 10 lines, for some reason. Not all programs really need 10 lines to do properly review them, and thus, this entire paragraph is simply filler.

I enjoy Castle - big fan of Nathan Fillion - but their Production Designer & Wardrobe person leave something to be desired.

As a New Yorker, I can usually forgive the obvious non-New York locals (like the #7 train going to Brooklyn) but this episode just went too far. Firstly, there has NEVER been a subway car that looks remotely like the car in this episode. Secondly, the turnstiles are all wrong. Thirdly, they can't decide if this is a 7th AVENUE station or a 7th STREET station - the outside sign read "7th Avenue" and the sign inside the station read "7th Street" - they're not the same thing.

Worst of all though is that the wardrobe stylist is completely unaware that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority PD does not patrol or have anything to do with the NYC Subway system; that's the exclusive job of the NYPD. Officer Aragon would never be on duty or even in uniform on the train.

So the plot of this episode was weak but the production design spoiled what would otherwise have been a mediocre episode.

Well, firstly I would like to suggest to reviewers Midnight_Rainbow and A_New_Hope that if Paranormal Paparazzi ever does a show with Trolls, you two should be featured. Secondly, Paranormal Paparazzi is an entertainment news show, NOT a paranormal investigative news show, so it's kind of ridiculous to criticize the program because you don't understand what it is. Afterall, it's called Paranormal PAPARAZZI, so the reporters speak to the people who video-ed the stuff or witnessed the event. It's not TMZ, which mocks the celebs, and it's not Fact Or Faked, which tries to debunk, it's just an entertainment show that spotlights interesting/strange people and events. So get over yourselves, Midnight_Rainbow and A_New_Hope. It's way too easy to anonymously trash things from the safety of your parents' basements.

I was really looking forward to this series, after SyFy canceled "Caprica." But then I watched it. "BSG: Blood and Chrome" is not horrible, but it is not good, either, and it's certainly not worthy of the Battlestar Galactica name. The biggest problem - and it's a huge problem - is that the entire show is obviously CG and greenscreen. Everything except the actors and some hand-props are computer generated, including ALL the sets and set pieces. The producers try to hide this using a strange color palette, After Effects lens flare and dark lighting, but it doesn't help. It's a shame, too, because it was a promising idea.

My granny always said, if you can't say something nice, don't say anything. That's a pretty tall order for this movie. If you can get past the incomprehensible plot, the ridiculous costumes, the cheesy sets, the 1990s looking "special effects," the awful dialogue, and especially, the terrible acting, you will eventually reach the end. So the best thing I can say about "Ice Planet" is that it does end. BUT - be warned - that's 83 minutes of your life you'll never get back.

Happily, this was not the swan song of the late director, Winrich Colby, who did direct some quality and memorable episodes of Star Trek (TNG, DS9, Voyager). Rest In Peace.

This is very possibly the worst movie I have seen this year. Was it actually released theatrically? Wow! Generally, when you see the name Luc Besson attached to a production, the two things you can be assured of are a terrible script, and bad directing. Usually bad acting, too. In this case, he doesn't disappoint (or rather, he does). It's strange to see good actors in what would be considered a below average "Made for SyFy Channel" crappy space movie. In fact, as low as SyFy's standards are, they might actually Pass on this one.

Why on Earth is Guy Pearce in this? He was in L.A. Confidential, for god's sake. Seriously, why?? And Peter Stormare, while I'm sure is a very nice person, is terrible in virtually anything that requires him to do an American accent. He can't do one - please, Peter, stop trying. It's terrible. Be Swedish.

So, in summary, this movie is terrible. Don't pay to see it, don't block out time to watch it... Just don't.

This is perhaps one of the worst high-budget (?? - visual effects are expensive) science-fiction series I've ever seen. I struggled through the first season, hoping it would get better, but I just can't bring myself to watch anything beyond the 2nd episode of season 2. Why not, you may ask? Well, let me break it down:

* Terrible acting, as bad as a SyFy Original "creature of the week" movie, but since a couple of the cast are not bad actors, I'll have to blame the directors and the writers.

* The directing is amateurish. None of the characters have any authenticity and all the relationships feel forced and phony -- there is no "chemistry" between any of the principle cast and I think they know it.

* The dialogue is clumsy and over-written.

* The music is overpowering, and it seems the directors are using it to "try" to convey suspense, action, romance, etc. that they are not able to create on-screen.

In summary, it's terrible. Unless you have extremely low standards, please don't waste your time; I've done it for you. TNT, maybe you could take some of your VFX budget and spend it on a professional writer, experienced directors, and an on-set acting coach. Or even better, don't bother -- put this thing out of its misery. Moon Bloodgood it lovely, though, but if you're a fan, watch her in "Journeyman" instead.

I love the new Hawaii Five-0. Great cast from my favorite shows, Battlestar Galactica and Lost. Usually, the guest stars enhance the story and compliment the performances of the series regulars, but in this case... Sean Combs has absolutely no business in this terrific show because he has no acting skills at all. His face might as well be carved out of stone and his only expression screams, "Get me outta here!" It's like someone severed the nerves controlling his facial muscles. The kid playing his son is equally ineffective; then again, he's only 11, so he'll improve. This is the problem with casting non-actors in roles that require them to act, and share the screen with good actors - it just doesn't work. Let's hope we never have to see Sean Combs play anyone but Sean Combs in any other show. And all you casting directors out there, PLEASE, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, DON'T DESTROY GOOD SHOWS BY CASTING CELEBRITIES JUST TO GET A LITTLE BUMP IN RATINGS!!

Okay, maybe I'm dating myself (I have to since no one else will), but this movie is simply an updated, and unattributed, ripoff of the classic, and one of my favorite films, "Logan's Run." I started to get a deja vu feeling about 30 minutes in, when Jude Law's character became Logan 5, and Forest Whitaker morphed into Francis 7. They even have a Jessica 6 in the guise of "Beth." About half-way through the film, there's a scene that is lifted, almost shot-for-shot from "Logan's Run." I haven't read the book this is based upon, and maybe it's just the director who stole from the 1976 film, but either way, just watch the original.

Saoirse Ronan is terrific and her Susie Salmon is worth the price of admission. Even though we've all seen the spots and trailers and know Susie is murdered, I still found myself hoping against hope that she would somehow get away. Alas... Mark Wahlberg is miscast in every film, so if you can tolerate him, you will enjoy this film. I was very fortunate to attend a special screening that featured a Q&A with Peter Jackson, Stanley Tucci and Susan Sarandon, and it was obvious that the film means something to them, especially Peter Jackson. Yes, there are a lot of special effects and CG to illustrate Susie's afterlife, but honestly, how else would you do it? Anyone? I thought not. There are a lot of Peter Jackson haters posting reviews here, and to them I say, "Show me your film!" I haven't read the book - don't plan to either - but Alice Sebold was happy with the film version, so that's good enough for me. I expect Saoirse Ronan will have a very successful career - lovely, talented girl.

This show is so dumb it doesn't deserve to be related to CSI. The characters are as wooden as Pinocchio, and the performances are worse. I live in NYC, and I have NEVER met anyone with the accents of Detectives Danny Messer or Don Flack -- seriously, I don't care that both of these actors were born here, their accents are so heavily affected they're ridiculous. But even worse than the accents is the unrealistic technology these detectives use. The NYPD barely has computers built after 1990 and they absolutely don't have Dick Tracy video phones, 3-D video projection, spacious offices with glass walls, and time to spend days on a single case. Yes, it's only TV, but it has absolutely nothing to do with New York City or the NYPD.

Some of you posting here are a little confused. Michael Moore is as patriotic an American as there is. Let's not forget that a TRUE patriot is someone who will speak out against injustice -- even when perpetrated by his government. The big lie promulgated by the radical Right is that Socialized Medicine = Socialism/Communism. The unsophisticated and uneducated masses in this country believe it: they think that waving the flag and "supporting the President" mean they love America. But America is not the President. America is not the Administration. Think for yourselves. Michael Moore has debunked the LIES spread by the insurance industry: the Canadian system works and ALL Canadians like it. Same for the Brits and the French. Someone wrote, "...I disagree with his facts..." and that makes NO SENSE -- a fact is a fact and is not open to interpretation: if it's not true, it's not a fact. The FACT is that thousands of our fellow Americans die unnecessarily every year because they cannot afford medical treatment. It's not because they would rather spend their money on recreational drugs. It's not because they're "livin' large" at the taxpayers' expense. It's because there's no money left for insurance after rent, food, clothing, transportation to/from work, student loans and taxes (mostly used to fund the war in Iraq). It's because we live in a country that values corporate profits over human lives. It's because there is no such thing as a corporate conscience. It's because we allow the un-Christian, Undemocratic, IMMORAL practice of "for profit" health insurance. When a doctor working for a health insurance company is awarded bonuses for rejecting the most legitimate claims, there is something very wrong with that company -- and the industry. Wake up America. The insurance industry hopes you're stupid. The Bush Administration thinks you are. Don't be a sap.

What is it about drug addiction that so draws first-time filmmakers to offer their own take on the subject? This subject has been done to death. Drug abuse is bad. We get it. Drug addiction is painful to watch. We get that too. But the bleak subject matter doesn't give the filmmaker license to make a sloppy film. Every film need not be Hitchcockian masterpiece of cinematic excellence, or use Orson Wellesian deep focus, but it's still a narrative movie. Verite does not mean pseudo-documentary. Even consumer mini-DV cameras are capable of producing white whites and black blacks, and this filmmaker is just being lazy by shooting no contrast scenes with existing lighting: the subject is bleak enough without artificially forcing it with sloppy cinematography. And even documentary films have a sound mix. Vera Farmiga is very talented, given the right material, but the director obviously over-directed her and sucked all the life out of her performance. Addicts may live in a fog, but they still have emotions, but none of these characters seem to exist off-screen. The supporting players merely delivered their lines without creating real people. Sorry to be so harsh, Debra, but some things are true whether want to believe them or not. I'm sure your next film will be better -- but please, not another drug movie. :)

Well, with far too many movies this season, the trailer is the best part of the movie. Unfortunately, the same holds true for "Hide and Seek." I won't summarize the plot here; so many IMDb users write long synopses instead of writing reviews. I won't spoil the plot or give away the ending. I will break it down into the Good and Bad.

GOOD: 1) Dakota Fanning - What a great little actress! Never fails to delight. Her 'Emily' is a very sympathetic character, and Dakota steals every scene -- not because she's cute, but because her performance is so deliberate and so exact that the audience is compelled to watch her face for clues to what's going on in Emily's mind. It's too early to think 2006 Oscars, and the Academy doesn't usually pay attention to Winter movies (or this genre), but Dakota should get a nomination -- she's just that good. 2) There are some genuinely creepy scenes, and some good suspense. 3) Sorry, there is no #3

BAD: There is no "Bad" really, just overall it was not good. The "twist" at the end was not entirely unexpected, and was not original.

So, it's an okay 'date movie,' but don't expect a De Niro masterpiece. Worth a look if you want a few real scares and maybe a nightmare or two.

Having seen this movie, I cannot understand why SIDEWAYS has been getting such critical acclaim and multiple Oscar nominations. The only laugh is the Sandra Oh, "I need to be spanked." line. She was good -- probably the best part of the film. Virginia Madsen ('Maya') has had a rather unexceptional movie career -- and her best role was probably in "The Hot Spot." She's talented, and beautiful, but she has had a horribly managed career up to now (obviously, an Oscar nomination is a good thing), and we who have always appreciated her, have been deprived of a decade of good Virginia Madsen films: she's done much better work than this. The film itself is just a slice of life. And not a particularly interesting slice. The audience doesn't really get to know, or care, about Miles Raymond (Paul Giamatti). So Miles has some misadventures with his friend Jack (Thomas Haden Church) on Jack's last weekend of freedom -- so what? Not to take anything away from the actors, the problems with this movie are a boring script, thinly written characters, uninspired directing, blah cinematography, awful music (sorry) that could have come out of any stock library, and a way too clever ending (i.e. pretentious). Don't say you weren't warned.

Wow, this movie was even worse than my expectations. The editor must have ADD, because the cutting was so fast it was almost subliminal. Both the editor and director have absolutely no idea how to cut an action sequence -- all close-ups without even the illusion that Halle was actually working that day. And the CG was not up to the task. Dumb story, dialogue sounding like it was written by a seventh grader, bad directing, bad editing, bad acting, awful and inappropriate music, and a ridiculous catwoman mask. It's completely unwatchable. Even Halle Berry's beautiful face, sexy body and round booty would not justify a five minute look. Pitof thinks he's a DIRECTOR, but this movie proves he's not even a competent VISUAL EFFECTS DIRECTOR. It's a crime that any studio would blow $100M on a pseudo director when this country is chock-full of actual directors who could have taken that same budget and made 40 good movies.