Reviews

4 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
College (2008)
1/10
To curtail the outlandishly positive reviews...
27 January 2009
To start, I didn't think this movie was abysmal. Sure, it was terrible in most every way possible -- I didn't care for the characters, nobody with acting skill was used, and the plot was thinner than a coked-up supermodel. The cast was lifted straight from another, already-mentioned movie. The introduction completely plagiarized a different movie. Verne Troyer's unnecessary appearance perpetuates two more things: the film's budget was grossly mis-allocated and Troyer's career is dying painfully.

In fact, I cannot think of one redeeming quality for this movie. But with new director and new production crew I could give it a "nice effort" at best. I was actually going to rate this three stars.

Then I just read the last two pages of these comments. These guys, the film crew (or whoever hired people to write these reviews), seriously are douche bags. All of the reviews are quite obviously planted -- written in almost precisely the same tone, and tout how fantastic and smart this movie is. Comparable to the well-written classics, let alone exude superiority? Not even close. The fat kid is not the next Chris Farley. Drake Bell should stick with kids' shows (maybe he'll be the next quasi-boring Jason Bateman in 30 years). Chicken Little got a lucky break with an acting job from his 15 minutes of fame.

If the crew had any sense whatsoever, they would not have written a dozen or so ten-star reviews prior to the film's release. Maybe then we wouldn't have had such high expectations for the movie, or be completely biased against them.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Two bucks wasted...period (review done by a 22 year old).
16 December 2006
Warning: Spoilers
When I saw the first Santa Clause at the age of 10 it had set the standard for Christmas movies for me. Nearly a decade later I could understand why they brought out a sequel - Disney is no longer doing a feature film per summer and they need to pay rent. I saw it anyway and it was exactly what I expected it to be.

The third film I went to see with my girlfriend at a dollar theater and still walked out feeling like I wasted two bucks.

Tim Allen didn't appear to give a damn about this movie other than that it's going to pay his cell phone bills for the next three months. Martin Short, as someone else had mentioned, is an acquired taste -- a taste that I do not care for and actually found somewhat annoying. I couldn't believe the original Neil, Laura, and Charlie were brought back though I felt they were used as filler characters more than anything. They didn't have any kind of situation or purpose in the movie other than to become victims of Jack Frost's Polar Ice breath. Santa Claus seemed to enjoy the company of his ex-wife much more so than his current one. The omission of Bernard is inexcusable. The "legendary characters" was a bit much and didn't add to the story, especially the Easter Bunny's horrible 70's Wookie costume. The kids playing the elves didn't even look thrilled to be there, regardless of who was playing Santa. The set from the first movie was huge -- outside looked like a dark, expansive glacier and indoors was a gigantic toy workshop. In this movie the outdoor set looked more like the sunny, bubbly Dr. Seuss Land at Islands of Adventure, and anything indoors was inconceivably tiny and elf-like, completely ignoring the fact that the "head elf", Santa, is a full-sized man.

The special effects were far worse than the first movie 12 years ago. In the first movie, the producer actually cared about the outcome and therefore sunk a large sum of money into the best special effects at the time. SC3 showcases every possible SFX shortcut. The CGI reindeer were pathetic -- the cartoony Scooby Doo eyes were just stupid. Just goes to show you that the art of puppeteering is gone for good. The "magic snow globe" looked like a novelty souvenir bought at a convenience store. Santa's sleigh looked like a poorly-built plywood prop. A lot of the sound effects were textbook cartoon fare...for a cartoon made 50 years ago. These kinds of details do not go unnoticed.

The filmmakers even had the audacity to use actual cut-scenes from the first movie - about 90 seconds worth - which to me is pretty tacky; seems like they just needed some more filler.

The entire movie is supposed to be a story being told by Mrs. Claus to her classroom but the introduction was so short I forgot all about that. I thought the movie was ending just as it cut back to the classroom with about 3 more minutes of movie. I'm glad I stayed for the Buddy Claus scene though - the generic baby with a red scarf on his head was the star of this scene.

This movie was so dumbed down it's unbelievable. Seeing the first movie at the young age I did of course I wasn't going to understand some of the adult humor. As I grew up, though, it was a lot of fun to understand some of the jokes that I had missed as a kid, which is what's so appealing about that movie. In SC3, if a 6 year-old fails to understand something it's because he's had some kind of unfortunate mental handicap.

The storyline's been described so many times by other members it's not worth it for me to go into. What I haven't seen anybody mention, however, is that this is a Christmas movie featuring Santa Claus on Christmas Eve and there is barely any mention of delivering toys to kids, much less any kind of action taken in preparation to do so. It's small, I know, but again it's the details.

Just chalk it up as another crappy Disney sequel.
5 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Ha ha ha what a piece of ...
25 December 2005
First off, I'm not a die-hard Dukes of Hazzard fan. I don't think I've even seen an episode. So I'm completely unbiased.

What a waste of...well...everything. Waste of money, waste of casting big actors, and worst of all, a waste of Dodge Chargers (and various other cars). A friend snuck me into the theater to see this and I still wanted my money back. There was nothing to laugh at. Jessica Simpson is type-casted as a dumbass blonde. Seann William Scott plays a watered down version of Steven Stifler. Johnny Knoxville plays a watered down version of...well...Johnny Knoxville. If you want to see Jessica Simpson half-naked, go buy a wall poster. You will get all the benefits of seeing her mammary real-estate without the hassle of hearing her speak. As I mentioned before, I almost cried coming out of the theater just thinking about all the cars they ruined to make this crap.

Super Troopers is a classic. Now please stop trying to make movies.
10 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Definitely Not on Par with the First Three
12 December 2005
I love the American Pie movies. I think they set a new standard for teen comedy flicks. But this installment just does not cut it.

This movie is absolute garbage. Nobody in their right mind wants to sit through an hour and a half of some kid doing a lame Steve Stifler impression. The rest of the acting was at most on par with some of the crappier made-for-TV Disney Channel movies, which to no surprise, some have the same director (Zenon was a real winner). Most of the profanity and "nude scenes" felt forced, as if they were there for prerequisite purposes only and offer no humor or shock value whatsoever. The aforementioned "nude scenes", by the way, are actually more or less left to the imagination, as each one cuts away before any real nudity happens (with the exception of Matt Stifler's corny bedroom game scene where you get to see 17 year old boy ass - who isn't looking forward to that!). Nudity isn't required by any means but it was definitely one of the stronger draws of the series. On the one hand we actually have high school aged kids realistically portraying their roles (as opposed to 25 year olds playing high school kids), but on the other that's where another fault lies: these are amateurish kid actors and are barely believable roles (Chinese gang member at band camp? sure!). The jokes are lame. The hidden camera stunts are old and uninteresting.

And I can understand Chris Owen may be short of work, but how did they manage to cast Eugene Levy in such a despicable role yet fail to cast the kid that played Matt Stifler from the first two movies, who was actually entertaining? Possibly because they blew the entire movie budget on Levy? I'd believe it! If it weren't for the ultra strategic placement of swear words and gratuitous wonder bra scenes, this should have been ABC Family or Disney Channel fodder, at best. The director should be downright embarrassed.
20 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed