Change Your Image
Ripshin
Reviews
Area 51 (2015)
Definitely in the minority
I actually enjoyed the film. More than I expected.
Granted it takes a while to kick in, and the ending will bother many, but I find the scenes in the Area 51 base to be quite tense.
Is everything explained? Not at all.
I'll admit to being quite surprised at the hate directed towards this film. Perhaps people were expecting another "Paranormal Activity" from director Peli?
I watch a LOT of found footage, and this is certainly better than most of the garbage that users give six or seven stars. Having just watched the awful "Hanger 10" right before this flick, I can definitely say it is a WHOLE lot better.
I'm glad I didn't read the reviews first, or I might have skipped it.
Hangar 10 (2014)
Completely falls apart
The final third of this film makes absolutely no sense. It doesn't help that many of the scenes were filmed in complete darkness.
Why do these people keep running away from each other?
Exactly WHO is holding the shaky cameras when the two people are left on the military base? Often, they are completely separated (a distance apart), yet each of them has a "third party" camera pointed at them. That makes absolutely no sense.
So, basically the aliens were infecting (some - not birds, apparently) life on earth with something causing "spikes" to grow out of bodies? That's it??
The film just meanders into a pointless conclusion.
NOTE: The accents are had to understand at times, and the streamer I was using - XUMO - was not subtitling all of the dialogue.
The Levenger Tapes (2013)
More of the lame same
OK, first of all, the lead actor just doesn't work here.
As usual, this is obnoxious people doing very stupid things. Time and again, you just yell at the screen, "What the ____ are you DOING?!!"
Yes, let's wander through the "dark" countryside (heavily fake lit, by the way) towards a guy whose truck we hit and ran from earlier. Let's continually creep into dark bushes because we see or hear "something." Let's open a "cage" (wait, there's no TOP), and step in with some crazy, monster woman inside. (Of course she escapes, and then somebody follows her into a strange house/cabin.)
Let' me go back to the "dark woods," where they're constantly using "night vision" on the camera...it's lighted like a football field. OOOOOOOOH, scary!!!
The ending is a hot mess.
Listen, my family once had a cabin in the remote woods, and I guarantee you, I would never have wandered around after dark. D'OH!!
Give me a horror movie, where everyone does the most logical thing - it can be done.
Butterfly Kisses (2018)
Terrible
I'll admit, that I lasted only thirty minutes. I normally slog through this stuff, but in this case, it is pointless.
This is really a sloppy "found footage" entry.
The "real people" actors are terrible. The lead performances are equally bad. "I've got it, Feldman." "I would not put my good name on the line." HUH? Cringe-worthy.
This comes across as a rehash of "The Blair Witch Project," at least as a "distant cousin."
I love found footage as a genre, but apparently, FAR too many people believe that they have mastered the formula. 75% of these films are garbage. If all else fails, copy "Blair."
Give it a rest.
UPDATE: I actually sat through the whole THING. Terrible. Probably the WORST "found footage" film that I've seen. SKIP IT.
Followed (2015)
Loved it
FINALLY, one of these films has leads that are normal, intelligent, and yes, attractive. None of the usual smarmy jerks.
Yes, the film is basically watching a couple on a road trip, but with a persistent undercurrent that kept me watching. This is what many would call a "slow burn," I suppose. I wasn't bored at all.
Great found footage flick.
Now, being that several people have made the same comment, I will say something. Folks, when you mention a "twist ending," guess what??? IT IS NO LONGER A TWIST ENDING. D'oh! Granted, if you put a spoiler alert and hide the review, it's fair game. However, it's a ridiculous habit that MANY users slip into. Just stop.
Exists (2014)
I didn't know that this film existed
I am a HUGE fan of "The Blair Witch Project." I have seen it well over fifty times.
This film is ten years old. I have NO idea why I didn't know about it. Sanchez directed both, of course.
I almost cut this off within the first ten minutes. The characters are total jerks. WHY? Wouldn't it be great, to have likable, intelligent people?
There are some really tense moments in this film, but they are undercut by the performances.
Idiots doing stupid things.
And Sanchez rips off his own "Blair," several times. Matt yelling in the distance? Josh in "Blair."
The Bigfoot cave? The house at the end of "Blair."
And if I heard the word "bro" one more time, I was going to punch the screen.
I am just amazed, that I never knew about this flick. It must have not received much attention.
Poltergeist (2015)
Pointless beyond belief
WHY was this made? It is such a pale imitation of the original.
I understand remakes. It has always been a "thing" in the industry. But THIS just feels so unnecessary. The original is iconic.
This is what you'd call "paint-by-numbers." (And I have an amazing collection of about two hundred originals. They are fantastic, but this is not.)
The acting is fine, but so insignificant, considering the original.
Wow, the director helmed the latest "Ghostbusters"?? I'll be curious. I am slogging my way through this film - I will attempt to complete it.
Wait, this Jared Harris stuff. Just NO. Signing out with thirty minutes left.
Don't bother.
Palm Royale (2024)
Hot mess
The set design is incredible.
But the series sinks, with every episode.
I have finished whatever the latest episode is, and I am just chugging through it. Such a waste.
I am curious about the ratings. I am hearing NOTHING about this. Even Apple+ has pushed it down the ladder, in terms of exposure.
Rather than a Kristen Wiig skit, I would have enjoyed this, more in the vein of "Big Little Lies," or something similar.
The slapstick is tiresome.
Great to see Carol Burnett. However, it feels like stunt casting.
I will watch it till the end, but I will be surprised if it is cleared for a second season.
I'll Love You Forever... Tonight (1992)
Impressive independent, "student" film
This film pleasantly surprised me. Fortunately, I didn't read these other reviews, prior to watching.
The performances are honest, and much better than the usual graduate thesis film (UCLA, in this case).
Paul Marius as "Ethan" is a truly effective lead. In many ways, beyond the plot revolving around him, he is also standing in for the film audience, closely observing what is going on with a group of gay men around him. He is also coming to terms with his past.
Victims of child abuse can often suffer an inability to become emotionally involved in relationships as an adult. I do not believe that this film is implying that the sexual molestation by his father, when he was quite young, is the "cause" of him being gay.
The other performers feel quite natural. As a former film school student myself, I can definitely say that director Bravo crafted a professional independent feature.
I love the black and white photography, and the often Brian Eno-esque score.
I am surprised that Marius does not have many acting credits. I really love his performance here.
I recommend this film.
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: You'll Be the Death of Me (1963)
Lesser entry
Frankly, every time one of the episodes of this series is set in a small town, most of the actors speak with a ridiculously fake, twangy hillbilly accent. It is distracting, and pointless. Couldn't they find actors with natural accents? Plus, it is so unnecessary to the plot. I'm surprised that they aren't playing banjos, with stalks of straw in their teeth.
Loggia's performance is weak. Basically yelling a large percentage of his lines.
He threw the button on the ground for somebody else to find? With his FINGERPRINTS on it?
Why would "Driver's" wife put herself in danger with questions, if she really believes he killed Bette Rose? Especially with his temper. Also, why didn't she scream LOUDLY when she had the chance?
I'm not convinced that the mute character was essential.
Another one to skip.
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: Murder Case (1964)
Incredibly grating
John Cassavetes is far too over the top in this episode. He's annoying whenever he's on screen. Scene after scene...he's just yelling sometimes.
Rowland fares much better.
What is surprising, is that actor Murray Matheson, who plays Rowland's "older" husband, was just 51 at the time!! He could pass for 75+.
The plot is dull. Many minutes pass without much happening.
The set design for the "play" is quite ugly - it should be presented as more than some "community theater" production.
I lasted about half-way, and turned it off. The first "Hitchcock Hour" that I have stopped watching.
Just skip it.
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: How to Get Rid of Your Wife (1963)
Not a fan of the comedic episodes
I wonder what viewers thought, seeing the exterior and interior sets of "Leave It to Beaver" in this episode, only six months after that series ended. Somewhat iconic at the time. Kind of like seeing the studio interior set from "The Brady Bunch" torched in the awful horror film "Bug" (1975), just a year after the series ended.
I thoroughly enjoy both Newhart and Withers, but this episode is a bit shrill and tedious.
The soundtrack is odd - a bit 'breezy"/jaunty/light jazzy, and distracting.
The rat poison plot is ridiculous, as is the conclusion.
Thirty years ago, I had the please of speaking with Withers on the phone, when attempting to set up a screening of one of her early films. She was charming, and she wanted to attend. Unfortunately #@*% Twentieth Century Fox (at the time) wouldn't allow us to obtain a copy of the film.
I do not recommend this episode. You won't be missing much if you skip it.
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: Terror at Northfield (1963)
Yet ANOTHER disappointing entry
Well, at least they didn't present the small town residents as a bunch of hillbillies. Only a few short scenes of townspeople with a slight accent.
I found it odd, that when the first two murders were discovered, a bunch of rubber-necking town folks show up. It appeared to be an isolated location.
"Darrin Stephens" doesn't make for the most forceful sheriff.
I found the whole "I had to kill everyone who owned the car, because there wasn't a date of death" conclusion to be quite lame.
I have not read the Ellery Queen short story, "Terror Town," on which this episode is based. Another review states that it doesn't involve a car.
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: A Nice Touch (1963)
Stinkaroo
Without a doubt, one of the most bland entries in the series. The plot, what there is of one, is a total bore.
However, the most negative aspect is Anne Baxter's performance - a major ham fest. This is nothing new, of course. Of her work, the only thing I've ever enjoyed is "All About Eve."
Segal doesn't fare much better. James Farentino plays a somewhat similar character in Season 3, and nails it.
Her fawning over "Larry Duke" is ludicrous, especially after the initial scenes with her character being strong and assured. We are to believe that she immediately turns into a simpering fool?
"Hitchcock Hour" often presents intelligent women doing incredibly stupid things (murder, usually), all in the name of "love." I would expect that from 1950s TV, but not in the mid-60s. Of course, Hitchcock and women - to be expected. (Although the episodes are based on the works of writers., of course.)
Even the conclusion is insipid.
Skip it.
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: Bed of Roses (1964)
This show and The South
Hitchcock Hour consistently presents Southerners as drawling idiots.
The accents in this episode are horrendous, particularly Kathie Browne's, portraying her "Mavis" character as an excruciating (yet murdering) dimwit.
And George Lindsey has a natural, pleasant accent, yet he is directed to speak in an exaggerated manner. Just annoying, as is his stereotypical performance as "Sam." (It does tone down a bit, as the episode progresses.)
"Bed of Roses" is padded with several pointless, or drawn out, scenes. The timeline makes no sense. George finds his dead "girlfriend" in the middle of the night, and leaves without reporting it to the police, yet the newspapers have a detailed story a few hours later.
The first three-quarters of the episode takes place within 24 hours??
The conclusion is an out-of-the-blue contrivance. And of course, Hitchcock makes the standard "criminals always get captured" wrap-up. Meh.
The three stars are for Patrick O/Neal - always a pleasure to watch.
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: Beast in View (1964)
A hot mess
This episode is ALL OVER THE PLACE. Wonky plot. Bad acting.
Where to start? LOTS of horrible supporting performances.
I am puzzled how this even made it through the screening process. Sloppy beyond belief. Awful.
Safe to say, this is the worst episodes of the series.
Kathleen Nolan's performance is cringe-worthy. I blame the director.
The conclusion is hilarious, and not in a good way. I couldn't stop laughing.
Seriously, this is really, really ridiculous.
WOW. What's with the "mirror" stuff?
Seriously, THE. WORST. EPISODE. Inept, at a student film level.
Have a drink, and watch this. Just...just...just.
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: Behind the Locked Door (1964)
Hate the wrap-arounds
Why shouldn't Swanson's "Mrs. Daniels" get away with her plan, as she didn't actually murder him? Why would she end up in jail?
It's great to see Swanson, but she tends to chew the scenery, unlike Lillian Gish in her performance the same season.
MacArthur's take on "Dave" is fine, although his little happy dance at the end seems forced. (And does his "song" include a word that kind of shocks me for 1963?)
The whole suicide scheme is ridiculous, especially if "Bonnie" knows that she can't survive barbiturates. And I don't buy just because she recently turned eighteen, she couldn't recognize that Dave is horrible. (I know, I know - her "upbringing." Supposedly. Meh.)
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: Body in the Barn (1964)
Watch it for Gish
Gish is really in top form - her performance sets the perfect tone, without going over the top, something many actors fall victim to in this series. The supporting cast is also quite good.
My only complaint would be the second half, when the plot gets a bit outlandish. Yes, typical Hitchcock Hour, but it might have been manipulated a bit better.
I would need to watch it again, but I don't remember when the people in the town all found out that the body in the barn wasn't Mr. Wilkins. Obviously after Mrs. Wilkins was executed - Gish is listening to the news report about it, when Mr. Wilkins suddenly appears. I assume at that point.
I also had difficulty "buying" that Gish's niece is part of the deception - that seems contrived. Did they "fish" Efram out of the rapids?
Definitely a worthy episode.
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: Nothing Ever Happens in Linvale (1963)
Enjoyable, but somewhat silly "plot"
I always enjoy seeing Thaxter in an episode - she's consistently great. Parker and Merrill are also excellent.
The casting of a few of the supporting characters is weak, particularly Furth as "Charlie." He's too much of a dim-wit. This is often the case when this series has a small town setting. Half the people act like rubes.
The plot, as a few user reviewers point out, is quite idiotic when you really think about it. Why bring attention to her disappearance? Just tell the neighbors she left him. Keep your "story" consistent. Granted, questions would arise, being that the murdered wife was so active in the small community. However, just leave the body where it was originally buried. Give it some time, then get together as a (murdering) couple. Move in Mrs. Logan's house. (That house has appeared in a few Hitchcock Hour episodes.)
I certainly didn't care for the dog/rat poison stuff, but it was apparently necessary for the silly "scheme."
Definitely worth watching. And, no, I did not foresee the ending - that was a surprise.
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: Good-Bye, George (1963)
Almost unwatchble
First of all. The casting of Stubby Kaye? Horrendous in the role of "George." He is a cartoonish mess, and it is completely unbelievable that he would ever have been married to "Lana," regardless if she were seventeen at the time. His line delivery belongs in some lame C-level comedy from the Forties. Fortunately, he is the victim almost half-way through (as was obvious from the start) - I came very close to turning off the episode.
And, of course, Alice Pearce plays a variation of the same character she performs in almost everything she does.
The whole border inspection scenario seems quite unlikely.
The ending is idiotic, and you can see it coming. The body would NOT have been moved before the house was unlocked. The agent would NOT have snuck the press into the cottage, no matter the attempted plot set-up of appeasing "Haila."
An episode to be missed.
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: Where the Woodbine Twineth (1965)
Well, I'm not reliving childhood memories
I just watched this for the first time, as an adult. I can see how it can be quite creepy for young kids, but I don't find it to be that effective. And back when this first aired, people were also watching "The Twilight Zone," so I imagine that this was not completely a surprise.
Actually, I was enjoying it, until the ending came around. How are they going to explain what happened to the child? Will they assume that "Nell" is insane? Of course, the others will see that the doll now looks like "Eva." I just can't take the ending at face value. The girl turned into a doll..."The End." What happens to "Numa"?
The doll switcheroo is a gimmick.
The commenters have gone a bit over-the-top with ecstatic praise.
Basically, a good episode for children, who likely won't ask logical questions after viewing.
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: See the Monkey Dance (1964)
Chatty Cathy
With some slight adjustments, this could very well be turned into a stage play. As many have commented - lots of talk, and very little action.
McDowall is usually quite "hammy" with his performances, and this is no exception. Zimbalist is also over-the-top, which is not the norm for him.
How many times could "George" have whacked "The Stranger" with that shovel?
I will admit, that I didn't figure out the conclusion. The reveal is quite understated. I suppose that The Stranger's earlier comment about shooting The Wife's previous lover in the leg, causing him to limp, should have been a give-away.
Maybe I missed something, but I am confused as to why The Wife is so repulsed by The Stranger, who in reality is her previous lover, not her husband. And I assume her actual husband did shoot The Stranger at some point.
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: Wally the Beard (1965)
What?
OK, Blyden's performance is good. He pretty much is the only thing that makes this watchable. Thus, three stars.
But seriously, nobody recognizes him with a wig, and fake beard? For years, I had really long hair, and a goatee. Recently, I chopped it all off, and nobody had any trouble knowing who I am. As another commenter stated (paraphrased), "What is this? Clark Kent?"
The whole landlady stuff is pointless. All this guy has to do, is admit his disguise. Sooner than he did.
Frankly, this episode feels awkward. This guy is making an absolute fool of himself. WHO would do this?
The final act just gets weird, and stupid. ARE YOU KIDDING ME? What a hot mess "twist." Just lame, bad writing.
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: Crimson Witness (1965)
A tedious bore
I find some of the comments to be quite hilarious - especially the analysis by one over-eager fan. Symbolism, symbolism, symbolism! Yikes. I understand the reasoning, I just find it extreme.
Numerous unnecessary scenes. Bland supporting performances by most, although Roger Carmel chews the scenery. His second secretary - the lover of all things culturally Hispanic - is presented as too much of a dimwit.
It is ludicrous how everyone in Ernie's life just suddenly dumps on him. It became comical, and therefore losing any impact of a supposed analogy to the dreams/rewards expected by Mid-Century middle class Americans.
Overall, one to skip. (Yes, I do appreciate the soundtrack.)
The Alfred Hitchcock Hour: An Unlocked Window (1965)
Bleh
This one is SO easy to figure out. I don't understand the raves in here. Using the "Psycho" house as a set is a tip-off...intended?
I get tired of these older films/TV series where women just scream helplessly, instead of grabbing a heavy object, and FIGHTING. Well, the nurse FINALLY does grab a fire poker, but makes poor use of it.
Latham as the drunk housekeeper is nothing more than annoying.
John Kerr had such a promising early acting career, before delving into TV series, and eventually becoming a lawyer.
How are people finding this frightening, unless they're recounting their experience of viewing it as a child. People honestly can't discern that the heavy-set nurse is a man??