Category: Movie/Long Subject Reviews

Visually impressive, with some good bits and really bad taste.

But this has always been the coldest, most cynical, least inspired, least structured, most inconsistent and just plain least interesting of the Python films…and the fact that on my 4th viewing the only thing I was pleasantly surprised to see again was Mr. Creosote is very depressing to me.

‘Flying Circus’ took clever and dared you to ignore it.  This takes clever and shoves it down your throat.

The ending song from ‘Life Of Brian’ said more on “meaning” than this whole movie does.

Grade: D

It’s kinda nice to see something light after a creepy ‘Twilight Zone’ episode.  Oh wait…this is a “horror” movie.  Somewhat gory, but mostly CHEEZY.

If you like really, really bad movies with horrific scripts, and you’ve already seen ‘Troll 2’ and ‘Hobo With A Shotgun’, this might sorta do the trick.  Otherwise it’s useless.

They’re not so much “flesh eating zombies” as they are “easily amused human lifters”.

Inspirational Quote: “My goose is cooked…I could get reform school for this!”

Grade: D-

It’s about ninja cheerleaders.

LOTS of cheeze…and a few quick random boob shots.

Bricka-Bracka firecracker sis boom bah, HAI-kiba HAI-kiba rah rah rah!!!
*Repeat four times, faster each time*

Inspirational Quote: “Now’s not the time for a philosophical debate anyway.”

Grade: F-

Before I watched it, first thought: this will be a necessary but otherwise irrelevant and amateurish rough draft for the superior remake (‘Let Me In’).

After watching it, I realized that I was correct.  It’s necessary if only because if it hadn’t been made, there’d be nothing to remake.  But otherwise it’s an inferior carbon copy…think a tolerable but merely decent if innovative old blues song reworked by Led Zeppelin.  You might admire the first more, but how many people would honestly rather LISTEN to the first more?

Differences that don’t matter: ‘Deliverance’-ness, credits done by Holy Grail Llamas.

Differences that do: less subtle, less challenging, longer but less flowing in progression, worse acting, dumber henchman.

In short, my first thought was right.  It’s not bad…but ‘Let Me In’ is much better.  And, since they’re virtually exactly the same apart from that which is noted above, this one is rendered redundant and irrelevant.  Any claims that ‘Let Me In’ is a “different” version of the book are nonsense…it’s a remake.  But it’s a far superior remake.  ‘Psycho’ the original ain’t.

So no, I don’t prefer the “dumb” American version over the “smart” original version.  It’s closer to the opposite, really.  But thanks for the idea, Sweden.

Grade: B-

Worthy of note:
A really good ‘Celebrity Jeopardy’
Lots of good impressions
The Paris Hilton
Weekend Update bits
Fallon’s eternal guitar-playing
cork-soaking
The Leather Man
Nick Burns, computer guy
Jimmy and Tina ‘Grease’ parody

…and some boring bits.

Grade: B+

Not quite halfway through, it goes from tolerable slightly witty dark/macabre comedy to stupid horror/comedy hybrid that fails at both.

Grade: D-

It’s amazing how little an SNL cast member can do and still get a greatest hits video.

Only somewhat worthy of note are “Overacting Negro Ensemble”, “Perspectives”, and “Not Gettin’ Any”.

Unfortunately, Chris Rock isn’t important to any of them.

Grade: D-

Hell must be fairly dull and generic. 

Ferrara doesn’t have his own schtick, and he’s not particularly funny.  But I do like some of his observations in a non-laughing way.

Grade: D

The first time I saw this (in 1995) I thought it was an intelligent thriller, with some stupid cop-buddy/action elements.  I was wrong.  It’s a stupid cop-buddy/action movie with SOME intelligent thriller elements.

Bruce Willis does about as good as he can, and for this sort of movie it’s enough.

The race card is WAY overplayed (Think Tim Meadows’ “whitey” commentary) and the “buddy” part is very forced.

If you’re patient, it picks up a bit in the second half.

Ist mediocre, ya?

Coolest Character: Bomb expert guy

Grade: D+

7/14/18: The Great Grade Update. Grade: C-

A darkly beautiful work of art.  Flawed but brilliant.

Nic Cage’s (Co-Producer) greatest contribution to cinema.

Most importantly, to quote a post I made immediately after I last saw this film (until just now):

‘Wow.

Chilling.  In one movie, understatement, subtle comedy, and the performance of Willem Dafoe’s career come together to provide what decades of slasher films have failed to – Terror.’

Or, as paraphrased from Robert Christgau…

“…nightmares of a world in flames, the kind you remember in all their scary inconsistency because you woke up (screaming) in the middle. How it will all end I couldn’t say…”‘

– ‘Shadow of the Vampire’, 12/18/10, Puppy

Grade: A-

Ok, so this is just as easily laughed at and dismissed by modern horror fans for its obvious deficiencies as it is lauded by rabid Romero fans for its obvious strengths.

The reality, for me, is somewhere in the middle.  Or perhaps both at once.

The “action” is cheezy B-grade, the “exciting” music and “shocking” FX are terribly dated, and the acting, for the most part, isn’t any better than the original.

In fact, it’s actually WORSE at times…which is difficult to comprehend given the time and budget Romero had to make this with compared to ‘Night’.

So what’s good about it?  Well, while it’s not particularly “scary” anymore, it’s certainly creepy.  There’s lots of little ironic/dark/witty touches and ideas that you won’t find in most of the admittedly more “realistic” alterations that have been done to death since.

But messages are best received in watchable formats.  Otherwise, just write an op-ed piece.  So the idea that this film is “important” because of what Romero may have been trying to say is absurd, as is the idea that it’s “important” because of the obvious influence it had on later zombie flicks.  ‘The Last Man On Earth’ was influential, but there’s no way I’d ever sit through that mess again.

The sad thing is…with ALL the problems with this film, with all the areas that could easily be improved upon, with all the bare ideas that could be made so much better…most zombie flicks STILL aren’t as good.  I don’t know of any other genre of film that fails to produce works 25-30 years after a dated archetype that aren’t BETTER than that archetype.

Grade: C+

The best Trek movie ever. 

Why?  Because it doesn’t try to get too cerebral and make science “fiction” sense…it tries to entertain.  And how do we do that, without a great script?  By producing characters of extremes that we all know and love (or hate) and a great conflict and having lots of really dramatic/emotional/adrenalized scenes.

Besides Nimoy and Montalban, the actors here are very limited in scope.  But they’ve had their characters for the most part already defined…all they have to do is fall in step with what is expected, not break any new ground.  And that’s exactly what they do.

Kirstie Alley, unfortunately, shows only slightly less emotion as a Vulcan than she does several years later as a human on ‘Cheers’.

Recommendation: If you hated the original Trek you won’t like this.  This is very First-Generational, NOT Second-Generational…not cerebral enough.  If you liked the original Trek, watch the episode ‘Space Seed’ right before this. You might also want to read a little ‘Moby Dick’. If you couldn’t care less and think all the fuss is really dumb, you’ll like this as much as you’ll like any other good sci-fi action flick.

Hey, James Horner on music.  I love that guy.

It’s not ‘Aliens’, but, like gasoline since Prohibition, “it ain’t bad”.

The ultimate explosive sci-fi soap opera.

Inspirational Quote: “You’ve managed to kill just about everyone else but like a poor marksman you KEEP MISSING the TARGET…”

Grade: B+

5/26/13: It’s not ‘Aliens’.  But maybe I should rate ‘Aliens’ a little higher.  Grade: A-

Well, I had to watch it a second time (part of it) because I apparently fell asleep near the end.  So, I guess what I’m saying with that comment is that all of it is dated.

This wouldn’t necessarily be that much of a problem, but most of it is very recent and as such is intended to be cutting-edge and relevant.

So there’s lots of good Tina Fey as Palin, but most of the best parts are quick flashbacks to no-longer-relevant parodies, which by this point aren’t much more irrelevant that the rest, but are funnier before they’re quickly cut off.

Amy Poehler’s Palin-rap ending is still cool, though.

Grade: C

It’s a zombie flick.

The setting is fairly interesting as zombie flicks go, the zombie make-up is decent, and there’s halfway-decent acting from a no-name cast.

But there’s nothing “believable” about it, you don’t really care about any of the characters, and nothing especially exciting happens aside from the usual.  After about halfway through it gets really stupid as “internal conflict” is introduced for no apparent reason other than…well, you have to have that in a zombie flick!

They’re a cross between en”rage”d and zombified…seem to drift back and forth for no adequately explored reason.

So there’s really nothing here that’s not better…blah blah blah…but if you love zombie movies it’s tolerable.

Grade: D

“part mockumentary” – Yes, really dry and fairly dull for the most part.

“part unabashed gore-fest” – Very, very little of that.

Gets a bit Blair-Witchy in the second half.

Grade: D-

‘Glory’ is the story of the forming, training, and performance of the 54th Massachusetts Regiment during the American Civil War.

Based upon letters written from newly-commissioned Colonel Robert Gould Shaw to his mother during the period of events chronicled, it is as interesting for its character development and interaction as it is for its (obvious) social and historical message.

Matthew Broderick is excellent in an (appropriately) understated performance (rare thing to say for a lead, I know…) as young Colonel Shaw, convincingly portraying both the naivete and conviction of a young man thrown in quite over his head into something he believes in but can’t quite fathom, at least in the beginning.

Morgan Freeman is brilliant (as usual) and Denzel Washington fully deserves the Academy Award he won for playing the passionate and defiant runaway slave Trip. One of the most powerful scenes in the movie occurs when these two actors, whose characters could barely be more different while still respecting each other, bring their conflicting philosophies to a logical argumentative conclusion.

I only have two complaints about the movie.

First, the battle scenes are a bit hokey and dated (not to the period of the movie, which is a GOOD thing, but to the limits of the battle “choreography” and the acting talents of the very extra extras), and second (and most annoying) the comparatively embarrassingly mediocre performance by Cary Elwes, who hit his professional pinnacle with ‘The Princess Bride’ and seems to be unsure if he’s a dramatic actor or a satirist, which, in a movie of this caliber and type, is a bit of a problem.

One last thing…

Roger Ebert, in his long-ago review, complained about the movie focusing on Robert Gould Shaw, saying it was racist and merely playing up to a “white” audience to focus on his contributions.

This is nonsense.

Shaw was the driving force behind the 54th, and is no less a hero than the brave men that fought alongside him. Saying that the movie focuses unnecessarily on his role is ignorant and just plain false, the sort of nonsense that gives Liberals (of which I am, to a certain extent, one) a bad name.

I mean, Shaw WAS their leader…the actions of the 54th are displayed exactly as they should – a brave leader and his brave men, together, each no better and no worse.

Grade: A

11/16/23: Just a little cleanup.

Hey, Jason Mewes.  At first I was like “Hey, that guy looks and sounds kinda like Jason Mewes”…then I realized it was.

It’s a dark comedy, the tasteless but (in this case only kinda) funny sort you’d expect from Jay. And he basically plays Jay here, not quite as constantly-jabbering and with shorter hair, but pretty much Jay.

There’s really nothing more to it than that.  So, in the category it squarely falls into, it’s not nearly as good as ‘The Return Of The Living Dead’, or even ‘Idle Hands’.  But if you liked both of those, you could probably sit through this tolerably if you had nothing better to do.

Inspirational Quote: “Is she dead…er?”

Grade: D

It’s a zombie movie set right after the Civil War.

So I guess that’s how it’s “different” from other zombie movies.  That’s the hook.

Otherwise it’s the same old sh1t, nothing special.  Kinda pointless, really.  Unless you want a historical fictional account of how the whole zombie thing started.  Very dull, though.

The great thing about making this movie is that it must have been REALLY cheap.  I mean, a few uniforms, some old pistols, lots of make-up, and rent a national park or forest.  There you go!

Inspirational Quote: “She was very different from me.  She was…younger.”

Grade: F

*SHUDDER*  Comedy For Dummies.

Dated, dated, dated.  Before he departed on his really mediocre film career he made a lot of mediocre sketches, only occasionally saved by the people he worked with and/or who wrote for him.

This sh1t was barely worth watching when it was new, never mind seeing a whole stinking pile of it many years later.  Recommended only for the very young and the very stupid.

Grade: F

11/23/12: “occasionally saved by the people he worked with and/or who wrote for him.” Grade: D-

Extremely simplistic “modern” re-telling of ‘Inferno’, the first part of Dante Alighieri’s ‘Divine Comedy’.

The “animation” is truly wretched, and the “modern” references just make it seem absurd/silly, not more relevant.  So it’s pointless. 

I only really watched it because I saw James Cromwell’s name in the credits.

Not for kiddies…the little jokes and quips aren’t really funny, so only watch this if you want to know the story (sort of) without having to read it.  But I can’t imagine this would possibly scare anyone, and unlike the original poem, it’s completely without majesty.

Grade: F

Featuring:
The McLaughlin Group
Massive Headwound Harry
Gerald Ford (and wolves)
Carsenio
Grumpy Old Man
Swayze fantasy
affectionate Italian restaurant
psychic game show contestant
“Choppin’ Broccoli” and other hits
George F. Will’s Sports Machine
‘It’s A Wonderful Life’ lost ending (You won’t find it on the Netflix Shatner episode)

Little bits:
Jimmy Stewart
porn hearing
McCartney and Sinead
Dylan translation
Dennis Miller/Dennis Miller
Bush V. Dukakis
Bush impressions

And of course some really dated stuff that ISN’T funny.  But not too much.

Grade: A-

2/25/13: Ehhh…let me amend: some REALLY dated stuff that ISN’T funny AT ALL and is borderline painful.  And too much.  This could use a little trimming.  Grade: B+

The cover and the description make it seem like it’s about a woman who seduces men and then eats them.  It’s not.

She doesn’t have an “insatiable appetite”.  Her vagina does.  It’s insatiable.  And very talkative.

So if you’re looking for shock/horror/controversy/gore/drama, this is akin to ‘How To Get Ahead In Advertising’.  But it’s not even good for a burlesque laugh because almost all the scenes involving her vagina also involve her being raped.

She does try to limit it to only the sleaziest of men, so there’s the “tragic hero” part. I guess.

It’s also very badly made…half of the extras apparently either don’t know they’re extras or forgot NOT to look at the camera.

Unlike ‘Lo’ (I did it again), this is not something to watch again.  In fact, having read this, the only reason to watch it at all is if you like rape scenes, plain and simple.

Inspirational Quote: “They can’t find him, they found his car down by the har-bar!”

Grade: F-

Watching this, I didn’t care whether he succeeded or not. I did, however, noticing his ‘Reservoir Dogs’ resemblance, dub him “Annoying Orange”.

Just as quirky/weird as ‘Lo’, but not nearly as interesting despite the topic.  In fact, my favorite part of writing this review has been getting to reference ‘Lo’ again. Amidst a sea of sh1t, a B is a beacon of light.

If this isn’t a parody of ‘Fight Club”s flagrantly absurd quasi-Nietzschean gibberish, it should be.  I take it as such, to get any enjoyment out of it.

Aleister Crowley wasn’t talking about this guy…

Inspirational Quote: “Eww…Stop! God!…I mean there is so much fcked up sh1t in this world that we can’t control, why the FCK would you ever wanna add to it??”

Grade: D

10/4/12: I’VE GOT IT!  How could I have been so BLIND?
There are 5 messages in this movie:
1) ALWAYS explore fantasy/roleplay before venturing into reality (e.g. cutting your arms off)
2) All anyone with a major anxiety/panic disorder really needs is a good SHOCK to the system (take THAT, psychiatric profession!  And Bembridge scholars!)
3) When writing a movie (or sketch), it’s important to remember that there should always be a “beginning”, a “middle”, and an “ending”.  Writing only one usually leads to poor results. (See ‘Kids In The Hall – Episode  17’ (Kevin’s middle) )

Inspirational Answer To My Question From The Movie: What does this movie have, after the premise? – “There’s nothing there…there’s nothing there…”

Grade: D-

Pretentious dull nonsense/nasty quasi-religious bdsm nonsense breaking up scenes of women dressed as nuns having softcore sex at:

26:25, 33:07, 1:00:05

You’re welcome.

Grade: F

With the two exceptions of 1) featuring REALLY has-been scream-queen Linnea Quigley (who is best watched in ‘The Return Of The Living Dead’) and 2) featuring cougar-heads that made me actually half-laugh/half go “Oh, COME on…” this can be best summed up, as it relates to the indescribably no-genre ‘1313: Frankenqueen’, by the following exchange…

“So…what do you think?”
“I THINK…that it’s exactly the same…yeah…it’s exactly the same.”

Grade: F-

“Shock The Monkey” has nothing to do with animal testing.  But it does make an appropriate theme song.

After ‘WarGames’ in 84, where he successfully played a kid, I believe this is Broderick’s first real “grown-up” role.  Unlike ‘WarGames’, this movie is not terribly dated.  It’s actually quite well-written and well-acted, and the sympathy it evokes in me is real.

Here’s my take on omnivores: As one, I feel no responsibility to act any better or worse than is expected of any other.  Therefore, as all other omnivores do, I eat both plants and animals.  No other omnivore is criticized for behaving as is in its nature.  However, by the same reasoning, no other omnivore kills, or even hurts, another animal unless it is in direct self-defense of self or “family”, or to eat them.  They don’t do it for sport, or “research”, or “enjoyment” (see sadist).

That’s why animal testing shows that we are, in fact, lower than chimps if we watch this movie and do NOT feel great sympathy for them and great resentment at the humans willingly doing things such as this to them.  Human beings are the only natural life forms that ever behave contrary to the basic laws of nature.  No wonder we’re the only ones actually destroying the nature that provides us with life.

All that being said…after the initial premise is established and taken to its logical conclusion, how much do you really want to watch “Chimpanzees Gone Wild”/”The Great Chimp Escape”?

I said I felt sympathy for the chimps, not the movie.

Inspirational Characters: Virgil/J. Garrett

Grade: C+

A collection of chapters forming a short “film” (about 50 minutes).

The animation is horrid and it’s nothing special…but if you want to see something zombie-ish that’s both kinda cutesy and kinda gross, you might want to check it out.

Also, the music’s cool.

Grade: C

3/1/13: Nothing special.  I was in a generous mood.  Grade: D+

For those that might watch for this reason: there’s NO nudity.

This movie brought to you by the random rounds of ammunition corporation, who remind you to use random rounds of ammunition every day as part of a healthy diet. 

Also the make-a-zombie-movie-to-get-your-friends’-music-into-it foundation.

And the HAIKIBA!-jumping-ZV’s foundation.

And finally the Mad-Cow-induced-Ebay-Selling-Vampires foundation.

Have I mentioned there’s absolutely NO nudity?

This got the same Netflix rating as ‘Lo’???!!!

The only way to enjoy this movie, supplied by a character from it: “You have to destroy the brain completely.”

This review inspired in part by the rip-MST3K-and-MPFC foundation.

That comment inspired by the UAF foundation. (Figure it out…come on…it’s easy).

Inspirational Quote: “Wanna shower first?”

Grade: F-

I know this is supposed to be deep and “meaningful” and touching and all, but to me, after watching ‘Lo’ – which I don’t know why I’m invoking except it’s fresh in my mind – it just seems a bit pretentious and overly dramatic.

Actually perhaps that’s why I’m invoking ‘Lo’…because it isn’t pretentious and overly dramatic.

There’s lots of fast-motion effects, like ’28 Days Later’-ish, but they don’t seem to be for any apparent reason…other than to be impressive. OK during fight scenes, not so much during the shaving scene.

There’s a time theme here…I get that.

The girl looks more bored/annoyed than scared…and rightfully so. So am I.

I guess I appreciate the symmetry…but everything: the flashbacks, the SFX, the lighting, the arty shots, (the symmetry), the wonderfully touching meaning/purpose…can’t hide the fact that this is still a fairly dull movie.

The idea is really great…but the script and the actors don’t even come close to fully realizing what the dream of that idea could be.

Grade: D

With the easy air of a seasoned pro, Jeff rattles off quip after quip, each fantastically polished to a perfect, lustrous sheen while maintaining the “offhand” attitude of someone who “just made ’em up”.  He’s a true pro, really, and his jokes are decent.  But after having watched him REALLY let loose on several roasts, and especially seeing reels of Bill Hicks’ relatively sloppy but infinitely more inspired and FELT act the day before, this blast from the past just seems like a lounge act phony.  No offense, Jeff.  Unlike Hicks, you’re very dependable and relaxing.

Grade: C

I’ve always liked Bill Hicks. He was funny, and I admired his honesty, courage, and lack of pretension.

But I don’t think he was ever as good a comic as he wanted to be, or as the world wanted him to HAVE been, after he died. I believe that if he hadn’t died of cancer, he would have just faded away slowly.

In death he became a tragic hero. But stories about heroes are usually exaggerated, if based on fact. He was too angry, with the world AND his own life, to be a true “stand-up comic”…he would have made one hell of a Crusader, though.

But not too many of those jobs are open anymore.

Anger is an Energy.

Inspirational Idea: Love

Grade: B

1/17/13: See ‘Pupdate: Documentary Grade Edits’. Grade: B-

This guy seems to be really popular lately amongst the artsy/cutting-edge crowd.

Remembering having seen him do stand-up a while ago and recalling him as being funny, I was a bit disappointed because generally that means said comedian is pretentious and weird without being particularly funny.  Maybe he’s popular in that crowd because he’s white, totally irreverent, and uses the “n” word (he covers that) and doesn’t seem scared.  Also, he’s clever, crude, and in bad taste…and says things probably a lot of said people WANT to say.

But I was surprised, when I watched this, that I was RIGHT…he IS funny.  Completely tasteless, and not hilarious or anything “unique”, but very funny.

Highlights: N word/C word/F word combo, anti-deer rant, “buckets of disease” rant, crazy waitress rant

Inspirational Quote: “When people come out of your vagina and step on your dreams”

Grade: B+

If you MUST watch, only points of any interest:
35:50 – 55:25 (James Lipton (again), office sketch, the Holy Teleprompter)

Grade: D

“Cowbell” is here, so that makes watching ‘The Best Of Christopher Walken’ even less necessary. 

But there’s a lot of mediocre/boring sh1t here, too…so if you’re not dying to see “Celebrity Jeopardy” or Ferrell’s great James Lipton impression again, this isn’t necessary either.

Grade: C

Perhaps I’m a bit biased because of memories from childhood (point of reference: I bought a BRAND SPANKING NEW Atari 2600 and had an “Oh, Joy!” moment) but this is certainly right up there in the “as good as it gets” department for this sort of film.  Dialogue and SFX are cheezy, of course.  But this is a fantasy movie made in 1981…I think that’s almost a given.

What sort of film is it?  It’s a D+D/Fantasy flick.  Not a fictional movie that happens to be set in a fantasy “world”.  What’s the difference?  The ‘Lord Of The Rings’ trilogy are movies based in fantasy worlds.  ‘Dragonslayer’ and ‘Krull’ are D+D/Fantasy flicks.  Two completely different categories.

The difference between these two categories, assuming both are “good” for what they are, is depth.

Depth of characters, depth of plot, depth of emotions/reactions that require/allow intellectual and/or philosophical analysis…as opposed to simply sitting back and enjoying the escapist ride.  Don’t get me wrong…I LIKE this, to an extent.  I like several movies of this sort.  They just honestly aren’t very GOOD if I’m going to be brutally frank about it.  And I am.

Think of it as your favorite junk food: very enjoyable in small doses but not really WORTH anything and if you have too much you might want to throw up.

Highlights: Medusa battle and mechanical owl self-test.

Grade: C+

Not as interesting as ‘Dogs Decoded’, and certainly not nearly as cute.

But it ain’t bad.

Grade: B-

1/17/13: See ‘Pupdate: Documentary Grade Edits’.  Grade: C

Very well-made, very well-supported, very interesting, very informative, and very cute.

This settles the “Cats vs. Dogs” intelligence argument pretty well, for those that actually still needed it answered.  Unless you consider cats smarter than 2-year-old humans.  Most dog-haters I’ve met say they “hate” kids, so I guess that’s a very real/sad possibility.

Or, unless you consider “domestication” in any way related to stupidity.  But if you believe that, you probably think that civilized human beings are stupid. 

The ability to obey commands is a sign of intelligence, not stupidity.

By the way, I like cats.  But to suggest that they’re smarter than dogs is…well, stupid.

Ruff!

Grade: B+

1/17/13: See ‘Pupdate: Documentary Grade Edits’.  Grade: B

“They expect me to be a “female comic”…” Yeah, funny.  Which she is here, kinda.

Hey, she’s gotten a lot better in doing the exact same act…wait, this is six years before.

Am I right or am I right?

Grade: B-

It’s rude and crude.  But it’s not worth watching not because of that, but because it’s dull and she sucks up to the audience WAY too much.  And the repeat jokes don’t help.  Wait for the next roast.

Grade: D-

Lots of good stuff (and only a few boring bits) from Farley, with assists to Phil Hartman and Christina Applegate.

Easily the highlight- Japanese Game Show

Inspirational Quote: “I….’m sorry, I don’t speak Japanese…”

Grade: B

Worth watching basically for “Cowbell” (of course) and “Colonel Angus” right at the beginning, maybe the ‘Dead Zone’ parody a little later, and the very ending bit where Walken gives away what everyone always knew or at least suspected.  Skip the rest safely.

Inspirational Quote: “Just to be, how you say, douchebag.”

Grade: C+

This is NOT the “first” zombie movie.  That being said, it IS the movie without which NONE of the zombie/undead/infected/parody/etc… movies that followed would have been possible.  However, that alone doesn’t make it worthy of anything except a high-five and a footnote. 

It doesn’t make it worthy of viewing or analysis.

What makes it worthy of viewing/analysis is the fact that even 40+ years after its release, it’s still creepy and interesting, if not quite scary.  The script is a bit lacking, it’s a bit cheezy sure, the running woman falls down yeah, and the “FX” and scary soundtrack are horribly dated.

But it’s amazing that it’s STILL a legitimate horror movie today, unlike the vast majority of the 60’s B movies (And this is a B movie, like it or not) that are just dull, boring, stupid, and/or completely irrelevant and worthless except as MST fodder.

The basement scene involving a sharp object is a lot more disturbing/shocking than Hitchcock’s shower scene it obviously draws from.  And the ending says more about Humanity than every Romero-wannabe collectively has, ever.

I take back my ‘Survival’ comment…you really did have something(s) to say, George.  But you should have stopped at ‘Land’.

Inspirational Quote: “They’re coming to get you, Barbara…”

Grade: B

Lowlights: Some dull moments with obviously uncomfortable sports celebs.

Highlights: Peyton Manning giving back, Stuart Smalley w/ Jordan, spanking Shaq, ‘Sexual Harassment And You’, counterpoint to Jeter, and of course “Little Chocolate Donuts”.

Grade: B

From the director who brought you ‘Sorority Babes In The Slimeball Bowl-O-Rama’…

A horror film remarkable for the fact that nothing horrible actually happens.

Well, the first hour is almost-naked men walking around, showering, exercising and lying down with a woman watching them intermittently and taking notes.

At around the hour mark the “plot” begins, then pauses briefly for more showering, then picks up again just in time for the movie to end.

I think I saw some of them drinking Schmitt’s Gay by the pool, too.

Talk about a great time for Shirt-In-A-Can.

I give it a 9.6 on the Das-ometer.

Grade: F-

Advantages over watching a ‘Whose Line’ repeat: Completely new bits, no “hoedown”.

Unfortunately, that’s all.  The new bits aren’t all that exciting, the old bits seem a little stale and aren’t any better than any given episode, and with Brad Sherwood as opposed to Ryan Stiles, it’s just not as funny…Colin and Ryan were the two funniest improvers on the show, and they had a great chemistry.

I just don’t see/feel that with Colin and Brad.  Besides, Brad was never all that funny.

It’s very “pleasant” and inoffensive, but it’s not worth the time for anyone except hardcore ‘Whose Line’ fans that have memorized every episode.

Grade: D+

Disgustingly funny: Jeff Ross
Funny: Amy Schumer, Gilbert Gottfried, SURPRISE GUEST(Tom Arnold.  OOPS)
Surprisingly funny: Carrie Fisher
OK: Katey Sagal, Wayne Brady, Anthony Jeselnik, Seth Green
DULL: Jane Lynch, Ellen Barkin, Roseanne Barr

Grade: B-

What do you get when you cross a mediocre comedian with a mediocre magician?

A really sad comedy act.

Plus the material was a lot funnier (well, a little funnier) when I saw it the first time…about 15 years ago.  Don’t waste your time.

Grade: F

I do too have a sense of humor regarding religion.

It just has to be…you know…funny.

This is occasionally brilliant and always interesting.

Completely irreverent, in thoroughly bad taste…and, most importantly (see ‘Python, Monty’)…funny.

Highlights: Hell, Wedding Reception, and the Fleur-de-lis

Grade: A-

Hmmm…not exactly ‘Braveheart’ this time.  More like ‘PettyThiefScumbag-Heart’

I mean, are we supposed to root for this guy?  He’s as unlikeable as Gibson himself after his anti-Jewish/anti-female comments.

I actually found myself rooting for the “bad guys” to win.  I mean, just on sheer “PRINCIPLE”, you know.  Apparently, Porter’s idea of romance is to beat the woman you “love” savagely until she “realizes” what’s “good for her”.  What a maggot.

I guess the problems of a wife-beating scumbag and the prostitute he used to pimp out don’t amount to a hill of beans in this cockamamie world…

1:24:00 – YAY!!!  Errrr…is that wrong?

WAIT A MOMENT…this movie was different the first time I saw it.  It had Kris Kristofferson and they beat the heck out of Porter.  It was watchable then, cuz Kristofferson was the highlight.  Now the ending is just plain non-existent.  But at least it ends.  I mean, D@MN…

Inspirational Quote: “Man, that’s just MEAN”

Grade: D- (Before the Director’s (horrible) Cut): C-

For those of you who can’t get enough Eddie Murphy, here’s some more.

Axel is still smarter than everyone else, Taggart is still grumpy, the head cop is still a dumb jerk.

But Rosewood…Rosewood has transformed from pleasant, naive greenhorn into a Rambo-inspired walking arsenal.  A very pleasant, borderline-disturbed walking arsenal.

It’s aged a bit better than the original, but neither of these were ever anything to really care about either way.  You don’t love it, you don’t hate it, you just watch it and then immediately forget it.

Sort of like Murphy’s film career.

Grade: B-