Veterans Day Movie Reviews

I have no clue what movie the guy from Chicago was watching. The only reason I bought this film is because it is an absolute joke to my friends and I that this film even exists. It is an absolute slap in the face to all other decent sports films (i.e. Slap Shot, Caddyshack). there is not one redeeming quality about this movie and I cannot believe that anyone would ever recommend it to anyone except for its laughable value.

I agree with chicago on this one. It`s a very dark comedy that shines in a few spots. The opening sequence alone is worth the price of admission. Coach Adler`s day just keeps getting more and more bizarre as it rolls along.

Usually I would not wirte a review however the other review listed is so dead wrong that I must. This movie is a satire of b-ball in college. It also has some great lines and the main actor is very funny. The overplaying of the roles by everyone and hyped up acting are designed to be funny and yet it pokes fun at college b-bll business.

I found it very funny and engaging and it falls in the movie genre of off beat movies such as Thief with Alec Baldwin and Thursday. Not a great movie but entertaining.

...these two movies are distinctly different, and only Arrival I is PG13. Arrival II, however, is rated R and contains an unecessary and EXPLICIT SEX scene with full frontal nudity during and after. This had nothing to do with the movie plot and since it was already an enormous flop from the first one, only tended to degrade it worse. If these were separate movies, I'd keep one and trash the other. As it is, I'm stuck for having bought them as a dual dvd. Don't waste your money.

Yes, it is movies about alien invasion. The original, while not out of this world film-making, is enjoyable in it's own right. Not overly done, and pretty simple storyline which is just enough to hold your attention. Hence, the follow up should have never been made. Nothing but bad acting, bad lines for lifeless, unemotional actors and special effects carried over from the first movie. All in all, I would say these two movies will surely be the drive-in B grade movies of this generation. No advice on buying, this one you will have to decide on, while I do suggest renting before you decide.

(warning: review will give spoilers for the original The Arrival, a great sci-fi thriller that I enthusiastically recommend)

The Arrival II is an unnecessary follow-up to the original, an inventive and suspenseful sci-fi thriller. Of course, unnecessary follow-ups are a rule of thumb, so a sequel to The Arrival seemed pretty inevitable, especially when you consider its ending. Too bad this "continuation" lacks all the qualities of its predecessors, namely in good writing, acting, and inspired direction. I actually purchased the Arrival II on DVD...as it was a double feature with the original. Before I even popped the film in, I was expecting ...from the first minute, so the best thing I can say is that the movie turned out to be a bit more watchable than I expected.

The Arrival II is set in Montreal, two months after the events of the original. Radio astronomer Zane Zaminski has died of an apparent heart attack, but he did manage to send out info of the alien invasion to his most trusted colleagues, as well as to his stepbrother, Jack Addison (Patrick Muldoon), and a news reporter (Jane Sibbett, Ross' lesbian ex-wife from Friends). This group becomes the targets of the aliens, until the only survivors are Muldoon and Sibbett, who go on the run together and try to expose the aliens' nefarious plans.

The Arrival II suffers distinctly from a lack of freshness, which is much needed in a sequel that's meant to continue a running story. All the material we have here is pretty much repeat. Basically, we know there are aliens out there disguised as human beings and they're whole goal is to terraform the Earth and mold it into an environment suitable for their own colonization. Oh, and let's not forget that spherical object with a strong vacuum pull.

Like the original, we've got our "intelligent" protagonist (we find this out because everyone keeps telling him he's smarter than he thinks) and blonde chick that plays as love interest. Problem is, these two are played by Patrick Muldoon and Jane Sibbett, neither of whom I've seen in anything on film or TV that suggests they can act. Muldoon is mostly expressionless, though occasionally has that "whoa, dude" act that would give Freddie Prinze, Jr. a run for his money. Sibbett is simply dreadful as the reporter. Let's put it this way, those who found Courtney Cox unconvincing as Gail Weathers in the Scream series will be shouting "Come back! All is forgiven!" The other performances aren't worth noting, except maybe Catherine Blythe, who gives the movie its sole bit of very gratuitous nudity.

The script has little to none of the intelligence of the original and it often mistakes scientific mumbo-jumbo as smart screenwriting. The plot's got a lot of twists and turns, mostly involving a guessing game of who's human and who's not. None of these little revelations are the slightest bit surprising, and they might even induce a few scoffs here and there.

The special effects on display range from pretty bad to hilariously awful, the worst bit probably being when one of the aliens reveals its true identity. There are a lot of other clunkers, such as the cheesy-looking holographic displays and the destruction of a power plant in the film's conclusion. Yeah, visual effects themselves usually don't determine a movie's quality, but they sure don't help the film here.

Directed by Kevin S. Tenney, the same guy who gave us the fun Night of the Demons, but has yet to have helmed anything worth seeing since then. For some reason, though, The Arrival II is still somewhat watchable (meaning you won't want to stab yourself in the eye), probably because the concept of aliens disguised as humans is intriguing enough on its own. Too bad this suspenseless and absurd sequel can't capitalize on the original's unique ideas.
* 1/2 out of *****

This movie was very boring, it was hard for me to beleive the actors and enter into the story, I could not wait it to end. I do like Uma thurman has an actress and the atmosphere and all the beautiful costumes was great but it could not help to save this movie.

Merchant Ivory is known for costume drama. But this dramatization - and I use the word loosely - of James's The Golden Bowl - is all costume. As beautiful as it is to look at, you still find yourself drumming your fingers on the arm of your chair, waiting for the spectacle, please God, to end.

As for the acting, yikes! Why, oh why would any director settle upon Nick Nolte for a major part? In his last several forays in front of the camera, Nolte speaks his lines - indeed, every drawn-out syllable - very, very carefully, but his mind is obviously elsewhere. I do not know what he is paying his agent, but that fee is worth every penny. Anjelica Huston, normally a good, solid actress, was all at sea, and could never quite settle upon her character's accent. Such as it was, it came and went. Uma Thurman played her character as extremely unlikable, even repellant, which cannot be what Henry James had in mind, and which makes no sense dramatically. After all, it was her character, Charlotte, who initiated all the action in the story. Whether this was Thurman's misinterpretation or the director's misguided coaching is anyone's guess. Kate Beckinsale as the wronged wife was completely and utterly dull. Only Jeremy Northam inhabited his part with any credibility. A contemporary Englishman playing an Italian prince, ca. 1903! And you know, he wasn't bad.

I used to (past tense) look forward to the next new movie from Merchant Ivory. But there was always the danger that their style - of a too-reverent, nostalgic regard for the upper-class style of the Edwardian era - would grow ever more mannered, sugarcoated, and lifeless. They are reaching the point where the viewer would be well advised to watch their movies with the sound turned off.

I kept waiting for a twist in this movie that never came. Maybe I just didn't get it. This is my second Henry James novel to movie that I have watched and not enjoyed. The other movie, Turn of the Screw, has a rather disturbing ending. Golden Bowl just ended. I found Nick Nolte's line delivery to be more like he was reading from cue cards. Northam and Beckinsale are the only redeemeding factors in this film.

This movie was very boring, it was hard for me to beleive the actors and enter into the story, I could not wait it to end. I do like Uma thurman has an actress and the atmosphere and all the beautiful costumes was great but it could not help to save this movie.

Merchant Ivory is known for costume drama. But this dramatization - and I use the word loosely - of James's The Golden Bowl - is all costume. As beautiful as it is to look at, you still find yourself drumming your fingers on the arm of your chair, waiting for the spectacle, please God, to end.

As for the acting, yikes! Why, oh why would any director settle upon Nick Nolte for a major part? In his last several forays in front of the camera, Nolte speaks his lines - indeed, every drawn-out syllable - very, very carefully, but his mind is obviously elsewhere. I do not know what he is paying his agent, but that fee is worth every penny. Anjelica Huston, normally a good, solid actress, was all at sea, and could never quite settle upon her character's accent. Such as it was, it came and went. Uma Thurman played her character as extremely unlikable, even repellant, which cannot be what Henry James had in mind, and which makes no sense dramatically. After all, it was her character, Charlotte, who initiated all the action in the story. Whether this was Thurman's misinterpretation or the director's misguided coaching is anyone's guess. Kate Beckinsale as the wronged wife was completely and utterly dull. Only Jeremy Northam inhabited his part with any credibility. A contemporary Englishman playing an Italian prince, ca. 1903! And you know, he wasn't bad.

I used to (past tense) look forward to the next new movie from Merchant Ivory. But there was always the danger that their style - of a too-reverent, nostalgic regard for the upper-class style of the Edwardian era - would grow ever more mannered, sugarcoated, and lifeless. They are reaching the point where the viewer would be well advised to watch their movies with the sound turned off.

I kept waiting for a twist in this movie that never came. Maybe I just didn't get it. This is my second Henry James novel to movie that I have watched and not enjoyed. The other movie, Turn of the Screw, has a rather disturbing ending. Golden Bowl just ended. I found Nick Nolte's line delivery to be more like he was reading from cue cards. Northam and Beckinsale are the only redeemeding factors in this film.

Let me start by saying, Shame On You Fox!!! This was one of the greatest comedy sitcoms of all time. It changed comedy on tv, like no other sitcom before it. And you got the stones to release these sub par "best of" sets...no chance, i aint buying! This was the only tv show that i watched with my father growing up. This show has fans from all age groups. This series needs the respect it deserves...Season by season box sets!!! So many stupid shows get season by season releases...just take a look at any dvd section in any store!!!! these "best of" discs are a joke. If fox has any respect for the fans that stuck by that amazing show for so many seasons that will release the greatest season by season box sets this world has ever seen. We want Justice, No Pieced together "best of" sets!!!!!

Married With Children is the show that reinvented the sitcom. From its debut in 1987 to the finale in 1997, it provided non-stop laughs. And now, five episodes are available on DVD at long last. But is this a good thing? Read on and see.

First and foremost, the good points about this DVD:
-DVD means excellent picture quality and sound
-5 extremely funny episodes
-The price
-Each episode is the complete original, not the syndication edit

Now onto what ultimately derails this collection - the bad points:

-It's a compilation of episodes from mixed seasons. Why not just release a first season box set, and then a second season, and so on?
-Episodes are NOT in original air order
-NO CHAPTER SELECTIONS! Uh, isn't that one of the reasons we hold the DVD format in such high regard?
-No extras other than trailers. I was hoping for interviews with cast and crew.
-ONLY 5 EPISODES!? Surely more than that can fit on a DVD, especially assuning they sacrificed chapter selections and extras!
-I don't care what the title says, there are episodes many times more outrageous than this.

Overall this collection is disappointing, compared to what it could have been. The other reviews also demonstrate this point excellently. Rather than buying this, consider holding off and seeing if Fox releases box sets.

This second volume of episodes from the cult classic MARRIED WITH CHILDREN contains some real gems, including the infamous "Raingirl" and "If Al Had a Hammer".

"A Man's Castle" - Peg (Katey Sagal) takes a redecorating class to help the Bundy abode look more livable. But when she decides to make-over the bathroom, Al (Ed O'Neill) will stop at nothing to protect his most sacred sanctuary!

"Raingirl" - When Kelly (Christina Applegate) becomes the weather-girl for the local TV station, it looks like financial success may finally be in the forecast for the Bundys. But with her reading-skills as scant as her outfits, it may not be sunny skies for long...

"Have You Driven a Ford Lately?" - Al and Steve (David Garrison) buy an old Ford Mustang and bond over fixing and restoring the hunk of junk to it's former glory, much to Peg and Marcy's (Amanda Bearse) dismay. But the boys' dream of cruising the open road 'Born to Be Wild'-style are about to come to a crashing halt...

"If Al Had a Hammer" - A new li'l Bundy is on the way and Al, in need of some space, builds his own private quarters with the help of his father's beloved hammer. But not even this mystical mallet can save his manly oasis from Peg and Marcy and their group of pregnant girlfriends!

"Who'll Stop the Rain?" - It's raining and pouring but it's never boring...especially at the Bundy house! To save money, tight-wad Al goes the do-it-yourself route when the house starts leaking, but he'll end up with both roofing and medical bills when he's finished!

These hilarious episodes will keep the entire family laughing for hours.

Also starring David Faustino. The DVD also includes a promo for the "Salute to Sinatra" CD. (Single-sided, dual-layer disc).

Simon Sez is, more than anything else, a movie that [stinks]. It is, however, also a movie that isn't likely to irritate because of its badness.

The plot revolves around a bunch of totally over the top characters, one of them being Dennis Rodman... I mean, Simon (played by Rodman), an ex-CIA agent now working for Interpol (although I frankly doubt his are Interpol working methods). Simon works in a small town on the french coast and is helped by two monks of death who live under a church and seem to be equipped with very sophisticated electronics. Whether they are real monks or not is never explained but, then again, nothing is really explained in the movie itself.

Although Simon seems to be investigating on some kind of story about a kidnapped girl, it is only when a former friend, Nick enters the scene that he really gets involved in the whole thing, which turns to be almost a story of some kind of disc for some kind of secret weapon. I guess I can stop here because, quite frankly, the story is absurd and ridiculously illogical.

The characters in this movie are some of the most over-the-top I've ever seen. Nick, for instance, behaves like an idiot most of the time: in the first ten minutes, he imitates a dog and a raptor such in an unbelievable way and in unlikely situations, it would be an understatement to call it a joke. The evil guy himself is a ridiculous caricature, then there are the two monks who are the craziest idiots... well, aside of Nick. Rodman, on the other hand, is absolutely restrained in this movie. He says a few lines, and always with the same facial expressions (some kind of smirk). Then there's a girl who fights against Simon in the beginning, then starts fighting with him and finally sleeps with him. Who is she and what she's doing here is never answered.

The movie is definitely an action/comedy and does provide laughs, but I am really not sure that laughs come they way they were supposed to. To put it clear, most of the time, you laugh at the movie rather than with it. At the end, you will scratch your head, not quite believing what you just watched.

It is a bad movie. Very bad. But if you are a fan of bad movies, or if you are willing to have a lot of laughs with your friends, maybe while drinking some alcoholic beverages, you will find a lot to enjoy here.

In any other case, avoid like the plague.

Watching "Simon Sez" is like reading a trashy comic book; like a Jean-Claude Van Damme movie, you never think seriously about its plot or characters at all. You just enjoy the series of set-pieces such as not-so-bad action scenes with awful lines, and too obvious comic relief that is not as funny as moviemakers intended. Dennis Rodman always looks like Dennis Rodman, but if so, who cares?

Actually, thanks to the participation of Xin Xin Xiong (as action director and second unit stunt coordinator) from Hong Kong, action scenes are better than average. Xin Xin Xiong himself appears as a bodyguard, and displays his superb martial arts skills, but, you know, Rodman is no Jet Li (with whom Xiong collaborated during Ji's Hong Kong era). If you are a fan of Hong Kong action films, you might find "Simon Sez" more than passable. If you are not, well, give only one star and forget about it.

This movie is AWESOME! The action sizzles, the comedy will have you rolling, and Dennis Rodman stars! But what I like about it most are the philosophical underpinnings. This movie is the perfect metaphor for the postmodern hyperrealist fugue theory proposed by John L. Umblaut in the 1930's. The theory is a brand of religious existentialism except with Kantian overtones. Look it up on the internet if you want more information. This movie is great. Entertaining, funny, thought provoking. Two thumbs up...Way up!

I watched all of the Dr. Kildare movies as a child, and I was surprised to find out that they weren't as good as I remembered them being. However, "Dr. Kildare's Strange Case" reminds me of a less complicated time when science seemed to hold all of the answers. Those who remember earnest young Dr. Kildare, crusty Dr. Gillespie, and pretty Mary Lamont will find this movie worth watching, just as old friends are still worth talking to, even when we've outgrown them. The plot is rather absurd--a patient goes insane after brain surgery, and the surgeon (who has recently had a lot of patients die) is blamed. Aided and abetted by his girlfriend, Mary Lamont, Dr. Kildare induces insulin shock in the patient (not considered a valid treatment for years, but don't blame the scriptwriters--at that time it was). Miraculously, the patient survives and the brain surgeon is exonerated. Even more miraculously, Dr. Kildare and Mary Lamont escape charges of attempted murder and even keep their jobs.

Lightweight, predictable (will the patient
with the mystery disease pull through? Will Kildare
hook up with the nurse?), hokey,
but not without some charm. Has some unintentionally
funny moments, and one can only thank God that
medical ethics have progressed since 1940
(that is if you believe the film accurately
reflects those of its period). Still, it's
reasonably entertaining, if not exactly classic
material.

The print used for the film in reasonably good
shape, except for some moderate damage at the reel
changes. Some rain lines, too, but very few scratches
or nicks. A couple of very minor video glitches.
The picture wasn't particularly sharp, but still
mostly OK. They could have put more effort into
the video transfer. The audio was decent.

In short a so-so transfer for a so-so
film. Still, when you take the price into consideration,
it's worth seeing....

I am a medical student collecting movies about the medical field. I enjoyed this movie for a couple simple reasons: It is full of amusing stereotypes, has some hilarious scenes on insulin shock therapy that would make a modern doc cringe, and Lionel Barrymore is a great actor! I think I will look for more movies with this funny old fellow.

The movie is about a Young Dr. Kildare (Lew Ayres) who is doing a residency at Blair General. He is in love with a nurse(Laraine Day) (of course!) and she can't stand the thought of not being married (my oh my), like the older Head Nurse of the hospital. Anyway, Dr. Kildare doesn't earn much as a resident (yup) so he figures he can't afford to get married right now. This little love story goes on around an incident with a Dr. Lane, a surgeon who is having bad luck with a string of dying patients. Dr. Kildare tries to save Dr. Lane's reputation by convincing the hospital that it isn't Dr. Lane's skills that are lacking. In the end, Dr. Kildare wins the admiration of the hospital, Dr. Lane, his residency director Lionel Barrymore), and of course the nurse.

Apparently there are 15 flicks about Dr. Kildare. This one is the 4th of 15. They follow the idealist young doctor as he emerges from medical school and eventually becomes an accomplished and confident doctor. I would like to see the other movies as well, but this is the only one on DVD right now.

Following the string of 15 movies, there was a t.v. series about Dr. Kildare that ran for a few years when t.v. was new.

Two vampire girls are blind, but only in the daytime! How on earth they ended up in a orphanage (oh, that's right, they're orphans!), but surely this one, run by nuns, must have driven them nuts with all the religious imagery around.

Anyway, there's very little vampire imagery, except when they feed briefly from each other.

The dialogue is terrible. They're in a graveyard ambushing someone. A young couple going there to make-out , see them hiding. One says "Look, they are evil creatures!" like they can spot them a mile away.

Very, very silly.

This film felt very slow to me, and was almost hard to get through, but when it was finished I felt good about it. Now looking back I love it. Hey! Wait! Thats how I feel about all Rollin films [except Requiem and Demoniacs] I loved them instantly!

It's nice to see that time has not diminished Jean Rollin's obsessions or eye for the macabre. In this relatively recent film, shot in NY & Paris, Rollin continues his fascination with vampires, in this tale of two girls who are blind and normal by day, but sighted blood-drinkers by night. This film is perhaps not quite as hallucinatory as earlier efforts, notably Shiver of the Vampires, but it still has the dream-like acting and hypnotic atmosphere that is typical of his mise-en-scene.

And the girls are quite adorable, whether tapping their way in a cemetery or ripping out some guy's throat on the Brooklyn Bridge.

The film is also a nice companion to Le Fiancee du Dracula, another recent effort, which mixes Rollin's ideas with a bit of Clive Barker, and features the splendid Brigitte Lahaie.

Shannon Tweed, only semi good in her own brand of softer adult films. In this movie she plays a cop trying to catch a killer that goes out at night as a call girl and kills the men who pay her to give them a good time. Don't waste your money on this one, its not worth it!

non

Shannon Tweed, only semi good in her own brand of softer adult films. In this movie she plays a cop trying to catch a killer that goes out at night as a call girl and kills the men who pay her to give them a good time. Don't waste your money on this one, its not worth it!

non