If you want a porn flick...
	I was not happy with this purchase.  This video only taught 10 min. of teaching followed by 30 min of a porn flick at the end.  The teaching was informative balanced with different women with various shapes and builds, I could have used more teaching and less of a porn show.  This was a waste of money!  There are a few more reviews like mine so take our advise.


Could you last from dusk to dawn?
	I don't know how I managed to see this gory splatterfest TWICE in college.It's a terrible movie (next to that other awful movie "Wild Wild West" which also stars Salma Hayek)

Quentin Tarantino George Clooney play a pair of ne'er do wells who take a family hostage.They end up going to a strip joint filled with evil vampires...and battling them until dawn.Turns out that the strip joint is built on top of an Aztec temple,hence the bloodsucking strippers.

George Clooney managed to overcome this,as well as "Batman Robin" to get into "Syriana" "Good Night,and Good Luck." He's a talented actor;too bad he couldn't save this movie through sheer charm.When it comes to heists,he's better in "Ocean'e Eleven" as a dapper casino-robbing metrosexual.

Avoid this movie,unless you REALLY like gruesome,violent movies..


Drown, damn you, drown!!
	How could Mr. Cameron take a subject like this and a cast and brig out the worst in everybody?

The production design and cinematopraphy are sumptuos, but the script and dialogue are so banal, the fine cast delivering one empty performance after another. (Including Leo, who was so good in "What's Eating Gilbert Grape?" in 1993 when I didn't yet know who he was, I thought he was really a cute little retarded kid... yet in "Titanic", there's just nothing there--- or nothing permitted).

Talk about a SHIP wreck!!

Only the two studio-backed block voting resulted in the record-tying Oscar wins/nominations.


It's no warning, it's Predictable!
	When I saw the movie, it was so predictable. Halfway into it, the broadcasts were so lame as well as the so-called live-footage. Total rip-off of "War of the Worlds." Reminded me
of an NBC-TV movie from the early 80's called, "Special Bulletin." Much better with it's live-broadcasts! The only
thing i liked about this movie, when I switched back to catch it's climax ending. They never even saw their ever-ending doom.
Sure put's the military in it's place!


MOVIE FEEDBACK
	I AM PRETTY EASY TO PLEASE WHEN IT COMES TO MOVIES.LOW BUDGET,HIGH BUDGET,DOESN'T MATTER.THIS MOVIE IS ACTUALLY THE WORST MOVIE I HAVE EVER SEEN IN MY 45 YEARS OF VIEWING.WAS TOTALLY NOT BELIEVABLE AND THE WRITING AND DIRECTING WAS SHABBY AT BEST.DON'T WASTE YOUR HARD EARNED BUCKS ON THIS LEMON!!!!


Great Play, But Look At The Editing
	Into The Woods is one of my Sondheim favorites.  Having seen the PBS presentation of this, I am thoroughly dismayed at how poorly this DVD is edited.  Rather than allowing one to be engaged by the staging and character interaction, this DVD uses pan and scan to isolate characters and provide sometimes inappropriate close-ups.  This especially detracts from what one wishes to see in a play; the staging.  By forcing the viewer's perspective, this version does a disservice to a very fine play that investigates our relationships with each other through fairy tales and their aftermath.

I am hoping that somebody releases a version that does not presume to edit out the director's vision


Overrated dramatic mess.
	I purchased this movie because I love Chris Cooper as an actor and because the reviews were very positive.  I played the movie yesterday and boy, was I disappointed.

The movie was much too slow and boring. I love mysteries and hate dramas therefore I thought the little personal stories throughout with flashbacks actually detracted from what I thought was going to be a good mystery story.  In the end the mystery is solved with a thud and don't get me started on the quasi Luke   Leia moment at the end.  PLEASE!


all humans must go
	this is a "horror" movie in the sense that it is incredibly grating and all the people in it act like total garbage.  I don't mean the acting is garbage, though it is.  I mean that all the characters in the movie are complete human garbage, such as make you want to start your own special death camp just to get rid of them.  If the aim of the movie was to turn the viewer into a one-man murder wave, then... bingo.  I am locked and loaded and ready to ratatatatatatatattat.... blow away the cast


"Is That All There Is?"
	I generally admire Jennifer Aniston's work so I picked this up when the video store offered a second rental free with the purchase of two bags of popcorn.  Sadly, watching the popcorn pop was more interesting than the movie.  If you went to sleep after the first 10 minutes, you would't miss much since nothing really happens.  If it's a comedy, it isn't funny. If it's a slice of life, the lives are deadly dull.  The emotional level is so low-key you suspect the entire group is on valium.  Jenifer Aniston especially, seems to have phoned this one in.

Real characters?  As it happens, I've known thousands of real people over the years and not a one bears the slightest resemblance to any of these sad-sack characters.  If they're actually representative of real Americans then we're in big trouble!  My wife   I had the same reaction at the end of this one ..... "THAT"S IT??!!"


Makes you want to kill yourself
	Dull and pointless.  How could Jennifer Aniston read this script and think that doing this film was a good idea?  We had to turn it off about half-way through.  Shallow, boring, superficial; take your pick.  It's like a contest--which character's life sucks the most.  If you're going to depress people, at least make it interesting.  Would it have been so hard for the writers to mix in a PLOT with their nihilism


Unconvincing
	Colin Firth and Kevin Bacon head up the cast as a comedy duo from the 50's whose careers are ruined by a scandal involving the murder of a young woman. Bacon does a pretty good job as a creepy funny man, with Firth as the anchor of the team. Off-stage the comedy roles they play are echoed in their lives. But I found "Truth" confusing and unengaging. I found it hard to care at all about the demise of the duo. And as several have noted, Lohman as the reporter who seeks to uncover the mystery of the murder is not credible. Give this one a pass


Shallow Treatment of Profound Ideas
	"The human race today is in a really bad state, mainly because most people do not want to wake up. They want to be told how to behave instead of understanding their own power." -- Miceal Ledwith in The Great Questions in the Hamburger Universe, Vol. 1 of Deep Deceptions

I thoroughly enjoyed the DVD "What the BLEEP Do We Know!?" mostly for the engaging snippets of dialogue from scientists, theologians, and mystics. I also enjoyed Ramtha's DVD "Create Your Day", even though it wasn't quite as good as the BLEEP cameos.

It was with great expectations that I viewed The Great Questions in the Hamburger Universe, Vol. 1 of Deep Deceptions by Miceal Ledwith. Unfortunately, the plodding pace of the 57 minute DVD--as well as the ramblings of Ledwith--was very disappointing.

Ledwith brings up some great points in this DVD, but never goes beyond the surface. He asserts that thinking people have discarded most of the infantile tenants of the "hamburger universe" (i.e. the "vault of the heavens" overhead with the vault of hell underneath). Yet, instead of treating his audience as intelligent folk, he makes nebulous comments without explaining the "what and why".

He mentions string theory (quantum physics) and the "true" nature of the big bang, going on to say that levitation isn't a "miracle" but only a matter of superseding gravity with the "Torsion Field". The problem is that he's tossing about these terms in support of Jesus' words that "ye are all gods" and "greater works than these shall you do" without actually explaining the meaning or *science* of a Torsion Field and just how consciousness supersedes natural laws. (FYI: The Torsion Field is quantum spin waves of empty space. Einstein and Elie Cartan did some preliminary work on this theory in the 1920's. The Einstein-Cartan theory could possibly be used to explain ESP, among other things.)

Ledwith spends a good portion of the DVD highlighting the silliness of traditional Christianity, including the clouds and harps of heaven. He goes on and on about how a cloud is, in reality, damp and would be uncomfortable to sit on (duh) and that if one were to play the harp for eternity, they'd wear down the fingers to the third knuckle. I understand highlighting the damage that traditional Christian thought has caused humanity, especially in terms of evolution. In fact, as a former minister trained in theology myself, I probably "get it" more than most.

But while poking fun at Christian thought is popular these days, you had *better* have some theological and scientific claims to back up your assertions--especially if you want to be a part of the "thinking". Christian apologists know their Bible inside and out, so if Ledwith wants to undermine their fear-based, illogical ideas he needs to do so with his supposed area of expertise...THEOLOGY. Heck, even at a simplified level, all one has to do is consider that if an individual set a paddle on fire and repeatedly hit a baby with it over and over and over, this act would be considered a barbaric tragedy condemned by Christians (and others, of course).

Yet, God the Father would do much worse by condemning humanity to eternal torment forever and ever? Apologists would say "Well, humans CHOOSE to go to hell." The interesting thing is that the Bible says "no man can come to the Father except the Holy Spirit draws him" because his understanding is "darkened".

This is just one of the many points that Ledwith could bring up, but instead, he preaches to the New Age choir by ridiculing monotheistic religions (primarily Christianity) via nebulous assertions. In fairness, Ledwith makes excellent points, but nothing that you couldn't get (much more eloquently) from Marianne Williamson, Gary Zukav, Eckhart Tolle, Neale Donald Walsch, and others. Some of these points are:

"We are pawns tossed about by those people we perceive as more capable and enlightened than us."

"If Jesus were on Earth today, he wouldn't recognize his own teachings."

"Anyone who looks back at our history can only be appalled at the small-mindedness, the hostility, the barbarism that has characterized our whole traverse as a race."

"We don't realize how following another's image of God is spiritually and evolutionarily limiting. We don't even think of it."

"The flat earth mentality still corrupts and completely distorts our fundamental beliefs at the basic level still today."

"We've never gotten rid of the Inquistatorial mind to this day."

"The answers we've been given by religion are bizarre, emotionally charged, and childish."

"Heaven varies according to the broker (Christian denomination), but the basis is pretty much the same: earning credits for good behavior so you can immigrate to heaven."

"God is just a human magnified (in monotheism). We take these categories from the lowest plains of existence and impose them upon the Divine. As a result, we're left with something so sentimental, mawkish, and inaccurate that it bears no relationship to reality."

"Whatever God is has no gender. These childish images are holding us back."

Ledwith makes other interesting comments, but they beg for elaboration. One such comment is:

"(That) Jesus' death was to appease the vengeance of a savage God...this had NOTHING to do with what Jesus Christ did."

I'd love to hear his explanation of the crucifixion! Spiritual teachers such as Williamson have brilliantly explained the metaphysical aspects of the crucifixion of Christ. Does Ledwith have a clue as to why Jesus died? If he did, why didn't he share it?

He quotes Jesus by saying "greater works (than I) shall you do", attempting to make the case that humans are living far below their potential--mostly due to a flat earth mentality. What he fails to mention, however, is that polemicists and theologians debate the meaning of "greater works" (meizona tout n in the Greek) in terms of whether "greater" refers to quantity versus quality. (My Greek professor made a case for the former, saying that converts would multiply miracles by sheer numbers.)

Ledwith also perpetuates the biggest misquote circulated in New Age circles, attributing "It's not our weakness that frightens us, it's our power" to Nelson Mandela. The actual quote is "Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure...", which was uttered by Marianne Williamson in her book "A Return to Love".

One of Ledwith's comments that I found particularly insightful is "As human knowledge grows, the territory of God shrinks. God becomes a refugee." The "God of the gaps", as he called it, are areas that we try to fill with human knowledge in the attempt to explain what we don't yet understand. An example would be ancient paganism attributing lightning to the actions of Zeus. Despite this interesting observation, it's not enough to enliven the rest of the DVD.

What separates the tight, insightful segements in "What the BLEEP Do We Know!?" from this DVD is that the conversations captured in BLEEP were the result of directors Chasse, Arntz and Vincente ASKING probing questions of the experts...questions borne out of the directors' own curiosity and personal paths. On The Great Questions in the Hamburger Universe, Vol. 1 of Deep Deceptions, however, Ledwith is left to ramble at the camera rather aimlessly, which doesn't make for good viewing and does not offer lucid alternatives to the flat earth mentality of the hamburger universe. Perhaps this is more the fault of "director" JZ Knight.

In the end, I couldn't help but feel like this DVD was thrown together in order to capitalize on BLEEP's popularity. Let's hope the subsequent installments of this series are tighter, deeper, and smarter


Garbage
	"Chamber" was always the worst entry in the Harry Potter series, but this film adaptation manages to take what was already a crappy story and make it even worse. Choppy editing, horrible humor personified by the untalented Rupert Grint, smug acting by the equally untalented Emma Watson, poor screenwriting by that hack Steve Kloves and incompetent direction by the other hack Chris Columbus makes this a very unpleasant experience.

Skip it if you can.


Good for beginners only
	I go to abs classes frequently and wanted to get this DVD to help mix up my routine and give me something to do if I didn't want to leave the house.  I was a little disappointed in this DVD.  I love Self Magazine and their workouts and the amazon reviews made it seem very promising.  The routines are broken down into four separate workouts.  The only one that involved any effort on my part was the Pilates-inspired section.  As for the rest, the other sections would have you do too few reps, I felt, to get your muscles warmed up, let alone reshape them.  I think this DVD is great for beginners.  Its simple enough to follow and it won't scare you away too soon.  But if you're like me and you workout on a regular basis and just want a new routine, this probably isn't the abs workout for you


THIS is the review I wish I'd read before buying
	I looked at the name (Groovaloos) and I looked at the cover -- and my gut told me not to get this DVD. I went against my gut and believed the reviews; I wish I'd listened to my gut. For those of you who think it looks and sounds a little hokey, you're right on the money. They can all dance, but compared to what I expected, they seemed mediocre. Here's the lowdown: (1) the sound sucks - they're in a city park and you can hear the instructions fine, but the music isn't loud enough to really "feel" something that makes you want to move, (2) they just seem like a group of people who don't naturally have a rhythm, but they've learned some moves; it's SO not inspiring, (3) it's not edgy enough, and (4) it looks good if you've got a group doing it, but when someone's doing it alone, it's just okay. Overall, this DVD was okay, but not great. Get it only if you're truly desperate


Yawn...
	I was a huge fan of the books growing up, and a lover of the period and Jannette Oke's books. I had greatly enjoyed the first movie and was eagerly looking forward to watching the next in the series. Well, I just finished -- and could hardly stop from yawning while I watched!

The movie started out well enough.  Wonderful filming, great costuming, glorious rolling hills and large trees transport you back in time.  No, the faults definitely do not lie with the production of the movie.

The scriptwriting and acting seemed to have gone down a notch.  I remembered the tomboyish Missie from the last film and couldn't wait to see her older.  The actress portraying the older Missie just did not do her justice! While she was pretty, she read most of her lines flat, with little emotion.  The worst was the very ending, which was supposed to have been a heart-breaking moment between father and daughter, instead fell completely flat.  In fact, most of the scenes with Missie had me checking to see how much time the movie had left.

I think there were several attempts to portray Missie as spirited (like her chasing the chicken in the restaurant), but to me they just felt out of place from the new placid Missie we were continually seeing.

Apart from that, the rest of the cast was average, with a few star moments here and there.  I can't remember the book very well to check for accuracy, but the story was so-so as well -- melodrama only reared its head in a few places.

Only if you want to keep up-to-date with the series, I would recommend this.  Otherwise, I'm glad they replaced Missie's actress for the next film.  Perhaps we'll get to see a more energetic performance.


Expanding your mind through books and bad German dubbing is a no-no
	Viewing a movie as an adult that you once enjoyed as a kid is a good way to see if it stands the test of time. Many of those films that stand the test of time are from the Fantasy genre, including Labyrinth and Dark Crystal. Would I add Neverending Story to that list? Hell no. The dubbing is atrocious (funny Germans), and the costumes and "effects" are flat-out bad. Labyrinth looks better than many movies released these days, and easily trumped Neverending Story when it was released two years later. The story and plot had the potential to be interesting, but the execution makes Neverending fall flat. And sure, Neverending Story may have advocated reading in the mid-80's, but Labyrinth advocated the use of psychedelics, which is the next step up for mind expansion


a comedy routine !
	unwatchable  !!!!!--over rated poet-- singers who sing off key---- aggrandizing this mediocrity is ludicrous---


What a pity!
	I hope people don't start to think of this movie as Alien 5.  In my mind this is a whole new venture, one that is separate from any of the work that Sigourney Weaver did on the first four Alien films.  The first 4 films are pretty good and I really like the whole series.  It works rather well and I would love to see another Alien film with Sigourney in it.  I think they could pull off one more film.  Ripley's a great hero.

This movie was pretty bad.  The only reason I give it 2 stars is because of the special effects.  I felt like I was watching a Scooby Doo version of Alien.  Whoever greenlit this film clearly just wanted to make money.  The plot was..well..stupid and the atmosphere of the movie was pretty much non-existent.  Each of the first four Alien movies were provocative in some sense no doubt because of Sigourney's involvement.  This one was as boring as a white wall and it was as cheesy as a funhouse at a state fair.


Day of the Suck
	Francisco was right, this film is about as well-conceived as buttcrust.

The review on the back of the dvd says "jaw dropping, " but the full quote probably reads "jaw dropping (because i was lulled to sleep like a baby)". There is about 30 seconds of truly jaw dropping footage, in the zombie attack scenes, but these scenes only account for maybe 5 minutes of the movie. The rest of this film consists of the ear-bleeding whines and yawn-inducing infighting of the human characters, ill-conceived and extremely unlikable caricatures of a pseudo-cynical and extremely redundant "evil side of human nature" message that would be better left to Jean Renoir (or even Adam Sandler considering the results here). I don't watch zombie movies for the characters, especially characters so vapid and unengaging. It seemed like the script writer read a novice's How To pamphlet and said "yeah, it needs some CONFLICT". If these characters weren't so constipated and bloated I'd give them a chance. One Amazon reviewer tries to justify all of the one-dimensional absurdity by crowning it with the weighty title of "social commentary," but that's just a mindless knee-jerk observation that fails to ascertain whether it was carried out sucessfully. It wasn't.  You'd get more insight watching a kid frying ants with a magnifying glass. The critical ambitions of this movie are ill-fitting and embarassing, and ultimately just plain disappointing since they allot almost no time to showcase the director's real talent, which is (you guessed it) the lovely undead. The rest is monotonous dreck.   I don't know why horror directors have so much insecurity about the worth of their strengths that they feel they need to shroud them in a poor man's dramatic rags.

All that aside, the ending is the worst anticlimatic cop-out in the history of horror movies. A horror movie that sucks for 3/4 of its duration needs a cool climax to redeem itself, but the cut-away at the end makes you wanna kick the director in the gonads. Sorry, but anyone who calls this a classic is a friggin soundbite-repeating moron.


i bet it's real stupid,
	i have not seen this movie, nor do i EVER want to. i've only seen the previews on tv and read about it in previews. why do i think it's probably one of the stupidest, pointless movies on the face of the earth?, because i bet just about every guy who's had trouble getting girls watched it, took notes, and believed each and every single thing that was in this movie, and believed every sentence that was in this movie where you got to hear the woman thinking out loud in the movie. i bet many guys took this movie way too seriously.

well, i bet some of the stuff said in there where it has the woman thinking out loud was garbage. not all women are the same, and not all men are the same... you can't believe every thing a woman says. not all women want what that one individual woman wants and some women lie. but hey, nobody's perfect. every guy had individual tastes too, and guys lie sometimes to.

i for one, as far what i finad sexually appealing with a woman's appearance, like women who are a tad bigger. i like'em to weigh about 140 to 160 lbs. if they're around 5'5" to 5'7". yet there are guys who like petite women(i personlly don't know why).

there shouldn't be a movie that tries to help guys get girls. the movie title "what women want" was just wrong. i bet many guys thought of it as the gateway to seriously improving their game if they're looking for a date.

i personally think guys put way too much emphasis on trying to find out what women want. i don't think that should be necessary. i think it's ridiculous. i think the guy should be himself like the girl is practially all the time and just feel good about himself. not every girl is going to be into every guy... i think self-confidence is probably the most important thing for a guy to have when trying to get women.

i'm a guy and that's my opinion...


Sentimental and fake
	Having enjoyed LOST IN TRANSLATION, I thought I might like this one, which seems to have some sort of cult reputation-- why I can't fathom. The entire plot is self-serving, shallow, and unrealistic. I guess it's supposed to depict the horror of repressive religious values, and while I don't condone those, the film lacks clear characters or any motivation. A lot of people have buttoned up parents who don't get it, and it doesn't mean they kill themselves-- because they were grounded!?

Since the writer-director gerw up in Hollywood, she may not be aware that you can't keep your kid home from school without a very good reason-- social workers and what not come after you. So the entire premise is false.

Romanticizing mass suicide by having a bunch of soft focus young blondes do it-- after which they supposedly ascend to erotic eternity in the imaginations of their boyish peers-- could actually encourage the act. It's not caring, not real, and not responsible.

But I guess that wouldn't bother the rich, overfunded daughter of a Hollywood genius out to make a name for herself.


Not as Advertised
	I bought this DVD for my collection.  I do not buy full screen format DVDs.  Amazon described the DVD as "Anamorphic, Closed-captioned, Color, Dolby, Full Screen, Widescreen, NTSC" with an aspect ration of 2.35:1.  However, when it arrived, it was Full Screen only with an aspect ratio of 1:33.1.  Consequently, I returned it.  My recommendation, if you only want Widescreen, don't believe the description that this DVD is dual-layered and don't buy it


If you care about "The BOYS" get the UK set
	It is a shame that American film classics ( like L and H)  get more attention and love outside of the US than in it.
I just bought the Universal Laurel and Hardy 21 Volume Box set which is only available in Europe from Amazon UK (region 2). This set is EVERYTHING people are saying it is. It is a complete film history of the boys which starts with the boys early silent films ( some solo efferts) and goes though the Hal Roach Features. All the prints are restored and of pristine quality. A truly beautiful set and a worthy tribute to the boys. There are some missing films ( I assume for copyright reasons) such as Babes in Toyland, The Devils Brother, Bonnie Scotland and Flying Deuces.

To acomadate these DVDs I bought a region free DVD player off Amazon,which is the only way to go if you really want to collect. The DVD player was very cheap. plays beautfully and  is well worth the investment. As a side note if you have a region free player all the DVDs in the Universal Box set are also availble as single dics, in case you don't want to spend all the money at once or just want a few of the films. If you love Laurel and Hardy this is the only way to go! Anything to screw Hallmark and the corperate monster!! Why did they buy these great films just to sit on them and distribute half-A prints!!!


Pretentious and Dull
	Personally, I found 8 1/2 to be one of the most boring films I've ever seen.  It was a pretentious, self-indulgent trip down the director's memory lane.  I understood the plot, and enjoyed some of the thoughts raised near the end, but overall was bored silly by stilted, pointless dialogue.
Having said that, the cinematography was stunning and the music almost made the film worth watching.  Perhaps 8 1/2 would have been better off as a series of photographs with musical accompaniment :P


This dud has its moments.
	Okay, this is a really bad movie.  That said, there are some moments here that are so over-the-top bad that they're funny.  The fake accents are so horrible that they become campy and the now notorious love scene involving Sandra Bullock is outright hilarious...and very embarassing.  How she could be making love without removing a single garment is a mystery, but the acting in that scene is ridiculous, as well.  However, it is certainly memorable.  Sandra Bullock shows up for another short scene later in the film, but her role is essentially a throw away part.  Then there is the sudden appearance of notable actor Steve Buscemi at the very beginning of the film in which he seems almost ashamed to be in.  His character never returns to the story after that.  By the end of the film there are so many plot twists that heartfelt boredom ensues.  The acting is bad, the budget is obviously low, and the script, which invokes the occasional giggle, is a quivering mass of bulbous drivel.  Avoid this film


Only for the kids!
	What do we do
When first started watching wrestling in my early teens, Ric Flair was a hero of mine, he matches were funny and he cut the best promos ever.

So when this DVD came out I got it immediately, hoping to relive my youth, but I realized something. All the matches are the same, there long and dull, the same moves are done over and over, and the matches only pick up when Flair opponent takes the advantage. There is nothing wrong with long matches, if that are done well, like the Iron man match between Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels, but it feels like these matches are long of the sake of being long, so it can show Flairs endurance.

I also noticed Flair is so repetitive, all wrestler use trademark moves, but flair has been using the same handful of moves his entire life, for example, chop...woo...flair flop...figure four...cheat....win, that not a description of one flair match, that's every flair match. When I started watching wrestling I only saw his WWF matches, so it all looked new to me, when you watch his matches back to back you realise how boring they are. Other wrestler have put together DVD, which shows a variety of different matches such as Eddie Guerrero, Chris Benito, Bret Hart   Shawn Michaels, all top wrestler adopt to there opponents, Flair expects his opponents to adopt to him, that's way all his matches are the same.

The only thing worst then his DVD is his book, I lost all respect for Flair after a read his book, it seem that he is just like HHH and Shawn Michaels in that he does not have the balls to say anything to anyone to their face, put does it behind their backs. He bashes Mick Foley for being a stunt man, who only does gimmick matches, so what's HHH, a guy flair calls great, can anyone name a good HHH match that isn't a gimmick match (WM X-7 against the undertaker does not count because it turns into a street fight). He says Foley kisses the writers asses when everybody knows that he is the ultimate back stage player, who used booking rights to award himself 16 world titles. He critises Bret Hart for not putting over Shawn Michaels at Survivors Series 97, when he was called upon to job to Lex Luger before he left who the WWF. he refused and took the title with him to WWF, brining the WCW to its knees.

After watching this DVD, reading his book, and seeing how his using backstage politics at the WWE now, to keep himself in the limelight, its fair to say the Ric Flair is one of the most overrated wrestler in history and by the way I could have won 16 world title if I had my friends booking the show
.


Same Time Next  Year Comments
	Not a bad movie...not a great movie.  Ellen Brustyn was great


Alec Baldwin Could've Been Hard-Boiled But Ends Up Soggy
	I remember going to great lengths to fit a matin e showing of HEAVEN'S PRISONERS into a busy Saturday afternoon during its 1996 theatrical release. Considering the source material and the talent behind and in front of the camera, our little filmgoing party of detective-film fans and Alec Baldwin groupies (a.k.a. my mom, my stepfather, and me) found this contemporary film noir to be a big disappointment. Baldwin, who also served as co-producer, brought James Lee Burke's New Orleans ex-cop/recovering alcoholic hero Dave Robichoux from the printed page to the big screen. While Baldwin and the rest of the cast did well in fleshing out Burke's characters and have some tangy tough-guy/gal dialogue, they're hampered by two things:

1.) The film's slo-o-o-ow pacing. Maybe the Louisiana heat got to everyone, not just Baldwin. Of all the actors, Long Island native Baldwin sweats the most, so much that it began to remind me of the sweating-bullets gags with Albert Brooks in BROADCAST NEWS and Robert Hays in AIRPLANE!

2.) A plot that, as rendered in the film (whether it's the fault of the screenwriter or the editor, I can't be sure), never quite follows through on any of its elements. It's too bad, because these elements could've made for an exciting movie: drug dealing, illegal alien smuggling, rival crime bosses (one is played colorfully by Eric Roberts before he became a parody of himself, essentially playing a Southern-fried version of his character from director Phil Joanou's 1992 thriller FINAL ANALYSIS), an adorable little Salvadoran orphan girl (named "Alafair" by the Robichouxs, after Dave's mom. Late in my pregnancy at the time, I liked the name Alafair so much, I nearly changed my mind about naming my then-unborn daughter Siobhan!), and a bevy of beautiful, beguiling women, including earth mother Kelly Lynch, vampy Teri Hatcher in a full-frontal nude scene that was much ballyhooed at the time, and Mary Stuart Masterson, looking like a young Jessica Lange in what was then a change-of-pace role for her: a troubled stripper who loves Robichoux. Despite the sexy promises in the movie's ads, none of the ladies share anything with Baldwin but dialogue and some kisses and/or embraces. Maybe the climate was already so hot, the filmmakers didn't want to add any further steaminess for fear of poor Baldwin collapsing from heat prostration! As my mom put it at the time: "I thought the height of my day would be seeing sexy, dashing Alec Baldwin, but he came up sweaty, rumpled, tired, depressed, and moving as if he was in slow motion. If he'd made love as many times as he got beaten up, it would've been the sexiest picture of '96!"

To be fair, there *are* a number of strong characterization and action scenes, but there's just too darn much talky, molasses-paced lag time between them -- and yet, oddly, some of the scenes end abruptly just as they're about to become intriguing! Perhaps Joanou, Baldwin   Co. could've dredged a tighter, more involving thriller out of this if they'd whittled the 140-minute running time down to 105 minutes or so. As HEAVEN'S PRISONERS is now...well, read James Lee Burke's books instead.


Devilishly addictive, but not much payoff
	This program is evil. It is easy to get sucked into watching Gantz, because of the unique and inexplicable situation that the main characters, who have all died, find themselves in. They have gone to purgatory, and purgatory is like an all-too-real video game. One feels compelled to continue on with the series to begin to answer some of these mysteries.

The art direction is decent. Visually, it doesn't look cheap. The English voice acting is embarassingly bad, especially the main character, but not as bad as the dialogue, internal and vocalized, that this character has been given to speak.

The worst thing about this series, apart from the juvenile humor about breasts and boners, is the "action" scenes. These inevitably play out with the people in danger standing around arguing and philosophizing about what to do, when the obvious course of action is to take the guns that are in their hands, and shoot at their alien adversaries like there is no tomorrow. After you witness a few of these frustrating situations on the video, if you don't feel like banging your head against the wall, you are made of stronger stuff than I.

This first set of episodes leaves the viewer with more questions than answers, and more frustration than satisfaction. Save yourself the pain.


More Gibson garbage...no stars
	I wouldn't normally write a review of such drivel but felt that I had to when I saw what Christiane Schmidt had to say.
Now we all know Mr Gibson has got issues with the British (as well as others) - just look at that other pile of tosh - Braveheart. But here is an example of why rewriting history to fit your own personal prejudice is dangerous. The usual response is "It's not history but Hollywood, it's fiction based on historical events". But the problem is that some people actually believe it really happened like that!
Now I'm sure that many atrocities took place on either side of what was in effect a civil war, but I've never read of the British burning down churches with people inside - Nazis, yes....British, no. But who cares about whether it really happened....it's only a film!!
Good grief, next thing you know they'll be making a film about the US recovering the first enigma machine.....oops.


Wonderful series, Horrible Idea to re-release like this...
	Let me just start by saying that I don't own "The Chosen Collection" but that I do own the original releases of all seven seasons.

Why review this then?

Quite frankly, I believe the combined sets to be a waste of money. I have seen the reviews of this set done by fellow reviewers, and it is was my experience that that the boxes for the previous sets are not much different than this - they are as flimsy as this set is, and just as breakable.

The set's discs appear the same as the previous editions, probably a rehash from leftover sets. A bonus disc may be the only redeeming factor, but since I don't own it, I haver never seen it.

I spent my money on "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" once, and once is enough for me. Buffy is a endearing series, but why throw away DVD sets just to have them "return" from the garbage


Total Garbage
	This movie is the most boring, uninteresting piece of garbage I have ever
wasted my money on. The plot is stupid, the characters are dull and insipid, and the whole movie leaves you asking, as the credits run, "So What?" Don't waste your money!


Candyman 3:  The Day of the Dead  (1999)
	Director:  Turi Meyer
Cast:  Tony Todd, Donna D'Errico, Alexia Robinson, Jsu Garcia, Mark Adair-Rios, Lupe Ontiveros, Elizabeth Guber, Rena Riffel, Ernie Hudson Jr.
Running Time:  93 minutes
Rated R for bloody violence and gore, sexuality and language.

The third in the series derived from a concept by Clive Barker, "Day of the Dead" (they can't even come up with their own subtitle) staggers down the well-trodden path already navigated by the "Halloween" and "Nightmare on Elm Street" movies: that is, taking a decent concept and flushing it down the toilet. The original movie was a near horror masterpiece and relied on atmosphere rather than gore, while the first sequel was bearable if completely routine. This one is just a load of rubbish.  Donna D'Errico, from Baywatch (what a spectacle of credibility), stars as Caroline McKeever, the great great granddaughter of the feared Candyman (Tony Todd once again), once a normal man but now an apparition who appears to slaughter everyone around you if you dare to say his name five times in front of a mirror.  Caroline says his name five times in front of a mirror and up he pops to murder her nearest and dearest. As the Candyman hacks his way through various bad actors, Caroline teams up with new pal David (Nick Corri) to find a collection of paintings knocked up by the Candyman while he was still alive, which may hold the key to stopping him.

There's not a single thing here that isn't scavenged from the first "Candyman" film and every other ropy horror movie produced since caveman days. The screenplay is so lazy it can't even be bothered to connect half the characters to the plot, the photography is bright and glossy, which is at odds with what's supposed to be a dark story, while nothing in the direction adds any atmosphere at all. Anyone could have directed this movie, so little effort has been put in to make it scary, while the ending is an outrageous cop out. No thought has gone in to developing themes or structuring the plot because no one here is talented enough to give this movie any depth beyond having D'Errico running around in a variety of tight vests.  The rest of the performances are poor too, although none are quite as bad as D'Errico's pathetic attempts at screaming and breathing erratically.  Surely more can be done with characters like the Candyman than the constant repetition of scenes where he appears to stick his hook through someone's stomach.  The fact that the makers of this movie think Candyman is so terrifying that the very sight of him just standing there will strike fear into our hearts is a sign that they just can't be bothered even to try something a bit different.  Clive Barker may not be the master of horror as every at first claimed him to be, but he's right about one thing: the sequels to his movies are garbage


THEY TRIED I GUESS
	The saga of the candyman continues in this third installment of the hit series. I can remember the first time I watched the original created by Clive Barker, I luv'd it, the same can't be said for this film. Caroline is last living descendent of the candyman, and he wants to end it all by ending her. All who watch this film and the acting of Donna D' Errico will wish for the same thing. One would only think that she got the job to secure watchers of Baywatch for the film and for that reason only, or maybe it's because a little fragile thing like her can't take on candyman head on. Get a real actress like KATHY BATES in there and she'll kick his ass {MISERY is a classic}.
As far as Tony Todd is concerned he does a good job in this film, but not as scary as he has been in the other films. He does a good job none the less, and serves as a co-producer. As far as the script goes it's a decent attempt at the franchise, Al Septien   director Turi Meyer do what they can. But that doesn't save the film from being less then average. Side performances from the art gallery owner, the two bad cops, and the gypsy women are great and save the film a little.
	There isn't much to the story, Caroline is his last descendent and he wants to stop his pain by taking her. People she knows gets killed so it looks like she did it, and she tries to stop him, that's it nothing more to it. Over all a more worthy sequel of its predecessors would be more enjoyable.


Idiotic movie about really stupid people
	Maybe the 1995 script was edgy and groundbreaking, but I doubt it. Since Vanilla Ice was in and out of the cultural eye 4 years before the spec script and 15 years before this movie, the concept of white kids trying to act black in the most ugly ghetto stereotypes is just not all that new. I went to high school with kids like this and I've bought the Eminem CD. And there's a little more to them than the stupidity. But let's discuss the movie.

Anne Hathaway plays a dumb girl who thinks that acts ghetto in her gated community and urges her boyfriend to go buy drugs in East L.A. (??). Seeing her boyfriend beat down, she's eager to return and find that hot latino dude that did the beating. Then she goes to parties, gets into even more trouble and starts losing her Jerry Springer-inspired ghetto talk. The Mexican guy keeps trying to tell her that there's more to his life than selling crack on the street corner, but well he's doing a lot of selling crack on the street corner. Actually, he's coming off like a gangsta Yoda ready to impart life lessons at the drop of a hat. Yes, it's ironic that she's trying to dress ghetto while he's trying (not very hard) to dress suburban (wife beater is suburban?)

The movie's climax is a scene in which Anne and Bijou ask the guys if they can join their "crew" and if the gang didn't have a sex gang initiation for women before they asked, they sure have it then (and really, who doesn't know that that's gang initiation standard - started by the Hell's Angels in 1965). After that disaster (both Anne and Bijous say no - but Bijou takes a little more time saying no) the movie unravels as Anne Hathaway discovers her inner WHITE GIRL and her friends act even more stupid. There's a neat scene between her and Bijou Philips toward the end that almost makes me like these people, but it's one of the few points of truth in an otherwise dumb movie.

The one thing this movie does is to make me appreciate DJ Squalls' character from Hustle   Flow (and Hustle   Flow in and of itself) since that's a white character in a black world that doesn't fall into either extreme of wigger or Doogie Howser. He's just himself whereever he goes. He's someone the morons of this movie could learn from (but really wouldn't you rather just see them all shot dead?


At least Kurt still has Goldie
	This is a great flick for people who are irritated by sub-plots because there are none.  There is nothing resembling reality found anywhere in this movie, so it makes for excellent escapism, which we all need now and then.  Since all the characters stay together, it is easy to follow along, so you can turn your brain off, it won't be needed.  Since it's all about the ship, acting wasn't necessary.  You can bet that movies like this toll the bell for the careers of Russell and Dreyfus.  I felt pity for them as actors, and hope they can rebound.  The movie is shorter than most, so there will be minimum impact on your life.  You will remember nothing about it soon after exposure


TOO easy
	I am 38 and considered obese, however I work in a busy operating room all day and found this to be too easy. This DVD would be great for the older generations. I still need to loose 45 pounds and I am using Denise Austin's Burn Fat Fast.


Opt for Something Better
	I think Denise Austin does a decent job in some of her other videos, but this isn't one of them.  She lacks any type of warm up in this one and often looks like she's just trying to make up steps in order to fill the time slot.  The moves are not well choreographed and very awkward.  Some may find encouragement in the times Denise gives the camera a bug eyed stare and says "We're burning butter.... yeah" but I found it annoying.  I think there are much better workouts for the money out there


How can anyone LIKE this pile o shart??? IT SUCKS!!!!!
	Definatly one of the worst movies ever.  The dialog is so boring I had an A.D.D. attack trying to watch it.  I usally never turn a movie off in the middle but I had to do it with this one. I tore it out of my laserdisc player and smashed it, so I would never have to suffer through this again.  The characters are so lame I did'nt even care about who was threating his life.  I wanted the stalker to go ahead and kill them all already.  Man this movie is making me enraged just typing about it. IT FU**IN SUCKS!!!!! And it is really dated


Very Poor Quality DVD
	Love the movie, but the quality of the DVD put out by Alpha Video was so bad it was very difficult to watch. The sound was scratchy and muffled and the picture looked as if the brightness was turned all the way up. If you don't want to be disappointed and feel like you've been ripped off, wait for the remastered cut before you buy this one


Wonderful film but poor DVD quality
	I bought the DVD with this artwork out of a dollar bin and I got what I paid for. The image is fuzzy and the audio is of poor quality. This must have been taken from a 16mm print. It may be that this film is in public domain, so it may be difficult to find a decent quality DVD. There are many issues of this film so you would do better to try one of the other DVD issues. Note: Amazon seems to spread these reviews across DVDs of the same title, so you may see this review under multiple DVD releases of "Meet John Doe".  The poor quality DVD that I bought has a cover that looked like this: [...


Meet John Doe
	I purchased this DVD a while ago - FYI - A documentary of the anaconda was in the case and not the movie.  I went to the web site to complain and my profile could not be found.  Here, years later, when I'm finally placing another through Amazon They found my account and noted that I purchased Meet John Doe.  I guess it's a little late to complain now


Needless Gore
	This movie was as one of the most disappointing in its genre, far less interesting than Pulp Fiction and even below the level of Reservoir Dogs. It is said that in the violent late Middle Ages street shows were  often staged in European cities where fake blood flowed like water, heads fell off and stomachs erupted sausages to simulate intestines  during an evisceration delighting  the crowd. It seems that in the violent final decade of the twentieth century we had come  full circle from Barbara Tuchman's gripping account of the  awful fourteenth century.  Despite the abundant gore if the film had been  better handled it could have been quite good. There are  glimpses of its failed potential at different  points. For instance the scene  towards the end where the prison governor's head is impaled on a broomstick and carried around by the revolting inmates seems to be a direct  copy of an actual event at the  Bastille during the days of the early French revolution. In sum, as a special kind of disgusting  art form it is interesting, as entertainment though Natural Born Killers sucks. I admit some  people will like it , no doubt the same crowd who would attend  public executions if they were available for viewing


Choppy movie
	I felt as though the camera was clamped to a paint mixer. After about 30 minutes it gave me a headache so I turned it off.


A real woofer
	I was on a plane from Shanghai to Bangkok -- stop drooling -- and I was reading a book. On the TV, I saw Tim Allen chasing an orange cat. In the course of the chase, he dropped down from two legs to four. The effects, I'll admit right up front, were great. This looked far better than the old 70s (I think) version called THE SHAGGY D.A., which I haven't seen. But even so, it sucks. I didn't need sound or subtitles, and I didn't need but 5 or 10 minutes to figure out that it sucks. True sucking is like that. (Yeah, I saw the bit with the Scrabble board. "I am Dad." Whoop dee freaking doggy doo.) It's possible we underestimate Tim Allen's ability as an actor, perhaps because THE SANTA CLAUSE was so unforgivably bad. But even so, this movie sucks. Sometimes life is just that simple.


Who let the dogs out?
	I am sorry to report that this movie is dead on arrival, and I have to agree with anybody that says this movie is [...]. The whole cast is wasted in this movie, and most of which I have seen in movies that I liked better. Like pretty much the leads in this movies, I have seen thier movies and liked htem better in, but this one, they might as well. If your a Tim Allen fan, please do yourself a favor, and get either the Santa Clause movies, or the Toy Story movies, and avoid this movie at all costs. Here are 99 minuts of my life, that I won't see again, and I am trying to make sure that you don't waste your time on this dud. Who wants to see an actor pretned to be a dog, in some scenes in the movie, ore pretty much the whole thing. I haven't seen Monster House or Cars, but I hope that these will be 2 better movies, or maybe a season dvd of Home Improvement will be pretty then this. Dave Douglas (Tim Allen) is a lawyer, that dislikes dogs, and even has a case against animal activist Justin Forrester (Joshua Leonard). And he is up for accused of trying to torch the California headquarters of sinister pharmaceutical conglomerate Grant   Strictland. And he doesn't much of a family life, since he is never home, and how many times have we seen something like this in a movie? His wife is Rebecca Douglas (Kristin Davis) and they have 2 children Josh (Spencer Breslin) and Carly (Zena Grey). And he has an appoontment to Josh's PTA meetings, and even through he is reminded at work, he forgets. Carly is not only a is both Forrester's student and a budding animal advocate herself, and her brother is trying out for football like his Dad, even through he secretly hates it, and didn't sign up for the fall musical. And then there is a mad scientist (Robert Downey Jr.), trying to extract the secret of immortality from the shaggy hide of a 300-year-old dog he had kidnapped from a Tibetan monastery. And Carly even kidnaps it from Grant   Strictland, and brings him home, nad even trouble starts when the dog bites Douglas, that gets him starting acting like a dog too, and even looking exactly like him at times. The movie expects us to believe the dog is 300 years old, which would be impossible, since neither dogs or people live that long, all I can say we are in an era of movies being made out of sequels and remakes, and this is one to avoid at all costs.


Trust me, don' t be a fool...
	It's a disgrace they charge money for this DVD. Producer and actors should be ashamed this is sold.
Fine if people want to experiment with filmmaking, but to release this film with big name actors and charge consumer, unforgivable.

I prefer to have rated this with no stars


keep away
	This was purhcased by accident.  But still one of the crapiest movies I ever seen.  Story wise, well it's bad to see what situation young girls could have with whores for mothers and growing up just like them.  It's actualy very sad to see young girls throwing away their life away.  Other wise, movie had bad ending, good quality packing and dvd from amazon.com ...


terrible customer service
	this is day 10 now and im still waiting for my package!!!!!!amazon seems great but when something goes wrong they run like chickens!

However.....LARRY BIRD IS THE MAN AND DONT EVER FORGET THAT


Zzzzzzzzzzzz
	Let me just preface my review with the fact that some of my favorite movies are incredibly slow and even "boring" to my friends.  So it isn't the glacial pace of this movie that so bothered me.  It isn't the unresolved ending that bothered me.  It wasn't the violence (in short bursts.)  It wasn't the acting (the acting was pretty good actually).  But as a whole this movie was simply a tremendous failure.  I didn't care who was sending the tapes and I didn't care what would happen with the main characters.  They were unrelatable on just about any level.  This movie is the kind where you will see a remotely interesting twist in the plot about 3/4's of the way in and you'll think, "wow I wonder where the story will go next".  And then it doesn't.  That was it.  Very disappointing.  I don't mind excruciatingly slow films as long as there's SOME kinda payoff in the end.  I really don't understand all the acclaim that this movie got.  As a "suspense" movie or as an "art" film it fails pretty miserably.  The premise was a good idea that went nowhere...slowly.  Viewer beware.


Dont waste your $$$
	This movie sucks! It is fake, everything is staged. Chicks dont laugh when they fight, nor do they dress like strippers!


Dont' buy this dvd!
	This DVD sucks, all the "fights" are fake, retarted, drawn out fights with girls that are not attractive and it was the worst waste of time I've ever had in my life.  I am now stupider for watching this DVD and buying it is on my list of regrets I have in life.  I wish I could say the only good part was.... but THERE WAS NO GOOD PART.  No shirts ripped off or good hits thrown, nothing.  I am a Marine stationed in Japan looking for a DVD to enjoy and this is what I get.  Where is the love


A film that you already seen before
	"Killing Me Softly" has one of those scripts that just don't give the audience a break - not only does it set up an improbable situation, but the big "twist" at the end is also mind-numbingly predictable (unless perhaps you haven't seen a thriller before in your life). The chemistry between the two leads is also lacking; Fiennes brings some physical magnetism to his role but as far as his acting is concerned, he's an inexpressive bloke, while Heather Graham is ALL TOO expressive - she overemphasizes every emotion her character is supposed to feeling by making faces at the camera. Besides, she's not even that attractive; even her co-star in this particular film, Natascha McElhone, blows her out of the water in that department. The ending is like when you have a 'jawbreaker' candy in your mouth, sweet and good in the beginning but when you get to the inside its bitter and sour. It was obvious towards the end of the movie that it would turn out like it did, I have seen quite a number of bad movies to figure it out so quickly

In spite of all that, Chen Kaige's direction is good, and he creates some suspenseful moments. So I give the film a generous "** out of 5" rating. But if you're a Heather Graham fan you will like this movie since she is nude in many scenes; and for Joseph Fiennes fans you'll receive half naked perks.


A TOTAL BOMB!!
	Whatever possessed Jessica Lange to appear in this mess will never be known.  The payoff at the end is a huge disappointment.  Jessica Lange tries hard to bring the material up to her level but the script does her in.  Gwyneth Paltrow is unbelievably bad.  But I think this is not their fault.  The screenplay and direction could have been better.  This could have been a very good movie along the lines of "Misery" or "Fatal Attraction" but it fails in every department.  As I said, the payoff at the end is a real disappointment.  This film is a waste of time and money.  Stay away from it!


A Little Too Mean For Its Own Good
	Kelly Preston and Tcheky Karyo are a New York City couple who come together after Preston leaves Matthew Broderick and Karyo uses Meg Ryan in order to get a Visa. Now Broderick and Ryan are teaming up to get even with their ex's. The problem is, the offenses they've endured (being dumped and being used) don't really warrant the horrible things they do to these two people, especially Karyo. Which is probably why first-time director Griffin Dunne used two such amiable stars in the feature roles. After all, how can we not root for Ferris Bueller and Harry's Sally? Unfortunately, it ends up being pretty easy not to root for them when their revenge is so excessive, the pace of the film is so uneven, and the script isn't particularly funny.

There's a difference between black comedy and just mean-spirited comedy. Despite a handful of amusing moments and a few nice cinematic touches, this film does not walk that line very well


not as avertised..editted movie
	the movie is good except this version has been editted and cut out sceens, very disapointtin


Well, if you are a true Beatle fan....
	I have been a Beatles fan since 1964, and I have distinct memories of the band's influence on my young life.  I saw Hard Day's Night, Help!, Yellow Submarine, and Let It Be in the theater when they were first released.  This film has always been the Holy Grail of Beatle fandom.

Now that I own it, I can honestly say I understand why it took so long to release it to the public.  That thirty years of isolation, locked up in a vault somewhere in London, only improved its standing in my imagination, not on actual film.  The BBC was right to bury this.  As a film, or television special, it's horrible.

But as a fan, I had to have it.  Now, that's all I can say about it; I own it.  When will Let It Be be released


"Just answer the questions, Mr. Paquette.  The attorneys will provide the wisecracks."
	Upon its initial release, the attention that Otto Preminger's "Anatomy of a Murder" attracted due to its subject matter undoubtedly deflected some attention away from the fact that the film had its fair share of problems.  When watched today after much of its scandalous elements have lost their power to shock, its meandering story and uneven characterizations are exposed front and center.

Attorney Paul Biegler (James Stewart) is asked to defend Lieutenant Frederick Manion (Ben Gazzara) after a bar owner is found murdered.  Manion claims that he committed the murder in a fit of rage after his wife, Laura (Lee Remick), was raped.  While preparing his case for trial, Biegler finds that Laura is extremely difficult to work with because of her temperamental and flirtatious nature.  Nevertheless, the resourceful attorney continues to work on exonerating his client even though it is not clear whether he and his wife are being entirely truthful with him.

Stewart is his dependable self in "Anatomy of a Murder."  In fact, his performance as an attorney who is not afraid to stretch the rules is the one saving grace of the film.  There is little nuance in the performances of Gazzara and Remick and even the great George C. Scott misses the mark with an over-the-top effort.  Yet, the problems with the acting is secondary to the unfocused screenplay.  "Anatomy of a Murder" oftentimes seems more concerned with exploring the eccentric natures of its characters than in telling a good story.  The investigation of the crime is done in a half-hearted manner and the mystery behind the dual crimes of the rape and the murder are never resolved to any satisfaction.  For a film to run as long as "Anatomy of a Murder" does, one would think that there would be more than enough time to resolve all of the lingering questions posed by the film.  Yet, this is not the case


gobbledygook   self-righteousness   pretentious twaddle make for a terrible movie
	there is a certain new-fangled school of screenwriting that thinks that if you put a bunch of characters on screen and have them make no sense of one another but sound as if theyre being profound, then they ARE. the prime example of this in recent years is the abominable "crash", but at least that was (somewhat) assuaged by strong performances. this -- arguably the worst "mainstream" motion picture of 2005 -- is redeemed by nothing. an excruciatingly long 2 hours, and as much as i (usually) enjoy george clooney, i might never forgive him for this drek


boring 2 pack set
	viewed it 1st was disappointed knodded my head in disbelief while watching,waiting,hoping!!!,the second time i tried to keep awake but could not keep my eyes open long enough, must of been those gravity waves in interstellar space out there in umm well you get the picture.My advise is for you to save your money and buy comos (the best imo)To be honest, i couldn't wait to sell it used at a $10 lose through amzn.the following week(they get a commission for sold items)nonetheless,i am content i no longer own it.Next time i will rent before purchasing on amzn. Just So you know, "cosmos" i can watch over and over for years as this was my first box set from amzn..the late carl sagans"cosmos" blows away "the astronomer"


Misses the point
	While some critics can argue with Dan Brown's research and reasoning on certain historical points, one thing these Da Vinci "debunking" presentations will never be able to refute is this: the downplaying of the feminine role in western civilization and Christianity, primarily by the Catholic Church, and the fact that the Church still considered Mary Magdalene a common prostitute until just a few short years ago: 1969. Nor is it possible to refute the recent polymorphously perverse scandals that have rocked the Church after centuries of suppression and may have everything to do with the doctrinal distortions that Dan Brown has brought out in the open for serious review. This institution is in trouble because it is seriously out of balance with itself and has cut off its spiritual nose to despite its face by downplaying or denigrating the role of women as sacred beings and bearers of the Light, when their healthy presence is needed more than ever as a corrective to some of these abuses and scandals. Dan Brown has done the world a great service by showing how the feminine role in the divine was written out 2000 years ago, with help from Peter whose misogynistic views of women are plainly evident in the scriptures even today and are still, quite frankly, shocking and debasing. Sorry, but upon this "Rock" of male dominancy was built the Church.

Thank you again, Dan Brown, by bringing these matters into the light of day so people can know more of their authentic history or at least do their own research to make up their own minds about which spiritual path is best for them and which ones were built on two millenniums worth of manipulations, obscurations and lies. These obscurations and lies happened through the efforts of a group of petty, insecure and misguided men down through the centuries to ensure their dominance and control over the masses, and they found a way to dominate not only the minds of the masses but their vast material resources, worth trillions, through guilt, control and other hidden but consistent abuses of power. And those of orthodox faith who continue to blindly support such hypocritical institutions have a lot more to answer for than any twenty Dan Browns put together. People are angry and they are angry at the failure of religion to live up to its own standards of behavior and for distorting what may have been Jesus' actual relationship with the women in his life--or were the disciples just supposed to be members of a exclusive Men's Club with Jesus as head and women as a species relegated to second class citizenship? To answer these questions, some of you will finally have to turn to your own heart and mind for a change instead of some literal interpretation of the truth, because not everything of the light is found in scriptures or on the printed page, especially after the scriptures have been selectively riddled with scissors for reasons of self-interest or from spiritual corruption. The next thing people should ask for is to have the vaults of the Vatican thrown open for public view. Lord only knows what plunder they contain


The Devil Bores Read-a and Moviego-a
	I read the book and saw the movie, which other than title and major characters, have little in common.  I can't say I really liked either.  The book is a little funnier. My major learning from the whole project was when "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" taught me about "roman a clefs", of which "Devil" is one.  Perhaps if I had more interest in the fashion industry, I'd have been more fascinated by the inside look that "Devil" provides.  Meryl Streep is very good as the apparently soulless Miranda Priestly, editor-in-chief of Runway magazine, but somehow she's never quite devil enough.  Anne Hathaway is passable in her second (or third) "made over princess" role.  The minor characters, including the wonderful Tracie Thoms as "best friend" Lily, are mostly wasted.


What?
	I was under the impression that this was the entire series. I finally, after many issues, got my set and unwrapped it, and my heart sank audibly when I saw "Complete Collection I". I popped the last disk in and lo and behold, it wasn't the full series afterall.


Say What....?
	....the ultimo movie about a bungled heist job and the crooks are holed out somewheres is....Reservior Dogs. This has great actors in it...I enjoyed seeing, f'instance, Dame Dunaway...but, she, Sinise, Dillon, Mantegna, and perpetual co-lister Faison had a poor dialog to work with. Imagine if QT had written it. Or, my favorite tough guy screenwriter, David Mamet. Fortunately though, Spacey will have something to build on develop a director's repertoire..


it doomed alright
	During my teenage years I was a fan of WWF wrestling and specifically, the Rock.  He was a tremendous wrestler who the fans admired right away because of his talent to be extremely funny on the microphone and cut some of the funniest, most disgusting lines ever mentioned on WWF TV.  His talent in the ring was spot-on, and the Rock would always give the people everything he had when it came time to step in the ring and compete.  He rarely made a mistake in the ring... but he made a HUGE mistake stepping away from wrestling and walking down the path to Hollywood.

It's not that Doom is really a bad movie.  Sure, it was a movie considered a disappointment right from the get go because no one wanted to watch it at the movie theaters.  It's just a normal, monster-shooting film that delivers a tiny amount of suspense, and that's it.  I'm sure the movie would've been big had it been released 10 years ago.  Todays generation is probably sick of go-nowhere do-nothing action films such as Doom.  Okay, so it DOES go somewhere, but the film isn't really designed to build to an awe-inspiring creative story.

Doom is the kind of movie you don't really want to seek out- you just happen to come across it at the video store and decide you need a quick 90-minute action fix, so you rent the movie, watch it, and then forget about it the next morning.  Of course, I'm sure you don't forget to rewind the tape because that's impolite.

The Rock never should have left wrestling.  It was a bad career move and the millions of wrestling fans (and the Rock means MILLIONS) really miss him.  Come back home, Rock.  Please


Barberella Psychadela It's Not
	The opening strip scene is reminiscent of Barbarella - too bad those aren't Basinger's legs though. Nerdy scientist falls for galactic beauty as presented by Kim Basinger. I have never understood Ackroyd's characters. And keeping in form, he is once again as unfunny as mud. Basinger tries so hard - too hard - to rescue this film, but that's no small task considering the ineptness of this way silly film. OK so she munches on batteries, and thinks she has to cook everything in the kitchen at mealtime. She seems a genuine Betty Crocker given that her favorite foods are nuts and bolts. Jon Lovitch also tries to prop up Ackroyd and this weak script. However, his contribution seems way overstated to me. He doesn't have much to do. Funny are the scenes inwhere the teenage girl eventually decides that her step-mother is not like other people. Basinger's character has a magic purse with an annoying creepy critter in it who tells her what to do. Think, Jar-Jar Blinks. I suppose it's OK as a backdrop for housecleaning. But that's it. Flat and mechanical


Dissapointed
	Ella Enchanted has been my favorite book for years and when I heard that they were going to make it into a movie, I was estatic. I marked the movie release date on my calander, got my tickets in advance, and waited on pins and needles on the way to the theater.

The movie was a huge dissapointment. While I wasn't expecting the movie to be just like the book, I certainly wasn't expecting that. While the movie itself was funny and an overall good movie, I hated it because it was absolutley nothing like the book. The only common thread I found were the names of the characters and the fact that Ella was cursed from birth.

I suggest that you go and read the book if you enjoyed the movie, it is far better with an increadible story line and an ending that still brings me to tears, despite the fact that I've read it over 100 times


stick with the classic "the bad seed" instead
	this must have seemed like a great idea at the time,"cast culkin against type as a killer child and show his range as an actor". the problem is his range is all the way from a to b.
  this movie never explains how or why the boy turns killer and asks us to except one too many "chance" happenings. in the end all we get is this "thriller"(and i use the term very loosely)that thinks just the idea of culkin as a killer is thrilling


Pretty Woman Meets Toxic Tort
	Even though I would agree that "Erin Brockovich" is an entertaining movie, Julia Roberts performance in it is no more Oscar-worthy than was her performance of a prostitute in "Pretty Woman."  I am second to no one in enjoying a good "David and Goliath" story, but this movie has such shaky roots in reality, it is more of a tall tale, than the "true" story of a historic class action suit that, I would imagine, left more unhappy plaintiffs, than it did satisfied ones.  However, as the movie title implies, this is indeed Erin Brockovich's story, in the same way that the "Xena" character is the main attraction in "Xena: Warrior Princess" (though it should be noted that Xena's wardrobe is considerably more modest than that of the Erin Brockovich character).

Erin Brockovich is a vain, brassy, boorish, single mother of three young children, with no marketable work skills, a transparently opportunistic manner, who dresses very much the same way as the prostitute character Roberts played in "Pretty Woman" (prior to Richard Gere's character taking her on the infamous Rodeo Drive shopping spree).  The movie's beginning finds Erin unemployed and pursuing a personal injury lawsuit in connection with an automobile accident; her lawsuit is lost, primarily thanks to her own disastrous testimony (swearing, cursing and shrieking from the witness stand) while being questioned by opposing counsel.   Unbelievably, Erin parlays the failed lawsuit into a job at her attorney's (played by Albert Finney) firm, mainly by pushing her way into the office and ensconcing herself at a desk.   Later, while handling the paperwork for a run-of-the-mill, pro bono, real estate sale, Erin discovers the file contains the seller's medical records, that, for reasons she (correctly) does not understand, seem to be of particular interest to the buyer, the mega utility company, Pacific Gas and Electric.  Erin independently embarks on her own personal investigation of the case and discovers that PG E had (for decades) negligently contaminated the ground water (surrounding one of their power plants in/near Hinkley, CA on the edge of the Mojave Desert) with toxic, hexavalent chromium.  This discovery leads to the queen mother of all class-action lawsuits (at least in terms of the award), in which hundreds of Hinkley residents sue PG E (by and through the representation of Erin's boss) in a toxic tort action that eventually nets a 330 million dollar settlement for the plaintiffs.

Roberts gives a photogenic, if not especially gifted, performance in her role as Erin. The movie contains a plethora of flattering shots of Roberts (literally gushing out skin-tight, low-cut, bustier-inspired "work clothes" that would never be permissible attire for any employee of a law firm on this planet) as she engages in warm and fuzzy discourses with the unsuspecting and unsophisticated Hinkley residents. While there is much to be said for Erin's apparent drive and tenacity as she pursues the plaintiffs in the suit, she is not an especially likeable character; rather, she is rude, verbally abusive and only conciliatory and kind when and if it serves her interests.

Albert Finney is considerably more appealing and believable as Ed Masry, the aged and  weary attorney who is Erin's boss.  The bantering that occurs between the two is generally amusing; unfortunately thanks to the inept direction and camera work, the focus for these scenes seems to be more on Roberts (strutting about in short leather skirts and noisy, five-inched-heeled mules) than on the sometimes-interesting personality dynamics that seemingly exists between the two characters.  Aaron Eckhart plays the affable, gentle biker and next-door-neighbor, George, who becomes Erin's boyfriend-by-convenience.  The "convenience" factor is totally one-sided and for Erin's benefit exclusively; she  unabashedly uses George for free, live-in childcare, thereby giving her the necessary freedom to assist Masry as they put together the historic case.  Erin eventually winds up receiving a staggering two million dollar "bonus" check  (from Masry) when the tort action case settles; contrastingly, George gets a "thanks" for his nanny services from Erin and his walking papers.

The plaintiffs in the case are an assortment of simple individuals with unpretentious outlooks on life, who have been dealt a dirty hand by the utility giant.  Though the Hinkley residents are sympathetically portrayed, make no mistake-this movie is about Erin Brockovich (indeed, I do not think there is a single scene in which the chacracter is not present) and less about the brave struggles with life-threatening, generation-spanning illnesses that the real-life plaintiffs were forced to face, due to the toxicity in their water source.  Erin Brockovich is presented to the viewing audience (in typical Hollywood fashion) as a sort of heroine; but in fairness it would seem more accurate to say that she was a woman who indiscriminately used people, walked on others when necessary and seized opportunity after opportunity until she eventually struck it lucky and got rich.  Is the movie entertaining-absolutely.   Inspiring- not even slightly.


PLEASE MAKE IT END!!!
	There are no words to describe how AWFUL (!!!) this "movie" was from beginning to end, but let me try anyway so as to give people a fair chance to avoid it and thus try and prevent their day/evening from being ruined: the film supposedly deals with a woman who has an accident and is "touched" by a sex angel only to discover she is a sex addict and the twelfth sex apostle... Need I say more?
The plot, the "humor," the dialogues, and the music are way beyond "below average."
There is next to no nudity and there are no, I mean 0 as in ZERO beautiful girls, in this film!
As for the acting-oh my- the acting is beyond words...
School plays (and pre-school for that matter) have better actors!  It is truly sad...
Rent or buy (ha ha ha) at your own risk.  You have been warned!


WHAT THE...
	THIS MOVIE IS NOT VULGAR NOR DOES IT RATE NC17...DONT BELIEVE THE HYPE. CHECK OUT PINK FLAMINGOS INSTEAD, NOW THAT IS A VULGARLY RIGHTEOUS MOVIE BY WATERS AND THE WITH THE GODDESS OF FILTH..DEVINE


Ripoff
	I watched this movie all the way through only because I paid $22.00 plus shipping and felt I should give it every chance to redeem itself. It is a stinker and if there were minus number ratings I would give it -10!! Rated "R" for what? Language? Adult content? I have seen Disney films more deserving of the "R" rating. This movie was silly, definitely not entertaining in any way and I threw it in the same bucket I put my dog's crap in when I clean up the yard. I am a Chris Isaak fan, have all his CDs and went to his concert on December 9. The fact that he would associate himself with this garbage has changed my view of him and unfortunately, even his music. I did not find the film offensive, I enjoy hard core porn. I feel this is a rip off, poorly done in all aspects and highly do not recommend it to anyone!!!


Hard people to like.
	The film has its amusing and even touching points, but not very many. The big problem with RH is that neither Ford or Benning are sympathetic characters. Henry is just the kind of self-important, ego-bloated, smug, arrogant, cold-blooded corporate ass that's helped step on working people for real, so it's really hard to feel anything for him, shot or not. He's arrogant even with a gun pointed at him, and the fact that it takes a bullet in his brain to even make him consider acting human is, if you think about it, appalling. And his wife is, in a way, even worse; she accepts his character so she can have all the material things it buys and status is provides. She goes into a panic when she thinks they may have to give anything up, and doesn't become "normal" ntil much later. Only their daughter has any heart at all. Maybe a better ending would've been Henry's not making it, Bening going nuts from losing her stuff, and the kid being placed in a foster home with the kind of people her parents should've been from day one. Barely watchable.


Amatuer Camera Man.
	Love Michael Buble, but this was more like a home made movie of someone using their camcorder from the audience. Parts of Michael's head was cut off, and then; sometimes, his whole head was cut off. Most of the time, the camera man didn't expect where Michael was going to move to and you'll get a jerky movement of the camera man trying to get Michael back into the picture. I wish they would have said in the description that this was more of a documentary than a concert. That this was just home made videos. This was definitely not worth $20. If you want a professional quality concert, I would recommend buying Michael Buble's Caught in the Act. Caught in the Act was worth the $20 bucks. You get professional camera men who anticipated Michael's movements, and parts of his head was never cut off like Come Fly with Me's DVD. Also, the sound quality on Caught in the Act was way better. Now, I understand why some places sold Come Fly with Me DVD's and had the word enhanced after it. The DVD that I received was not enhanced. Anyways, skip this one, and get "Caught in the Act" instead.


Will  the real Herzog please emerge.
	This was so messy and Mr. Dorrington so over the top in
hi self promotion. YUK.!..my partner and I were disgusted.
He and his deceased friend/photographer are the rotten people who enter jungle animal habitats and cause the animals so much stress as to charge at them and these creeps can take photographs and brag-Degenerates for sure.Too damn bad for your buddy. It was obvious this was not quite of the caliber daring/bold/ and challenging as some of Herzogs past films. We have been fans for 20+ years. Looks like he did it for the money and Dorrington rode
Herzogs coatails in  a way. Geez..I had just watched March of the Penguins and Wings of Migration and those! are truly documentaries made by film experts. The babbling and rambling on in The White Diamond made me pity Herzog. He did it for the $ maybe.Dorrington yammers on and on in such a disgusting way I suggest you turn the sound off and fast forward to the end shots
of the waterfall and the swifts. Hey Dorrington-Who cares about you? Herzog..Get out of California before you rot


Not what I remembered
	I remember LOVING this movie and all of its silliness. I recently made it a nostalgia purchase and realized-it isn't that great. but my 6 year old LOVED it and continues to watch it all the time. My child is now a Weird Al Fanatic...and I am ok woth that


GOES TOO FAST
	This DVD covers addition from 1 plus 1 to 3 plus 3 plus 3 in about 60 seconds!  It does not give enough BODY to the addition explanation and is hard to follow.  It was a pure waste of money


Horrible DVD
	Do not buy this DVD as it is a total waste of money,Joe Walsh can
be heard on a much better DVD with Eagles Farewell 1 Melbourne,Au. This DVD DOES NOT have DTS 5.1 Audio format as advertised


just not for me
	This show is so boring all it's about is poltics. What was HBO thinking having the one of the oddest shows out, it doesn't play no background music even when it's going off. And all the people do on that show is argue like petie little children, in one episode I found very shocking to hear was from a blond hair woman saying the two oldest sons of Saddam Hussian that died they made their bodies into make up she said it's so (Queer Eye for the Straite Guy) and another episode she call a gay a fag, I didn't know she had that in her. What I found weird was why would actor George Clooney would talk what the show is all about during previews, he has nothing to do with political things. Thank god "K-Street" never did get a second season


hysterical mother is vindicated (yawn)
	Jodie Foster is excellent but there is no doubt that the daughter will be found on the plane at the end. The only mystery is in the details. No real suspense. I found the plot to be a little farfetched


Two hours I'll never get back.
	This has to be one of the worst movies I've ever seen. The only thing that stopped me from demanding my money back at the end was the fact that I saw it in a free sneak preview.

By the end of movie you don't like any of the characters and you don't care what happens to them, even the ones that started out sympathetic and likable.  The third time Jack Nicholson's character gets beaten with his own golf clubs you're torn between wishing they'd just kill him already and wishing they'd kill you instead so you don't have to sit through anymore of this crap.

Save your time and your money, turn around and walk away from this one.  I wish I had


The emperor's new clothes
	Despite managing to give fleeting impressions of importance and quality, this film is a complete put-on. The long "set-piece" scenes (wedding, Russian roulette, etc.) are much discussed, usually either in the context of being "essential for character development" or "boring". In fact they're a delaying mechanism behind which the filmmaker attempts to hide his lack of storytelling skills. Once he does try to move things along, awkwardly jumping without explanation or exposition from one bloated set-piece to another, you can see the reason for his procrastination - despite being desperate to give the impression of profundity and truth, he really has nothing to say. The actors go a long way toward diverting attention from the film's awkward vacuousness, by giving false and short-lived impressions of character and narrative, but this falls apart whenever the filmmaker attempts to make anything "happen" narrative-wise.
2 stars is rather generous, but De Niro, Walken and company deserve some recognition for some good acting, albeit for such a misguided cause. Ultimately, despite some controversy, many of the film's questionable portrayals of Vietnam, Vietnamese, America, Americans and war are to be condemned more for their cinematic silliness than for their historical inaccuracy


This Star Does Not Shine
	So-So story about a man's relationship with a less than pleasant child star and said child star's mother.

Like that old Dickie Roberts movie, it tries to say something about the plight of former and soon to be former child stars, but does not do a good job of it.

Mickey Rooney and Shirley Temple, where are you when we need you?


A good soundtrack in search of a movie.
	About the only thing this movie has going for it is the excellent music. The producers of this film are out of their mind if they expect any viewer who's not screwed-up in the head to feel sorry for the two stupid main characters just because their sick, incestuous, and adulterous lifestyle is incompatible with the world they live in. If you want to leave your entertainment center in a good mood, don't watch this


Who wrote this?
	Waste of time.  I turned it off.  The "extra features" were slightly interesting.  The actual film was just a vehicle for the creators to show themselves dancing.  A vanity piece.  Why not present just the dance and save us from excruciating, badly-written melodrama.  Don't bother


Disappointed Pride and Prejudice Fan
	This Pride and Prejudice fan was hoping for a modern-day movie with a storyline much closer to Pride and Prejudice.  Even Colin Firth could'nt save this one for me!  On its own I found it sadly lacking in just about everything I look for in a romantic comedy including romance and humor.   If you are a true Pride and Prejudice fan, I recommend buying the BBC series and the 2005 movie version.  Both are excellent.  I would'nt waste my time again with this one


did they read the book?
	it seems like the actors didn't even read the book before they decided how to play their parts!  amanda root is terrible as anne elliot... overly timid and shy... captain wentworth isn't at all handsome or dashing... and when they finally get together at the end, it's so awkward, bland, and unclimactic you wished you'd never watched the movie because it so tainted the way you saw that moment as you read it in the book... some people might have liked it, but i definitely didn't.  to get an idea of the adaptions of jane austen i did like, i liked the keira knightley and the colin firth versions of pride and prejudice.  this movie could have been bette


Good Story Idea. Wooden Acting.
	Apparently, this is a film that many women, who have read the book, can make enjoyable.

Characters, including Anne   the Captain, display wooden acting. Poker-faces. Others speak at a clipped pace. The properness of the times allowed for personality, as shown well in "Pride   Prejudice" 1996   2006, but not here. Shyness, plainness, or slowness, may be portrayed likeably, with some personality.

Both Anne   the Captain maintain wide-eyed, desperate, looks, constantly. Many of us do get nervous within romance; but we are compelled, by conversation, and activity, to interrupt our nervousness with personality. Thus, Anne's   the Captain's constant, wide-eyed, nervousness is un-natural. All of us at the age of Anne and the Captain, would have refined our nervousness to be responses of: shyness, thought, distance, hopefulness, approval, or alarm.

You understand the quiet thoughts, because of the story, in spite of the confusing, paralyzed, looks; rather than because of them. You come to like Anne and the Captain toward the end, in spite of the wooden acting, because of the story's ending.

This film has pretty scenery; such as walks along the ocean. The costumes are often very unique and well done. There is beautiful singing in one scene, and even better, wonderful singing over the closing credits.

Good period, romance films are so few, and so desired, that many women labor to imagine this film better than it is. I applaud their positive imaginations. However, they continued their fanciful, wishful, thoughts into rating this film. A reviewer, who liked the film, says she had read the book, and she cites a huge amount of important background from the book that is not shown in the film. A poor script for those who have not read the book. Awful directing made awful acting.

I would like to see this good story re-made by a better Director.

Well-made romance films are: "Pride   Prejudice", "Wives   Daughters", "North   South". Fairly made is "Under the Greenwood Tree"


Fictionally Tragic
	All of us have a dark side.  Unfortunately AUTO FOCUS focuses on this small subset of actor Bob Crane's life and expands it out of proportion.  In doing so the movie reduces the other voluminous and interesting aspects of Crane's life and career as window dressing.  Even the screenplay is, at best, an uneducated guess at the evening escapades of Bob Crane and John H. Carpernter  -- since both are deceased with the former murdered and the latter the twice-accused murder suspect.

In viewing this film I knew that it would involve some of Crane's extracurricular activities.  My interest in the film was as a HOGAN'S HEROES fan and hopeful that the movie would spend more time on the back stage politics and production of the successful six-year series.  Bob Crane's professional credits alone would make for a good film.  AUTO FOCUS unfortunately revolves around Crane's so-called "secret life" and is little more than a product for the risque film crowd.

Facts are facts and there are established truths about Bob Crane's private life.  AUTO FOCUS, however, should be approached as a fictionalized story straight out of a grocery store scandal magazine.  You are better off spending your time and money buying the DVD releases of the HOGAN'S HEROES television series.


We Don't Care
	I was optimistic for Greg Kinnear once.  He was very funny ragging on Soap Soup.  He usually plays the nice-guy second banana in film or a man dying of AIDS.  Auto Focus gave him a chance to portray a 1960's TV icon, Hogan, in Hogan's Heroes.  The replication of the original cast is a bit eerie.  After all, these actors dress up as German prison guards.  A chill goes down my spine, but Hogan's was a comedy, which made the series kind of a curiosity beyond the silly caricatures of those funny SS guys.  Anyhow, Bob Crane played Hogan for six years and Kinnear badly imitated.  Yes, I'm sorry to say, Kinnear is awful as Crane, which puts a damper on the bio-flick.

Here's a disc jockey with semi-hip 60's patter on the air with an All American family, a loving wife and cute kids.  They live like Ozzie and Harriet in the LA burbs, going to Catholic Church on Sunday.  Crane lands his big break, falling for the trappings of fame.  Most people fall for the trappings of fame.  Read the supermarket check out magazine racks.  So all of a sudden, Crane's garage porn collection isn't enough.  Women, very beautiful, Hollywood loose-morals women find Crane and his buddy William Defoe irresistible.  The birth of the video camera comes into play.

The trouble with the script or maybe it's the cardboard way Kinnear acts, we watch, but in the end, we don't care.


Dopey 50's sit com
	This has not aged well. The scripts are silly, the acting is of the "chewing up the scenery" variety. Gale Storm no longer seems cute; she comes across as annoyingly perky. Spend your money on something else


Disappointing......... very disappointing
	The picture book of the same name by Chris Van Allsberg is one of my favorite Christmas stories of all times.  So I was pretty excited to hear Hollywood was making a movie version and a great actor like Tom Hanks was a leading participant.   What a disappointment!  The movie's tone is empty and wintery at best and at worst downright creepy.  There are macabre touches throughout the movie with the most memorable being a mysterious hobo (apparently supernatural?)  who appears on top of the train from time to time and utters interesting Christmas messages such as "Do you believe in Ghosts?"  The "lighter" scenes are so frenzied and overblown they do nothing to give the viewer a more cheerful holiday feeling.  Admittedly I saw the movie in DVD format on the small screen and I am told many of the scenes played better in 3D.  Yet "The Polar Express" still remains a highly unusual and uniquely unmerry Christmas movie especially for a presumed target audience of families with young children.


A Detriment to the Environmental Movement
	This film is a tough one to review. The film itself is amazing. So therefore, I should give it high marks. The problem is that what most people seem to be getting from this is that all environmentalists are wackos, and there is no way we can cohabitate with nature (as if we came from outer space or something). That is a bad and dangerous message, and so I feel it is appropriate here to give this 1 star based upon that.

Amazing footage, but ultimately does nothing but further the sensationalism required to seek and destroy more animals and natural habitats. How many grizzlies are hunted down and killed every year vs. how many humans are killed by grizzlies every year? Then take into account the fish we killed off because of dams, pollution, and over fishing that destroy the bears food source.

How many grizzlies kill humans vs. how many cars kill humans? Shouldn't we all be more scared of cars?

I agree with the other reviewers that have said that this guy is cracked and self-serving. We can co-exist with nature, but not in the way this nutjob tries to do it. Native Americans (whom we also destroyed) co-existed with them for thousands of years. They respected the grizzly. This guy no more respects the grizzly than does the cancerous civilization he condemns.

Treadwell was very conflicted and troubled. Not that we aren't all troubled, not that we all don't deal with failure and disappointment, not that a good rant doesn't make you feel better from time to time, but he had a death wish, and this was really just suicide by bear the way I saw it. Am I the only one that noticed he seemed very at odds with his sexuality? Lastly, in some of the interviews, well, they were just weird and contrived, like they were acting. These weird people in this film do nothing but harm the cause


This movie is a clunker
	Wasted talent.  None of the characters are believable in the roles they are portraying.  Some funny stuff.  Craig Ferguson can do better.  Charlotte Church should stick to singing as acting is not her forte.  Every thing in this movie seems forced and there is no chemistry between the characters


I'll be there... but not for long
	There's a reason why they talk about the "Voice of an Angel" -- it's because Charlotte Church certainly doesn't have the acting presence of one. Her acting debut "I'll Be There" is proof enough -- only the presence of its star got this tepid little drama into theatres, where it rapidly dropped out of sight. Rightly so.

Seventeen years ago, Paul Kerr (Craig Ferguson) of the Love Rats had a fling with a groupie at a concert. Fast forward to the present: Kerr discovers that unknown to him, his ex Rebecca (Jemma Redgrave) gave birth to a daughter, Olivia (Charlotte Church), who is now a well-adjusted paper girl.

The problem is, Olivia has been kept a secret from her dad. Rebecca is embittered, but Kerr wants to get to know his daughter, and similarly Olivia wants to get to know her father. Music seems to be the thing that will bring the angel-voiced girl and the burned-out rocker together, but Rebecca doesn't want her child to follow in her father's footsteps.

"I'll Be There" was hyped months in advance as being inspired by the life of actress Liv Tyler, who, despite being only in her twenties, has had an immensely interesting life. Well, maybe someday she WILL get a biopic, because "I'll Be There" is only similar in one way: It involves a rock star and his daughter. Otherwise, it is boring in about every way that Tyler's life is interesting.

With a forgettable script, not much humor and a goofy premise, the movie doesn't have a lot going for it -- it reads like a disgruntled teenager's absurdist fantasy, scripted for Church to act out. And not a terribly interesting teenager, either. It gets increasingly ridiculous when Olivia decides to pursue music to bond with Daddy Dearest; it's an obvious ploy to show off Church's vocal skills.

The best that can be said of Church's performance is that at times she looks sweet. As for acting talent, she is bland at best, but she does perform some good songs, and her voice is as pretty as ever. Just watch the songs and fast-forward her actual scenes. Redgrave does as good a job as she can, and Ferguson wrings some pathos from his performance as an aging rocker. His is the only memorable role in the film, and it's a shame that the movie didn't focus on him rather than the dull Miss Church.

Miss Church appears to have chosen a role that glorifies her in the middle of an atrocious film -- also known as the Britney Spears approach. "I'll Be There," but I promise I'll get out as soon as I can