eckhouse24 Reviews

The 100 (2014–2020)

One of the Best kept Secrets on Television!

[10/10 · 17 January 2016]

I never heard of The 100 Until I was going through Netflix. I read the plot line and was surprised to hear this was a show on the CW. I watched the first couple of episodes and I understood why it was on the CW. But then something happened. I kept watching and the show kept getting better and edgier. As I continued to Season 2 the show just kept keeping me involved with these characters. Characters that started off annoying and whiny became very well developed and for every choice they made, there was a reason and not just lets do it.

The show has a dark tone to it but under it all, there is light. And though at first, the script, the lines that these people were saying came right out of cheesefest, it too got better. And the acting became so much more believable.

Now, the premise is questionable, but who cares. Most shows have a premise that is questionable. I loved Breaking Bad, but was that a really believable premise. We can question the logic of any TV series or movie or just sit back and be entertained and believe that what ever they are telling us is a part of their world, not our world.

I look forward to Season 3 and will not miss an episode.

Terminator Genisys (2015)

Fun and Enjoyable Watch!

[10/10 · 11 July 2015]

Went in this hearing all the buzz about it not being so good and to be honest, I thought it was better then good. I had a fun time watching this movie, maybe because it brought me back to what was SO good about the first two in the series.

T3 was just one long action ride chase scene that for it's mistakes, made up with the final three minutes. SALVATION could have been better but it always felt like it was missing 30-45 minutes of footage and Arnold!

GENISYS beings the series back to storytelling. I am sure there will be people who hate the alternate timeline, but I think it makes it interesting. I loved how the opening scenes were almost carbon copies of the FIRST TERMINATOR. I thought ARNOLD looked pretty good and acted well. The action scenes were top notch and there was a lot of paid tribute to all the films and the series in this film which was nice, even the brief cameo by Robert Patrick was great.

I have two negatives....the relationship between Kyle Reese and Sara seemed forced and unnatural and John Connor seemed miscast.

Overall, I would recommend this movie and remember to check your brain at the door when you walk into the theatre....there should not be much thought going into this movie, you should be watching it for the ride....I mean seriously, if this is much better then a FURIOUS 7!

Sunshine (2007)

Sunshine - Not as Bright as I had hoped

[6/10 · 6 October 2012]

** out of **** Sunshine is a film about a crew of 8 voyaging out to he dying sun to help restart it. It is Earth's second attempt. The first one failed 7 years prior. Though a sci-fi film, it plays more like a psychological thriller as the film is more about this crew of 8 coping with being alone together for so long and possibly never returning to Earth.

Written by Alex Garland (28 Days Later, 28 Weeks Later) and Directed Danny Boyle (Trainspotting, A life Less Ordinary) the film does succeed in what it's trying to say even though sometimes it seems as though they want to do more. The actors are all above average in their parts, most notably Cillian Murphey. Even the special effects were decent for a film probably made for little money.

Basically, this was just a film I could not get into. It lost me mid way, not because I couldn't follow along but because I didn't want to follow along anymore. I was more interested in a film about loneliness and man vs mankind then what we got in the second half when the film changes directions a little bit.

Eventually, the crew gets a signal from the lost ship of the first attempt to restart the sun and the crew decides to investigate, going off their projected track towards the sun. Of course, curiosity will harm this crew and they will realize that they should have just kept going. When this happens, I kind of lost interest and never really regained it.

Try it out as I am only one of a few that did not really get into this film. Most like and you will probably like it to.

Three O'Clock High (1987)

Underrated 80's Film that All should Watch.

[10/10 · 6 October 2012]

"Three O'Clock High" was one of those 80's films that dealt with high school students against each other. Released in 1987, it went un-noticed because of all the other 80's nerd films like Revenge of the Nerds, Lucas, Some Kind of Wonderful. This film was a bit more original in my opinion.

It was the day in the life of Jerry Mitchel, a not so popular student whose main high school contribution was to either the school paper or running the student school store. On this day, he wakes up and tells himself that it's going to be one of those days. The kind of day when you realize your out of clean clothes and that your wash was left in the washing machine. Your car has a flat and your stuck taking your mom's station wagon to school. Just an ordinary day.

Just an ordinary day until student legend Buddy Revell starts his first day at his new school. He is a legend because of his short temper which had gotten him kicked out of many schools due to fights and pulling weapons out. When Jerry encounters Buddy in the bathroom, he makes the fatal mistake of touching Buddy Revell. Revell does not liked to be touch. Revell challenges Jerry to a fight, after school, in the parking lot.

The rest of the film is following Jerry throughout his day trying to get out of the fight. Hour by hour, the day gets worse for Jerry up until the fight.

The film is funny and is shot really well. The story, simple yet original, works because the actors are very believable in their roles and the scenarios are just a bit over exaggerated. If you like 80's films, you like comedies, or you just like trying out a new film, check this one out. I think you will enjoy.

Saw IV (2007)

Saw IV - Decent enough to watch

[5/10 · 6 October 2012]

My guess is that three is a trilogy and any more then three, a film series can be considered a franchise. So with that, the "SAW" franchise continued with "Saw IV" another film about the serial killer Jigsaw and his maniacal way of sending people to their deaths.

The first film was arguably one of the freshest most original horror films to come out in years. It had a certain style and feeling that grabbed your attention and wouldn't let go. You knew what you were watching was gross yet you couldn't turn away. "Saw II" continued that feeling a bit and spun the concept in a new direction and after all was said, it was almost as good as the original. "Saw III" seemed to be the end of the trilogy. The idea was no longer original. We saw Jigsaw die. Honestly, the film itself was not too entertaining. Sure, the contraptions used were fun to watch, but otherwise, "Saw III" had me leaving with a stale taste in my mouth.

Thus came another Halloween and with it another annual "Saw" film, this time, "Saw IV." How could this be with Jigsaw dead? The film begins with Jigsaw's autopsy which is one of the most gruesome parts of the film. During the autopsy, a cassette is found in the stomach of Jigsaw. When played, it is the voice of Jigsaw speaking to a homicide detective. Jigsaw proclaims that the games have only just begun and so does our story.

The film takes place 6 months after "Saw II." Officer Rigg, a S.W.A.T. team member has lost two friends, Det. Matthews (Donnie Walberg) and Det Kerry. His belief that Matthews is still alive has driven him away from his wife. Thus comes Riggs obstacle. Riggs finds out that Matthews is still alive and he has 90 minutes to save them. Along the way he will have to face obstacles and make choices to save a person or to let them save themselves.

The film plays like "Saw III" in that it is one man walking through obstacles, coming across people. However, instead of the mindless violent traps set in the third film, Riggs is forced to be a trial and jury himself. He has his options, can he resist his temptation to be everyones savior and let people make their own life saving choices, or does he risk his friends life and save people himself. These moral questions is what makes "Saw IV" a decent film. There is a new message to be told. It spins the franchise in a new direction yet brings it back to some of the ideas of the original film. And there are new twists throughout the film that does leave you guessing.

We also get an even more in-depth look of who Jigsaw really is and why he became who he is. The mystery behind this man is always unraveling in each film.

Where this film goes wrong is that it has an unbelievable ticking clock. It's story is to be told in 90 minutes, and there is an actual countdown but a lot of the things going on throughout this film would need more time then 90 minutes. It took me out of the film questioning if all of this can really happen in 90 minutes. Of course in film we have to suspend disbelief but how much can we suspend before we say ridiculous.

This and this alone has me giving "Saw IV" a less then favorable review. Reason being, the moment I am taking out of a film questioning it's approach, you have lost me. I am no longer following the story but following the believability of the story.

All in all, it is a watchable film with all the aspects of a horror film can deliver. It is not the best in the series but not the worst either.

Greek (2007–2011)

Watched all 74 Episodes!!!!!!!

[9/10 · 3 June 2012]

I was surprised to enjoy this show as much as I have. I remember watching an episode once about 4 years ago and thought it was pretty good but never caught another episode and then I stumbled upon it 2 months ago on Netflix and decided to see it all the way through.

Greek is not just good writing for an ABC FAMILY show, it is actually good writing for any show. The characters are believable, the actors playing the characters work, and the stories are involving. Sure, it's not LOST or Grey's Anatomy, and the situations are much smaller, and like sitcoms of yesterday, there is a lesson to be learned at the end of every episode though the show plays more like a serial.

What surprised me most about this show though is how well the characters themselves were written and how well they interacted with each other. The audience can truly feel like their growing up with the college kids of CRU.

And this is not another high school/college drama of hook-ups and out of control relationships. The relationships in this show feel much more real. And there is a rooting interest for these relationships and friendships to move forward.

The Series Finale does leave you wanting to know more of what happens after college for these kids and sure would hope ABC FAMILY is working on a reunion movie of sort because it would be nice the future of these kids.

All said, this is a show I would recommend. I'm 32 yet I enjoyed this series and I think if you give it a try, you might get hooked as well.

Friday Night Lights (2006–2011)

One of the Best Kept Secrets that most people missed!!!!!!!!

[10/10 · 21 March 2012]

I just finished watching the series on Netflix and I am ashamed that I did not follow the show when it ran on NBC and then again on DirectTV. FNL was filled with such strong characters and excellent writing that it was hard not to get emotionally involved in their lives.

Kyle Chandler deserved his emmy for his role as Coach Taylor, the high school football coach of the town favorite Dillon Panthers and then the East Dillon Lions. Connie Britton as his wife, Tami Taylor, who played a similar role in the FNL film, was a perfect match. These two are an inspiration to what a perfect marriage should be. Their on screen romance, fights, parenting, jokes, etc are played perfectly by these two that you get the sense that they have been married outside of the show.

The show is rounded out by great supporting characters and actors, all with their well written story lines (though some get to be a bit far fetched....watch season 2) FNL is a show which does not ignore the supporting characters or their story lines and makes them seem just as important as what is going on in the Taylors life.

I feel the show delivers on how High School Football can really be in a state like Texas, where it is more important than college or even the pros in some towns. The town of Dillon lives for their football, they swear by their football, it's like no other place on earth for High School Football.

Now believe me, FNL is not without it's Flaws. From season to season, it appears that some story lines are just dropped or forgotten. Much of this can be over looked because of the well written characters as this is a very character driven show. ANd some of the story lines do get recycled but then again, it is High School Football and in High School, the hallways are filled with decades of the same story, just different characters.....

FNL lasted 5 seasons and though I enjoyed the characters of Tim Riggins, Smash Williams and Tyra Collete , I found the kids of East Dillon, season 4 and 5 to be filled with more believable stories. Their actions and interactions felt more real. Their relationships with each other were more heartfelt. And their situations felt more genuine. Characters like VInce Howard, Jessica, Luke Cafferty, Becky, and even Tinker seemed more like High School kids trying to make it.

When said and done, FNL should be considered on of the best TV shows to ever air on Television. As a TV Power couple, Coach Eric Taylor and wife Tami Taylor should be right at the top. Very rarely can I complete a series and know that I will forever miss those characters.

Check the show out on Netflix or buy the DVD's.....it's worth it! FNL is what Television shows should be like.

The Last Kiss (2006)

The Last Kiss is a must see.

[9/10 · 22 February 2010]

The Last Kiss is a film of complex relationships. It's about 5 relationships though the main focus is that of Michael (Zach Braff,)a confused man not knowing what he wants out of life and his pregnant girlfriend Jenna (Jacinda Barrett,) a woman who believes that her relationship is perfect.

All five relationships are tested to see how strong they are. Some will survive, some will fall, some won't even get off the ground.

Though not original, this film succeeds because of the great writing an fine performances. It was written by Paul Haggis (Million Dollar Baby.) The plot is rich in story and rich in characters. The dialogue never tries to be over dramatic. It's not a typical "chick flick" as the film deals with a lot of genuine issues that both men and women face.

Zach Braff and Jacinda Barrett are simply terrific in this film but the supporting cast is where there film really shows strength. Casey Affleck (Brother of Ben Affleck) and Marley Shelton are terrific as a married couple with child, struggling to make their marriage work. Rachel Bilson (OC) plays Kim, a young college student who is the temptation for Michael. And Tom Wilkinson and Blythe Danner (Meet The Parents) play Jenna's parents who have been married for 30 + years yet they too are having their problems.

The Last Kiss was directed by Tony Goldwyn (Most notably Carl from Ghost.) He has come a long way since his acting debut in Friday The 13th Part VI: Jason Lives. Hopfully he continues to direct more films because he is quite good at it.

This is a film I definitely recommend. It's a great coming of age story, especially for those who have or will be turning 30 sometime soon and are in some kind of relationship.

2012 (I) (2009)

Check Your Brain and Enjoy

[7/10 · 1 December 2009]

There are some movies that you go to see because of the acting, or because of the story, or because it is an Oscar favorite. This is not one of them. This is a movie where you just need to check your brain at the door and be ready to be entertained.

2012 is another one of those End Of The World Disaster films where the Government has a plan and our hero is a common person trying to get by and somehow we know, that both the government and the hero will meet up somewhere. I expected that going into the movie and that is basically what I got, however, I enjoyed it this time around. Sure, the story is predictable, and the characters just seem to get lucky every time around. Some may even say that this is an insult to ones intelligence. But what film is not predictable, and what film does not have convenient situations. I mean, doesn't every romantic comedy have that All is Doomed moment right before the couple reunite and fall in love for the final time. Doesn't every slasher film have that final confrontation with the Heroin and the killer. We as an audience know what to expect but we continue to see these movies. And I am OK with that. It's like going on a roller coaster. We know their are ups and downs, and their is always that final drop before everything smooths out.

2012 is like that Roller Coaster ride. It has it's ups and downs, and we know that most people will make it to the end. We know that cities will fall, landmarks will crumble, and there will always be that All is Doomed moment where you think it's all over.

John Cusack was actually pretty good in his first major action movie since Con Air. He's a likable character, much more then Dennis Quaid in "The Day After Tomorrow" (Also directed by Roland Emmerich.) The destruction scenes were pretty entertaining as well. From the fall of L.A. to the site of an all ready fallen Las Vegas, I enjoyed the chaos around everyone.

Now, this movie was not without it's flaws. Every film has an annoying kid who won't listen to his parents, and this one also had the annoying kid. Also, Danny Glover's President of the U.S. was uninspiring. Sometimes, the cgi did get in the way.

With all of that, I still believe this is one of the better "End of the World" disaster films and one worth the money to see in theaters. It is entertaining, it's fast, action packed, and in the end, I think you feel you got your money's worth. So what if there is no Oscar worthy performance. It is all right to see a movie that lets you take off your thinking caps so you can just enjoy without asking questions.

Rambo (2008)

"Rambo" - The Movie For Guys Who Like Movies

[10/10 · 30 January 2008]

"Rambo" is definitely one sick action flick that brings the genre back to where it was back in the 80's....It's a Movie For Guys Who Like Movies where the baddies are super bad and the hero doesn't take that kind of crap. It's balls to the walls action that doesn't pull any punches.

Stallone is awesome once again as John Rambo and his writing and directing seem just perfect for this kind of film. We don't get bored by 30 minute build-up...the action starts pretty quickly and for the most part, doesn't let up. How this film didn't get an NC-17 rating is unknown to me, but I am glad Stallone had enough balls to make sure it was Rated-R and didn't try to pull out some PG-13 "Rambo".

The film is in your face violent. It shows no fear in showing young kids dying, women getting raped, blood and guts getting spilled around. These bad guys are pure evil, just as they are in the real world. You can't wait for Rambo to get his hands on these evil bastards. As in most action films of the 80's, the acting is sub par at best with Stallone actually giving the best performance. The direction is better then expected with steady shots in time of peace and more camera movement during times of violence....

All said, this is definitely one of the best pure action films to come out in a long time, the kind of film where you can check your brain and still have a great time. A must see for all who love the Action Genre. ***1/2 out of ****

Flags of Our Fathers (2006)

Flags Of Our Fathers-OK...but not Great

[6/10 · 6 May 2007]

Flags Of Our Fathers ** out of **** I saw this film awhile back so forgive me for getting the review out now.

As some may know, this film was shot simultaneously with "Letters From Iwo Jima" both directed by Clint Eastwood. Flags gives an American Side of the story while Letters tells a Japanese side of the battle. I have yet to see Letters though I am looking forward to it.

"Flags Of Our Fathers" tells the story about the famous photo of the 6 men lifting up the flag on top of Iwo Jima. It is shot very well but unfortunately most of the movie does not focus on the battle but instead on the lives of the 6 men after they have come home from the battle.

The story is told in flashbacks from either the soldiers or people who knew the 6 men. Unfortunately, we never get a good understanding of who is telling the story at which time. We kind of have to figure it out on our own which sometimes takes you out of the film because you are trying to figure out who the character is.

As mentioned earlier, the film spends very little time on the actual battle. Maybe 20 percent of the film takes place during the battle, the rest, back in the states. I did have an interest in the story back in the states but still feel that there should have been at lease a 40 percent vision of the battle. The audience never gets a real chance to meet these soldiers before or during the battle. Because of that, it is hard for us to sympathies with these characters because quite frankly, we didn't get to see what they went through.

The acting in the film was OK but there were really no stand out performance to even mention in this film.

I have a feeling Letters will offer more of an insight on the actual battle even though it will be from the Japanese perspective. I think that is what will make that film more interesting because we rarely get the chance to see a war from another side.

I think Eastwoods task of making two movies about the same battle with two different perspectives was a bold move and it almost worked but I think Flags was a disappointment.

Blood Diamond (2006)

A great Film

[9/10 · 6 May 2007]

Blood Diamond ***1/2 out of **** The people of the United States are known to be huge consumers. What these consumers don't know is the history of what they are buying. For instance, that shirt made in Korea, or your game system made in Japan, or how about that diamond ring found in Africa.

Blood Diamond is the story of a smuggler, an African native and a journalist in the country of Sierra Leone at a time of Civil War. By the first ten minutes of this film, we know how violent it's going to get when a Rebel Group of fighters, the RUF, come into a village and terrorize it's peaceful citizen. What do these guys want. Strong abled bodies to do their Diamond Mining. What about the rest of the people. Kill them.

Djimon Hounsou is Solomon Vandy, one of the villagers that the rebels have taken hostage. He is forced to mine for Diamonds. While on the job, he stumbles upon a huge 100 karat Diamond. He buries the diamond as the area is being secured by armed forces against the RUF.

Danny Archer (Leonardo DiCaprio) is a diamond smuggler who finds Solomon while in a jail house. He hears that Solomon has found a priceless Diamond and comes up with a plan to use Solomon to get that diamond. He offers to help find Solomon's family.

Maddy Bowen (Jennifer Connelly) is a journalist looking for a story to expose the Diamond Scheme to the First World Nations. She wants Archers story.

The film is a violent adventure that exposes the real life violence in Africa because of US consumer needs. Leonardo DiCarprio (Nominated for Oscar)gives an awesome performance despite his accent. Jennifer Connelly gives a convincing performance as Maddy Brown, she is everything; Sexy, Sensitive, Brave and Smart all at once. The best performance of the movie goes to Djimon Hounsou(Nominated for Best Supporting Actor,) the refugee searching for his family. Above all, we want to see his character come out on top.

The villains in this film are deep and we really hate them because they are, plain and simple, bad dudes you don't want to mess with. They will stop at nothing, including having children kill innocent people.

Once again, the film is violent, but this kind of film has to be violent to get it's point across. The reality of this country is violent, it is gruesome and yet the western world closes their eyes and soaks up the benefits.

The Number 23 (2007)

The Number 23 is fine performance by Carrey

[8/10 · 6 May 2007]

The Number 23 *** out of **** Joel Schumacher is a director who may forever be known for the disgrace that was "Batman and Robin" but Schumacher has done some pretty entertaining films, such as The Lost Boys, A Time To Kill, and Falling Down to name a few. "The Number 23" is another film I would throw on that entertaining list though it is not without it's flaws.

This film stars Jim Carrey who once again proves that he is more then just a slapstick comedy actor. In this film, Carrey plays Walter Sparrow, an Animal Control worker who is pretty content with his life but becomes obsessed with a book that his wife gave him after getting bit by a mysterious dog. He believes that the book is about him or at least mirrors his life. The main character in the book, a detective named Finerling (another character played by Carrey) becomes involved in a murder mystery that is somewhat disturbing and yet Sparrow seems to feel connected to everything that is going on. And as Fingerling in the book becomes more obsessed with the Number 23, so does Sparrow. The events in the book begin to mirror the events going on in Sparrow's life. Soon, Sparrow begins a journey to find out who the author of the book is.

The scenes with Fingerling are stylish, somewhat of a comic book feel. The "real" moments in the film have a nice dark and creepy feeling to it. The jumps from "real" to "Book" are done really well.

The acting in this film is alway to perfection. Jim Carrey gives a stunning yet erie performance. He plays Walter Sparrow with a sense of warranted sympathy yet you can't help but be afraid of him as you join him on his obsession. Virginia Madsen is Agatha Sparrow, Walter's wife. She plays the part so well that you feel scared for her as she is watching her husband fall deeper and deeper into obsession.

All in all, this film is stylish and fun to watch, filled with suspense however, I felt the ending fell a little flat. A flat ending can really derail a film and though this film suffers because of it, the acting, writing, and suspense keeps you into the film all the way to the end which makes it still worth watching.

The Hills Have Eyes 2 (2007)

The Hills Should Have Closed their Eyes

[1/10 · 6 May 2007]

The Hills Have Eyes 2 1/2* out of **** The Hills Have Eyes 2 is a sequel to the 2006 remake of the 1977 original which had a 1985 sequel. This sequel is not a remake of the 1985 sequel.

This film is about a group of trainees in the National Guard who go off to the desert for one last piece of training but fall victim to a bunch of wild mutants who became that way due to military testing and are looking to breed.

This film is terrible for many reasons. One, it's terrible sense of direction. Where is this film going. The 2006 movie was directed by Alexandre Aja who turned the remake into something horrifying. This sequel is directed by Martin Weisz who tries to rehash some of last years ideas but fails miserably...The film also plays more like a video game than a movie with each level getting harder and harder for the characters and no time for actual story.

Weisz can not be fully responsible as the script for this film is more terrifying than the movie itself. Written by Wes Craven and his son Jonathan Craven you would expect this film to be witty yet scary but there is none of that. The characters are 2 dimensional and the dialogue is more disgusting than the gore. There is no rhyme and reason for anything that goes on in this film. The film had somewhat of a decent idea with military trainees going in against the mutants but there is not one character you care about. And how would a young man still in training have the attitude that Napoleon (main character) has. If he was so much against the President and the War than why would he even sign up for the National Guard.

The actors in this film give the audience no reason to believe in the characters. All of the performances fall flat. You don't care about anyone, not even the mutants. The mutants are neither scary or funny which leaves you wondering why you are even watching the movie. The Hills Have Eyes 2 is definitely milking the box office for as much as it can get but I can't see many flocking to see this film. I wish I didn't!

The Good Shepherd (2006)

The Sometimes Good Sheperd

[6/10 · 6 May 2007]

** out of **** The Good Sheperd starts off slow and continues the pace all the way through the film. If you make it to the end, you almost want to congratulate yourself for being able to stay awake for almost 3 hours.

When I found out DeNiro was going to be directing this film, I was excited as I am a huge DeNiro fan. The film is Robert DeNiro's second in which he directed. The first being the cult classic "A Bronx Tale." "A Bronx Tale" was solid because DeNiro was the set director. " The Good Shepard" DeNiro took over the directing job during pre-production. The film was mess before it got started.

The film is about how the CIA came about. It's an interesting story that loses interest fast. Matt Damon is Edward Bell Wilson, a man who never intended to be involved in any type of government agency but had his destiny fall in the palms of his hands despite his dreams. And though he is perfect for the job and a true American, his personal life suffers because of it. Matt Damon is great in his performance and is reason number one why we continue to watch this film.

The second reason is Angelina Jolie as Edwards wife. Sexy and beautiful, she plays this part with real emotion and the audience suffers with her, not because of her. This may be one of her finest performances as she is real convincing.

The rest of the film is slow and sometimes hard to follow. The story is told in the present and the past and finally, they meet up with each other for an ending that is probably supposed to be surprising but isn't because either you see it coming, or you just don't care about any of the characters that it involves.

All in all, it's an OK film with fine performances and some interesting scenes. It is a film that I would have waited for the DVD or even cable because at least if I fall asleep, I fall asleep at home instead of a theater chair.

Rocky Balboa (2006)

Rocky Balboa-AWESOME

[10/10 · 6 May 2007]

***1/2 out of **** In 1976, Sylvester Stallone brought the character of Rocky Balboa to life in the film "Rocky." It was the story of a local underdog who received a once in a life time chance for the World Heavyweight Boxing Championship against Apollo Creed. But within that plot, "Rocky" was a love story between to people. The film was a major hit and sparked 4 sequels ending with the not so good "Rocky V." 30 Years later, Sylvester Stallone brings Rocky Balboa back to the big screen after 17 years in the new film "Rocky Balboa," the fifth sequel. Some people have poked fun of this idea of an over the hill boxer fighting in the ring but what most people don't realize is that "Rocky Balboa" is not a movie about boxing, as was the case with the original film. This story is about a man, Rocky, who must come to terms with moving on in life.

As most know, Adrian Balboa is all ready deceased when the film begins. When we first see Rocky, he is a man living day to day, without the love of his wife. His son, Robert, is tired of being known as Rocky's son and pushes Rocky away any chance he gets. Rather then moving on, Rocky is stuck in a moment of yesterday rather then today and tomorrow. He relives the moments of his past year to year on the anniversary of Adrain's death. On one stop of the tour, Rocky meets up with an old neighborhood "friend," Maria, and a relationship is born. With this new relationship, Rocky begins to live again. He begins to bond with her son. Rocky even seems to be interested in this woman romantically though his heart still remains with Adrian.

There is a boxing match in this film that features Rocky vs Mason Dixon, played by real life boxer Antonio Tarver. Though and exhibition match, the fight sparks interest with he people. My only issue with this film is that Antonio Tarver's Mason Dixon reminds me more of an NBA star than a boxer. He is not a fearsome opponent but then again, maybe that is the way Sly intended it. In the end, I think Rocky's opponent is life and the fact that life must move on.

This film works because it has heart. We are easily seduced by these characters. Rocky and Paulie (Stallone and Burt Young) have awesome on screen moments and jokes and the chemistry between Rocky and Maria (played by Geraldine Hughes) is perfect. It is almost as great as the chemistry between Rocky and Adrian in the first film. And though the film moves rather slow, it's OK because the characters are so charming that you won't notice it as much. And if one recalls, the first two films moved rather slow. And when "Gonna Fly Now" hits and the training montage begin, it makes the waiting all worth it.

The final fight at the end may be the best one because it does tell a story. It keeps you involved the whole way through. I won't give away the ending but I do not think anyone will be disappointed.

This is a finale to the series that I believe everyone envisioned "Rocky V" to be. It is charming, delightful, exciting, funny and moving all at the same time. Most of all, it has heart, which is what is expected out of a Rocky film.

Spider-Man 3 (2007)

Spider Man 3: Good film, but way too complicated for one movie.

[8/10 · 5 May 2007]

Spider-Man 3 (Contains Spoilers) *** out of ****

As I write this, please keep in mind that I never read the comics...

The Spider-Man films have always been focused on story while putting together great action. Both films have a nice flow and they were both really enjoyable. With that, I was looking forward to the 3rd installment but I must admit, I was a little worried, and with good reason.

To me, this film was way to complicated for a 2 hour and 20 minute movie. I felt this film should have just had two villains instead of 3. Instead, with three villains, there was not enough focus on all three.

The first two films built this great story between Peter Parker and Harry. This film continues that story but it seemed to rushed. I left the theatre wishing there was more from this story. Instead, their conflict was interrupted by two other villains. Sandman and Venom.

Sandman was a pretty good villain but it seemed like he got the Two Face syndrome like in Batman Forever. He seemed to take a back seat to the rest of the story. It seemed as though he could have played a much larger role. And his departure was unsatisfying to me.

Venom...possibly the most anticipated villain in the series and he seemed like he was just there. I felt they should have introduced him...possibly end the storyline where Peter rips off the black suit. Then have him face Sandman at the end. When all is said and done, show Brock in the church praying for the demise of Parker...and than the black suit falls onto Brock and the movie ends making the audience look forward to Spider Man 4, which has been green lighted...and with a piece of Symbiote still around, it's possible Venom will make a comeback in the 4th film...The College Professor still has a piece.

This film did have some story to it. It's theme was about the choices we make in our lives.It Dealt with feelings of revenge and remorse. Forgiveness and redemption. Every character has a choice to make and it's the choices they make that will effect their path.

Overall, this film had potential. It wasn't as good as the first two but it wasn't all that bad. The action scenes/fight scenes were incredible and everyone was great in their parts.

One thing I can say is that all three films have reminded me of the first three Superman movies. With Superman 2, Superman chooses to be human for the woman he is in love with, losing his powers as three villains wreck havoc. Near end, he regains his powers and saves the day. In Superman 3, Superman is affected by a weird piece of Meterorite which turns Superman into a more evil version and eventually, Superman fights his inner-self. I know the Spiderman movies are more close to the comics than the Superman movies were, it just seems very close to me.

__________________________________________________ Spider Man-**** Spider Man 2 **** Spider Man 3 ***

Lake Placid 2 (2007 TV Movie)

Awful!!!!!!!!!!!!

[1/10 · 29 April 2007]

Lake Placid 2 is the sequel to the not so good Lake Placid. This movie stinks beyond undescribable words but I will try.

The acting is terrible. It seems as though a page of script was written and shot at the same time. When the crocidile attacks, most of the characters seem so calm about it, even making jokes after one of their own has just been killed. I thought that maybe John Schneider might be the actor in the film but that honor goes to the dog in the film.

Of course, the acting is only one flaw in this film. Another flaw is the script itself. The dialogue is incredibly bad and there are many scenes that just seem to make no sense.

The most important part of the film is it's direction. David Flores who is not noted for anything major but I can't seen a great future for this guy. There are many continuity mistakes and the characters all seem stiff...The special effects are terrible. I am sure that in today's era that even a made for TV movie can have decent special effects. The Crocidile looks awful and the death scenes are just garbage. There is no fear in this film.

Sometimes I enjoy watching these ridiculous movies for a nice laugh but I couldn't even enjoy it as a bad movie. If you want to see a good terrible movie, than watch other Made for Sci Fi movies like Crocidile and Crocidile 2...They are much better yet still terrible.

The Night Listener (2006)

A Solid attempt by Williams.

[7/10 · 10 October 2006]

The Night Listener Robin Williams is one comedic actor who is never afraid to take any risks with his choices of roles, and with The Night Listener, Robin Williams takes on another role that strays from his usual comedic movies. Robin Williams plays Gabriel No one, a radio talk show host who fills his air time with stories he tells that sometimes go into his personal life. He is at a time when his personal life is being disrupted with a problem with his loved one, (his boyfriend.) In the midst of his depression, he begins a friend ship with his number one fan, a 14 year old boy dying of Aids who has just completed a book. The book tells a trouble past this kid had with a bunch of pedophiles, one who was his father...

As Gabriel and the boy , Pete, (played by Rory Culkin) continue to talk, Gabriel's boyfriend or ex, begins to question if this boy really exists, being he sounds a lot like his adopted mother and social worker...this idea begins to play with Gabriel and he attempts to visit the boy and his mother in Wisconsin.

The film plays like a psychological thriller and though the film is somewhat predictable, it still manages to creep you out as your watching. And it does so on many levels. Robin Williams puts in another fine performance showing that he is more then just a comedian. Toni Collette is great as Donna, Pete's adopted mother.

All in all, this movie is saved by it's actors because the creep factor can set in and the story is somewhat predictable.

*** out of ****

World Trade Center (2006)

A tale of good, and not about evil

[10/10 · 10 October 2006]

World Trade Center-**** out of ****

Some believe it is too early for a film about the events that occurred on September 11, 2001, saying that Hollywood is trying to profit from the tragedy of that day. I heard it before when United 93 appeared in theatres back in early spring. United 93 was released, and was a mild success, the latest talk was about World Trade Center, a film directed by Oliver Stone, a director who is known for his interest in political history. Many feared that Stone may try to use this story as a way to show people what he saw on the day of September 11, 2001. Instead, Stone shows us the good in humanity through the eyes of two new York Port Authority Policeman who became trapped in the rubble and pulled out to safety.It is an emotional story, but a story that should be told, because we always hear about the evil that happened on that day, but so few times do we hear all the good that happened, and this is one of those stories.

Nicholas Cage plays John McLoughlin, who like many people who work in New York City, wake up at 3 in the morning for a long commute, either from Long Island, New Jersey, or upstate New York. Slowly, we meet his family though they are all asleep, we can see that he has a wife and 4 children. Next, we meet Will Jimeno, played by Michael Pena (Crash.) Jimeno is a rookie for the Port Authority. As the two begin their day, so do the events of 9/11. Soon, they and many other go off to the World Trade Center to help with the evacuations, and as they and a few others are inside, the towers come down.

The rest of the film we see these two struggle to stay alive as their families struggle to keep hope that they are alive. Maggie Gyllenhaal gives an extraordinary performance as Allison jimeno, Williams wife.

We are introduced to people who will play a key role in their rescue. Michael Shannon plays David Karnes (Staff Sgt. Karnes of the U.S. Marines) a man who after the news, leaves his job, suits up in his uniform and makes his way down to Ground Zero.

This film works for the opposite reasons why United 93 worked. With United 93, there were a lot of unknown actors who looked more like regular people. It helped the audience to relate to the victims on that flight a bit easier because we were able to see these people as anyone or better yet, someone like us. A grandma, a businessman, a wife, a child, a husband, a cousin, a teacher, etc-these descriptions are everyone one of us. In World Trade Center, the better actors were better trained not to overact and over dramatize the events. Instead, they are natural with their delivery and with that, put on a better performance.

As mentioned earlier, this is not a film about politics. In fact, there is no real mention of terrorism except for the news on the television sets. In fact, we never even actually see the planes crash into the World Trade Center. I like this aspect because many of us did not even see these planes crash until after they hit when the media got a hold of personal camcorders. Also, many of the rescuers who risked their lives did not even see the planes hit.

This film is about the good in humanity. For all the evil that occurred, there was a lot more good that went on. And what makes it better is that everything that happens in the film is all based on the accounts of the McLoughlin family and the Jimeno family and the others who participated in the rescue of the two gentleman. There were 20 people who were rescued from the rubble of the Trade Center, Jimeno was 18, and McLoughlin was 19. It makes it a much better watch to know that this story is not made up like the story in Pearl Harbor or the love story of Titanic. These are real people and they were rescued, and many helped in their rescue. And how do we know? Because many of us watched on one of the various news channels that brought us these rescues. Some may say that I am biased towards this film because I lived in New York at the time so I have to like it, but I lived on Long Island, miles away from Ground Zero. I watched as most Americans did, through the eyes of the men holding the news cameras.

This is a film that all should watch at least once. Not because you should feel like you have to because it is your patriotic duty, but because it is a real true feel good story with a happy ending that isn't made up. It does well in showing that no matter how evil some can be, there are a lot more good people out there, and most of them are just like you and me.

Hollywoodland (2006)

Visually stunning, the rest...not so good

[5/10 · 10 October 2006]

Hollywood Land ** 1/2 out of **** "Hollywoodland" revisits a moment that still haunts Hollywood today. In 1959, actor George Reeves, shot himself...or so the story goes. George Reeves wore the Superman costume for televisions "The Adventures Of Superman." Though talented in the role, George Reeves was never happy playing the part. He saw himself as a better actor, and the part of Superman for a children's show was not ideal for him. This was a man who was proud of his role in "Gone With The Wind." The reason that Reeves suicide still haunts Hollywood is because his suicide is still a mystery. No one knows for sure what happened. Was he really depressed, or was he murdered.

Adrien Brody plays the fictional Louis Simo, private investigator with his own personal issues. He is hired by the mother of George Reeves who believes his death was not a suicide. Louis Simo at first doesn't care what happened, he is more interested in getting his name in the papers. Any press is good press. Through his investigation, we get to see parts of George Reeves' life, the good times followed by the bad times. They are flashbacks that happen within the story of Adrien Brody.

We watch as George Reeves meets Toni Mannix, the wife of Eddie Mannix, a top producer for MGM. George Reeves and Toni Mannix fall for each other. In this time, George Reeves is struggling to get parts until he reads for a villain on the Superman show. What starts out as an audition for a small part lands him the role of Superman which he would play for several years. Unhappy with this part, Toni convinces him that any work will help. As their relationship progresses, Reeves becomes unhappier in his current role. And finally, when he goes out of town to get a directing job, he falls in love with a younger Lenorre Lemmon in which they become engaged.

Was this a murder out of jealousy, was Lenorre tired of being with an unhappy older man, would Eddie Mannix do anything for his wife...or was George Reeves depressed and ready to kill himself.

This film does not give any answers, just some insight on what may have happened. It lets the viewer make their own decision.

All in all, I thought this was an OK film. The cinematography is outstanding and the acting is well done. Diane Lane is exceptional as Toni Mannix and Adrien Brody portrays Louis Simo, an unlikeable PI with a likable touch. Ben Affleck portrays George Reeves with a sympathetic touch. You feel his unhappiness. I think one of the best scenes in the film was when Reeves is out entertaining children as Superman and one of the children pulls a gun out and points it at Reeves, asking to see if the bullet can actually be stopped by Superman.

With all of this said, though I liked parts of the movie, I was not interested in Louis Simo's personal life. Though it is out of a film noir handbook, I honestly wanted more out of the George Reeves story. Parts of Louise Simo's story was unwatchable...boring and too long. The film itself seemed much longer then the 126 minutes posted. I did like the reaction out of Louis Simo's son, Evan Simo, who is devastated by the death of Superman.

All in all, this is an interesting film. It deal with a real life case with some fictional characters to push the mystery. It makes no decision for you. The film is visually outstanding but beware it is 126 minutes and it feels like it is 226 minutes long.

Scoop (2006)

Scoop delivers laughs

[8/10 · 10 October 2006]

Scoop *** out of **** Woody Allen is definitely not my favorite director, but I enjoyed "Match Point." It was an excellent dark romantic thriller that luckily did not star Woody Allen. It did have the beautiful Scarlett Johansson in it.

"Scoop" is Woody Allen's latest film and though he appears in this one, it's OK. It also features Scarlett Johansson and the two of them work perfect together.

Johansson plays Sondra Pransky, a young college journalist who gets the scoop of a life time from the ghost of Joe Strombel (Ian McShane.) Joe heard the scoop while on a boat with the grim reaper and a bunch of other souls the Reaper has taken. One of those souls is the secretary of Peter Lyman (Hugh Jackman.) She tells Joe that Peter may be the serial killer roaming the streets of England. Joe, with the scoop of a life time, travels back to the living and gives this info to Sondra, during a magic act. Sondra is at some magic show with Magician Sid Waterman (Woody Allen.) She becomes a volunteer to go in a disappearing box and while she is in the box, she gets the visit from Joe. Not knowing what to do, she enlists the help of Sid Waterman to help her crack the case.

This film has a nice light-hearted feel to it compared to "Match Point" and yet it all works. Johansson and Allen work great together. Allen's humor fits perfect for this story and role. Hugh Jackman is terrific as Peter Layman, the "suspected" serial killer.

This is a fun little movie to see if your ever looking for one to watch. The cast ensemble works well together and the story flows and you sometimes forget that your watching Woody Allen be himself. I say give it a chance because you just might like it.

The Departed (2006)

Scorsese is Back!!!!!!!

[10/10 · 10 October 2006]

The Departed **** out of ****

Over the past 5 years, it seemed as though Martin Scorsese was spending too much time trying to win himself an Oscar for best director that the films he was making, though good, were not typical Scorsese films. Gangs of New York and the Aviator were both good films though it seemed as though I wasn't watching a Scorsese film. After viewing The Departed, all I can say is that Scorsese is back.

This film almost seems to be a screw you to the Academy. He did his best to conform to Academy style to win his award and when all was done, Scorsese was left standing statue less. Now, Scorsese returns to a genre that has made him one of the best directors in the business. The Departed is a crime drama that is bloody and vulgar just the way Scorsese has made films in the past.

The Departed has an all-star cast that includes Leonardo DiCaprio, Matt Damon, Jack Nicholson, Martin Sheen, Alec Baldwin and Mark Wahlberg.

Nicholson plays Frank Costello, a villainous crime boss who under the eye of the Boston Police and FBI. Leonardo DiCaprio plays Billy Costigan, a police cadet hired to go secretly undercover to be an informant Sheen and Wahlberg. It is later learned that not only does the authorities have an informant in Costello's crew, but Costello has an informant in the State Police.

All the cast members give an outstanding performance. It is hard to say who had the best performance because they were all great. Nicholson, who has been doing a lot of comedies lately, reminds us just how great of a villain he can be. DiCaprio reminds us once again that he is a better actor then Titanic would suggest.Damon once again shows us why he is one of the better actors today. And though both Wahlberg and Baldwin both have small parts, they come across as great performances.

The film runs in at about 2 1/2 hours but it certainly doesn't feel like it. There are no slow moments which is good for a long film. Scorsese has a brilliant talent for mixing a great soundtrack with a great film. Look at Goodfellas and Casino. Both of their soundtracks help push the films along. The violence is in your face as it should be with a story like this.

In doing this film, Scorsese may bring himself a best director award at the Oscars without trying as hard as he did in the past. Many feel he was robbed back in 1990 for Goodfellas and it would only be fitting that he gets an award for this film being this film is his most violent since Goodfellas. Lets just hope that Kevin Costner isn't working on Dances With Wolves II.

The Break-Up (2006)

The Break Up!

[5/10 · 29 June 2006]

The Break-Up-Possible Spoilers! The Break-Up stars Vince Vaughn and Jennifer Aniston about a couple going through a break-up and the situations that they go through that are sometimes funny, sometimes sad. Vaughn is Gary Grobowski, a typical male working for his Chicago touring company shared with his two brothers who at a Cubs game, hits on Brooke (Aniston) and the two fall for each other. The two have a simple argument that turns into the end of the relationship for the both of them. The only problem is, neither one of them wants to admit their wrong and neither one of them wants to move out of their condo. So this is where the shenanigans begin.

The movie is helped by an excellent supporting cast. Jon Favreau (Swingers) is the saving grace of this film. For the short time that he is on screen, it is nothing but laughs. Jason Bateman as the couple realiter and friend also puts on a funny performance. Joey Lauren Adams is perfect as Brook's best friend and Vincent D'onofrio and Cole Hauser are perfect as Gary's two brothers. D'onofrio is so perfect in his role that sometimes we forget that this movie is about two people breaking-up. But the truth is, it is.

What is so upsetting is that Aniston and Vaughn have great comedic chemistry and they are believable as a couple but for some reason, it is hard care about this couple because Gary is an ass and Brooke is a perfectionist sort of that these two are both so unwilling to compromise that in reality, they should not be together, which is why the film fails, because we just don't care. What is even worst is that while one of the characters makes a last minute character change for the better, the other doesn't It also fails because as the film progresses, the laughs seem to disappear and then we are sitting back wondering how long is this film going to last. The ending seems to drag and though I liked the way the film ended, it took way to long for me even to care.

With that being said, the movie did have me laughing at some parts and Jon Favreau is a scene stealer but overall, I was very disappointed.

** out of ****

An American Haunting (2005)

A Ghost Story that should have been kept quiet!

[2/10 · 29 June 2006]

An American Haunting movie review So yesterday, a friend and I went to go see An American Haunting at the matinée price. Let me tell you, I was still robbed of my money.

An American Haunting is based on the true story of the "Bell Witch Legend," on of the United States oldest haunting stories. It stars Donald Sutherland as John Bell, whose family becomes the victim of a spirit who is haunting them. The story is told through an old letter by Mrs Bell which is found by a modern day single mother whose child seems to be going through some scary stuff herself.

She writes that John Bell was found guilty of breaking church law when he is accused of charging interest on land that he sold to a woman, Kathy Batts. Kathy Batts places a curse on John Bell and his older daughter Betsy Bell and they soon fall victim to a ghost that is haunting them. At one point, the ghost is slapping Betsy around.

The problem with this movie is that first, it is not scary, and second, it's ending gives the viewer no payoff. We are not fully convinced of this haunting and some may even feel that it deals very little with the witch theory. For me, the ending was neither intelligent or scary and by the ending credits, you are questioning yourself why you chose this movie over sitting around doing nothing.

The acting is played more like a made for Sci-Fi Channel movie and the writing isn't as good. All in all, I give this film * out of ****!