kezopster Reviews

Into the Dark: My Valentine (2020) Season 2, Episode 5

Solid entry for the Into the Dark series

[8/10 · 19 March 2023]

I'm a horror movie fan and I hate the haters. I grew up on b-movies where the plot was thin, the blood was generous, and the babes were always hot. This movie does a good job with that.

The plot of two pop stars, one with a stolen identity, is as good of a hook to hang a story as anything else. Heck, I would go so far to suggest that it's a fun, novel hook. Better than teens stuck in a abandoned house without cell service, right?

Britt Baron and Anna Lore are fun analogs for each other. I'll be honest, I was left guessing at the resolution. I had it pegged as going in one of two ways - am I disappointed with the resolution they offered? Nah, not really. That answer was fun, too.

It's a fun little movie - short, entertaining, and should do a pretty good job at satisfying your "I wanna see a horror movie" fix.

Dragged Across Concrete (2018)

Needless slow paced without any character development to show for it

[2/10 · 19 March 2023]

If you want to try watching this movie, be sure you're watching on device where you can speed it up. Even then, you'll still find yourself hitting the fast-forward button.

Look, I'm all for a moody, character driven drama - but this movie takes the cake. No reason to dwell on reloading a gun in real time or at least half a dozen other scenes that turns the movie into a total mess.

When Jennifer Carpenter shows up on screen, it feels so disjointed that I wasn't sure I was still watching the same movie. The entire scene with her husband and child drags on forever with zero value. But, hey, that's sort of the tone of these entire disaster.

A Darker Reality (2008)

Daniel Baldwin is good

[4/10 · 4 August 2013]

I'm hesitant watching movies featuring other members of the Baldwin family not naked Alec. Sorry guys, but there have been quite a few clunkers along the way, you know? So, I was skeptical going into this and pleasantly surprised with the performance submitted by Daniel Baldwin as the villain. (No spoiler, it's revealed early in the film.) (As another reviewer mentioned, the cop scenes are trite. For worse, stilted cop scenes, see the movie THE WICKED.) From reading the other reviews, I'm guessing the point of the movie was focusing on the trauma being experienced by the victims, experiencing their horror. That's probably half the film and if I consider my viewing through that lens, then I still can't up my score. The female actors did a good job, but it still felt over-the-top too often.

While the film attempts giving motivation to "The Ghost," his methods feel haphazard. SAW had motivation and over-the-top style to the killings. HOSTEL did the same. Heck, even Texas CHAINSAW MASSACRE or THE HILLS HAVE EYES had the killing room better thought out. Or, maybe I watch too much DEXTER.

The Wicked (2013 Video)

Higher quality than most B movies - about a witch, too!

[7/10 · 9 May 2013]

I can't think of a many horror movies that feature a witch as the villain. This one does and the witch is pretty good. I don't see where the movie has a rating. I don't recall any drinking or drug use. Had they cut back on the F word, I bet this movie would have earned a PG-13 rating. The gore isn't direct. This isn't a slasher flicker. I don't recall any direct nudity.

Are there holes in the storyline? Sure, like there are in most B-movies. Is there some remarkably horrible acting at times? As others have said, pretty much anytime the deputies are on screen. Are there one or two decent performances? I thought Diana Hopper as Sammy was a joy and hope to see her in more things. Jess Adams as Julie does a nice job. Adams is the pretty girl and looks to me as a hot mix of Megan Fox and Liv Tyler.

As with any B-movie, you'll howl at some of the plot holes and stupid mistakes made by characters at times. To me, that's part of the fun. Unlike a lot of b-movies, this one has a pretty decent soundtrack.

The Hazing (2004)

Everything a cheesy horror flick SHOULD be!

[8/10 · 5 September 2011]

Like my title says: EVERYTHING a cheesy horror flick SHOULD be! I had GREAT FUN watching this movie. The set-up is believable enough. The actors all feel like actors, not a bunch of film students trying to act. No academy award performances, but no "so over the top you crinch" moments, either. The movie keeps a good sense of humor through-out. Plenty of blood (and to humorous levels at times). Effects are nicely done. Nector Rose as Delia is an absolute JOY - easily stealing the show (and there's a GREAT topless scene with her). Tiffany Shepis as Marsha spends most of the movie in Spandex - looking great for an actor described in her bio as "voluptuous." Best of all, after spending all that time tracing her curves through that skin-tight costume, the viewer is rewarded with a nice shot of her without the costume.

This is the kind of movie that keeps me watching cheesy horror flicks!

The American (2010)

Long. Boring. Plodding. Uninteresting

[2/10 · 4 August 2011]

Unlikely that any of this should be considered a spoiler, but just in case...

I liked George Clooney. I like his mix of roles, too. However, this movie was, well, long, boring, plodding, and uninteresting. Trying to excuse it as "European" in its feel should be a slap in the face to the many European masters. Okay, I get it, it's not meant to be a thriller, but a character study... but even there, it's excessively light.

George Clooney's character is a hit-man whose interested in retiring? Doesn't make him very empathetic. He's cold and calculating? Um, isn't that the way all hit men and spies are supposed to be (according to Hollywood)? He's removed from society, alone and separated from it? Again, a cliché.

There's little intrigue concerning his situation. Why are the "Swedes" after him? Never explained. (And really, "Swedes?" Doesn't sound very threatening.) Is he a "good" or "bad" guy? That's never explained, either. There's no sense of his past. He's a nobody, a tool with specific skills, and that's it. How focused are the Swedes at getting him? Early in the film, he tosses the cell phone given to him and chooses to live somewhere other than where he's told by his handler. Ah, so he's concerned that his handler has outed him? He's going to drop farther off the grid? Makes sense, until he calls for "one last mission." There's no real reason for the priest to befriend him or vice versa. There's no real reason for his isolation to feel imposed on him. Nothing suggests he's anything than what he appears: a loner who likes being alone. Are we to believe he's tired of his life? Why? Where are we to get that impression? Plodding. Boring. Uninteresting. Lack of details doesn't add intrigue, it just makes the film empty.

Splice (2009)

Choose Species over this!

[4/10 · 4 November 2010]

Wow... I don't write many negative reviews, so this is new for me. I'm not sure where to begin. First of all, I'm glad I watched it on my PS3 at 1.5 times the speed. After the first 45 minutes, the pacing was just too slow. Even then, I kicked it up to 10x a few times. I'm all for mood and atmosphere, but c'mon! Stylistic issues: the "groovy" scientist "nerds" in the movie drive a Gremlin? Really? I mean, pu-leeze! I get that the film maker is trying to suggest that these are scientists, so driven by their individual genius that they don't fit into society, but really... an AMC Gremlin? In many ways, it's the perfect mascot for this dog of a movie. I'm old enough to remember the Gremlim... how it was AMC's answer to, um, Ford's Pinto! And that's how this movie felt, like an AMC Gremlin in response to Species.

I don't like to pick on individual actors. After all, I've been wonderfully entertained by Steve Buscemi or Owen Wilson enough times that I'm okay with an actor NOT fitting the mold of Hollywood beautiful (like, say, Tom Cruise or Ben Affleck). But unlike his role in "Predators," he just didn't work for me in this movie. Pleae don't get me wrong, his acting was impeccable. He fit the part of a geeky scientist, much like Brent Spiner or Christopher Lloyd... but really... he's NOT the person I want to stare at for nearly two hours.

Unfortunately, for me, the same applies to Sarah Polley. She may well be "... a favorite of critics for her sensitive portraits of wounded and conflicted young women in independent films" (as her IMDb.com profile reads). However, she's not someone I want to spend nearly two hours staring at.

I hate how shallow both of those paragraphs sound, but I'm just keeping the experience of watching this dreadful movie as real as I can.

I love the premise of the movie. I heard an NPR interview concerning this movie that talked about the threat of gene splicing and I was anxious to see it. At times, it seems to promise to turn into something more like "Alien," but doesn't. Maybe more like a modern day treatment of "Rosemary's Baby?" Had the leads been played by more attractive actors... had the pacing been a faster... if the storyline didn't wind up so predictable at the end... change any one of those and it would have been a better movie. Meanwhile, my advice? Pass on this one unless you're REALLY bored.

Undead or Alive: A Zombedy (2007)

Zombies meet the Wild West = GREAT fun!

[8/10 · 14 August 2010]

Chris Kattan as Luke Rudd is hilarious in this movie. The city slicker cowboy in love with the two whore, he's soon in over his head. James Denton as Elmer Winslow does a snarky good job, too. His character (Winslow) reluctantly putting up with Kattan's Rudd. Kattan's character decides they're partners, much to annoyance of Winslow.

Does this movie bend some the rules of zombie classics before it? Well, let's see... the zombies are undead creatures hell-bent on eating flesh and brains and people become zombies by getting infected by a zombie. As far as that goes, in my opinion, they immediately qualify as full-fledge zombies. Yeah, the zombies can talk, reason, shoot guns... whatever. But they are still determined to do one thing: eat your brains! Weakest link in this ensemble of three? Navi Rawat, but she's beautiful, she's fun, and when she shines, she lights up the screen. And hey, she's already half Native American, so it's nice to see a real Native American playing that role.

If you're a zombie purist, this movie's take on zombies might offend you. But if you're not that particular that zombies must fit a certain mold, this movie is a fun zombedy.

The Expendables (2010)

Everything an Action Movie should be, times 2!

[9/10 · 13 August 2010]

Get ready to cheer. Be ready to laugh. Be ready to be amazed with wonderful, live action fighting scenes using everything from fists, to blades, to guns. I don't know how this movie avoided being cheesy, but darn it, it did! Mindless explosions? Not really. Excessive? Again, not really. I hate the sort of climax usually seen in an action movie where the pyrotechnics are the show. I want to see the actors/stunt-men doing their thing. I want to see people. I can see fireworks on the Fourth of July. (Though, trust me, there ARE fireworks in this movie, too.) The balancing of this many stars is incredible and pulled off remarkably well. When Sylvester Stallone made his final Rocky movie (Rocky Balboa), he said he did it as a "thank you" to the fans. Maybe that was the idea behind this one, too, though I heard a quote from somewhere that after seeing wimpy Tobey Maguire as "Spiderman" full of CGI and a stuffed/padded suit, he realized action heroes like himself were, well, expendable.

This is fantasy baseball and fantasy rock-n-roll camp for adults all rolled into a wonderful action flick with enough of a plot to give the characters motivation for their action. A deep plot? Heck no. A predictable plot? Certainly. But trust me, if you thought you've seen it all before, you have yet to see "The Expendables." Thank you Mr. Stallone!

Stan Helsing (2009)

I've seen worse

[6/10 · 3 August 2010]

Maybe the fact that I've seen worse says something about the movies I watch, but truthfully, I've seen many b-horror movies that were a lot worse than this parody. ("Deathproof" comes to mind quite quickly.) There's a lot of effort in this movie to be really funny and, at times, it does just that. The spoof of "Chucky" made me laugh because it was so unexpected. The bazillion references like "...yeah, it's the last house on the left." That was fun, too.

In a lot of ways, this movie felt like it was a comic book adaptation. The premise is good enough. Stan Helsing is in denial about being a Van Helsing. Heck, this movie is at least as good as "Van Helsing" and "The Brothers Grimm." Desi Lydic as Mia, an erotic dancer turned massage girl; she was just fun.

Diora Baird as Nadine, was clearly picked to be a look-alike for Courteney Cox from "Scream." Still, she was immensely watchable in the movie.

Kenan Thompson fell a bit flat at times, but was fun, too.

It's a send-up of teen slasher flicks and when it worked, it was fun.

Some movies, you just give up watching... or fast forward to get it over with quicker... this one, for whatever reason, I kept watching. I guess hoping (pulling for?) the next little gem to make me smile.

Hide (2008)

One of the most beautifully shot films I can remember seeing

[7/10 · 30 June 2010]

Through-out this movie, I was amazed at how the images looked on the screen, the use of color and light. I know, as an audience member, we're not really supposed to notice that sort of stuff, but I did and it added.

Before seeing this movie, I was complete ignorant about Rachel Miner (Betty) and Christian Kane (Billy). The story focuses on them, revolves around them, and is told in a series of flashbacks. The opening scene is remarkably compelling before revealing that it's actually a flashback.

Meanwhile, this modern day Bonnie and Clyde are a couple worth watching. Rachel Miner's Betty is a joy against Christian Kane's Billy. I don't know if that's Miner's natural accent, but if it isn't, she's spot on. Same is true of Kane's, though Miner's is sweet music through-out. She's one bad-assed chick.

Spoiler alert: The ending is a bit wonky. Takes a moment to sort it all out and put things into perspective and then you feel a bit cheated as you realize, "okay, so most of that never really happened then, it's just his punishment?"

Armored (2009)

Sort of like "Reservoir Dogs"

[8/10 · 30 June 2010]

Just sort of like "Reservoir Dogs." I mean, it's a heist film and things have gone wrong. Namely, one of the people end up getting cold feet when things start to go wrong. Unfortunately, how do you back out of a heist when you're already in the middle of it? Watching one of the special features, one of the people talked about how the movie is like a freight train, starting off slow and building steam until it's rocking and rolling along. Good analogy. The problem is, the first thirty minutes are about as exciting as watching a big, heavy freight train leaving... slow and plodding. There's only character development for two main characters with a little bit extra thrown in for a minor (though pivotal) character.

If anything, the movie delivers the goods a bit too late. But if you stick with it, I think it's a rewarding film.

The House of the Devil (2009)

Do NOT make the mistake of watching this movie!

[1/10 · 18 April 2010]

When it was done, I turned to my daughter and said, "I think I just saw a movie worse than the 2006 remake of "The Wicker Man."" It was bad, really, really bad. And when you think it can't get any worse, it finds a way to do just that.

Much is said in other reviews about how it somehow works as an 1980's throwback and how it feels as if it was shot in the 80's. B.S.! Trust me, I'm old enough to have lived through the 80's as an adult and saw lots of movies. And even back in the 80's we understood a concept known as "pacing." After 30+ minutes of exposition, all we really learn is the main character is a poor college student in need of cash to rent an apartment. For whatever reason, the roommate she seems to resent magically turns into her best friend on the long ride out to the creepy house in the middle of no where. A house that can still get a pizza delivered. (Okay, a plot point, but a highly manufactured plot point.) Meanwhile, we're left to wonder why things are so creepy. For us, in the theater (or in our dark home with the killer surround sound and big screen LCD TV), we have reasons to expect the worst. We're expecting a suspenseful horror movie. The opening credits tell us to expect Satanism. Cool! Sign me up! I'm all for some dark robes and pentagrams. But for the characters in the story, their motivation for being creep-ed out is what? Sure, they make an effort to justify it, but it falls far short of its mark.

Injury to insult, she's prowling around in the house with a knife at the ready for which reason? More injury to insult? Okay, she's going up some stairs towards a door... a sinister looking door. We know it's a sinister door because the music changes and she looks worried and by the way its lit... Wait a second, why the hell is that door any more sinister than all the other doors she's opened? For those involved in the making of this movie: I'm sorry to trash something I'm sure you worked very hard at making. I hope you made good paychecks from this movie, learned a lot, and made the kind of contacts that lead to bigger and better jobs in your future. But, as far as this movie is concerned, please buy up all the copies so no one else has to see it, okay?

Zombieland (2009)

Good, but not as good as the critics are saying

[8/10 · 10 October 2009]

Twice the critics have set me up to love a movie and after seeing it, I walked away slightly disappointed. The first time was "District 9," a true disappointment considering the acclaim it received. This time, to a lesser extent, it's "Zombieland." It's not "Shaun of the Dead." Too bad, too. It's more like "Juno" meets "Shaun of the Dead," without the pregnancy fun.

Bill Murray's cameo is great fun. Woody Harrelson does light up the screen at times, but the movie's main character is Jesse Eisenberg as "Columbus," who is quirky and fun, but never lights up the screen as well as Woody Harrelson does. Trust me, Woody gets LOTS of screen time and I believe he carries this movie.

The characters are rather shallow. With Emma Stone and Abigail Breslin never being fleshed out much more than Amber Heard's "406." Would have been interesting to find out why these two sisters were traveling together before the zombies attacked.

In general, the storyline is rather thin. There are zombies. Lots of them. They're angry and hungry, though not necessarily for brains. There is a reason given for how they turned, but it's not much of one and it's easy to miss the quick reference to "Patient Zero." Otherwise, not much is said to explain them. (Do zombies need an explanation?) Anyway, not bad, but not great... enjoy with lower expectations than the critics say and you'll enjoy a real gem of a movie. Expect something better than the average zombie movie and you'll probably walk away a bit disappointed.

Inglourious Basterds (2009)

Someone please take away Tarantino's writing and directing license

[1/10 · 5 September 2009]

Today would have been my father's 88th birthday. As it is, I'm glad he didn't live long enough to see this movie. It's difficult to decide which part of it worst. Gluttony comes to mind, but maybe that's because I'm still trying to erase the loving close-ups Tarantino gives us of a couple characters enjoying their strudel.

From the very opening credits, I was suspect. Can credits be artful and boring at the same time? I say, "Yes!" But that was quickly swept away by the opening scene at a French farm house where an SS officer (Christoph Waltz as "Col. Hans Landa") is searching for hidden Jewish people. After treating us to about ten minutes of subtitled French, the two characters switch to rather flawless, unaccented English. The "action" is boorish. The dialog laborious. And this scene establishes the pace and tone for the rest of the movie.

Scene after scene ("Chapters" as the movie puts it) labor on and on with nothing happening. The characters are NOT expanded upon beyond their original shallow depth. I think I've seen more nuanced characters in a Bugs Bunny cartoon.

Each "chapter" reminds me of a weekday soap opera. You can leave it for several years, return in the middle, and pick right back up where you left off.

The film's ending is farce mixed with a dash of tragedy.

I loved "Reservoir Dogs," "Pulp Fiction" & "Natural Born Killers," but around "Jackie Brown," it felt as if everyone became afraid of the great artist Tarantino. "Kill Bill" was clearly excessive. "Death Proof" and "Grindhouse" were uncalled for. If simple gore is art, then please, Mr. Tarantino, make a decent horror movie. Otherwise, just stop. Buy an editor and listen to them. I believe you're too much of a fan of cinema to realize you're boring us to death.

As for my dad, he was a veteran of the D-Day invasion at Normandy. His landing was the one you saw the opening of "Saving Private Ryan." He was in Stephon Ambrose's book. He loved "Hogan's Heros" (the TV show), so I know he had a good sense of humor about lighthearted treatments of WWII. Still, I'm glad he didn't have to suffer through this horrible movie.

I left the theater during the café scene. Stepped outside to smoke a cigarette because I was so bored. I came back in time to still be bored again before the "fireworks" started. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.

Cut this movie down to the hour and half it probably should have been and you might have a decent movie. As it stands, it rates on par with "2001: A Space Odyssey," only less compelling.

Heckler (2007)

Jamie Kennedy faces his critics, literally

[9/10 · 20 April 2009]

What a fun, insider look at hecklers and how they impact stand-up. The sheer number of different comedians who lend a story or an opinion to this movie is remarkable. If it had stopped there, it would have been an okay movie, but not very fulfilling. After setting up the initial premise, Jamie Kennedy wisely makes it more personal by confronting his own critics... both critics of his stand-up shows as well as critics of his movies (most notably, "Son of the Mask").

While other commentators say the movie veers off at this point, I disagree. Instead, I believe the movie hones in on its subject matter. From the sophomoric audience heckler being put on the spot to the sometimes equally sophomoric film critic being put front and center to speak for themselves... this is where the movie earns its chops.

Mixed in with these incidences of one-on-one confrontations with his critics, Jamie continues with anecdotes from other comedians, actors, and directors and their opinions of critics. It's not a movie about "what right someone has to express an opinion" as much as it is a movie demonstrating the impacts of that person expressing an opinion. Some comedians express clear zeal about slapping down a heckler; while others make it clear their feelings about hecklers. It's interesting to see how some comedians seem to just take a heckler in stride as being part of the business versus others who seem to believe that hecklers interrupt the flow of the show.

If you like stand-up comedy, but this movie on your "must-see" list right up there with "The Aristocrats" and a few others. It's fun, interesting, and entertaining. And if you object to the focus the movie takes on Jamie Kennedy, remember: it's his darn movie and who else could give us such a wonderful insider's view of bad reviews than someone who's received so many! Keep laughing, Jamie!

Pretty Peaches (1978)

Campy and Fun Example of Porn as a Movie

[8/10 · 7 April 2009]

When porn first went "mainstream," it did so with a series of big screen feature films like this one from 1978. Unlike the adult films of today, movies back then aspired to be "real" entertainment. While this movie has all the depth of a Keystone Kops movie, the effort at storytelling and real movie making is clearly there. From wacky characters suitable for a hardcore sex-romp, it also features real sets, locations, and even costumes. In general, the sex scenes, while explicit, are very short. Yes, all the action is clearly shown, including porn's infamous "money shots," but gone are most of the super close-ups of body parts connecting. One gets the sense that the movie makers were more interested in showing their actors having real sex in near real time. Also absent are the implants and finely honed bodies so popular today. Additionally, as is true with most seventies erotica, the women are presented ala natural. It's main character, as portrayed by Desiree Cousteau started her movie-making career as a mainstream actress in B movies. Unable to achieve any real success, she transitioned into adult films and remained popular for many years.

The Big Bad Swim (2006)

Doesn't suck

[6/10 · 16 January 2009]

I watched this movie for Paget Brewster, whom I first encountered during the delightful Showtime program "Huff." Was anxious to see more of her acting, especially as a different character. As a "vehicle" for her, it was good. If you're a fan of hers, you'll truly enjoy the movie.

All the acting in the movie is solid. The storytelling is relatively brisk (note: relatively). One element builds on a previous element, shown in chronological order. Style is good and consistent through-out. Sub-plots are uneven in places. A few characters are either not fleshed out or stereotypical. There are a couple missed opportunities for interactions between characters.

When I saw it, I didn't realize it was an independent film until I came online to IMDb.com to view/make comments on it. I guess that's high praise, that it didn't feel like an independent film in size or scope. The "hook" of the story revolving around adult characters in a beginners "learn to swim" class mostly worked.

Hancock (2008)

A GREAT movie poorly reviewed

[9/10 · 7 August 2008]

At first, I thought this movie was going to be a comedy, it's not. It has lots of very funny moments, but they are the result of a very lonely superhero. I love comedies. To me, funny and revealing of the character, is much better humor than just funny to be amusing.

The plot twist everyone talks about is revealed relatively early, about midway through, and the rest of the story hinges on it. It's nicely foreshadowed and stunning when "the truth comes out." The truth is a doozy and puts everything prior to it into a brand new perspective. The last time I saw movie that did as good of a job at a plot point as this movie was "L.A. Confidential," an admittedly different kind of film.

Would the movie suffer if its producers choose to reveal the plot twist? Actually, I think not. I think the entire marketing campaign should have been based on that revelation. It would have put the movie in a different perspective and rather than critics panning it, they would have embraced it and loved it.

It's truly too bad, because this is a gem of a film. Read the reviews for it carefully... pro and con... think about who the reviewer is and how credible their opinion is to you. Yes, this is a "superhero" movie, but it's more in the vein of the Spiderman movies than it is X-Men. I truly liked this movie and cannot wait for it to come out on DVD so I can enjoy it with family and friends and get their take on it, too.

Death Proof (2007)

Sigh, not even a good grindhouse flick

[6/10 · 12 September 2007]

First off, Kurt Russell is wonderful in this movie, though don't expect to seem much of him in this flick.

The fuzzy, scratched pictures... the sound gimmicks, etc., all add the sense of time warp, and for those old enough to remember seeing movies like this at a drive-in through a tinny speaker... it's a bit of a trip down memory lane. Not always a welcomed trip, but forgiven in favor of artistic integrity.

Also, interesting is his use of 70's era fashions, cars, and locations... while still keeping the movie squarely in the 21st century (one of the characters carries a cell phone and texts a friend, for example). Again, artistic and this time, highly welcomed.

Flaws? Plenty of them in my opinion. First off, the plot. While the killer is nice and menacing, he doesn't kill enough to establish his threat. Secondly, entirely too much time is spent listening to the women ramble on about one thing or another. While vaguely entertaining at time, it seldom advances the plot nor makes them more sympathetic.

Now, perhaps my most controversial comment: an homage to grindhouse movies without any sex or nudity? Um, excuse me, but there are a couple of things that drove us to the drive-in... good car chases, lots of unnecessary, graphic violence, and at least one good scene of equally unnecessary (but welcomed) scene of female nudity... preferably, full frontal with that great 70's crop of hair down there.

In general, this movie is all tease and no please with the possible exception of a good car chase.

Californication (2007–2014)

Another good, quirky Showtime Original

[9/10 · 16 August 2007]

Fans of David Duchovny should enjoy this show. I think he's at his wry, deadpan best. His character is estranged from the love of his life, lost his ability to write, and his 'masterpiece' was turned into a crappy movie; his angst is clear. He's sinking slowly and gloriously into a hedonistic lifestyle of booze, drugs, and women; and it's plain he's just trying to hide from his pain while waiting for his muse to return.

I'm not sure when Showtime decided to get serious about making quality original programming, but I'm sure glad they did. I loved "Huff" and "Dexter." I find this new show falling squaring in between the two, with "Huff" being a solid 10 in my book for a TV sitcom and "Dexter" coming in as an 8+.