Change Your Image
johnbits
Reviews
Death Tunnel (2005)
What he said. In other words--read for 90 seconds and save 90 minutes.
I read Shane's review, unfortunately only AFTER wasting one dollar and (more importantly) hours of my life somehow thinking that surely there has to be at least ONE redeeming scene, shot, thought, line--something that made someone finance this (insert your worst expletives here). Nope--just more of the same until the end.
While putting it more colorfully and bluntly than I would have submitted, it was refreshing to see that the first review I read captured quite well the nature of the (lack of) quality of this "production". Comparing it to excrement does the production of bodily waste a disservice.
Still in an apparent state of apparent intestinally-induced semi-consciousness, I actually looked at the extra's and found that those responsible for this travesty look and act like escapees from the "Deliverance" clinic of inbred insemination.
I actually rented "The Cave" after this, despite all the "worst movie ever made" reviews and found most of them must have reviewed a review rather than watched the movie. It may not have been the best movie ever made, but compared to "Death Tunnel", it deserves the implied sequel. The makers of "Death Tunnel", on the other hand, deserve to be sentenced there, if for nothing else than committing a crime against every aspect of the entertainment business by releasing this disease upon an unsuspecting public.
In conclusion, I can only hope that I have not been too kind here and shall learn from my experience to read reviews first for the warnings, avoid anything else from the producers of this garbage, and to remember that the dollar was cheap, it was the time I can't get back that was valuable.
...and the only reason I gave it a "1" was there were no negative number choices on the list!
Closer (2004)
For those who choose their movies by the Oscars
While I am not inclined to make negative comments, in the interest of those who value their time, I must say that both my wife and I feel we wasted ours with this movie. In the movie at an art gallery, one of the characters comments about how one is not supposed to question the art. Likewise, it seems most reviews here are by the 'art critics' of the movie-going audience. Praise for 'intelligent dialog' and depth seem hollow. This film, like a number of the other highly acclaimed productions that seem more about what is trendy rather than what is substance, seems to exist primarily as a 'teaser'. It is a long, quirky excursion of continual suggestiveness. There are no 'sex scenes' as would be generally referred to, rather, the movie spends a lot of time talking about truth, relationships, and the intimate, specific details of unseen sexual acts repeated for the voyeuristic satisfaction of the two male leads. I'm sure many will want to point to the 'brilliance' of using characters so convinced of their understanding and devotion to the best of relationship values while constantly repeating failure after failure of each of those same values. Perhaps urine in a jar and monkeys throwing paint on canvas does make art--if so, this is your film. If not, don't bother. Society and each of us can, of course, use the benefit of entertainment to reflect us and to reflect on. However, lately that seems to mean find the lowest common denominators, portray that they are both uniform and accurate in describing our worth, and then repeat the same format of failures in a time line that is broken, jumbled and asynchronous and you have what will surely bring Oscar nominations and high praise as another brilliant work of art from Hollywood. And having recently seen "11:14" on DVD with Patrick Swayze reduced to mockery of himself, I should guess that Julia Roberts presence in a movie is no longer an indication of quality. But as they say, "ya pays yer money and ya takes yer chances!"
Almost an Angel (1990)
An excellent film for the fan of Crocodile Dundee and Oh God!
I have seen this film many times and enjoyed it each time. Although it contains only minimal language concerns, it is best when viewed uncensored and uncut--as are most films. I find the humor that Paul Hogan uses to bring this concept to film takes what sometimes seems familiar story lines and raises them to the wonderfully unique. It has one of those rare mixes of humor, drama, and bittersweet and thought-provoking themes. Hogan provides a consistent character throughout and writes an ending that should be quite satisfying for those who hate the vague, confusing ends so popular with script writers today. Like, Oh God!, I find the movie uplifting with each viewing, as I find Crocodile Dundee's offbeat humor refreshing each time. Regardless of the rating you would give, I am sure you will at least feel the time spent watching this film was worth it.
Antibody (2002)
A pure waste of your time.
Echoing the majority of comments here, this is a horrible ripoff of 'Fantastic Voyage'. With the exception of a few lines added for comic relief, the film as someone else suggested would be best used as fodder for a revived film-spoofing voice-over show. Robbin Givens and the newscaster looked a bit pleased to be seen in anything, but the rest of the cast seemed to be in pain (understandably). Heinricksen appears to have a hemorrhoid problem during his FBI review, or maybe he is just looking for the stage exit door to escape his agreement to do this film. It seems every opportunity was taken to waste chances to choose logical, practical, entertaining or otherwise valuable approaches to each scene. Some of the most ludicrous: seats with no harnesses, Star Wars fighting within the blood vessels, a terrorist who wakes up but does not even flinch during during several deep needles in the neck as he pretends to sleep, and the entire 'deactivation' of the detonator scene! Why did Zabka leave Mr. Miagi behind--we needed him to kick this one into the trash!