Reviews

I had to take a phone call and when I hung up, there was still the 13th Amendment debate! Too long, and there was no happiness at all in this movie. Dark. And, most of all LINCOLN WOULD NOT HAVE TAKEN GOD'S NAME IN VAIN. Spielberg would definitely take God's name in vain as would 99.9% of Hollywood. Don't waste your time or money on this sham.

This season has been dragging. This particular episode has been so boring and uninteresting. Norman is NOT a character that is endearing. I think the family dynamics between father and son is a better theme, and not the supporting character.

I watch this today in 2021 and this was such a white man show of what a Native American is... they have no right to say Indian. As much as I wanted to scroll through I did not. This was, and is, the way white people (or non Natives) treat us. People scream about other cultures being butchered but the Natives, well it's constant. No one says a thing.

She is still young but growing up, Shirley Temple was the doll of the century. Granted this shows her as a survivor of a mass Native American killing, but it's taking me a long time to get into it. She has the compassion down pat, but where is the compassion for the Natives? I mostly wanted to see her perfowith Randolph Scott and the little Native boy, but it's getting hard for me to continue watching.

This is one of my favorite shows, but this episode was one of the worst. No laughs, just camp that was not funny. As a Native American I found it offensive, even for those days it could have been more sensitive to Natives. Did not finish watching, it wa so bad.; it was as if they just got tired like Oliver's mother and out these people together to do a show. It was a mishmash.

This may have been not as good as the second movie, but it carried its own weight okay. The performances from John Corbett, whom I've always had a crush on, and David A.R. White are great. The others were only so-so, walking through their parts. The light in darkness was a good theme, but again, the sub cast did not carry it all that well. But, I would see it again because I may have missed something in there. All in all, GOD IS GOOD ALL THE TIME, and ALL THE TIME GOD IS GOOD.

This is the first movie I've ever walked out on in quite awhile - actually, ever! If you don't think, and want to see some stupid non-human tricks, go see it. But really, don't waste your money.

Having never read a "Hitchhiker's" guide, I thought "Well, this should be interesting..." Bah, humbug! The most likable character is the Android - as depressed as he was. In watching this movie, I was as depressed as the Android -- and got worse and worse, eventually leaving. If you enjoy mindless, blundering fools, hey, have a great time and enjoy. Me, I prefer the Three Stooges, or Abbott & Costello. Mos Def is a fine actor, gave an okay performance, but what a lot to sit through.

This has got to be one of the stupidest, inane, inept movie I've seen in a long time. The best cast is the supporting actors - Rickman, Holbrook, Lee Browne, and even Thompson. The writing was as bad as Bellows and Baker together as the lamest acting job.

The only reason to see this, and why I saw it, was Rickman. He was pliable as a detective - but if he had better lines, it would have been an actual treat. I have to admit, for once in my life I couldn't stand Thompson -- she is a top notch actor, but this one was way out in left field for her and her friend Rickman. I hope they got a decent wage for doing this crappy movie.

I did not expect a lot from this movie, since it was in the budget section. Kenneth Branagh, a truly remarkable actor, was perfectly cast as the writer, playwright and not so wanting to be a father to be.

Branagh had me laughing and crying.... Amy was a great character for a child, and a great little actress. As annoying as she could have been, she wasn't, but rather endearing in the life of her two neighbors. Krumholtz was annoying, the only one.

This is a movie that I would recommend to fans of Branagh as a gem! He was great (and buffed) in Frankenstein, and more curmudgeonly in this one - as "Pete" told him. Nevertheless, he came across as the real deal and made me wonder why he doesn't have kids yet!! Why not Kenneth? You'd be a great father. Is he a mirror of his character?

This was a great movie to see for the Christmas season. Allen gives another great performance as Mr. Crank. I think Allen is a Christmas man, always fun in movies that depict holidays. Curtis is fine as his wife, but the scene stealer was Austin Pendleton.

Having missed Pendleton these past years, I'm seeing him more and more! Always a talented supporting actor, he appears in this as someone who no one knew. Not wanting to give anything away, all I'll say is that the supporting actors help this film and provide a movie that makes one think about the materialness of what Christmas has become. I applaud all involved for this future classic.

This was one of the better movies I've seen on HBO. The characters were brought out to make us see them as who they were, not as just people on the screen.

Alan Rickman is by far one of the best actors in England AND Hollywood. He brought such depth to the Doctor Blalock's character that I believed he WAS the doc. Mos Def surprised me in this role, as he was truly genuine as well. From the beginning scene to the end this movie was captivating, and brought tears to my eyes.

Rickman astounds me all the time in his acting. We've seen him in various roles, and in each one he becomes that character. His presence commands a role well scripted and directed. Unfortunately, not all writers/directors can meet that challenge - in this movie, it was met. Rickman deserves a Best Actor nominee and award for this portrayal.

Harry Potter is a sequence of stories beginning with Harry as a child, and then growing up. Nevertheless, it is a kids story, and this film lacks that kid element - unless we have demented kids running around.

This particular story, The Prisoner of Azkaban, sets up Potter's mid-kid crisis so to say. He finds a friend of the family, but realises his own magical strength as a wizard. It's one of the most important stories in the series, but this film depicts a real dark side which I would never allow my kids to see. Columbus did a great job in the first two movies, endearing us to characters such as Weasley, Malfoy, Granger, Dumbledore, Snape, et al. This director's version made it all about Potter. One character can be a movie, but with the talented experienced theatrical actors such as Smith, Gambon, Rickman, and Thompson - they went to waste! Potter's father, if you read the books, was a slime bag - an arrogant man with an ego bigger than Aunt Marge. Sirius Black was his partner in crime, so birds of a feather flock together.

Albeit it's a good series of reading, the movies need to bring some compassion of the characters, which the first two did. It'll be interesting to see how the next director does with Goblet of Fire.

I love this show! The actors are enjoyable, the acting is well done, and some of the situations remind me of growing up in East Los Angeles.

There have been shows that try to get across ELA living, most do not come close (esp. the one on currently which is badly acted on KCET). What "Resurrection Blvd." has to offer is what I saw growing up in Boyle Heights, and the ELA experience in a nutshell. This is a familia in my hometown, and I honestly feel like they could have grown up next to me.

The endearing characters is the Santiago family itself; they are close, but far apart in the generation between father and son. Boxing is the main issue, but in reality, it's all about family. In reality, that's my life as a kid and adult - family. One sacrifices for the family, and it's normal. One of my favorite characters is Miguel - he could be doing almost anything, but his character is almost the glue. He is the middle of the generations and holds them together, doing whatever he has to for the sake of family.

This a a program that was worth my time watching every episode. It would be hard to accept if you did not grow up in ELA, but maybe opening up your mind, you can see a bit of social circumstances that are just like anyone else, regardless of class or ethnicity.

While Alan Rickman is perhaps one of the best actors around, this movie was NOT a vehicle that promoted him in any way, except to have him come in and out for those tension moments. A great actor like Rickman needs a stronger role to bring out his various talents in acting. This was a vehicle for Owen and his sister instead.

I hated this movie immensely, even with Alan Rickman in it (he is the only reason I saw it). Clive Owen, as nice looking as he is, was slimy in going after his sister, and his sister was even slimier for giving in. Incest is NOT a topic that ingratiates itself with viewers, unless they are morally deplorable in the first place. This is a movie you should watch with your eyes closed. Meaning, why bother watching it?

I've watched many of the police dramas since I was a child in the 70's and this was a decent show for something current. The acting is good and the premise is promising. But, why does ABC hate this show?

The rookie kid, Amonte, is a good hearted thug from the East. The veteran Sarge is a rough, by the book cop who handles his family the sme way. It is better than that old show, The Rookies, with Ontkean, et al. Hudson adds charm to his character, and Nucci brings in his freshness to the small screen here. I love it. The other guys on the show are fun and great to look at - no doubt in that. This show has it all; political correctness, a diverse cast, current themes, and yet ABC is submerging it into the trash. Disney, of all studios, should be backing this show 110%. I love Disney.

If there is a way to save this show, and you like it, we should try and do something......

Since watching this show since it's inception, one must wonder what happened to the Camden's? Did the so-called Pastor leave his parish and denounce God by having these awful, greedy children?

It started out good, with the kids learning their lessons about being responsible. However, the ONLY child who is remotely of a gentle and decent nature is Matt. Everyone else has turned either into a greedy, selfish, immature, outright horrible child. The better kids are not Camden's, (i.e. Robbie, Wilson, Peter, and Martin). What are these parents teaching their kids, being a minister's family? If the Pastor in the church I attend had kids like these, I would be shocked! Maybe it's time for Warner Brothers to say goodbye to this talentless show. The elders are the real actors, while the family children have no talent. It's like Warner is saying, "Let's let the younger generation run the show" and that is failing. You can have a lousy popular show, but it just shows that there is no structure other than madness. Richard Lewis' storyline can offer some interest if they let it.

Let's get back to some integrity, moral issues, and maturity.

This was an interesting study in societal sexuality, as well as the "dark interests" of man.

While I can't say the wife was a strong character - she was the wrong choice for the part, in my opinion - she was a rich kid in search of escaping her drool life. She was a rebel in fact, and never fully matured for her husband, a lawyer (Rickman). It's obvious he married her for her money and to cover his sexual desires, which is taboo. Rickman played his part to a tee, his flirtations with the young man, and very subtle undertones of gayness. The young man was gay to the hilt! When he did Marilyn impersonation that should have told the wife everything. He was perfectly cast as well. He has hustler written all over him.

I was not crazy about the ending, as I knew what was coming. Overall though, the acting from Rickman was great, Reedus was good, Walker was okay but I had misgivings. For a gay themed movie, it was average, but not blatant at least. It's worth viewing if you don't have "Truly Madly Deeply" lying around for a spin.