Reviews

Since I love the works of Charles Dickens, especially "A Christmas Carol", I decided to tune in and watch this latest version of his masterpiece. I can't even finish it. It's a musical. A poorly done musical. The songs are unbelievably poor. The acting is bad. And sadly, probably the worst part for a purist such as myself is the fact that they have added characters and scenes not in the story. Why? The story is great the way it is, why change it?

I was saddened to see how poor this production is. There are many, many good productions. Check out the others.

Go watch Patrick Stewart's version, on stage, if possible.

Or read the book and use your own imagination. Don't waste your time on this one.

This film, while not a "battleship Potemkin", is not a truly rotten film, as many seem to think. It is merely average, as so many other low budget monster flicks of the 50's and 60's were. It is not so much bad as undistinguished. The pink-faced hero does nothing to make himself memorable. Richard Kiel, while great in the role, is limited to being tall... Not a great character. He did his best with what was given. My final analysis. It's not terrible, merely forgettable. If you want bad, check out "The Apple". That was bad...

A vampire is obsessed with blood. A method actor with the role. A director with the film.

Who is the most obsessed? This film attempts to answer this question. In order to fully appreciate this film you must have some knowledge of the original film "Nosferatu", how films are made, and how attached directors can be to their "Vision". If you have this, you will love this film. If not, the film might not make sense. Half the audience in the showing I saw walked out. Granted, they were teens who probably accidentally thought this was something like "Dracula 2000", which was showing in the next auditorium.

Watch "Nosferatu", then watch "Shadow of the Vampire". Enjoy.

...And I was in it! A friend was a prop person on this steaming pile, and I went out when they were shooting in the desert. It was a night shoot, and I spent a lot of time standing around watching setup and teardown. Then came the Epic Speech Of Jared Syn To His Troops. The director suddenly decides that there are not enough troops, and some flunky comes up and asks me if I want to be in the film. I tell him sure, and soon I'm standing in the back of a crowd with a piece of brown cloth over my shoulders like a poncho and a helmet on my head. And I stood there, and stood there and stood there. Being in the movie was as dull as watching it being made.

Then it came out!!! I had waited for months for "My" movie to come out. Was I ever disappointed! I knew it wasn't "Citizen Kane". But this wasn't even "Warlords of Atlantis"! All of my friends went from "you were in a movie???" to "You were in THAT???????"

Even though I was in it, it is still one of the lowest-rated films on my list. I do admit, however, that I have a warm spot in my heart for this piece of tripe.

Any time you want to just stare in mute amazement at what can be called a film, check it out.

While this does not have the stature of "The Day the Earth Stood Still" or "Forbidden Planet", this film is still a classic. It is so stereotypical of the cold war alien paranoia films that I use it as the example in my film class. It is obviously the basis for films that came later, such as "Independence Day" and "Mars Attacks". Any S/F film library is incomplete without this fine film.

If you have not lost a loved one, it may be tough to follow most of this film. But if you have ever lost one, or loved someone so completely that losing them would effectively end you world, this film explains a lot.

It is an epic tale of loss and gain, of stopping a nothing to regain what was lost. Written by Richard Matheson, the same man who wrote "Somewhere in time" (The book was originally titled "Bid Time Return") he has a knack for covering the "Stopping at nothing" theme well. Read the books. They are even better than the films...

Akira Kurusawa is one of the greatest directors of all time, and this is one of his greatest films. The main battle scene is THE best battle scene ever. The music and sound are used to ultimate effect. This is, simply, one of the best films ever.

I caught this film several times back when I had only one cable movie channel and no VCR. I watched it the first time in total disbelief. Could somebody have actually made a film this bad? On successive viewings I attempted to analyze this film more deeply. On every level it is bad. Really bad. The attempt at depth, by relating the film characters to characters in the bible was laughable. We don't get characters, but caricatures of the people, so one-dimensional that it hurts. The music, stamped out of the music mill, was in no way inspirational, and the story, acting, directing, scripting and everything else about this film was just horrid.

The Archetypes were not. The music was not. This film should not.

Yes, I want to own it on DVD. I have an extensive collection of painfully bad films. Not just Ed Wood "So bad, they are fun" films, but Dreck like "The Apple". Just to remind me that Hollywood can make some REALLY bad mistakes.

I saw this film as part of a focus group in Riverside, CA, before any other American release. I loved it. Witty, amusing and fun. It was wonderful. A study of relationships and the troubles we all seem to have, plus a hilarious look at all the Touchy Feely New Age Mumbo Jumbo nonsense that was so prevalent in the 90's.

Sadly, the focus group was poorly chosen and almost 1/3 of the people in the audience left after the first "guy with guy" scene. If you are not disturbed by sexuality, you should be very well entertained. This mass exodus should be interpreted as saying anything about the film, but about the number of narrow minds in Riverside.

I only hope that it will be released on video in the USA...

While not a film for everybody, this is the epitome of the term "Cult Classic". With the twisted vision of Richard Elfman and the fantastic music of his brother Danny, this film is a classic. Minimalist sets and makeup combined with pythonesque animation sequences to create a truly memorable film.

The experiences of naturalist Farley Mowat as he studied the Arctic Wolf are the basis for this great film. Not only entertaining and very moving, looking at the role humans play in the world of animals, but also a very good depiction of how science actually works. This film should be required viewing for every science class. Real-world science, done in spectacular style.

Anybody who does not get how science really works need only watch this film to see. Every aspect shows how scientists work, and how they must test their ideas, and perhaps modify what they think is a correct answer. A prime example is Tyler's (the main character's name, instead of Mowat) experiment in What Can Wolves Live On, If There Are No Caribou?

Watch it, and see science, the way it really works.