Reviews

SPOILERS AHEAD...

I decided on watching this after my typical preview of the boring blah blah on Netflix. Netflix watchers rated it pretty high and I enjoy this creepy, weird genre.

Decided to stream it via my BluRay box but the TV's cinema settings were a bit wonky so I watched S1 on my PC.

Watching the pilot and the subsequent episode I recognized 2 names from previous movies; Winona Ryder and Matthew Modine. The rest of the cast were a bunch of newbies.

The feel I got was 'what the hell am I watching? Stephen King? John Carpenter? Steven Spielberg? After S1E2 I started getting this bad headache. The splish-splosh of themes and mish mosh of various movie directions started to ring in my mind like a great bell.

This bell rang until the very end. So what was Stranger Things? A huge extrapolation of various works by various directors and mushed into this TV series called "Stranger Things" - Aliens meets Hemlock Grove meets E.T. is this Stranger Things.

Since there was nothing else on Netflix, I watched all of Season 1 in one sitting. Just to be objective. It really was meh.

No wonder this is just on Netflix, it would never survive on its own.

*** A wee bit of a spoiler below.. Caution!! *** Season 11 started off awful. I had such expectations for season 11 after 10 went off with such a bang. Although something inside me stopped me from buying S11 on iTunes and now that the show is on Netflix I can see why my gut was right.

Amara is boring, yawn, Zzz. Up till now the show has focused primarily on biblical, historic and factual data from sources. But there is nothing, anywhere were the God Almighty having a sibling. This is pure fiction which is contrary to the whole sub plot/theme of the show which sadly now is headed for the Charmed archive.

So why did I rate this episode 10/10.. read on.

And I was about to give up watching it on Netflix until I saw this episode and I just broke down.

Its heartfelt, wholesome and just plain awesome. We are now as adults (most of us) used to have an imaginary friend and this episode helped us relive the joys and pains of that childhood. Kudos to Krike.

Watching the numerous previews of this upcoming show I was pretty impressed with the storyline having never watched Sex in the City (gasp!) yes I know..

Anyway, I DVR'd the show and watched it a day later. First impression.. WHAT THE F(*#.. who are these people? Not one recognizable actor! Alright, well.. maybe..just maybe..it will work out.. Yeah I think not! The dialogue is stale, fast paced and really boring. The "cute guy" is not even cute.. Reminds me of a "C" horror movie, yikes! 10m11s in.. I yelped, STOP!! and deleted the show & canceled the series from my DVR.

This show may..just MAY survive one season and then be canceled.. I can only hope, utter bull$!t. If I can rate 0/5 I would.

I saw an advert for this movie in a few magazines and I was psyched to see this movie.

It did not air on Hallmark channel as advertised, and aired on the ABC Network.

The movie is 2 hours long (separated by commercials) - broken up into 3 parts.

Part one: Introductions to the cast members, their respective illnesses, ADD ADHD, etc... The actors were horrible and at times insensitive.

Part two: Raising money for Space Camp which the wanted to go.. After a few weeks of striking out trying to raise $50,000, this burger guy just hands a check for 50K.. PREDICTABLE

Part three: Space Camp, loosely interpreted, the kids experience the full-range of what space camp has to offer and of course during their mission something goes wrong.. Someone panics,, its OK... they land, win an award and everyone is wonderful.

WASTE OF TIME! TOTAL GARBAGE. You want to watch a movie about space camp... GO WATCH THE REAL "SPACE CAMP"

I saw a special sneak screening of this movie yesterday and had difficulty staying awake. With the exception of Chace Crawford, all the other people are either new-comers or have been thrust over from the "B" movies.

The movie had very little to do with haunting in itself and everything to do with school and being bullied and blah blah blah. The plot, theme and overall feeling of this movie suggests its a c/p from various other "one-hit-wonders" over the past several decades.

Acting was pretty bad and with the exception of one semi-professional actor, Chace Crawford, the movie lacked the general harmony and cohesion that makes a movie a blockbuster. The fact its being released to the public rather then direct-to-video makes me wonder why the directors are taking such a gamble.

I personally am rating this a 6/10 for the sole purpose that Chace Crawford took the slack of the other characters and stood out as the sole recognizable actor in the movie. Don't waste your money, wait until its on cable and get it for free.

When I first saw this movie, I was about 19 or so and thought to myself, OKAY, mother has MAJOR issues, a dash of OCD and was a real b**ch. During the movie, I got confused... I mean, who in their right mind goes through a person's closet, then screams at the top of their lungs at sleeping children "NO WIRE HANGERS" ???! Am I missing something? At first, I thought it was funny and then after watching the movie further, saw it was a bit more serious and although certain scenes had some drama it was mixed with tongue-in-cheek humor.

Waking children up in the middle of the night to help her fired mother chop roses and trees was a bit on the funny, oddball side.

I do remember hearing that this movie is not fact based. Christina tells how she was treated, but the other kids that Joan adopted tell a totally opposite tale.

What I don't understand is at the end during the will reading, the lawyer said that there were "no provisions" made for Christina or Christopher. Now, Christina, I understand and as will you if you watch the film; but why penalize Christopher? He didn't do anything in the movie to suggest that he was a "bad boy." In closing, some scenes were very funny, some satirically funny and some were plain old-fashioned drama. I'd rate this a cult classic comedy/drama.

Only thing that was just a wee bit off was Mr. Mayer's portrayal in the movie, his accent was wrong (Look at L.B. Mayer's real place of birth) and you will understand my remark.

THIS REVIEW CONTAINS MANY SPOILERS! Let's start..... Went to see it opening day 3/2/07, theater packed with teenagers. I guess the MPAA rating of R do not apply to 16 year olds like it did in the 80's. Anyway, movie starts..... All star cast, impressive and the killings begin. Although it was a bit on the extreme graphic end to watch the *actual* stabbings and shootings, certain scenes were so excruciating, I even had a hard time as a professional reviewer. The movie revolves around this guy who calls himself "Zodiac", now mind you, this movie is LONG, over 2 hours. Dead space (pardon the pun) if you asked me. The movie could have concluded in the usual 1h 40m time frame.

Moving on... Police cannot solve this, so this "Zodiac" killer who has sent numerous letters to newspapers in San Francisco grabs the attention of this cartoonist, Jake Gyllenhall. Why Jake was on a trippin' mission to find the killer, only one can imagine.

There were several errors in the movie, and I will add them to the goofs section as soon as possible. There are roughly 4, two of which stand out very well. Look for them if you decide to watch the movie.

Don't go to the theater and waste $10 or whatever, wait until it is free on Cable or Satellite. The ending (which I will not reveal) angered 80% of the jam-packed theater, myself included.

My rating system, out of a possible 10, I give this movie 2, only because of the all-star cast. Plot, theme and direction was HORRIBLE.

Well, the movie in my summary quote is hard to find, but if you watch it and watch Just My Luck, you will see the similarities.

Melissa Joan Hart and Lindsay Logan have one thing in common. They both cannot act. Both speed their way through their movies and leave the poor viewer trying to catch up on the verbal spew.

Chris Pine was better as the bad guy with a horrible accent in the sequel of Princess Diaries then in this trash. The music was dreadful and so corny, cheesy and stereotypical, it was disgusting to sit through an hour and thirty plus minutes of this garbage.

Note to self, no more Lindsay Logan movies. Girl can sing, but not act. Even the remake "Freaky Friday" was like pulling teeth. Original was so much better.

I would have rated this lower, but the reason it got a 4/10 is because there were no mistakes in Geography!! CONGRATS WRITERS, you actually know where EN WHY SEE is.

First of all, the original "The Prince & Me" was good. This movie was just plain horrible. I agree with the original reviewer, this was not filmed in Denmark. The set (and I catch detail) looked like it was glued together. Just like it's awful sister "Princess Diaries: The Royal Engagement" (which was better) this was a bomb. Some awkward law stated a daughter, Kirsten (who appeared out of nowhere) is said to marry Edvard. Well blah blah blah, Paige (which if you turn her name from Morgan to Matthews, you got Paige from "Charmed") and oddly enough look kinda the same. Anyway, tabloid blah blah blah and girl rivalry and itching powder... Geez, can you get any more lame. Then after a little Harry Potter dungeon sitting, they find the loophole to this idiot-cratic (is that a word? LOL) marriage and voilà! They get married and live happily ever after... Did you ever have a doubt? Oh and BTW: Do not rent this on DVD, there is an error in the encoding that will not allow you to play the movie by pressing play. It's an Omen to let you know that this movie SUCKS!

I saw and have the original 1959 black and white that stars Shelley Winters and Millie Perkins and no matter how many times I watch it, I can't help but not to cry.

This version was (obviously) a set, like the 1959 was, but there were so many mistakes in layout. Spiral staircase? Items that did not exist in that time period existed in the film. Doris Roberts, sad to say CANNOT play drama, she a comedic actress and that will not change. James Coco was a horrible Mr. Van Daan and Mr. Dussel resembled a college professor of mine rather then the dentist he was supposed to play. In the original film, Anne walked the "gauntlet" to go to Peter's room, that seemed to take her more then a minute. In this crappy remake, it took her under 10 seconds. The first reviewer was correct... This remake is just that, a remake. What was the director thinking casting comedic actors in a drama role like that. I'm sorry but James Coco cannot play drama. Max.. Schell was better in Deep Impact then this movie. The cranky Mrs. Frank was just that cranky, I couldn't stand her. Referencing and comparing to the 1959 version, I like her better, she did a better job of being the overwhelming mother. Out of 10 stars, I give this remake 3. Don't waste your time, get the 1959 version and a box of Kleenex.

I bought this movie several years ago and after watching it, could not get the images of those people out of my mind. The movie chronicles what happened at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in Chernobyl, USSR, 1986. The story unfolds with a doctor seeing the images of a disaster on television and consults another doctor (Jason Robards) and is sent to Chernobyl to cover the events. He spends time with the wife (Sammi Davis) of a burnt victim who attempted to put the flames out of the reactor. The movie has some intense, emotional scenes which are graphic and children should not watch. Certain parts were hysterical, especially about the centrifuge in the hospital. I remember them asking how they got the machine in if it didn't fit in the doorway. The reply was, that the machine was in first and they built the room around it. Though it was filmed on location, some of the actors' accents were not Russian. And only few actually had the proper accent and were believable. Still, this is the only movie of it's kind and thus serves as the only documentary of the disaster. I give Chernobyl: The Final Warning 9/10.

I saw the original Amityville Horror in my youth and yesterday went to see the remake. What does one have to do with the other? The house did not look the same. The dates were wrong. What happened to the walls dripping with ooze? The toilet backing up? Where did they get the bathtub sequence? And those house ducts, what were they used for? Ryan Reynolds looked like, Ryan Reynolds and not George Lutz. A complete waste of time. James Brolin made a more convincing George in the original film. This was not worth the movie. Do not rent it or buy it. It was a bomb. An interesting bit of goof. The real estate agent said it was a 1600's Colonial. But when you looked at the house from a distance, it was clearly a Victorian. And the staircase was on the wrong side, LOL. If you have further questions, private message me through IMDb. Out of 10 stars, I give this 1/2 a star.

I wanted to read the other comments before leaving my review and the majority definately rules: This movie is aweful! From the acting to the non-realistic animation to the countless errors. I was actually hoping that the flaps would have been extended by a stretch of the imagination (can't extend flaps without engines). The landing gear cannot be lowered unless you have electricity. That tiny little fan that was going was not sufficient by any stretch to lower the landing gear. The one thing I thought was quite peculiar is when they landed, the back wheels touched down and then the nose one broke off, thus suspending the plane with both back tires in the air. How did the captain apply left and right brakes to tires that weren't touching the ground? Did they forget the spoilers? Word to the director: Find out *all* you can about planes before attempting a "plane" movie. Sorry for the technical rant, but I give this movie 1/10.