Reviews

I guess movies like this are aimed at a specific audience, but, for the life of me, I can't figure out who that would be. I'll admit I only watched as much as I could stand, and I feel kind of wrong about reviewing something I could only stay with for about 30 minutes. However, you don't really need to sniff a pile of crap for a second time to know it's still gonna stink.

Apparently, some of Victor Frankenstein's relatives return to his abandoned estate because they've run out of money. I think. I'm not sure because the 'plot' is buried beneath a lot of other subplots that don't seem to fit immediately (maybe it becomes clear if you can actually watch this entire travesty, but I can't go there again). They end up finding Frankenstein's monster by accident and cook up some kind of half-assed idea to revive the creature and somehow glean cash from this whole thing.

I get the feeling that this was supposed to be a comedy, but the laughs never come. When a group of 'wayward' girls turned seltzer bottles on the local police in the middle of an Equal Rights protest, that was my cue to exit. Avoid.

'SEED OF CHUCKY' is perverse, absurd, disgusting and fun as all hell.

Anyone who goes to see a CHUCKY movie expecting a horror film is not living in reality. CHUCKY has become a comedy series of the blackest sort and that's certainly not a bad thing. While 'SEED' is no 'BRIDE', it still manages to deliver the goods and there are about a million in-jokes to test your movie IQ. Go to see this in the proper frame of mind and you won't likely be disappointed.

---My only serious criticism would be that this whole movie stars spoofing themselves (John Malkovich, Neal Patrick Harris, etc., and now Jennifer Tilly and Redman) has been played out. It's great to see that they have a sense of humor about themselves but it's getting old.---

I can't explain my adoration for this film. I initially saw it sometime in the mid-80's and it was love at first sight. Perhaps it's because it reminds me of Hershell Gordon Lewis with less gore and (somewhat) better acting? Who knows and who cares?! Hot tunes, bad hair, and acid-washed brains make for good times. SCREAM, BABY, SCREAM is a riot and I highly recommend it for anyone who enjoys those preposterous '60's tripped-out monster movies (you know who you are). For a double dose of groovy gory fun, track down a copy of BLOOD FREAK and you'll never be the same.

I had the pleasure of catching this wildly confusing yet thoroughly entertaining movie at a special advance screening last night complete with the director/writer and cast members in tow (there were plenty of family members present as well; I felt privileged to share this with them).

Imagine if you took 'PI' and meshed it with a smaller scale 'BACK TO THE FUTURE', only without the Zemeckis feel good elements. We get a glimpse into some of the darker consequences of time travel were it actually possible. I look forward to seeing this several more times so that I can at least attempt to figure out the more technical aspects of the story. Ultimately, PRIMER is a great note with which to start off the Fall movie season, and I recommend you do yourself the favor of seeing it as soon as possible.

I finally watched this mini-series last night expecting the worst, but I was pleasantly surprised. Granted, the digital TV effects circa 1995 look very cheesy now, but if you can get past that, you'll enjoy one of the most faithful King adaptations I've seen. One thing seriously bothers me, though. I also recently saw ROSE RED and it was horrendous. It was several hours too long, very borrowed from various other sources, and pretty much a bust altogether. It was Stephen King at his absolute worst. How is it that something as involving and edge-of-your-seat as THE LANGOLIERS gets a lower rating on this site than ROSE RED?