Reviews

23 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
10/10
One word...Masterpiece
15 April 2008
Before I begin, allow me to say that I love zombies. As far as I'm concerned, George Romero is the Zombie Master. Others have tried to emulate his work, but almost all of them fail miserably.

With that said, here's my review. I had heard so much about this movie that it almost became legendary in my eyes. I saw the remake, which I loved even though it's got fast zombies, but I wanted to see the original.

I caught the last 40 minutes of this on Encore one day and wondered why it was held in such a high regard. It seemed very dated and way too campy. Seeing this made me want to see it from the beginning even more. A couple of years later I finally bought this. After watching it i was kicking myself for not buying it sooner.

There are lots of movies that people call "Masterpieces." I've seen some of these yet NOTHING I have ever seen is in the same league as this movie. After watching this I finally understand the true meaning of the word "Masterpiece." Because it's Romero, the gore is top notch. You're not gonna get too much better if he's directing a movie. It also helps that Tom Savini did all of the effects. I think the only person who could do a better job than Savini is Rick baker, but that's for another post.

The story is incredibly sad and beautifully portrayed. The atmosphere pulls you into a world where the Zombie Apocalypse has come to fruition. Yes, the acting is cheesy at times and there are campy moments. The cheese I'll attribute to the seventies. The camp is there because the survivors are trying to make the best of things in a world where everything will only get worse.

I fell in love with this movie after only one viewing. I like to say that NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD is my favorite zombie movie, but I'm not so sure that I can say that anymore. I also can't say that I like DAWN better than NIGHT. Let's just say that it's excruciatingly close and I don't want to compare the two.

This movie is VERY highly recommended.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Black Sheep (2006)
10/10
Hilariously Ridiculous!
29 December 2007
I fell in love with this movie from the minute I saw the trailer. It looked bad enough to watch again and again. I recently got it for Christmas and it was really a treat to watch.

EVERYTHING about this movie is ridiculous. The concept alone makes me giddy with joy to see it. The best part has got to be the Were-Sheep.

If you like zombie movies, this follows that formula really closely so you'll enjoy it. If you like movies that are completely ridiculous, yet take themselves seriously you'll enjoy this. If you're a gorehound this movie has got all the gore you need.

Horror fans, go out immediately and buy this movie. It's easily one of the best horror-comedies to come out in recent years. Trust me, you will NOT be disappointed.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Transformers (2007)
5/10
I'm at a loss for words...
26 July 2007
I literally just got done seeing this. You can call me a fan boy if you want and you're probably right. While well done, this movie was NOT as bad ass as I was told it was. Sure, there were good action scenes and some funny moments as well but it just didn't seem complete to me for some odd reason.

First of all, whenever Megan Fox was on screen, I was distracted by her. Can she be any hotter? Second, Hugo Weaving is NOT Megatron. He was adequate for what he needed to do, but it's just not the same.

Third, I have a lot of unanswered questions. I understand "suspension of disbelief" but how can a human sized robot walk right past a large crowd of people (with people FACING him) and not get caught? I'm really not trying to bash this, I just wasn't very impressed. There was, however, some good to it.

The voice acting wasn't too bad, the action scenes were done very well and I'm glad there were little things that honored the cartoon series.

Fans may enjoy this, fan boys may not. I'm not making a recommendation or a non-recommendation. I can only tell you to judge for yourself.
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Night Junkies (2007)
8/10
One of the sexiest vampire flicks you'll ever see.
4 May 2007
Set in the winding streets and dark alleyways of riverside London, the story centers on Ruby and Vincent. Ruby works as a lap dancer whose "pimp" is intent on promoting her as a call girl. In a dark alleyway Vincent was 'turned' by a prostitute, and after weeks of battling with his condition, he has finally give in to his addiction: blood.

Vincent and Ruby meet through a chance encounter in a London café and fall in love during one special night. Vincent tries to feed on Ruby to satisfy his addiction which goes against his heart. Ruby escapes, but has now been 'turned' and has also become a vampire. Ruby has come from a very dark past, and has always had to be a fighter. Her father was a heroin addict who killed himself in the next room when she was a little girl. After she has turned into a vampire, she keeps getting creepy flashbacks about him. Unsure of what is happening to her, she returns to a remorseful Vincent who convinces her to stay and work things out. Together hey try to go 'cold turkey' on their blood addiction. Ruby's previous 'owners' want their star girl back and Matt, a man from her recent past, seeks her out.

Made for under $100,000, the production value is exceptionally good. Since the movie was low budget, you might expect acting typical for alow budget movie, but surprisingly the actors did a really good job. I especially liked Giles Alderson as Vincent. Lawrence Pearce also found some beautiful women to play the strippers. They are some of the hottest women I've seen in a vampire flick, and yes, there's plenty of nudity. This movie has an addicting sexiness that grabs you from the start. In fact, this movie has a sexiness that most vampire movies forget to include.

The writing is very Tarantino-esquire and his influence is obvious as well. Not that this is a bad thing, some of the conversations are fantastic and this movie offers some decent quote-ables. We also get some really great scenes, for instance, after Ruby turns, she is involved in a dominatrix fantasy with a John. He's bound, naked and bending over. She then grabs a strap-on dildo and is about to apply it when she faints from the changes that she's going through.

This movie seems very misogynistic at times. There are several scenes where women are beaten. One woman is beaten to death by a man who then proceeds to lick the blood off of her face.

The action scenes were decent, but there could have been more of them and there wasn't too much gore, but vampire movies shouldn't have all that much. There is, however, an ample amount of blood that is used very nicely. The way this movie was made, it's almost hard to tell that it's low budget.

What sets this movie apart from other vampire movies is the vampires themselves. They are portrayed as real people, but just have been dealt a "bad hand." They have no supernatural powers except for some enhanced senses and there was no evidence of them being stronger than an ordinary human. The vampires in this movie are junkies. Their addiction is blood, and when Ruby is sitting in a hotel room trying to quit "cold turkey" she was going through withdrawal. This reminded me a bit of "Trainspotting".

The bites are also different from typical vampires. Instead of the two marks on the neck, we are shown a full human bite mark. The standard weaknesses aren't in play either. They are not immortal. Holy water and garlic don't work, although sunlight causes their skin to crisp up. It seems the best way to kill them is by a stake through the heart, a bullet in the head, or by draining all of their blood. Of course any ordinary human would die with these methods as well.

While this was very good, there is some bad but not much. The only bad I can think of is that it's not as graphic as I would have liked and the story moves very slowly and plays out as a horror/drama.

This is Lawrence Pearce's first film and it's done very well. Like I said, it runs a bit slow and it's more dramatic than action-packed, but if you like vampire movies that are out of the norm, you may enjoy this movie.

Even though the movie moved really slow and more action would have been very welcome, I'm going to recommend this.
11 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Corpses (2004 Video)
1/10
Is there really a word for how bad this is?
9 June 2006
Warning: Spoilers
***This comment may contain spoilers***

Question: What do you get when you give an asshole a couple of hundred dollars to make a horror movie? Answer: this movie.

I don't even know where to begin with this "film". The best part was when the words "THE END" came on the screen. It's almost painful to watch this farce. it looks almost like it's a student film, yet it has the quality and the pacing of a porn movie.

It seems that the people who were playng the newly risen (trust me, they're NOT zombies) never watched a zombie movie, or the director had his head up his ass. It could be a combination of the two.

The gore wasn't too bad, but where the hell are the people eating zombies? These zombies just grab your limbs and rip them off. Too bad this added a comic effect to the movie.

This brings me to the newly risen. There are several reasons why I refuse to call them zombies. First, one minute they were shuffling around and the next minute they were running at full speed. Second, one of them talked. When the hell did zombies learn to talk? This is easily the worst thing in ANY zombie movies. Lastly, they were reduced to drug addicts looking for their next fix. there was a scene where they were all holding their arms out for more serum so they could stay alive for another hour. Who writes this nonsense? The mortician says that his newly risen allies have been trained to obey him, and he also debriefs them on their larceny missions. Yeah, you read that right and I wish I was kidding.

This movie is definitely NOT recommended.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
I paid $7.50 for THIS?????
4 February 2006
When I first heard about this movie, I was excited. It looked like it was going to be a really scary horror movie. My sister told me that she couldn't sleep for something like two days after seeing this movie.

That made me want to see it all the more.

After seeing this I came to this conclusion: This movie both sucks ass AND bites the big one at the same time!

I was truly scared when I looked at my ticket stub. I will never get that 86 minutes of my life back.

They should have shot blanks at us during the movie. At least then, I'd actually be scared. This movie's only redeeming value is that it was done creatively. Other then that, the DVD would make a nice coaster or ornament.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Blade (1998)
8/10
Wonderfully Done
10 November 2005
I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. When I saw it for the first time I almost cried because it was incredibly close to the comic. Not since Batman (1989) has a movie been so close to the comic, and it was a breath of fresh air. The action is fantastic and the script was written very well, I guess so since David Goyer writes comic books! I highly recommend this movie for everybody who is a comic fan. Hardcore vampire fans might not like it but so what. Wesley Snipes was perfect in his role as Blade, and he pulled off being a bad ass really well. What would have made this movie better is if Wesley Snipes did his own stunts. I don't understand being a 5th degree black belt, but not doing your own stunts. Big Baby.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Unbelievably bad.
25 October 2005
First, let me say that I am EXTREMELY biased. I have never been a fan of Rob Zombie - I think he's an idiot. My sister confirmed this when after she saw it, she told me that "Rob Zombie's a genius." I took this as a bad sign. I couldn't have been more right. This was one of the WORST horror movies that I've ever seen. The beginning was great, but after the opening credits, it was all downhill from there. I understand that it was a tribute to horror movies, and I can accept that. I also understand that Rob Zombie is a huge fan of horror movies, again, I can accept this. So with Rob Zombie being a fan of horror, AND making a tribute to them, how do we come to this tripe? This movie was so bad, I fell asleep SEVERAL times while watching this. I'm glad I saw it on HBO and didn't have to actually spend money. Too bad I can't get a refund on time lost.

1 - Not worth seeing for FREE.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Not the best, but very good
18 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
First, let me say that I LOVE Star Wars. I first saw A New Hope when I was three years old, and it changed my life. When I heard that the prequels were coming out, I was ecstatic. Now that the movies have come full circle. I can honestly say that I am well pleased with the series. As I said in the title, this movie is not the best by a long shot, but it's still really good. I personally think Episode II: Attack Of The Clones was the best, and this is a close second for the prequels. George Lucas can pull something from American Beauty (film a plastic bag floating on the wind) and I'll watch it. I will be a George Lucas fan to the end.

This movie had a lot of hype coming with it. While the hype was good, I believe that it harmed this movie a little. Now I've gone to all of the spoiler sites and knew everything that was going to happen, but the anticipation of what may have been took away from what actually was. Most people that I talk to who have seen this movie say that it was good, but the dialogue sucked. I challenge anyone to show me one "Star Wars" movie that has an Oscar worthy script. You'll never find it. Star Wars is, in the exact words of George Lucas, "the most expensive low-budget movie ever made." Every low budget movie generally has cheesy dialogue. With Star Wars, the dialogue is not as important as the story. This movie tied everything together. It finished the plot. The dialogue can be as cheesy as it wants. This is a "B" movie. Don't get me wrong, I'm not putting Star Wars down at all, I'm just putting it in the appropriate genre: Science FANTASY. Get over the cheesy dialogue and get into the story.
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Sin City (2005)
10/10
Pure Perfection!
18 June 2005
Before I begin, let me explain my rating system: 1 - Not worth seeing for free, 2 - Worth seeing for free, 3 - Worth paying to see, 4 - Worth paying to see again, 5 - Worth buying. When I first saw this movie, I was not prepared for it. I have never read a Sin City comic, but I knew all about Frank Miller. While I was watching this, there were some parts that were almost shocking (for me) and I thought "this is really dark. No, this is Frank Miller." I had no idea that Sin City was like that. I have to buy the graphic novels now. This movie was FANTASTIC. A comic book movie could not have been done better. I applaud Robert Rodriguez for his efforts, and for standing his ground with the DGA (he got kicked out...again!) I give this movie a 5/5.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
House of Wax (2005)
1/10
Horror Movie? More like Horrible Movie!
9 May 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I was unfortunate enough to see this movie on my Anniversary (my wife wanted to see it more than me.) This was one of the worst horror films that I have ever seen. Avoid this movie at all costs! I would ONLY recommend this movie for Paris Hilton fans. I only rated this movie 1, because that is as low as the meter goes. My wife told me that it got two and a half stars. I told her that it was two stars too many! I felt embarrassed when I left the theater,and I'm afraid that people will laugh at me when I tell them that I saw this dribble. This movie goes to show you that it is a really bad idea to remake ANYTHING that Vincent Price once did. My philosophy is to never remake anything done originally by Vincent Price, Christopher Lee or Lon Chaney. They are the masters and their works can NEVER be replaced, ever. **This might be a spoiler** Who has the bright idea to make a movie with a house made of wax in the south? The sun would melt it almost immediately! This is a bad example of a poorly written movie.
6 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Wrong Turn (I) (2003)
Not just a movie title
24 November 2004
This movie was terrible. The trailer made it look like it was going to be a really great horror movie, but instead it was just garbage. I noticed that Stan Winston was an executive producer and that his studio did the special effects. This was the ONLY good thing about this movie. The gore was fantastic. The story was so-so at best. I was so interested in seeing this movie that I went to a website that spoils movies (if you want the site, e-mail me) and the movie sounded pretty good. I was able to rent this along with Cabin Fever, and THAT is a great movie. This was horrifying because I actually spent the money to rent it. Stan, if you read this, PLEASE pick a better movie next time.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Beyond Words
8 September 2004
I recently finished watching this movie. There are really no words that can be used to describe it. Calling it a masterpiece doesn't really do it justice because it's infinitely better than that. This was the most realistic, accurate and beautiful portrayal of Jesus I have ever seen. A close second is the movie THE MIRACLE MAKER. Being that is animation and this is live action, I'm not going to compare the two.

As I was watching the movie I did notice some inaccuracies in the movie that did not appear in the Bible, but because it's a movie that's expected. This movie was completely amazing. I smell multiple Oscars (Best Director, Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Wardrobe) Mel Gibson is a genius. A lot of people say this movie is anti-semitic, but that's so far from the truth. This movie is about compassion, love and forgiveness. Anyone who claims that this movie is remotely close to being anti-semitic has got serious issues.

Unfortunately I never saw this movie in the theater as that would have broadened the experience for me. I borrowed the DVD from a friend, but I will buy it as soon as I can. This is a must have for everyone. It truly is the most accurate depiction of the crucifixion I've ever seen. Someone on IMDb who reviewed the movie said that the beating was unrealistic because nobody could have taken abuse like that and lived. The truth is that the movie, as accurate as it was, was too kind. Jesus DID get beaten, and this movie does show us an extremely severe beating as well as severe punishment.

The truth of the matter is that The Bible says that Jesus was marred more than any other man. In reality, when Jesus was crucified, his beard was RIPPED out of his face. He was completely UNRECOGNIZABLE when he was on the cross. Just think, He did that for you and me. So to say that the beatings in the movie were unbelievable is incorrect.

I rate all movies on a scale of 1-5 (1 - not worth seeing for free; 2 - worth seeing for free; 3 - worth paying to see; 4 - worth paying to see again; 5 - worth buying.) This movie goes above and beyond 5. It is essential for anyone who calls themselves a Christian and for movie lovers alike. At best, this movie cannot be described in all of its glory. Thank you Jesus for what You've done, and thank you Mel Gibson for having the faith, courage and inspiration to put this to film.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Cabin Fever (2002)
10/10
One of the best horror movies I've ever seen
11 August 2004
I LOVE this movie!!!!! I rented it and watched it 4 times in a row!!! I don't understand why people always give this movie a bad rap. Upon watching the DVD it is discovered (by listening to the director's commentary) that this movie is a TRIBUTE to old horror movies (Evil Dead Series, The Thing and Texas Chainsaw Massacre to be exact.) The movie from what I saw was a refreshing horror movie compared to the dribble that comes off as being horror today. From what I saw the movie is PERFECT IN EVERY WAY. It totally brought the genre back to life and I have since become a fan of Eli Roth. Keep up the great work Eli!!! No, I don't think that the movie was scary as I am a seasoned Horror fan, but the entire premise of the movie drags you into it and explodes with over the top gore. Eli Roth made a masterpiece which has (very) quickly rose in the ranks as one of my favorite horror movies. Again Eli, keep up the great work!
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hulk (2003)
10/10
Absolutely fantastic
1 January 2004
Warning: Spoilers
*** May contain Spoilers*** First off I would like to say that Ang Lee is a genius. He has perfectly captured the essence of the Hulk in this movie. It has all of the humanity and tragedy of the hulk with no filler. I was amazed at the camera work in the movie, which appears just as a comic book would read. I thought the acting was great for a comic book movie (because it's a comic book-based movie I know that the acting is expected to be at times cheesy); but the acting here was really, really good. The best actor of the bunch was Sam Elliot who pulled of General "Thunderbolt" Ross almost to perfection. Josh Lucas, who played Major Talbot was a bit of a sissy at times, but Talbot always was a conniving sissy. I also thought Betty and Bruce Banner were portrayed very well, by Jennifer Connelly and Eric Bana, respectively. The special effects are what got me the most. While a lot of people are upset at the effects and say that the Hulk looks too fake and cartoony for this movie to be taken seriously, I loved it. While the Hulk DOES look a little like a cartoon at times, I believe that this is the best look for him. I loved Lou Ferrigno as the Hulk, but there's only so much that flesh and blood can do. With CGI there are no limits. There's so much more that I can say about this movie, but I don't know where to begin. The movie was PERFECT in every way. This is by far the BEST comic book-based movie. I feel that the origin of the Hulk should have been with the Gamma Bomb (Rick Jones could have been in the movie as well) I feel that the alteration in the movie with the nanomeds and gamma technology was a good move. I'll agree that the "Hulk Dogs" were kinda corny, but it shows the insanity that David Banner has achieved throughout the years. Nick Nolte was great as the villian, and his energy absorption/fusion powers were really cool. I HIGHLY recommend this movie to everybody. I give it a 5/5. In fact, I bought this movie BEFORE I saw it!!!!!
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
FIRST play the game, then watch the movie.
23 December 2003
First and foremost, this movie is based on one of the most successful video game franchises in history. The games are wonderfully created and each one gets better than the last. I was excited when I heard this movie was coming out, because I am a fan of the games. I was unable to see it in the theater, so I had to rent it. It was a little upsetting to see Freddie Prinze Jr and Matthew Lillard as Maverick and Maniac. I do not feel that these two were able to capture the true spirit of these characters completely, although Lillard is close. I would have preferred Mark Hamill and Tom Wilson in this movie to stay true to the games, who knows the movie may have been more successful. At any rate, if anyone sees this movie and has NOT played the games, please don't be harsh. The movie was surprisingly close to the game in most areas. Granted the technology was greater in the game, but you can do more with that format. All in all this was a good movie with a very strong story, albeit subpar acting at times, but good nonetheless. My challenge to anyone who has seen and badmouthed this movie is to compare this movie to every other movie-based-on-a-videogame. I'm certain that this one will be in the top ten of anybody's list.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
As a movie FANTASTIC, as an adaptation...poopie!
19 December 2003
Warning: Spoilers
This is probably the most amazing movie that I've seen in that year (1997). I first saw it the first week that it came out and thought it was too long. I then saw it again a couple of weeks later and thought it was PERFECT. About 2 years after the movie came out I got a copy of the book and read it. I read the book in about a week and could not put it down. The book is absolutely phenomonal. I was upset at the movie for everything they did. <<<<<SPOILERS>>>>> First, in the book the Lieutenant is dead already, whereas in the movie he is still alive. Also ALL of the characters mentioned in the book are men, but there are women in the movie ( so not to look sexist I suppose.) The book is told from the first person perspective of Johnny Rico, but the movie is not. It's a really, really bad thing to compare the movie to the book. Please, if you've never seen this movie, but have read the book, don't look at this as an adaptation. It will anger you to the end of sanity. This movie is completely and totally well done, albeit the acting COULD have been better. I highly recommend this movie to anyone who has not read the book, but if you have read the book, don;t take this movie seriously, please. 5/5 (worth purchasing)
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
My vote? 5/5
17 December 2003
This is the most AMAZING animated movie I have ever seen. I first saw this movie when I was around 6. This movie is completely captivating and grabs you from the second it starts. It is a wonderful film for the family, however there may be some tense moments for very young children. I LOVE this movie and I haven't yet purchased it, but I'm always looking. I can't wait for the remake in 2004. There is so much that can be said about this movie, but I'm just going to tell everyone who reads this review to buy it BEFORE you watch it. It's bound to become an instant favorite.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
G-Phoria (2003 TV Special)
It's about time!!!!!
6 November 2003
Finally, Video games are getting recognized in a good way. This is the FIRST awards show dedicated strictly to video games!!!! It was extremely informative and enlightening to see the equivelant of the oscar go to some of the best games ever made. This is truly a landmark event. I truly hope that G-Phoria gets better with every year.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
One of Jeffrey Jones' best
23 October 2003
I loved this movie! From the beginning to the end it is an absolute masterpiece! The title alone makes you wonder 'Mom and Dad Save the World'. If you take this movie seriously, please do yourself a favor and have your head examined. This is a great movie when you need a quick laugh. 5/5.
10 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Daredevil (2003)
7/10
Beware - Minor Spoilers
22 October 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Normally I do not like Ben Affleck, in fact the only other movies that I liked him in were Dazed and Confused, Chasing Amy and Good Will Hunting. This movie was different and actually gave me a little bit more respect for Ben. The movie was fairly close to the comic, but I was truly upset that Stick did not make it into the film. He could have had 3-5 minutes in the flashback sequence. Also the costume was almost laughable. Daredevil with a collar?? Also, it ruined the ENTIRE franchise by allowing Matt Murdock's true identity to be exposed to EVERY MAJOR CHARACTER in the film. I was enjoyable, and only because I am a sucker for a decent comic book film will I rate this a 5/5.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
The best so far!!!
22 October 2003
I love this movie, I give it a 5 of 5. Before I begin my review, let me explain MY rating system: 1)Not worth seeing for free, 2)Worth seeing for free, 3)Worth paying to see, 4)Worth paying to see, again and 5)Worth the purchase. Now on to my review: George Lucas has done it again! This is his crowning achievement so far, and it's only gonna get better! I know a lot of people didn't like the acting or the dialogue, but to the fans this was beyond a masterpiece. This movie far surpasses everything in the previous trilogy with sound and visuals. Granted, George Lucas sticks to a certain formula, but if the shoe fits... I feel that the acting in the movie was not as bad as most have said, and the dialogue is standard Star Wars. There is no way around it. George Lucas has his method of doing things and he's not gonna change. For every Star Wars fan that thought this movie was bad look at it this way: My wife is ABSOLUTELY NOT a Star Wars fan, but she liked this one! If a non-fan can like it, why can't everyone who claims to be loyal? I say respect Lucas for his vision and his dreams, because if it was not for Star Wars 90% of the movies today could not have been made.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Creepshow (1982)
10/10
Buy it, Watch it, Love it
22 October 2003
There is so much that can be said about this movie that may offend some or intrigue some. First, I would definately put this movie in the Horror top ten. It's got everything, suspense, gore, comedy, comic books, Tom Savini. What more can a movie ask for? This is the best venture from Stephen King because it does not take itself too seriously. The only thing I can say for anyone who has not seen this is the final story in the movie definately puts the CREEP in creepshow. I rate it 5/5.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed