Martimus98

As much as I truly hate to dump on Bruce Willis given his current medical issues, I have to wonder why he would have agreed to be in this turd of a movie. I realize that money is important but geez Louise. There are two things that I always look for in an action movie which speaks volumes as to the effort put into the movie, accuracy of the shooters and reloading . What I saw in this movie on the 1st point was cut and dry, the mercenaries couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with automatic weapons and the good guy hardly ever misses. Strike 1. For the second point, I don't think I ever saw any character in the movie actually reload their firearm. Strike 2. For me, strike 3 was the script. The plot had more holes in it then a chain link fence.

Sadly I was somewhat disappointed with this movie. I had expected so much more from it. The story itself was fresh and interesting. The choice of actors, however, left me underwhelmed. I enjoyed George Clooney playing a grumpy old man. It suits him! :) I enjoyed Hugh Laurie's role. I enjoyed Raffey Cassidy's role as Athena. I was less than impressed with the other main characters. This movie could have been so much more than just another formulaic Disney movie.

They Live is an interesting story. I think it was well written and well acted. I'm likely biased since I've always enjoyed the silliness of wrestler turned actor Roddy Piper.

Honestly this was a movie that was made around an awesome soundtrack. The music, in and of itself, is awesome. The story itself is a time capsule about roller disco's of the 1980's, yea they were a thing. Olivia Newton John, aka Olivia Neutron Bomb, was phenomenal. She is both beautiful and superbly talented in this movie. Gene Kelly is, well, Gene Kelly. He was an incredibly talented actor and dancer in his day and has great screen presence. The story line was silly but what can one expect from a modern story whose main character is a muse (one of nine Goddesses from Greek mythology). The animation wasn't all that good but that was not unusual for the late 1970's. Given the size of the case, I feel sorry for those people who had to create and maintain all of those creative and unusual costumes. Was this an award winning movie? Absolutely not! It's a silly yet fun musical where guy meets Goddess, guy loses Goddess, and guy gets Goddess.

This story was based on a novelette written by Isaac Asimov, The Positronic Man. It's a story about an unusual robot that spends it's life striving to become human. The movie is highly underrated in my opinion. I think the actors all did well dealing with what had to be a challenging story to recreate. I'd speak highly of Robin Williams in particular but I think that others have spoken to his comic genius better than I can. I enjoyed Sam Neill's contribution to the movie. Embeth Davidtz did well in her dual role of 'Little Miss' and Portia. In my opinion Chris Columbus allowed Robin fairly free reign in his role and that's what really made this movie shine. Is it a serious re-telling of Asimov's story? Not really. It's a serious story peppered with Robin Williams silliness that makes the subject matter much easier to digest.

Of all of the Sam Rami "Evil Dead" movies, this is by far my favorite. Bruce Campbell is his usually zany self. The story is happily over the top and predictable. Nobody in this story takes themselves seriously. Army of Darkness was never intended to be a serious story of any kind. It's simply a spoof of horror movies. Was there blood? A fountain of it (ala Tarantino). Were there dismembered limbs? Yea a dismembered hand that flys up and grabs someone in the face. Were there members of the undead? Absolutely and many/most of them were hilarious in their silliness.

This movie was impressive. The Richard Matheson story was tremendous and the movie didn't totally lose the point of his story. The actors did well given a production where most everything must have happened in front **** screen. Could the movie have been better? Absolutely! But it was infinitely better than much of the schlock coming out of Hollywood.

Personally I think the movie was OK. It's a heavy subject for many and was done in a sci fi horror-fantasy sort of genre. In my opinion the fact that the "critics" don't think much of it proves to me that it was a decent movie. In my experience it's rare that my movie preferences ever line up with the professional movie critics.

I was somewhat intrigued by the premise of this movie, only to be disappointed by it's implementation. The over-arching premise was interesting but the sub-plots tended to be simply weird. Watching Pratt's character obsessing over Lawrences character in suspended animation was, in a word, creepy. If I had to generalize I'd likely say that the writer did an excellent job of crafting an interesting story. The movie makers, on the other hand, fell well short in their implementation.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]