Reviews

Understand this is a SOUTH WALES production and you'll be better off. They try like hell to sound American, but fall short. It would have been better to just make it about anything other than Manson. They have none of the details correct, even for changing up the basic plot.The lead actress reminded me of Kristen Stewart, so that was nice. A Wales murder mystery would be more appealing. They set themselves up for massive criticism. Whatever the case, it dragged me out of retirement for writing IMDb reviews!

Saw this back when it came out and just saw it again over thirty years later. Just as weird as ever. I seriously doubt they could make this movie today, or even 10 years ago. N1gger? Fagg0t? Just not gonna fly. Basically a no name cast, or very little known, made it grittier. A few scenes are a tad hokey, but keep in mind it was 1982 Los Angeles. Very hard to come by but one lone torrent is floating around with a single seed. Worth a watch every 30 years to be sure. Cole Hauser, the son of Wings, acts today and is what made me take a second look at his wacky dad. I sure do miss the days of one line reviews allowed here. Yeah, I've been here that long. Just a crying shame I have to blather on at the very end like this.

There are maybe two brief parts of Amanda being topless and that is it! One or two brief simulated oral sex scenes and there you have it. It plays like a TV movie of the week. There could have been a lot more movie and really drawn the viewer in. Chloe Sevigny appears for exactly 2 seconds. Eric Roberts about 5 seconds. James Franco in an odd turn as Hugh Heffner. Doesn't really work.

Not understanding what all the hype is and stories about people not wanting to see it or walking out. Boogie Nights was far more tawdry!

Two directors? Never a good sign.

Forgettable film that could have been more.

Well, I FINALLY saw this last night. So weird. So bizarre. So timely. Yes, completely camp. The acting, old-timey film with it's technical gaps, music. The script still fits in today. Politics and religion in the spotlight. So ahead of it's time. Really keeps ones attention though. Tim Carey was born to play this role.

I watched mostly for the Frank Zappa soundtrack, but was a memorable film experience that I'm glad I had.

I also really miss the days when this website let you write a review that didn't have to be ten lines long. Yes, I've been here that long, but one could also argue long enough to actually do the correct thing here and just write a longer review. I feel ornery. Today.

Watching this utter garbage, I went from disgusted to offended to angry. Do "filmmakers" just expect to be able to put out whatever they feel like and we must embrace it as art? This is an example of a reprehensible story that should never have been made. I cannot emphasize enough how much I abhor this really bad movie. If it's only purpose was to set out to sicken, I suppose one could say it succeeded on some level. It also made me so angry that I was actually viewing it. I convinced myself that it was more of an experiment to see if I could stand it. I am deeply embarrassed to even confess that I did watch it. Complete waste of time, energy, and I regret it altogether. I guess I had to see the "bad hype" for myself. Totally lives up to it. Utter crap. In other business, that "actor" who plays crazy Martin should seriously go into seclusion for the next 50 years. Disgraceful.

I am perplexed, baffled and confounded by the GLOWING user comments for this movie.

It completely falls flat. It is at times even awkward to watch. The chemistry between the lead actors is non existent. Martin Short phones his performance in. I also believe he was confused about who his character was even supposed to be. He went from cad to caring and back again SO many times I couldn't keep track.

I think "David" acted like a jerk and didn't understand why "Kathy" would want anything to do with him.

There is NOTHING funny about this movie. "Innerspace" made the same year is a much better choice for a Short flick.

NC-17 films notoriously depict explicit sex. Explicit violence garners an R rating.

Sex frightens the American people far more than violence. Don't expose your children to sex because it is REAL and they have far more access to it than a hand grenade or an M-16.

We all have genitals! Eegads. You can see the problem. The movie industry is showing people having sex. This is far easier to achieve than re-enacting a scene from The Terminator.

America was founded on Religious principles. There is no getting around it. For the rating board to have clergy on the appeal board it is utterly absurd.

I do understand that there must be some limits to what is shown in mainstream films. I object to the way it is carried out and by WHOSE standards films are rated.

Regulating morality is dicey and I'm not saying I would be better at it. If nothing else, this film was an interesting look at the process we have in place presently.

While I do appreciate the intention and the fine acting, the plot was completely depressing. I needed Prozac after the first 15 minutes. It brought me down and I stayed there for quite sometime. Even thinking back on it I feel glum. I am sure the aim was to be a real downer and it surely succeeded.

I liked the fact it was in France because that made it so much more believable. Americans are no where as near as wacky as Europeans. They will do anything. Eating oneself to death is absurd. Even for the 1970's. It was truly appalling to watch even as fiction. Pleh.

Just one Americans opinion.

Not often do films come across as truly real. Not scripted, or acted but as if a day in the life. In no way could it be described as Over the Top. Steve Buscemi was the reason I bought this. I am a big fan of all of his work and had missed this one. He was good here again. I love how it is so eighties. I was 23 when this movie was made and I could get right into it as if in a time warp.

Dated also by the scene where Michael said he needed to get a word processor and the man told him it was around $4,000 dollars and he should wait until the prices fell. Another scene I liked was two deaf men signing at a gay bar. Cleverly flamboyant.

I can't add anything that hasn't already been said and said better than me.

Where do I begin? The TV movie made in the 1970's with Lucy Arnaz has it all over this meandering mess. It is an utter snoozefest. The acting is flat, dull, BBBBBBOOOOORRRRRINGGGGG. Brian De Palma used to wow me with his direction and gore. This has neither. "Body Double", "Dressed To Kill", this was his heyday. He has strayed far. Go back to your roots! The Elizabeth Short storyline was actually more of a sub plot. They merely capitalized on the name and made a completely different film that, trust me, would not have sold any tickets were it not for the connection.

In summary, I would suggest skipping it and renting the TV version if you are even remotely interested in Miss Short and the unfortunate events.

Cheap thrills and god awful "acting" abound. John Carpenter's 1980 outing was the real deal. I remember being scared back then. This is completely laughable. An utter snoozefest. You could not pay me to watch it again. Irritatingly poor. Annoying to the point of anger. People opening doors they shouldn't, going outside at night alone, telephones going dead. All the clichés are here. Plain stupid. Someone make Rupert Wainwright go away. Someday, I may even finish watching it, but not today. Tomorrow's not looking good either. How about never? That works.

To IMDb, stop making people write so much that no one bothers to read it. There is value to short and to the point reviews. They don't ALL need to drone on and on. The above wasn't long enough I had to add this. hmph.

Films that promote thought, discussion and change are the best films. I had chills watching and was completely fixed on the screen every second. For a movie that we all know the ending to, it was still one of the most dramatic I've seen.

The acting was very believable, especially from the family members on the other end of the phone calls. It is exactly how any one of us would have reacted.

That is what is so compelling about United 93. We can put ourselves in their shoes and know we would do and feel just the same. It connects us all on a human level.

I don't think we need a movie to remind us of the events of that horrific day. But it doesn't hurt.

While the plot was terrible, some of the characters were HYSTERICAL. Case in point: Vince Vaughn as Raji. One of my top 10 characters in ANY movie. He had it down. The Rock was also good. I don't care much for Uma Thurman in any role. Danny Devito had a 30 second cameo, so don't expect too much of him. Is a bit sad seeing the late Robert Pastorelli in his final role. He did a bang up job as Joe Loop. He'll be missed. Travolta is doing Travolta. Grins and all.

If you are renting, stick around for the closing credits as they feature each of the players doing a little bit of dancing. Even the ones that don't make it all the way through the movie. Thus leaving you with a happy feeling! Just a fun little movie.

I had been terrified to see this movie based on it's gore but, I was pleasantly surprised when it also had a nail biting storyline and some decent acting. Sure it was bloody, but it was cleverly done and I liked it much better than Se7en. The ending had me completely fooled! I love it when that happens. I'll never be afraid to see a movie again. ("It's only a movie") Thanks Mr. Wan!

I must say, I am unhappy with IMDb's new minimum length for comments. I have written dozens of comments that are succinct and to the point, and hardly 4 lines. The above 6 was plenty, I thought. But it wouldn't "go through." Why force users to commit to 10 lines? Don't they realize most people read shorter comments than longer ones? Even in the newspaper. Keep this in mind when threatening punitive actions on faithful IMDb users. Yes 2 or 3 lines is too few, but let's not get carried away.

Seeing the name Wes Craven here, I was expecting far more in the way of horror if not suspense. Disappointed on both accounts. In a word, silly. The acting was extremely bad with second rate, basically unknown, actors. I'm undecided as if it was the story that was lacking and Meryl Streep could have made it quite interesting, or if it was just a terrible plot and an uninspired director. Either way, don't say you haven't been warned. Better to spend those 2 hours of your life rewatching one of your favorite movies. Try Alfred Hitchcock.

As the theatre lay uncomfortably quiet, even the kids were hard pressed to laugh at this drivel. This movie is highly inappropriate for children...and sensible adults as well. To call it "silly" would be too much praise. This movie is seriously horrible. Kind if in the way that "Citizen Kane" is seriously marvelous. I'm talking serious.

Mike Myers "cat" was funnier back in 1939 when it was Bert Lahr. Similarity was freakish.

I'm always amazed how Kelly Preston gets work. Must be the push-up. If there was a ray of light at all, it was in Alec Baldwin in the last scene of the movie. Still not worth sitting through an hour and 22 minutes to get to it, but I did laugh. Once. Good job everyone. Your masterful merchandising skills conned my kids into dragging me off to watch. Next time, maybe deliver the goods. Just sayin.

Nothing new here whatsoever. One of the more boring outings of the ever popular Rugrats. Bruce Willis adds nothing and songs are forgettable. Numbers 1 through 5 appear at various stages during the movie. Everyone was scratching his head wondering if they were supposed to remember them to perhaps win some terrific prize. A search on Google turns out they should have been scratching cards given out during a Burger King promotion where the smells coincided with the particular scenes. I guess I need to watch more television. Must have missed that commercial....somehow. In any case, was probably far more interesting than the movie. Luckily, the time flew by. Thank TPTB, it is a short one.

Excellent movie that was well cast, well directed, well acted, has an awesome Soundtrack and is completely enthralling. If you haven't seen it yet, what are you waiting for? Go rent it. I own it. I own the Soundtrack too. It's worth rewatching again and again. Willem Dafoe is SO sleazy, you will love to hate him. CSI fans will enjoy an early performance by William Peterson. This is a hidden gem that I wish would at least get some well deserved airplay on Cable. Seek it out.

As many have stated correctly, better than Hannibal, but not as good as Silence. Was very disappointed to learn the director was rather green, and it showed. Edward Norton basically phoned in his performance. Not that he was miscast, but he needed more, well, direction. I ended up not caring about any of the characters...Not a good sign. (I think we were ALL rooting for Jodie Foster in SOTL) Emily Watson was a ray of light, but in retrospect, had a small throw-away role. I'm starting to wonder if Sir Anthony will do anything for money. Ralph Fiennes was acceptable, but the movie should have gone on longer to delve into his character more. (But only with a different director) I certainly wasn't on the edge of my seat, if that was the goal here. Better to rent this as it isn't really a "must see."

James Woods can't even save this miserable outing. Sharon Stone comes on WAY too strong and should put this at the bottom of her resume. Sly Stallone? You'll be begging for another Rambo. You know something? I saw this at the theatre when it came out years ago, but rewatching it on Cable (Why?) I couldn't even REMEMBER most of it! Neither could my spouse! We must have SLEPT through it or something...yeah, that's it. Total snoozefest. Rent if you have severe insomnia. Is better than Sominex®.

Run of the mill Arnold moobie. Eraser was better. Acting is horrible. Even Arnold phoned in his performance. The plot is pretty thin (No "fireman" is going to get that kind of access to sensitive areas, period) and you can guess everything that is about to happen before it does. Francesca Neri's job at one point is to sit there and look gorgeous...collagen lips and all. Jungle scenes dragged. Best advice: wait for the video. For diehard Arnold fans only...maybe not even them.

I was amazed that only one person made comment on the Faust legend. (Do a Google search on "Faust" right now) Perhaps I was expecting too much from the IMDb users, who knows? It's a nice movie to pass the time while keeping one interested. One steamy, yet brief scene thrown in to keep you awake. While yes, the Eric Stoltz character seemed to be put there for the sole purpose of leading one astray, just try and go with the flow of the main idea of the story. Honesty is the best policy.

Target audience: Adolescent boys. Period.

Variation on "Running Man" - ok - who are they kidding? RIPOFF of any Arnold movie complete with such dialog as "uplink" and "Hasta la vista, baby." Lorenzo Lamas as an Arnold wannabe that actually claims to be a "Chuck Norris fan", at one point. Good grief.

Bad acting, bad music, paper thin script, oh so silly. Next time I'm flipping channels and I see Lorenzo Lamas in the credits, I'll just keep on flipping...as I usually do. Maybe I just couldn't locate the remote and I was feeling particularly lazy that day. Who knows?

Here's another Lamas line: "Ya, I think I've seen this movie before." Me too. So why'd you make another one so badly?

Very funny comedy from the guy who does it best. Done in 1978, but the only thing dated about it are his pants. Famous 7 words you can't say on television bit (although some of them you can now....thanks to NYPD Blue) went on to become an underground hit for Blink 182. Also great pieces about the measures of time....and flatulence. Yes George, we did "live to see it"....thank goodness.

Here's to the "One cheek sneak."