Reviews

I did the play Jekyll and Hyde about 5 months ago. I was the lead for this play, and I had to watch this movie with the rest of the cast and I must say, it really was not that helpful. At least not on my part. I'll get to that but first some of the good things.

The people in the cast did a good job portraying their characters. Most of them were from the original cast when the play came out. George Merritt and Barrie Ingham were good as Utterson and Carew. I was also very impressed with Coleen Sexton's portrayal of Lucy. No one will ever beat Linda Eder, in my opinion, but Sexton doesn't do a bad job. It was just too bad she couldn't have sang "Bring on the Men", instead of "Good and Evil." I didn't know she was only 20 when doing this show. Andrea Rivette also did a good job playing Emma too. I would give the whole cast a solid B for effort.

The one thing our theater group thought that was stupid was David Hasselhoff playing the lead of Jekyll. I give credit to Hasselhoff for his Hollywood career, and for being a babe magnet on Baywatch, but this guy is no Broadway performer. At least not in this role. Every time I listened to this guy sing I kept thinking what Wildhorn was thinking about when he hired him. Was he trying to turn this into a comedy. If so, the joke was not funny. I understand that he was trying to make money, but putting faith in Hasselhoff was the worst call to make. He made a horses*** of the role. The only song he sang decently was "Lost in the Darkness." Another problem I had was that most of the singing parts in the play were cut out of the show with stupid boring dialog that would put any J&H fan to sleep. I would give Hasselhoff an F for this performance, but I respect the fact that he was trying something new so i'll give him a D-.

Overall I give the performance a C. I wish Wildhorn could have hired Anthony Warlow to do this show, he was fantastic in the "The Gothic Musical Thriller soundtrack of Jekyll and Hyde." He was the perfect guy for this role. It's just too bad that he lives in Australia. I just hope Hasselhoff never plays the role of Jekyll again.

I watched this film in my cinema history class. I have never really watched many Bollywood films, but I was really impressed what I saw. It was almost like an 80's pop culture musical, with a touch of Grease in it.

What makes the film so enjoyable is that it's not only colorful in it's style and environment, but all of the characters have very colorful personalities that make the film work. In the sense of the plot it is easy to predict what is going to happen, but the movie is so well made your not really occupied with that though. Another factor is that it also has very convincing emotional content. The movie starts off very emotional when Raoul loses his wife Tina. I even almost cried at the end when I saw how heart broken Anjali and Raoul were because she was getting married to Aman.

I give this film an 8.5 out of 10. Both Shahrukh Khan and Kajol both did an excellent job in this film. If your bored with the same old crap you watch all the time, then watch this. Just be warned it's a very long film, and remember to display your subtitle on your DVD player.

This movie has it's up's and downs in comedy. Some of it was pretty funny and a lot of it was kind of silly. I just can picture Michelle Tratchenburg in bra and panties, considering the fact that she looks like she is about 15. The nude beach scene was kind of disturbing too. Thank god i was

If I could give anyone a reason to see this movie, it's the "Scotty Doesn't Know" song. I will always remember Eurotrip for that reason alone, and maybe the German sex part. I could not stop laughing after seeing that part. I also had no clue that the bald headed singer was Matt Damon.

I honestly loved this movie. I know a lot of people have said that it is bad and that it was mainly cheesy, but it's really not a movie that you can really take seriously. It was meant to be silly and I think it did an excellent job presenting that. I thought it was pretty funny some of the quips the snowman made. They were definitely something you would not hear from Frosty.

I honestly think that if the movie itself was not low budgeted, it could have been a classic horror. It had great idea's that could have been developed. It was not impossible to tell that they were rushing through it. I still give it credit for trying, despite the limitations it had.

I have just gotten out of watching this film. I was sort of disappointed with what I saw. Don't get me wrong, it did have a lot of funny moments and a lot of the characters were greatly portrayed by the actors.

I thought the real problem was that the movie itself did not have a real direction in regards to plot. Also the actors parts, in regards to their motives and goals were also uncertain. From what I saw, it was pretty scattered in many cases. I understand that they were trying to make a documentary on a shark, but it seemed to me like they had nothing better to do with their time.

Overall I'd give the movie a 5 out of 10. Like I said the actors were not bad, neither was the humor, the movie itself just simply needed to take a specific path.

I watched this film expecting it to be bad and all I can say is that it was worse than even I anticipated. Here's the 3 reasons why.

3. The intro to the story itself was not bad, but the rest of the movie was dead. It's as tragic as watching a pregnant mother expecting her child to come out of her stomach. She waits about 2 hours while watching golf on the sports channel, but does it happen no? And that's when she's realizes her labor was false and she's even more crankier than before. Oh I pity the father! The point too all of this is DO SOMETHING MORE WITH THE PLOT!

2. The acting. OOOOO the acting. I thought I was sitting in movie produced by retards. Jennifer Garner I swear to God was awful as Electra. I don't care how good looking she is or athletic. Electra is supposed to be mysterious and independent. She was more like a prissy school girl trying to be mysterious and independent. MCD as Kingpin was also no good. It's not because of his color but because he just wasn't convincing as the Kingpin. The Kingpin is a crime lord and Duncan was more like a pimp. Let's call him "Pippin D" and put a hat on his head, to go along with the suit and diamond cane. I understand he was not given enough scene time, but he didn't do a lot with the time he had.

AND THE NUMBER ONE REASON IS:

1.BEN AFFLECK! It amazes me how he manages to get lead roles in movies when his acting skills are duller than a plastic butter knife. It also amazes me how in an interview he shows intelligence and depth. I personally don't get it. When are these Hollywood directors gonna understand how bad this guy is? WHEN I TELL YA? WHEN?

Other then Jon Faverau and Colin Farrel who both did great jobs in their performance, everything was bad. It's too bad because they were the only ones actually trying to make the movie worthwhile. I give it a 2 outta 10.

I saw this movie a long time ago. It was told from Bret's Hart's perspective about his history in the WWF up until the screw job that was performed. It was an interesting documentary looking back on his past and some of his past matches. I will definitely say that Bret Hart was the best wrestler of the time. I don't think that there was anyone on the wrestling roster that could outstrategize Hart in a match. Plus he took every match seriously. That's definitely what made him the best wrestler.

I will never respect Vince Mcmahon for what he did to him. It was a public humiliation and no one, especially Bret, deserves to be screwed like that. Bret spitting on Vince had proved that there something was going on backstage. He lost a real diamond in the rough when he got rid of Hart. It was even worse when Goldberg kicked him over the side of the head and forced him to retire because of a stroke he suffered.

On the other hand: I can understand why Vince did what he did. I found some reasons as to why I think Vince screwed him.

1. Even though Bret's matches were still good, all he did was complain. In fact before a match he would complain during his promo's killing the hype of a good match. He was really never entertaining to listen to.

2. Vince wanted him to respect the tradition that a wrestler loses in his last match. Bret thought he was more special than the rest of the people so he didn't want to lose. No one would have had any less respect for Hart, even if he had lost in his home country. Besides it's not like he was losing in his own hometown.

3. It's possible that Vince also assumed Eric Bischoff and Bret could have been plotting to steal the WWF belt from Vince and use it to some obscene purpose, like what Alundra Blaze did with the WWF women's championship. Personally, I don't think Bret would have agreed to do something like that, but given his position, I don't think that McMahon could afford to take that chance.

If there is anyone I feel sorry for in all of this, it's Shawn Michaels, HHH, and Earl Hebner. They were the unlucky 3 that were caught in the middle of this issue that was strictly between Hart and McMahon.

Overall the movie itself is 8 out of 10. I still think the situation is ridiculous. If Hart would actually pull his head out of his ass and see his own mistakes, I'd probably have more respect for him. It seem's to me all he does now is just degrade everyone who talks about him in a negative manner. I thought Flair had some accurate points about him in his book. Not to which are completely unbiased, but Bret put up an article that degraded Flair's credibility. I know that he has suffered a lot of losses and that the passing's of Stu Hart, Owen, and the British Bulldog have made him all the more bitter about wrestling, but he has got to let the past go. If he cannot let go of his pride than I guess he proved Vince's words about him, right all along. Bret did screw Bret.

Troy is a film adaptation of the Ilaid the famous poem that Homer wrote about Achilles dying by Paris' hands and so forth. The movie itself was not bad, but I thought the plot in someways were stale. I wish that it could have focused more on Agamemon (played by Brain Cox) who was trying to take over Troy to rule all of Greece. Instead the plot itself, was staled for the simple reason that Paris took Helen from Agamemon's brother. I thought this killed the whole meaning of the war itself. I was glad however that the tension between Agamemon and his mischievous yet most elite soldier Achilles both on their own personal quests for power and glory, was present to counteract the sappy garbage that was going on.

On to the positive's:

• Brian Cox was perfect as the ruthless Agamemon. He really brings out what he is trying to accomplish and sticks to that goal. Another great bad guy performance by this well versatile actor.

• After his plunk in the Hulk, Eric Bana has really brought himself out of the gutter as Prince Hector. His presence and determination to keep his city safe was well presented by Bana. I think this movie really brought himself out of the deep end.

• I always get angry about this. Sean Bean was great as Odyssesus. I just wish the directors would do more with him in his good guy roles. He is another well rounded actor and it bothered me that he wasn't in it enough.

• Once again Brad Pitt only chooses a role that he knows that he is capable of pulling off, and as Achilles he does an excellent job. I have always respected Pitt because he knows his limits and doesn't try to make himself anymore than what he knows he can do.

NOW THE BAD STUFF:

• I have said it before, I will say it again. Orlando Bloom is not as talented as all the girls think. He was terrible in this film. He can't even pretend to be naive for about 10 minutes. The only thing he did that was credible was shoot a bow and arrow and he has already done that in L.O.T.R. I still believe that Bloom can evolve from his arrow shooting ways. I haven't given up on him yet, but if he doesn't improve within the next 5 years then he'll never be good in my eyes.

• Diane Kruger did absolutely nothing in this movie. As Helen she was more of a statue that you would put on a trophy than a helpless woman. I think she is a great actress but she presented nothing in this movie.

The rest of the acting was pretty poor too. Even Peter O'Toole did not really strike anything interesting to me. Looked to me like they just added extra's in to prevent doing anymore work.

Overall I give this movie a 6 out of 10. The battle scenes were excellent in this movie. I just wish we could have seen more of a conflict between Agamemon and Achilles. What could have happened was Achilles could have grown somewhat of a conscience and realize that there was more to glory then winning a war. I dunno it was just an idea.