Reviews

I enjoyed the movie. I am a fan of Bruce Lee and had read his books and of course, saw his movies. I also read numerous articles and other biographies from his wife and friends.

This movie is about Bruce when he was living in Hong Kong from his sibling's viewpoint. The biggest reason why I enjoyed this movie was that it filled in some information gaps that I had about Bruce Lee.

I knew that he was born in San Francisco because his father was a performer in the Chinese Opera and was performing here when his wife gave birth to Bruce. What I always wondered was why did the parents pick the name Bruce? It seems the mother said "push" when the American nurse asked what name they wanted for the baby. The father's English was not so good so he garbled "push" and it sounded like "Bruce" to the nurse. Unfortunately, another question has popped up that I hope the book will answer when I read it is why did the mother say "push." According to the movie, during the labor, the American nurse kept saying "push," and maybe the mother liked that word and stated this when the American nurse asked for the name. I'm wondering whether Bruce's mother even knew the meaning of the word "push" and whether the father even knew what the wife was saying? Again, I hope the book will answer these questions.

I knew his family was in entertainment area but I did not know how connected they were in the Hong Kong entertainment scene. It seems the Lee family knew most of the performers in Hong Kong.

I knew that the family lived under the same house but I did not know they had several servants and the servants' family living under the same house. This signifies that they were pretty well off.

Bruce was a natural leader and it showed when early on, he became the leader of his newly formed friends. He was also a born entertainer. He began acting at an early age when one his father's friend put Bruce in one of his movies.

Bruce did not like studying but loved hanging out with friends and getting into fights. The movie fills in on how and why he learned Wing Chun Kung Fu. The major basis of his subsequent fighting style.

He loved dancing. I knew he was a Cha Cha Cha champion in Hong Kong but I did not know he did not win that without a female partner. In fact, he won that with his younger brother Robert Lee, as his dancing partner. The movie told the story why his younger brother became his dancing partner, and that was due to a love triangle.

One of the biggest question that I had about Bruce was why did he have to leave for America so quickly? From various articles, I knew he was in trouble but there was no real elaboration. According to the movie, one of his close friends was a drug addict. Bruce went to save him but the friend was in a drug den. There was a confrontation with a drug boss. In the ensuing struggle, some of the boss' men were injured and some of the drug was lost.

As stated in the movie, the father told him that if he stayed in Hong Kong, he will either be killed by the drug gang or be put in jail by the authorities. Therefore, he had to leave immediately for the U.S.A. By the way, there was a minor mistake in the movie in that the $100 bill was the modern bill with the giant portrait of Benjamin Franklin.

This also filled in some gaps in that I always wondered why some people in Hong Kong thought that he was killed by the Triads or some Chinese gang. Thus the conspiracy theory.

I am sure like any movie based on a real person, the movie company took some liberty with the facts but I hope it was not much. Overall a good movie that emphasized his family, friends, and career while growing up in Hong Kong.

Someone gave me this movie and I never heard of it. It had some stars as well as solid veteran actors. One of the cast members was 50 Cent, the rapper. That immediately made me wary of this film because any movie with rappers will usually suck. Luckily, 50 Cent was only a peripheral character; in fact, he was OK .

The movie is quite gritty and realistic in its outcome. The premise though was unexpected but I kind of thought there would be some sort of illegal activity but nothing like this.

The movie starts out with a family in Talbot, Ohio. The father had an accident and is in a full body cast at the hospital. The son tells the father that they sold their home to pay for his medical expense. The father laments over this but the son states it is OK and that he will be working as an electrician. At a job, he hears a man state that this letter will make him wealthy but does not elaborate. The man overdoses on drugs and dies. While the ambulance is taking the body, the son steals the letter.

At home, the son reads the letter. It states to go to a certain location to pick up a letter. He does and it has money and cell phone. It states he has to go to New York City to await further instruction. He does but unknown to him, he is being followed by police. At New York, he gets a phone call to come to a particular point in a rural road somewhere in Pennsylvania. He does and he is picked up and driven to a house deep in the woods. The police lose him during this time. At the house, he is stripped searched for police detection device but there is none so he is allowed to dress and he is driven to a mansion in a middle of nowhere.

In front of the mansion are expensive cars. He meets the people who have been given him his instruction. They see him and recognize it is not the correct person. He tells them truthfully what happened and that he can leave if they are not satisfied but they tell him it is too late to find someone else and he has no choice but to participate. All this time, he does not know what is going on but you can tell he really wishes to leave now but he knows they will not let him leave alive. There are only men at this scene and they are placing bets.

He is told to wear a shirt with a number 13 on it and to stand on a platform. There are other participants, maybe a total of 14. The participants are in a circle. Each one faces the back of the head of one of the other participants. Each one is given a revolver and 1 bullet and told to put it in. They are told to raise the gun up in the air and to spin the cylinder. After several spins, they are told to stop and cock the gun and point it to the back of the head of the person in front of them. There is one ceiling light in the middle of this circle. They are to look at it and when the light comes on, they are to pull the trigger. When the light comes on, some of the gun fires and kills those people. Those that are alive have a momentary break. More bets are placed.

The next round, 2 bullets are put in the gun. They do the same thing and more people are killed. They have a break again. Next round, 3 bullets are used. More people are killed and now only five people are left. The next round is the duel. Each sponsor of the respective participants is told to pick a ball that has tin foil wrapped around it. After each sponsor has the ball, they are told to unwrap it. It is revealed that there are two balls that are black. Those two will go to the duel. The other three are free to go with prize money.

At the duel, 4 bullets are used. They face each other and spin the cylinder of the gun and they point it at each other's head. When the light comes on they shoot and the son wins. He takes 1.8 million dollars. Afterward, his sponsor offers him a ride to wherever he wants. He does not trust them so he states OK but he wants to go get his stuff first. Using that as a pretext, he makes his escape.

While waiting for a train, he is spotted by the police. He hides the money in a trash can. He is taken to the police station and questioned but he tells them only half truths. The police let him go because they have no evidence against him. He goes back and after some searching, finds the money bag. He takes the money and puts it in a United States Postal package with certified receipt, to be mailed to his home. He then calls his mother and tells him to expect a package with some money. She asks him what is wrong but tells her nothing and hangs up. He buys a toy and puts it in the money bag and boards the train. On the train is the sponsor of a participant who lost in the duel. The son rides in an empty car of the train. This sponsor shoots the son and takes the money bag and leaves the train. The son takes the certified receipt and eats it all before he dies. The End.

My three friends and I watched this movie and we all enjoyed it, however, we disagreed whether the ending hurt the overall quality of this movie. I felt that Kitty's last minute decision to go with Hugh rather than Brett was not realistic. If this movie was made presently, Kitty would have chosen Brett instead of Hugh. That is why I give it 7 out of 10 stars even though as I write this, maybe this movie should deserve a 6 instead. One other friend agreed with me while the other two felt that the ending was "just right."

I thought that the movie could have been 2 hours long instead of 101 minute in order to elaborate on some characters like show Kitty when she was young perhaps. But that is what makes this movie so good in that you want it to be longer in order to see more of your favorite characters.

Themovie begins in 1783 where Kitty lives in a terrible section of London. She is an indentured servant of Old Meg who makes her steal things for a living. One day, she tries to steal the shoes off of a man named Thomas but gets caught. Thomas is a noted painter and decides to "clean her up" and paint her portrait. While painting her, two men drop by, Brett and Hugh. They both see Kitty and is enamored with her but Brett is on his way to India so Hugh tries his luck. After her portrait is finished, Thomas let her go, whereupon Hugh gives her a ride in his coach. During the ride, he discovers who she really is and feels sorry for her so he makes her his servant. However, it is soon shown that he and his aunt, Lady Susan Dowitt, whom he lives with, are both in debt.

During a gallery showing of Thomas painting, Kitty's portrait called the "Anonymous Lady" is getting rave reviews and powerful and rich men want to know who this woman is. It is at this time that Hugh gets the idea to make a "lady" out of Kitty and have her marry a rich aristocrat, especially Duke of Malmunster, in order to alleviate his finances. Hugh and Susan begin to train Kitty but it is very difficult. One day, Hugh's neighbor Selby sees Kitty and is taken aback by her. Kitty is introduced as a relative to Hugh. Selby is a rich merchant but is of the wrong class so Hugh does not want to marry Kitty to him. That changes when Hugh is sent to debtor's prison. Kitty marries Selby in order to use the dowry money to free Hugh. Soon though, Hugh goes into debt again and Susan ask Kitty for money. Kitty ask Selby for money. He ask what it is for and she states it is to buy things but only gives 5 pounds from his lock wooden box. When Selby is gone, she breaks into the box and gets more money but Selby's housekeeper sees that and reports it to Selby. Selby confronts Kitty but she denies it. He begins to threaten her and she loses her composure and reverts back to her Cockney accent. Selby sees he has been lied to and begins to beat Kitty in order to get the truth out of her when another made helps Kitty by striking Selby with an object and killing him. The maid then commits suicide. Kitty is now a wealthy widow.

Kitty is in love with Hugh and makes this known to Susan. Susan is sympathetic. Hugh tells them Kitty is going to marry Duke of Malmunster. Susan is against it but Kitty agrees because she loves Hugh even though Kitty and Susan never tells him. Unknown to all but Susan and Kitty, Kitty is pregnant with Selby's child. After Kitty is married to very old Duke of Malmunster, she announces she is pregnant. Duke of Malmunster believes he is the father. A male heir is born and right after, Duke of Malmunster dies. She is now not only a duchess but also very wealthy. Hugh ask for a castle and Kitty gives it to him. After a series of conversation, Kitty professes her love for him and the reason why she did all this was because she loved him. However, Hugh cannot believe Kitty is serious because he never thought of her as nothing but a "guttersnipe." They argue and smack each other in the face and do not see each other for awhile. Hugh's friend Brett comes back from India and sees Kitty in an event and courts her. Soon they are to be married. Kitty and Brett goes to Thomas to see another painting of Kitty but Hugh is there and make condescending remarks to Kitty so she leaves. Thomas tells Hugh to leave Kitty alone because while Hugh may see Kitty as a guttersnipe, however, Kitty is truly now a lady. Hugh now sees he was wrong and goes to Kitty to stop the wedding and profess his love to Kitty but she states it is too late. Hugh threatens her but Kitty does not care. On the eve of the wedding, Hugh brings Old Meg and confronts this fact to both Kitty and Brett. Kitty admits to everything and tells Brett it is OK if he does not want to marry her but Brett does not care and wants to marry her. Hugh admits defeat and sees Kitty is the better person and tells her he will stay out her life. As Hugh is leaving, it dawns on Kitty that she still loves Hugh so she goes after him and they kiss. The End.

Where do I start. First of all, I want to say that I left the theater after 30 minutes because I could no longer stay and watch the rest of the movie. The movie, in my opinion, was that bad.

What was wrong with it?

(1) Bond movies usually have a great central villain. If you look at Bond movies from the 1960's through the 1980's, and for the most part the 1990's, Bond movies had interesting villains. The villain in this movie evokes little or no emotion in that you do not care if he wins or not because he is not diabolical enough. Bond villains are usually over the top and megalomaniac. The villain in this movie is just a generic bad guy in my opinion. Totally uninteresting.

(2) This movie had no real substance in that there was a great deal of action but no real dialog. In a Bond movie, there is usually a great conversation between the characters. For example, those smart quips between Q and Bond or Moneypenny and Bond or the head of the MI6 and Bond. Most of the conversation in this movie very terse and uninteresting.

(3) The gadgets is what makes Bond movies so interesting and something that people cannot wait to see. Do you all remember when Q would demonstrate some cool gadget to Bond and you just had to exclaim "wow" because it was so interesting? There was none like that here. That is not to say that there was no interesting gadgets but that the gadgets that were presented only got a lukewarm response. For instance, Bond had this IPhone like cell phone that does more than your average IPhone but it does not evoke any exciting response because you know it will be within reach in a couple of years.

(4) The action while "nice" was scattered and not focused. The type of cinematography presently is to shake the camera, more or less, with the action. I personally never liked that style of movie making and find that disorienting. That's not to say that it was like that throughout the film but I noticed it during action sequences.

(5) The new Bond is still not my cup of tea. Yes, he is probably more close to what Ian Fleming envisioned for Bond; meaning, gritty and no nonsense British agent but I grew up with Roger Moore, and in my opinion, Pierce Brosnan, and of course Sean Connery, are the "classic" Bond.

I will describe what I saw in that 30 minutes and you make up your mind.

The movie starts with some chase scene through what looks like the Italian Alps. In the back of Bond car is some guy and he is delivered to MI6. The guy claims he is from some secretive agency and that they have members all over the world. At that point, one of the British agent in the room kills the guy and kills some of the people in the room and takes off, and Bond chases him until he is killed. He later searches for some clue of this organization in Haiti where he kills some man and assumes his identity. He saves a girl who is supposed to be killed by the very man whose identity he has stolen. The person who wanted her dead is suppose to be the central villain in this movie where he wants to destabilize some Latin American country so that they can take over a patch of land where there might be oil. That's it.

Wow! I thought Blair Witch Project sucked but this movie brings suckiness to a whole new level. First, I am not a fan of the 'Blair Witch' movie where you see the movie from the point of view of the person who is holding the camcorder. As you might expect, the movie shakes A lot. Now I heard from people and on the news that some people vomited and even fainted in the movie theaters because the erratic movie shots made them dizzy. I was not one of them. However, 'Blair Witch' type movies do annoy me. This movie feels like an indie movie but it's not because millions of dollars have been poured into this piece of dirt.

The story is about a group of twenty somethings in New York City and one of them is going to Japan because he got a promotion. They throw a going away party where one of their friends shoots the event on his camcorder. During this party, there is an explosion many blocks away. They all go out and the head of Statue of Liberty falls onto their street. Then they see some sort of giant alien but don't know what it is since the movie only shows couple of seconds of it. Then there is more explosion. The power goes off. They see the military fighting it. The people try to escape on the Brooklyn Bridge but it collapse and some of the friends don't make it. Then they try to go and rescue a girl/friend who is in the alien attack area. They find her alive and try to escape on a military helicopter but the aliens attack it and they fall back on to the ground. They survive but the one who is carrying camcorder gets attacked. I think he is killed. I'm not sure because I was about throw my popcorn at this crappy movie along with what was left of my soda drink. The friends take the camcorder and take off to who knows where. The End.

The only good thing about this movie was that the aliens looked cool.

I remember how I was really entertained when I saw 28 Days Later. I mean, zombies that run like an Olympic sprinter was simply genius! I have to admit though that the last half of that movie was not that good but the running zombies made the defect seemed minor.

When I found out that there was going to be a sequel, I was waiting in anticipation of it. Unfortunately, I should have just waited for it to come out on DVD because the movie sucked. This time, the novelty of running zombies could no longer hide the poor story line.

In 28 Weeks Later, the movie begins with British Isle still in the beginning stage of running zombies. In a countryside, you have a group of people that is barricaded in a house. They are being quiet so that they don't attract the attention of the zombies. One day, they hear a knocking on the door and it is a boy who is asking for help. They are hesitant at first but decide to open the door. They do but this attracts the zombies and they crash in and do what zombies do. In that group is a husband and wife. They are trying to escape but gets split up. The zombies will soon reach the wife and the kid. The husband wants to rescue them but fear grips him and decides to escape alone. The wife cries out for help but he keeps running and he escapes.

Fast forward and over a month later, all the zombies die from starvation. The NATO led by the US, lead to assess the situation and then decides to repopulate the British Isle 28 weeks later.

They bring in all those British expatriates back to England. In London, they have a "green zone" where it is safe and there are plenty of US soldiers guarding it. Many of the soldiers are trying to bag up the dead bodies in order to burn it but there are too many and bodies are piling up on the side of the streets.

Of the 15 thousand British expatriates are two teenagers, a boy and a girl. They are the children of the husband who ran away. They meet with the father and are happy but sad since their mother died. The father lies to the children how their mother died because he is too ashamed.

The children later go to their old house and finds their mother in the house alive. The US soldier picks them up and examines the wife. She is found to be clean and not a zombie. The reason for this is that she has a genetic mutation that stops her from becoming a zombie. Her children also has the genetic mutation. The scientist discover that she is a carrier of the zombie virus even though she is immune to the virus.

Before the scientist can decide what to do with her, the husband sees the wife and kisses her. She bites him on the tongue and instantly he becomes a zombie and kills her. Then he goes and starts making zombies and they in turn make zombies. Soon they are overrun with zombies. Some survivors try to escape and blow up the whole area. But some of the zombies escaped and went onto the continent of Europe, specifically France. So I guess this means there is going to be another one. I guess the next one is going to be 28 Months Later.

My first problem with this movie is the repatriation after 28 weeks later. That does not make sense. Why would the authorities approve repatriation without knowing if the virus had truly been wiped out? I understand the story writers had to think of something but they had several years to think of a good plot. Is this the best they could do?! Also, I don't know about any of you but if my country just have been wiped out because of zombies, I would want to know what the hell happened and is there a cure for it before I go back. In the movies, you see all these expatriates just excited about going back home like it is some Woodstock fest.

My second problem with the movie is that you have sole survivor of a zombie attack. I mean no one had survived except her and also she is found to be a carrier of the virus. Hello! You put guards around that woman like the kind that guards Fort Knox. But in the movie, there is one or two guards at most. That does not make sense.

I mean, the movie tries to make the military in the movie like they are some bumbling idiot. Give me a break. If this is going to be comedic zombie movie then fine, but if it is going to be a serious horror movie, then use realistic story line. I could go on and tell you others but this is enough. You get the picture.

Before seeing this movie, I saw Anthony Hopkins on Entertainment Tonight where he mentions that he played the evil character in this movie in the mold of Hannibal Lechter of Silence of the Lambs. After seeing the movie I could see the comparison. Both Hannibal and the character he portrays in this movie are diabolical, very smart, and have a certain amount of hubris to their respective characters.

I found this movie to be well written in terms of the story as well as the dialog. The plot itself is nothing new. You have a husband who finds out that his wife is cheating on him. The quirk in the story here is that the other man is a high ranking police officer. Also, the husband develops a elaborate and brilliant plan to kill his wife and ruin, instead of killing, the other man.

In this mix is a deputy district attorney who has an excellent conviction rate and who cannot wait to enter private practice with a high paying law firm. The killer uses the deputy D.A.'s cockiness to his advantage.

The ending itself was quite unexpected. I mean, I expected the usual plot of the killer being caught in some form or another and going off to prison. Here, the audience is left to their own imagination of how the movie ends. I liked that aspect. It leaves a certain cliff hanger but you know that the killer will probably be found guilty given the direction of the movie towards the end.

That being said, the movie did have weak points. After the killer gets off the attempted murder charge, the other man kills himself on the steps of the courthouse. I don't know but usually if a killer is freed, someone close to the victim would be so outraged that they would try to kill the killer rather than themselves.

Also, I did not particularly care for the actor who portrayed the deputy district attorney. I have seen him in various supporting roles and he has a face and acting ability that is fine as a supporting character but not as a main character. He did not have the acting range to adequately portray the deputy D.A. very well. But in fairness, his adversary was Anthony Hopkins and Hopkins is such a great actor that his acting ability dwarfs other actors and actresses around him unless their acting ability is equal or above him.

But overall, the movie was very entertaining. A good crime thriller movie. I highly recommend it.

I am a fan of Spiderman comic book. I have been collecting them since I was a young child. I know the origins of Peter Parker, how he became Spiderman, the origins of Sandman and his interaction with Spidey, and etc.

That being said, I know you have to change the story when you adapt a book/comic book for movie purpose. I get that but I don't think they did it well. On top of that, the movie had just too many things going on. Due to this, the movie could not sufficiently delve deeper into a particular story line, even though the movie was over 2 hours. The movie just glossed over major characters or conflicts leaving the viewer, or at least me, less than satisfied.

First of all, I cannot stand seeing Kirsten Dunst as Mary Jane Watson. This just annoys greatly. If you are a Spiderman comic book collector like myself, you know that Mary Jane Watson was gorgeous. She was a supermodel and therefore, very beautiful. Dunst is cute but she is no supermodel. I don't know who picked her for this role, but as I said before in Spiderman 1 and 2, she should have been replaced. Hopefully she will be gone for Spiderman 4.

Tobey Macguire is OK. He would not have been my first choice for Peter Parker role but he grew on me.

In this movie, these are the things that were covered (the movie did not cover these things in this order): Petey's (Peter Parker) problems include finding out Sandman is the real killer of his uncle, he wants to propose to MJ (MaryJane Watson) but ultimately does not due to other reasons discussed below, Harry Osborne (his best friend) wants to kill him, MJ's career is in ruins and is now a waitress, Steve Brock is trying take Petey's job at the Daily Bugle so Petey's career is going nowhere, Petey has a new costume that is a living symbiotic-life form from out of space which makes him stronger and gives him self-confidence but is also trying to overtake his body, the origin of Sandman is shown and he is battling Spidey, and on and on.

Let's start off with Harry Osborne. In the comic book, he becomes the Hobgoblin. Here, he has no name and his costume should be a variant of the Green Goblin but it is not. Fine, I could overlook this.

Next, you have Sandman, a major villain and character within Spiderman stories. He becomes just ONE of the villains in this story. I mean you have 3 MAJOR villains in this story! I could understand 2 but 3! If they had done it well it would be OK but they did not.

Next is the symbiotic life form. This life form's name escapes me now but he bonds with this life form when he was on another planet. Here, the life form comes to Earth as a meteorite in a fashion very much like the Blob. The story of this life form and its interaction with Petey should have been sufficient to constitute as being the sole villain in this movie but they brought in 2 more! I know I am belaboring the point but they just gloss over these great villains and it really annoys me.

This movie had great special effects. That I will not deny but all of you know that that alone will not make a good movie. You have to have a good and smart script as well as good performance from your actors and actresses. Here, the story/script which is a major component of this movie was weak. There was too many superficial topics and characters covered but not in depth.

I understand why Sony wanted to create a movie to override your senses because if I was a studio executive and I had OK'ed nearly 400 million dollars budget for this movie, I would want to make sure that I put in as many action scenes as possible to override the audience senses but at a certain point, enough is enough. You have to start developing the characters so that the audience can feel for these characters.

I went to the movies with my friend and her 10 year old child. My friend and I did not like it while the child did. My friend does not know anything about Spiderman except what she saw in the movies.

In my assessment of the Spiderman trilogy so far, I would have to say that Spiderman 1 was the best for me. Spiderman 1 was better than Spiderman 2 and 3 because Tom Osborne, the Green Goblin's character was really developed enough that you could really understand the villain; meaning, how he thinks and why he does such evil things. By the way, Willem Dafoe played this character really great.

In the end, I recommend waiting for it to be released on DVD. If you cannot wait, then at least see it at matinée price.

I wish I could give this movie a negative number but I can't so I am given it a 1.

Where do I begin...

The movie begins with a young couple in an apartment. They get a knock on the door and there is a small box with no note. They open it and it is a wooden dummy--the kind you use in a ventriloquist act. I don't know about you but if I get an anonymous box with a creepy looking wooden dummy on my doorstep, that s**t is going into the fireplace or my BBQ pit or into the wood chipper. Of course, like some dumb idiots, they take it in and then they start talking about some curse from their hometown about some woman and her wooden dolls. Now, that should give an indication to throw that crap out but nooooooo. They keep it.

Husband goes out for some grocery and in the meantime, the dummy comes to life---surpriseeee! The dummy kills the wife. Husband comes home and finds the wife dead with her tongue ripped out and her jaw lowered down like a dummy.

The detective, played by Wahlberg, thinks the husband did it and tries to get him to confess but the husband says he did not do it. The husband is let go for insufficient evidence. Man, Wahlberg's acting sucks! Get the younger Wahlberg. He's at least decent.

Any normal person would have destroyed the doll but this guy decides to play hero so he goes back to the apartment and look in the box that the dummy came in and it has his hometown name on it.

The husband arrives back home and sees his estranged father. They talk briefly and he takes off. At the funeral home, the embalmer takes the dead wife's body for embalming. He opens the body bag and when he sees the corpse he freaks out because he's seen this before.

At the funeral, the embalmer's wife says it is about Mary Shaw, the puppeteer who is buried on the same cemetery as the dead wife. Later, the embalmer tells the husband that long time ago, a puppeteer was performing and a young child was heckling Mary Shaw. Some weeks later, the child disappeared but was never found. The family and some friends of the missing child believed it was Mary Shaw who did it and killed her and then ripping her tongue out.

Well from then on all those who killed her is killed by ripping out their tongue. In fact, all the generations of those who participated in the killing are killed.

Fast forward, Wahlberg shows up and he and husband go to Mary Shaw's place where there are whole bunch of wooden dolls. The dolls go after them and Wahlberg is killed and husband burns the dolls. Husband comes home but finds out that his father is a puppet and that Mary Shaw's spirit is pulling the string. In the end, husband gets his tongue ripped out.

Jesus Christ this movie sucks! The people who gave the approval to make this movie should have their tongues ripped out.

Let me first start out that the premise of the story is interesting but the script and the execution of it was off and in some scenes, waaaay off. This is about a woman, played by Sandra Bullock, who gets a strange phone call and then she gets a knock on the door and a policeman informs her that her husband was killed in an auto accident.

That night, she sleeps and wakes up to find that her husband is alive and nothing bad has happened. She keeps going forward and then backward in time. This is all causing her to question her sanity. On top of that, she suspects that her husband is cheating which is causing her conflicted emotions.

Now this seems interesting and it was to a degree but the execution and certain scenes just made this movie suck big time. For instance, there was a scene where she could not believe that her husband's body was in the coffin that was inside a hearse. As the pallbearers were taking the coffin out, she grabs at the coffin to see who is in the coffin. Well, this causes the coffin to be dropped and the top half of the coffin to be ripped out of the coffin where a head pops out and rolls around the ground. I can tell you that I busted out laughing so hard that tears were streaming down my face. I mean what kind of coffin is it that the top half just falls apart and then like a scene from Jackass, the head starts rolling around on the ground? I mention Jackass because there was a scene where Johnny Knoxville was driving a hearse up a hill and the coffin slid out and a body burst out causing people to gasp in horror. The creators of the movie must of thought of that when they made this scene.

Another laughable scene was where the daughter runs around the house and manages to burst through the glass door to the patio and her face is all cut from the broken glass. Can such a thing happen? Possibly but this kid was not going full tilt straight to the glass door but rather was lazily running to the glass door. Now, I don't know about you guys but I have a glass door myself that leads to back of the house and I have had kids hit the glass door and nothing like that has happened.

There were some CGI's in this movie that seem poorly done such as the bird and the bees scene.

Overall, a dumb movie.