The_MOW

Under discussion:

The Great Train Robbery  (1979)

Based on the movie's director Michael Criton's book about the real life events surrounding the world's first train robbery on May 15, 1855, where thousands of dollars worth of gold was stolen.

"Edward Pierce" (Sean Connery), along with his sidekick, "Robert Agar" (Donald Sutherland) and "Pierce's" lover (Lesley-Ann Down), plan to heist a moving train of gold meant to finance a war. First, the three must gain four keys, which have been separated for safety.

Now, the three have to get the keys, and get on board the moving train to get their prize.

The first thing you'll notice is the costumes worn by everybody on screen. They appear to be quite accurate, and some outfits appear to be thick and heavy. The outfits also appeared to me to be brand new on everybody. Not one outfit had that worn look.

The performances from the main cast is pretty good, as is the chemistry between the cast members. Connery is near perfect as the lead scoundrel who charms every one who comes across him, not knowing his true intentions. Sutherland is fairly laid back in his role, and can come across as boring at times.

The pace of the movie is real slow and deliberate. For many, it might be a bit too slow. I found it to be a nice, steady pace. It only picked up a little bit when the heist goes down.

If you are looking for a lot of action, there really isn't much in this film. The action kicks in a bit as the heist goes down, and you are rooting for the villains in this film.

Overall, this is not a bad movie. However, I wouldn't go out and rent it. Check it out if you come across it on television, or on Hulu.com.

Under discussion:

Trekkies 2  (2004)

I admit it. I am a professional wrestling fan (who hates the "Wrestling is fake" debate) and, believe it or not, I am a Trekkie. I am what the mainstream considers a nerd who, unfortunately, lives with his parents (only because I am physically disabled and uses a wheelchair.)

Trekkies 2 is a continuation of the 1996 documentary, Trekkies. It is hosted by Denise Crosby, who portrayed "Lt. Natasha 'Tasha' Yar" on Star Trek: The Next Generation, and the granddaughter of Hollywood legend, Bing Crosby.

This film has a somewhat bigger budget. As the movie goes overseas to visit with European fans of one of the most beloved franchises in entertainment. In the original, they stayed in the United States.

It visits with some hardcore fans overseas and in the USA who live the life of a person obsessed with the franchise which began in 1966. One of those redesigned his apartment to somewhat look like it could be in the TNG (The Next Generation) era to the point where he built a "Transporter console", which he credits from preventing him going down a dark path when he wife divorced him.

You also get some interviews of people the crew came across at European and US fan conventions where people meet other fans, trade, sell and purchase merchandise, and embrace with world created by the late Gene Roddenberry.

You get to see how Star Trek is celebrated around the world. Although they are in the same fandom, each country featured in this film celebrates the franchise differently.

The producers were very respectful to fans who do not speak English. Instead of having Crosby do a voiceover explaining what the fan was saying, we get the text in subtitles in the now-famous Star Trek font.

In the film, they talk about the hard core fans who live and breathe Star Trek to the point that they seem to believe that they are in the Star Trek Universe. One of which is Barbara Adams, one of the fans featured in the original movie.

Adams made a name for herself when she wore her Starfleet uniform to court as an alternate juror in the Whitewater trial, which had former US President Bill Clinton and current US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton as defendants. In the first movie, she claimed that her costume was a legitimate uniform and she had the right to wear it anywhere she wanted. The judge dismissed her because her wearing the costume became a distraction to the point that she was interviewed outside the court about it. She was under strict orders not to talk to media during the trial.

In this movie, she is part of a group discussing the hard core fans who seem to be out of touch with reality. One person brought her up, without knowing who she was at first, and said that she shouldn't have worn the costume to court out of respect and seriousness of the trial. She eventually asked another person in the discussion what's the difference between her uniform and the uniform of a soldier in the military. I would have loved to had the opportunity to respond to that question.

I was not too impressed with Crosby's performance as host. When she was talking with fans, she was quite comfortable as much as the fans were. But, when she read from the script it was painfully obvious.

I liked her interaction with the fans interviewed in this film. The fans probably did some hero worship when she came into the room when the cameras were off, but were very comfortable when the cameras were on them. You could see the passion they have for the franchise, and how comfortable they are with discussing it.

The fans who were interviewed were fantastic in this film. The majority proved that Star Trek fans are not nerds who live in their parent's basement at 34 years old. They discussed why they are fans, what Star Trek means to them and had some fun with showing their collections and costumes. Those who were featured in the film were quite interesting in fact.

One interesting segment is when the movie visits with people featured in the first film, and discussing their reaction to not only the first film, but how it was recieved. One, who now creates CGI effects for a living, discusses how the first movie created a sort of catchphrase for him, which he jokes about. He also talks about how a movie reviewer said in his review of the first movie how he (the fan) will never have sex. The punchline is that the woman who is now his wife is sitting next to him as his discusses what the reviewer mentioned. He even joked about how some people questioned his sexuality.

The music is completely original, and provided by a group of fans featured in the film. The majority of the tunes are only memorable due to the Trek-themed lyrics, which are filled with references from various shows in the franchise. If you are a fan of the franchise, you might just find yourself singing the tunes. However, if you aren't a fan, you will just think how nerdy these people are and just laugh at them.

This is not a high budget movie, so don't expect spectacular special effects. The most spectacular special effects are shown in clips from various fan-produced films, which can be viewed online. I have links on my computer to dozens of these fan-produced shows, and many have special effects which are surprisingly impressive. In one of these clips, it is obvious that the sets are actually green screen efects edited in in post-production, and it's obvious that they are computer generated.

If you think that people who go to fan conventions dressed up as a blue alien with white hair and blue antenna are virgins who live in their parents' basement, then you must see this movie to have your eyes opened up. This film, as well as the first one in this series, will prove to you that Star Trek fans are from all walks of life. They are parents, executives at major corporations, dentists, college students and even politicians.

Trekkies, some of which call themself Trekkers, are just like you. The only difference is that they are part of a unique fandom that has been around for almost 45 years. A fandom which believes in a peaceful future where there is, as said in the Star Trek Universe, universal diversity in infinate combinations. The world of a Trekkie is one where people of all races, creeds and sexual orientation are accepted, and hope that one day the mainstream will be the same.

Put this movie, and the original, quite high on your To See list if you are not a fan of the franchise. If you are a fan, then place this one in your Must See list.

Under discussion:

Of Mice and Men  (1992)

Two men, one mentally disabled (John Malkovich), the other (Gary Sinise, who also directed the movie) who swears to take care of the simple, but physically powerful man.

The two begin working on a farm, where "Lenny" (Malkovich) struggles to behave, as well as to try to remember that he has to be gentle as to not hurt anybody or anything since he is more physically gifted than mentally. All the while, "George" (Sinise) tries to put himself between "Lenny" and those around him to protect his traveling companion.

Based on the John Steinbeck book, of which I did not read, this is actually a pretty good movie with some pretty strong performances.

In fact, the performances are the only reason to watch this movie. The entire cast is near perfect. Malkovich and Sinise has pretty good chemistry as the two lead characters. Personally, I liked Sinise better than Malkovich, neither of which are my favorite actors.

There are also some strong performances from various members of the supporting cast. However, it appears that many of them were not given a lot to work with.

If you have not read the book, you may not think that the supporting cast was given much. I didn't think so either since I've never read the book. Personally, I would have liked to have seen a few of the supporting characters more.

There is some good chemistry with this cast, some better than others. You can really see where the chemistry was best by the scenes with the strongest performances.

The soundtrack is completely lacking in this film. In fact, I think I remember only one piece of music near the end of this film. And it sounded like they turned the volume down on that little piece of music that is completely forgettable.

The wardrobes, and other period pieces seen in this film, looks very authentic. It didn't appear that they tried to make it look like period clothing, it looked pretty authentic. They even went as far as making the clothing look like they were worn for some time, with little washing.

There is no spectacular camera work in this film. There are a couple of foot chases in here with some quick editing. The lighting is used well, and the angles are done nicely. There's just nothing memorable in any of the shots.

If you are looking for action, there isn't any worth looking for. This is pure drama, with no explosions or gun play.

Maybe because I never read the book, I kept looking away from my computer screen (I watched it on Hulu) because I was getting bored. If you haven't read the book, the only reason to see this is for the performances.

There is no reason to see this movie except for the peformances. In fact, I didn't even know it existed until it came up on my Hulu recommendations list. I am more familiar with the Lon Chaney, Jr./Bergess Merrideth version. This movie is only worth seeing once.

I do suggest that you read the book so you know what is going on. In fact, you may like it better if you familiarize yourself with the source material first.

Under discussion:

The Secret of NIMH  (1982)

A widowed field mouse (voiced by the late Elizabeth Hartman) has a sick child (voiced by Ian Fried) and two other children. They live in the garden of a farm where other animals live and feed.

They all need to move when it comes time for the farmer (voiced by Tom Hatten) begins to plow the field to prepare it for gardening. However, due to the sick child, "Mrs. Brisby" (Hartman) is reluctant to move.

She, with the help of of bumbling crow (voiced by the late Dom DeLuise), she seeks out the advice of a mysterious, but wise old owl (voiced by the late John Carradine). The "Great Owl" tells her to seek the assistance of the rats.

When she finds the rats, she is amazed at what she sees. They have the ability to use electricity, stolen from the farm, which a kind rat named "Justin" (voiced by Peter Strauss) frowns upon since stealing is wrong.

She learns of the rats story, where they lived at a place called N.I.M.H., or "NIMH" (which is short for the National Institute of Mental Health, a real-life medical organization in the United States), and gained an encreased mental ability thanks to experiments performed on them. She also learned that her late husband had his hand in the rats, and other animals, escape from NIMH.

The animation is real good in this movie, and holds up almost 30 years later. Though the majority of coloring is darker colors, the scenery and characters are animated fantasticly. Lighter hues are scarce in this film. The darker hues are best used with the "Great Owl", whose shot mostly in shadows so that his orange-yellow-tinted eyes stand out.

The characters are inhanced by the performers. Hartman made "Mrs. Brisby" kindhearted while in desperate need of saving her children. DeLuise made the crow a bumbling idiot, and was simply fantastic as the comedy relief.

Even though the parts were probably recorded separately, the on-screen chemistry is really good in this movie. Sometimes, you forgot you were watching an animated movie depending on who was on screen with whom.

The only major downfall of this movie is that the subplots of this film completely miss the mark. It is told in the movie that NIMH is interested in the rat population of the farm, but they are never seen on-screen as villains trying to recapture the rats. And the lead rat villain's (voiced by the late Paul Shenar) story of trying to take over the colony is completely relegated to a such a minor subplot, it's not even worth it. Personally, I would have tried to see the villain trying to create a stir by talking to others in the rat colony to envoke an uprising at just the right moment.

Character development is fairly weak in this film. Although there is some pretty good development in the main characters, the supporting characters are a miss. I didn't understand what many of the minor characters had to do with the plot, as they were really under developed. I really couldn't tell who was needed for more than just plot advancement, and who was not needed.

The music is pretty boring. I didn't even think it helped enhanse the action of the scenes. I remember at the end, just as the credits begin, there is one song with lyrics. This song would never be a Top 10 smash, or a Hollywood classic. In fact, it's pretty forgettable.

There is some mild violence, and one bad word in the entire movie. I might keep the Sesame Street crowd away from this movie because of these, and that the movie is not anything like a Disney movie.

I can just barely recommend this movie. It's almost a couple of notches above being skipable. Personally, I would check it on Hulu if there is nothing else to do.

Under discussion:

Sunset Pass  (1946)

A young outlaw (Robert Clarke) is accused of a murder he did not commit.

Now, an express company detective (James Warren), who is sent to the area to solve a bank robbery, is determined to find out the truth as payback when the outlaw saves his life.

Let me say right at the top that this movie is way too short. Lasting only 64 minutes, they had to rush the story.

Due to the movie's length, there was no chance for the story to develop as it should have. There was also many problems with the plot and various subplots.

The main plot does not show until the last part of the movie. We do see some development on the romantic level, as well as relationships between the main characters.

There were some impressive performances in this film. Warren was fantastic in one of the main leads. I also enjoyed Nan Leslie in the leading actress role.

As for the supporting cast, there were some good performances, and some bad. Only a small group of the supporting cast appeared to have just stood there as they said their lines, and were unbelievable.

Character development is completely horrible in this movie. The characters' individual stories were completely rushed, and I found it confusing trying to remember who was who, and how they were related to each other.

I was also not impressed with the soundtrack in this movie. You have two on-screen performances of a couple of short, boring songs. You also have some music during some horse chase scenes. Every piece of music is completely forgettable. In fact, even the two performances is as well. The songs which are performed on screen are slow, and the singer is completely boring.

As for action, there is only one real good gun fight at the climax of the movie. It too felt rushed though. You get some other gun battles, but they are tame in comparison to the one near the end of the movie.

The gun battles are not violent, due to the movie being produced in 1946. You don't get any blood at all to show gunshot wounds. All you get are the actors grabbing where they were hit after falling to the ground. In comparison to today's movies, the violence is extremely tame in this movie.

If you like Westerns, or Zane Grey, who wrote the novel this movie is based on, then I suggest you check this out. However, thanks to the length of this film, it's not the best. For the rest of you, this one is one you can skip.

I can only suggest this to the audience not into Westers only for the pretty strong performaces from the main cast.

Under discussion:

Lone Wolf McQuade  (1983)

Texas Ranger "John 'JJ" McQuade" (Chuck Norris) is a loner who bucks authority. However, he will work with some people when he knows it's needed.

During some down time from work, "McQuade" meets a beautiful widow (Barbara Carrera), who is with the mysterious martial arts expert "Rawley Wilkes" (the late David Carradine), who tries to get "McQuade", who has a reputation for using martial arts while trying to apprehend criminals he goes after. However, "McQuade" turns down the challenge.

Now, "McQuade", along with his new partner "Deputy Kayo" (Robert Beltran", slowly learns of "Wilkes" shady background and go after him. But, federal agents try to stop them. However, "McQuade" makes it personal when his daughter (Dana Kimmell) is injured when she and a boyfriend witness a murder.

Let me say first that this is not the best action movie, but it really is a pretty good movie. This is not a shoot'em up, fisticuffs film where there is only brief moments for the audience to catch their breath. It is, however an actioner where the action is needed.

I really liked Norris in this role. He played "McQuade" as a gentle man who perfered to be alone, but really loved those close to him. "McQuade" is one of those who only had to give you a look to tell you to back off, and Norris did a good job conveying it as well.

Many key supporting characters were barely developed, or not well developed. "Wilkes" and his boss (Daniel R. Frishman), a wheelchair-bound dwarf who has apparently crossed paths with "McQuade" many times in the past to the point that the Ranger knows when he tried to bluff him with an empty gold-plated pistol. The movie doesn't really tell us much about the two villains. In fact, I had to read online what "Wilkes" is as a criminal. Most of these supporting characters were just there to move the story along, and to give "McQuade" motivation.

As for action, as I said before, it's spaced out nicely through the movie. Maybe it's because this movie is almost 30 years old, the violence is pretty toned down. Of course, because of the two leads, there is martial arts fights sprinkled around more than gun fights and explosions. I would have liked to seen just a little more action than there was. However, the action scenes are handled well.

I wasn't impressed with the soundtrack in the movie, but the pieces of music is handled well and helps the scenes. I couldn't tell you any music from the movie if I heard it again, as the music is pretty forgetable.

Despite the flaws, I enjoyed this movie. I wouldn't put it in your Must See List, but I'd check it out if you catch it on television.

Under discussion:

The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian  (2008)

Four siblings (William Moseley, Anna Popplewell, Skandar Keynes and Georgie Henley) are whisked back in time to the magical land of "Narnia" when the four are waiting for a train.

They find the land, in which they were declared royalty hundreds of "Narnia's" years before, in ruins.

They eventually learn that the prince (Ben Barnes) of the neighboring "Telmar" summond them with a magical horn, and decide to help him get to the throne as he was destined.

However, the uncle (Sergio Castellitto) of the prince, who is king of "Telmar", wants the prince dead. But, the siblings and the prince rally the "Narnians" into battle.

Let me say this first that this, and the last one in the series I watched (I think it was the first movie in the series, but that was long ago) is not making me want to read the books they are based on. I usually lean more toward science-fiction than fantasy, so that could be the reason as to why I don't want to read the source material.

I found the story long, and dragged on fairly slow. However, it never slowed to a crawl. In fact, though the pace was pretty slow, it was just fast enough to keep you from getting too bored. The begining of the movie was really slow, and made me want to turn it off. However, once the siblings got to "Narnia," the movie's pace picked up to something more bareable.

I wasn't really impressed with the performances in the movie, but the actors did a fine job. I did like how the chemistry between the actors worked out, especially those who were in the previous film.

One thing that must have looked amazing on the big screen was the scenery and special effects. From what I have read about this film, a good majority of the film's budget went to the special effects -- of which there is alot. In fact, this film heavily relies on special effects.

In this film, you get scenery that would be impossible, if not too expensive to make. You also get at least 99% of the cast as CGI characters.

I usually hate characters made entirely by a computer, but the ones in this film are simply the best I've seen. Usually, human actors aren't looking into the CGI characters' eyes when they are together on screen. However, it appeared to me that the CGI characters are lined up perfectly.

The only downside of the CGI characters is that hair and fur do not look realistic ever. Look at the animals in this film on close-ups, and you will see what I mean. This is especially evident with the lion "Aslan" (voiced by Liam Neeson). In close-ups, the fur on his body, not to mention his eyes, don't look realistic. However, the animation is amazing with all these characters.

The voice actors worked very well, including scenes with real people. Many times, I forgot that I was looking at a talking lion or mouse. I have to give props to the human actors who had to perform with the CGI characters. Their performances helped bring the CGI characters into reality really well.

I wasn't really impressed with character development with new characters in this film. The lead villain had only enough screen time to explain to the audience why he does what he does, but he doesn't get enough time on-screen to develop in a way to where you would not like him the instant he returns to the screen.

If I remember correctly, the actors portraying the siblings were pretty bad in the first film. There was some big improvement, especially with the youngest actors. If you ask me, the human actors really didn't stand out from each other.

Wardrobes in this film were great in this film. Human clothing mainly consisted of darker tones. There were no brightly colored outfits that stood out like a sore thumb. The clothing seemed to be really accurate for the time period.

The action was spread out through the entire film. None of which built to the battle between the forces of good and evil. There was one major battle, followed by a sword fight that was really hurt by it being placed right after the battle.

Because the world of "Narnia" is over a thousand years ago, you deal with weaponry that does produce blood. However, there is no blood where there should be. Parents will not have to worry about any serious amounts of blood, nor will they worry about any foul language.

Except for one particular piece of music, I really don't remember the soundtrack in this film. I do remember one song near the end of the movie because it's the only one I noticed with singing. Most of the music is just insrumentals that did help enhance the scenes. It was nothing memorable though.

Catch this on HBO if there is nothing else on. This movie, in my opinion, is not good enough to skip a favorite television program over. It almost comes close though.

Under discussion:

Tarzan  (1999)

Based on the famous series of novels written by Edgar Rice Burroughs (September 1, 1875 – March 19, 1950), Disney has come up with a pretty entertaining adaptation of the beloved literary character.

The first thing I must talk about is the animation. Disney has perfectly blended classic animation with computer animation. The computer animation enhances the classic animation with movement drawings couldn't do. In many scenes, "Tarzan" (child voiced by Alex D. Lintz; adult voiced by Tony Goldwyn) is sliding on large tree branches rapidly. In the classic animation style, they would not have been successful in "following" "Tarzan" through the trees as well as they could with computer animation due to the rapid movement.

There are very few dark colors in the scenery. In fact, the only dark colors were used for the gorillas, shadowing and human hair. Most of the colors are light gray, lots of green (it is in a jungle) and other brighter colors.

There are some pretty good performances in this film. However, none really stood out in my opinion. I was not that impressed with some supporting characters, as they had little screen time and thus had no time to develop. Rosie O'Donnell was a delight as "Terk," who was "Tarzan's" best gorilla friend.

If you ask me, they really missed the mark to make a memorable villain in this film. They had two chances, but killed one, and just did a horrible job making a human villain.

As for music, which Disney is known for, there isn't a lot performed on screen by characters like in previous movies. In fact, characters burst into two songs. The rest of the soundtrack is done mainly by Grammy and Academy Award-winning Phil Collins. The songs by Collins is easily alot more memorable than the rest of the musical score. In fact, all I really can remember is Collins songs. However, the Collins songs, which he wrote and performed, is not as memorable as some of the classic songs Disney is known for. Therefore, if you hear the songs by Collins, you won't be catching yourself singing these tunes, nor will you think of the movie when you hear the songs. The songs did fit well into scenes though.

The movie is well paced, however I did think the story was really rushed due to the 89 minute length of the film. They really rushed the part where "Jane" (voiced by Minnie Driver) and the team she was with tried to bring "Tarzan" back to civilization with some of the animal characters as prizes. They also did a pretty good job with the famed relationship between "Jane" and Tarzan. If this movie was a little longer, they really could have worked on many scenes, character development and the relationships between the characters. After seeing this movie, I am almost certain they made the animated television series based on this movie to better explore the relationships in the movie.

If you ask me, this is almost a Disney classic. But, in my opinion, it barely misses the mark to be up there with "Snow White" and others touched by Disney's magic.

Under discussion:

Shrek  (2001)

"Shrek" (voiced by Mike Myers) is an ogre who loves the solitude of the swamp in which he lives. However, that solitude is disrupted when the fairy tale creatures in the area are forced into the swamp by "Lord Farquaad" (voiced by John Lithgow), ruler of the nearby "Duloc."

"Shrek," along with a talking donkey named "Donkey" (voiced by Eddie Murphy), goes to complain to "Faarquaad", who sends the two on a quest to save "Princess Fiona" (voiced by Cameron Diaz; singing voice by Renee Sandstrom) lava-protected castle where she is being held against her will by a dragon.

Eventually, the three escape, and it becomes obvious that "Princess Fiona" and "Shrek" are ment to be together. However, "Shrek" wants to live a life of solitude, and "Fiona" is hiding a secret that she is ashamed of.

Now, the two have to learn what destiny has in store for the two, or they will live lives that weren't ment to be.

Let me say first that this movie is far from perfect. First of all, the story presented is pretty weak and rushed. We don't really get to see when "Shrek" and "Donkey" really get to trust one another. It appeared to me that the two became friendly somewhere between a couple of scenes. I also think that there were just too many characters in the supporting cast.

I did like how the performances were handled in this movie. The actors really brought the characters to life. Sometimes, I forgot that the actors were not on camera, and I don't believe that they were in the same room when they recorded their dialogue.

The movie is enhanced by the wonderful animation. In fact, the animation is simply amazing. Personally, I think the animation was even better on the silver screen than it was on television. The colors of the animation is simply beautiful, and the scenery really looked three-dimensional. The use of colors was perfect through the entire movie.

Realism, in my opinion, is the only downfall in computer animation. Human skin looks more like rubber than actual skin. And when it comes to realistic looking hair or fur, it misses the mark. "Donkey's" hair just doesn't look real to me.

Another downfall is that much of the humor is not for young children. In fact, there is some language that isn't for children in this movie either. If I remember correctly, the movie was marketed as a family movie. It really isn't thanks to some jokes and language. These jokes would go over younger children's heads, and would make older children laugh when it comes to bodily function jokes. But, some references are certainly targeted to the adults in the audience.

Another fun aspect of this movie is the references to other movies, and numerous fairy tales. Some movie references I didn't notice, but did notice a particular special effect that everybody has seen from a certain sci-fi franchise starring Keanu Reeves.

As for the soundtrack, I can't recall one original song or musical piece in this movie. All the songs are ones you heard before, including a really good cover of a classic Monkees song. I'm not really sure if the songs fit into the scenes, but it was fun hearing them.

I can only say that you should watch this on HBO on a rainy day. It's cute, but not that cute.

Under discussion:

Fly Me to the Moon 3-D  (2008)

"Nat" (voiced by Trevor Gagnon), along with his brainiac friend "IQ" (voiced by Philip Bolden) and the always hungry "Scooter" (David Gore) are kids with big dreams. They want to be the first flies in space. And what encourages their dreams is the first spacecraft to land on the moon, the Apollo 11, is waiting for its historic trip on the launch pad near where the three hang out.

The first thing you notice is the animation of the film. I found it done very well done. The scenery had depth to it, as things in the distance actually looked like they were behind the focus of the scenes. I didn't see the movie in 3-D, as it was broadcast on HBO. However, I could see that there really wasn't any scenes which took advantage of the 3-D effects except a fight between characters near the end. I also wasn't really impressed with the design of the characters. To me, they didn't look like anything resembling a fly, especially in the coloring. The flies were an unusual blue-gray that was kind of distracting to me.

The performances from the cast was not bad, but it wasn't good either. There were many times I focused more on my computer than the story. The writing was certainly written for a younger audience, with comedic moments that will make younger kids laugh. I saw nothing for adults, like jokes that they'll get the punchline for the adults to understand the meaning.

History was not followed in this film. In fact, I think it was completely ignored, as the main focus was the flies. I also hated when a well known astronaut popped up on the screen and explained that the stories about the flies in the film was a work of fiction, and no flies were on Apollo 11. I did like how he thanked the men and women who sacrificed their lives for space exploration though.

If you are an adult, this is not for you. It was not made for the entire family. This is certainly just for kids. But, save this one for a rainy day.

Under discussion:

Rocky III  (1982)

"Rocky Balboa" (Sylvester Stallone, who also wrote and directed the movie), the Professional Boxing World Heavyweight Champion, is living the life he sought. He lives in a huge house with his family, has been on the cover of various magazines and has numerous endorsment deals. However, unknown to him, he has gotten soft inside the ring to the point where his manager, "Mickey" (Burgess Meredith) booked him in bouts with inferior fighters. Even getting in the ring with the cocky professional wrestling star, "Thunderlips" (Hulk Hogan in his acting debut).

He lost his edge, and "Mickey" knew it. However, the champ wouldn't believe it. He even went against "Mickey's" orders, and accepted the challenge of "Clubber Lang" (Mr. T in one of his most famous roles), a tough, bad attitude boxer who rapidly reached the Number One Contendership by himself with no trainer helping him out.

"Mickey" warned "Balboa" not to accept "Lang's challenge, but the mohawked fighter verbally went after the champ's wife (Talia Shire) at a public appearance. He immediately accepted the challenge. However, "Mickey" was proven right, and "Balboa" lost the title to "Lang." And, to make things worse, "Mickey" suffers a heart attack backstage during a confrontation between "Balboa" and "Lang", and dies in the dressing room as "Lang" easily defeats the champion for the title.

Now, "Balboa" has to regain what he once had. And he gets help from an old rival (Carl Weathers). A rival who once saw the "Eye of the Tiger" when he fought "The Italian Stallion" himself for the title.

This is one slow moving movie, especially about half-way through the film. I saw myself looking at websites around that time more than watching the film on On Demand. It does pick up leading up to the rematch between the two boxing rivals around the time "Apollo Creed" shows up.

The acting is near perfect all around. You knew almost immediately when "Balboa" admits that he lost his edge, by Stallone's performance in the scene, that the death of "Mickey" affected him deeply. Certain cast members were performing characters who were more important in the previous two movies. I felt that they were there because they somewhat advanced the storyline, or were just there because they have been part of the series since the first movie in the franchise.

I liked the chemistry between Stallone and Weathers in this film. In previous films, they were rivals, and now they are on the same side. They acted like two professionals in one of the toughest sports on the planet, one now acting more like a teacher more than a rival who was still annoyed at once losing the title to his now-student. Weathers really shined in this role, making the audience forget how arrogant he was six years before in the first movie.

Another breakout performance was that of Mr. T. Surprisingly, as "Balboa" is getting back his edge, "Lang" is almost forgotten. The film focuses more on "Balboa" training for the rematch more than "Lang" living the life of the defending champion. You almost completely forget he was in the movie until he comes back into the story for the rematch. Personally, I would have liked to have seen some references to "Lang" as "Balboa" is in training. This was the role that gave Mr. T his tough guy image. He was the bad guy you wanted to see destroyed.

This film is predictable. You know who will win at the end. Personally, I would have liked to have seen some plot twists that would have made the end a little less preditable.

Another problem with this film is the soundtrack. I can only remember two songs in the film -- the "Rocky Theme" piece that is so recognizable now you know immediately where it came from, and "Eye of the Tiger" by the one-hit-wonder (this song) Survivor.

Another problem with this film is, at times, it is hard to understand Stallone's speaking. At times, I had to rely on what others in the scene were saying in response to understand what was going on.

Unless you already own the other movies, I say get this film on VHS/DVD to complete the series. I also think that this would be a pretty good third choice to rent.

Under discussion:

Surf's Up  (2007)

The cameras of the "Sports Penguin Entertainment Network (SPEN)" follow "Cody Maverick" (voiced by Shia LaBeouf), a rockhopper penguin from "Shiverpool, Antarctica," to "Pen Gu Island" for the annual "Big Z Memorial Surf Contest," which is a tribute to "Maverick's" childhood hero, an Emperor penguin named "Ezekiel ‘Big Z’ Topanga" (voiced by Jeff Bridges).

After almost missing the boat to the island, which is actually a whale, "Maverick" and his new friend, "Chicken Joe" (voiced by Jon Heder), a surfer dude chicken from Wisconsin, finally gets to see their competition -- which includes the defending nine-time champion, "Tank 'The Shredder' Evans" (voiced by Diedrich Bader).

Now, the young penguin must prepare for the contest of his life, and defeat the defending champion, who has been bullying him and others.

For most of the movie, you see the action through the "SPEN" cameras. This is one of the most creative parts of the movie. You have many of the main characters being interviewed on-camera by an off-camera interviewer (voiced by Sal Masekela). The characters talk to the audience this way to tell of their feelings and everything they are doing for the surfing contest. If you ask me, this is the most creative part of the movie.

Another thing that stands out is the animation. If I am not mistaken, they animated actual champion surfers on the waves to give accurate movement. The animators did a great job at detail. When the penguins are close to the "cameras", you can actually see each individual piece of fur, especially in the black fur. And the water has ripples in it as it becomes a surfable wave. However, like all computer animation, it is not completely realistic looking. If you ask me, some of the scenery looked pretty fake, as did "Chicken Joe's" comb, which appeared to be reflective at times.

Character development is only fair in this movie. Possibly because of the young target audience, which really doesn't care about the development of the characters in a movie. They are, however, well written, and the chemistry between the characters are pretty good.

What makes the chemistry between characters work is that many of the actors recorded scenes together, which is unusual for an animated movie. Normally, the actors record their lines separately, and they are edited into the scenes during post-production. The actors who recorded lines together even had a chance to ad lib some lines when the time was right.

As for comedy, the kids will probably laugh a lot more than adults. I really didn't laugh, but chuckled a few times.

Many of the songs used in this film were beach tunes from the 1950's and 1960's. These tunes just enhanced the feel of the movie. The original score also worked pretty well.

There are a few laughs for adults, including some that only adults will understand. However, this is a kids movie, and they will be the ones who will really enjoy it. I can only recommend it for kids.

Under discussion:

Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End  (2007)

"Lord Cutler Beckett" (Tom Hollander), who has declared war on piracy to the point that he will order the hanging of a child who is remotely associated with pirates, is in the possession of "Davy Jones'" (Bill Nighy) heart. Since he has the heart, "Jones" has no choice but to do his bidding, and goes after every pirate ship to destroy it.

However, the great pirate, "Captain Jack Sparrow" (Johnny Depp) is trapped in Davy Jones' Locker, and has to be released by the crew of his ship, which are being led by "Will Turner" (Orlando Bloom) and his love, "Elizabeth Swann" (Academy Award nominee Keira Knightley).

Let me say first that some of the scenes are hard to see on television. This is due to the shadowing and dark colors used in these scenes. I noticed that I was paying more attention to my computer than the movie during these scenes.

The performances, on the other hand, are as good as the last movie in the series I've seen (I have not seen the entire series, and do not recall which one was the last one I watched). Knightley is wonderful as the leading lady who seems to get in some trouble at times, but can fight back when needed. Bloom is nearly perfect as the charmer. Nighy is real good, but the animation effects on the tenticals off the character's face may be a little distracting to pay attention. And Depp is absolutely fun in what may be the role he will be remembered for when his time has come.

Another thing you can't help but notice is the wardrobes and special effects. The pirates outfits appear to have not been washed in about eight months, while the military uniforms appear to be authentic. As for the special effects, they are absolutely fabulous -- especially make-up effects. You can actually believe the actors faces are real and not prostetics.

As for action, I wasn't too impressed. Because of when the movie is set, you get cannon fire and a lot of sword play. If you ask me, there is just a little too much going on with swordfights involving most of the cast. In one scene, a ceremony takes place during one of these swordfights. The fighting around the ceremony, which briefly stopped when one of the others came in to fight those involved, was pretty distracting. However, this scene got some funny moments, as intended.

I didn't think that the actors chemistry was not that great in this film. When Knightley, Bloom reconnect on-screen with Depp, it just didn't work that well if you ask me. I also found that there was little chemistry with the new cast memebrs and the ones already established in the franchise.

Another thing I was not really impressed with was the soundtrack. Although the music enhanced many scenes, I just can't remember any of the music except the excerpt of "A Pirate's Life" sung by "Sparrow" to himself at the end of the movie just prior to the closing credits. Most of the tunes are instrumentals, and are done well. However, none are really memorable.

The script itself was kind of weak as well. I think the writers slacked off after the success of the first movie. The story is pretty good, though far-fetched with the stiry with the heart.

If you are a fan of the franchise, check this movie out. However, if you have not seen this movie, I strongly suggest that you watch the entire series due to the majority of the characters are well established in this film. I think only one or two characters had some character development in this film, and we learned some background on them. While other characters had little to no new development of any kind.

I would rent this one, and only add it if you have the other movies in the series in your video library.

Under discussion:

Hot Shots!  (1991)

Former US Navy fighter pilot "Topper Harley" (Charlie Sheen) is called back to duty, and he reluctantly agrees despite personal demons he has suffered since a freak accident that killed his father, "Buzz Harley" (Bill Irwin).

While preparing for his mission, "Harley" meets a lovely psychiatrist named "Ramada" (Valeria Golino), and begins to pursue her. The two eventually get together, despite her being involved with "Harley's" fellow squadron member, "Lt. Kent Gregory" (Cary Elwes), who lost his father in the same incident that "Harley" lost his.

As the squadron prepares for their mission, the mission is being sabotaged by an aerospace firm's representitves who are there to allegedly supervise the mission.

Let me say first that, in my opinion, the second movie in this franchise is a lot funnier. Like the second movie, this one is full of jokes that just keep flying at you, but I noticed that I wasn't laughing at much as I was when I saw the second one awhile ago.

I really didn't feel great chemistry between the cast, and only a little chemistry between the focus of the movie, Golino and Sheen. I felt that the focus was put on the various jokes more than anything else.

Like I said earlier, this movie is packed full of sight gags, jokes and just about any other kind of joke there is. However, unlike the second movie, I only had some chuckles and mild laughing outbursts. I don't know if it was because I was still waking up since I watched this movie at 7:30 in the morning, or the jokes weren't all good to produce a good laugh.

The special effects in this film was only slightly fair. It was quite obvious that models were used in the air battles. Even sounds added in for comedic effect were obviously added in during post production.

The cast itself, despite what little chemistry there was between them, was really good when it came to the comedy. How anybody could act so serious when the jokes are happening around is beyond me. I would get so distracted when I start to see something ment as a joke, I would start cracking up.

One standout performance was from the late Lloyd Bridges, who has done similar movies in his career. He easily has one of the wackiest characters in the entire movie, but his performance is done so seriously that it's easily one of the most memorable in this movie.

I was not too impressed with the soundtrack. A couple of songs were used for comedic purposes that produced a chuckle, but I can't really recall more than one song in the the entire movie.

One thing the writers forgot was the subplot of the aerospace firm that wants to replace the current jet fighters with German-made ones. Yes, there are a few scenes to advance the plot, but not enough for it to mean anything at its climax. In fact, it is put so far on the backburner as the "Harley"/"Ramada" love story is being developed, I completely forgot about it.

I would say that you should wait until you find this one on television, or the Free Movies section of your On Demand service. I can only recommend this one if there is nothing else on television.

Under discussion:

Ice Age: The Meltdown  (2006)

Three unlikely friends, "Sid the Land Sloth" (voiced by John Leguizamo), "Manford 'Manny' the Wolly Mamoth" (voiced by Ray Ramono) and "Diego the Saber-tooth Tiger" (voiced by Dennis Leary) have discovered that the ice damn keeping the area they and other species live dry is melting. There claims are confirmed by a vulture.

The residents of this area go on a journey to a natural boat made out of a large tree for safety. Along the way, they meet "Ellie" (voiced by Queen Latifah), a female Wolly Mamoth who believes she is a possum, and her two "brothers", and actual possums, "Eddie" (voiced by Josh Peck) and "Crash" (voiced by Seann William Scott).

The group then go on an adventure to the boat, while trying to dodge predators that are following them.

Let me say first that this movie is very much a kids movie. There are a lot of things that kids will like, but the adults will find pretty boring.

A lot of times, this movie seems to drag and drag. I found myself looking more at my computer than paying attention as to what was going on on my television.

When it comes to humor, I can't say that it's a great comedy movie. In fact, the jokes either produced nothing or a mild chuckle. There was a pretty good laugh near the end of the movie, and some pretty good laughs with "Scrat the Saber-tooth Squirrel" (voiced by Chris Wedge). I just wasn't real amused with the movie's humor.

Another thing I was not impressed with was the music. I can barely remember two tunes, but none of the lyrics, except a little bit that was sung by one of the characters after the scene, because he found it catchy.

One thing I was pretty impressed with was the animation. Although the creatures were cartoonish looking, which was by design, they were well done. The detailing is not that great though, you only see any sense of movement of muscles with the mammoths. But, because this movie is target to kids, the didn't bring out the details that other movies have had.

I also think that the story itself was only fair -- maximum. There are numerous times where the movie begins to move at a slow snail's pace. During these scenes, like I said earlier, I found myself paying attention more to my computer. Kids really don't care about a story except for one that can keep their attention. I honestly can't give you an age limit on an audience for this movie. But, if you are in your tweens or above, I would say skip this movie.

Under discussion:

Tenacious D in the Pick of Destiny  (2006)

"JB" (Jack Black) runs away from home after being spanked by his father (Meat Loaf). Years later, he finally makes it to Hollywood and comes across the greatest guitar player he has ever heard, "KG" (Kyle Glass).

After a little squabble, the two decide join forces and perform at an Open Mic Night at what appears to be a less than popular bar. To their shock, they don't do that good.

Back at their less than spectacular apartment, the two are trying to figure out what the legends of rock have that they don't while looking at some old magazines. It's only then that they realize that the guitarists on the covers have the same guitar pick.

While trying to look for a similar pick, an employee of the music shop (Ben Stiller, who is also the film's Executive Producer) tells him the ancient story of the "Pick of Destiny", of which they seek. This employee, who has long gray hair and thick glasses, also tells them that the pick, which was made from Satan's tooth, is in a history of rock museum.

Now the two pot-smoking losers with delusions of granduer goes on a music-filled adventure to steal the pick.

Let me say this up front, if you are not a fan of Tenacious D, which gave us the comedy actor Jack Black, then you should skip this one. I am not a fan of these two, and only watched it because it was suggested by Flixter.com.

The jokes, for the most part, produce silence more than anything. I laughed at maybe three of the jokes, and chuckled at a few others. Tenacious D is only for a certain audience, of which I am not.

This movie lags in numerous places, and this is where the worst jokes appear. And let me say that, when Black and Glass are not working off one another, they are completely lost on screen.

All the songs in this movie is by and performed by Tenacious D. Many of the songs perfectly advance the storyline by describing their adventures at the time in the film. However, I felt that the songs sounded too similar to be told apart.

Another problem with this film is that the language will turn off a lot of people. There are a lot of four-letter words in this film. There are also some drug references. I would not recommend this for children.

Part of Tenacious D's schtick is that Black is in your face, and Glass stays in his shadows for the most part. This is how they are in this movie, and it doesn't really work. Now, this may have been part of the act, but I felt that Glass just didn't want to be there. In one scene, he performs his (background) lyrics at a party and he just can't work alone.

Tenacious D are supposedly rock fans in real life, and have maybe two rock legends in the movie, I lost count because I was so bored with this film. Personally, I would have liked to have seen more rock legends and icons in the film. However, we don't get that.

What we do get is a movie filled with completely lame jokes, lots of foul language, a lackluster script. You also get horrible acting, and an unoriginal story. However, you get some pretty good songs that pretty much sound the same.

The story could have been promising, but many of the scenes appeared to have been added into the film at the last second. This is somewhat similar to The Blues Brothers movie many years ago, but the Blues Brothers had a much bigger following -- and two songs on the Billboard music charts. Tenacious D only has a small following, with a few HBO specials under their belt. And, unlike The Blues Brothers, the comedy is not well thought out at all.
If you are a hard core fan of Tenacious D, then I suggest you check it out. However, like most of the movie audience when this film was released to theaters, I would say avoid this one. Save your money on this one, folks.

Under discussion:

The Marine  (2006)

I am a huge professional wrestling fan, and usually have a mild interest in seeing a movie featuring somebody in wrestling, depending on the type of movie it is. I have seen many movies where wrestling stars have been in minor, supporting roles to major roles. I wanted to see this one when it was in theaters, but something stopped me when the reviews began coming in, and the WWE spin doctors kept touting its fair success (debuting at #3 in the US) when the movie's star, John Cena was in the ring.

The WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment) heavily promoted "The Marine" as the movie was about to be released by their then new motion picture division, WWE Films (recently renamed WWE Studios). They gave us behind-the-scenes segments on all their TV programming. Then, when the movie came out, the movie's star would come to the ring wearing a military-style cap, and would salute as he entered the arena. To explain his absence while filming the movie, the WWE explained that Cena was attacked by another WWE star at a club after one of the shows.

What this movie re-enforces is that Vince McMahon, the chairman of the WWE and co-producer of this film, should stick to professional wrestling (which he renamed "sports-entertainment" in the 1990's). He has tried branching out into other forms of entertainment with things like the World Bodybuilding Federation and the NBC-backed XFL professional football league, and they failed.

However, despite getting bad reviews and peaking at #3 at the US Box Office, a sequel is reportedly in the works.

"John Triton" (Cena) loved being a US Marine. After a big mistake in Iraq during a mission to save some fellow soldiers, he is dishonorably discharged. Now, he's back home, living with his beautiful wife, "Kate" (Kelly Carlson) and working as security in a high-rise in an unnamed city (Queensland, Australia in reality) until he loses that job when a TV crew films an incident resulting him throwing a jilted lover of one of the building's employees out of the building -- through a window.

Some time later, the "Tritons" are on a road trip and stop for gas. What they don't know is that a group of diamond thieves are also in the gas station/convenience store, who robbed a bank the other day. When one of the thieves kills a cop who stopped for gas, they jump into the "Triton's" car and take "Kate" with them.

Now, the former "Marine" goes after those who took his wife.

The first thing you notice in this movie is that the actors are given uneven dialogue. Throughout the entire movie, the cast has some weakly written dialogue that sometimes makes you wonder if the person who wrote it knew what they were doing. There was just way too much bad lines in this movie if you ask me.

Despite the bad lines, there is some pretty good performances in this film. One that certainly stands out is that of Cena, who makes his acting debut in this film. I found him very comfortable delivering his lines and he had some pretty good chemistry with just about everybody he was on screen with. I liked the chemistry between him and Carlson, and wish that they had more scenes together to develop their on-screen relationship more before the kidnapping. I also liked lead villain, "Rome" (Robert Patrick), but his character wasn't well written like the rest of the cast of characters

In fact this movie has poor character development all around. We get that the villains are, until a certain point in the movie, working for somebody who contacts them via cell phone. But, we never get their or their employer's motive as to why they want the diamonds. You also get "John's" co-worker who was barely used as comedic relief.

Even the hand-to-hand fight scenes were not done well. In one scene, "John" gets smashed over the head with something that would have knocked out any other action star to allow the villains to get away for the time being, but he just shrugs it off. In another scene, and I have seen this in other movies featuring professional wrestlers who are involved in a movie fight, he takes out an opponent with a move used in wrestling.

Visually, this movie is pretty bland. They barely use the scenery, except for establishing shots. We also get basic day and night shots with no flash.

The action is also poorly handled in this movie. I found the action sequences too short to be interesting. Yes, we get some fair gun play, with little to no blood, and one really impressive explosion in the film. I just found these sequences poorly edited together and not interesting.

The people behind the movie obviously didn't do their homework while this movie was still in development. For example, look at the hat "John" wears when he is given his discharge orders. It's a US Army hat. A Marine would not be issued another military branch's clothing. Also, the chopper that is seen in the opening scene is the wrong kind for that particular mission. You get other mistakes through the entire movie, and I could go on, but I have a limited space.

I can't recommend this as an addition to your DVD collection unless you are a fan of wrestling or a fan of Cena in the wrestling world. As a rental, I can only recommend this if your first eight picks are unavailable. Don't put this high on your Must See List. In fact, check this one out on HBO when there really is nothing else on.

Under discussion:

The Château  (2001)

"Graham" (Paul Rudd) and his adopted, African-American brother (Romany Malco) go to France to claim a chateau they have inherited from an uncle they don't know.

The two meet the staff of the place, and there is an immediate language barrier and culture clash.

Now, the two have to figure out what to do with the place.

The first thing you can't help notice is that the film itself is very grainy. In fact, at times, I felt like I was watching video transferred to film. At other times, I felt as if the footage was a lot older than it is.

However, there are some good performances in this film. But, some interaction was hard to believe. There was probably some problems in the writing of the scenes, because this script was far from perfect. The two leads did a pretty good job,and many times appeared to be more friends than adoptive brothers.

If I am not mistaken, this movie is suppose to be a comedy. When you have people speaking two different languages with no way of being able to understand one another, it can be funny -- if the script is done properly. This movie missed many times to take advantage of this problem. If the two lead Americans were more comical, then they could have made the scenes a lot more funny. They completely missed making them understandable to the French funnier.

Another problem was the weakly written romantic subplot. I felt little to no chemistry between the ones involved in this plot device.

Another problem with this film is that it mostly takes place in the chateau and its grounds. We get a couple of scenes on a train and at a train station, but we never get to meet anybody who lives near the place. They never even go to a nearby village where the two Americans could have gone to for whatever reason, lose their French-English dictionary and tried to ask for directions back. I just could not laugh at anything in this film.

The soundtrack is completely forgettable. I can only recall two or three songs in the entire movie, and most were during the closing credits.

The only thing interesting in this movie is when a particular character reveals himself to the Americans. However, with the poor writing of the film, they barely go anywhere with this plot twist.

I just can not recommend this movie. But, check it out when it is on HBO -- when you're really desperate to see a movie.