'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

[miless]

my favorite is his gripe with Nosferatu not wearing a cape. I mean the cape Dracula wears is always really goth... actually it makes sense! This was written by a goth kid.

[domino harvey]

I'm surprised the reviewer didn't call the film out for ripping off that episode of Are You Afraid of the Dark

[Michael Kerpan]

I suspect this remarkable reviewer was rather young when he wrote the Nosferatu review. He sounds far more literate (and well read) in a book review he wrote just a couple of years later.

[zedz]

This statement has me utterly befuddled. I'd love to ask Jenn to elaborate on what the hell she means by that.

I can't stop chuckling at that. It's going to be my new catchphrase. I will say it every time I watch a Miriam Hopkins film and just laugh and laugh.

Its bad enough that she uses "u" in place of "you" but also that she makes the statement in such a confident, eye-rolling way, suggesting that we already know what she means because its just common knowledge.

"Yeah, sure baby, I know how old movies go with acting"

(backs out of room)

And the punchline for this - as if it needed one - is that it was from a review of Salo, of all things. (Which should put a bizarre spin on the Miriam Hopkins experience)

[MichaelB]

We could probably have a whole sub-thread of reviews at DVD rental sites from people who got out a subtitled film by mistake.

Or a musical, as the one-star Amazon reviews for Sweeney Todd attest.

I sat down and looked forward to this film.It creates a great atmosphere and is superbly shot.Johnny Depp looking like a corpse brought back from the dead creates an evil air of mystery.Almost all the dialogue is badly sung and as we approached the twenty minute mark,we gave up.Quite simply,spoken dialogue would have made this a film you would talk about for years,as it is,i couldn't watch another minute! A fantastic opportunity missed.

Like many people, I couldn't wait to see Tim Burton's adaptation of the musical Sweeney Todd. With an all-star cast and great director, my expectations were high, but as soon as the first amateurishly composed song cropped up my hopes were immediately slashed. I just couldn't believe this film was allowed to be released, and it was a real struggle to see it through to the end. I only gave it one star because you can't give anything less. Very, very disappointing. Sorry to all those who really loved it, I wish I could share in your enjoyment.

Dearest-On-Earth and I were all pavloved for "Sweeney," after "Fear And Loathing," "Blow," and/or all the "Pirates." But after viewing "Sweeney" - in abject horror and shock - we both agreed that A) In "Smokey And The Bandit," when Sally Fields inquired of Burt Reynolds, "do you like Stephen Sondheim?," his reply - NO! - was entirely and altogether appropriate; and B) I guess "we SHOULD have known better," because English movies have a justifiable reputation for being stultifyingly BORING. Unnecessarily explicit, too - I mean, snuff films aren't really enjoyable.

This was supposed to be some sort of horror movie (so it states). So why is there singing in it? All throughout the movie, all they do is sing. I'm so upset i wasted 4 dollars on renting this. One of the worst horror movies i have ever seen. horror and musical, do not mix together. i don't know what the heck tim burton was thinking. This film is just really bad. Not to mention the fake blood. I actually had to force myself to watch it because I hate wasting money.

[Steven H]

Dr. Strangelove, from imdb:

I love Stanley Kubrick. I love Peter Sellers. I even love James Earl Jones. But this movie is not a comedy. It's not funny. Someone falls down. Someone else gets shot in the eye with a spray of water. If you've seen Full Metal Jacket, don't expect that level of humor. The characters are poorly sketched. George C. Scott is awesome, but he's toned down for some reason (PG rating perhaps too cautious -- I'd go with G). This doesn't reflect the talents of any of the crew or cast. And you probably won't laugh once. War sucks. Granted. You don't need to have a shoddy accent and physical comedy to prove it. Oh and PS - irony should NOT make you laugh out loud. PLEASE. DON'T.

PLEASE. DON'T.

It is also a bit racist too, since the only person of color that I saw was James Earl Jones. I know it was 1964 and all, but that just underscores the irritating and never ending racism of America, and just adds another discredit to this painfully boring film.

...and from Netflix:

I thought this movie was boring as all hell and even though it had been recommended viewing to me, I would not re-recommend it.

seems logical!

Not bad but definitely nothing special, must be a period piece. Can't understand why it's still so famous.

I did not like this movie. Perhaps, if I had seen it before 9-11, and maybe when it first came out, maybe it would have made some sense to me.

I kind of thought this was a documentary when I put it on my queue. I had no idea it was an actual movie.

Surprise!

[tavernier]

All of these people will be voting for McCain.

[Matt]

If you've seen Full Metal Jacket, don't expect that level of humor.

I am dying over here!

[miless]

George C. Scott was"turned down" in Strangelove?

[tryavna]

because English movies have a justifiable reputation for being stultifyingly BORING

:-s

I wonder if this person is even remotely aware of something like Withnail and I existing...?

[miless]

or How To Get Ahead In Advertising... which, if anything, is definitely entertaining.

[MichaelB]

or How To Get Ahead In Advertising... which, if anything, is definitely entertaining.

Actually, I'd cite that film as evidence for the prosecution - even Bruce Robinson admitted that it was essentially an over-extended rant that only served to preach to the converted because the kind of people he was attacking wouldn't have gone to see it in the first place. There's virtually no dramatic tension, and not much of the comedic variety either.

I saw it on its original release, and can't tell you how much slack I was prepared to cut it, since Withnail & I was and remains one of my all-time favourite films - but I was looking at my watch and willing it to end long before it finally did.

[nyasa]

because English movies have a justifiable reputation for being stultifyingly BORING

I wonder if this person is even remotely aware of something like Withnail and I existing...?

I think I'd use Mr Bean as a riposte - probably more their, er, cup of tea.

[miless]

BUT HE DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING!!!
SO BORINGZX

[luridedith]

my expectations were high, but as soon as the first amateurishly composed song cropped up my hopes were immediately slashed.

Wow. Just wow. Mandy's obviously the greatest composer of the century and knows her shit... much better than that mere amateur Stephen Sondheim.

[Matt]

my expectations were high, but as soon as the first amateurishly composed song cropped up my hopes were immediately slashed.

Wow. Just wow. Mandy's obviously the greatest composer of the century and knows her shit... much better than that mere amateur Stephen Sondheim.

That's what I hate about the internet. Everybody's an expert.

[bitca]

Came across this thread through a Stephen Sondheim Google alert, and I actually have something to add to this thread. Not so much a review but a recap. Still rediculous and hopefully it entertains!

My ex-roommates turned out to be awful people, and I should have figured this out sooner. Like, say - when they rented Premonition and had me watch it with them. After watching this ... film(?), I immediately expressed my hatred of it, assuming they would join in.
Me: Well, that was a waste of money and time. Not only yours but anyone involved in the film. How do concepts like this even get green-lighted?
*crickets*
Roommate 1: I don't know, it was kind of scary.
Roommate 2: Yeah, and it really makes you think -
Me: About what?
Roommate 2: You know, like, not taking things for granted.

After this, I made some smart-ass comment and I think she assumed I was agreeing with her. So then I walked out of the living room quietly, speechless.

[luridedith]

Just browsing the flixster reviews of the amazing yet devastating In A Glass Cage and came across this gem:

Oh, this movie is all kinds of fucked up. Sure the pace is deliberate, but oh, man it really puts you off child molestation.

OMG I know, dude! Child molestation was so tempting before I watched this movie.

[MichaelB]

OMG I know, dude! Child molestation was so tempting before I watched this movie.

Speaking of which, here's another IMDB Valerie and her Week of Wonders review:

This movie is obviously a piece of silly late '60s, early '70s LSD hippie fantasy drivel.

The only thing that makes this movie worth watching is the central character, Valerie, who is just stunning in her achingly sweet, pouting, wide-eyed pubescence. She's a real charmer, for sure.

It's hard to believe that a movie like this could be made nowadays in these ultra-pedophile-sensitive days. I must admit that I felt a little degraded myself, being asked to ogle a 13 year old's budding breasts and naked bottom. Not that that stopped me from ogling them. Make no mistake, I'm no prude.

[Mr Sausage]

Make no mistake, I'm no prude.

Definitely not the first word my mind went to.

[souvenir]

The TCM message board is a veritable gold mine for this kind of thing, but sometimes they especially outdo themselves. Here discussing the channel's showing of Seven Samurai and Rose McGowan's comments:

Personally i think Rose did her very best considering the movie she had to work with...UGH,,,i was completly bored and im sur ethe only reason they had that movie was the asian theme going on right now on TCM.....(another UGH)...lol.....my opinion and hers and i must say i certainly dont think it fair for you to say such hurtful things about her personally when she has every right to state her opinion and guess what she gets PAID to tell us her opinion...lol... and i think shes doing a GREAT job no dought and obviously so do alot of other people because shes still on the air....i think she has a real appreciation for CLASSIC movies and i dont mean 1920 whatever Japanese war movies.....yikes!! lol....who the heck wants to sit and watch that on a saturday night....sheeeeeeesh.....

and

ps. I just want to add i loooved the movie The Joy Luck Club i think it really showed not only chinese heritage but ALL relationships being chinese white, mixed and how no matter where u are from life is the same for all of us we all go through the same things the same trials and tribulations....yet it teached us the chinese and what THEY went through...generation to generation....i know thats not a CLASSIC so called movie but i noticed a few of the actors from that movie on TCM talking about chinese heritage portrayed in the movies,,,.....and i just LOVED that movie..everything about it it...the actors, the story the director the cinemaphotagraphy...all of it.....

[tryavna]

The TCM message board is a veritable gold mine for this kind of thing, but sometimes they especially outdo themselves.

There are a few -- a very few! -- really sharp posters on the TCM board, and you can glean some valuable info from there sometimes. (For instance, that's where we first learned that Criterion had bought up the rights to London Films from MGM/UA.) But I can't spend more than about 15 minutes a week on that site because it gives me a headache. There is an unbelievable disconnect between the ideal audience the TCM programming department obviously wants (e.g., folks who will appreciate what the goal is with this month's "Asians in Hollywood" theme) and the vast majority of people who post on their message board (which is essentially a combination of old fuddy-duddies and young clueless people who consider the direst dreck coming out of Hollywood between 1930 and 1960 "classic" because it's old).

[souvenir]

The TCM message board is a veritable gold mine for this kind of thing, but sometimes they especially outdo themselves.

There are a few -- a very few! -- really sharp posters on the TCM board, and you can glean some valuable info from there sometimes. (For instance, that's where we first learned that Criterion had bought up the rights to London Films from MGM/UA.) But I can't spend more than about 15 minutes a week on that site because it gives me a headache. There is an unbelievable disconnect between the ideal audience the TCM programming department obviously wants (e.g., folks who will appreciate what the goal is with this month's "Asians in Hollywood" theme) and the vast majority of people who post on their message board (which is essentially a combination of old fuddy-duddies and young clueless people who consider the direst dreck coming out of Hollywood between 1930 and 1960 "classic" because it's old).

You're absolutely right. I found out about Magnificent Obsession supposedly being on its way from Criterion there, but it's largely a wasteland of people who consider films from the '60s "too new" for the channel and are appalled at anything that doesn't fit within their own (narrow) moral code.

[domino harvey]

Someone registered on TCM's forums just to post this:

rose mcgowan is an airhead bimbo.

It's like if the .com forum had a corporate sponsor

[Lemmy Caution]

Just went to IMDb to check the full running time of Tokyo Olympiad, and glanced at the featured comment of the moment:

My view of this film is that it did not particularly energize me or inform me about the Tokyo Olympics. Many of the editing choices were not good, and it was not a film that would stand the test of time. Compared with the wonderful Olympic films by Bud Greenspan over the years (16 Days of Glory), this is clearly the product of a relative amateur. But this predates Greenspan's Olympic work, and for its time it was probably the most ambitious approach to filming such an enormous athletic event since Riefenstahl's work in Germany.

Individual sequences that were particularly enjoyable were the close close-ups of the shot-putters and the hammer-throwers, the sprinters spiking their starting blocks into the cinder track, swimmers on the starting blocks just before the start, the amazing finishing sprint by American Billy Mills to win the 10,000 meter race (to this day one of the great singular Olympic moments).

This film did not personalize the athletes--there was virtually no background provided about them, no personal story. The only portion that came close to that focused for a time on a young runner from Chad who, as was pointed out in the film, was at 22 much older than his country at the time. This was clearly the filmmaker's choice--to present an abstract vision of the Tokyo Games--but it somehow left me cold. To present the first Olympic Games held in Asia in such an impersonal, abstract way, seems like the incorrect choice of approach.

Well, I've now seen this film once, probably will never watch it again--it brought back some memories of those Olympic Games, some nice photography. But in the end uninspiring & forgettable. Oh, yes, it rained a lot in Tokyo in October of 1964.