Aside from some pretty significant plausibility issues, this is actually quite a decent shock horror. A family stop off at gas station where the elderly attendant tells them of a dirt track shortcut across the desert that will save them a few hours. Towing their caravan, off they go, but when a puncture causes them to lose control and crash into a big rock, they begin to realise that they are not the only folks nearby - and I use the term "folks" loosely. What now follows sees our travellers terrorised by some hideously mutated people who had been left there ever since the US Government carried out nuclear tests. Reduced to just 3, "Big Bob" (Ted Levine) and his faithful hound have to track down his kidnapped baby grandchild - a perilous journey indeed. Now quite why they decided to take the shortcut is just one of a few dodgy decision taken by the "Carter" family that made me wonder, and rendered the plot increasingly silly as we progress to an ending that seems to drag on a bit too long. That said, there are plenty of jump moments and Alexandre Aja manages to keep the annoyingly screaming hysteria to a minimum. Once it eventually gets going, it becomes decently paced and the photography is tightly cut to maximise the impact of some pretty gruesome scenarios (and prosthetics!). Though not as gritty as the 1977 original, I think it's still just as good.

One of the best horror remakes to come out in this most recent trend. Rather than ignoring its source material, or taking the other extreme of drearily rehashing it scene for scene, Aja and Levasseur's _The Hills Have Eyes_ simply expands and improves upon the original.
_Final rating:★★★★ - Very strong appeal. A personal favourite._

**The universality and invincibility of Death, the fear of dying, the importance of faith and its use by the Church in a timeless film, but not suitable for everyone.**
The film, set in the late Middle Ages, begins with a knight returning to his homeland in Sweden after participating in the crusades. When he spots the figure of Death, who has come to get him, he decides to try to gain time by inviting her to play chess: if he wins the game, Death will not take him.
What follows is a huge film essay around the themes of death, beliefs, faith, religion and the role of spirituality in human experience. While the plague is raging and claiming victims, we see people increasingly scared, and blindly resorting to faith to protect themselves from what looks like the end of times. We see people's daily lives, with their mistakes, virtues, sins and difficulties. We see the knight himself, with a growing fear of dying and struggling with deeper and deeper doubts about faith, the existence of God. Furthermore, we also see how the Church exploited the fear of death to reinforce its power, influence and relevance within uneducated communities shaken by the epidemic. The ending is simple, but there is a deep meaning in it.
Swedish filmmaker Ingmar Bergman's masterpiece seems to have its origins in his own fear of death. Max von Sydow, who gave life to the knight, is the greatest actor present in the film and gives us a strong and impactful performance. The film has gained notoriety over the decades and has become one of the most timeless and culturally significant classics of European cinema. However, it is not a film for everyone. Its simplicity, the way it approaches very complicated and philosophical themes and the ending that is difficult to understand at first glance are more than enough reasons why many people do not like this film, and I have to admit that there is a reason. For me personally, it wasn't a success, it's not a movie you want to see regularly, but I recognize its value.

Interesting and iconic movie about faith and the meaning of life. A must seen.

Quality.
No surprise to see the hype around 'Nomadland', it's extremely well made and holds a lot of heart. Frances McDormand is the star, her performance is truly outstanding. A few of the other cast members, most of whom are real life nomads, merit props too - namely Charlene Swankie, who has one great scene. The cinematography and music, meanwhile, is stunning.
Not much more to note. It's simply a terrific film, one that feels incredibly real.

If you enjoy reading my Spoiler-Free reviews, please follow my blog @
https://www.msbreviews.com
As of this article's date, Nomadland has already received countless nominations for basically every ceremony that honors movies in some shape or form. This includes Chloé Zao (The Rider, Songs My Brothers Taught Me), who has also been nominated for the director and screenplay categories, gaining tremendous support from the film community since female directors are rarely recognized for their magnificent work - Emerald Fennell (Promising Young Woman) and Regina King (One Night in Miami) are also in the game this year. Despite never watching the two previous movies of Zao's career, I did know about her filmmaking style being very connected to reality and authenticity, not letting the typical Hollywood-isms impact her vision.
If there's something that definitely proves her remarkable commitment to achieve that realism is the hiring of non-actors to participate in her films. Throughout Nomadland, several *real people* tell their story, explaining why they became real-life nomads and offering an enriching, inspirational perspective of life. This is, by far, the most captivating, emotionally compelling aspect of the movie. Learning who these people are and what drives them is incredibly enlightening, shattering wrong, terrible stereotypes that should have no place in our world. With so many outstanding deliveries from the non-actors, I'm absolutely sure some of the interactions between Frances McDormand's character and the real-life nomads are unscripted.
In fact, there's a clear documentary style associated with this film. From Joshua James Richards' on-the-ground, gorgeous cinematography to the well-structured editing work (also done by Zao), the narrative holds a superficially uneventful, observant storytelling that many viewers will find tiresome and boring, which is completely understandable. It's hard to deny that the screenplay is pretty much based on following McDormand in an RV through the American West, watching her meet new people, working in a couple of different jobs, and that's really it. If people go into this movie expecting mind-blowing developments and Earth-shaking revelations, all will leave extremely disappointed.
It's a slow-paced, somewhat repetitive film told through Zao's unique vision, which is the key aspect that makes this movie work so well. Her astonishing dedication to delivering such a grounded depiction of a particular lifestyle elevates the overall piece. Technically, I already addressed that the film is beautifully shot, but Ludovico Einaudi's score is tear-inducing on its own. With heartfelt piano tracks, Einaudi's music plays during the most stunning landscapes, helping those moments to induce the viewers to enter an introspection-like state of mind. Zao's screenplay is packed with underlying themes, but the diverse, impactful views on what it means to live and how to deal with grief and personal traumas grabbed my attention the most.
Despite all that I wrote above, Nomadland is highly performance-driven. Frances McDormand carries this movie with yet another powerful display to add to her already impressive career. Her reactions in every single conversation that she has with the non-actors seem to come from McDormand herself and not from her character, Fern. Speaking of her, Fern is an amazingly likable character, the absolute definition of what it means to be a good person. Following such a protagonist makes the extremely long journey a bit lighter. Every non-actor is absolutely perfect. I have nothing but overwhelming respect for them and the life they chose to live.
I don't expect the general public to love this film, but I'd love to see the viewers trying to figure out what makes it so special. Many spectators will finish their viewing and think this is just another "technical feature" that only gets praises from critics. I sincerely wish that viewers would ask themselves why they didn't enjoy a movie as much as other people and research about it. Learn about what makes the film so inspiring and such great storytelling. Yes, it's heavily philosophical, its pacing could have been better controlled, and it doesn't really have massive surprises or significant events. But if it possesses a lot more than what it's at the surface, then investigate, read a little bit about what went into creating this movie, and maybe - just maybe - it will become a more enjoyable watch.
Nomadland offers a contemplative, enlightening, touching story about a nomad's life, starring real-life people that make this film much more special. Chloé Zao's unique, passionate vision and her outstanding dedication to authenticity are more than enough characteristics deserving of dozens of nominations. Gorgeous cinematography and a lovely score tremendously elevate the movie, creating the perfect atmosphere for thoughtful storytelling. Some pacing issues and an uneventful narrative based heavily on merely accompanying the protagonist through her journey negatively affect the film's overall enjoyment, which will definitely leave some viewers disappointed. Frances McDormand carries the movie on her shoulders with another commanding performance to add to her remarkable career. However, the spotlight goes to the real-life nomads who participated in this beautiful project, sharing personal stories filled with valuable perspectives on so many themes related to life and ways of living it. A worthy contender for the awards season.
Rating: B+

I watched this because of Frances McDormand and David Strathairn, and I was surprised to find they are the only actors really. There are a lot of rolls filled by actual ca,pers and travelers.
This movie is definitely a slow burner. If you aren’t used to quiet, slice of life movies , you may find it to be slow going.it is a character study, but with many characters s. A lot of people with real stories pass through the main character’s life. She helps them or they help her, and everyone moves on.

It says so much that these nomads, who have chosen to commit to this life of freedom, do so with so little. While those who have stripped them of their livelihoods carelessly enjoy the horrors of excess, a single plate or a tyre full of air become objects to treasure. The purpose of life is not in what we physically possess but what we possess in our hearts, the people we see and the sights we see. The indescribable magic of Chloé Zhao's work is that it speaks both to the pain and the glory of being alive, not in some imagined way but in its actuality. 'Nomadland' is an extraordinary film from an extraordinary artist with extraordinary stories to tell, and you can't help but feel that same call of the open road and the vastness of the sky, to leave the chaos and confusion of the modern world behind and be one with the world, both the one around us and the world within us. Being alive can break your heart, but my god, it can also be so beautiful.
- Daniel Lammin
Read Daniel's full article...
https://www.maketheswitch.com.au/article/review-nomadland-the-extraordinary-chloe-zhao-delivers-another-american-classic

Imagine the archetypal middle class family - mum, dad and three kids - all muddling along nicely in their home next to a graveyard, until things really do start going bump in the night! Doors, chairs and drawers start having minds of their own; the lights come on when it suits them, not you... Well initially, the "Freeling" family think this is just a bit of a giggle - that is until their daughter "Carol Anne" (Heather O'Rourke) disappears and when the paranormal investigators discover she is in an other dimension, only able to communicate via the white noise of the television screen, the battle is truly on to retrieve her from her truly malevolent captors. Zelda Rubinstein is super as the medium "Tangina" and Tone Hooper really does manage to use her character, and that of the little girl - as well as some pretty eery light works to create a suspenseful couple of hours that have you on the edge of the chair. Not, I have to say, because I particularly wanted the child back - I'm a bit with Ian Fleming on that front; but because these evil spirits could easily subsume the whole of humanity! Chilling stuff!

This movie holds a special place in my heart. Yes, by the standards of 2020 the special effects could be better. But we've seen the remake so we know new does not always mean improved.
This is what I like in a horror movie. Suitable for older kids as well. As much as I appreciate R rated horror, I like PG-13 better. Because, like this movie, PG-13 focuses much more on story and characters. The fear of the family and all the emotions in this movie feel genuine to me. Even watching it today, I don't find the acting to be over the top. Much of what people see in this movie has become a trope, but for many of my generation, you saw it here first.
The score of the movie and the famous line of "They're Here" will always be an important part of our pop culture as much as the shower scene in "Psycho"

Like most of my contemporaries, I remember as a kid staying up late at night during the AMC Halloween horror movie marathon week (or was it a complete 31 days?) and watching the Freeling family get spooked by some O. G. paranormal activity; watching their house turn into a portal for spirits, some of which abducting their youngest daughter.
Unlike some of my contemporaries, I'm very split on this film. As a fan of the genre, horror always intrigues me, even when it's done poorly/reuses the tired tropes. When rewatching _Poltergeist_ for what seems to be the twentieth time - now in my early twenties - the movie seems dated, to the point where what made it bone-chilling in the first place, seems calm and a little ridiculous. Perhaps I'm desensitized to this type of movie. Perhaps I'll appreciate it more when I do have a family, when I _am_ Craig T. Nelson. But currently, the film struggles against its pacing, unconvincing effects (see scene in the children's room where the closet tries to vacuum them up, and the "face" scene - you'll know), and the nature of it attempting to be both family friendly and a horror movie. Sustained over the years since its release, however, are the performances by the cast, specifically the parents.
Overall, it's still a fun film; but because of some considerable flaws, it hasn't aged too well. Recommended for kids? - Hell yes. How else are they going to attain the fear of clowns?

We know it as the beast.
The Freeling family are happy and functioning perfectly well until one night their youngest daughter announces that thru the TV, the supernatural are here!
Poltergeist divides the horror crowd big time, the gore fans are simply not impressed by the events in the film, while ghostly supernatural fans such as myself see it as a wasted opportunity. But strip away the flashy production and you start to see the core joke of kids infatuation with the goggle box, so yes, the film could easily be titled under the banner of being a Black Comedy. But be that as it may, and lets not be under any illusions here that, Poltergeist is not a knowing wink wink horror film of substance, the film really could have been a truly terrifying piece of work to cater for all tastes, and I firmly believe that that was the main intention of the makers from the off.
Thus lies the chief problems with Poltergeist, it tries so hard to cover all bases it gets that confused to the point it veers from tedium to shock and back again before you have time to digest, and it kills what should have been a genre masterpiece. There are moments in the film that chill the blood, the sense of creeping menace hangs heavy during a storm, a toy clown becomes evil personified just by being lit in the stormy light, and then? Well it violently switches to something involving a tree that wouldn't be fit for Creepshow 27! On the film goes, suspense with chairs and pieces of meat, and then BAM...monster time! It just doesn't work, it's a collage of genre splicing that both director Tobe Hooper & producer Steven Spielberg are firmly to be held responsible for, because it's obvious that both their signature's clash to create an uneasy bedfellow.
Yet as uneven as it is, and as blatantly plagiarised as it is of Twilight Zone episode Little Girl Lost, I still find myself enjoying watching Poltergeist, with its slick production and some memorable moments; the clown, poor darling Heather O'Rourke saying "they're here", the first chair sequence, and the always creepy Mrs. Tuthill, all things that help to make it a frustratingly enjoyable nights viewing. 6/10
Just don't go into the light afterwards I guess...

One of the biggest moments of my childhood was seeing _Poltergeist_ for the first time at 7 years old. I saw it on a 4:3 set on a very old DVD in my parents' bedroom, after my mom had recently come home from the hospital after surgery. One night, my dad came home from the library with some DVDs, and one of them was _Poltergeist_.
I popped it into the DVD player without hesitation as I'd wanted to see it since I was 5. I knew from the moment it started, _Poltergeist_ was going to be a great movie, but little did I know it would become my favorite movie of all time, and I'd want to experience it again and again.
Craig T. Nelson and JoBeth Williams star in this classic as Steve and Diane Freeling, who live with their three children, 16-year-old Dana (Dominique Dunne), 8-year-old Robbie (Oliver Robins), and 5-year-old Carol Anne (Heather O'Rourke) in Cuesta Verde, CA, soon learn that their home is haunted, and that the spirits talk to Carol Anne through their television. Everything seem normal at first. Dana gives construction workers the finger and talks on the phone later than she's supposed to, Robbie is a huge Star Wars fan, and Carol Anne feeds her goldfish an entire tube of food. One night, a tree tries to eat Robbie, but they quickly save him. When the ghosts kidnap Carol Anne through the closet, they are forced to fight the evil spirit that holds their daughter if they ever want to see her again.
Well-acted, well-written, and well-directed, with great special effects, _Poltergeist_ is, in my opinion, the greatest ghost story of all time. Let's start with the acting. The way lines are said, the facial expressions, body language, everything about the characters feels real. Craig T. Nelson's performance as Steve is the most real dad in a movie I've ever seen. JoBeth Williams' performance as Diane is the most real mom in a movie I've ever seen. Heather O'Rourke gives the best performance by a 5-year-old I've ever seen. Zelda Rubinstein is also great. It doesn't even seem like they're acting. The performances are top-notch.
The special effects still hold up, because they still look real.
The plot is still _very_ original, because it's set in modern suburban America, and it's about a normal family that loves each other, rather than an abusive husband and father.
_Poltergeist_ is so well-written that nobody has to die, nor does it have to be gory to keep us on the edge of our seats.
Hooper and Spielberg keep it subtle by hardly showing the ghosts.
_Poltergeist_ features a great plot, great acting, great directing, and great writing. I can't recommend _Poltergeist_ enough. _Poltergeist_ **is** a kid's movie, so it's not all that scary, though there are scenes that may scare you or creep you out, but you won't be scarred for life. In the end it really is a fun thrill ride. It's a movie every kid must see by the time they're 8 years old. For some reason, I find myself trying, sometimes unsuccessfully, to hold back tears every time I see it.
_Poltergeist_ is my favorite movie of all time, it truly is a great classic, and it still holds up after over 30 years as its message is still relevant today. _Poltergeist_ tells the story of a family nothing can tear apart. It's a classic good versus evil story, a story of perseverance in spite of your worst fears coming to light, and holding it together in spite of everything seeming to fall apart. It's about never giving up hope. When I watched Craig T. Nelson, I saw my dad on that screen, and I see him on that screen even more now. When I watched JoBeth Williams, I saw my mom on that screen, and I see her on that screen even more now. Your experience might not be exactly like this, but there's no denying that this movie is awesome. I know you're probably worried because of things you've read online about it being scary, gory, or boring, but don't be. The violence is never gory. The occasional cursing never gets too bad. Despite everything that happens, there's a sense of hope that stays the entire movie. Let your kids see it. They'll thank you.

This could have been so very much better had director Mimi Leder focussed on creating either a decent science fiction film or an extinction event family drama, rather than this messy hybrid with too many slushy emotional sub plots. Téa Leoni is a television journalist assigned to investigate the resignation of a senior US Government official (James Cromwell) during which she discovers that a comet discovered a year earlier is on a collision course with Earth. President Morgan Freeman convinces her to hold off on broadcasting the story whilst they finalise their contingency plan - a joint Russo-American space craft called the "Messiah" charged with a mission to divert this monstrous chunk of rock from it's path of destruction. Robert Duvall manages to conjure up some sort of gravitas as the navigator of the ship but otherwise a good cast - on paper - including Maximillian Schell, Jon Favreau, a very young Dougray Scott and Vanessa Redgrave as her mother, all really fail to make any, well, impact! The effects are quite good but I'll bet they prayed they only had to shoot the finals scenes once!

A high school Astronomy club discovers a celestial anomaly, their advisor checks it, becomes alarmed at what he finds, and things shift gears.
Not bad for a movie that made "E.L.E/Extinction Level Event" a popular phrase and made the naive public aware of The Danger From Space.
From there, seemingly unrelated events come to the attention of a novice TV reporter, culminating in an Apollo-Soyuz level cooperative near space mission.
The star-studded crew isn't worked very hard, even as the people are divided into two groups by lottery.
Nevertheless, Family is front and center, in many forms, from divided to nuclear to "baby makes three."
At least the audience wasn't subjected to a barrage of macho chatter that characterized "Armageddon," but a out-of-this-world reading of "Moby Dick."
Morgan Freeman's "President Tom Beck" does his best "Abraham Lincoln" in this film, which is one reason I watch this film when it is broadcast, even though I have the DVD. 8/10;)

I was really disappointed, considering all of the great actors involved and since I love science fiction and the great disaster films of days gone by. I bought the DVD used and got my money's worth--it's a decent watch.
I would recommend watching if you like disaster movies or any of the actors involved, maybe even renting or buying the DVD used or for a really good price new, say for 5 bucks, but anything more would be wasteful or being ripped off.

What is the name of that video game all the kids are playing? Assassins Creed is it? Something like that? Yeah, that's kind of what's going on here. Robin Hood is coming at you straight out of a video game.
And, it looks like a video game, which kind of makes it so much worse, because it's like watching an immature kid play a video game without the emotional investment of playing yourself.
And then they raise the stakes by making it so Ultra-Woke that they almost forget that the point of Robin Hood was that he stole from the rich to give to the poor in their effort to modernize the politics.
It's just a mess of video game inspired dialogue and action. Stay away.

Meh. This is a big budget film that fails big at retelling a tale that's been told so many times before.
After many aborted starts, I have watched this movie twice within the past year. I didn't watch it multiple times because it was enjoyable and I wanted to experience it again. I watched it twice because it was so unmemorable that I didn't remember that I'd already seen it. Or maybe it was such an awful experience that my mind blocked it from my memories.
The most memorable line in the film comes as Marian discovers that Robin is the Hood.
"You call that a disguise!?", asks Miriam, referring to his hood which has become the public symbol of his thieving.
To which Robin replies: "Well, it fooled everybody else!"
I ask "You call this entertainment!?", but I won't wait for a reply.
I'd write more details about this film, but I can't bear to think about it. I mostly write this review as a reminder to my future self to not waste further time my watching this movie a third time.

I just feel kinda bad for everyone involved. It was clear that whatever was supposed to happen, was **tried** at. Very hard. But it did not work.
_Final rating:★★ - Had some things that appeal to me, but a poor finished product._

Just OK. Justin Long is his usual quirky, excellent self. Gina Philips plays the sometimes right, sometimes wrong older sister. Won't be watching the other ones...

Indeed, where did you get those eyes?
Siblings Darius and Trish are driving home from college through rural America. They have a brief run in on the road with the driver of a beat up van, later on, on the road side, they observe weird goings-on from the driver of said van, an observation that puts both of them in immense danger.
Jeepers Creepers tips its hat off to the creepy horror movies that were all the rage in the 70s and early 80s, boasting genuine suspense and characters fully formed, Jeepers Creepers is something of a refreshing antidote to the ream of horror movies available that line up teenagers purely to be slasher fodder. Lifting it just above average is the fact that our two sibling protagonists have viable discussions before venturing into the realm of horror staple requirements, although the picture is "B" movie in substance, it does however attempt to be credible in its story telling.
Sadly though, after a wonderfully edgy first half, the picture drops down in standard, the introduction of "The Creeper" may well be a necessity, but it shifts the film to such a degree, it rapidly loses its creepy momentum. Not that the second half of the film is a disaster, far from it, it's got a scary fun vibe to it, it's just that it promises so much, but ultimately runs out of steam. Jeepers Creepers was successful enough to spawn inferior sequels, with the "Creeper" of the piece firmly entering the horror hall of fame, thus an argument for the film having done its job seems totally viable, it's just sad that it didn't stay on the side of edgy and become a horror classic. 6/10

An under-appreciated horror piece from my formative years, best watched going in with no clue what you are in for.
_Final rating: ★★★½ - I strongly recommend you make the time._

I loved this movie.For it's budget & little CGI used.It was a great thriller.I don't consider it as horror.I'm sure many don't agree.I have been hoping for a new movie.

This is a fun, almost campy movie; don't try to think about it too hard. Rather, enjoy it for what it is.
It has an almost folklore-ish feel to it, as if what's being presented is more of a tongue-in-cheek tale (which it is fully aware of) and as such some aspects _maaay_ have been exaggerated. And if you watch it in this vein, I think you will enjoy it quite a bit. But the second you start to take it seriously, it will crumble to pieces.
It's entertaining to watch. The characters are very large (and sometimes goofy/campy) and the plot heads in the correct direction most of the time.
This movie flew under the radar during its original release (not helped at all by being released 16 days before Aliens...) but had found extremely solid footing in home rentals/home video.
I remember my first viewing of this movie -- I knew nothing about it going in, I just sat there and watched it...and I loved it. It was funny, it was exciting, and in some few scenes even thrilling. It's not perfect, it has its flaws and blemishes certainly, but boy is it fun! :)

'Big Trouble in Little China' didn't entertain me.
There isn't anything about it that I really like, to be honest. It isn't a truly terrible movie by any means, but the story didn't take hold of me and the characters and their actors weren't all that watchable. I wasn't sold on the plot's set-up and then when it goes crackers it was too goofy for me to enjoy too.
It's one of the weakest Kurt Russell performances that I've seen, and I'm someone who rates that guy fairly highly as an actor. Elsewhere, Kim Cattrall is kinda forgettable, while James Hong (unique voice aside) doesn't get given enough to stand out. The make-up/special effects, particularly for the latter, didn't do it for me either, likewise with the humour.
A quick glance at Wikipedia suggests this had competition with 'The Golden Child'. Well, if we're comparing, then that one did it better, albeit only by a relatively small distance because I don't recall much about that Eddie Murphy movie; it has been over four years since I watched it for the one and only time, admittedly.

Enjoyable enough adventure flick with another charismatic performance from Kurt Russell. The plot certainly felt disjointed at times (and one sequence didn't really advance the plot all that much) but still had a lot of fun. Not one of Carpenter's best nor a standout amongst 1980s movies, however still liked it well enough. **3.5/5**

Ol' Jack always says... what the hell?
Out of 20th Century Fox, Big Trouble in Little China is directed by John Carpenter and stars Kurt Russell, Kim Catrall, Dennis Dun, James Hong & Victor Wong. The adaptation is by W.D. Richter with the screenplay from Gary Goldman & David Z. Weinstein. Dean Cundey photographs and Alan Howarth doubles up with Carpenter for the musical score.
Truck driver Jack Burton (Russell) agrees to take his friend Wang Chi (Dun) to pick up his fiancée at the airport. Little does he know that he is about to get involved in a supernatural battle between good and evil beneath San Francisco's Chinatown district.
A box office failure upon its release, and known to be the moment when John Carpenter gave up on Hollywood, Big Trouble in Little China has gathered "cult" momentum over the years and shows up rather well these days. Blending Chinese mysticism with chop-schlocky adventure, Carpenter's movie is at once daft but also a ball of energetic fun - propelled by a handsome, but inept action hero. Carpenter had always wanted to tackle a martial arts movie, and here he gets to do it whilst laying on the comedy and playing with effects work as his movie mostly comes alive in a magical underworld of monsters, magicians and sexy green eyed women.
It's evident now that the film was ahead of its time, not from a technical viewpoint, but from the point it tried to Americanise chopsocky. This is some time before Chinese style wire-work and mythology became common to Hollywood, one has to believe that Tarantino was nodding approvingly around about this time. It's also worth noting that although this "American" movie has an American beefcake as its main protagonist, it's the Asian Americans who actually are the heroes of the piece, with Dun's sidekick the stand out hero as Russell's Burton bumbles his way from one sequence to the next. It was a bold move by Carpenter to structure the narrative this way, something that annoyed the executives at Fox and kept the paying public bemused. It's easy to see why the film failed, contrast it with the similarly themed Eddie Murphy movie, The Golden Child, from the same year, which was a box office success. There the public got what they wanted (or what they were used too), the standard American hero fluff where Murphy saves the day and gets the girl.
Carpenter dared to be different and clearly had a lot of fun along the way, as evidently did his cast. It may have taken a decade of VHS and DVD releases to prove he was right, but right he was, Big Trouble in Little China is a damn fine popcorn movie. Russell plays it meat head style, with swagger in tow and tongue stuck in cheek, nicely toned physique for the girls to enjoy, and making vest wearing cool two years before Willis did in Die Hard. Cattrall is wonderfully alluring, red lips and green eyes shimmering bright in a world of colour; and boys do look out for her wet scene, it's wolf whistle time! Dun is likable and athletic, while Hong as Lo Pan gives the action/adventure genre a truly memorable villain. The film is briskly paced and not found wanting in the set piece department either. Not all the effects are high grade stuff, but in a film with such zestful comic book traditions at heart, it hardly matters one jot. With a great home format package doing it justice, Carpenter's movie is now, at long last, getting the appreciative audience it fully deserves. Amen to that. 8/10

_Big Trouble in Little China_ is not the movie it is marketed to be. But it is good. You wait the ten minutes it takes for the absurdity to kick in and then you ride the ridiculous ride until the closing credits.
_Final rating:★★★ - I liked it. Would personally recommend you give it a go._

I think this movie was marketed as an adventure movie when it came out. I can imagine that some people were disappointed if they were indeed expecting a real adventure movie. I remember being one of those people when I first saw this movie.
However, if you approach it seeing what it is, that is a comedy or at least an action-comedy, then it is actually a quite enjoyable movie. The entire movie is utterly ridiculous. The screaming, posturing Asian martial art champion parodies especially so.
Everything in this movie makes you laugh as long as you do not try to take the movie seriously. The action scenes are often absolutely hilarious. They are also quite well done and choreographed actually. The special effects are of course utterly outdated but they are good enough for this movie.
There is a story as well but it doesn’t really matter much. It is just there to tie the funny scenes together, especially the action scenes. Acting? Well, let’s just say that it matches the comic nature of the movie.
I actually just picked this movie as a trial experience in using Netflix (which finally came to France last Monday) on my PS3 for the first time and I did not want to start something were I would be pissed off if it turned out that it stopped working halfway through. I have to say that I had much more fun watching this movie this time than the first time I was watching it…and Netflix worked perfectly on my PS3.

"_It's the worst smile I've ever seen in my life._"
I would say this was a little predictable from the middle to the end, but it's still enjoyable. The whole third act might haunt you if you are not used to disturbing scenes, but it made the movie for me. Reminds me of It Follows.