A young man finds himself shipwrecked on a tropical island with only the coconuts and friendly, mischievous, fauna for company. He's pretty ill-equipped for his new lifestyle and is gradually starving! What to do? Well he has a go at building a raft, but each time he sets off it ends up as little more than kindling. After one such incident, he concludes that his antagonist is a beautiful sea turtle that he has observed nearby. When it comes onto land one day, he flips it over and leaves it to perish in the hot sun. Magic has an hand to play now, though, as the creatures morphs into a young woman with whom he gradually starts to bond and... The animation and soundtrack on this dialogue-free feature are gorgeous. The story itself has a brevity and engagingly fantastic nature to it. What makes something paradise? What keeps something paradise? It felt a little long at ninety minutes and don't be expecting any great conclusions at the end, but it still flew by and I really liked it's simplicity.
The Red Turtle is a dialogue free film. That may turn a lot of people off. However, it fit the mood of the movie perfectly. It's a fantasy film that is filled with pure undefiled love. You will find yourself wanting your own family after this one. The ending is left open to interpretation but only makes the plot seem that much more interesting when you try to unravel who/what is the Red Turtle. A definite watch for those looking for more than the typical Hollywood blockbuster.
**Man always needs a purpose.**
Since the Hollywood upgraded to the 3D animation, the rest of the world took over and given some incredible films in the last one and half decades. The Japanese animes are undoubtedly the best, but the European animation, particularly the 2D animation started to boom in the recent times with special mention goes to Tomm Moore. So basically I might miss some Hollywood animations, right now, but I'm very watchful over this kind of films. That's how I watched it, but anyway I would have seen it.
This is the director's first feature animation film, but he was known for his awesome short animations which one of them won him an Oscar. It was jointly produced by three countries, including Japan's Studio Ghibli. It's their first non-Japanese production and a great beginning and timing to expand the production in other continents. Especially after their legend, Hayao Miyazaki retired from the filmmaking.
The film was short like the 80 minute stretch without a single word spoken in its entire narration. There's no even sign language used, everything's actions and reactions. So you would find empty in the film's cast section which is kind of weird. I mean there are characters in the film, but all were imaginations without names and what year it takes place, where with so many questions like that. Basically to say, a film without the cast, but the crew members managed to give the best to the viewers to get it without any struggle.
One thing is for sure, that the film is very enjoyable. It is a fantasy film, so whatever you see, you have to accept it. Because that's how things happen in a theme like this, all fictional. Though, the first thing you have to keep in your mind is not the entire film was an hallucination event. There are some dreamy events and that's fine since the film character is coping with loneliness.
A man who had lost at sea, wakes up in a small island. It's a life supporting land mass with fresh water and fruits, but he also has to put some effort for fishing. His notion is to leave the island as soon as possible to go back to where he had come from, the civilised world. In his every attempt to sail with a raft he had made using bamboos, fails to cross after a certain stretch of the island coast. He later comes to know what stopped him and with an anger reaction he commits a mistake. So now he has to come out of the guilt and to do that he chooses what seems the right.
It was like a simple story without any meaning about everything that's shown in it. So in my entire watch I thought the same and said it was an okay film with great animation. But the ending changed my stance. That twist, I don't think everybody would understand. But one thing I want to make sure if you yet to see it, that it was about the purpose. The man always looks for a reason to do things and even to live or die. That's where the red turtle comes in.
Although my biggest question is, is this film a follow-up or in any way connected to the director's previous short animation 'Father and Daughter'? Because it seems the man who got lost in the sea is from that short film. But it never revealed the reason why he was stopped by whomever from return home. Also, both the conclusions syncs. It's just a my theory, so only the director can explain that.
I'm very sure this film is in the Oscars race. If it fails to make, then its not my prediction was wrong, but the Academy Awards people got it all wrong. I'm also sure it won't win as 3D animation dominated world, particularly 'Zootopia' 'Finding Dory' and 'Moana' are taking the first three frontrunner spots. Except the technical differences, only the grown ups can say this one has a better and meaningful story. It is very similar to 'Ponyo', but a grown-up's version. Anyway, it is a must see film, especially the adults and in particular those who always think animation is for children. If they see it, they might change their mind. Highly recommended!
8/10
Outlandish!
During the reign of the Vikings, a man from another planet crash lands on Earth and unfortunately brings with him a giant alien beast known as the Moorwen. Not only that, but once assimilating himself with this particular Viking faction, he finds that he is now part of a war they are engaged in with another Viking race.
Yep, it's predator in the Viking age, berserker sci-fi played purely for entertainment and cheese sandwiches. Jesus Jimmy Caviezel brings the broody macho posturing, John Hurt the ham, while Ron Perlman picks up an easy pay check for growling a lot. It's still a lot of fun, though, the mixture of TV movie type production values mixing with a cheeky idea that sees the creation of a genuinely cool monster (effects not half bad at all). Good genre action for the undemanding genre faithful. 6/10
Any fans of the original "Jaws" (1975), hell even of the sequel (1978) need not bother with this completely unrecognisable nonsense. Believe it or not, there is still one "Brody" - "Mike" (Dennis Quaid) who wants anything to do with the sea. His previous, death defying experiences haven't put him off! Anyway, he works at a newly opened sea world where a baby great white finds it's way in for a quick snack through a broken seagate. Where's mama, though? She can't be far away! The baby shark is captured, but swiftly dies and it is as if the big one knows, and let's just say she is seriously narked. Aside from some decent underwater photography, and some talented folks doing water-batics, it's a dreadful stain on the reputation of the franchise. The opening titles offer a clue to the 3-D effects, and I do recall sitting in the Odeon in Glasgow with my cardboard glasses on wondering what all the fuss was about 40 years ago. Now I know - it was all just a badly constructed, poorly acted gimmick that is as forgettable as it is terrible.
Yeah... not good. I don't dislike 'Jaws 3-D' as much as most evidently do, though.
Dennis Quaid and Bess Armstrong are actually pleasant in terms of the cast, none of those behind them are anything worth noting but are somewhat serviceable. I will say I didn't enjoy the plot, but only because it lacked something worth watching - it's poor, not terrible. More of the shark was wanted, but I would personally say that about the preceding two films as well.
Parts of this 1983 flick that are terrible, though, are the special effects, especially right at the end. There is also some poorly done green screen and it, clearly, has a dire cover. There's no doubting this being made was a cash grab, that's basically the only reason to ever go 3-D, but a cash grab doesn't necessarily mean it's an awful film; which this isn't, in my opinion. It's simply bad. The cover is hilariously awful though, granted.
**When in doubt - point a long stick toward the screen**
These 3D ventures are amusing. Whenever the plot slows down a cast member randomly picks up a long stick and points it at the camera.
This film is no exception. Whenever the plot crawls to snails pace characters start pointing long sticks at the camera for no apparent reason.
Doing most of the long stick pointing here is Dennis Quaid and Bess Armstrong - she needs a _strong arm_ to pick random objects up and point them toward the camera as often as she does.
- Potential Kermode
This story takes place in the bleak future of 2022 but it feels very much like 1973. There are some moments of inspiration but a number of tricks have been missed in imagining a dystopian future, notably race, gender and technology. I know that dystopia is supposed to be worse but it looks rather like 1973 instead of an degraded 2022. The story is good but almost everything else is dated. As such, it seems it may benefit from a remake but I think the reason it hasn't been remade is probably because it has actually be rebooted a number of times in other films and its actually a fairly simple plot.
Eh, not great. But it has some big names, so I had to watch it.
RIP Paul Walker
The name is Dalton and we thought he would be bigger.
Dalton (Patrick Swayze) is a highly regarded professional cooler of bars and clubs. He is hired by Frank Tilghman (Kevin Tighe) to clean up his Double Deuce Road House down in Jasper, Missouri. A rough drunken and bloody place, the Double Deuce is just the start of Dalton's problems as he falls foul of town despot Brad Wesley (Ben Gazzara).
I don't know if it's the same the world over, but here in Britain a bouncer is very different to that of a doorman. This is something that anyone who has been in and round the profession can attest to. So even though the casting of Swayze at first glance seemed an odd one, his character Dalton (wonderfully essayed by him actually) is the epitome of a doorman cooler, where violence is the last resort and used only in extreme circumstances. All of which makes Road House an interesting film in the context of its subjects, it's only when the makers resort to cheap tricks and heavy formula that the film descends into soggy popcorn fodder.
The fight scenes are competently handled here, and the characters are an engaging bunch (an axis between Dalton and his landlord Emmet is particularly warm). It's also a very sexy film, mucho machismo for the lads and ladies as Swayze buffs up and kicks butt, while Kelly Lynch sets pulses raising as the perfectly toned, obligatory love interest, Doc Clay (this is a world where doctors look and are shaped like Lynch). A huge question remains though as to if Road House means to be as cheese funny as it is? Because outside of the obvious jokes (plenty) there's cringe moments that make you wonder if it's comedy first, hard buttock actioner second? Be that as it may, Road House is an entertaining film regardless. Scorned by many but cherished by a lot, it remains a late 80s genre splicer that now has something of a cult following. See it at least if only for Sam Elliott's delightful turn as Wade Garrett, the cooler with a reputation as big as Jasper itself. 7/10
Fotnote: Michael Kamen scores the music and basically uses the same score he used for Die Hard the previous year.
I think I am required by law to like this the most, right? Even if I am a Voyager fan? I mean, if I don't they will strip me of all my credentials. I will be kicked out of the club and banned from every comic book store across America...
... actually in 2022 that doesn't sound that bad...
... but, Yeah, you have to love Kirk, the country boy in space. The womanizing sailor. I mean, some people call him the space cowboy, some call him the gangster of love.
He was just brilliant. Spock was just brilliant... and the show was a Star Trek first, it established the franchise, and.... like ALL great science fiction shows, it got canceled too soon.
And then came back in movie form to establish one of the greatest franchises of all time. So, yeah, I have to like it.
Star Trek (AKA Star Trek The Original Series, AKA STTOS) is a series that has had a dramatic influence across much of the science fiction genre, and as some have suggested, influenced culture around the world. The writing, directing, and cinematography of Star Trek are top-notch, even by today's standards. On par with more recent series like Battlestar 2004.
From the top writers and directors of science fiction of that era, sophisticated storylines across the series deal with challenging topics that are risqué even today. Star Trek was radically ahead of its time in the 60’s having a multi-racial main cast including things like non-white character’s and women holding officer positions in Starfleet (unheard of at that time and for decades after)
Warning: Some female characters wear mini-skirts (a fade in the 60’s). Some creatures had campy costumes (state of the art in the 60’s). I would recommend checking out “The Original Series Remastered Project” which has the series remastered at 1080p with updated CGI graphics.
Before Star Wars, this was a fan favorite for sci fi fans alike!
It was campy, cheesy, entertaining, and a little bit pervy!
I mean, C'mon, there were scandidly clad women in the show, even for the 60s! And don't get me started on the Starfleet women's short skirts!
Probably my best highlight of the show! 😅
But yeah, the original series was the best.
The original series may be a bit hard to watch with a modern mind set, but the episodes still contain the key discussions on what it is to be human. Really the show was a great platform for modern thinking and is worth watching to understand the process that people went through to get to the modern day. Yes it is Science Fiction, but really it is Social Commentary.
With a compelling story, jaw-dropping animation and impressive action sequences, _Suzume_ is a contender for Makoto Shinkai’s most thrilling and enjoyable film to date.
It’s an uninterrupted adventure with relentless twists and turns and no brakes. You’ll easily fall in love with the film’s rich and detailed animation, not to mention the jazzy and stylish score provided by rock band Radwimps and composer Kazuma Jinnouchi that would make even Yoko Kanno envious.
Suffice to say, _Suzume_ is a dazzling rabbit hole of animation and charm.
**Full review:** https://boundingintocomics.com/2023/04/18/suzume-review-a-dazzling-rabbit-hole-of-animation-and-charm/
"Suzume" is cycling to school one morning when she encounters a strange young man who asks her for directions to the nearest ruin! She sends him off in the direction of a dilapidated complex and continues her journey. Gradually, though, she begins to wonder who he was and what he was up to. Quickly, she races to find him and encounters a door - sitting in the middle of a wet patio. She opens it to see another world on the other side. If she crosses the threshold, though, it becomes her own world with the other world, well, still on the other side... On the ground she notices a small carving. It looks like a cat, hang on - it is a cat - and suddenly all hell breaks loose as a giant worm tries to enter her world through the door. Luckily, her wanderer, "Souta", had also found the door and together they close it and lock it with a magical key. He explains that there are loads of these portals around the Earth and it is his job as a "closer" to keep them shut else the planet will be destroyed. Now, back to the cat. It seems that it has a special purpose here, and when it appears to curse "Souta" - turning him into a yellow, three-legged child's chair (that previously belonged to "Suzume") we find their investigations take on a bit of a comical effect as they rush from door to door chasing the open wormholes and the cat - all while slowly discovering that they might be falling in love. It's quite fun for the first half hour with plenty of action, a bit of humour with the hobbling wooden seat and as we establish the story and the characters. Thereafter, though, I found this to be a little too repetitive with the story recycling itself a bit too often. There are a few extra characters drafted in - her aunt, with whom she lives, and a lady who runs a bar who takes her in for the night - but they don't really add very much to what is essentially a short story stretched out for two hours that could easily have been shorter and more condense. The production is colourful and the standard of animation throughout is bright and vivid, and I did quite enjoy it - but as a story it really lacks substance as it progresses to it's eventual close. To be fair, that denouement is not as predictable as you might have thought and it tests the mettle and the affections of all concerned as many of the assumptions that we (had all) made as the story developed become questionable. By that stage, though, I had sort of lost interest in "Suzume" as a lead character.
***Horror adventure in the Mayan jungle***
RELEASED IN 2008 and directed by Carter Smith based on Scott B. Smith’s novel, "The Ruins" refuses to make the mistake of too many conventional horror flicks by NOT going over-the-top with the situation, the "monster" or the horrific thrills; films that do so are usually more goofy than horrifying. Take the ending of "The Ruins,” which is different than the book and, in my opinion, better: In a typical horror movie there would've been a wild (i.e. thrilling but totally unbelievable) vehicle pursuit by the Mayans; not here. It's the BELIEVABILITY of "The Ruins" that makes it effective, which is reinforced by the acting of the five protagonists.
Speaking of whom, the main cast consists of Jonathan Tucker as Jeff, Laura Ramsey as Stacy, Jena Malone as Amy, Shawn Ashmore as Eric and Joe Anderson as Mathias, the German. The two girls and Tucker (Jeff) especially stand out. I found these protagonists likable and fairly fleshed-out for a 90-minute horror flick. For one, they're not the typical frat trash you see in so many horror flicks. Secondly, we see signs of character again and again, which I detail below.
Critics complain that the antagonists are decidedly un-scary, but that's one of the main points of the movie. Like 1963's "The Birds," it takes something we see every day and are NOT scared of and turns it/them into a source of horror.
One memorable scene is when Stacy and Amy are in the dark bowels of the pyramid searching for a cell phone they keep hearing. What they discover is equal parts shocking, surreal and amazing (more on this below). Another memorable sequence is when Jeff & Eric are forced to perform a gruesome operation. The climax is also well-done and suspenseful.
While the story takes place on the Yucatán Peninsula, Mexico, it was surprisingly shot at Gold Coast and Tamborine Mountain, Australia, just south of Brisbane, which is on the East coast. In any case, the locations are spectacular.
BOTTOM LINE: "The Ruins" surprised me in light of the inexplicable mediocre ratings and incessant panning. It's an adventure story mixed with psychological horror utilizing something common and un-scary as the "monster." It features quality gore, excellent locations & props, quality performances and proficient filmmaking in general. Plus it takes advantage of the presence of Laura Ramsey and eschews the overdone cartoony-ness of too many horror flicks, which are more funny than creepy or horrifying. In other words, "The Ruins" delivers the goods.
The theatrical version runs 90 minutes and the unrated version 93 minutes. I viewed the latter.
GRADE: B+/A-
***SPOILER ALERT*** (Don't read further unless you've seen the film)
The plants that live on the pyramid and what they are able to do spur a fascinating point: The animal kingdom spans the spectrum of worms to human beings. What about plant life? The plants at the Mayan ruins are obviously from the higher-developed end of the plant kingdom – they work as a team to obtain sustenance and are able to mimic sounds, like human voices and the ringtone of a cell phone.
I've heard complaints about how the protagonists constantly make the wrong decisions. Answer: The foursome had befriended Mathias and therefore trusted him. They wanted to experience some Mayan history off the beaten track. When the Natives suddenly arrive on the scene and brutally shoot one of their members in the head the only place for them to safely flee is the pyramid. At that point they're stranded because the Natives have the ruins surrounded. How is any of this a wrong decision?
Someone complained that the youths never attempt to escape the pyramid until it is basically too late, which supposedly defies logic. Answer: They're only on the pyramid for two nights and were waiting for help to arrive. Their only other recourse was to make a run for the jungle, which was impossible because the pyramid was surrounded by Natives with deadly weapons who already proved they would kill without mercy anyone infected by the plants. As such, the most logical thing to do was to wait for help and only make a run for it (to the jungle) if they absolutely had to, which is what happens. It sounds logical to me.
Another criticism is that the protagonists are imbeciles with little character development. I found them likable, as noted above, and there are numerous examples of character: They desire to experience the culture of the area and not just utilize their exotic vacation to party, like the average one-dimensional spring-breakers. Also, they refuse to leave Mathias for dead in the pyramid and the girls risk going down the same dubious rope that resulted in his fall. Moreover, Jeff insists on performing the gruesome task of cutting off Mathias' legs and Eric agrees to help even while the primitive operation causes him to vomit. Lastly, Jeff willingly sacrifices himself so that Amy has a chance to escape and she makes a bold dash for freedom. All this sounds like character to me.
Needless to say, the criticisms leveled at the film are mostly invalid or easily explained.
This certainly is not RoboCop and its not even RoboCop2, its, sad to say, RoboCop3. An embarrassment for everyone involved. It is the same level of failure as the third Mad Max movie, where he goes off to play with kids in the desert and then Tina Turner does a little dance or something. He has a jet pack in this one, idiotic. Fourteen thumbs down.
Nancy Allen ("Lewis") is pretty much the sole survivor from the original in this, frankly, terrible conclusion to the series. Dan O'Herlihy must have read the script and so passed on control of his technology company ("OCP") to the even more ruthless "Casey Wong" (Mario Machado) who uses Hollywood veteran Rip Torn ("the CEO") and his para-military pal "McDaggett" (John Castle) do demotivate what is left of the Detroit police force; replace them with a bunch of criminal enforcers - the "Rehabs" and do for the city what Nero did for Rome - glass and steel phoenix from the ashes sort of thing. Luckily, our half-man half tin-opener lawman is on hand to fight the good fight and thwart this most evil of plans. There is plenty of action, to be fair, but the dialogue really does put the "b" in anal, the acting is really wooden and what innovation there was from 1987 has long gone. It is a pretty shameless attempt to capitalise on a dying franchise that is really nobody's finest work either behind or in front of the camera. Really, just a shocking waste of celluloid.
_RoboCop 2_ might pale in comparison to the original, but _RoboCop 3_ is the sequel that's genuinely bad.
_Final rating:★★ - Had some things that appeal to me, but a poor finished product._
Really good watch, would watch again, and can recommend, especially for slasher fans.
As soon as I saw "trapped in a movie", I was sold. I'm a big fan of survivalist situations (realistic or not), and have been waiting to find a "trapped in a movie", as opposed to "trapped in a video game" for some time now.
While my expectations were a bit high, I think the cast helped even me out some. This has some highly recognizable cast for 2015:
Thomas Middleditch "Silicone Valley"
Malin Akerman "Watchmen"
Adam Devine "Pitch Perfect"
Alia Shawkat "Arrested Development"
Chloe Bridges "Pretty Little Liars"
Most of which I'm not actually a big fan, but Taissa Farmiga ended up carrying most of the movie anyways.
Given that they're trapped in a slasher movie, we have to deal with several cliches, and SO MUCH meta discussion that is literally takes over the movie at certain point, but that is part of the survival strategies. We also get some pretty interesting death scenes, along with some that are more comedic than interesting.
Surprisingly, the movie is actually both too formulaic and unique to discuss much without spoilers, so I'll just say any slasher fan that enjoys discussion about slasher movies is going to like this one.
It was silly, but entertaining. And it had room for poignant moments.
And personally, the outtakes were the most hilarious!
And, good cast as well.
Amusing slasher parody with heart
This is a parody of 80’s slasher flicks, especially the Friday the 13th franchise. The story revolves around five teens somehow being translated into a fictitious 1986 slasher movie called “Camp Bloodbath.” The prematurely deceased mother (Malin Akerman) of the teen heroine (Taissa Farmiga) starred in the movie and she gets to meet her again, albeit as a young woman.
While this 2015 film is a throwaway flick it’s reasonably entertaining, especially if you’re familiar with slasher films. What I like best is that it has heart and you can feel the loving relationship of mother and daughter. It’s also nice to see Nina Dobrev again, who’s one of the most alluring females in the cast, although she’s outshined by curvy Angela Trimbur as airhead Tina.
The movie runs 1 hour, 28 minutes and was shot in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, with some stuff done in Los Angeles.
GRADE: B-
Make a slasher movie that's about an R-rated slasher movie, then make that movie be PG-13? Solid weird ass choice. But whatever, _The Final Girls_ is some proper fun.
_Final rating:★★★ - I liked it. Would personally recommend you give it a go._
Decent.
I did watch the 'Lizzie McGuire' television show when I was younger, not religiously or anything close but I do remember liking it. I wouldn't, though, know if it works well with the exact storyline, given this film connects to what occurs on the small screen; I was an on/off watcher at best.
Hilary Duff (Lizzie) and Adam Lamberg (Gordo) work together nicely, but it's a slight shame that Lalaine (Miranda) doesn't appear - I recall liking her in the show. Elsewhere, Alex Borstein (Ungermeyer) and Yani Gellman (Paolo) are solid.
This is nothing overly memorable, and it isn't far ahead from being a bad film; the ending drags out, especially the music performance. However, all in all, I'm satisfied after viewing 'The Lizzie McGuire Movie'.
"I Spit on Your Grave 2" tries to replicate the raw intensity of the original but falls short in almost every way. The first act is rushed and unconvincing, with little character buildup to ground the story or create emotional investment. The film leans heavily on gruesomeness, but without a strong narrative, compelling characters, or meaningful tension, it feels hollow and excessive. While the new out-of-country location had potential to be interesting, the film barely showcased the beauty or uniqueness of the setting. Jemma Dallender delivers a somewhat believable performance and looks great on screen, but even she can't salvage a movie that lacks the believability and nuance that made the first film impactful.
Now the RAS are clearly not a very global organisation as they have to parachute in (via albatross) "Miss Bianca" and "Bernard" all the way from New York to Australia in search of the missing nine year old "Cody". What's happened to him? Well, he happened upon a trapped golden eagle high on a cliff top and released her. Whilst earning her undying affection, he also succeeded in earning the enmity of the bird's hunter "McLeach". This man, and his hapless hench-salamander "Joanna" already have a fair amount to species in their underground collection so it now falls to our determined mice and the young boy to free these critters and keep "Marahute" and her three eggs safe from this nasty poacher and his hungry pal. I quite enjoyed this. It plays a little too much to Aussie stereotype now and again, but there is plenty of fun in the adventure with some amiable characterisations - I liked "Joanna" and the rather grumpy koala - as we tear along for a quickly paced and enjoyable sequel to the 1977 story (who knew mice lived that long!?). Nope, you won't remember it for long - but it passes eighty minutes enjoyably enough.
An extremely stylish film showing remarkable cinematographic creativity and vision, even if the story does not truly measure up to the visuals.
8/10
_**A black detective in Gotham desperately wants to nail a snooty racist murderer**_
The nephew of the original John Shaft is a detective in New York City (Samuel L. Jackson) where he tries to apprehend an arrogant racist killer (Christian Bale) by finding a key witness (Toni Collette) while dealing with a gang lord (Jeffrey Wright) and corrupt cops. Vanessa Williams is on hand as a helpful officer.
“Shaft” (2000) is a ‘hip’ crime thriller that resurrects the franchise 27 years after the original trilogy from 1971-1973 that featured Richard Roundtree in the title role (he returns here as the aged uncle). The cast and filmmaking are fine; the problem is the lame story with which they’re shackled.
The key crime in the opening act is glaringly weak. Bale’s character is a snooty punk born with a silver spoon in his mouth, but I didn’t buy his rash, racist actions at the night club. It just didn’t ring true, especially since he seems to get along with black people just fine the rest of the movie. Likewise, Collette’s actions aren’t convincing as the doe-eyed bartender. Simply put, the scriptwriters tried too hard to concoct a racist whitey villain when subtly was in order.
If you can roll with that serious flaw, there are enough thrills to amuse, including Jackson as the bad axx protagonist and Wright’s entertaining drug lord. Plus it’s always good to see the charming Vanessa Williams.
The film runs 1 hour, 39 minutes, and was shot in various areas of New York City, as well as nearby Newark.
GRADE: C-
CinePops US / International 
CinePops Spain 
CinePops France 
CinePops Italy 
CinePops România 
CinePops India 
