_**Competent action flick with Arnie is moronic and forgettable**_
A US marshal and witness protection specialist (Schwarzenegger) “erases” the identities of people he’s assigned to protect, including a woman (Vanessa Williams) who has damning evidence against a high-tech weapons corporation. Meanwhile the marshal becomes suspicious of some of his coworkers. James Caan and Robert Pastorelli are on hand.
"Eraser" (1996) is a proficient Schwarzenegger action thriller; Vanessa is beautiful, Pastorelli is amusing and Caan is effective. There’s a thrilling skydiving scene and a well-done zoo sequence with crocagators. Unfortunately, the opening act failed to really pull me in with its convoluted storytelling and the ‘final battle’ sequence is dull and eye-rolling. Both Siskel & Ebert surprisingly gave this a ‘thumbs up.’ God knows why.
The film runs 1 hour, 55 minutes and was shot in Southern Cal, New York City, New Jersey, DC, Maryland and New Brunswick, Canada.
GRADE: C+

_The Killing Joke_ deserved a better adaptation. Not even that. Just re-edit this to cut out the first half and you have a perfect adaptation. This is one of my favorite Batman stories ever. Unfortunately, the first part is spent irrelevantly on Barbara, and has largely nothing to do with the rest of the movie. However, after about a half hour of filler, the ACTUAL adaptation of _The Killing Joke_ is awesome. Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill deliver another classic performance of Batman and Joker. Half of this movie I despise and half of this I love.
5/10

OK, so I'll admit I was expecting something closer to the graphic novel, and I was pretty disappointed that it only really loosely followed something that was epicly brilliant as the comic.
However, I'm not a stickler for total accuracy.
And, really it is better than most of the other Batman movies, it does manage to tell a good story and reveal some of the Joker's ever-changing and never consistent backstory, even if it does gloss over a lot of it.
In the end, especially in this current era it's a reminder of how great comic books used to be and how great they could be again if they only started telling actual stories once more.

The first 30 minutes was wasted with Barbara being so annoying! I just didn't see why that whole bit was thrown in when the movie itself is meant to center on the Joker.
Even with Mark Hamill's final bow out as the iconic villain couldn't save the film. Still, at least that joke at the end was a little amusing!
Other than that, they could've done better with the story.

Shares the few weaknesses of the short comic it is based on, but adds a bunch of its own new weaknesses to try and get it up to a theatrical runtime and justify its cinema release.
I think part of the reason the reception for _The Killing Joke_ has been so overwhelmingly negative is that the expectations were so high going in. But that wasn't without cause. It sees the long awaited return of both Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill to their famed DC roles, and the comic it's based on is widely regarded as one of the better stories ever published by the company. And of these lofty expectations, _The Killing Joke_ falls short.
Hamill is great, and Kevin Conroy usually is as well. There are a couple of occasions that the latter slipped though. I don't know if he's rusty or just didn't care, but his voice performance is not 100%. The story essentially meets that of its source material, but rather than expand the existing story, they chose to awkwardly force an entirely different one in beforehand, to the point that this is essentially two episodes of two different shows, rather than a single cohesive movie.
_The Killing Joke_ is a little gross and is not the return to form for DC Animation that we all had hoped it would be, but the final sequence is fantastic and I don't know that the movie overall deserves quite as much vitriol as it has had.
_Final rating:★★½ - Had a lot that appealed to me, didn’t quite work as a whole._

Not even the voice acting could save this movie. Check out my full review here.
http://www.hweird1reviews.com/allreviews/the-killing-joke-movie-review

The "Reverend Mother" (Dame Maggie Smith) seeks out the now hugely successful "Deloris" (Whoopi Goldberg) to help her to save a school from closure. Upon arrival, and assumption of her clerical moniker "Sister Mary Clarence" she discovers a disparate band of students who have little faith in themselves, each other - or their teachers. Can she lick them into shape and use their newly formed choir to save the school from the bulldozers? The premiss is not a patch on the first film, and neither is the execution. Dame Maggie offer a few classy cameo roles, as does an on form Mary Wickes with James Coburn appearing occasionally as the ferret-like administrator determined to help ensure the school does actually close, but for the most part this is akin to an early episode of "Fame". The kids, including an early appearance from Lauryn Hill, are almost auditioning - either to the nuns or to the audience, and even the ending is just a little like the end of "the Sound of Music" (only admittedly, somewhat livelier!). It's not terrible, but somehow it misses the faux-menace of the first in the series. It was made very quickly after that first one, so i wonder if this was more about capitalising on that success rather than making a quality sequel?

Excellent Film!
Delicious Chris Evans offers us yummy acting and tasty directing in this feature about two people learning about the realities of love and friendship (and money)!
Chris Evans' character Nick is down-to-Earth; witty; whimsical; and caring and it all seemed to unfold naturally for Mr. Evans. Beautiful Alice Eve's performance was wonderful! Her character Brooke was genuine, complex, easy for many to relate to, and lovable. Both Chris Evans and Alice Eve were perfectly matched, for both their characters and one another.
I was shocked when I learned, at the end, that Chris Evans directed the whole thing. Cheers to Chris! I like the focus on the characters' faces; I liked the mood that was maintained throughout the film; and I like the light-hearted approach to two complex characters faced with the complexities of love, emotions, friendship, and money.
The film kept my attention until the end. I am waiting for Chris Evans to direct again. I am waiting for Before We Go 2, hoping that Nick and Brooke find one another and again find true friendship, true love.

> One night adventure with a stranger!
In his 15 year old acting career it was the Chris Evan's first direction. Many actors had tried that and only a few had succeeded, but some of them just preferred a low cost, simple project to avoid a major disaster. He also produced it and acted alongside the British actress Alice Eve. The film was a one night event based theme which begins when a young woman misses her train, and later forced to spend the night with a stranger after her purse got stolen. During lots of time left for the next train, theirs little adventure begins as they embark around the city.
This is really a solid film. Well written screenplay and performed with a beautiful night adventure in the city that never sleeps. The problem with me was, I had seen many similar flicks, so this one looked okay, in a good way, but not that awesome. Still a fine film and definitely highly recommend others who like drama-romance. The plus point was the actors, the chemistry was brilliant. The story was very good, yet like I said it was so simple.
It was not just two who meet and develop a friendship or a relationship, but they both reveal their story behind their visit to the city. At first it was a casual disclose, but the true reason comes out when they begin to trust each other and feel comfortable. So each of their tale has a small twist in the same night to overcome that was troubling them for some time. The film makes the impression that they two are made for each other, but only the final scene reveals how their destiny ends when the dawn breaks out. Not so clever, but an enjoyable little gem, maybe a perfect film for the date night.
6.5/10

The Pale Blue Eye had great performances, fantastic cinematography, and a decent story but fails in terms of pacing and a bloated runtime that did not feel warranted.
Christian Bale is fantastic in this role. He is incredibly intense, being able to capture the seriousness of his detective work balanced with the emotions of his unfortunate tragedies in life. A performance of this caliber is expected of Bale, but what was a surprise is the standout performance of Harry Melling. Melling was whimsical and tad odd with his portrayal of the famous Edgar Allen Poe. He legitimately stole every scene he was, including the ones with Bale.
The film was quite long and drawn out. The beginning act did fine as the audience is still learning the world and the crimes committed. But after that wears off it begins to drag going into a climatic third act. A lot of this bloat could have been cut down to create a better viewing experience. That being said, I did enjoy the story of this film. It was engaging and had some twists that I think worked pretty well, although the ending did leave me with a few questions.
Score: 61%
Verdict: Decent

_**Does a killer prowl the neighborhood or is it just local lore?**_
A mother and daughter (Elisabeth Shue & Jennifer Lawrence) move into a Pennsylvania suburb where a nearby abode was the scene of a double murder four years earlier, committed by a deranged girl named Carrie-Anne. She was thought to have drowned, but her body was never found and local legend suggests that she prowls the eerie woods. Meanwhile her brooding brother (Max Thieriot) lives on the property and is maltreated by some of the residents. Gil Bellows plays an officer that befriends the mother and is sympathetic toward the despondent young man.
“House at the End of the Street” (2012) is a coming-of-age drama mixed with mystery and horror of the slasher variety, but more realistic than a guy in a mask lurking around with a machete. It borrows story elements from “Psycho” (1960) and “Sleepaway Camp” (1983), but has the polished modern tone of flicks like “Solstice” (2008), “The Last House on the Left” (2009) and “My Soul to Take” (2010). It’s not great like “Psycho” or the remake of “Last House,” but it’s at least on par with “Solstice” and superior to “Sleepaway Camp” and “My Soul to Take.”
Jennifer looks great in her prime while Thieriot’s character makes for a sympathetic study. The lush Eastern locations are sumptuous and the relatively believable story holds your interest while offering some unexpected revelations. The feminine cast also includes Allie MacDonald, Eva Link and Jordan Hayes.
The film runs 1 hour, 41 minutes, and was shot in Metcalfe & Carp, Ontario, both outside of Ottawa.
GRADE: B

Lawrence of Suburbia.
A little better than its garbage reputation, as evidence by the support it got at the box office from its target audience, Mark Tonderai’s horror/thriller is safe genre film making. There’s no intelligence in the screenplay, no copious amounts of blood letting, the characters do dumb things and in truth it unfolds as a standard girl in peril movie. These things are what have led to it being savaged by critics, but backed by a trio of strong performances from Jennifer Lawrence, Elisabeth Shue and Max Thieriot, boosted by a genuine narrative surprise and the fact that Tonderai is able to do the peril motifs with suspenseful impact, ensures House at the End of the Street is at least a decent enough time waster. 5/10

**A mastress stroke!**
Another American politics, why should I care! If you are saying like that, then you are missing out something wonderful. First of all it was not based on any real, except the gun control theme that rocked the US recently. Nor it was adapted from a book. That's really got me. This was a beautiful screenplay and I could not think how flawlessly someone has written just for a film, not for a book. Secondly, in todays world where the voices were raised for the equal rights/opportunity for women, this film became a great example to head on the right path.
It opened with a court scene, then went back to flashback to reveal everything that happened in between period. There's a voting is to take place in the parliament for the introduction of a new bill. The miss Sloane's firm splits over differences and hence two teams fight for one another in the same matter, but to achieve the opposite result. Pursuing the MPs and all other dramatic events takes place, while they are ready to go any length. Then the story comes to an end with a twist with one of them victorious, but a heavy price has to pay it.
You might won't like the politics, but this is not one. This is something like the story of an election campaign team. How they work to achieve their goal, particularly keep checking their rivalry. So it was more or less a cat-mouse game kind, but the perspective was not shared equally. The majority of the film was from miss Sloane's angle. Just like from 'Zero Dark Thirty', Chastain has been simply awesome. One of her career best performance for sure. I don't get it how this film had missed the Oscars race. She should have won the best actress award. I might a little late to watch, but I did not miss it. So I hope you too as well not to miss it.
_8/10_

I guess I was a bit more impressed with the leads in this movie than the other reviewer here, for I think they held up their end of a story that is, if anything, even more of a take-off on action movies that the Raider franchise.
It is fluff, of course, with odd violence offsetting what is a rather gentle adventure. Good luck finding it on one of the streaming services out there. It is for sale or rent only at this time. I had a chance to watch it free, however, as I wasn’t about to buy or rent it. It is good, but not that good.

This film does make you realise just how good Harrison Ford was in "Indiana Jones" (also 1984) and how good Danny DeVito is in this - but as far as Michael Douglas and Kathleen Turner go, well they are really pretty mediocre. He is "Jack", the dashing rogue who ends out helping slushy fiction writer "Joan" through the Colombian jungle in search of her kidnapped sister - something about a treasure map. This adventure takes for ever to get going, but once it does it offers us a colourful and entertaining enough series of set-piece escapades with a beat-heavy synthesised score that works hard to compensate for some really inane dialogue from both. Kidnapper DeVito ("Ralph") amiably steals the scenes he features in, as the story builds to a suitably perilous - and predictable - denouement with big creepy insects, a waterfall, car chases - and everyone gets wet a lot. You get the drift. It's fine to pass an afternoon and there is some chemistry between the two, but it's all a bit of a pale imitation now and the comedic elements have not aged very well either.

Different kind of role for Adam Sandler. He played it to perfection. He is the devil's son who doesn't even want him. His mother is an angel in heaven.

I don't like American Comedies, and I especially don't like Adam Sandler, but for whatever reason, I love _Little Nicky_. Maybe it's A) because I was big into the heavy-metal-heavy Satanic themes when I first saw it at a mere 7 years old, or maybe it's B) because of how young and therefore unrefined my taste was I was when I first saw it, or maybe C) it's just... Actually good?
Almost certainly a combination of A and B.
_Final rating:★★★½ - I really liked it. Would strongly recommend you give it your time._

Big bang action with quality cinematics and beautiful colour. A snappy script, enjoyably cliched characters and just the right amount of humour make this a great watch. But there's something magical going on here that sets this one above many other similar movies.

Maybe if Chris Evans played himself more - an arrogant, pretentious, nerdy, minor-role douche - he could play a better arrogant, pretentious, nerdy, minor-role douche.
This sucks.

Staring Negan before he was Negan, Captain America before he was Captain America, Gamora before she was Gamora, Stringer Bell *after* he was Stringer Bell, and two other dudes I really feel bad for as they don't have a cool name from something else...
Despite all this talent, the movie just wasn't that good. Boring action scenes with too much slo-mo, predictable plot, cringe worthy as hell jokes, and technobabble that anybody with even a passing knowledge of what's being talked about will laugh at...
So why 5/10 stars instead of less? It's stupid fun. I have to believe the corny jokes and ridiculousness of some of the scenes were done purposely... They just weren't done well. It felt like they wanted to make an over-the-top action-comedy in a comicbook style, but realized about halfway through that they'd spent all their budget on actors and the soundtrack.
We had a lot of fun watching it, but I can only recommend watching this to laugh at... Even then though, you probably have better options.

Definitely a movie for kids. There's a lot of cool cgi stuff in this movie, but it's just a lot of nonsense and unnecessary things that go on in the movie which makes it pretty dumb.

Wow, this was out of all of a second wasn't it?
So, I am going to more or less focus first on the fact that this has NOTHING to do with the book. Why even carry the same title if you are going to diverge so much from the source that it is unrecognizable for the fans of the source?
But that IS the new trend isn't it? That is the new Hollywood formula.
1) Take an established book or franchise 2) Remake it to not at all resemble the source material 3) Have it flop 4) Blame the fans of the source material for the bad reviews 5) Tell the fans of the source material that it wasn't made for them, but rather for the people that were never fans of it and don't want to see it. 6) Wonder why it failed.
But that is not really the ONLY reason. I mean I grew up in the 80s, I saw made for TV movies, geared at children, that looked better than this.
Seriously, it looked like an NBC Saturday Morning cartoon made for kids under 10 in the 90s on a shoestring budget.
When you cast so many big names that you have no budget left to make the film...it's going to look horrible.

Sweet enough. Just a shame it doesn't finish as great it starts.
'A Wrinkle in Time', I think, starts off very nicely. It gives a satisfactory background to the main character, while it builds the intrigue well. Unfortunately, it does drop off as it goes on - but not to the point that it hindered my enjoyment, it is a noticeable step down though. I really like the special effects, I think they look terrific throughout.
Onto the cast. Storm Reid does a respectable job as Meg, her performance arguably gets better as things progress - which is the opposite to the film overall. Chris Pine is underused in his role, but the casting of Oprah Winfrey, Reese Witherspoon and Mindy Kaling is good - Zach Galifianakis too. I didn't actually find Deric McCabe's character, Charles Wallace, annoying like most seemingly did.
Surprised to see that this has a low rating across the board. I've never read the Madeleine L'Engle novel so perhaps that has something to do with it? I do agree the writing isn't necessarily great either. Each to the own, but I genuinely enjoyed it I can't lie.

Oh man, if I'd at any point ever had any faith at all in _A Wrinkle in Time_? I would have been **sorely** disappointed. Which is a shame on both counts, because it would be great if a film targeted at young people with both complex ideas **and** multiple women of colour in lead roles could have been like... Good.
_Final rating:★½: - Boring/disappointing. Avoid where possible._

I was drooling when I saw the first preview. the talent involved in this...aaaaahhhhhhh.
You just know it's going to be good.
And Crowe, who thinks he's the best actor who ever lived actually acted in this. Seeing him actually act is worth it. Many of us believed it was only a legend, but here it is, proof he does have talent somewhere beneath the brass.
Pacino, Mann, Plummer, Gabon and you turn around and low and behold Gershon is doing a good job too.
It's like a dream cast with a B-Team that rises up to the challenge.
I'd give it a 10 if...wait, I can 10 of 10 just because it is a privilege to watch everyone in this film...who cares about the plot even? It could have been the worst story ever written and the cast and director would have saved it. It was like they were doing Richard III. that quality of awesome.

What if Michael Mann, Russell Crowe and Al Pacino ensemble in a film all together? Well, The Insider, with the above clever formula does exist and it is definitely an earthly paradise. Russell Crowe is a tobacco industry researcher named Jeffrey Wigand who accidentally revealed a addictive substance abuse in a famous tobacco company named Big Tobacco. He appeared in a CBS program “60 Minutes” based on an invitation by its presenter, Mike Wallace. His fate changed drastically, he had no choice but to sacrifice his reputation, job and family. In contrast to his heroic role in Gladiator, Crowe here plays excellently as a hero who tries to fight for his freedom as it is taken away when he has to deal with corporate criminals. Al Pacino performs well as usual in his role as an investigating journalist named Lowell Bergman. Mann attractively packed this 2,5 hour long crime drama with a variety of careful analysis so that this film is away from boring.

**A film full of qualities, but which will not please the general public.**
There are films that are made for commercial audiences and others that are clearly made to please specialized critics and film theorists. Although this film was present on the commercial circuit, the truth is that Wim Wenders directed this film for critics and film festival audiences, and this explains why critics love it and why the general public hardly knows this work. . About me? To be quite honest, I didn't particularly like the film, and it's not the kind of film I like to watch or watch with pleasure. However, I am the first to recognize that it is a work full of artistic and technical qualities, and that it deserves a close look by any student and fan of the seventh art.
The plot revolves around a man who spent four years wandering through desert areas of Texas due to a huge psychological shock. We don't know what he suffered, but it is obvious that he is not well when he is finally rescued by his brother, and he spends a long time without saying a word, just trying to resume his march to nowhere. As the plot develops, we understand the emotional void he feels and desperately seeks to fill. The reunion with his son, whom he hadn't seen for years, will mark the beginning of a journey of inner healing, of reuniting with himself and the hurts of his past. The idea of family, the crisis of moral and social values, the role of men and women in marriage and the absence of feelings are themes that the film, very discreetly, addresses throughout the story it tells us.
Anyone who wants to see this film should prepare themselves for a long, very visual experience: the film is a grueling two and a half hours long and the action is quite slow. Wenders, who even thought about becoming a painter, likes to work very carefully on the visual and pictorial side of his films, and the slow action allows him, in this specific case, to explore to the maximum the visual beauty of desert scenes or urban landscapes. of Texas, where the action is concentrated. Do I need to say that the choice of sets and filming locations was one of the aspects that I liked most? Thanks to a good cinematography job, each one looks even more beautiful, wild and rude. Harmonizing perfectly with all this, the soundtrack, on guitar, plays a little with the Wild West and with the melodies that we usually associate with the Western style.
In addition to a very well done and solid plot, and good visual and technical values, the film also features the extraordinary work of Harry Dean Stanton. The actor has never been one of those stars that draws crowds, but he has quality and gives us here, probably, the best work of his film career. He is solid and impactful enough to capture our full attention with a minimum of words and facial expressions, and he doesn't say a word or change his facial expression during the first half hour of the film. The film also has excellent contributions from Dean Stockwell and Nastassja Kinski, and even young Hunter Carson does a well-done job. However, the stage is all Stanton's.

Harry Dean Stanton is on cracking form here the amnesiac "Travis". He turns up in a Texan clinic dressed in a striped suit, but recalling little for the slightly roguish doctor who helps him after some dehydrating time in the desert to use to help identify him. A tiny scrap of paper in his wallet enables him to, though, and soon "Walt" (Dean Stockwell) arrives to try and get his long-lost brother back to his own home in Los Angeles. As the story now gradually unfolds, we discover that "Travis" has a son who lives with "Walt" but we are unsure as to just what has led him to his current, absent-minded, predicament. Unwilling to fly, the two take the long road trip back getting to know each other and slowly building a renewed sense of trust before he is to be re-introduced to the son (Hunter Carson) he hasn't seen for four years and who requires some answers of his own. The last half hour brings the threads together neatly, if a little conveniently, allowing a few brief appearances from Nastassja Kinski that brings the story of "Travis" and his trauma full circle. To be honest, I found the actual plot rather weak, indeed the story isn't up to much at all really - it's the performance from HDS that is measured and engaging. His flawed character gradually comes out of his self-induced shell as it seems he is learning about himself almost at the same pace as we are - and that makes the film compelling for the most part. It's a story that takes it's time, and watching it I found it did take me a few minutes to get myself into a suitably low gear to appreciate it. It's isn't a plod, or a slow watch - it is a nuanced, occasionally amusing, search for identity - oh, and for a field in Paris, Texas!

"#Alive" is a gripping and intense South Korean zombie movie directed by Il Cho and starring Yoo Ah-in and Park Shin-Hye. The film follows the story of a young man named Joon-woo (Yoo Ah-in) and a young woman named Yoo-bin (Park Shin-Hye) as they struggle to survive in their apartment complex during a zombie outbreak.
The movie is filled with suspense and tension from beginning to end, with the zombies serving as a constant threat that keeps the audience on the edge of their seats. The pacing of the movie is expertly done, with a gradual buildup of tension that leads to several heart-stopping moments.
One of the most impressive aspects of "#Alive" is the excellent acting by Yoo Ah-in and Park Shin-Hye. They both deliver powerful and nuanced performances, conveying a wide range of emotions as they battle both the zombies and their own inner demons. Their chemistry is palpable, and their relationship provides a sense of hope and humanity in an otherwise bleak and dangerous world.
The movie's visual effects and cinematography are also top-notch, with realistic and gruesome depictions of the zombie outbreak. The film makes excellent use of sound and lighting, creating an eerie and foreboding atmosphere that enhances the suspense and terror.
Another standout feature of "#Alive" is the way it explores themes of isolation, loneliness, and the human need for connection. Joon-woo and Yoo-bin are both isolated in their apartment complex, cut off from the outside world and unsure if anyone else is still alive. As they fight for their survival, they also struggle with feelings of loneliness and despair, highlighting the importance of human connection even in the face of a zombie apocalypse.
Overall, "#Alive" is a thrilling and engaging zombie movie that offers a fresh take on the genre. The film's excellent acting, pacing, and visuals make for an intense and unforgettable experience. I would rate "#Alive" a 7 out of 10.
Written and Reviewed by RSOliveira

**Overall : A cold, harsh, and brutal story with a gritty realism that takes its terror to another level.**
Frozen is a fairly straightforward film. A group of friends get stuck on a ski lift as the ski resort shuts down for the season, stranding them to fight hypothermia, ferocious wolves, and dizzying heights for survival. Don't expect deep character development or powerful themes. But what Frozen does offer is a horror movie with such realism that it feels like a true story. The anxiety and fear are authentic and genuine to what anyone would experience, making the movie much more tense and horrific. Frozen is far from perfect, but its true-to-life suspense and panic grip its audience with tangible dread and fear.