James-Remar Movie Reviews

Blowback follows very well trodden ground. A standard cop vs. serial killer movie, it sticks to the cliches of the genre. The killer's "twist" is that he kills each victim in the style of a martyred saint, with a bible reference in a test tube placed in the mouth. Perhaps the intention is to echo other recent screen psychos like Seven's John Doe or Silence of the Lambs' Buffalo Bill. Blowback's villain is, however, like all the other characters, lacking in character depth and ultimately unconvincing. Mark L. Lester, the director, has been a prolific producer of mediocre action movies, notably Commando and Big Trouble in Little China. Some of these can perhaps survive as late night movies to be watched over a few beers. Still, even among the lesser cop movies, there are a lot that should be seen before this one. Try Fallen or Bone Collector. Regarding the DVD, it's 3:4 format, with no features (not that you'd want them)

this Movie kept me intrested the whole time i watched. Its not much for kids but sure makes me want to go to college.

A thinly disguised Charlie's Angels Rip off made for cable and turned into a shortlived series.

The girls are gorgeous, the guys are gorgeous, so there is something to stare at, but the plot, direction, and acting is a yawner. An excuse for models posing.

Pleasant enough, but I suggest getting it used!!!

Gave it for 4 stars, and that is for McShane's performance the was the only bright spot in the acting department.

I really enjoyed this movie, the tropical location and fast paced action were great. I hope there will be more movies like this one, maybe even sequels. I didn't see the TV show, but would like to order those when they become available.

Well when I first watched this movie I thought it was ok. There is a pretty cool jungle fight scene in the begining. The world has ben taken over by an evil alien race who defeated them with these giant robots. At the begining as aI said before a group of freedom fighters is searching for the wreckage of an old robot which could spell freedom for the earth. On the way there they are attacked by this huge robot. Now This has to be one of the cheesiest bluescreen scenes I've ever seen. We're talking like Godzilla fake here. Although I will admit the robot to robot fight scenes are quite cool. I give it a solid three for leaveing me dissapointed at the ending.

My little cousin has watched this tittle 6 times. He knows it line for line. It has a good story line. I will buy this video. Wish it was out on DVD.

As a deep and true Auel fan, I was embarrassed for the movie, even, as they say, for a part played by Darryl Hannah. How do you *do* a movie like this effectively? Hollywood, I have to give you credit for trying, but I vote that it didn't hold a candle to the book. Still trying to get her latest novel! Thanks, Tom, from a tall blonde! How hysterical!

As so often happens with screen adaptations of books this one is a real loser. From start to finish the writers/producers seem to have taken the general plot outline and characters and dropped most of the actual story.
It will do all right as a way to spend an afternoon if you haven't read the book (at this writing the paperback is $2 cheaper)but too much is so unlike what Ms. Auel wrote. I know that lot's of detail had to be removed for times sake but at what cost to the story? Little Ayla's orphaning resembles the book as does her discovery by the Clan but the way the Neanderthals behave isn't like the book. I don't even remember all of the scenes but when Ayla gives birth to her son Durc, that's conpletely different, although good. Later in the story when Ayla's adoptive mother Iza (Pamela Reed unrocognizable in makeup)is too old and frail to go to the CLan Gathering Ayla is sent in her place, they made a real mess of that one.
Daryl Hannah is very well cast as the adult Ayla, she's the best reason to watch ths movie.

Okay, I've got to say that this movie is not nearly as good as the book, but that is, as we all know, a common phenomenon. The book by Jean M. Auel, on which this movie is based, is several hundred pages long and contains detailed accounts of everything from plant life to the intricacies of the interpersonal relationships of this fictitious group of Neanderthals. You cannot boil all this down to a movie that isn't even two hours long, and expect the same kind of story. However, I found this movie both moving, and surprisingly convincing, as far as the make-up is concerned. Sure, you can't take a modern person and remove their chins and flatten their foreheads, but considering that radical surgery wasn't an option, the make-up people did a very nice job.

All in all, this is not one of those movies which will be a classic for generations to come, but I will definitely credit it (and the book) with adding to my own life-long interest in prehistoric humans in general, and the Neanderthals in particular. It is important to keep in mind that this is very much a work of fiction, but considering how little is known about this period in human prehistory, a little poetic license is warranted.

As a deep and true Auel fan, I was embarrassed for the movie, even, as they say, for a part played by Darryl Hannah. How do you *do* a movie like this effectively? Hollywood, I have to give you credit for trying, but I vote that it didn't hold a candle to the book. Still trying to get her latest novel! Thanks, Tom, from a tall blonde! How hysterical!

As so often happens with screen adaptations of books this one is a real loser. From start to finish the writers/producers seem to have taken the general plot outline and characters and dropped most of the actual story.
It will do all right as a way to spend an afternoon if you haven't read the book (at this writing the paperback is $2 cheaper)but too much is so unlike what Ms. Auel wrote. I know that lot's of detail had to be removed for times sake but at what cost to the story? Little Ayla's orphaning resembles the book as does her discovery by the Clan but the way the Neanderthals behave isn't like the book. I don't even remember all of the scenes but when Ayla gives birth to her son Durc, that's conpletely different, although good. Later in the story when Ayla's adoptive mother Iza (Pamela Reed unrocognizable in makeup)is too old and frail to go to the CLan Gathering Ayla is sent in her place, they made a real mess of that one.
Daryl Hannah is very well cast as the adult Ayla, she's the best reason to watch ths movie.

Okay, I've got to say that this movie is not nearly as good as the book, but that is, as we all know, a common phenomenon. The book by Jean M. Auel, on which this movie is based, is several hundred pages long and contains detailed accounts of everything from plant life to the intricacies of the interpersonal relationships of this fictitious group of Neanderthals. You cannot boil all this down to a movie that isn't even two hours long, and expect the same kind of story. However, I found this movie both moving, and surprisingly convincing, as far as the make-up is concerned. Sure, you can't take a modern person and remove their chins and flatten their foreheads, but considering that radical surgery wasn't an option, the make-up people did a very nice job.

All in all, this is not one of those movies which will be a classic for generations to come, but I will definitely credit it (and the book) with adding to my own life-long interest in prehistoric humans in general, and the Neanderthals in particular. It is important to keep in mind that this is very much a work of fiction, but considering how little is known about this period in human prehistory, a little poetic license is warranted.

This Canadian horror film from director Carl Schenkel uses elements of the Frankenstein story, even featuring a Dr Stein, with experimental procedures that remain unapproved because of their side effects and a pioneering doctor who has "genius beneath the madness". We also get a touch of The Phantom of the Opera with the doctor now haunting the morgue of the hospital he had practiced at, and of course continuing his work. Schenkel has some skill in creating suspense, also injecting some comic shocks, but by the time we are chasing the killer in the unused basement of the hospital (why do horror movie hospitals always have unused basements?) the mad/genius doctor's efforts to rejuvinate himself alas does not help to rejuvinate the audience. I am not educated enough to know how scientifically valid the doctor's theories are (that pituitary extract culture can be used for muscle fibre and bone regeneration), though I am morally aware enough to question his rationale of using terminal patients in the same way the Nazi's used death camp inmates. Schenkel opens with a lightning benefited Whatever Happened to Baby Jane black an white camp sequence, which introduces his taste for gore and sadism, and the camera's style of overview prefigures the killer's fondness for jumping onto his victims. But it also sets up false expectations - the use of a lollipop becomes a red herring, though perhaps this in itself allows us to accept Schenkel abandoning the plot of another doctor's experimental procedures, with a baboon, no less. The only time the opening campy tone is repeated is in the over-the-top touches of the performance of Sean Haberle as the doctor. The superhuman qualities of the cliched serial killer/slasher are reinforced by Haberle's use of the stolen pituitary gland extract, yet his continual need for rejuvination because of sustained injuries is a running gag, and his look to the camera at one point is hard to read. Otherwise we get the standard heavy-breathing on the soundtrack and schlock music score. There is a restaurant sequence with a walltank of upstaging whales, a grotesque sewing up of the mouth of an actor using an alien accent, a full frontal nude shot of James Remar in a pool, and a nifty strategy for overcoming the obstacle for finger print security. We also get a laugh line in a police interview with "You'll have to speak up. The tape doesn't record gestures". As the heroine, one's assessment of the performance of Isabel Glasser may be influenced by how one views doctors. Are they ordinary people who can act like clutzes or gifted heroes with a right to be arrogant? Glasser's big moment comes with a memory speech where her mascara tears ruin her perfect glazed makeup, but her deliverance remains stoic, as if the tears do not belong to her. Perhaps she obtains our empathy because the only other character with equal screen time is the killer, though she looks awfully silly when she runs, and I don't think I'd choose her as a consultant.

Of course "the Surgeon" is a low budget film but what is a horror movie without suspense? This film had it's share of gore and murder but it all came with a yawn. The main characters were underdeveloped so when they meet their end the veiwer could hardly care less. The story had possibilities but just didn't follow through. Some low budget films turn out to be some of the best in the horror genre but this is not one of them. The DVD has scene selection and that is all. That could be a blessing. I dont think anyone would care to hear a commentary track on how this 'gem' got made.

I have bought this film in german, because im a german. it is a good film, but in germany it has not the name "the surgeon", it has the name "exquisite tenderness". The Director Carl Shenkel is a good director. when you like horror films, see this film.

It's hard to tell what William Friedkin is driving at in this grim tour of New York City's leathers bars. Al Pacino plays a detective who infiltrates this fringe of the homosexual world to flush out a killer, and whose own sexual identity becomes blurred in the process. It starts out strong but ultimately is too confusing and clichéd to be called "good."

It's not hard to tell that Cruising is from the director of The French Connection and The Exorcist. On the French Connection side of the cinematic coin, Cruising has the same documentary like and gritty, urban noir texture. On the other it has The Exorcist's blunt edged shock tactics, shoving unsettling imagery in the viewers face at every opportunity to do so.

Body parts are found in the rivers around NYC while a serial killer is hacking up men that frequent hardcore S&M gay leather bars. Desperate to close two unsavory cases (and not caring whether they are truly linked or not) top cop Paul Sorvino sends in rookie Al Pacino (who fits the victim profile) to lure the killer out of the shadows. The case seems to have an effect on Pacino's character, but director William Friedkin is far too objective, letting the unsavory events unfold without allowing the viewer to become emotionally involved in them, so it all seems shock for shock's sake. This movie was extremely controverisal when first released and (judging from the polarized reviews here) still packs a powerful and unnerving punch. Recommended for those that want a dark and disturbing ride.

A BRILLIANT vison by William Friedkin, equally enhanced by Al Pacino's naive cop on the beat, searching for an eluisive and brutal serial killer amidst the shadows of New York's 'alternate life styles' circa 1980. This much maligned movie is one of Mr. Friedkin's finest excursions into forbidden territory.

CAUSED quite a stir in pre-release; a disclaimer had to be added, BUT for that matter it could have been set in ANY 'world', although this one did mannage to jolt a few times ....

Yes, Pacino is the naive cop - slowly awakening to 'other' potentials in this cold-hearted world of the beautiful people. It's a strange trip, you never quite know who you might bump into along the way - straight or gay - it seems to be open season, as for 'casual sex' beware! BUT that was back then.....

NOT too explicit for its time - the editing is flawless [the opening seduction scene, the graphic, yet 'non-graphic' sex, [SUPERB EDITING] then the subsequent murder - somewhat reprised in Verhoven's 'Basic Instinct' - also caused quite a fuss - and a companion piece to this one].

The story falls apart when we find 'our killer' or is this intentional? Now, does the focus fall on Pacino and his girlfriend - Karen Allen - totally oblivious of her lover's change [maybe?] Wonderful and scary moment when Pacino is making love to Allen - proving ........?

AND the conclusion? All Studs and leather .....

BUT it's all quite tame, remember all of this is set pre-cybersex.

Would be fascinating to re-visit this theme along the computer-chip route.

Highly recommended for the uninitiated - but be warned - it can be quite a bumpy ride!

[PS - GREAT Soundtrack too!]

Terrible installment to the Hellraiser series. This movie not only lacked a story line that stayed together, it lacked the "charm" of the previous Hellraiser movies. Why was Pinhead "counsiling" this guy? He is to be the pain and torturer not the philisophical metaphoic therapist. I can't believe they called this a Hellraiser movie. Ignores the facts laid out in previous installments and goes off on a ridiculous tangent about nothing. Should not have been called Hellraiser, in fact should not have been made at all, it didn't even intrest me enough to be able to watch it as a movie mutually exclusive to the Hellraiser series....lousy, boring, and pathetic.

After having watched all four Hellraiser movies, I think Hellraiser Inferno is completely different. Well, I have got the feeling that a lot of true Hellraiser fans won't like this chapter. The protagonist of this movie isn't very sympathic and friendly: he takes drugs, sleeps with hookers(even though he has got a beautiful wife) and denounces his partner at the police station. A lot of people will despise this character and turn off the tv. However I stayed with this broken character and it is quite interesting to see how he unleashes the horrors of the box. His evil character traits are essential for the end of movie. Another flaw is that Pinhead only appears for two or three minutes on the screen. Nonetheless the movie deals with the desperate search of the protagonist for a mysterious person called the Engineer, who is connected with the box. If you accept the fact that this Hellraiser movie is completely different from the other parts, you'll enjoy a great and dark horror thriller.

Let me start of with something that ... me off... no original theme music. Now that thats out of way let me really get into this movie. I have always loved Hellraiser for being a different kind of Horror series. It became more predictable however starting with 3 (which I still love just because its Hellraiser) but it sort of changed into another Freddy sort of thing and I really believe that even though this takes the series in a pretty new direction, that if it really does anything, it really brings back the feel of the first two in a certain sense.

Here we follow a man into his own personal hell. We got to see a glimpse into that in the second film and we now have a whole film of one man's hell. Some of the shots and effects in this are incredibly stylistic for its straight to video budget. Those wanting a Pinhead movie will be disappointed. Those wanting a somewhat predictable yet interesting thriller will not want to miss this. Especially if you are a Hellraiser fan not just a pinhead fan.

While there is still plenty of gore some of the scares are more effective using sound and other effects. One of the screams by a woman over the phone is particularly terrifying. I myself really enjoyed the film. It doesn't take much to scare me I will admit but some of this movie is just plain evil and I think Hellraiser fans will embrace that evil with open arms not to mention the moderatly contrived yet awsome last half of the movie.

I really liked it... Again no one liners from Pinhead but who cares. I was happy to see the series, if only for this brief moment, go into a new direction. And with news out that the new one Hellseeker will have the return of Ashley Lawrance and the Mute girl (for hellbound) I can't wait to see what happens there.

Terrible installment to the Hellraiser series. This movie not only lacked a story line that stayed together, it lacked the "charm" of the previous Hellraiser movies. Why was Pinhead "counsiling" this guy? He is to be the pain and torturer not the philisophical metaphoic therapist. I can't believe they called this a Hellraiser movie. Ignores the facts laid out in previous installments and goes off on a ridiculous tangent about nothing. Should not have been called Hellraiser, in fact should not have been made at all, it didn't even intrest me enough to be able to watch it as a movie mutually exclusive to the Hellraiser series....lousy, boring, and pathetic.

After having watched all four Hellraiser movies, I think Hellraiser Inferno is completely different. Well, I have got the feeling that a lot of true Hellraiser fans won't like this chapter. The protagonist of this movie isn't very sympathic and friendly: he takes drugs, sleeps with hookers(even though he has got a beautiful wife) and denounces his partner at the police station. A lot of people will despise this character and turn off the tv. However I stayed with this broken character and it is quite interesting to see how he unleashes the horrors of the box. His evil character traits are essential for the end of movie. Another flaw is that Pinhead only appears for two or three minutes on the screen. Nonetheless the movie deals with the desperate search of the protagonist for a mysterious person called the Engineer, who is connected with the box. If you accept the fact that this Hellraiser movie is completely different from the other parts, you'll enjoy a great and dark horror thriller.

Let me start of with something that ... me off... no original theme music. Now that thats out of way let me really get into this movie. I have always loved Hellraiser for being a different kind of Horror series. It became more predictable however starting with 3 (which I still love just because its Hellraiser) but it sort of changed into another Freddy sort of thing and I really believe that even though this takes the series in a pretty new direction, that if it really does anything, it really brings back the feel of the first two in a certain sense.

Here we follow a man into his own personal hell. We got to see a glimpse into that in the second film and we now have a whole film of one man's hell. Some of the shots and effects in this are incredibly stylistic for its straight to video budget. Those wanting a Pinhead movie will be disappointed. Those wanting a somewhat predictable yet interesting thriller will not want to miss this. Especially if you are a Hellraiser fan not just a pinhead fan.

While there is still plenty of gore some of the scares are more effective using sound and other effects. One of the screams by a woman over the phone is particularly terrifying. I myself really enjoyed the film. It doesn't take much to scare me I will admit but some of this movie is just plain evil and I think Hellraiser fans will embrace that evil with open arms not to mention the moderatly contrived yet awsome last half of the movie.

I really liked it... Again no one liners from Pinhead but who cares. I was happy to see the series, if only for this brief moment, go into a new direction. And with news out that the new one Hellseeker will have the return of Ashley Lawrance and the Mute girl (for hellbound) I can't wait to see what happens there.

This is a poorly acted movie with an unbelievable script, no one talks this way. I didn't care what happened to either main character. Oh, and the hospital people were extremely unprofessional in the movie. ONe male nurse yelled at the boyfrind of one if the dead patients and removed the sheet covering her face while she was dead on the stretcher in the hallway. Come on. And Jamie gurtz kept having hissy fits. What a spoiled brat

I FIRST SAW SILENCE LIKE GLASS IN 1991,I SAW IT ON BRITISH TV AND DID NOT REALIZE AT THE TIME WHAT A GREAT FILM IT WAS.I THEN TRIED IN VAIN TO TRY AND FIND THE FILM IN BRITAIN BUT WAS NEVER ABLE TO DO SO BECAUSE I RECENTLY FOUND OUT THAT IT WAS NEVER MADE AVAILABLE TO THE UK.
I HAVE RECENTLY BOUGHT THE FILM FROM THE US AND HAVE ALSO PURCHASED A VIDEO RECORDER THAT ALSO PLAYS NTSC,WE HAVE PAL/SECAM FORMAT IN UK.IT WAS WONDERFUL TO SEE THE FILM AGAIN AFTER 11 YEARS,GOD,TIME GOES FAST.
I WAS A BIG FAN OF JAMI GERTZ WHEN I FIRST SAW THE LOST BOYS,BUT AFTER SEEING HER PERFORMANCE HERE IT REALLY MADE ME SEE WHAT A GREAT ACTRESS SHE IS.SHE PLAYS A BALLERINA CALLED EVA WHO DEVELOPS CANCER AND IS ADMITTED TO A CANCER HOSPITAL AND BEFRIENDS CLAUDIA,PLAYED WONDERFULLY BY MARTHA PLIMPTON,THE TWO BECOME BESTEST FRIENDS AND HAVE A SPECIAL BOND THAT CARRIES THE FILM WELL.
SEEING THE FILM FOR A SECOND TIME WAS STILL THOUGHT PROVOKING AND SHOULD MAKE US ALL SEE JUST HOW SPECIAL AND FRAGILE OUR TIME HERE TRULY IS,THE FILM IS A TRUE STORY AND PERSONALLY,I THINK MOST OF THE BEST ONES ARE.
IN MY OPINION,SILENCE LIKE GLASS SITS WELL WITH OTHER GREAT FILMS SUCH AS;BEACHES,FRIED GREEN TOMATOES AND STEEL MAGNOLIA'S.
SILENCE LIKE GLASS IS A FILM THAT I WAITED A LONG TIME TO GET BUT IT WAS DEFINETLEY WORTH THE WAIT.

JUSTIN WELLBELOVE