James-Remar Movie Reviews

Related Subjects: James-Belushi
More Pages: James-Remar Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
VHS movie reviews for "James-Remar" sorted by average review score:
Inferno
Released in VHS Tape by Paramount Studio (07 September, 1999)
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
Director: Ian Barry
Average review score:

Inferno
This was an interesting concept for a movie. A solar flair burst bigger than anything ever recorded is headed toward Earth. The temperature begins to rise on what is already a hot summer. The movie focuses on Los Angeles and how the city copes with the rising heat. The main characters are a local high school teacher, who is also a member of the National Guard, a Doctor who can no longer practice because of a patient's death, a lifeguard from a local beach, who is also a medical tech and her bad boy ex-boyfriend, also a General who has been sent to LA to try and keep the city under control until the solar wave passes over Earth. The city is placed under Marshall Law as the temp soars to around 140 degrees and starts baking the city along with the cast. Not a bad story but could have been better.

Psycho
Released in VHS Tape by Universal Studios (28 August, 2001)
MPAA Rating: R (Restricted)
Director: Gus Van Sant
Starring: Vince Vaughn and Anne Heche
Numerous critics had already sharpened their knives even before Gus Van Sant's shot-for-shot color "re-creation" of the 1960 black-and-white Hitchcock classic was released, chiding the Good Will Hunting director for defiling hallowed ground. This intriguing cinematic curiosity, though, is hardly as sacrilegious as critics would lead you to believe. If anything, Van Sant doesn't take enough liberties with his almost slavish devotion to the material, now updated with modern references. At times, you wish Van Sant would cut loose with a little spontaneity, a little energy, a little something. Unfortunately, when he does venture outside Hitchcock's parameters, with inserted shots of storm clouds during the murder sequences, it's to little effect. Granted, he liberally splashes color throughout the film (especially in the case of the infamous shower scene), and this is a great-looking movie, but in his obsession with adding a new physical dimension to the film, there's little insight into these characters that Hitchcock hadn't already provided. Vince Vaughn, a robotic and giggly Norman, doesn't crawl under your skin the way boy-next-door Anthony Perkins did, and Anne Heche is admirable if not very sympathetic in the Janet Leigh role. Van Sant does score a minor coup, though, in his casting of the supporting roles: Julianne Moore provides a welcome shot of energy as Heche's irritable and curious sister, William H. Macy is a perfect small-time detective, Viggo Mortensen is studly enough to make you understand why Heche would want to run away with him, and James LeGros walks away with his one brief scene as a used car salesman. And Danny Elfman's gorgeous rerecording of Bernard Herrmann's score is a potent supporting character unto itself. Students and fans of the original film will get a kick out of the modern revisions, but don't expect anything of Hitchcockian caliber; watch it for the sum of its intriguing parts, but not the whole. --Mark Englehart
Average review score:

WOOF!
UGH...! Did a remake of the original horror/suspense classic have to be made? These are NOT even the original cast (although I understand that they'd be pretty old now considering the movie's 40 years old) Also, the acting was very cheesy, stupid, & crappy & Anthony Perkins is the ONLY TRUE Norman Bates instead of some other guy who doesn't even come close to fitting the picture. Another problem is that it's just not even scary WHATSOEVER! All they did is colorize it in order to give it a more 90s style look but the dialogue is all same ol' same ol' as the original "Psycho". Besides, people don't even talk that way anymore! Time has changed A LOT over the years yet they try & give it a 60s look. I know that some movies should be left alone while others sometimes REALLY need a remake. ("The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" is an example because while the first version was good, the 2003 version actually turned out to be even better due to that the cript is NOT the same but still with some similarities) "PSYCHO" on the other hand did not need a remake at all! As another reviewer here stated, IT'S ALL BEEN DONE ALREADY!!!! Very crappy & just pathetic! Don't waste your time & get the original version of this instead!

Very poor
I guess when you cast a bunch of Hollywood's elite to star in a remake of a classic 60's horror flick, you can't really expect much. It seems like the director (Gus Van Idiot Savant or whatever) just wanted to bulk it up and add more glitz and glamour, while meanwhile the original was a humble, modest, bold effort. Vince Vaughn is the most unconvincing psychopath on film ever, his personality did not work for this movie, and seeing him in his other movies makes this one a little awkward. Julianne Moore is usually a superb actress, I don't know why she would involve herself in this piece of cheese, I mean, did they REALLY have walkman's back then? The only plus side is Anne Heche who fits her roll very well, it's just a shame she had to die off 30 minutes into the movie, making this one a true "sleeper" indeed.

A so-so remake of a film classic
Marion Crane (Anne Heche) steals $400,000 from her boss and flees from Phoenix, AZ, to California to meet with her boyfriend Sam Loomis (Viggo Mortensen). Along the way, a heavy rainstorm forces her to seek shelter at the Bates Motel, where she meets Norman Bates (Vince Vaughan), an odd fellow who enjoys stuffing birds, is very devoted to his mother, and hides a twisted little secret.

Gus Van Zant's remake is only so-so at best. Most remakes try to update the film, adding new technology or bringing some of the themes up-to-date. Van Zant's remake is shot-for-shot with the only changes being that the film is entirely in color and that he's added a few non-sensical images to the murder sequences. With some of the scenes, the viewer can tell they were shot either in front of a green screen or in front of a movie background, making it appear very stagy and dated. Also, the color takes away some of the menace that is created in the original black-and-white.

Most of the cast does an admirable job, including Anne Heche as Marion Crane, who portrays the nervousness and anxieties of her character extremely well. Vince Vaughan is miscast and over-the-top as Norman Bates, making him too menacing and too unsympathetic. The supporting cast is okay with Julianne Moore, William H. Macy and Viggo Morensen.

One other good point of the film is Danny Elfman's presentation of the Bernard Hermann score. No changes to it, but it does prove how important music can be to setting the mood for a film, and that urgent violin strain in the shower sequence still causes chills. But overall, this movie remake is only so-so.

Psycho (1998)
Released in VHS Tape by Universal Studios (08 June, 1999)
MPAA Rating: R (Restricted)
Director: Gus Van Sant
Starring: Vince Vaughn and Anne Heche
Numerous critics had already sharpened their knives even before Gus Van Sant's shot-for-shot color "re-creation" of the 1960 black-and-white Hitchcock classic was released, chiding the Good Will Hunting director for defiling hallowed ground. This intriguing cinematic curiosity, though, is hardly as sacrilegious as critics would lead you to believe. If anything, Van Sant doesn't take enough liberties with his almost slavish devotion to the material, now updated with modern references. At times, you wish Van Sant would cut loose with a little spontaneity, a little energy, a little something. Unfortunately, when he does venture outside Hitchcock's parameters, with inserted shots of storm clouds during the murder sequences, it's to little effect. Granted, he liberally splashes color throughout the film (especially in the case of the infamous shower scene), and this is a great-looking movie, but in his obsession with adding a new physical dimension to the film, there's little insight into these characters that Hitchcock hadn't already provided. Vince Vaughn, a robotic and giggly Norman, doesn't crawl under your skin the way boy-next-door Anthony Perkins did, and Anne Heche is admirable if not very sympathetic in the Janet Leigh role. Van Sant does score a minor coup, though, in his casting of the supporting roles: Julianne Moore provides a welcome shot of energy as Heche's irritable and curious sister, William H. Macy is a perfect small-time detective, Viggo Mortensen is studly enough to make you understand why Heche would want to run away with him, and James LeGros walks away with his one brief scene as a used car salesman. And Danny Elfman's gorgeous rerecording of Bernard Herrmann's score is a potent supporting character unto itself. Students and fans of the original film will get a kick out of the modern revisions, but don't expect anything of Hitchcockian caliber; watch it for the sum of its intriguing parts, but not the whole. --Mark Englehart
Average review score:

WOOF!
UGH...! Did a remake of the original horror/suspense classic have to be made? These are NOT even the original cast (although I understand that they'd be pretty old now considering the movie's 40 years old) Also, the acting was very cheesy, stupid, & crappy & Anthony Perkins is the ONLY TRUE Norman Bates instead of some other guy who doesn't even come close to fitting the picture. Another problem is that it's just not even scary WHATSOEVER! All they did is colorize it in order to give it a more 90s style look but the dialogue is all same ol' same ol' as the original "Psycho". Besides, people don't even talk that way anymore! Time has changed A LOT over the years yet they try & give it a 60s look. I know that some movies should be left alone while others sometimes REALLY need a remake. ("The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" is an example because while the first version was good, the 2003 version actually turned out to be even better due to that the cript is NOT the same but still with some similarities) "PSYCHO" on the other hand did not need a remake at all! As another reviewer here stated, IT'S ALL BEEN DONE ALREADY!!!! Very crappy & just pathetic! Don't waste your time & get the original version of this instead!

Very poor
I guess when you cast a bunch of Hollywood's elite to star in a remake of a classic 60's horror flick, you can't really expect much. It seems like the director (Gus Van Idiot Savant or whatever) just wanted to bulk it up and add more glitz and glamour, while meanwhile the original was a humble, modest, bold effort. Vince Vaughn is the most unconvincing psychopath on film ever, his personality did not work for this movie, and seeing him in his other movies makes this one a little awkward. Julianne Moore is usually a superb actress, I don't know why she would involve herself in this piece of cheese, I mean, did they REALLY have walkman's back then? The only plus side is Anne Heche who fits her roll very well, it's just a shame she had to die off 30 minutes into the movie, making this one a true "sleeper" indeed.

A so-so remake of a film classic
Marion Crane (Anne Heche) steals $400,000 from her boss and flees from Phoenix, AZ, to California to meet with her boyfriend Sam Loomis (Viggo Mortensen). Along the way, a heavy rainstorm forces her to seek shelter at the Bates Motel, where she meets Norman Bates (Vince Vaughan), an odd fellow who enjoys stuffing birds, is very devoted to his mother, and hides a twisted little secret.

Gus Van Zant's remake is only so-so at best. Most remakes try to update the film, adding new technology or bringing some of the themes up-to-date. Van Zant's remake is shot-for-shot with the only changes being that the film is entirely in color and that he's added a few non-sensical images to the murder sequences. With some of the scenes, the viewer can tell they were shot either in front of a green screen or in front of a movie background, making it appear very stagy and dated. Also, the color takes away some of the menace that is created in the original black-and-white.

Most of the cast does an admirable job, including Anne Heche as Marion Crane, who portrays the nervousness and anxieties of her character extremely well. Vince Vaughan is miscast and over-the-top as Norman Bates, making him too menacing and too unsympathetic. The supporting cast is okay with Julianne Moore, William H. Macy and Viggo Morensen.

One other good point of the film is Danny Elfman's presentation of the Bernard Hermann score. No changes to it, but it does prove how important music can be to setting the mood for a film, and that urgent violin strain in the shower sequence still causes chills. But overall, this movie remake is only so-so.

Psycho (1998)
Released in VHS Tape by Universal Studios (08 June, 1999)
MPAA Rating: R (Restricted)
Director: Gus Van Sant
Starring: Vince Vaughn and Anne Heche
Numerous critics had already sharpened their knives even before Gus Van Sant's shot-for-shot color "re-creation" of the 1960 black-and-white Hitchcock classic was released, chiding the Good Will Hunting director for defiling hallowed ground. This intriguing cinematic curiosity, though, is hardly as sacrilegious as critics would lead you to believe. If anything, Van Sant doesn't take enough liberties with his almost slavish devotion to the material, now updated with modern references. At times, you wish Van Sant would cut loose with a little spontaneity, a little energy, a little something. Unfortunately, when he does venture outside Hitchcock's parameters, with inserted shots of storm clouds during the murder sequences, it's to little effect. Granted, he liberally splashes color throughout the film (especially in the case of the infamous shower scene), and this is a great-looking movie, but in his obsession with adding a new physical dimension to the film, there's little insight into these characters that Hitchcock hadn't already provided. Vince Vaughn, a robotic and giggly Norman, doesn't crawl under your skin the way boy-next-door Anthony Perkins did, and Anne Heche is admirable if not very sympathetic in the Janet Leigh role. Van Sant does score a minor coup, though, in his casting of the supporting roles: Julianne Moore provides a welcome shot of energy as Heche's irritable and curious sister, William H. Macy is a perfect small-time detective, Viggo Mortensen is studly enough to make you understand why Heche would want to run away with him, and James LeGros walks away with his one brief scene as a used car salesman. And Danny Elfman's gorgeous rerecording of Bernard Herrmann's score is a potent supporting character unto itself. Students and fans of the original film will get a kick out of the modern revisions, but don't expect anything of Hitchcockian caliber; watch it for the sum of its intriguing parts, but not the whole. --Mark Englehart
Average review score:

WOOF!
UGH...! Did a remake of the original horror/suspense classic have to be made? These are NOT even the original cast (although I understand that they'd be pretty old now considering the movie's 40 years old) Also, the acting was very cheesy, stupid, & crappy & Anthony Perkins is the ONLY TRUE Norman Bates instead of some other guy who doesn't even come close to fitting the picture. Another problem is that it's just not even scary WHATSOEVER! All they did is colorize it in order to give it a more 90s style look but the dialogue is all same ol' same ol' as the original "Psycho". Besides, people don't even talk that way anymore! Time has changed A LOT over the years yet they try & give it a 60s look. I know that some movies should be left alone while others sometimes REALLY need a remake. ("The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" is an example because while the first version was good, the 2003 version actually turned out to be even better due to that the cript is NOT the same but still with some similarities) "PSYCHO" on the other hand did not need a remake at all! As another reviewer here stated, IT'S ALL BEEN DONE ALREADY!!!! Very crappy & just pathetic! Don't waste your time & get the original version of this instead!

Very poor
I guess when you cast a bunch of Hollywood's elite to star in a remake of a classic 60's horror flick, you can't really expect much. It seems like the director (Gus Van Idiot Savant or whatever) just wanted to bulk it up and add more glitz and glamour, while meanwhile the original was a humble, modest, bold effort. Vince Vaughn is the most unconvincing psychopath on film ever, his personality did not work for this movie, and seeing him in his other movies makes this one a little awkward. Julianne Moore is usually a superb actress, I don't know why she would involve herself in this piece of cheese, I mean, did they REALLY have walkman's back then? The only plus side is Anne Heche who fits her roll very well, it's just a shame she had to die off 30 minutes into the movie, making this one a true "sleeper" indeed.

A so-so remake of a film classic
Marion Crane (Anne Heche) steals $400,000 from her boss and flees from Phoenix, AZ, to California to meet with her boyfriend Sam Loomis (Viggo Mortensen). Along the way, a heavy rainstorm forces her to seek shelter at the Bates Motel, where she meets Norman Bates (Vince Vaughan), an odd fellow who enjoys stuffing birds, is very devoted to his mother, and hides a twisted little secret.

Gus Van Zant's remake is only so-so at best. Most remakes try to update the film, adding new technology or bringing some of the themes up-to-date. Van Zant's remake is shot-for-shot with the only changes being that the film is entirely in color and that he's added a few non-sensical images to the murder sequences. With some of the scenes, the viewer can tell they were shot either in front of a green screen or in front of a movie background, making it appear very stagy and dated. Also, the color takes away some of the menace that is created in the original black-and-white.

Most of the cast does an admirable job, including Anne Heche as Marion Crane, who portrays the nervousness and anxieties of her character extremely well. Vince Vaughan is miscast and over-the-top as Norman Bates, making him too menacing and too unsympathetic. The supporting cast is okay with Julianne Moore, William H. Macy and Viggo Morensen.

One other good point of the film is Danny Elfman's presentation of the Bernard Hermann score. No changes to it, but it does prove how important music can be to setting the mood for a film, and that urgent violin strain in the shower sequence still causes chills. But overall, this movie remake is only so-so.

Psycho - Spanish subtitles
Released in VHS Tape by Universal Studios (28 August, 2001)
MPAA Rating: R (Restricted)
Director: Gus Van Sant
Starring: Vince Vaughn and Anne Heche
Numerous critics had already sharpened their knives even before Gus Van Sant's shot-for-shot color "re-creation" of the 1960 black-and-white Hitchcock classic was released, chiding the Good Will Hunting director for defiling hallowed ground. This intriguing cinematic curiosity, though, is hardly as sacrilegious as critics would lead you to believe. If anything, Van Sant doesn't take enough liberties with his almost slavish devotion to the material, now updated with modern references. At times, you wish Van Sant would cut loose with a little spontaneity, a little energy, a little something. Unfortunately, when he does venture outside Hitchcock's parameters, with inserted shots of storm clouds during the murder sequences, it's to little effect. Granted, he liberally splashes color throughout the film (especially in the case of the infamous shower scene), and this is a great-looking movie, but in his obsession with adding a new physical dimension to the film, there's little insight into these characters that Hitchcock hadn't already provided. Vince Vaughn, a robotic and giggly Norman, doesn't crawl under your skin the way boy-next-door Anthony Perkins did, and Anne Heche is admirable if not very sympathetic in the Janet Leigh role. Van Sant does score a minor coup, though, in his casting of the supporting roles: Julianne Moore provides a welcome shot of energy as Heche's irritable and curious sister, William H. Macy is a perfect small-time detective, Viggo Mortensen is studly enough to make you understand why Heche would want to run away with him, and James LeGros walks away with his one brief scene as a used car salesman. And Danny Elfman's gorgeous rerecording of Bernard Herrmann's score is a potent supporting character unto itself. Students and fans of the original film will get a kick out of the modern revisions, but don't expect anything of Hitchcockian caliber; watch it for the sum of its intriguing parts, but not the whole. --Mark Englehart
Average review score:

WOOF!
UGH...! Did a remake of the original horror/suspense classic have to be made? These are NOT even the original cast (although I understand that they'd be pretty old now considering the movie's 40 years old) Also, the acting was very cheesy, stupid, & crappy & Anthony Perkins is the ONLY TRUE Norman Bates instead of some other guy who doesn't even come close to fitting the picture. Another problem is that it's just not even scary WHATSOEVER! All they did is colorize it in order to give it a more 90s style look but the dialogue is all same ol' same ol' as the original "Psycho". Besides, people don't even talk that way anymore! Time has changed A LOT over the years yet they try & give it a 60s look. I know that some movies should be left alone while others sometimes REALLY need a remake. ("The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" is an example because while the first version was good, the 2003 version actually turned out to be even better due to that the cript is NOT the same but still with some similarities) "PSYCHO" on the other hand did not need a remake at all! As another reviewer here stated, IT'S ALL BEEN DONE ALREADY!!!! Very crappy & just pathetic! Don't waste your time & get the original version of this instead!

Very poor
I guess when you cast a bunch of Hollywood's elite to star in a remake of a classic 60's horror flick, you can't really expect much. It seems like the director (Gus Van Idiot Savant or whatever) just wanted to bulk it up and add more glitz and glamour, while meanwhile the original was a humble, modest, bold effort. Vince Vaughn is the most unconvincing psychopath on film ever, his personality did not work for this movie, and seeing him in his other movies makes this one a little awkward. Julianne Moore is usually a superb actress, I don't know why she would involve herself in this piece of cheese, I mean, did they REALLY have walkman's back then? The only plus side is Anne Heche who fits her roll very well, it's just a shame she had to die off 30 minutes into the movie, making this one a true "sleeper" indeed.

A so-so remake of a film classic
Marion Crane (Anne Heche) steals $400,000 from her boss and flees from Phoenix, AZ, to California to meet with her boyfriend Sam Loomis (Viggo Mortensen). Along the way, a heavy rainstorm forces her to seek shelter at the Bates Motel, where she meets Norman Bates (Vince Vaughan), an odd fellow who enjoys stuffing birds, is very devoted to his mother, and hides a twisted little secret.

Gus Van Zant's remake is only so-so at best. Most remakes try to update the film, adding new technology or bringing some of the themes up-to-date. Van Zant's remake is shot-for-shot with the only changes being that the film is entirely in color and that he's added a few non-sensical images to the murder sequences. With some of the scenes, the viewer can tell they were shot either in front of a green screen or in front of a movie background, making it appear very stagy and dated. Also, the color takes away some of the menace that is created in the original black-and-white.

Most of the cast does an admirable job, including Anne Heche as Marion Crane, who portrays the nervousness and anxieties of her character extremely well. Vince Vaughan is miscast and over-the-top as Norman Bates, making him too menacing and too unsympathetic. The supporting cast is okay with Julianne Moore, William H. Macy and Viggo Morensen.

One other good point of the film is Danny Elfman's presentation of the Bernard Hermann score. No changes to it, but it does prove how important music can be to setting the mood for a film, and that urgent violin strain in the shower sequence still causes chills. But overall, this movie remake is only so-so.

Mortal Kombat: Annihilation
Released in VHS Tape by New Line Studios (25 August, 1998)
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
Director: John R. Leonetti
Starring: Robin Shou, James Remar, and Talisa Soto
Average review score:

No.
The fight scenes are like extended games of Patty-Cake.

The special effects are worse than the first one's for some reason.

John Candy would've made a better Jax, at least he could act.

Sonya is an 80's jazzercise instructor, WITH AN ATTITUDE.

There is no "TOASTY!" at all.

You're better off watching a special on ox migration than this. At least you won't feel stupider afterward.

Poorly made movie.
Mortal Kombat Annihilation was a poor attempt at a sequel and is one of the worst ever made.

MKA takes off immediatley where the first film ended. The bad guys are not honoring the humans victory at the tournament, and they are preparing to invade earth. Once again, it's up to our heros to save the day and prevent the emperor from invading.

MKA storyline is bad. They don't leave characters origns to what they were in the game. They killed off the funniest character from the first movie in Johnny Cage. Once again to much is focused on Lu Kang and his quest to be the best. The special effects weren't as good as the first. When the characters do there animality's it's very bad looking.

Don't waste your money on the flick. Even if your a hardcore MK fan I can't see you liking this. I got in a promo pack and would never have paid money to have seen it. Don't waste your cash. Trust Me.

Johnny!!
What's up, MK fans?! This is another good movie, but not as great as the first. A lot of the characters from Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 for Sega Genesis are in it...to name a few:
Liu Kang
Rayden
Sonya Blade
Jax Briggs
Princess Kitana
Jade
Nightwolf (doesn't fight)
Cyrax (bit part)
Smoke (bit part)
Mileena (fights Sonya, only one line)
Noob Saibot (not seen him yet but I know he's in there)
Ermac
RAIN (he finally showed up!)
Sheeva
Shao Kahn
Sindel
Motaro
Scorpion (back from the dead)
Sub-Zero's younger brother (also named Sub-Zero)

Kabal and Stryker are mentioned in the movie. Scorpion and Sub-Zero finally battled...

Mortal Kombat: Annihilation
Released in VHS Tape by New Line Studios (25 August, 1998)
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
Director: John R. Leonetti
Starring: Robin Shou, James Remar, and Talisa Soto
Average review score:

No.
The fight scenes are like extended games of Patty-Cake.

The special effects are worse than the first one's for some reason.

John Candy would've made a better Jax, at least he could act.

Sonya is an 80's jazzercise instructor, WITH AN ATTITUDE.

There is no "TOASTY!" at all.

You're better off watching a special on ox migration than this. At least you won't feel stupider afterward.

Poorly made movie.
Mortal Kombat Annihilation was a poor attempt at a sequel and is one of the worst ever made.

MKA takes off immediatley where the first film ended. The bad guys are not honoring the humans victory at the tournament, and they are preparing to invade earth. Once again, it's up to our heros to save the day and prevent the emperor from invading.

MKA storyline is bad. They don't leave characters origns to what they were in the game. They killed off the funniest character from the first movie in Johnny Cage. Once again to much is focused on Lu Kang and his quest to be the best. The special effects weren't as good as the first. When the characters do there animality's it's very bad looking.

Don't waste your money on the flick. Even if your a hardcore MK fan I can't see you liking this. I got in a promo pack and would never have paid money to have seen it. Don't waste your cash. Trust Me.

Johnny!!
What's up, MK fans?! This is another good movie, but not as great as the first. A lot of the characters from Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3 for Sega Genesis are in it...to name a few:
Liu Kang
Rayden
Sonya Blade
Jax Briggs
Princess Kitana
Jade
Nightwolf (doesn't fight)
Cyrax (bit part)
Smoke (bit part)
Mileena (fights Sonya, only one line)
Noob Saibot (not seen him yet but I know he's in there)
Ermac
RAIN (he finally showed up!)
Sheeva
Shao Kahn
Sindel
Motaro
Scorpion (back from the dead)
Sub-Zero's younger brother (also named Sub-Zero)

Kabal and Stryker are mentioned in the movie. Scorpion and Sub-Zero finally battled...

Born Bad
Released in VHS Tape by New Concorde Home En (26 October, 1999)
MPAA Rating: NR (Not Rated)
Starring: James Remar
Average review score:
No reviews found.
Confessions of a Hitman
Released in VHS Tape by Plaza Entertainment (10 August, 1999)
MPAA Rating: NR (Not Rated)
Starring: Confessions of a Hitman and James Remar
Average review score:
No reviews found.
Confessions of a Hitman
Released in VHS Tape by Hemdale Home Video I (18 April, 1995)
MPAA Rating: R (Restricted)
Starring: James Remar
Average review score:
No reviews found.

Related Subjects: James-Belushi
More Pages: James-Remar Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8