Michael-Bay Movie Reviews

I saw Bad Boys 2 over the summer and it was quite a traumatizing expierence. For real, the movie shot at me like a cannon. This sequel to the fun-filled original is loud,long, cramed with endless language and violence and did i mention long? The action sequences do look impressive but there are too many loud car crashes and bloodshed. In one huge scene, the police chase a cartel in the freeway and there's bodies and people dying.The filmmakers are absolute nuts! I'm speaking to u Jerry Buttheimer! Speaking of limbs, the morgue scene with Smith and Laurence picking out the dead's insides is outrageously disgusting.If this is your cup of tea have fun. as for me, im spending my time better in good use

It is entertaining, but i was asking myself through the movie is all of this necessary? The language is very crude, which is not uncommon these days but i think they went a bit too far, please don't let small kids watch it. What was Jerry thinking? How they spoke to that teenager was just unnecessary and not even funny, and they about shredded a small city during a car chasing scene, looks like they killed tons of people, and i don't think they even mentioned anything about it, they make cops look careless. I would rent this first, before buying it.

I was pleased with this movie; the humor and action factors were high, but it's all been done before. Martin Lawrence and Will Smith make a great comedic team, which keeps the movie moving along nicely. Some of the scenes made me laugh out loud, so the humor was done VERY well. The action was very good too, especially at the end, when they invaded Johnny Tapia's home. There were a few tense spots, but you knew they beat the odds.

All in all, not a bad release. This movie is above average, but still falls short of being the best.

I saw Bad Boys 2 over the summer and it was quite a traumatizing expierence. For real, the movie shot at me like a cannon. This sequel to the fun-filled original is loud,long, cramed with endless language and violence and did i mention long? The action sequences do look impressive but there are too many loud car crashes and bloodshed. In one huge scene, the police chase a cartel in the freeway and there's bodies and people dying.The filmmakers are absolute nuts! I'm speaking to u Jerry Buttheimer! Speaking of limbs, the morgue scene with Smith and Laurence picking out the dead's insides is outrageously disgusting.If this is your cup of tea have fun. as for me, im spending my time better in good use

It is entertaining, but i was asking myself through the movie is all of this necessary? The language is very crude, which is not uncommon these days but i think they went a bit too far, please don't let small kids watch it. What was Jerry thinking? How they spoke to that teenager was just unnecessary and not even funny, and they about shredded a small city during a car chasing scene, looks like they killed tons of people, and i don't think they even mentioned anything about it, they make cops look careless. I would rent this first, before buying it.

I was pleased with this movie; the humor and action factors were high, but it's all been done before. Martin Lawrence and Will Smith make a great comedic team, which keeps the movie moving along nicely. Some of the scenes made me laugh out loud, so the humor was done VERY well. The action was very good too, especially at the end, when they invaded Johnny Tapia's home. There were a few tense spots, but you knew they beat the odds.

All in all, not a bad release. This movie is above average, but still falls short of being the best.

I saw Bad Boys 2 over the summer and it was quite a traumatizing expierence. For real, the movie shot at me like a cannon. This sequel to the fun-filled original is loud,long, cramed with endless language and violence and did i mention long? The action sequences do look impressive but there are too many loud car crashes and bloodshed. In one huge scene, the police chase a cartel in the freeway and there's bodies and people dying.The filmmakers are absolute nuts! I'm speaking to u Jerry Buttheimer! Speaking of limbs, the morgue scene with Smith and Laurence picking out the dead's insides is outrageously disgusting.If this is your cup of tea have fun. as for me, im spending my time better in good use

Being such a fan of the first movie with its comic timing, excellent direction that Michael always brings (Though Pearl Harbor was crap) and a great score (yet is sounds suspiciously like Speed's Hmmmmmm) anyway...i was surprised to find that I loved the second one even more...and the freeway chase scene rivals The Matrix Reloaded (Yes I said it!!) I think everything was better because Will Smith had more time to work on his comic/action skills between these films, and Michael definetly knows how to play to HIS audience as does Jerry Bruckhiemer. And the camera work in this film was turned up to 11! the 360 degree shooting scene going from room to room through bullet shots! GENIOUS! I definetly can see this film spawning at least one more sequel and is the Letha Weapon of our generation....with lots more blood and a more hardcore style of comedy.

... Well I finally got to see Bad Boys 2 a few weeks ago and I was very pleased. I can't wait for the dvd to come out.

The movie is ACTION packed to say the least. There is action, brief nudity, a lot of cursing, violent and digusting killings, and a lot of drugs. It is not a kid's movie and I was disapointed to see how many people brought their kids with them to see this movie.

Anyway, Will Smith and Martin Lawrence make a great team and yes their jokes were sometimes annoying and dry but not enough to be overshadowed by the really funny scenes. I liked the first Bad Boys film but I really feel that the sequel is much better. I would not be surprised to see a third installment.

If you like action, good special effects and great stunt coordination, this film is for you. I can't wait to watch it again!

I first saw this film as a rental from the video store. It was a dusty sun bleached box sitting at on a bottom shelf. I'd have to admit I was a little confused about some parts of it when I was done. It was not till a few years later that I bought the extended edition that I really began to enjoy this movie. If you are going to buy this make sure you watch the extended edition, everything finally makes sense. For some reason they felt American audiences would not "sit through" the regular version so they cut it down. Anyway, Edward Woodward as the annoying Sergeant Howie does a great job and Christopher Lee is as always a great actor to watch as Lord Summerisle. Some of the music is quite laughable, especially the song the villagers sing in the pub, but overall it is mostly a fun movie to watch. Besides is it is a great conversation piece to have in your DVD collection. The special features are not really that great, although the trailers are quite funny in the fact that they are poorly done, there is also a "hidden" interview with Christopher Lee which is a very poor picture quality. The main reason to buy this version over the regular one is the extended edition of the film.

First, let me say I feel this is the most underated movie of all time! This movie has a history so bizaar you wonder how it's survived! The movie has been butchered over and over and there's so much controversey over who has the COMPLETE version of the film! Well, probably someone does and until they give up the rights, we'll probably never see the entire movie fully restored! But saying that, I still feel this movie is worth buying(especially if you've never seen it at all) just so you can have it in your collection! These reviewers telling you not to buy the movie are only hurting the movie from being seen at all! Even if you could buy the complete version somewhere, it would probably cost you an arm and a leg to get it! So to all of you who haven't seen this picture, buy it! The theatrical version is 88 min. and the extended version is 100 min. The 88 min. version has been remastered and 5.1 sound while the extended version isn't. It's just mono with a VHS quality to the video. If you're interested in the history of this film, the 35 minute documentary on the film is included and it explains the fall of British Lion films and how the film was distributed to america all butchered up! Christopher Lee gives one of his finest performances and Edward Woodward does a fine job as the american sent to investigate the missing young girl. One thing I found humorous in the radio spots for the film is when they mention that "it's the film ROD STEWART doesn't want you to see!"

Britt Ekland is in the movie and she was dating Rod Stewart at the time! All in all, this movie is worth buying and it's for people want something different from what hollywood currently makes today! Also, anyone who puts down ANCHOR BAY entertainment should keep quiet! They do the best job at remastering their movies and that's the bottom line! Also, I didn't see any other major studio trying to get the rights to THE WICKER MAN and if they had, you wouldn't get half of what you get with this Limited edition!

movie )

OK I'm sure many people bought this expecting it to be a horror movie because it was made in the 70s and Christopher Lee starred in the movie. This couldn't be further from the truth. It was intelligently written and while it showed it's fair share of nudity - it was enjoyable and had a sense of pastoral quietness that I hadn't seen in movies before. It was funny hearing these pagans breaking into dirty little songs about sex or something related to it.

The one problem with reviewing this film today is that people may presume that the policeman is the guy we should be booing. But I would disagree - I think at the time when this film was released people could relate to the policeman because he was a Christian and I think at the time ( although it's this I'm a little unsure of ) people had a lot more respect for people. To watch something like this was of course a little terrifying for them.

It does bring up what happens when some people's minds are closed when it comes to different religions. It's something that still happens today so the film is far from dated. We see today in the news about Israel and Palestine and The divide in the North of Ireland with the Unionists and Nationalists. It's not something you'll actually get from watching the movie but you'll notice it after you watch the news

As for the movie - enjoy it - have a laugh with the songs and well it's just....just something that seemed out of place in the horror genre

Now a 1, and a 2 and a 3 and a 4 - Corn rigs and barley, corn rigs and barrrrlllleeeeeeeeeey

I first saw this film as a rental from the video store. It was a dusty sun bleached box sitting at on a bottom shelf. I'd have to admit I was a little confused about some parts of it when I was done. It was not till a few years later that I bought the extended edition that I really began to enjoy this movie. If you are going to buy this make sure you watch the extended edition, everything finally makes sense. For some reason they felt American audiences would not "sit through" the regular version so they cut it down. Anyway, Edward Woodward as the annoying Sergeant Howie does a great job and Christopher Lee is as always a great actor to watch as Lord Summerisle. Some of the music is quite laughable, especially the song the villagers sing in the pub, but overall it is mostly a fun movie to watch. Besides is it is a great conversation piece to have in your DVD collection. The special features are not really that great, although the trailers are quite funny in the fact that they are poorly done, there is also a "hidden" interview with Christopher Lee which is a very poor picture quality. The main reason to buy this version over the regular one is the extended edition of the film.

First, let me say I feel this is the most underated movie of all time! This movie has a history so bizaar you wonder how it's survived! The movie has been butchered over and over and there's so much controversey over who has the COMPLETE version of the film! Well, probably someone does and until they give up the rights, we'll probably never see the entire movie fully restored! But saying that, I still feel this movie is worth buying(especially if you've never seen it at all) just so you can have it in your collection! These reviewers telling you not to buy the movie are only hurting the movie from being seen at all! Even if you could buy the complete version somewhere, it would probably cost you an arm and a leg to get it! So to all of you who haven't seen this picture, buy it! The theatrical version is 88 min. and the extended version is 100 min. The 88 min. version has been remastered and 5.1 sound while the extended version isn't. It's just mono with a VHS quality to the video. If you're interested in the history of this film, the 35 minute documentary on the film is included and it explains the fall of British Lion films and how the film was distributed to america all butchered up! Christopher Lee gives one of his finest performances and Edward Woodward does a fine job as the american sent to investigate the missing young girl. One thing I found humorous in the radio spots for the film is when they mention that "it's the film ROD STEWART doesn't want you to see!"

Britt Ekland is in the movie and she was dating Rod Stewart at the time! All in all, this movie is worth buying and it's for people want something different from what hollywood currently makes today! Also, anyone who puts down ANCHOR BAY entertainment should keep quiet! They do the best job at remastering their movies and that's the bottom line! Also, I didn't see any other major studio trying to get the rights to THE WICKER MAN and if they had, you wouldn't get half of what you get with this Limited edition!

movie )

OK I'm sure many people bought this expecting it to be a horror movie because it was made in the 70s and Christopher Lee starred in the movie. This couldn't be further from the truth. It was intelligently written and while it showed it's fair share of nudity - it was enjoyable and had a sense of pastoral quietness that I hadn't seen in movies before. It was funny hearing these pagans breaking into dirty little songs about sex or something related to it.

The one problem with reviewing this film today is that people may presume that the policeman is the guy we should be booing. But I would disagree - I think at the time when this film was released people could relate to the policeman because he was a Christian and I think at the time ( although it's this I'm a little unsure of ) people had a lot more respect for people. To watch something like this was of course a little terrifying for them.

It does bring up what happens when some people's minds are closed when it comes to different religions. It's something that still happens today so the film is far from dated. We see today in the news about Israel and Palestine and The divide in the North of Ireland with the Unionists and Nationalists. It's not something you'll actually get from watching the movie but you'll notice it after you watch the news

As for the movie - enjoy it - have a laugh with the songs and well it's just....just something that seemed out of place in the horror genre

Now a 1, and a 2 and a 3 and a 4 - Corn rigs and barley, corn rigs and barrrrlllleeeeeeeeeey

Do you really Know the people you know? I adore the way in which Lynch leads you into his own microcosm, each screen is more intriguing than the previous and you become involved with the characters. Blue Velvet is no exception: a simple town boy gets drawn into a woman's world, only to inadvertently uncover dark mysteries. We take this spooky walk with him; a genuinely spooky, utterly bizarre, often weirdly funny walk that'll cling to your thoughts.

I don't idolize Lynch as many reviewers do (although I admired his work in The Straight Story) and I believe he has too often pursued weirdness for the sake of weirdness. But at his best he has produced marvels of film making. Blue Velvet is one of the latter as it doozily exposes the hidden dark underbelly of small towns, and of people that are seldom what they seem on the surface.

More than one viewing of this film is absolutely required, the first time round, if you are like me, you may end up thinking this is simply a noir-ish attempt at vulgar violence. The second viewing will actually make you see some of the things Lynch wanted you to see because you can see them without the shock factor. Even so, this may not be for everyone, but a must for Lynch fans.

Set in the quiet picture postcard logging community of Lumbertown, Jeffrey Beaumont (Kyle MacLachlan), a somewhat naive and squeaky clean college boy, finds a severed human ear. Shocked and disturbed he reports it immediately to the police whilst, with the help of his girlfriend (Laura Dern), he begins his own investigation, which soon leads him into stumbling into the seedy and violent world of abused nightclub singer Dorothy (Isabella Rosellini) and drug-sniffing psychopath (Dennis Hopper).

This is the first movie in which David Lynch really showed us all his cards and united themes and imagery, now familiar to millions through the likes of Mulholland Drive, Wild At Heart and Twin Peaks. Although 16 years old, David Lynch's Blue Velvet has lost none of its shock value. It is still deeply and uniquely disturbing, at times incredibly surreal and utterly compelling viewing. Beautifully filmed and directed by Lynch, its aesthetic value is often deliberately at odds with the subject matter and it is a work of dark genius. It also features superb acting performances all round. In particular, MacLachlan, Rosselinni, Dean Stockwell and Laura Dern shine, but it is Dennis Hopper's magnificent performance as a drug sniffing twisted psychopath that most people will remember.

Bizarre and frequently haunting, beautiful but frequently surreal, this is a movie that will stay with you for a very long time and really is a must see!

It's been called everything - kinky, creepy, disturbing, erotic. Call it what you want, but don't deny that director David Lynch's twisted journey into the dark side of American suburbia remains a landmark in cinema history - not to mention the scariest movie ever made. The plot itself isn't much - Kyle Machlaclan's naive Jeffery Beaumont stumbles upon a severed ear in the grass one day and discovers a web of crime, perversion, and, yeah, Isabella Rosselini eerily crooning the title song. What makes Blue Velvet so important is the way that Lynch creates an environment of emotions, nightmares, and desires as opposed to a plot-driven machine. Years down the road, it's still difficult to remember whodunit in Lynch's film, but Frank Booth's gas-hissing hysterics, those bugs beneath the grass, and that perfectly white picket fence linger on like a nightmare that enters the real world. Dennis Hopper's masochistic Frank Booth is perhaps the most memorable character from the film, but it's Machlachlan's Jeffery that really makes us shudder. His willing descent from his Leave It To Beaver-esque world into Velvet's realm of violent sexuality reminds us all that we're just a step away from madness.

This is without a doubt, one of Terry Gilliam's best film. The story is an imaginative one with an all-star cast. A great classic that everyone should see. Unfortunately the Criterion version of this DVD was a very dissapointing. The transfer was below average and the sound is probably the worst sounding DVD i own. I even tried to turn up the volume to give a theatrical feeling, but still could not ignore the poor recording. For a $30 Criterion disc, I was expecting more features, better quality and a behind the scenes look at the movie but again was dissapointed. One of the main reasons why I bought this DVD is because Amazon.com advertises this as a "DTS stereo" disc which is completely misleading. This dvd is not even Dolby Digital 5.1. I would recommend saving your money and wait for the regular version.

Time Bandits is my favorite movie, and the Criterion DVD is worth the cost to me because of the commentary by Gilliam and many of the actors. That said, it could have been so much better if the entire movie had been printed, rather than cutting off the top and bottom to make a "letterbox" format, with the same aspect ratio, but about 1/2 the visual information. What a sorry thing to do to such a wonderful movie!

I know another reviewer warns of "fake letterbox," but here is what it says on the liner notes: "Time Bandits is presented in its original theatrical aspect ration of 1.85:1. This digital transfer was created from the 35mm interpositive." How could you read this and believe the transfer would throw away so much of the film? The close shots are especially annoying. The VHS version is actually closer to the film visually than the DVD.

If I didn't love this film enough to care about the commentary (which apparently refers to a LaserDisk print, actually), I'd return the DVD in a heartbeat.

What a shame.

*****
(Five stars)
Have you heard the phrase "damning by faint praise"?
If you read a faint criticism of "Time Bandits", you could think of that phrase.
Great film.
Hope this review meets the review guidelines or it's toast.

This is without a doubt, one of Terry Gilliam's best film. The story is an imaginative one with an all-star cast. A great classic that everyone should see. Unfortunately the Criterion version of this DVD was a very dissapointing. The transfer was below average and the sound is probably the worst sounding DVD i own. I even tried to turn up the volume to give a theatrical feeling, but still could not ignore the poor recording. For a $30 Criterion disc, I was expecting more features, better quality and a behind the scenes look at the movie but again was dissapointed. One of the main reasons why I bought this DVD is because Amazon.com advertises this as a "DTS stereo" disc which is completely misleading. This dvd is not even Dolby Digital 5.1. I would recommend saving your money and wait for the regular version.

Time Bandits is my favorite movie, and the Criterion DVD is worth the cost to me because of the commentary by Gilliam and many of the actors. That said, it could have been so much better if the entire movie had been printed, rather than cutting off the top and bottom to make a "letterbox" format, with the same aspect ratio, but about 1/2 the visual information. What a sorry thing to do to such a wonderful movie!

I know another reviewer warns of "fake letterbox," but here is what it says on the liner notes: "Time Bandits is presented in its original theatrical aspect ration of 1.85:1. This digital transfer was created from the 35mm interpositive." How could you read this and believe the transfer would throw away so much of the film? The close shots are especially annoying. The VHS version is actually closer to the film visually than the DVD.

If I didn't love this film enough to care about the commentary (which apparently refers to a LaserDisk print, actually), I'd return the DVD in a heartbeat.

What a shame.

*****
(Five stars)
Have you heard the phrase "damning by faint praise"?
If you read a faint criticism of "Time Bandits", you could think of that phrase.
Great film.
Hope this review meets the review guidelines or it's toast.

I won't lie to you, Halloween 4 is an okay movie. It's not very entertaining, however, until near the end when they show Michael Myers more. There is more gore than the first and second movies, but very doubtfully more than the third, which has nothing to do with Michael Myers, meaning that it should not be part of the Halloween series at all. The basic overall plot is Michael Myers has been in a coma from being inside the hospital when it blew up, and so he's been at the Richmond Mental Institute for ten years. But as he was being transferred back to Smith's Grove, he overheard one of the doctors saying that Jamie Loyd (Danielle Harris), the daughter of Laurie Strode, was living in Haddonfield. As expected, Michael sprang to life and killed the doctor by shoving his thumb in his forehead...very stupid, and to think Alan McElroy was actually involved in making the Spawn series in HBO. Michael, played by George Wilbur, goes back to Haddonfield and proceeds to stalk his little niece. Well, with a few boring stretches, Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers will keep you entertained most of the time, but you may get bored of it a couple of times, too, so beware.

This movie came out in 1987 or '88 (I can't remember which), a time when the slasher genre was starting to die down - even the Jason films weren't grossing as much as they used to. So, it's rather odd that the producers would pick this as a time to resurrect Michael Myers.

As I said in the title of this review, this movie, like Halloween II, follows the slasher formula every step of the way, with gory kills, sex-crazed teenagers and people doing exceedingly moronic things - the rules of the horror genre that we all grew to know and (some of us) love during the '80s.

Considering that the original Halloween was built on suspense rather than splatter, this is actually a pretty decent sequel. It's better than Halloween II, at any rate. Sure, Michael is about as menacing as a ballpoint pen by now, but it's still a fairly entertaining entry in the series, and it's lightyears ahead of 5 and 6. If you're a fan of Mr. Myers, this warrants a rental.

This Movie Is A Good Addition To The Halloween series The Best Of the Ones With Jamie Definlety Worth Seeing

I won't lie to you, Halloween 4 is an okay movie. It's not very entertaining, however, until near the end when they show Michael Myers more. There is more gore than the first and second movies, but very doubtfully more than the third, which has nothing to do with Michael Myers, meaning that it should not be part of the Halloween series at all. The basic overall plot is Michael Myers has been in a coma from being inside the hospital when it blew up, and so he's been at the Richmond Mental Institute for ten years. But as he was being transferred back to Smith's Grove, he overheard one of the doctors saying that Jamie Loyd (Danielle Harris), the daughter of Laurie Strode, was living in Haddonfield. As expected, Michael sprang to life and killed the doctor by shoving his thumb in his forehead...very stupid, and to think Alan McElroy was actually involved in making the Spawn series in HBO. Michael, played by George Wilbur, goes back to Haddonfield and proceeds to stalk his little niece. Well, with a few boring stretches, Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers will keep you entertained most of the time, but you may get bored of it a couple of times, too, so beware.

This movie came out in 1987 or '88 (I can't remember which), a time when the slasher genre was starting to die down - even the Jason films weren't grossing as much as they used to. So, it's rather odd that the producers would pick this as a time to resurrect Michael Myers.

As I said in the title of this review, this movie, like Halloween II, follows the slasher formula every step of the way, with gory kills, sex-crazed teenagers and people doing exceedingly moronic things - the rules of the horror genre that we all grew to know and (some of us) love during the '80s.

Considering that the original Halloween was built on suspense rather than splatter, this is actually a pretty decent sequel. It's better than Halloween II, at any rate. Sure, Michael is about as menacing as a ballpoint pen by now, but it's still a fairly entertaining entry in the series, and it's lightyears ahead of 5 and 6. If you're a fan of Mr. Myers, this warrants a rental.

This Movie Is A Good Addition To The Halloween series The Best Of the Ones With Jamie Definlety Worth Seeing