darkmoonfirelyte--disqus
darkmoonfirelyte
darkmoonfirelyte--disqus

While the production values in the sequel are pretty good, story-wise Scream Blacula Scream is a plodding mess. Too much time is devoted to the voodoo cult full of stock characters you never really care about, so much so that Blacula because more of an afterthought than the main focus of the movie. William Marshall

Blacula, hands down. I love that movie because it's a good Dracula- genre flick, but it's also so deliciously dated. (Edit due to phone auto-correct)

Wow, CSI really has been running for a while…

I refuse to watch this series until we get to the reboot, Jungle Book Genisys.

I fully agree with you about needing likeable characters. It was the same reason I couldn't get into Sons of Anarchy — I didn't like anyone. Even shows like Breaking Bad and the Shield were better suited for me if only because at least at the start I could understand where the protagonist was coming from (even if I

I'm disappointed that the timeline will be linear instead of taking place in the present, and then twenty years past, and then twenty years before then, and then twenty years before then, all with the same characters recursing backwards and forwards until the entire story is revealed to be a dream inside the head of

Don't feel bad, Caroline, I've never managed to get into Seinfeld either. And with so many other things out there to watch, I doubt I ever will.

I couldn't get into that show at all. I tried the first episode, and there wasn't a likeable character in sight. I gave up and haven't looked back.

During this review, as McCown slowly slipper further and further into cinema-fueled insanity, I was reminded over and over of Joe R. Lansdale's The Drive In. People go to a movie and the theater (or drive-in in the book) consumes their very souls.

…awww crap. Now even I'm getting confused.

*shoves glasses up nose* You reference Cube in this article, but the picture is actually from the sequel, Hypercube. Jeez!

That's what I usually notice about his review. He lambasts them in the content, and then tries to make up for it with a passing grade. Just look at his review for Iron Man 3 — he absolutely detested it if you just read the content, but then gave it a C+ (if I'm not mistaken).

I was kinda thinking the same thing. Considering the vitriol I've read from Dowd aimed at other Marvel movies, a B- is practically glowing.

Hell, there are literal bags of Cheetos-brand popcorn in grocery stores. This seems like the opposite of news.

I know this is probably the real Joker they're going with, but I have to say I'd love to see this as just some Joker pretender and the real Joker shows up later in the movie and murders him. This really feels like a Joker Gang member, not the real Joker.

I think some of it is probably the hype around the movie butting up against the movie you actually saw — expectation can ruin a movie. I certainly agree with you that the flick isn't as good now for me (at 34) as it was when I first saw it years ago, but for a simple superheroic/revenge flick, it holds up surprisingly

I understand that just about every half-way bankable movie can rate a direct-to-video "sequel" (hell, just look at the Fright Night remake — a movie I really loved — and it's terrible sequel-in-name-only), but it still surprises me that The Man with the Iron Fists rated a sequel. From the way the review describes it,

That is just a funny bit of writing. Terrible, but funny.

Well, musings and wonderings are usually internal dialogue anyway. Most of the time the context of the situation dictates they're musing in their head, so you don't have to deal with "she mused" to establish context — girl be thinking, and we all know it.

I absolutely detest the word "funnily", especially when people use it when they should simply be using "funny". "Funnily enough" sounds terrible, and no one is ever able to say it without it coming across as mush-mouth. If you have to have a character say something like that, say "funny you should mention that." It's