I, Da Ca$hman's Movie Reviews

U Can't Beat Me Man!

Organized:

Chronologically. You will see the oldest films at the bottom and the newest films at the top.

Rating System

Ratings tend to not be the best indicators of opinions - for a better understanding read the entire review. However, ratings are also quick. So here is a quick legend of what these ratings might mean. Note that if there are multiple options, these options can merge in the hurricane that is my mentality.vAll ratings are made with both objective quality of the movie and personal opinion in mind. Reviews are made looking for all aspects of the movies, however seeking the positives as a priority over the negatives. If my rankings were chosen with a different method, this list would be entirely different.

0/5 - Nothing going for this movie. Example: A.V.P.:R.-Un:R[4.0]]{BETA}

1/5 - Barely anything going for this movie. Example: Batman & Robin

2/5 - Option A. Overrated. Example: The Amazing Spiderman. Option B. Had a lot of potential but it didn't fall through. Example: Alice in Wonderland (2010) Option C. Nothing new, nothing special, and synthetic. Example: Dolphin Tale. Option D. At least they tried. Example: Alien 3

3/5 - Option A. Cheesy and Fun, the best and worst of Popcorn Entertainment. Example: Piranaconda Option B. Good, Okay, but nothing that I even recommend by any stretch of the imagination. Just check it out if you're bored to death. Example: Highlander

3.5/5 - Very good, enjoyable. It's a fun time, and I recommend it, but don't rush out to the theaters. Something you would rent on Netflix. Example: Dracula 2000

3.8/5 Close to awesome but just great. Example: Iron Man

4/5 - Awesome but not perfect. Example: Batman Returns

5/5 - Between 90% done overtly well or 95% done well. Example: Batman Begins

5.5/5 - 95% Done overtly well or 100% done well. Example - Return of the Jedi

6/5 - Beyond Perfection. 100% done overtly well. Example: Cloverfield

All decimals represent a space in between these ratings.

Requests

They are available, however keep in mind I have my own schedules of movie reviewing and there are movies that I have reviewed on a now dead  YouTube Channel and some movies I have reviewed on my regular YouTube Channel. You may also post requests in Contact Us or the Request form on my YouTube Page.

Ad Space

Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time (2010)

I watched this 3 days ago not knowing I was deathly ill until I arrived at my house so I'm gonna take this baby home in a quick paragraph. (Infact it's so good *cough**literally*refer to Alien: Resurrection*cough**literally* that I might have done that anyways just with a little more oomph.)

Man, holly mother F'n $#!T is this underrated! I'd say most people think of it as a combination of everything bad about Pirates of the Caribbean and Mario Bros. Film. Well, I describe it as everything about Pirates of the Caribbean and Indiana Jones! Man, THIS IS HOW YOU DO AN ACTION-FLICK! With mind-numbing action, great scenery AND a plot that is absolutely fantastic. And through in some bad dialogue for good measure. I say, everybody who loves an action movie should see this, just make sure you understand your steak DOES in fact come with your corn. Then, you will love it like crazy. 

My usual definition of a beyond perfect movie is where nothing lacks what its supposed to have, and some parts if not all parts excel that point. This movie fits that criteria LIKE A VHS FITS IN A VCR! The Rating? 6/5

Robin Hood (2010)

Don't know the backstory of Robin Hood. Don't even know much of the well-known Robin Hood? Get ready for a bad, bad experience. Get ready, for a really slow movie.

Seriously, I went in not yet seeing Gladiator or the 1991/38 versions of Robin Hood, or doing any reading. Boy I feel bad I did this. Now, this ain't a total rant, this just a real problem. This is the kind of mistake someone between the ages of 6-16 would do. They assume you know the story that they know by heart (they being Ridley Scott,) to the littlest detail, so they don't explain the storyline ONE BIT in the movie. Are you @#$%ing kidding me? Ridley Scott seems to have this habit starting out with Alien, his first movie. However, the storyline didn't need to be explained, as at least things were apparent. You understood what was going on. Here, you don't if you don't know the story.

Now, onto the good. This doesn't hold any punches as to what I know. I mean, come on. You gotta think this is gorier then the 38 version. Well, I'm happy to say even the young if they TRULY WANT TO can probably see it. However, don't bring a 6 year old to this movie. Maybe 10 and older. This does have a lot of killing, and blood. The blood was worked well into like you felt him bleeding. The killing, was crap. Sometimes, you think a character gets killed and then he does get killed a minute later when you think he doesn't. 

The Dialogue is mostly average but Jim Crow brings on some hardcore awesome speaking. He rolls out words like no other man has shown in a film about Robin Hood. Maybe I'm overrating but still, he's pretty great. It almost seems like the scriptwriter was sexist, he gave the guys great dialogue with Robin Hood having the best, and the ladies mediocre dialogue at best. I feel very mixed about this movie as you can tell.

The casting had good intentions, but the acting not so much. Everyone seems like their trying to imitate the original 20's German horror flicks mixed with The Wolf Man 1941. That's cool if I was watching one of those movies, but not a 2010 epic action film. And by Epic, I mean genre. I don't relate this to Predator 2, AVP, FVJ, Matango or Cloverfield at all. Those movies were Epic, and it's not just because I'm a huge monster movie fan. It's because, I am a fan. That's why I love those movies.

It seems every part of this movie was just like an imitator of Robin Hood himself. He tries to shoot the bulls-eye on a target but under such pressure (from the Super Bowl commercial) they flat out ruin the shot and miss half the time. They hit it only on accident.  I can deal with that though, but so slow and long. I swear the ending could have came 10 scenes before.  The small things matter though, and that's why I came. I enjoyed it for what it was. I also didn't like what I should have not liked.

The Rating? 2.5/5

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)

It was a matinee showing, it's R rated, it's a horror movie, it's a remake, and Iron Man 2 just came out. Thus, me and my friend were the only ones in the theater.

They were taking a risk making this movie and doing what they did. This is a re-imagining, and they REALLY took a risk doing what they did to Freddy, so any purists out there I would recommend not watching. However any fans of the original who do appeal to re-doing the story with a few homages (Clash of the Titans) I think would enjoy.

But again, they really took a risk doing this to Freddy. They tried a more real life tone, instead of pure fantasy and unrealistic Jack@$$, they went for a weird tone. They had both the children and the Freddy turn tables on each other.The children are very realistic, they think one thing then they think another then there back to thinking the first thing but with a little more insight. The Freddy in this movie...well...he's a mix of the old Freddy and Michael...Freddy vs. Jason vs. Michael vs. Jigsaw? But anyways, he starts out innocent but makes mistakes from his inner soul that is not accepted by society, and eventually turns into a monster and a Jack@$$ that we all love to hate and hate to love.

The most innovative part of the movie by far was the dialogue. Yeah...usually dialogue isn't the strong point in a remake. Freddy has some of the best lines ever, and you've only got a taste of the full Mummified Chicken from the trailers. The director and scriptwriter also thought about how to trick the audience. Obviously not in the same way, but more in a Hawthorne way. I say this because the pharmacy one character goes to is called Hawthorne Health & Weight or something like that. There's plenty of hidden messages in the background, plenty of symbolism and enough tricking you to go around.

The re-imagining is also very psychological.  It plays with the human body and makes us feel "good God, this could happen to me. Oh, $#!T, what the #$%@ AAAAAA! WILL SOMEBODY HELP MEE!!!!" I'm getting to carried away. Da Ja Vue by the way, and I know I didn't spell that right. But anyways, they don't just go for symplicity and scares like the original, although it does have that, it definatly gets in your mind and makes you think about your childhood, other peoples childhood, your experience with Freddy and the dinosaur era. That's the thing though, the design of Freddy ain't so good. He looks like a prehistoric reptilian villain beyond all reaches of outer space!

He just doesn't have the same scare factor with that face. Instead of thinking "Oh god, dear god, FREDDY'S COMING TO GET YOU!!! LOOK OUT!!!" You think "Oh god, dear god, Freddy's coming to get you??!!" But this problem only occurs when you get a clear visual of him, and after a while you become used to this face and almost adapt the idea that this is not the original Freddy but he is in the same universe...Freddy vs. Freddy? I'm coming up with all these slasher cross-overs, Alien vs. Predator vs. Terminator vs. Jaws vs. Robocop vs. Freddy vs. Jason vs. Michael vs. Jigsaw vs. Norman vs. Batman vs. Superman vs. Iron Man vs. The Incredible Hulk vs. Godzilla vs. Gamera vs. King Kong!!! Wow, that took up three whole lines.

The acting is superb, they are eccentric yet human. They are scared in a crazy but realisitc way, they go insane in a way that is totally believable and you feel like you've seen before. The only probleme with the acting is Nancy's speech can be slurred, I don't like the voice of Freddy as much as I loved the original but it is still awesome, and the younger Krueger from before he was burned is too bubbly.

[SPOILER ALERT] The idea of having Fred be have pedophilia and originally have taught at a preschool, is an interesting choice. It's very disturbing but there's so much of this crap in the real world it defeats the purpose of a movie. We want to get away from it all. However, they totally pulled it off right, they showed the crazy realistic but hidden mentality of a child abuser that strikes a knife in your heart.

The Rating? As a new Nightmare on Elm Street, I'd say 4.1/5 being merciful as I am. But as a movie in it's own rights, 6/5!!!

The Losers (2010)

Refreshing as a warm gun.

The statement above simply means that there is a lot of killing in this movie. (And an inside joke.) Most of the killing is done with guns, but once in the movie there is a gun-knife battle. They played with this. The saying "you brought a knife to a gun fight" actually doesn't play here. But I sense the director knew that saying and that's why he included the scene. But we're just getting started!!!

This movie was extremely refreshing. I haven't seen an action movie in the theaters like this in ages! It's absolutely great. Everything that is about an action movie is there, so why the he11 is there a PG-13 rating? Not enough blood you MPAA idiots!?!? If you see this movie and feel there isn't enough explosions, you're right. What makes up for the fact is that the explosions that are there are EXTREMELY FAN-@#$%ING-TASTIC OF EXPLOSIONS!!!! 

All action movies need a little comedy unless it is a really grim action. And usually, a grim action does not work...it can, but it usually doesn't. This movie delivers the comedy, but recognizes that the comedy needs to be extreme melted cheese on corn or else it will be a comedy. This is action. Horror has comedy as well, but it's Dark Humor, not light humor. Even drama has comedy, but just not in the really big scenes. All movies need comedy, but in a way that doesn't make you feel your watching a comedy. This movie successes in the essay I just wrote.

This movie also plays well in the artistic style. Like a comic book, it paints the name of the city they are traveling to on the scene, as if it were drawn. For instance, you'll find "BOLIVIA" painted on a large forest of trees in an early scenes. Some of those scenes can be a little cheap, but lately, so can Comic Books. Oh, did I forget to mention this movie is based off a comic book? Yeah, it keeps that all-around yet hardcore feeling of a comic book intact. Also, many times, this movie pretends to end but then continues and tricks you. It deliberately confuses the viewer. Something you don't see much anymore because of activists. AKA Hollywood can be a coward. 

The acting is above average. It fits well for the action movie type of persona. It isn't crazy like Pro-Wrestling, it isn't freaky like Horror, it's just mild voices with Bad@$$ personalities. I can't explain the acting to well. I think that the acting was made better by the script, I can see the scriptwriter going "okay, how can this be poetic justice?" Or "How can I make this funny?" Something you usually see from the actors, is actually from the scriptwriter and the actors just try there best to put that into their character.

The overall plot wasn't so big, as much as it were the plot of the scenes. Cougar makes the movie all the more awesome, without Cougar there would be no movie, it would just be *sarcasm*SUMMER BLOCKBUSTER OF THE YEAR*sarcasm* material.  My favorite scene is not the climax, although that comes close; rather, it is the office scene. This scene is done extremely well. 

Visuals were nothing to complain about. But I do have something to complain about, the soundtrack. The end the note on the song that goes ON AND ON AND ON AND ON! (You will figure it out once you see it.) Most of the soundtrack besides that note was okay, but it was the action that was big. People keep getting shot left and right, they even shoot two of they're main characters in the limbs. The second person was a directors smart. There's a scene where two of the main characters are pretending to lay down with no legs. Then, later, that very same person gets shot and has no legs. They even have bodies laying down in both the scenes. I'm noticing directors are coming back.

Explosions. Quality not Quantity. You wanna see the Airplane scene for sure.

There's probably more to talk about in this movie, it's so refreshing. But I can't go on. Rating? 5/5.

Oceans (2010)

Magnificent.

Okay, so, there's not much I can say. All I can say is that this is real. It shows both the hardships and the love of the ocean and maybe not enough. I can understand why, this is Disney and there are kids coming, I was surprised what was in it was in it. I can't believe it was just 1 1/2 hours though, it felt like it had to be at least 2:10 but no.

Something that seems to be good and bad is the fact they keep promoting stuff. In front of Earth was this, infront of this was African Cats, and infront of African Cats will be something else and they are all on Earth Day. It's gonna be a Disney tradition to do this with stolen movies. A few others I know of are Chimpanzee, Orangutan, and Flamingo. 

But keep up the good work at bringing Nature to the big screen. It's very nice to watch, but seriously, could have ended a lot quicker then it really did. But, it is magnificent

The Rating? Eehhh... Let's give it a 3.1/5.

Hubble 3-D

Yes folks, grace your eyes...my eyes...I have finally seen...A 3 Dimensional Imax Movie!

**** AVATAR AND ALICE! HUBBLE IS WHERE IT'S AT!!!! Okay, that's not entirely true, but the 3-D. It actually jumped out at you, you actually were able to grab the images off the screen, I don't know if it was because it was Imax, but 3-D here was much better than Avatar. I was a child again, remembering the red and blue paper glasses at the original 3-D movies. This is a must see, Avatar was an avoid, this...is a must see.

Now, don't get me wrong, I ain't a CSU Science Teacher or whatever. I still a dude ya know.

Near the End to The End except for the Very End I had some trouble concentrating (now that I've confused the heck out of you so do you.) But, most of it was very easy to understand and quite amazing. It was absoulutely fantastic, the colors, the framing, everything about the film was what 3-D Imax was supposed to be. THIS is a phenominom...heck with it, it's a phenom, THE UNDERTAKER OF AVATAR!!!!

Educational, that's what it's going to be classified as. I don't think that is appropriate, but this was very educational. There was one bad thing about the 3-D....the glasses...that's it. If they're gonna make a 3-D that can be fulfilled without glasses, make it quick! Not only is it bulky for me because I already wear glasses, but for that very same origin it kept screwing up and I saw the double-picture behind the illusion.

A couple of things you don't expect are these guys: Warner Brothers and Leonardo DiCaprio. Warner made this, and Leo narrated it.

Though, as I said, the end was confusing. I still have no idea weather Hubble is still up in the air or not. But, if it is gone, it was a very, very important invention. It was one of the greatest in space exploration. This telescope bases everything that we think about the universe, and when you think about it...I'm actually right.

The dark thing is...so many planets, stars, all these heavenly bodies, and still no other planet. WRONG. They discovered a few years ago a planet that may or may not have water on it, we know that it does have very similar conditions. BAD NEWS IS REALLY: We'll never be able to make it to there. It will take billions of light years to get there at light speed. So billions of years. If we mess up here on earth, we're screwed.

All in all...if you like Imax,  3-D or Space this is a must see.

The Rating? 5/5

I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

Magnificent Desolation-Walking on the Moon 3-D Imax.

In fame, the Sherlock Holmes to to Hubble's Avatar. In quality, the Avatar to Hubble's Sherlock Holmes.

 

Title Just roles off your tongue don't it?

Tom Hanks, yeah...man. Here we go how am I gonna explain how much I liked and didn't like it without getting arrested? I hated how they did not explain the conspiracy theories in there proper respects. They should have explained both sides. (Yeah, I believe the conspiracies.) What was great was how wonderful the 3-D was (as I stated in Hubble.) And the Imax, everything, helped take away the disbelief and had me entertained and moved throughout the movie. It was incredible. Just, not constiutional.

This movie, for a place that is nearly nothin, went into EXTREME (CHAMPIONSHIP WRESTLING) DETAIL! WOW! This thing goes to the lengths of all time to give you the great view of the moon. Not just that, but the honor and wonder that gave the ones who gave they're lives, living or dead, to space travel...beatiful. So they're you go. Naw, I still gots more to say.

Something annoying is that so many clips don't fit the Imax screen. I understand that they would be pixelated, BUT THOSE WERE TINY! Felt like I could be watching this on my home TV at times. At least be as big as a regular theater screen, and not the original aspect ratio of the 1970's clip!

So no more men on the moon eigh? WRONG! Neil Armstrong (still alive) was actually asked to go to the moon for the 40th anniversary. He obviously said no, and the mission was rescheduled, but it will happen IF IT IS REAL. We will see stuff on our TV trust me.

There's probably more to say, but it would probably be more repeats and ramblings.

The Rating? 3.6/5, because *sarcasm*I am a stubborn stupid conspiracy theorist*sarcasm*.

I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

Dinoshark (2010)

A Dinosaur-Shark. I'm not joking with you, it's a hybrid of a Dinosaur and Shark.

 

Produced by the "King of B-Movies," Roger Corman.  A so bad it's good Syfy Channel bad CGI B-Movie can't hurt! It's really great to watch one of these, too bad I'm as tired as a wet cat in a Noah's Ark flood...NOW YOU SEE JUST HOW TIRED I AM EH?!?!? One thing I like about this movie is the location, Mexico. I know it ain't Samoa, but it ain't California either. It's somewhere nobody usually hosts a B-Movie at. It's always in Japan, America or Italy. 

Some of the CGI in here is actually pretty great, but most of it is that really bad low budget Syfy. The design of the over all creature is bad@$$, Jaws acted bad@$$, but Dinoshark looks bad@$$. The actors aren't great but at least they're realistic. I found there to be more gore in this movie then I thought would be aloud on TV. I guess I gotta start getting caught up on the real world of $. After all, I, DA CA$HMAN! Wat up wit' dat!??!?

Most things The Asylum wouldn't cover on the lighting and stage props and background is covered by Syfy, so that just begs the question...why the heck are they promoting Mega Piranha as their own movie?!?! It's good to have hot actresses and hot actors, but like most low budget B-Movies of today, it goes beyond what it should. I mean, one time the actresses just takes off her shirt randomly for no reason! AM I WATCHING P0BN OR A B-MOVIE?

Some other spots are minor that stand out that are good. I just typed the worst grammar sentence ever.

Over all, an enjoyable experience. I'm really surprised I was able to deliver that review.

The Rating? As a low budget B-Movie, 3.8/5, but just as a movie in general 3/5 maybe 2.8/5.

I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

Alice and Wonderland (2010)

SEQUEL to the classic 1951 classic classic classic classic (you catch my classic you understand the classic...okay, I'm parodying Disney masterpiece release commercials.)

 

Ah, whatever your thinking, IS WRONG!!!! Unless it is that the theory of relativity is false...Okay, there's been a weird trend, the return of good kids movies. Where the Wild Things Are, to A Christmas Carol, The Princess and the Frog, and they're making a new video game called "Epic Mickey" (Although those who are 8 will have nightmares playing this game.) I expected this to be among the war against crap. I...was flipping wrong! This is the equivalent to Hollywood BullCrap

What does it start out as? Well, it actually starts out pretty good, I like the first scene with Alice as a 6 year old very much, it was very well done. The next scene, was alright, a little unnecessary and not exactly for those who are 5 to talk about *cough*Alice is forced to marry a crapper*cough* Yeah, I meant to say that. Here's the good part about that scene though: three of the characters in that scene (and I controversially recognize a fourth) are in the same portray as characters later featured in Underland or... *cough*IT'S WONDERLAND YOU IDIOTS!*cough*I do not care if the book said it or not, and no I have not read the book.  So, here's where the good transition happens. The rabbit appears, and Alice wants to chase it. Awesome, Alice does chase it, and falls down a rabbit hole in a tree, Awesome! Then, she drinks a potion and turns small! Awesome! Eats a cake and makes her big! Awesome! Then, the crappiest voices for the characters and the worst plot of all time...Oh Heck No!

So this is where we enter Wonderland. Wow, they really took a weird adaptation to Wonderland's scenery, I thought they should have kept a itsy bitsy closer to the dark realms that were featured in the Disney version, it was produced by Disney Pictures right? Right? But, it's okay, not the worst part of this movie. Ugh, I hate Tweedle Dee and Dum, they are completely and utterly stereotyped, where as in the original (as I recall) were a little more character like. The Rabbit, why does he co-operate with Alice? Why not just run away? I understand SOME changes have to be made, but even if they're going for a sequel, it should be the same idea every time. Like, in almost all Godzilla movies (minus 2) Godzilla is fighting another monster. I understand if they don't have him fight a monster, but what if he tagged up with a monster and didn't fight one? It would be immature at the best.

Who's this mouse? A character from the book? I can respect that, but she is way to corny. Infact, they're all corny except for the Dodo bird, and he's gone in a jiffy and doesn't talk...AND THAT'S WHY HE'S NOT CORNY! Well, all the introduction characters are corny. The Chesier cat (is that how you spell it?) Is pretty cool, I don't think he has the same charm, but he's alright. He had the best line that SO should have been the purple cat's line...I can imagine Pooh and Kah saying that "I don't get involved...in...politics." PERFECTION! So, they're talking about this Jabberwocky (Jabberwocky woo woo woo) (You will understand my most embarrassing moment near the end of this review) and, I like the Jabberwocky in other adaptations, but I decided early that I didn't like it because......He only shows up in the final battle and does not speak more than 10 words! WHY ABUSE CHRISTPOPHER LEE AKA COUNT DOOKU AKA COUNT DRACULA LIKE THIS!!!!!!

So, then comes this gigantic rabid white cat...Umm...God, I should have watched the 1951 yesterday, I don't think I remember him but he seems familiar. Anyway, he starts beating people up and capturing them for the "Red Queen" (who's opposite is "The White Queen." I understand this book was written before MLK, but please, you don't haft to keep to the book to details and not retain the entire plot of the 1951 movie, it should be reversed.) Not to mention, she is called The Queen of Hearts in the original book, but Red Queen in the sequel. So, this is a sequel but...You catch my drift. I guess I realized this was gonna be pretty corny from there on, so I can't remember too much.

Oh, but you will hear me rant about this holly crap. Johnny Depp. Now, I know what your thinking "overacting, we understand you Ca$hman." NO! He underacts! What the heck! I'd rather have overacting than underacting!!! OIY SCHABATSCHE! And, he isn't even the same size as the hare! Oh, BTW, that hare isn't psychotic like in the original, but more like a wound up old senior citizen with a bad case of "post-WWE-career" syndrome. (P.S. I love WWE and TNA for that matter.)  But, come on! THE HATTER IS SUPPOSED TO BE PSYCHOTIC! I like that the cat and the hatter and hare...and the mouse, all sat down for tea, but it wasn't carried in the way I would have appreciated. And, they all react to her like some hero, was she a hero in the original? I remember her being harassed by everyone in Wonderland.

The Red Queen...okay...I understand you should have made her skinny because people are more sensitive to biases, and Walt wasn't the best about being Politically Correct but...Did they haft to paint her face white??!!! That's even worse! At least it is natural to be fat (yes...it is...) but it is not natural to have your entire face painted white! I understand, maybe some painting of face paint...but this is ridiculous. And, boy, they made the White Queen all human, but The Red Queen inhumane. Or inhuman? Whoops. But seriously, inhumane, she orders a frog to have his head chopped off for drinking wine out of the royal glass or something, and then has a pig be her foot stool while she sits in her throne. BTW, she doesn't even say "OFF WITH HER HEAD!!!" Right! She did in the trailer!!!! What the heck!!! And can't we have a similar voice instead of this...well...it goes well with the attire and body type. The White Queen feels like someone from Final Fantasy or Kingdom Hearts...nuff said.

The servant of the queen is kinda cool, but I feel bad for him having to be trapped with this slave driver. She acts cool to him, but to have to see this torture in front of him...ugh. And, she isn't exactly good looking. I swear, (and she is 19 in this movie) the only remotely attractive person in this movie was Alice, and that's not cool! You make what we think is an innocent kid look attractive? Then put back our heads on with a Wikipedia page that LONGER THAN ANY OSCAR WINNING MOVIE?!?!?!?!!??!!?!?!?! Oh, and they also include the flowers, but for barely any time at all. That's another thing they miss, they keep introducing characters throughout the original but just stay with a certain group in this one. I mean, after we get introduced to the White Queen there's really nobody else introduced.

Wait! Another guy I forgot about because he was barely included. The Blue Caterpillar, I know he's called something else but I just like The Caterpillar.  He smokes, but in the original he just gives Alice trouble, instead here, we actually get what we expect, words of wisdom. It be cool if the original wasn't such a donkey, which I miss. Well, here we go, the Jabberwockey (that is how you spell it correct?) As I said, he talks no more than ten words, you wanna know why? Because that jerk Alice (actually, I really think she's cool in this movie, but I still like the original better) cut off his tongue! I know your trying to kill him but...Hey, Tim Burton, there's a lot of things wrong with your mother, can I tell you?

The epic clash is not so epic, she talks through the hole thing with no Christopher Lee, which bugs me. She cuts off his head, I would expect at least a little blood. It kinda felt like they were going video game style. But, I didn't get to play as Alice during the final chapter because IT'S A MOVIE!

Now, here's where "Jabberwockey, Jabberwockey, woo woo woo" makes sense. After the jabberwockey is defeated and the White Queen is queen again, Red Queen almost gets killed by the servant yadda yadda yadda, The Hatter (AKA not Johnny Depp in this scene) does a disco dance off! No lyrics, you may as well insert my lyrics, it's just THAT CORNY! I think of the Rick Roll every time I see this.

Here's a picture of this version's Jabberwockey:

 

I like the ending, Alice showing a little attitude. Again, I liked Alice in this movie.  Okay, there was one last scene that was very corny after that, but I'm considering that the official ending.

Well, I've written a ton of paragraphs about a movie that I don't like (EPIC FAIL) and I guess I'll give it a summary. Somebody took Tim Burton, Walt Disney, Martin Luther King Jr. and Harry Potter in a blender with a rotten pickle, and forced it down a 5 year old's face! This tried to be all four great flavors, and it wound up being really bad. It had great intentions, like I said I thought it was going to be great, but it was bad.

The Rating? 2/5.

I, Da Ca$hman Signing Off.

The Princess and the Frog (2009)

Thank God! Disney went back to it's roots!

Kid's movies are coming back! Walt Disney is coming back! Dang, I am so glad to see this. I had just enough of Disney Channel Bull$#!T. Finally, we see this. This, Where the Wild Things Are and Christmas Carol are the new great kids movies of our generation. Too see Disney making this right decision, is unbelievably making me happy. I want kids to have this in there childhood, no more Miley Cyrus, more Disney! Things should go back to the way they were, and I hope they do.

Probably the greatest thing is the way it is filmed. No real live actors (except for voices), no CGI. Real animation. Infact, Disney animation. There's depth and colors and crazy sizes just about everything. It's incredibly fun, it's a Disney Musical! BOOM! But it also has that seriousness that classic Disney movies do. The trial of shooting animals is one of these things, nobody actually does get shot, but there are hunters and machine guns. That's part of real life! That's a reason why I loved Where the Wild Things Are, it showed some real life for once.

The characters are spot on Disney, the alligator feels like Baloo and King Luie (I have no idea how to spell that) mixed together. And there's a recurring theme, like in all Disney movies, there all trying to reach this one goal but they keep meeting enemies, tests and allies. But there all on the same journey until the very end when they realize what they really wanted wasn't what they were looking for the whole time. That happens in every Disney movie!

The Shadow Man reminds me of Scar (Me=Big Lion King Fan.) He's one bad son of a gun. And there's another thing, while the main characters are searching for there goal there is the villain who tries to stop them...for a different reason. Disney sure does play with the typical hero story. This movie almost lost sight of what it was trying to teach kids, but it latched on to that rope just in the nick of time. (With some kids falling off, but Disney movies aren't meant to be the same thing every single time.)

[The next paragraph might be offensive]

Something different from typical Disney movies [which is actually an improvement] is the inclusion of...agh, I'm not even gonna say it. Okay, I'll say it. I like how there's a African-American cast of characters instead of an all Caucasian cast. However, a lot of Disney movies seem to be bias againts African-Americans, well this, feels like it's trying to be bias againts Caucasian just so it will get better ratings. How bout an equal cast?

Usually in Disney movies, we see far away places. The Jungles of India, the deserts of the Middle East, the jungles of Africa, Wonderland, everywhere. Here, we see a new twist, I'm not in favor nor against, New Orleans. Oh, and here we go with this one: I have not been pleased with a musical in SO LONG! This is a musical that made me feel good, IT'S A DISNEY MUSICAL FOR CHEESE SAKE!

I could say even more about how happy I am with this movie, but I'm not, cause will be here forever.

The Rating? 4.9/5

I, Da Ca$hman signing off. Happy Easter.

Sand Serpents (2009)

A Syfy Channel Original Movie...or is it RHI?

No trailer, as recent as it is it's an obscure film.

I was falling asleep while I watched this so excuse me.

The one thing different about this SyFy movie is that it has pretty good acting. It isn't all lame and emotional like others, instead it feels like Godzilla mixed with Commando. Godando? I like that, I'm gonna write a script called Godando.  Of course, this isn't the best CGI, but it is better than the usual. Something that is kept like normal with the design for the good of mankind is the design itself, the actual picture of something like this if it weren't CG looks like a Bad@$$ worm right there.

So there's my short thoughts. Enjoy.

The Rating? 3.9/5

Mr. Troop Mom (2009)

Not to be confused with Mr. Mom (as I did.)

Waste of my time, GEORGE LOPEZ?!?!? WHYYYYYYYY!!!!! He used to be so good! God! The characters were weak, the jokes were weak, the props were so stereotypical, the plot was absolutely terrible, scriptwriting awful, just incredibly disgusting. 

The Rating: 1/5, hollywood Bull$#!T

BTW for the adults, this movie seemed to encourage pedophilia. They had a scene were the little girls were in no pants.

One Man's Dream (2009)

For those of you who haven't figured it out already, I was at DisneyWorld the other day *cough*Disneyland is the parking lot for Disneyworld*cough* and one of the attractions was One Man's Dream. It had a walkthrough and a 15 minute movie, and since I am running low on material (thanks to me not having a computer at the main place.) I may as well review the 15 minute movie.

Okay, so you've probably figured out this was about the man Walt Disney himself, what you didn't know is that it was narrated by Disney himself! Some of the documentary did have modern voice recordings but most of it was Walt audibably journalizing his life. Rare recordings yes indeed.

What I'd think of it? Well, I thought it was great, the fact that we got to hear from Walt himself was incredible. It definatly gave some insight some of us might not have known about, and really, I mean really...it was great. Your listening to the history of Walt Disney! What do I need to say?

Anybody here watch WWE? Well, our speaker sounded just like Santino Marella.

I can't talk about it too much without giving away anything, so I'll just give it a rating right now.

The Rating? 4/5.

I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

Iron Man (2008)

I AM DA-CA$H-MAN, danananananananana

This is one of those rare ones, like The Lightning Thief, it is new Popcorn Entertainment. It ain't real entertainment, it is popcorn entertainment. For most of the movie, I enjoyed the mind-numbing action and the special effects, cheesy lines and everything else that goes good on movie snacks. Don't expect this to be the companion of The Dark Knight and Incredible Hulk, this is more along the companions of Superman The Movie except modern.

One thing I found intreging is that people disrespect Robert Downey Jr., he is a great actor, I definatly like his personality. Sherlock Holmes, stuff like that. I don't think this movie DOES or DOES NOT deserve it's amount of fame, it's just fun and nothing else. It's better than what Avatar got, when it deserved nothing. Avatar was a bad movie! But, I don't wanna spend every single one of my reviews talking about how much I hate avatar.

Another thing I'm liking is the choice of AC/DC for the music score. Any movie would go great with some AC/DC my friend! (A little Metallica wouldn't hurt either.) The characters are all blockbuster hollywood of 2008, heck, that's how everything feels like, and what's to say that that's a bad thing? This ain't one of the best comic book movies ever, but it is definatly fun.

Well, that's it, don't expect the experience of your life just expect fun. There is not much more to say since the whole movie is pretty predictable in that aspect. One more thing:

I AM DA CA$HMAN, SIGNING OFF YES I AM.

Opal Dream (2006)

I have mixed feelings about this one.

No trailer on a review? Weird.

Well, here's the first thing: Australia does not have as good actors as the US. They all seem bored and dried out from the desert that they live in. The scenery does not make me feel good nor does it look realistic. I thought Australia would be just a little more lush, maybe as much as the African Savannah, but not a complete desert, that's the Sahara.

But there are good things, the script was obviously done by a professional, but I can tell the director and editor didn't do such a great job translating the script into visuals. So you won't be completely disappointed. Secondly, it plays a realistic tone as for casting. I think that may make it a little dry, but I believe that they did try to make things look realistic. If it didn't occur to you yet, all girls AND boys have imaginary friends. Some are in different forms, but this is because the child does not want to go to the outside world. Maybe we could see this in Alice In Wonderland (1951.)

Some other things are why an Opal? I understand it may have been in the book, but you must understand such a change would not effect, scratch that, make it better. An Opal does have pretty stripes, but other gems are fully colored in vibrant colors. Even if it's transparent-blue, it would be better than just a regular stone with some stripes. That's like if you make a sand castle and just paint a few dabs on it, it only makes it more attraction generating and not positive reaction generating.  And the wooden leg they find is way to small, and the lollipop wrappers are way to big.

The movie is all just very dry, but it proves a good message. Though, I wish someone who actually had talent would make a movie involving a girls imaginary friends. But, at least these guys tried, where as other *cough*HOLLYWOOD!!!*cough* does seem to think that if they touch on anything that hasn't already been touched they'll get sued by angry parents. Guess what Jake? Maybe old subjects are also touchy, and you should just focus on making a good movie then making a Good Dang PROFIT!!!!

So there ya go, I kinda rushed and picked at little things, but there ya go.

Oh, the rating. Well, if there were more imaginary friends movies out there I'd give it a 2/5, but since it's an entire half of what I know of and the whole of what I've seen I'll say 3.5/5.

I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

The Deader the Better (2005)

James D. Rolfe is awesome. So here's the basis: two guys are hired to kill the living dead from dusk till dawn. (Two movie references right there.) The movie is in black and white but the blood is red. And that's the first thing I want to talk about, it definably helps with the gagging and gore-hound effect, but it has some flaws. Nit-picky flaws, but flaws. They make some of the other things the blood is one in color, so at times you can even see the characters faces. 

It's also done in the style of (besides splatter flick) a classic Universal-type flick. You know, Frankenstein, Dracula, The Creature From the Black Lagoon. And everything works into it, the setting, the characters, and the monsters kinda feel 50's-60's (not the same era but you know wat da heck I talk 'bout.) The two characters are common yet awesome, one guy who you can relate to, and one guy you can relate to. But there both totally different ways, and you hate one or the other. It's kinda hard to tell who people hate more in these types of movies.

Speaking of the characters, you start to feel like you're a member of the team, because they're the only living members of the cast. The entire movie takes place at the cemetery except the final scene, and that scene is on a road with only the main characters car. You definably feel the physcollogical state of these two guys, who are best friends yet at each others throat due to the insanity that is caused by having to kill the dead for your job, then sleep the rest of your days. You also can't get another job.

Most so-called-B-Movie titles are like this, example is Kung Fu Werewolf From Outer Space. But, if you actually watch the movie, the title becomes much more of a character. But most people pass off these movies, and just go with the strait Academy Award 1,000,000 Dollar stuff like Titanic, Alien and Iron Man. And well I do love those movies, I will say these movies deserve a little more money, because they're much more sophisticated then people say. White Zombie though...I dunno. 

So there are my thoughts, what a great disgusting and sophisticated movie, go check it out! I rate it (testing new format) 4/5

The Jersey Odysseys Episode 1: Legend of the Blue Hole (2004)

Wow...just wow..Cinemassacre did something that most people are afraid to do, and that is make the greatest surprise ending of all time. Trust me, you wanna see this. The ending is absolutely incredible. But, that's not all. The actors are awesome, a little tired literally but they pull the job off.

For an independent college film, this movie sure has some great camera angles. It also has an amazing soundtrack. But I can't stop thinking about that ending, you've just gotta see it. Everything also looks real good, and there's definably some real scary scenes.

No seriously, this one dream scene is super scary. You do not want to watch it if you are squeamish, it's one of the most all-time scariest scenes I've ever seen. Or should I say that I have scene? I also appreciate the tackle of Cryptids, Paranormal and E.T.'s, something I used to be obsessed about. I don't do it much anymore because well, I don't go out and investigate, and there isn't much happening in those fields as of late like the proffessor in the beggining was trying to have the main character understand.

The main character is someone that we've all been at one point, the guy who's always tossed aside for his ideals. Weather it be the usual as a 5 year old or it be a 15 year old rebel or a 20 year old scientists, you don't not relate to this guy at times.

But again, that soundtrack. He wasn't lazy, I mean, WHY IS JAMES NOT IN HOLLYWOOD?!?!?!?!!?!? Oh wait, he is. He's gonna be in Plan 9, and he's already been in the two documentaries His Name Was Jason and Never Sleep Again. Hopefully, he's gonna have some bigger roles. The only reason why I would be sad if that happens is that I would never see his Monster Madness or AVGN again, but dude, if your reading this, start making yourself worldwide famous!!! Oh yes, the soundtrack. It definably adds to that eerie feel and scary atmosphere that really shines the movie.

Overall, a fantastic but short film. I like everything about it except for some nitpicky scenes but that's it. The Rating? Most of the movie is a 5/5 er, but we're rating the entire movie. 6/5!!!

Speak-The Movie (2004)

Ah, the good ol' year of 2004! What do you remember it for? Monster Movies? Spider-Man 2? Here's something you might not know about, a movie based on a book (obviously), but made independently by ShowTime, and is not all that "We conquer the world cause we are kids." Stuff, it's kinda hardcore....but trust me, the book, is way more hard to take.

 

,Now, if your already disliking this movie, dislike it from what I talk about, dislike it because you've already seen it, or just wanna read the book, it looks a little something like this.

 

Notice the tree, how some leaves blend in to her "skin" but most of the leaves are blood red. We will talk about that in the book review, but for now, lemme talk about the movie (yes there will be spoilers, and a lot of comparing.)

 Ah, Hollywood BullCrap, haven't we all seen it before? Whatever you saw, maybe GODZILLA, or Money Pit, something that just didn't let you enjoy something, there is always something that makes us angry in movies. But, sometimes, it just goes to far. There are a few things I didn't like about the movie of Speak. First off, the tone is taken way, way down in most of the movie, from a psychopathic dramatized horrified girl just trying to live and biting away at her flesh, to a stereotypical goth addict with the good horrifying stuff only coming in at the last few parts. Boy, they also toned down the violence. Too many things were changed, and I understand you can't completely copy the book or else you have a 5-20 hour movie, but, there is a line. Some very basic things, that could have kept the time at a very similar rate, were replaced. I guess they couldn't get the copyright or some crap. Fortunately the most important hardship of this poor girls experience is saved, but even those were told in a minimal or wrong fashion. I'm not disgusted at this movie, since I loved the book, but the only things I liked about this movie were already in the book, so there was no reason to watch this movie.

 The people were all stereotypes, except the one person who should be a stereotype, Andy Evans! But lemme tell you the basic gist.

Melinda is a Freshmen in Syracuse. New York. Do I need to say more? No, No I'm just kidding (no offense to anybody.) Okay, so apparently she went to an end of the 8th grade party with her friends, with two things: Beer and Seniors. Must I say more? (Okay, I gotta stop.) She is beautiful, having a wonderful time, then, gets drunk.  What looks like a "Greek God" to her approaches her, acts all romantic and crap, and then brings her to the forest, and rapes her. Hard to, but we don't need to talk about that unless I was running a...well, ya know. See, here's where I think people can be Donkey's some times (and not the Democratic Party!) She calls 9-1-1 AKA 9/11, the police you know. She doesn't even say anything, she's in shell shock what can you expect? The Police get the address and take everyone away, and now her friends hate her. While I can understand her friends being a little twitched about loosing their party, the fact that they hate her is a bunch of BS! Now, she is biting her lip to the bleeding point, trying to stitch it up with a marker (she knows it won't work,) and is not talking...no...seriously...she doesn't talk in the book for a long while. But she talks a lot in the movie, just in a dry, disturbing voice. So, I'm not gonna give out anything besides that, except my own opinion I gave earlier, and some of the foot notes that I typed up.

The Rating? Well, I give it a 3.75/5 as a movie, but as an adaptation I'd give it a 2.89/5, maybe even a 2.5.

Have a nice day, I, Da Ca$hman.

Finding Nemo

Arguably the most popular Pixar film of all time.

Hoof, the trailer makes it looke epic. We'll it ain't epic, but it is definatly something fun to watch. It ain't the best Pixar film ever made, but it is one of the best. The biggest thing about the story is it seems to reflect Bambi, in Bambi, we saw how the evil of man is destroying our wildlife. While, in here, we see man destroying our undersea life. We see the epic struggles that good soles will go to rescue people they love.

Finding Nemo puts the usual "Hero Story" into a mix, it plays around with the usual story, but, I'm not gonna explain it all to you right now cause I'd sound like a professor.

 So, Pixar is the weird place between good Disney Movies and bad Disney Movies, it still has that corny feeling and stereotyped characters, but it really gets to your heart and has a lot of meaning. I think I've also figured out a few mysteries behind this movie.

A. How did Dorry get her short-term memory loss? You say it runs in the family? Remember her questioning that? I think it came from the BANG when Marlin first meets up with Dorry. B. Some of the fish in the tanks are relatives to fish in the sea. For instance, the yellow BUBBLES fish, I personally think might be related to Dorry. Proving that her family is not short-term memory loss, just blond (no, just kidding...however the actor who played Dorry was blond.)C. Where did Nemo get his name? Anemone, A Nemo Ne. A Nemo Knee, Nemo has a bad fin, Knee is part of a human limb, see the connection?

This actually has a great side-story, I know most of the time a side-story isn't great, because it's usually a side-story, here, it's two stories in one. You can do a report on Marlin's adventures and Nemo's adventures with the same movie

I am an animal freak, so I really did like the huge abundance of lots of species in the movie. The humor is pretty good, not professional, just pretty good, worth a few laughs. Except, holly crap, the whale talk from Dorry, flipping hilarious!!!!

This movie also never seems to stop. There is a ton happening in this movie, and it is never slow (likely because of the amount of fish in the sea.) There is always multiple scenarios, and it just goes to show how hard a good father will go to rescue his offspring, especially after such an incident from at the begging. (BTW does the wife of Marlin sound familiar to you, similar actor I dunno.)

One great thing about kids movies these days (I can't believe I just said that,) is that there all original. This, is no exception. (Well, Where the Wild Things Are and Christmas Carol are remakes, but you get the jist.) I could go on about the symbolism, personification, metaphor and inner meaning about this movie, but I can't. Lemme just tell you, the whale is from Pinocchio, there is no denying that.

The Rating? This isn't a 4.5/5 star movie, but, I think it deserves it for everything it gives us. Now, don't get me wrong, the classic Disney is still the best, but, this was really good.

I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

Kung Fu Werewolf From Outer Space (2001)

Like all B-Movies, it's not a B-Movie.

A Cinemassacre production yes it is. It tells the story of something completely random in a way that makes you emotional. Infact, it's all done in a way that strikes me emotionally, it seems like something made out of complete innocence. Not to insult James. It's all very humble and it's not professional looking, it's just an extremely well done story. Plus, the special effects look realistic yet terrible, something called do-it-yourself type of style.

It also has barely any dialogue. So it tells the story in a way that feels like there is no uncomfortability. It must have been hard for the scriptwriter (probably James) to have written this with no dialogue. When you write something like this, it's very tempting to add dialogue but the magic is defiantly there if the only dialogue is the narration. And you also need a narrator for this to.

The Rating? We'll give it a 3.5/5

Battlefield Earth (2000)

Yes, it is John Travolta

Well, if you go into this expecting a Syfy channel movie, then you will probably get what you see. If come in with just an open mind, you can see stuff. Zaranyzerak said it well in a video he did saying that "Trailer Park Boys" seemed stupid at first glance, but these characters have layers on them. And so they do. I'd say John Travolta is probably the best guy in the line-up. Man, I love his lines. In fact, most of the aliens seem to have better lines then the earthlings. Maybe to show how earth and mankind are loosing the fight unless something great can pull off, and they don't have that much hope. While, the aliens, they have it all and can feel the great lines as much as they please.

But, you really feel emotion in these characters. And emotion that only comes from a classic...usually. If there's one thing that matches the Syfy channel, it's the CGI. But, I understand. Imagine a Tie-Fighter 15 feet above the surface of Endor in Star Wars. That would be hard wouldn't it? The emotion, you haft to see it too understand it...and I'm two days late on the review and I was sick while I was watching it. Excuse me for that. Remember The Thing (1982) which is being remade into The Thing (2011) which is a remake of exhibit one and exhibit one is a remake of The Thing From Another World (1953) which is a remake of a short story The Thing (18--). Now that I've co-oped out my short paragraph lemme bring your attention to it.

It had no female actresses. Why? Not because they were sexist, but because they didn't need em. The story flowed fine without a lady in it. I do hate when they put in a girl or an African-American JUST to fill in a demographic. If you're gonna put those groups in their, you wanna put them in the plot and not just to be there. Another example is Glory (1989), it doesn't focus on the female actors too much, simply because females didn't have much of a say back in the Civil War era. Fact, probably until the '60's did they not have much say. So, what do we say for Battlefield Earth? Well, it does pretty much try to fill in the demographic of the lady, but they also got TWO other demographics without actually wasting them. They result as John Travolta's partner.

So, there are my thoughts without ruining the movie. The Rating? 3.7/5+-

Jumanji (1995)

WHERE IS MY KONG! WHERE IS MY KONG....I want a Gorilla. Why did they not put a gorilla in this film?

But seriously folks, (count how many times I've said that so I don't haft to,) watching this movie over again is like going through ultimate nostalgia non-stop, however increasing you're knowledge. It's like reviewing 7th grade in 8th grade. Which is practically what 8th Grade Math was like. If you haven't figured it out now I absolutely loved this movie when I was a kid. It has layers. Like an Onion only in half-opposite. It tells more from repeated viewings. Before, I cared more about the visuals and the music more than the plot and character development. I still did back then, pretty much acknowledging what I have now. But now, that acknowledgment is too the 10th power. 

Also, take somebodies face. Not literally, look at one. Look at it close up, you'll see freckles, hairs, pimples, etc. Now look at it far-away. Now you just see the eyes and nose and stuff, but no details. This applies both good and bad in re-watching Jumanji. It plays noticing the nit-picky stuff you didn't even have a clue about when you were young. And then it also lets you on the little inside jokes, and symbols in the film.

I also remembered a line from Robin Williams (one of the most underrated actors along with Steve Carrel,) "Things you can't even imagine" when he was talking about being trapped in the African Jungle. At the time, I thought he meant literally something you can't imagine. Now I know, that theory applies only to the young ones. It's a phrase to represent how big something is. I also wanted to know what is was like to imagine something you can't imagine. Even mature adults have this kind of dumb feeling. What would happen if you sneeze with your eyes open? I've hear that your eyes literally pop-out, but I seriously doubt that because wouldn't you feel pain? 

So, there's my Jumanji story in a nutshell. Well, there's probably more that is beyond words besides "youth," but that's just me. So, how would the movie play out if a teen or adult watched it as a virgin (DON'T GET ANY IDEAS MR. TWISTER!)

Well, ever watched The Goonies (1985)? Of course you have, it's gonna be the 25th Birthday! (Along if Jaws who's 35th Birthday comes soon. And Jumanji AND Apollo 13 who's 15th Birthday come this year.) And if you haven't your missing out on some of the best of the '80's. The Goonies and The Gremlins are usually called the two CCG's (in my book at least,) stands for Copy-Cat G's. The two movies starting with The G that spawned many copy cats. Gremlins is obvious, ranging from who knows what. Goonies, never really talked about. Their usually discredited for being way too "cheesy" but lets be honest, everybody who loves the Goonies watched it as a young one, as did I. It was Cheesy, you just didn't see that at the time. You were in your youth. Triple Y! Triple H! I say, this is one of the most underrated gems out their. Nobody talks about it! When I try to start a conversation about it people say "it was good" or "I didn't like it...it was just..." why do we not live in a world of movie reviewers? You'll notice this is the longest paragraph of the review so far.

It's the perfect formula for an adventure movie starring kids. It's both a tad scary, adventurous and quite smart actually. The movie doesn't dumb down for inpatient audiences. They just wanna see "roll dice-challenge-roll dice" continued, Well, here's what it really is and makes for quite an impressive movie. "Plot and character developmentX3/finding the game, roll the dice, challenge, plot and character developementX2+Finding the game+Challenge/3, roll the dice+challenge/4 or X2, and it never loops." It always changes the formula and this is only minutes of the movie summarized in that equation. This is something that is extremely innovative, yet nobody else seems courageous enough to write it in their script, and it is disappointing me a lot.

Plus, this is how CGI should be used. Only when necessary or extremely convenient. Most special effects are real, it's just a few things that are CGI. Sparingly

So their you go. The Rating? 4/5

Apollo 13 (1995)

One of those rare movies that The Nerd, The Geek, The Dweeb, The Dork AND The Academy can enjoy. I being The Nerd. Not AVGN however.

 

This movie was fantastic. Even though I personally don't believe that the Apollo missions were real, this movie is God D@m real!!!! First, it bugs me that Tom Hanks looks like Dan Akroid. Second, it bugs me that WWE would name a stupid wrestler (not to say wrestlers are stupid,) after one great Astronaut. Thirdly, this movie makes you feel like your  there. The acting and visuals are so impressive, they give you the feeling of what it would be like in there in space.

The director was OBVIOUSLY extremely smart. He puts every shot into thought, something as smart as I get I will never have the patients to do. The scriptwriter went above and beyond with only one problem: The movie either feels long or is to long, took me two days to watch this film. The producer didn't spare any expense he gave them the opprotunity, and the editor does things exactly right. The slashers who made this movie are fantastic.

It's interesting that they tell the story of Apollo 13 and not 12 or 1, that was not typical. They also don't recreat any transmissions, only scenes. What I mean is that they use real television broadcasts from 1970. Again, the acting is awesome, it makes you feel like you know these guys. Even as this is based off real life, it took a good director to recognize the irony and drama that went into this story.

Heck. what am I saying, A1 was a pretty huge part of this movie. But it's like, it's like dirt. Not bad, but good. Dirt makes up so much of what we call the earth, or at least what we feel is earth, yet we recognize plants and animals more like earth. But dirt not only makes up more earth, not only does it help keep living things survive, it is earth. Basically, in a sense, Apollo 13 was Apollo 1 except successful. It's the symbolsim and metaphor stuff you here about in school.

I could talk more and more about how this movie is so realistic, but here's the stuff: this is awesome space. It gives you the fun of space. It gives you space, outer space, but not space between you and a zillion years of cold darkness. But, that's the thing: this movie is all over the place.

At this point you probably wonder: why the heck was he reviewed Apollo 13 and not Star Wars? Well, I used to do reviews for YouTube. When I watch a movie more than once, it almost takes away the charm unless it's done amazingly. I also need to get off my butt and watch some of the movies in my collection,

And Apollo 13, the rating? 4.9/5. Almost there, just not there yet. 

The Shawshank Redemption (1994)

Not the best movie ever made *gets hit in the face with a knife by an angry fan, and then resurrects back to life and the story goes on from their* *not a reference* but a damn great masterpiece I'll tell you what.

 

Well, this wasn't that innovative of a style of movie. It's probably been done before when it was made. However, not too many movies have done this style of making a movie, where you actually get to hear one of the main characters thoughts. Now, as I say it like that, you must be thinking "Way too many movies Ca$hman, maybe one is To Kill a Mockingbird you say, one of the first movies dealing with law?" Well, it's done in a magnificent way. Having Morgan Freeman be the narrator was the perfect choice, that stands out from the rest of narrative films.

This movie also didn't go with the crowd in many ways. It showed many examples of real violence and murder that has never been taken care of or known about. The fact that they just kill people in prison as much as they want to, @#$%! AREN'T YOU SUPPOSED TO GO TO PRISON FOR THAT?!?!?! Man, this movie is full of @#$% up stuff, and if you're weak heart you would be better off not seeing it. Now, this is awesome, but I mean, you don't recommend Saw or Friday the 13th to a 5 year old. And you don't recommend Shawshank to the wrong person either. However, that violence is real and should be put into public knowledge so people understand it. Like Titanic or World War 2, we shouldn't be forced it down *cough*it will happen*cough* but we should understand it.

This movie also plays an awesome last act. I won't spoil it for you, but everything that happens eventually ties in in the most beautiful of ways. This whole movie is half the time real world hate and half the time real world compassion. It's about Andy over coming the challenges of prison with his best friend Red played by Morgan Freeman. As you can tell, I really do like Morgan Freeman. Glory was an awesome movie. Now I gotta see Invictus. Or however you spell it. Everything that happens ties into itself in more ways then one. It's not just "beginning, situation, resolution" like they teach you in L.A. class in the 5th grade. It's more like "beginning+situation*25/ending."

The movie is also very colorful in both stage props and places too shot. It was shot in both Ohio and The U.S. Virgin Islands (which were the Islands after Chuck Norris arrived.) Every single shot of the movie portrays a painting like image that was DEFINABLY going for some academy awards. Half of you just went "well did it win? Of course it did right?" And half of you went "DON'T TALK TO ME ABOUT THOSE TRAITORS!" And there's a few of you who just don't like the Academy Awards in general. The Shawshank Redemption did not win Academy Award of the year for the 1994 Academy Awards. Here comes the riot, all dressed in blood, da da da da da da da da da da da da da!

The movie does play out a little slow, probably because I'm used to Sci-Fi, Horror and Action movies. That's why the Saturn Awards was created!!! But, you get the picture. After all, I've been sick since Sunday and today is Wednesday, so I am tired. Most of the time though, you are able to follow what is going on. The cast and acting are absolutely incredible. Each person has an unique personality that doesn't blend in with everybody yet works as great as Honey on Peanut Butter. Haven't tried it? It's delicious. Morgan isn't the only one to be praised, but everybody deserves a handful of applause. Get it? I can't speak about them in words.

Infact, there's alot I can't speak about in words. See the movie, it's completely awesome. Not the best movie ever made, but man is it every up there. I rate it, 6/5!

Leprechaun (1993)

An awesome Leprechaun!!! And...that's it!

So, the characters are okay, it flows kinda slow. Oiy. But, the storyline, and The Leprechaun, and The Gore!!! Awesome Stuff! Now, this ain't your Friday the 13th, and this ain't your Abbott and Costello. This is your...Leprechaun basically, there is no way to describe it. Seriously...there is no way to describe it. I will tell you that the special effects are fantastic, the good stuff before CGI. Well, not quite before *cough*Jurassic Park*cough*. But anyways, here's the plot: Anybody who steals the Leprechaun's gold won't live through the night, and his entire sack a gold is missing in this South Dakota town. Leprechaun has sold his sole to the devil for the gold...and...oiy. He goes around killing people! And...it's absolutely ridiculous. My favorite part is when he finds the mirror...his eyes!! WOO!

The Rating?: Ugh...this is not a rateable movie. It is just...what it is.

I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

Glory (1989)

Showing the realities of war.

The first thing I'd like to say about this movie is that it doesn't hold back. It doesn't censor anything for a wider audience. It shows alot more crap the african-americans went through then most filmmakers would ever think of putting in their picture. In fact, it just shows a lot more crap everbody had to go through. The Civl War was not a good time, it was hard, and this movie shows it better than any other movie I've ever seen.

The only thing I could ask for from the actors is a little more volume. But, they pulled off their lines quite well. As to so, the scriptwriter obviously knew what to do. He didn't just think about what happened in the Civil War, he though about WHAT HAPPENED IN THE CIVIL WAR! The director is okay, but what really stuns me about the driecting is how this all seems realistic. He doesn't use reflectors and he doesn't remove unncecessary sounds; in fact he adds them into the scenes just to make it seem like this is what was going on in the Civil War.

The props and scenery look fantastic, they look like a movie that was just made a few years ago. But as surprising as it sounds, this is an 80's movie. It's noe of those movies that has that quality, along with 2001: A Space Odyssey. Again, what really shows is the scriptwriting and plot. Every character and every plotline just shows the horrors that have been in this war. It's absolutely eye-opening, something that today's Academy Award winners dont' have. Let's just say, the Academy had better taste in the 80's. May I defend my statement with Gandhi (1984.)

This movie shows everything. It shows all of the above from the view of one group of soldiers not in the biggest of stations. A mostly african-american command, it shows both the horrors of race relations, war, and just plain hate that have haunted this country. Although the Union won, this story teaches us that there was no honor nor dignity nor win in The Civl War; or frankly, any war.

The Rating? 4/5

Return to Oz (1985)

I don't consider it a proper sequel. However, like Americans, you don't need to be proper to be an enjoyable experience.

Unfortunately, there is no trailer.

So, how do I describe this? Hope you can deal with my tired self and allergies self. It's Spring at 9:44 P.M. Mountain Time. So, how do I describe this? A movie that deserves a cult following. It's a movie that not every child should watch, but the most righteous  should definably check out at a young age. I feel bad that I had not. I have not even seen Love Bug, Apple Dumplings Gang, or even the original Witch Mountain movies. I feel I lost out on some real growing into a more patient man. Fortunately, I grew up good enough. But, no more whining, let's get on with the movie. 

Well, lemme tell you the bad things: The original cast of Todo, Tin Man, Scarecrow, and Cowardly Lion don't play too much of a part and are replaced with Tick Tock, Jack Pumpkin Head, Gump and Melinda the Chicken. The good news on this: they're are executed in a well manner. Now, the original Wizard of Oz shall never be even matched, it's like [REFERENCE TO PUNCH-OUT]  Mike Tyson vs. Glass Joe. However, we do all love Glass Joe as Punch-Out fans, because of the awesome way he is carried out as an underdog and an over looked Gem.

And that's what this movie is, an over looked Gem. It's not a masterpiece, but still classic. My biggest thing on a kids movie is does it give you some emotions? Heck yes does this one. It scares the crap out of you especially if you are a child, and has some disturbing things for the adults. DOROTHY IS PUT IN AN ASYLUM! HOW'S THAT FOR MESSING WITH YOUR CHILDHOOD! But, she does escape. It all symbolizes the world we want to go to and the bad people in our lives who don't have a clue and try to stop it. Just like in the original, only you haft to have seen the original to spot the symbolism. 

I do wish they kept the Kansas scenes B&W. But, the idea of Oz being in color in '39 was symbolic it showed the world that Oz was a beautiful fantasy in the form of symbolism. But, color was in full force at the time, and so it may have seemed to cliche to have done that way. And personally, I'm starting to realize that myself. Another thing I am mad about, is that they changed the apple trees to lunch pail trees. Seriously! Plus, there's no witches nor is there a real Wizard. It's a whole new storyline, that makes you feel like you're watching a movie that's completely different with many little references and similarities. 

At this time of day, there isn't much more to talk about. I say, if you love the original but just on the right note, check it out. The Rating? 3.7/5

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)

I decided I should watch it with the new one coming out.

Please refer to the Alien Resurrection and Leprechaun reviews.  I cannot explain it. This movie is pure awesome, that's all I can say. Watch it if you can stand horror. Cause it's a masterpiece not explainable. A ride you must take to find out.

UPDATE: I would like to put on some key areas.

Most of the movie is pure slasher flick, you watch any other slasher you'll figure the style out. A few differences are first, the music is very 80's-ghost busters style. The series has gotten better with progression, and so has Robert England. However the main basis of the unique style of A Nightmare on Elm Street series is still in tact. One liners, dream sequences, and scarier than the rest of the crew of the 80's.

I still can't say much after that, but there is a ton more. It is pure awesome.

I rate it 5.5/5.

Tron..........*drum roll*....1982!!!!!

Yes, we finally figured out what year it was released for those who have no idea whatsoever.

 

Well. after watching this I must say, 80's sci-fi all seems the same. But, that's a good thing, it's something thats always entertaining to watch. It's all based off Star Wars. All of it, this, Indiana Jones, everything in the 80's sci-fi genre. I love it. The plot is great, it is about a gigantic mainframe leading slaves in an order of computing inside a video game. Programs are the slaves, users wrote everything, you have to see it to understand it. Meanwhile, Flynn, this character, has wrote several games and is not getting credit for it from his boss.

Characters? I like to view Flynn as the Luke Skywalker in this movie, and Tron is like Han Solo. Master Control Program is absoulutely the evil emperor, and Yori is princess Leia. The bit is definatly C-3PO and R2-D2. It goes on like that from there. The special effects, 80's were a milestone in special effects, it's just lately when people have been abusing it. I cannot believe I am looking at an old movie. A good way to summarize this movie is like playing Star Fox and watching Star Wars.

You know, anybody wondering how Disney made this film, it was when Disney was scrambeling when Walt died, and they needed material without there main guy. So, they startede making Horror and Sci-Fi films...interesting. It was definatly something worth watching, very fun indeed, I'd say Popcorn compared to some, but a classic masterpiece for all time.

The Rating? Let's face it, for what it is, it's perfect. What it is isn't perfect though, but for what it is, it's perfect. 5/5.

I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

Caveman (1981)

Now, this is a treat if I ever saw one.

THEY DON'T CALL IT THE STONE AGE FOR NOTHING!!!!!!!!!! THEY DON'T CALL IT THE STONE AGE FOR NOTHING!!! LOL UP MY ROTFLMBO!!!!!!!!

Now, lemme just say that, there are a few of groups in the patience genre for movie goers. There's the modern spoiled 3 year old brat who has no idea what movies are like and only watches the fastest movies released today. There's the un-patient movie goer who does respect old films but prefers to watch new films. There's the patient movie goer who understands the quality in slow old movies. And then, there's the super patient that is almost unspeakable and unbelievable that AVGN doesn't even know exists. If you are one of the first three, you may want to consider what you are watching. This is probably the slowest movie I have ever watched in my entire life.

Besides Money Pit of course.

However, this is actually a great movie. The only reason it feels slow is because of the fact there is barely any modern day dialogue in the film. Only Caveman talk. And yes, this does take away some of the Comedy. But let me finish, if you can handle a slow movie and liked movies like Young Frankenstein or Airplane then this is a movie to see.

The real treat for me was the Harryhausen type effects, though harry was not actually a part of the film. I refer to Stop-Motion. But, that's not all. What is stop-motion is ridiculous. The T-Rex is real big, the Wolf/Dino/Owl/Chicken has the biggest google-y eyes I've ever seen. Awesome.

The storyline doesn't need to be that apparent, it holds the movie together but is still vague. This is obviously because of no English speaking peoples.  But, it all comes together in the end and you leave feeling satisfied. The obvious green-screen in this film is classic.

The humor is very crude, so I wouldn't recommend this for the kiddies. It ain't Flintstones, no matter how much it inspired thus and Captain Caveman. I mean, there is actual Crap in the film. I also wouldn't recommend for younger audiences due to the Marijuana scene. Those are real plants with fake flowers.

Again, the humor is similar to Airplane. A "Nearby Ice Age" refers to distance instead of time. There's old fashion fishing, the discovery of fire, invention of cooking, etc.  It's all done in that kind of style. I can tell you what I have just told you, but other than that you have to see it to believe it.

The Rating? 3/5

Willy Wonka & The Chocolate Factory (1971)

You know, it's like Walt Disney. There are definably plenty of people that hate both of these, but, in my mind, this is the ideal children's visual tale.

 

Forgive me, this one's gonna be a quicky. First off, every character in this movie is an okay choice. Not to much personality, it has those kids movies from the oldies cliches. The production and scenery for this movie is awesome, and so are the REAL special effects. The tunnel scene, jeez, what were they drinking? Or were they getting paid? All in all, a great movie, just with a lot of cliches. The Rating? 3.5/5

Dogora (1964)

There is a space cell called Dogora going around Japan EATING THINGS! AND THAT, is hardcore baby.

A Japanese monster flick is three things: underrated, weird and stupid awesome.

Now the only downfall this movie has compared to other giant monster movies of the time is that they don't show the monster enough for my taste. We need to have a little more focus on the monster. Infact there is only ONE GIANT  monster scene. After that they just go little.

But, besides that, this is your typical Toho film. I don't like how they hire English and American actors in Japanese films. It's just weird. I also don't like how some don't even know how to stay some stuff in Japanese.

The things that appeal to me in a monster flick are the giant monster scenes, the science, and the cheese. This satisfies me but not nearly as much as many of the other Toho films.

It is plenty weird, so if you're on drugs (hopefully your not) go ahead and give it a watch. Heck, if your on drugs, check out a 70's acid monster movie. Like Godzilla vs. Gigan.

The Rating? 2.9/5. If you see my definitions of the stars you'll understand why.

Alice in Wonderland (1951)

How do you get to Wonderland?

Well, the answer to that, is have a child, or be a child.

They say "Over the Hill." Well, that's just a child's way of putting it like "It's easier then it looks."

In today's world, we find ourselves as teenagers and adults stressing like there might be no tomorrow. A worldwide recession, and the increase of the lost of innocence, it takes a strong person to keep there love for life throughout eternity. This, is why I HATE IT WHEN PEOPLE PUT OLD DISNEY MOVIES IN THE FAMILY SECTION!!!! BLOCKBUSTER....SHOWTIME....OFF WITH THERE HEADS!!!

These movies are meant to entertain and teach the young, I understand, but it is also meant to be analyzed and loved to an even bigger degree by those of the teen, adult and senior.

It starts out with Diana (who we assume is Alice's mother), trying to read her a history lesson. She cannot pay attention, as she plays with her cat. This, defiantly is true for most children and teens. Not to specifically, but they don't pay attention to the stuff society wants them to pay attention to. They'd rather pay attention to the wonders of nature and life. This is why some people use the word "geek." They can't open themselves to happiness, only to success. When a "geek" grows up...they become a politician. Alice then starts talking about if she were to create her own world, it would be utter nonsense, but she later learns utter nonsense is not a joy, but a dream, a wanting of secure. Your parents tell you that your home is secure. Well, it is not, and neither is the outside world as they explained. There is a certain place, a place called dreamland...or Wonderland as they put it...that is the place that is secure.

She then sings a song that parallels her adventures in Wonderland.  As soon as she finishes, the White Rabbit comes up. This is where I believe Walt intentioned to have Alice fall asleep, but she is later found asleep in a different place...so...I do not know. Maybe chasing the rabbit down the rabbit hole, was the middle ground between dreamworld and real world. And when she climbed down that hole, she found dreamworld, but it took some getting used to to even enter the place. Now, I cannot even begin to tell you the weird things she finds on the way down, but I can tell you it is worth a check just for that 10 seconds. No, wait, I can tell you some stuff. There is a mirror, but it is an upside down mirror. It is like, she thinks she is falling down, because society told her she was if she ever imagined so deeply, but in the mirror, she sees what is really going down, she is going up to a place that is Wonderland.

Seriously, this movie is a little to weird to explain. And that's the best part, it's too weird! WHEN WAS THE LAST TIME YOU SAW THAT IN...ANY MOVIE RECENTLY? But, I am not done. When she meets the door, is her first test. That living, breathing door. She cannot control which way and what way to eat the cake and the potion, and eventually cries over the difficulty. PARENTS: Have you ever had a kid that didn't cry over difficulty? If you have, something is up, either he/she is hiding something from you, or there is a subliminal message buried deep in the mind of that child. However, her cries drown the door, well almost. The door survives, but has a lot of work to do. The door succeeds in getting her to Wonderland, but at his own expense. This is like a parent  sacrificing his/her own goals, possessions or even life to help the child achieve the wonders of there life, as there is so much more ahead of that child. She enters the sea, that blue sea, and she finds a Dodo Bird...THIS IS THE DODO BIRD? Jeez, that is crazy. When she gets to the island, where the fish are running to dry themselves off, and the Dodo isn't even getting wet, the Dodo tells Alice what to do to be dry. She doubts it, but it eventually leads to her success. This is like when a parent tells a child what he/she should do, even though they are doing better, fact is, that parent can do better, but the child can't, so the parent helps at the very best he/she can.

That White Rabbit, she spends a ton of the movie chasing the White Rabbit (which made me realize how short this is.)  But, on the way of chasing the White Rabbit, she finds herself stuck with Tweedle-Dee and Tweedle-Dum. They tell her stories, and make nonsense, and have fun. But, Alice is to in a rush. This to me either is a grandparent or a persistent child trying to be friends with the kid. It's very unclear, and remember, this is based off a book. What does she see next? I'm thinking she saw The White Rabbit's house. "Marry Ann!" I have no idea what that means. But, the White Rabbit tells her to grab the glove, and she ends up becoming as giant as a monster. The Dodo Bird then comes, and brings a Lizard, and they try to get Alice out with a lot of force, with no  go, but Alice figures out she hast to eat something herself, and figure sou the problem. This is like when Kids tell you "LEMME DO IT MYSELF!" Give em' a chance, maybe they'll figure it out, and maybe you've got the bad idea.

The next thing I think she saw was the Flowers. They seemed nice, caring, beautiful at first, singing very nicely. Then they reveal themselves as being very, very judgmental. They don't except anything besides a flower. It's like those who don't except something that isn't them, bias. They nearly kill Alice over it! I swear! Oh...but the blue caterpillar. That...Blue...Caterpillar. OIY SHCABATSCHE! This guy give Alice a hard time. He keeps asking, "WHO...ARE...YOU?" This is like when an adult doesn't know how to help a child, but wants to. The caterpillar then becomes a butterfly, and is pissed. This is when the adult just can't deal with his/her confusion, and thus, becomes enraged. Oh, but the chesire Cat you say? Is that how you spell it? He is the one, the guardian angel, the one above all of your earthly souls. The one who is clever, yet deceiving. As the same actor has said "you can never tell with bees..." words of wisdom, must be referring to his act as the Cat. You can never tell with the one sent for you, you can only guess if he does good or bad. The Angel and the Devil on your shoulder, you don't know if it is him or her, you just know it is talking to you. My favorite line from the Chesire cat is "Can you stand on your head?" THAT ONES HILARIOUS! Can you stand on your head, absolute genius. And there's a symbol in that too, people always say they can do these amazing things, and the younger ones pressure there friends into doing it. The child cannot do it, and is confused. Now, when the Cat does it, it is greatly exaggerated but what isn't exaggerated in this movie?

 The Mad Hatter and The March Hare. I love these guys, but before we can go any further, I have a question everyone wants the hear the answer to. "Why is a Raven like a Writing Desk?" I think I might have the answer. They both tell stories. The writing desk is pretty self explanatory, you can read a book or write on a writing desk, and usually there is stories in those tales. But, this question is meant to be the unsolvable question, that only the greatest people can answer. (Not bragging.) These questions often get asked to children, by desperate adults, thinking that kids know more because they are young. They do not know these kinds of things, rather, they know about happiness and nature. They know about natural instinct. Not these kinds of riddles. Then, Alice ask the question back, and they become afraid, like she is some demon. This is like adults having they're real fears thrown back at them, by children, but they do not know how to handle it and they take it out on the children. But, anyway, these guys are insane! They're absolutely nuts, they represent adults telling children to do things, more and more things, things that they are not capable of, and just to many things. They cannot handle it, and eventually abandon the grown-ups.  Which is what Alice does. The Unbirthday is one of my favorite ideas, every year you get one birthday, but all the other days you get an unbirthday. Which is just a way of saying endless birthday. This is like either a child dreaming up of an idea that could never make it in society. Or, it could be the idea of a parent spoiling a child with all these wonderful things. Of course, Alice doesn't get spoiled, but you can see where I am coming from. I love all the literal jokes "half a cup of tea." All these literal jokes are just my style.

Finally, the climax. She meets all these different creatures. She is confused, and eventually finds a way home. She follows the path, in excitement, but a lion-broom comes to take it away. Cruel fate. She is lost, her opportunity is taken away. This is when a child is tricked or is fooled, thinking he or she is getting something and eventually getting something else. Like, when a child is kidnapped. Or, when a child is promised something but misunderstood and got more excited then he/she needed to. She eventually gives up at everything. She is done, she just wants to go home. This should be obvious, but it isn't. It's when children go to run away, and find themselves lost among all these different and cruel people. They don't know what to do, and eventually just want to go home. They have had enough, but sometimes, if they are lucky, like the creatures, there will be good people who will the help the child. What am I talking about? The scene where she is crying on the rock, and all the creatures look at her in sympathy and empathy. They feel her pain, and I suspect they'd rather be in another world, where things are happier, just like Alice, but they are here for a long time. Then comes the Chesier Cat, talking to Alice. He acts all cool but I can tell on the inside he feels for Alice. This is like when an old friend, now unrecognizable, comes to the aid of a child when he/she is lost. The Chesier Cat explains that everything is the Queens way. This is like when a child finally comes to realize that things are not in her/his control, but in the hands of someone else. Something they can't control. Alice want to get to the Queen, to ask how to get home, and the Cat gives her a shortcut. Then, vanishes. Alice is excited, ready to go to the Queen to get home.

She gets to the scene where the cards are "painting the roses red. They're painting the roses red." And, when Alice ask why, they tell her that it is because if the roses aren't red (like hearts) they are going to have their heads chopped off. But, before they can finish they're work, they are called to bow before the Queen. The Queen spots the unpainted rose, and has them all chopped off if I remember correctly. She is like the politician, the president, the queen, the king, they all sound amazing at the begging, but when they finally see the one who rules the land, they realize what a beast he/she is. When they meet the ruler, the ruler tries to be friends with him/her, but warns them of the danger. Obviously, this is a child, and she/he is not able to live up to the expectations, and breaks them. But here, it's not even her fault. It is the Cat's fault. And she is punished for it. This is like when an abusive adult pranks a child, and ugh...a child can't handle that, I know that for a fact.  This is what happened. The other ruler, who has a nicer agenda, suggests mercy. Then, the ruler feels pressured, and grants it. The court, oh the court. Bringing a child to court, it should be obvious but it isn't. It is like making a child do something that only an adult should do, and it is done so many times. But, like when Alice grows, that kid might get something out of it, a little growth spurt (mental.) But, she made a mistake, she ate both slices. She grew back to small after being big. This is learning from a mistake for a child.

Then, the most dark scene of all. She is chased by everyone she has met, it's all coming to her at once. This is...the most dreaded prospect of all...growing up into a teenager. She tries to escape, but cannot escape by physical means. The only way to escape the horrors of puberty are to pretend they don't exist, to realize it is all in your head, and that is what Alice does once she sees she is asleep. She wakes up, with her mom waiting for her. This is the most opposite scene of all, it is showing that real life can be magical, which it cannot. But, I will say that there are definably things in real life that are worth living for, just spend more time in Wonderland then you do in real life. Another day, still in the light of childhood. This movie, I could cry for it. Poor Walt, he had to apologize for it, when it hit theaters it got such bad reviews, but this is one of the most meaningful movies I've ever seen in my life! This is all a message, a trip, a wonderland. This is a trip through a child's mind, both wonderful and magical, but harsh and sad. We see it like a child sees it.

Well, if you want to go back to that place called Wonderland, full of adventure...it's Underneath a Tree for a child, but it's just Over the Hill for an adult. A Child discovers it, an adult returns to it, if they really try. Don't expect Wonderland to come to you Over the Hill, go to it Over the Hill, and you will have reached it again. Love is waiting for you, do you want love?

 The Rating: Eternity. This movie should be seen by every human being in the world!

BTW I am sick of all this "DISNEY IS EVIL." Crap about subliminal messages, yes, it does say something in the smoke in this movie. In the stars in The Lion King. It was the animators who did this! Not Disney himself. They did this because they were jealous/hated Disney, but Disney was a brilliant man.

Citizen Kane (1941)

To me, extremely innovative, but not the greatest motion picture ever made.

Excuse me, I was extremely sick while I was watching this movie and I couldn't pay as much attention as I usually could. 

So anyways, how do I feel it is innovative? Most people say it is for the shots, which, definably it is. For a B&W film, it's absolutely beautiful. Everything is so craft fully filmed. The moving shots going up and down, just everything is beyond words for the shooting.  It's the work on genius on it's shots, it planted the ultimate apple tree seed for the farmers of tomorrow to eat from and plant more seeds. See my symbolism?

And that's another way I think this was extremely innovative, symbolism. This was obviously done before, some of the all time greatest and favorite films before this were King Kong, Frankenstein, Dracula, The Mummy, Werewolf of London, The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, Nosferatu, The Phantom of the Opera, Hunchback of Notre Dame (you can see I love horror movies of that time,) but all those wonderful titles of which I have not reviewed on this site all show symoblism in something of fantasy. A giant gorilla, a vampire, a zombie mummy, a werewolf, a shape shifter, a phantom, some of them were real but are outcasts, and thus were not seen very much at the time. Citizen Kane however, delivers the symbolism in a factor of the human perspective. There's also much more of it, in Frankenstein, the whole plot is one point of symbolism, however, this carries out like a book with multiple symbols in addition to that type. I haven't really explained it have I? You would haft to see it for yourself, which I highly recommend. 

The scripting is very awesome. The idea of doing something, again, so familiar to us, is pure genius. Making it work so well. They didn't just flat out go flat, like some people these days do. But, they really did put the candy on the apple. They were also aware to make sure the candy stayed on the apple and not become it's own candy but to stay with the apple. Am I still symbolic or am I just a maniac? Oh, I haven't even talked about the greatest of things. It's done between two stories, the story of Charles Foster Kane is told through stories from his friends, and a newsreel. At the same time, we try to find out what his dying words "Rosebud" mean in the time after his death. So, they tell two stories at once. You pick any masterpiece from well, anytime but especially that time, you will probably not find that innovation. And you never really find out what Rosebud means until the end of the movie, and then, it's still done extremely symbolic and discreet. 

So, this is extremely innovative. Probably one of the top 10 innovative movies of all time. I'd say, a collection of opinions would say that these movies are the top greatest not in a specific order. Citizen Kane, King Kong (1933), Transformers (1986), Jason and the Argonauts, Casablanca, Cloverfield, Alien, Godzilla (1954) and Frankenstein (1931).

So what is the rating? As an innovative picture and part of history, it by far deserves a 6/5. However, past the innovation, to an naive view, I'd say 4/5. Take it up to 5/5 between the two. I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1916)

We are going WAY back in time...with no trailer.

Silent Movies are not the ones that you can review, it's a one to take the experience and only if your patient. I mean, Silent Movies were not made for 2010, they were made for the early 1900's. They can be enjoyed but only on a first person level from a very intelligent being.

There are some key things, but there are key things in every movie, and I am sick so I don't feel like reviewing.

UPDATE: I would like to point out some key areas.

The movie is silent yes, but not all B&W. From what I've seen and understand, several different areas are dipped in color. The inside during the day is yellow, underwater is light blue, night is red, the jungle is yellowish-green, but it's not real techincolor. But if you don't like B&W but do like classics, check this out.

Of course, there is the people who do like B&W and love classics will want to see this movie to.

Night of the Living Dead was a landmark for it's African-American main character.  However this movie has some more various main characters as well. It was 1916 so don't expect pure love for them but still. I haven't read the book but I know something in here that wasn't in the book: the back story of Captain Nemo.

This was the very first Special Effects Spectacular, and there is more to talk about, but I'm not gonna today. Maybe tomorrow, or the next day, or the next day, or the next day, or the next day.

The Rating? 3.7/5