Amazon.com

One of the box-office smashes of the summer of 1999, this film by director Barry Sonnenfeld (Men in Black, Get Shorty) was raked by critics but embraced by audiences. Based on the 1960s TV adventure show that starred Robert Conrad, this film reimagined Secret Service agent James West as Will Smith, adding Oscar-winner Kevin Kline as his sidekick, agent-inventor Artemus Gordon. President Ulysses S. Grant puts West and Gordon on the trail of malign genius (and former Confederate soldier) Dr. Arliss Loveless (Kenneth Branagh) in a story about racism, partnership, and world domination. The special effects are lavish, even garish, but not all that special; they're not enough to elevate a mundane and familiar plot. Even Branagh, playing a man who only exists from the waist up--literally--can't find the juice in this lumbering affair. Still, the fast-talking team of Smith and Kline is a nimble one. Smith's affable charm and Kline's subversive wit win many points, though not nearly enough. --Marshall Fine ... Read more

Reviews (183)

Has got to be one of the worst films I have ever seen...
Once again I say, "Wild Wild West" has got to be on of the worst films I have ever seen. I myself have never seen the original TV series starring Robert Conrad but the movie "Wild Wild West" was pretty awful. And the thing which really gets me is, it could have been such a terrific movie!

Two U.S. Marshals, Capt. James 'Jim' West (Will Smith) and Artemus 'Artie' Gordon (Kevin Kline) are assigned to discover why most of the country's leading scientists have been kidnapped. An old enemy of West's, General 'Bloodbath' McGrath (Ted Levine) lead them to the mastermind, a waist-high madman Dr. Arliss Loveless (Kenneth Branagh). Dr. Loveless' plan? To take over the United States government!

The plot is nothing new, a madman threatens to take over the government with the help of a super machine created by kidnapped scientists. The only people who can save everyone are the two main characters. You've heard it before, huh? "Wild Wild West" was extremely interesting in the way they thought up of a way to combine lots of cool inventions and gadgets into a story of the 'wild west'. But it has its many downfalls. One being that the story seemed to lull at some points, like it's just something to fill in the time. There should have been more twists and turns, captures and escapes, or something!

The acting wasn't all that bad, though I must say I much more enjoy watching Will Smith in the "Men in Black" movies. He seems to have the exact same attitude, cockiness, and humor as he does in the movies I mentioned, except he lacks some smarts. He has a tendency to 'shoot first, shoot later, shoot some more and then when everybody's dead try to ask a question or two.' Unfortunately in this movie there really isn't given any chance for ANY of the characters to fully develop, let alone make you like and cheer for them. Kevin Kline for me was the best actor in the movie, him getting a chance to play two roles, one as Artemis Gordon and another as President Ulysses S. Grant. He was extremely charming and likable, a bit smarter and more sophisticated than his new partner. The bad guy played by Kenneth Branagh was nothing new, just your usual crazy madman. And though Salma Hayek is credited along with the main actors as Rita Escobar, you have no chance to see her much and for some reason was a very unlikable character. Though there was some attempt for Will Smith and Kevin Kline to vie for her affections, there is exactly 0% romance in this movie.

And the reason for the 0% romance is because of blatant sexual jokes and innuendos put into "Wild Wild West". For a PG-13 movie, I found it a bit too much, even resulting for me to fast forward and skip some parts. And I believe this is one of the main reasons for the downfall of this movie. There were some moments where there was some good, clean, and fun humor, but the movie seems to mostly rely on innuendos and dirty jokes to make the audience laugh. And I assure you that I did not laugh much. "Wild Wild West" should have had some romance. Even most of the best action and adventure movies have romance, including such hits like "Matrix", "Top Gun", and much more.

But I must give "Wild Wild West" the minimum of two stars for the action and special effects. Some of the action is pretty intense and exciting, especially the end. And the oh so super gadgets are VERY cool! I especially love the President's 'not-so-normal' train. Dr. Loveless's gigantic spider is dynamic, too. And Artie's numerous disguises are ingenious!

To sum it up, "Wild Wild West" had some potential to become a fantastic movie. But because of the empty characterizations, somewhat empty plot, and terrible and sick jokes succeeds in making "Wild Wild West" a flop for me. If you're thinking about watching "Wild Wild West", rent it if you're really serious about seeing it. But here are two other recommendations, "Men in Black" stars Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones who fight extra-terrestrial and "Silverado" stars Kevin Kline as a gunfighter who saves the town of Silverado.

Here an interesting bit of trivia for "Wild Wild West":
The movie 'won' 5 statuettes at the 20th Annuel Razzie Awards, including Worst Picture. Robert Conrad, who played the original James West in the 1960s TV series, accepted 3 of the awards in person as his way of expressing his low opinion of what had been done with his source material. :)

Jab your eyes out!
Paint a mustache on the Mona Lisa! It's a shame and sad that this movie was made cause it will never have the opportunity to be made right. The TV James West was the perfect wild west secret agent with the gadgets and brawls. Robert Conrad created a wonderful character only to be mocked in this vomitus, stick to the bottom of your shoe movie. Save your money on this and buy some of the real TV episodes. Find "The Night of the Falcon" with Robert Duvall as the foil to James West - perfect example of how this should have been made.

Just Vin

Ambitious work
While numbers continually dropped in the 19th century American frontier due to murder and disease, what truly conquered the "wild west" was technology. The rapid enumeration of product patents and their proliferation throughout the western territories: the laying of railroads, replacement of wooden structures with brick, the development of communications advances, and the personal automobile all transformed the place we know of as the Old West into its modern equivalent.

Sonnenfeld here has cleverly respun this history in the form of a narrative story, sometimes metaphorically accurate, and sometimes hilariously inverted. When gunslinger Captain 'Jim' West (Smith) and master-of-disguise 'Artemus' Gordon (Kline) are paired up to defeat the psychotic Confederate and mad inventor Dr. Arliss Loveless (Branagh), it's an idealistic winner takes all in the battle between the traditional west and the technological Eastern invasion. Of course to throw things further off-kilter, Sonnenfeld has made our protagonist, West, a black Civil War hero. With 20th century concepts of individual vs. corporate control, sexual promiscuity and identity, and racial equality and acceptance, "Wild Wild West" recasts this unique historical period to its modern viewers.

funny
This is one of those movies that make you laugh and have a good time, of course the plot it's bad, and the situations in the movie are absurd. But you can have a good time with the clowninngs that Will Smith and Kivin Cline make. And Kenneth Brannagh looks impressive with just half body.

What Were They Thinking?
Wild Wild West is one of those movies that make you wonder just what were they thinking when this movie was being made. One thing that is absolutely essential for enjoying a movie is the suspension of disbelief. That is, you have to be able to believe that what's on the screen could really happen the way that things on the screen are happening. The things that go on in this movie make that impossible. Example: there is a gigantic steam-powered spider. Even with today's advanced technology, such a contraption would be just about impossible to build and get to operate properly, let alone in 1869.

Once again: What were they thinking? ... Read more

Reviews (10)

Opinion
I love William Petersen, in anything he does, but he's played in some really crappy movies, & he's so good, this is OK, Liked where he was downing the straight shots, of boos very realistic- he's so incredible to look at that you kinda of forget how lousy the movie is. Diane Lane is as always good & beautiful, the chemistry between her & WP was pretty good, lucky girl, to be in bed with him. I liked the last line he spoke in his jail cell, very profound & prolific. Have never seen before or since the other guy, don't have much of an opinion of him!!!

A whole lot more interesting than it seems
The other reviews for this film notwithstanding, this is NOT the "Gun Shy" that stars Neeson and Platt. This particular film stars William Peterson ("Manhunter")as Jake Bridges, and Michael Wincott ("The Crow")as Frankie McGregor, in what appears to be a fairly cut-and-dried exercise. Jake, a down-and-out writer is befriended by Frankie, a collector for a local mob boss. Jake needs money and something to occupy his mind so he won't drink himself to death. Frankie wants an education.

The two of them not only click,they become very good friends, and Peterson falls in love with his friend's girlfriend Melissa, (Diane Lane "The Cotton Club")setting up your basic triangle. The rest of the film is about how this whole thing plays out between them.

What makes it really interesting, though is the strong, homoerotic thread that winds through the film. By the end, you have to wonder why Melissa is even in the film (Butch assurance, perhaps) since the guys are so emotionally entwined they have made huge sacrifices for each other. (Don't want to give too much away here, so you'll have to see it for the particulars.) Even in the details, this thread seems obvious, at least to me.

But hey, don't take my word for it. If you don't see it, that's fine too. The film can be enjoyed on a number of levels. It's not a great film by any stretch, but the acting alone puts it way up on the list. All three principals turn in wonderful, nuanced performances, making this film well worth seeing. Give it a shot.

William Petersen
An OK movie, William Petersen carries it. He's an incredible actor, as we all know and too die for handsome & sexy- loved where he was throwing back the straght shots of boos- very realistic- kinda of a weird ending- Diane Lane & him had OK chemistry-don't know the other actor, never have seen , or heard of him before or since- just glad I can see WP on CSI- wished he'd make a killer Oscar winning movie

William Petersen
Bought this because , I am a huge William Petersen fan, he's great as a kinda of has been writer, who gets back on track, because of meeting the other guy, who I've never heard of?? Diane Lane is as always beautiful, love when he throws back the straight shots of boos, so realistic!! he is as always soo good, & soo handsome & sexy, whatever he's in is better because of him- the movie really isn't that good, but the ending is interesting, the last line, he spoke I liked.

Only watch for Michael Wincott's intense performance
There is only one reason to rent or buy this highly derivative, would-be noir, low-budget indie flick ' Michael Wincott's skillful, moving performance in what is apparently his only full-length, feature role after years of doing small supporting parts mostly as psychotic serial killers. Here he is very moving in a complex role as a soft-hearted Mafia wiseguy with a penchant for saving people. It is a neat idea that takes your initial stereotyped reaction to his harsh appearance and deep, gravely voice -- that he is going to be yet another crazy killer -- and spins it in the other direction. By the end of the movie, it's his character (Frankie) you are concerned about....not the "hero". While the film is otherwise pretty forgettable, I couldn't get his performance out of my mind after seeing it this summer. Prior to this, I had never heard of this very talented actor before.

Unfortunately, GUNSHY is otherwise badly flawed, suffering from a genuinely awful script by Larry Gross loaded fillled absolute howlers, corny situations and references to better films (especially GROSSE POINT BLANK, DONNIE BRASCO, GET SHORTY, LEAVING LAS VEGAS, MONA LISA, just to mention a few) that just make this look very lame in comparison...plus the absurdness of a crime gang that has exactly four members, one of whom is in a wheelchair, and who hail from that crime mecca of IRELAND. The terrible problem of IRISH gangland crime in Atlantic City?

The other leads are just unbelievably bad in this. They are otherwise respected performers, so I am not sure if the bad script or bad direction threw them off or what. William L. Petersen in particular is actually embarrassing. He is very badly miscast as Jake Bridges, a down-and-out journalist, who just like the character in 'Leaving Las Vegas' has gone to a gambling mecca to 'drink himself to death.' Petersen's performance is full of annoying mannerisms -- it is really agonizing to watch the hammy expression on his face as he chokes down drinks (demon alchohol, I guess). Combined with his heartless betrayal of his only friend Frankie, this makes Jake unsympathetic, and as he is the protagonist AND narrator that throws the whole dramatic structure of the film off-kilter. Beautiful Diane Lane (Melissa) is so affectless and flat that she is barely engaged with the story at all and is handicapped by a dreadfully fake "dees-dem-does Jersey" accent. (Needless to say, when either of them has a scene with Wincott, they are simply blown off the screen by his intensity and professionalism.) She has zero sexual chemistry with either actor, and she is particularly unbelievable as a nurse -- who wears spike heels to work with her nurse's whites! -- and who doesn't seem to know better than to leave a man (severely beaten and in shock) passed out unconscious on her living room sofa. The script suffers from Mr. Gross's concept that nursing is a 'loser' profession for uneducated gun molls, a very odd idea indeed, as an R.N. would normally have a college degree and earn a very good income.

Additionally, I have a hard time believing that Mr. Gross ever did more than visit Atlantic City -- this film doesn't have the gritty realism of a story set in a very particular time and place. It could have been set most anywhere and indeed was filmed mostly on soundstages in L.A. (so why not set it there? Or right...the whole 'Leaving Las Vegas' drunk thing). Except for a nice aerial shot of the Jersey shoreline in the titles, we see nothing of the casinos, or beaches or anything that would particularly center this story in its location.

Some other reviewers have commented on a homoerotic thread running through the story. This isn't really supported by the performances, but it certainly leads to some very odd lines in the movie. Jake mentions to Melissa that 'both men and women find him very attractive' -- not the sort of thing one usually says to a girl you are trying to pick up. But the most egregious example is in a shooting range, where gangster Frankie is teaching writer Jake how to use a handgun for the first time, and as they take turns firing their weapons, Jake tells Frankie, 'Now I know what I was afraid of...it feels so good.' Uh...OK. Phallic reference. I get it. But nothing is developed along this plotline, there is no erotic chemistry between the actors, and it's just a pointless and embarrassing red herring.

The two worst moments in this movie are when Petersen abruptly and pointlessly bursts into the sea chanty "What do you do with a drunken sailor?" and sings THE WHOLE THING while waiting for the other gangsters to complete a bank robbery. This is crawl-under-your-seat embarassing.

The other one is near the end, when we see Petersen in jail -- a country club prison for white collar criminals, no doubt, as he has a private cell with his own desk and typewriter. In a cutaway, we see a bookstore piled with copies of his book, "Deception in Atlantic City: A true crime story", which has won the Pulitzer Prize for Journalism (according to the window sign). The mockup of the book is unbelievably lame -- it looks like a kid created it on a home computer -- but the worst part is that the PULITIZER PRIZE-WINNING BOOK obviously must be the story of GUNSHY (i.e., how Jake got in with a "gang" as a mole, but then double crossed the police and went to jail to save his gangster buddy). So scriptwriter Larry Gross is basically saying that the plot of GUNSHY is so wonderful, so original, and such an expose of organized crime & police corruption, that it deserves the most prestigious prize in the world for journalism!!!! hahahaha....NOT.

At the time this film was made (1998), all three actors were pretty much minor leaguers despite long resumes. Today (2003) Petersen has the lead in the No.1 TV series CSI, and Diane Lane is a major film star with an Academy Award nomination for Unfaithful and new film Under the Tuscan Sun...while Michael Wincott is still basically doing cameos as psycho killers. If this isn't total injustice, than I don't know what is. Anyways, rent this video for his performance and fast forward through the bad parts. ... Read more

Reviews (326)

Great Color, Great Costumes....Not much substance
To put it simply..this movie didn't have just a real great plot. At best, it was quite weak. Most of the movie takes place inside of a serial killer's deranged, albeit very colorful mind. Actually, the film reminded me a lot of Silence of the Lambs, except you don't really care about what happens to the characters; and Jennifer Lopez is no Jodie Foster.

Actually in this movie, Ms. Lopez's character acts more like Little Bo Peep, or Goldie Locks. She is just too sugary sweet. You want here to wake up and yell at someone.

As for the visual aspects of the movie; the were awesome! The costumes, the terrific use of color, and all of the sets were spectacular. This will sound gross, but there is one really cool scene where a horse gets sliced like cheese between plates of glass. But, it is alive and you can see its organs moving! Really gross, and doesn't mean much to the film, but really cool, in a sick sort of way.

Overall, I would buy it again....especially for the cheese slicer!

Bizarre and intriguing
The Cell

Score: 69/100

Four stars from Roger Ebert. Ten stars from my friends. 69 stars from me. I'd have to agree with myself. In my opinion, The Cell is not really 10/10 or 4/4 quality. It is indeed a fine film, but to call it a masterpiece or an instant classic is going far, far over the top.

Catherine Deane (Jennifer Lopez) is a psychotherapist who is part of a revolutionary new treatment which allows her mind to literally enter the mind of her patients. Her experience in this method takes an unexpected turn when FBI agent Peter Novak (Vince Vaughn) comes to ask for a desperate favour. They had just tracked down a notorious serial killer, Carl Stargher (Vincent D'Onofrio), whose MO is to abduct women one at a time and place them in a secret area where they are kept for about 40 hours until they are slowly drowned. Unfortunately, the killer has fallen into an irreversible coma which means he cannot confess where he has taken his latest victim before she dies. Now, Catherine Deane must race against time to explore the twisted mind of the killer to get the information she needs, but Stargher's damaged personality poses dangers that threaten to overwhelm her.

There is lots to like about this film. It's haunting images bring the art to life with lots of expression, the make-up and costume design is amazing and the idea of entering the mind of a serial killer is quite original and used with immense style. However, there is a couple of flaws which make The Cell plummet from what could've been a higher rating. Vincent D'Onofrio is strangely muted in his performance, and instead of been intelligent, some of the scenes are just plain strange, with no explanation or excuse to tag them along. But Jennifer Lopez looks and acts amazingly, although not quite up to her sexy standards in Out of Sight. I have to admit the best scenes in the film are the ones inside Carl Stargher's mind. They are occasionally brilliant (the part where Novak is trying to tell Catherine that the mind isn't real is disturbingly amazing) and well-filmed by Tarsem Sighn, director.

I liked the bizarreness of this film because it wasn't typical. All the images were new, and most of the ideas were original and we hadn't seen them put on film before. It's not perfect, and not exactly something you'd watch twice, but this is still an entertaining film for a Tuesday night, one that will stick in your nightmares for a wee while after viewing.

J-Lo In Wonderland...
The dark, bleak inner world of serial killer Carl (Vincent D'Onofrio) Stargher's mind is a bizarre labyrinth of horror and mystery. It also holds the key to finding Carl's latest female victim, before it's too late. Psychologist, Catherine (J-Lo) Deane is part of a team that has the ability to transfer a person into the mind of another. Catherine must enter Carl's head and travel through it's dank halls and passages, in order to help the FBI find the poor girl he's stashed away in a hidden dungeon. You see, Carl puts his victims in a plexiglass tank, drowns them over the course of 40 hours, and bleaches their lifeless bodies. Unfortunately, Carl slipped into a deep, irreversible coma, just as the feds moved in on him. Now, it's up to Catherine to make contact with Carl's inner self and get the information that will save his latest prey. Catherine is both gentle and strong, as she battles the insane beast that has manifest itself in Carl's mind. She befriend's Carl's "inner child", a terrified little boy, constantly on the run and reliving past tortures at the hand of his sadistic father. Can Catherine gain the boy's trust and get him to tell what he knows, or will the beast-man get them first? An excellent psycho / supernatural chiller, THE CELL is a haunting, beautiful creep-fest! Give it a look...

CELL MATES
THE CELL is one of the most visually arresting movies of the recent decade, rich in kaleidoscopic, Dalian imagery, and some beautifully arranged vistas. However, all this technical wizardry can't elevate Jennifer Lopez's wimpy performance. Yes, the woman is beautiful, and she photographs better than any beautiful actress in some time. But, Jennifer seems too inhibited to let her inner beauty outshine the outside. While she smiles and cries effectively, these emotions don't seem to be coming from her. Vincent D'Onofrio, a brilliant actor, gives a typical psychotic performance, but it is mind-numbing all the same; Vince Vaughn seems to be giving his audition for Norman Bates, but in actuality, he's better in this than he was in the remake of PSYCHO. Marie Jean Baptiste, an actress of worthy merit, is lost in the script, with only Jake Weber as Vaughn's periplectic partner, giving a performance of any nuance.
THE CELL is visually delightful, but emotionally void; however, it is a trip while you're with it. Doesn't leave you feeling much afterwards, though.

First rate movie
THE CELL is a really interesting movie that will most likely shock you. Visually, it's one of the most beautiful movies I've seen, the cinematography is breathtaking. Jennifer Lopez plays a child psychologist who can enter the minds of children and help them work through their problems. She enters the mind of a serial killer (played by Vincent D'Onofrio) who has fell into a coma. She has to find information about one of his victims he has been holding in a glass cage that is filled with water every now and then. She only has 48 hours to complete this, and she encounters a truly strange messed up world inside of his head, trying to find the truth. Like I said, it's visually quite stunning and the plot was interesting too, kept me guessing and glued to the screen. Very good movie. ... Read more

Reviews (326)

Great Color, Great Costumes....Not much substance
To put it simply..this movie didn't have just a real great plot. At best, it was quite weak. Most of the movie takes place inside of a serial killer's deranged, albeit very colorful mind. Actually, the film reminded me a lot of Silence of the Lambs, except you don't really care about what happens to the characters; and Jennifer Lopez is no Jodie Foster.

Actually in this movie, Ms. Lopez's character acts more like Little Bo Peep, or Goldie Locks. She is just too sugary sweet. You want here to wake up and yell at someone.

As for the visual aspects of the movie; the were awesome! The costumes, the terrific use of color, and all of the sets were spectacular. This will sound gross, but there is one really cool scene where a horse gets sliced like cheese between plates of glass. But, it is alive and you can see its organs moving! Really gross, and doesn't mean much to the film, but really cool, in a sick sort of way.

Overall, I would buy it again....especially for the cheese slicer!

Bizarre and intriguing
The Cell

Score: 69/100

Four stars from Roger Ebert. Ten stars from my friends. 69 stars from me. I'd have to agree with myself. In my opinion, The Cell is not really 10/10 or 4/4 quality. It is indeed a fine film, but to call it a masterpiece or an instant classic is going far, far over the top.

Catherine Deane (Jennifer Lopez) is a psychotherapist who is part of a revolutionary new treatment which allows her mind to literally enter the mind of her patients. Her experience in this method takes an unexpected turn when FBI agent Peter Novak (Vince Vaughn) comes to ask for a desperate favour. They had just tracked down a notorious serial killer, Carl Stargher (Vincent D'Onofrio), whose MO is to abduct women one at a time and place them in a secret area where they are kept for about 40 hours until they are slowly drowned. Unfortunately, the killer has fallen into an irreversible coma which means he cannot confess where he has taken his latest victim before she dies. Now, Catherine Deane must race against time to explore the twisted mind of the killer to get the information she needs, but Stargher's damaged personality poses dangers that threaten to overwhelm her.

There is lots to like about this film. It's haunting images bring the art to life with lots of expression, the make-up and costume design is amazing and the idea of entering the mind of a serial killer is quite original and used with immense style. However, there is a couple of flaws which make The Cell plummet from what could've been a higher rating. Vincent D'Onofrio is strangely muted in his performance, and instead of been intelligent, some of the scenes are just plain strange, with no explanation or excuse to tag them along. But Jennifer Lopez looks and acts amazingly, although not quite up to her sexy standards in Out of Sight. I have to admit the best scenes in the film are the ones inside Carl Stargher's mind. They are occasionally brilliant (the part where Novak is trying to tell Catherine that the mind isn't real is disturbingly amazing) and well-filmed by Tarsem Sighn, director.

I liked the bizarreness of this film because it wasn't typical. All the images were new, and most of the ideas were original and we hadn't seen them put on film before. It's not perfect, and not exactly something you'd watch twice, but this is still an entertaining film for a Tuesday night, one that will stick in your nightmares for a wee while after viewing.

J-Lo In Wonderland...
The dark, bleak inner world of serial killer Carl (Vincent D'Onofrio) Stargher's mind is a bizarre labyrinth of horror and mystery. It also holds the key to finding Carl's latest female victim, before it's too late. Psychologist, Catherine (J-Lo) Deane is part of a team that has the ability to transfer a person into the mind of another. Catherine must enter Carl's head and travel through it's dank halls and passages, in order to help the FBI find the poor girl he's stashed away in a hidden dungeon. You see, Carl puts his victims in a plexiglass tank, drowns them over the course of 40 hours, and bleaches their lifeless bodies. Unfortunately, Carl slipped into a deep, irreversible coma, just as the feds moved in on him. Now, it's up to Catherine to make contact with Carl's inner self and get the information that will save his latest prey. Catherine is both gentle and strong, as she battles the insane beast that has manifest itself in Carl's mind. She befriend's Carl's "inner child", a terrified little boy, constantly on the run and reliving past tortures at the hand of his sadistic father. Can Catherine gain the boy's trust and get him to tell what he knows, or will the beast-man get them first? An excellent psycho / supernatural chiller, THE CELL is a haunting, beautiful creep-fest! Give it a look...

CELL MATES
THE CELL is one of the most visually arresting movies of the recent decade, rich in kaleidoscopic, Dalian imagery, and some beautifully arranged vistas. However, all this technical wizardry can't elevate Jennifer Lopez's wimpy performance. Yes, the woman is beautiful, and she photographs better than any beautiful actress in some time. But, Jennifer seems too inhibited to let her inner beauty outshine the outside. While she smiles and cries effectively, these emotions don't seem to be coming from her. Vincent D'Onofrio, a brilliant actor, gives a typical psychotic performance, but it is mind-numbing all the same; Vince Vaughn seems to be giving his audition for Norman Bates, but in actuality, he's better in this than he was in the remake of PSYCHO. Marie Jean Baptiste, an actress of worthy merit, is lost in the script, with only Jake Weber as Vaughn's periplectic partner, giving a performance of any nuance.
THE CELL is visually delightful, but emotionally void; however, it is a trip while you're with it. Doesn't leave you feeling much afterwards, though.

First rate movie
THE CELL is a really interesting movie that will most likely shock you. Visually, it's one of the most beautiful movies I've seen, the cinematography is breathtaking. Jennifer Lopez plays a child psychologist who can enter the minds of children and help them work through their problems. She enters the mind of a serial killer (played by Vincent D'Onofrio) who has fell into a coma. She has to find information about one of his victims he has been holding in a glass cage that is filled with water every now and then. She only has 48 hours to complete this, and she encounters a truly strange messed up world inside of his head, trying to find the truth. Like I said, it's visually quite stunning and the plot was interesting too, kept me guessing and glued to the screen. Very good movie. ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Brings new mwaning to the word "Idiotic."
Okay, this movie....oh man. This horrible clash of genres features over the top and under the top acting, idiotic characters, "special" Effects that are none too impressive and is the worst thing Isaac Hays has ever been involved with. Seriously, this is one ripe for MST3K, folks. Buy it only to torture yourself or other people. I have a long, curse-filled, spiteful review on my website, but I can't post the URL here so whatever. If you are going to buy, BUY USED. Do not waste any extra money on this thing. Spend it on a bag of Oreos or something instead. You'll be glad you did.

Campy fun, but no T&A
Oblivion is a campy, fun loving Sci-Fi Western movie that doesn't try to explain itself, nor does it take itself too seriously. If you are a trekky like me, its almost worth the cost of the DVD just to hear George Takei (who plays a drunk doctor) pay hommage to "Bones" McKoy with such wonderful lines as "I'm a doctor dammit, not a magician!" Oblivion has all the stuff you would expect in a B-movie western, including the wooden hero with a problematic past, the nasty villain with a band of losers, the hostage, and the shootout. This is combined with the sci-fi laser guns and bizarre B-grade off-world creatures.

This movie has all sorts of weird scenes. The best without question (also worth the price of the movie) has to be the funeral scene with the simultaneous Bingo game taking place on the second floor. This hilarious combination of sappy funeral speeches with bingo announcements like "B-1" going on in the background is a scream.

And while this movie has a really hot black nylon chick in Musetta Vander (if you're into the Trinity "Matrix" look, get this!), it is truly missing the gratuitous T&A. Musetta (the hot siren from "O Brother Where Art Thou") is hot though, so the movie still survives.

I give it 3 stars on the B-movie scale - T&A would have brought it to a solid 4.

Slower than its sequel but makes more sense.
The best of the stacks and stacks of direct-to-video junk out there.

Self-consciously campy, with stop-motion creatures, and (thankfully) good-natured, with no really objectionable stuff to speak of.

If you hear the words "low-budget" and run for the hills, pass this one up. But if you know and love AIP movies of the late 50's, it's a good bet you will enjoy this. This is as close to the feel of those that I have so far found among modern [movies].

Classic, high camp... with MUSETTA VANDER
I love this movie... I first saw it eight years ago and only recently hunted it (and its sequel, Backlash) down as an exorbitantly-priced VHS, even though it meant playing it on a tiny, tinny-sounding TV/VCR.

So, it's a "Sci-Fi Western." Let me see... Was it hokey? Heck, yeah! That's what MAKES the movie. Basically, toss Clash of the Titans, the original Star Trek series, The Adventures of Buckaroo Bonzai Across the Eighth Dimension, and a little Jim Henson puppetry into a blender, and you've got a fairly representative perception of what it's like. I have no idea what the budget was, but what it looks like is NOT mainstream Hollywood, NOT trendy-Indie, but very hip and quirky and campy on a well-designed shoestring budget.

The characters are waaay over the top... waaay waaay OVER over the top... even the seemingly straight-played parts by Richard Joseph Paul and Jackie Swanson (Little House on the Prairie really was this tragic, it just wasn't meant to be). And YES, George Takei pokes fun at his Star Trek pigeonholing with wincingly blatant one-liners, but it's so FUN to see him cutting loose (Sulu was awfully straight-laced). Musetta Vander is absolutely DELICIOUS as the black leather-clad, electric whip-wielding Lash. If you've always had a soft spot for really wicked women (with a Bettie Page thing going), you'll fall for her after seeing this. Carel Struycken is so freaking cool, I want to hug him. His voice (I sooo dig his voice) and kind of innocent savant demeanor (but with bits of cold practicality peeking through) reminded me of Andre the Giant in The Princess Bride.

If you live for the credits, here you go:

Directed by Sam Irvin and written by Charles Band, Peter David (I), Mark Goldstein (II), John Rheaume, and Greg Suddeth. The credits include Richard Joseph Paul as Zack Stone, Jackie Swanson as Mattie Chase, Andrew Divoff as Redeye, Meg Foster as Stell Barr, Isaac Hayes as Buster, Julie Newmar as Miss Kitty, Carel Struycken as Gaunt, George Takei as Doc Valentine, Musetta Vander as Lash, Jimmie F. Skaggs as Buteo, Irwin Keyes as Bork, Mike Genovese as Marshall Stone, Frank Roman (I) as Wormhole, Jeff Moldovan as Spanner, Joe Muzio and Craig Anthony Muzio as Two Head, Tim Miller (I) as the Stinking Turncoat, Peter David (I) as Cowhand, Nadine Emilie Voindrouh as Josephine, Sam Irvin himself as the "Whipping Boy," and a bunch of techs and extras who probably laughed and partied their way through the entire (for Pete's sake, go find a copy of the freaking film and watch it already) filming.

What are you waiting for? A newsletter and button?

Nebula boy.

>=)

In The Year 3031...It's Cowboys And Aliens.!!!!!!!!
Not since robotic cowboys strutted the dusty streets of Westworld has a sci-fi western caused such a ruckus! Oblivion's a rough and tumble frontier outpost with all sorts of bizarre creatures wandering about. But when Redeye (half man, half lizard and all mean) swaggers into town, all hell breaks loose!
Featuring a posse of favorites including Julie Newmar as the racy saloon hostess, George Takei as the tipsy local "Doc," Carel Struycken (The Addams Family) as an eerie mortician and Meg Foster playing a robocop with a quick draw and a heart of gold-plate. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

HURT'S SO BAD
What is it with these enormously talented actors like JOHN HURT, who was so good in "The Elephant Man" and "Alien"? Why would he overact so shamelessly in this 1993 almost B-movie sci-fi thriller? His big finale scene is so over the top it makes Vincent Price look like a deflated balloon. Whereas Price knew just how far to go, Hurt takes his demonic villainous role and shoots it to the stars.
Otherwise, this pre-X-Files fantasy suffers from a ponderous script, slack direction, and not enough time with the alien. Bill Patton, who is always willing to be the true maverick anything, spars deftly with Lindsay Frost, and their comic timing helps the duller moments. I particularly liked Paul Ganus in his role as the bespectacled villain. Behind his corporate glasses, lurks a giant of a man, obviously beefcake material. However, when his moment comes, he is beat to a pulp by Paxton and then whines when he realizes an elevator is going to chop off his head. What made Ganus so interesting was the cool aplomb he displayed, and his bulky threat behind the Armani suits. Lou Gossett, Jr. tried hard, but his role became so stereotypical, it muted his performance. The scene on the skyscraper could have been more chilling, but back in the early nineties, CGI hadn't been introduced so it's obvious they're on a scrim with a blue screen behind them.
But heck, this is so much better than a lot of these films, it's worth a rental.

Cheesy Sci-Fi
This is a horrible movie. The plot is something about a killer alien that can't be stopped or something. We've seen this before. The stars of this movie no one has heard of and the dialogue was laughable. Watch the scene of the alien being chased in a hotel and laugh your head off. Don't see this movie unless u have 2.

The X-Files
Starring Bill Paxton as Tucker and Lindsay Frost as flint. It's about a couple of cops chasing an alien and the goverment wants to keep this alien buisness a secret. Looks like an episode straight out of the X-Files, but i belive it was made before the first episode of the X-Files was aired. Surprisingly one goverment men appears in the X-Files also. The guys who want to keep this alien buisness a secret have more clearence level than the president, but they have just a single woman security gaurd gaurding the enterance of their headquaters (?) at night (?+?), When the two cops tell her that she looks exactly like sigourney weaver (?+?+?) she lets them inside (?+?+?+?). Oh! what the heck why look for reality in a film about aliens. ... Read more

Description

In defiance of the Elder Lords, the evil Outworlders are back to wreak hell on Earth. Led by the mighty Shao Kahn, their gruesome goal is humanity's complete and utter destruction. Earth's last and only hope is the mighty martial arts warrior Liu Kang. ... Read more

Reviews (136)

The movie was pretty good, but needed more features
When I finished watching the 1st mortal kombat I was so pleased by the movie, and begged for a sequel. So i saw the sequel when it came out and was pleased, yet displeased. The Fighting is excellent, yet the 1st had better/longer fight scenes, but just not enough of them; where as its the exact opposite in the sequel. Here is a list of the negatives: -Johny Cage died a quick death, c'mon, he's funny! -Some characters actors were changed -Rayden's plot, and the change in him(brother?) -Kitana didn't wear the simialar outfit style of jade and Mileena, and cindel should have just been shao kahn's queen, not kitana's mother! -The short fights provided no background on the characters like mileena, jade, rain, ermac, motaro -Shao kahn was supposed to be more intriguing. He shouldn't have had a father, and was often just seen in a black suit. The actor looked liked he was the one who learned from Shang Tsung!In the first mk, shao kahn's power is nicely shown. -Instead of bringing back old characters that died in mk, they should have introduced new heroes and villains -the plot on shao's unallowed arrival was horrible -give some backround on jax. I mean in mk we see him last when he tries to stop sonya from pursuing kano, and then in the second, he's rescued from a lab? knows how to fight? -The emperor killed off his own men

thats just about it, and I must state I gave it a 3 star because of the quaility martial arts, effects, and new appearances of many fighters. It was just a movie that could have been beautifully done, but spoiled by the outrageous plot, change in character, non-stop(time taking) fighting. It was all in all farely decent though and would be a good movie to buy as a COMPANION to the original 1 question~ what the hell is the plot of the 3rd movie supposed to be?

The Grrls Step Up
Well, since they mucked up the plot from the game in the first MK, I was not surprised that this one, plotwise, is confusing. They tried to stuff 3 & 4 into one movie (the previous one squishes 1 & 2 of the games together).

What's GREAT:

A Sonya that can physically do the part. While Brigette Wilson is hot hot HOT, she was not physically suitable for the physically demanding part of Sonya Blade. I appreciate the heart and toughness she exuded though--and her hard work. But thank the Gods for Sandra Hess. No more "falling down not from being hit but from kicking your opponent" moments. And no more rigged fights (how insulting was that bit?). Sonya Blade got off in this movie and it was convincing (as convincing as these things go anyway). And she actually does Sonya's trademark move!

Kitana: You know, she only gets one really good fight and it's great! (The very last one wasn't so great) Best part--the nod to Bruce Lee and her trademark FAN BLADES!

Mileena: The fight with fan fave Mileena is probably the most brutal HTH I've seen in American films. It was fantastic and she does all of her signature moves (save for the Sai Toss--no chi stuff is in these movies). It's worth renting just for this fight.

The fights are amazing (save for Liu vs Baraka) and the music is great! There are nods to the fans of the arcade series all around.

BAD:

When you've squished the plots of 4 games into two movies, there's bound to be problems. And when the last two chapters have waaaaaaaaay more characters and twists than the first two but the lengths are about the same, well, you get a jarbled mess.

This movie really should have picked one thread to follow and just had a tournament going on in the backdrop. And rather than spending money (and screen time) on the CGI for the Animalities it would have been much better to use that precious time fleshing out some of the 50,000 characters used.

Not as good as the first one
INTRODUCTION:
In the early-mid nineties, the Mortal Kombat series of video games became one of the most popular and well-loved, as well as one of the most controversial. With all this popularity, it's not surprising that the game makers wanted to make a movie based on their widely-loved (and hated) series. And in 1995, the Mortal Kombat movie arrived in theaters. A sequel arrived in theaters two years later. Read on for my review.

BASIC PLOT:
This movie picks up right where the previous film left off. Shao Kahn has taken steps in creating a plot in which the world will fuse with his own realm, the Outworld. Following the death of Johnny Cage at Kahn's hands, the world's finest warriors must find a way to save the world from certain doom.

FILM OPINIONS:
Overall this was a good film, but the film makers made a critical mistake in the first five minutes of the movie. They killed of Johnny Cage. WHY!? Linden Ashby's acting was, by far, the true attraction of the first film - combining a sense of action with a sense of humor. Killing him off immediately puts this film at a disadvantage. Another problem with the film is the awkward plot. If you didn't see the first movie, and even if you DID see it, you're going to be confused once or twice, maybe more. There are also too many characters introduced in too little time - a problem that a TON of movies suffer from. Still, it's a worthwhile film if you saw the first one.

DVD:
When you find a DVD for this low of a price, it's only natural to assume it doesn't have any extras. If you made that assumption, you are correct. Other than the very basic DVD stuff, you're not going to find any special features.

OVERALL:
Overall this is a good film, and it's worth checking out if you're a fan of the games, and you've seen the first film - just be warned, no "movie to game" film adaptation is perfect, and this one is no exception. Still, it's a good film, and I think you'll be pleasantly surprised.

Oh My God
You know, this movie would not be so bad if its characters had a point. Yes, there are a load of characters from the MK3 game, but they don't explain where they come from, their significance in the plot, why the heck they're there! The dialog is as choppy as the plot, and I don't even know where the whole animality thing came from without reference to the games!!! The coolest characters in the movie were Jax, NightWolf, and that's just about it. AND JOHNNY!!! =(

You know how sometimes you could just watch a movie and go "ugh... this is so bad"... this is one of them. I was very disappointed, considering how good the first one was.

I still like it
Even though we miss the brilliance of Bridgette Wilson and Christopher Lambert, this movie is not as bad as everyone says. I loved it, even though the new Sonya Blade is an annoyance, it's still great. The warriors have more challanges in front of them and Jax is back, my favourite character this time around. If Rayden and Sonya were the originals, this movie would blow out the first one. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Fun, but not as good as the first...
The two Oblivion movies are some of the best, and least known, of the Full Moon films.

This film takes place immediatly after the first. (I think they were filmed at the same time.) The main plot concerns an intergalactic bounty hunter after a sabatour wanted by the galaxicorp. The main suspect is Lash. (Played by the incredible Musetta Vander.) Zack, as sheriff, must help the bounty hunter in his quest.

The film lacks the in-jokes that made the first so fun. Julie Newmar has much more of a role in this one. (I am not certain what to think about her in this. Something about a 60+ year old woman in a form fitting outfit that is kind of frightening. Especially since she still looks good, in a weird plastic surgery Brazil-like way.)

If you liked the first, get this. If you have not seen the first movie, get that as well. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Sci-fi action adventure at it's best Aliens meet Terminator
This has got to be the best and the most funniest action adventure sci fi I had ever seen. I'd seen it over 5 times and I still love every moment of it. It's scary, funny, and it has alot of pulse pounding action. The Bad guy robot was very scary It has all the elements like action and suspense that makes it all worth the watch.
It's definitely like Alien meets Terminator.
Very good movie.

Dreadful
I recently saw this film on one of the Cinemax channels a while ago,and I must say,that this film is very,very bad.It's so bad in fact,I don't think it should get any stars.First off,what the hell is up with the acting? It's some of the worst I've EVER seen! It's so bad,it makes Madonna's acting look like it should win an academy award.The acting is absolutely terrible.Second,the photography SUCKS.I don't know what kind of camera the film makers used.The lighting is awful too.And third,the script is seriously padded,along with the storyline and plot,which did not make ANY sense whatsoever.Flat and extremely unimaginative.Now, the film DOES have it's good points,the special FX and gore galore being the best features,but all in all,there really isn't much to recommend here. I never saw Project-Shadowchaser 1-2,but they can't be any worse than this.Avoid,avoid,avoid.Rated R-contains gory sci-fi violence and strong language. ... Read more

Reviews (10)

Opinion
I love William Petersen, in anything he does, but he's played in some really crappy movies, & he's so good, this is OK, Liked where he was downing the straight shots, of boos very realistic- he's so incredible to look at that you kinda of forget how lousy the movie is. Diane Lane is as always good & beautiful, the chemistry between her & WP was pretty good, lucky girl, to be in bed with him. I liked the last line he spoke in his jail cell, very profound & prolific. Have never seen before or since the other guy, don't have much of an opinion of him!!!

A whole lot more interesting than it seems
The other reviews for this film notwithstanding, this is NOT the "Gun Shy" that stars Neeson and Platt. This particular film stars William Peterson ("Manhunter")as Jake Bridges, and Michael Wincott ("The Crow")as Frankie McGregor, in what appears to be a fairly cut-and-dried exercise. Jake, a down-and-out writer is befriended by Frankie, a collector for a local mob boss. Jake needs money and something to occupy his mind so he won't drink himself to death. Frankie wants an education.

The two of them not only click,they become very good friends, and Peterson falls in love with his friend's girlfriend Melissa, (Diane Lane "The Cotton Club")setting up your basic triangle. The rest of the film is about how this whole thing plays out between them.

What makes it really interesting, though is the strong, homoerotic thread that winds through the film. By the end, you have to wonder why Melissa is even in the film (Butch assurance, perhaps) since the guys are so emotionally entwined they have made huge sacrifices for each other. (Don't want to give too much away here, so you'll have to see it for the particulars.) Even in the details, this thread seems obvious, at least to me.

But hey, don't take my word for it. If you don't see it, that's fine too. The film can be enjoyed on a number of levels. It's not a great film by any stretch, but the acting alone puts it way up on the list. All three principals turn in wonderful, nuanced performances, making this film well worth seeing. Give it a shot.

William Petersen
An OK movie, William Petersen carries it. He's an incredible actor, as we all know and too die for handsome & sexy- loved where he was throwing back the straght shots of boos- very realistic- kinda of a weird ending- Diane Lane & him had OK chemistry-don't know the other actor, never have seen , or heard of him before or since- just glad I can see WP on CSI- wished he'd make a killer Oscar winning movie

William Petersen
Bought this because , I am a huge William Petersen fan, he's great as a kinda of has been writer, who gets back on track, because of meeting the other guy, who I've never heard of?? Diane Lane is as always beautiful, love when he throws back the straight shots of boos, so realistic!! he is as always soo good, & soo handsome & sexy, whatever he's in is better because of him- the movie really isn't that good, but the ending is interesting, the last line, he spoke I liked.

Only watch for Michael Wincott's intense performance
There is only one reason to rent or buy this highly derivative, would-be noir, low-budget indie flick ' Michael Wincott's skillful, moving performance in what is apparently his only full-length, feature role after years of doing small supporting parts mostly as psychotic serial killers. Here he is very moving in a complex role as a soft-hearted Mafia wiseguy with a penchant for saving people. It is a neat idea that takes your initial stereotyped reaction to his harsh appearance and deep, gravely voice -- that he is going to be yet another crazy killer -- and spins it in the other direction. By the end of the movie, it's his character (Frankie) you are concerned about....not the "hero". While the film is otherwise pretty forgettable, I couldn't get his performance out of my mind after seeing it this summer. Prior to this, I had never heard of this very talented actor before.

Unfortunately, GUNSHY is otherwise badly flawed, suffering from a genuinely awful script by Larry Gross loaded fillled absolute howlers, corny situations and references to better films (especially GROSSE POINT BLANK, DONNIE BRASCO, GET SHORTY, LEAVING LAS VEGAS, MONA LISA, just to mention a few) that just make this look very lame in comparison...plus the absurdness of a crime gang that has exactly four members, one of whom is in a wheelchair, and who hail from that crime mecca of IRELAND. The terrible problem of IRISH gangland crime in Atlantic City?

The other leads are just unbelievably bad in this. They are otherwise respected performers, so I am not sure if the bad script or bad direction threw them off or what. William L. Petersen in particular is actually embarrassing. He is very badly miscast as Jake Bridges, a down-and-out journalist, who just like the character in 'Leaving Las Vegas' has gone to a gambling mecca to 'drink himself to death.' Petersen's performance is full of annoying mannerisms -- it is really agonizing to watch the hammy expression on his face as he chokes down drinks (demon alchohol, I guess). Combined with his heartless betrayal of his only friend Frankie, this makes Jake unsympathetic, and as he is the protagonist AND narrator that throws the whole dramatic structure of the film off-kilter. Beautiful Diane Lane (Melissa) is so affectless and flat that she is barely engaged with the story at all and is handicapped by a dreadfully fake "dees-dem-does Jersey" accent. (Needless to say, when either of them has a scene with Wincott, they are simply blown off the screen by his intensity and professionalism.) She has zero sexual chemistry with either actor, and she is particularly unbelievable as a nurse -- who wears spike heels to work with her nurse's whites! -- and who doesn't seem to know better than to leave a man (severely beaten and in shock) passed out unconscious on her living room sofa. The script suffers from Mr. Gross's concept that nursing is a 'loser' profession for uneducated gun molls, a very odd idea indeed, as an R.N. would normally have a college degree and earn a very good income.

Additionally, I have a hard time believing that Mr. Gross ever did more than visit Atlantic City -- this film doesn't have the gritty realism of a story set in a very particular time and place. It could have been set most anywhere and indeed was filmed mostly on soundstages in L.A. (so why not set it there? Or right...the whole 'Leaving Las Vegas' drunk thing). Except for a nice aerial shot of the Jersey shoreline in the titles, we see nothing of the casinos, or beaches or anything that would particularly center this story in its location.

Some other reviewers have commented on a homoerotic thread running through the story. This isn't really supported by the performances, but it certainly leads to some very odd lines in the movie. Jake mentions to Melissa that 'both men and women find him very attractive' -- not the sort of thing one usually says to a girl you are trying to pick up. But the most egregious example is in a shooting range, where gangster Frankie is teaching writer Jake how to use a handgun for the first time, and as they take turns firing their weapons, Jake tells Frankie, 'Now I know what I was afraid of...it feels so good.' Uh...OK. Phallic reference. I get it. But nothing is developed along this plotline, there is no erotic chemistry between the actors, and it's just a pointless and embarrassing red herring.

The two worst moments in this movie are when Petersen abruptly and pointlessly bursts into the sea chanty "What do you do with a drunken sailor?" and sings THE WHOLE THING while waiting for the other gangsters to complete a bank robbery. This is crawl-under-your-seat embarassing.

The other one is near the end, when we see Petersen in jail -- a country club prison for white collar criminals, no doubt, as he has a private cell with his own desk and typewriter. In a cutaway, we see a bookstore piled with copies of his book, "Deception in Atlantic City: A true crime story", which has won the Pulitzer Prize for Journalism (according to the window sign). The mockup of the book is unbelievably lame -- it looks like a kid created it on a home computer -- but the worst part is that the PULITIZER PRIZE-WINNING BOOK obviously must be the story of GUNSHY (i.e., how Jake got in with a "gang" as a mole, but then double crossed the police and went to jail to save his gangster buddy). So scriptwriter Larry Gross is basically saying that the plot of GUNSHY is so wonderful, so original, and such an expose of organized crime & police corruption, that it deserves the most prestigious prize in the world for journalism!!!! hahahaha....NOT.

At the time this film was made (1998), all three actors were pretty much minor leaguers despite long resumes. Today (2003) Petersen has the lead in the No.1 TV series CSI, and Diane Lane is a major film star with an Academy Award nomination for Unfaithful and new film Under the Tuscan Sun...while Michael Wincott is still basically doing cameos as psycho killers. If this isn't total injustice, than I don't know what is. Anyways, rent this video for his performance and fast forward through the bad parts. ... Read more

Reviews (183)

Has got to be one of the worst films I have ever seen...
Once again I say, "Wild Wild West" has got to be on of the worst films I have ever seen. I myself have never seen the original TV series starring Robert Conrad but the movie "Wild Wild West" was pretty awful. And the thing which really gets me is, it could have been such a terrific movie!

Two U.S. Marshals, Capt. James 'Jim' West (Will Smith) and Artemus 'Artie' Gordon (Kevin Kline) are assigned to discover why most of the country's leading scientists have been kidnapped. An old enemy of West's, General 'Bloodbath' McGrath (Ted Levine) lead them to the mastermind, a waist-high madman Dr. Arliss Loveless (Kenneth Branagh). Dr. Loveless' plan? To take over the United States government!

The plot is nothing new, a madman threatens to take over the government with the help of a super machine created by kidnapped scientists. The only people who can save everyone are the two main characters. You've heard it before, huh? "Wild Wild West" was extremely interesting in the way they thought up of a way to combine lots of cool inventions and gadgets into a story of the 'wild west'. But it has its many downfalls. One being that the story seemed to lull at some points, like it's just something to fill in the time. There should have been more twists and turns, captures and escapes, or something!

The acting wasn't all that bad, though I must say I much more enjoy watching Will Smith in the "Men in Black" movies. He seems to have the exact same attitude, cockiness, and humor as he does in the movies I mentioned, except he lacks some smarts. He has a tendency to 'shoot first, shoot later, shoot some more and then when everybody's dead try to ask a question or two.' Unfortunately in this movie there really isn't given any chance for ANY of the characters to fully develop, let alone make you like and cheer for them. Kevin Kline for me was the best actor in the movie, him getting a chance to play two roles, one as Artemis Gordon and another as President Ulysses S. Grant. He was extremely charming and likable, a bit smarter and more sophisticated than his new partner. The bad guy played by Kenneth Branagh was nothing new, just your usual crazy madman. And though Salma Hayek is credited along with the main actors as Rita Escobar, you have no chance to see her much and for some reason was a very unlikable character. Though there was some attempt for Will Smith and Kevin Kline to vie for her affections, there is exactly 0% romance in this movie.

And the reason for the 0% romance is because of blatant sexual jokes and innuendos put into "Wild Wild West". For a PG-13 movie, I found it a bit too much, even resulting for me to fast forward and skip some parts. And I believe this is one of the main reasons for the downfall of this movie. There were some moments where there was some good, clean, and fun humor, but the movie seems to mostly rely on innuendos and dirty jokes to make the audience laugh. And I assure you that I did not laugh much. "Wild Wild West" should have had some romance. Even most of the best action and adventure movies have romance, including such hits like "Matrix", "Top Gun", and much more.

But I must give "Wild Wild West" the minimum of two stars for the action and special effects. Some of the action is pretty intense and exciting, especially the end. And the oh so super gadgets are VERY cool! I especially love the President's 'not-so-normal' train. Dr. Loveless's gigantic spider is dynamic, too. And Artie's numerous disguises are ingenious!

To sum it up, "Wild Wild West" had some potential to become a fantastic movie. But because of the empty characterizations, somewhat empty plot, and terrible and sick jokes succeeds in making "Wild Wild West" a flop for me. If you're thinking about watching "Wild Wild West", rent it if you're really serious about seeing it. But here are two other recommendations, "Men in Black" stars Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones who fight extra-terrestrial and "Silverado" stars Kevin Kline as a gunfighter who saves the town of Silverado.

Here an interesting bit of trivia for "Wild Wild West":
The movie 'won' 5 statuettes at the 20th Annuel Razzie Awards, including Worst Picture. Robert Conrad, who played the original James West in the 1960s TV series, accepted 3 of the awards in person as his way of expressing his low opinion of what had been done with his source material. :)

Jab your eyes out!
Paint a mustache on the Mona Lisa! It's a shame and sad that this movie was made cause it will never have the opportunity to be made right. The TV James West was the perfect wild west secret agent with the gadgets and brawls. Robert Conrad created a wonderful character only to be mocked in this vomitus, stick to the bottom of your shoe movie. Save your money on this and buy some of the real TV episodes. Find "The Night of the Falcon" with Robert Duvall as the foil to James West - perfect example of how this should have been made.

Just Vin

Ambitious work
While numbers continually dropped in the 19th century American frontier due to murder and disease, what truly conquered the "wild west" was technology. The rapid enumeration of product patents and their proliferation throughout the western territories: the laying of railroads, replacement of wooden structures with brick, the development of communications advances, and the personal automobile all transformed the place we know of as the Old West into its modern equivalent.

Sonnenfeld here has cleverly respun this history in the form of a narrative story, sometimes metaphorically accurate, and sometimes hilariously inverted. When gunslinger Captain 'Jim' West (Smith) and master-of-disguise 'Artemus' Gordon (Kline) are paired up to defeat the psychotic Confederate and mad inventor Dr. Arliss Loveless (Branagh), it's an idealistic winner takes all in the battle between the traditional west and the technological Eastern invasion. Of course to throw things further off-kilter, Sonnenfeld has made our protagonist, West, a black Civil War hero. With 20th century concepts of individual vs. corporate control, sexual promiscuity and identity, and racial equality and acceptance, "Wild Wild West" recasts this unique historical period to its modern viewers.

funny
This is one of those movies that make you laugh and have a good time, of course the plot it's bad, and the situations in the movie are absurd. But you can have a good time with the clowninngs that Will Smith and Kivin Cline make. And Kenneth Brannagh looks impressive with just half body.

What Were They Thinking?
Wild Wild West is one of those movies that make you wonder just what were they thinking when this movie was being made. One thing that is absolutely essential for enjoying a movie is the suspension of disbelief. That is, you have to be able to believe that what's on the screen could really happen the way that things on the screen are happening. The things that go on in this movie make that impossible. Example: there is a gigantic steam-powered spider. Even with today's advanced technology, such a contraption would be just about impossible to build and get to operate properly, let alone in 1869.

Once again: What were they thinking? ... Read more

Reviews (326)

Great Color, Great Costumes....Not much substance
To put it simply..this movie didn't have just a real great plot. At best, it was quite weak. Most of the movie takes place inside of a serial killer's deranged, albeit very colorful mind. Actually, the film reminded me a lot of Silence of the Lambs, except you don't really care about what happens to the characters; and Jennifer Lopez is no Jodie Foster.

Actually in this movie, Ms. Lopez's character acts more like Little Bo Peep, or Goldie Locks. She is just too sugary sweet. You want here to wake up and yell at someone.

As for the visual aspects of the movie; the were awesome! The costumes, the terrific use of color, and all of the sets were spectacular. This will sound gross, but there is one really cool scene where a horse gets sliced like cheese between plates of glass. But, it is alive and you can see its organs moving! Really gross, and doesn't mean much to the film, but really cool, in a sick sort of way.

Overall, I would buy it again....especially for the cheese slicer!

Bizarre and intriguing
The Cell

Score: 69/100

Four stars from Roger Ebert. Ten stars from my friends. 69 stars from me. I'd have to agree with myself. In my opinion, The Cell is not really 10/10 or 4/4 quality. It is indeed a fine film, but to call it a masterpiece or an instant classic is going far, far over the top.

Catherine Deane (Jennifer Lopez) is a psychotherapist who is part of a revolutionary new treatment which allows her mind to literally enter the mind of her patients. Her experience in this method takes an unexpected turn when FBI agent Peter Novak (Vince Vaughn) comes to ask for a desperate favour. They had just tracked down a notorious serial killer, Carl Stargher (Vincent D'Onofrio), whose MO is to abduct women one at a time and place them in a secret area where they are kept for about 40 hours until they are slowly drowned. Unfortunately, the killer has fallen into an irreversible coma which means he cannot confess where he has taken his latest victim before she dies. Now, Catherine Deane must race against time to explore the twisted mind of the killer to get the information she needs, but Stargher's damaged personality poses dangers that threaten to overwhelm her.

There is lots to like about this film. It's haunting images bring the art to life with lots of expression, the make-up and costume design is amazing and the idea of entering the mind of a serial killer is quite original and used with immense style. However, there is a couple of flaws which make The Cell plummet from what could've been a higher rating. Vincent D'Onofrio is strangely muted in his performance, and instead of been intelligent, some of the scenes are just plain strange, with no explanation or excuse to tag them along. But Jennifer Lopez looks and acts amazingly, although not quite up to her sexy standards in Out of Sight. I have to admit the best scenes in the film are the ones inside Carl Stargher's mind. They are occasionally brilliant (the part where Novak is trying to tell Catherine that the mind isn't real is disturbingly amazing) and well-filmed by Tarsem Sighn, director.

I liked the bizarreness of this film because it wasn't typical. All the images were new, and most of the ideas were original and we hadn't seen them put on film before. It's not perfect, and not exactly something you'd watch twice, but this is still an entertaining film for a Tuesday night, one that will stick in your nightmares for a wee while after viewing.

J-Lo In Wonderland...
The dark, bleak inner world of serial killer Carl (Vincent D'Onofrio) Stargher's mind is a bizarre labyrinth of horror and mystery. It also holds the key to finding Carl's latest female victim, before it's too late. Psychologist, Catherine (J-Lo) Deane is part of a team that has the ability to transfer a person into the mind of another. Catherine must enter Carl's head and travel through it's dank halls and passages, in order to help the FBI find the poor girl he's stashed away in a hidden dungeon. You see, Carl puts his victims in a plexiglass tank, drowns them over the course of 40 hours, and bleaches their lifeless bodies. Unfortunately, Carl slipped into a deep, irreversible coma, just as the feds moved in on him. Now, it's up to Catherine to make contact with Carl's inner self and get the information that will save his latest prey. Catherine is both gentle and strong, as she battles the insane beast that has manifest itself in Carl's mind. She befriend's Carl's "inner child", a terrified little boy, constantly on the run and reliving past tortures at the hand of his sadistic father. Can Catherine gain the boy's trust and get him to tell what he knows, or will the beast-man get them first? An excellent psycho / supernatural chiller, THE CELL is a haunting, beautiful creep-fest! Give it a look...

CELL MATES
THE CELL is one of the most visually arresting movies of the recent decade, rich in kaleidoscopic, Dalian imagery, and some beautifully arranged vistas. However, all this technical wizardry can't elevate Jennifer Lopez's wimpy performance. Yes, the woman is beautiful, and she photographs better than any beautiful actress in some time. But, Jennifer seems too inhibited to let her inner beauty outshine the outside. While she smiles and cries effectively, these emotions don't seem to be coming from her. Vincent D'Onofrio, a brilliant actor, gives a typical psychotic performance, but it is mind-numbing all the same; Vince Vaughn seems to be giving his audition for Norman Bates, but in actuality, he's better in this than he was in the remake of PSYCHO. Marie Jean Baptiste, an actress of worthy merit, is lost in the script, with only Jake Weber as Vaughn's periplectic partner, giving a performance of any nuance.
THE CELL is visually delightful, but emotionally void; however, it is a trip while you're with it. Doesn't leave you feeling much afterwards, though.

First rate movie
THE CELL is a really interesting movie that will most likely shock you. Visually, it's one of the most beautiful movies I've seen, the cinematography is breathtaking. Jennifer Lopez plays a child psychologist who can enter the minds of children and help them work through their problems. She enters the mind of a serial killer (played by Vincent D'Onofrio) who has fell into a coma. She has to find information about one of his victims he has been holding in a glass cage that is filled with water every now and then. She only has 48 hours to complete this, and she encounters a truly strange messed up world inside of his head, trying to find the truth. Like I said, it's visually quite stunning and the plot was interesting too, kept me guessing and glued to the screen. Very good movie. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

an exellent movie,a worthy sequel to the first.
This as you probly all ready know is the widescren edition and it is just as good as the origional,acton packed,exellent special effects and a good story line. Kitana makes her return along with Lue Kane to kick but

Staggeringly inept.
I would heavily recommend this film to anyone wishing to endure 90 minutes of loud,senseless,cohisionless noise and colour. To anyone else,I will say,avoid it.

THAT LUI KANG AND JOHNNY CAGE WENT TO THIS PLACE.
THAT LUI KANG AND JOHNNY CAGE WENT THIS PLACE TO FIND REPTIL AND THEY FIND HIM AND THEN LUI KANG STARTED TO FIGHT HIM AND LUI KANG WON AND THEN THEY WENT BACK TO THE OUTER WORLD. ... Read more

Reviews (183)

Has got to be one of the worst films I have ever seen...
Once again I say, "Wild Wild West" has got to be on of the worst films I have ever seen. I myself have never seen the original TV series starring Robert Conrad but the movie "Wild Wild West" was pretty awful. And the thing which really gets me is, it could have been such a terrific movie!

Two U.S. Marshals, Capt. James 'Jim' West (Will Smith) and Artemus 'Artie' Gordon (Kevin Kline) are assigned to discover why most of the country's leading scientists have been kidnapped. An old enemy of West's, General 'Bloodbath' McGrath (Ted Levine) lead them to the mastermind, a waist-high madman Dr. Arliss Loveless (Kenneth Branagh). Dr. Loveless' plan? To take over the United States government!

The plot is nothing new, a madman threatens to take over the government with the help of a super machine created by kidnapped scientists. The only people who can save everyone are the two main characters. You've heard it before, huh? "Wild Wild West" was extremely interesting in the way they thought up of a way to combine lots of cool inventions and gadgets into a story of the 'wild west'. But it has its many downfalls. One being that the story seemed to lull at some points, like it's just something to fill in the time. There should have been more twists and turns, captures and escapes, or something!

The acting wasn't all that bad, though I must say I much more enjoy watching Will Smith in the "Men in Black" movies. He seems to have the exact same attitude, cockiness, and humor as he does in the movies I mentioned, except he lacks some smarts. He has a tendency to 'shoot first, shoot later, shoot some more and then when everybody's dead try to ask a question or two.' Unfortunately in this movie there really isn't given any chance for ANY of the characters to fully develop, let alone make you like and cheer for them. Kevin Kline for me was the best actor in the movie, him getting a chance to play two roles, one as Artemis Gordon and another as President Ulysses S. Grant. He was extremely charming and likable, a bit smarter and more sophisticated than his new partner. The bad guy played by Kenneth Branagh was nothing new, just your usual crazy madman. And though Salma Hayek is credited along with the main actors as Rita Escobar, you have no chance to see her much and for some reason was a very unlikable character. Though there was some attempt for Will Smith and Kevin Kline to vie for her affections, there is exactly 0% romance in this movie.

And the reason for the 0% romance is because of blatant sexual jokes and innuendos put into "Wild Wild West". For a PG-13 movie, I found it a bit too much, even resulting for me to fast forward and skip some parts. And I believe this is one of the main reasons for the downfall of this movie. There were some moments where there was some good, clean, and fun humor, but the movie seems to mostly rely on innuendos and dirty jokes to make the audience laugh. And I assure you that I did not laugh much. "Wild Wild West" should have had some romance. Even most of the best action and adventure movies have romance, including such hits like "Matrix", "Top Gun", and much more.

But I must give "Wild Wild West" the