Reviews (4)

"One Good Movie"!
I loved this movie from beginning to end. Marc Singer made this movie so interesting in my opinion. I haven't seen a movie of this genre since "Fatal Attraction" (which was just as awesome).

Marc Singer RULES!
This a great movie not only because Marc Singer is in it, but is very well done. Don't be put off by similarities to Fatal Attraction...it is in some ways better. Plus Marc shows his behind.

Marc Singer vs. Michael Douglas!!
First off everyone should watch this movie for one reason alone! Marc Singer! This guy was the Beastmaster...THE BEASTMASTER!! Not to mention staring in tons of great soft core Cinemax at night style movies. Don't stop with this movie. Watch Street Corner Justice, Cyberzone, Deep Space, etc. The list goes on and on. This movie right here is pure genius. Leonard Maltin refers to it as a Fatal Attraction clone but in reality this movie was filmed prior to Fatal Attraction. It just took longer to get released because it lacked the mega-starpower that Fatal Attraction had. Not to mention this is far superior. Marc Singer is ten times tougher than Michael Douglas. And with lines like "I didn't want anything serious, but you do. You want to get beaten up." it's clear that the scriptwriter was a absolute genious. I cannot say enough of how great this movie really is. Please do yourself a huge favor and pick this screen gem up immediately.

HOT, HOT< HOT
Lisa Pescia should be famous. She's made an appearance or 2 on Seinfeld, but she's got the goods. Like Leonard Maltin said, not bad for a low-budget ripoff. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Lower Level
Handsome made thriller has Elizabeth Gracen running for her life when she stays late at the office and is trapped in the building she designed by a security guard who has a fixation on her, who also knows all the ways to activate (and de-activate) the computer controlled elevators, gates and doors of the high rise. All acting is top-notch. Gracen turns in a great performance, as does David Bradley as the psycho guard and Jeff Yagher as Gracen's boyfriend. Although clichéd and often categorized as a reversal of "Fatal Attraction," this thriller generates enough thrills, chills and false alarms to keep the viewer solidly entertained. Great script and direction too.

very thrilling,keeps you glued to your screen. Bravo!
I first caught this made for direct to video gem on cable in 1990. I was not expecting what was eventually delivered by this film. The acting was first rate, and I was kept in suspense during the entire film. Ms. Gracen turns in a stellar performance. There is no signs of her former Miss.America connection in this sexy, dark suspense/thriller. She certainly established herself in my book as a seriously underated actress.This film is certainly worth a look. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

"One Good Movie"!
I loved this movie from beginning to end. Marc Singer made this movie so interesting in my opinion. I haven't seen a movie of this genre since "Fatal Attraction" (which was just as awesome).

Marc Singer RULES!
This a great movie not only because Marc Singer is in it, but is very well done. Don't be put off by similarities to Fatal Attraction...it is in some ways better. Plus Marc shows his behind.

Marc Singer vs. Michael Douglas!!
First off everyone should watch this movie for one reason alone! Marc Singer! This guy was the Beastmaster...THE BEASTMASTER!! Not to mention staring in tons of great soft core Cinemax at night style movies. Don't stop with this movie. Watch Street Corner Justice, Cyberzone, Deep Space, etc. The list goes on and on. This movie right here is pure genius. Leonard Maltin refers to it as a Fatal Attraction clone but in reality this movie was filmed prior to Fatal Attraction. It just took longer to get released because it lacked the mega-starpower that Fatal Attraction had. Not to mention this is far superior. Marc Singer is ten times tougher than Michael Douglas. And with lines like "I didn't want anything serious, but you do. You want to get beaten up." it's clear that the scriptwriter was a absolute genious. I cannot say enough of how great this movie really is. Please do yourself a huge favor and pick this screen gem up immediately.

HOT, HOT< HOT
Lisa Pescia should be famous. She's made an appearance or 2 on Seinfeld, but she's got the goods. Like Leonard Maltin said, not bad for a low-budget ripoff. ... Read more

Reviews (7)

It's got Mark....
And that's about it. Yes, it's little more than a display of Mark's abilities as a martial artist and his charm shines through what is basically a lousy movie. There's poor performance everywhere and plot holes even I couldn't ignore. Mark goes to the police after seeing his friend killed and the chief says there's no evidence. NO EVIDENCE???!!! What would you call a first hand account of the murder?

Ok, let's look at the good points. Um...Mark. I loved watching his various workouts, especially the one towards the end where he's standing outside the ranch house. He makes a gesture which seems to move the flock of sheep about him. Mere serendipity I assume, but effective. He then proceeds to show off some back flips and an arrow break on his neck, which he learned from his father, Al.

It's for movies like this that DVD's were invented. You can fast forward past the parts you don't like. Which sadly, are too plentiful in this movie.

Formula All the Way
The original KICKBOXER with Jean Claude Van Damme was an interesting movie that dealt with issues of overcoming one's limits. When Van Damme did not wish to reprise his role of the kickboxer, Sasha Mitchell tried valiantly in three more sequels, but his juvenile appearance and limited martial arts ability hindered his performances. Now in KICKBOXER 5, director Kristine Peterson uses Mark Dacascos, who also tries, but as with Sasha Mitchell, his acting does not convince. Part of the problem with the sequels, including this one, is that the role of the villain is at least as important as that of the hero's. In the original, Michele Quisi is Tong Po, a believable Thai kickboxing thug. Quisi was a multi-layered antagonist, who, in his kicking the wall in an early scene, set the tone that here was a brute not to be trifled with. In the sequel KB2, Quisi returns, even if Van Damme does not, and it is his performance that saves the film. In KB5, the villain is James Ryan, who simply does not look menacing enough to act as the dramatic foil to Dacascos. Ryan is simply playing out, rather than playing, the demented leader of an outlaw kickboxing federation whose inner council ought to see that their chief is leading them to ruin. You would think that any leader who kills his own minions ought to worry about their continuing loyalty. The plot, of course, is nonsense. It involves the usual absurdities of a warped thug (Ryan), who tries to collar all the world's kickboxing titles as his own personal property even as all his henchmen try to tell him that by doing so, he is compromising his (and their) other vital interests. Dacascos refuses to join Ryan's outlaw federation and spends the majority of the film battling first Ryan's inept goons then Ryan himself in a climactic concluding confrontation that seemed not climactic at all. There is absolutely nothing in KB5 that rings true or makes one want to wish for a KB6.

Kickboxer Fans Save Your Time!
Fans of the Kickboxer series will be dissapointed by this fifth installment which has nothing to do with the previous entries except for the fact that David Sloan is killed in the opening. Sasha doesn't show up, it's just a siloutte of another actor.

The characters are pretty boring and the film itself is very tame for an R-rating though Dascasos use of the word "buttface" could be a bit extreme for some.

The film could have gone without attaching the Kickboxer name to it. Even on its own two feet, this movie isn't very good and I am somewhat a fan of the lead (Mark Dascasos).

KICKBOXER 5 THE REDEPTION
VERY DISSAPPOINTING,HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE KICKBOXING SAGA,A PRODUCTION THE COULD OF DONE WITHOUT,DAVID SLOAN DIES.........LOL.COMMON REALLY EVEN I COULDNT BELIEVE IT,SEE THE MOVIE FOR A GOOD LAUGH,NOTHING ELSE.

Yes, indeed average...
...was this movie of Mark Dacascos, one of my favorite Martial Arts-actors of all time. That was one of his rookie movies in that he played a character who wants to avenge " his firned's" death (as usual in these kinds of movies) Of course this plot was immediately predictable and showed some bad acting. If Mark wouldn't have played in this movie I'd give this video 2 stars right away. But luckily it's not as halfwitted as it seems. I actually enjoyed Reeves and Croft teaming up together.

Overall I'd say Mark has done better movies like Only the Strong and Drive. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Lower Level
Handsome made thriller has Elizabeth Gracen running for her life when she stays late at the office and is trapped in the building she designed by a security guard who has a fixation on her, who also knows all the ways to activate (and de-activate) the computer controlled elevators, gates and doors of the high rise. All acting is top-notch. Gracen turns in a great performance, as does David Bradley as the psycho guard and Jeff Yagher as Gracen's boyfriend. Although clichéd and often categorized as a reversal of "Fatal Attraction," this thriller generates enough thrills, chills and false alarms to keep the viewer solidly entertained. Great script and direction too.

very thrilling,keeps you glued to your screen. Bravo!
I first caught this made for direct to video gem on cable in 1990. I was not expecting what was eventually delivered by this film. The acting was first rate, and I was kept in suspense during the entire film. Ms. Gracen turns in a stellar performance. There is no signs of her former Miss.America connection in this sexy, dark suspense/thriller. She certainly established herself in my book as a seriously underated actress.This film is certainly worth a look. ... Read more

Description

Flesh-starved furballs invade an L.A. ... Read more

Reviews (29)

Critters 3: You Are What They Eat
This is a classic cheesy horror movie. The acting is okay, I'm sure a lot of people watched it for Leonardo DiCaprio's character. There is also another familiar character in this movie, Charlie. The Critters (crites) didn't look fake - okay well when watching up close you could tell their nails were fake (They would bend) and also you could see the hair was fake. I mean it's not like they can go out and capture a real Crite.

They looked the same as the second movie - I don't see what the difference was, but doesn't matter. I still love this movie. It wasn't a favorite, but it was still good.

not good like the first two
As you may know there are some B movies that consist of pointless sequels. There are also B movies that after a sequel, the series takes a nose dive. This is the category that Critters 3 falls into. First off, I realize that B movies are not to be taken serious to some degree but this movie went over the boundary line in that department. Critters 3 takes a break from the plot of the first two (Superman 3, anyone?) but that doesn't ruin the movie. In fact, the only returning character is Charlie. And folks, if you want to see this movie just because Leo Decaprio is in it then you are making a mistake. His acting is not enough to save this film. Anyway, one viewer pointed out some obvious plot holes such as Charlie becoming sheriff at the end of Critters 2 which is completely ignored in this movie. Come to think of it, I don't think Critters 3 even took place in Grover's Bend, Kansas (the same as the first two). Also, there were some critter eggs that just happen to appear under a man's truck that are unknowingly taken to an appartment complex in which later on the critters start to wreck havoc all over the place. Critters finishes with a "to be continued" ending. Critters 3 & 4 were filmed back to back just incase anyone was wondering though make no mistake... you really don't have to see this movie to understand what is happening in Crittes 4. Yes, that's right. As far as I'm concerend it would be better to go on to Critters 4 after watching Critters 2. Critters 3 is a direct-to-video film and for those who still want to see it, you will find out why.

Critter s 3 tame but still dangerous
Fist the terrorized a farm. then they over ran the town of Grovers Bend. Now they have moved up into an apartment. This was and okay film. It was not as good as the first to. Don Opper retuns as charlie. This has the less gore of the 4th movies. A very low death count only 2 people die in this one.

Things I like the cystal Charle gives the boy glows when there in danger. Lenoard De Caprio looks interesting in this film. This porbably was his first movie to star in. Not as successfull as the other films he wasin but still pretty good.

Just like in critter 1 ans 2 the krites apperance has been altered. It has some fun parts in it. There is this part is really fun when Josh Lenadord Dicapro goes with his father to evict the people living in the apartment.

After he shuts of the power he hears the sound of a televesion. He goes to investigate. This part of the movie I think wassupposed to be a rip of off the part in Gremlins when the Gremlins are watching Snow white. The Krites are watching a thing one a batter powered t.v about how to pre pare chicken.

It get real intense near the end especial when the apart catchs one fire. The fire is caused by one of the Krites that died by shallowing a flare. This is similiar to a gag that was in the first one where one of the Krites swallows a lit fire cracker.

The little boy I adormal. At the end of the movie the dad and grows real cllose tohis shown and daughter. They apolize for they way they have treated each other. Pretty good movie.

Here what they could have done tomkae it better. Gaving Charlie a larger rule, put more gore in it. Brought bradly brown back again have put ug in it. Ug you do not see again until the last one or credits of 3 if you choose to watch them. I will and alway will like critters. I own all four on VHS.

I am planning of buying them on DVD so I can watch them more frequently. Crittes series is great but Vhs were out real quickly if you watch then alot. I will and always will like critters.

OK movie, but starts the downfall for the critter series.
Ok, first off let me just start off by saying there is a whole lot more to this movie than Leonardo DiCaprio, infact, I am ashamed to own this movie because he is in it, anyways this movie is pretty good if you like the critter series, its even a bit scary at times. The only reason why i don't like this movie is because it just doesn't follow the rest of them. but if you like the critter series go for this movie! it really isn't all that bad!

The ok Critter movie!
Critters 3 I thought wasnt as good as they said because they didnt do some real action.When I frist saw the movie it was the first critters movie I saw so I thought it was pretty good,but when I got 1,2,and 4 I didnt think it was that good of a Critters movie.Besides what happened when Charlie got the Cherif duty in the secound one and he's not the Cherif of Groversbend in the third?When Charlie gave that kid a crystal and it would glow if there was trouble and it didnt when there wasnt , that was like something that didnt even need to be in the movie.Afterall I guess it is an ok critters movie but some things I just think are just plain stupid. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Slaves to the underground
I actually liked the movie alot, but oddly enough i did not like the main plot so much. There were alot of interesting characters, particularly the other members of the band, but the main characters left alot to be desired. The movie was fast paced and filmed well, with bits of humor about things completely unrelated to the actual movie plot, but I enjoyed those parts the most. especially the rant about cindy crawford being a tool. Unfortunately I found the main characters not very likeable. The leader of the band was pretty cool, but a little too hot tempered, while her girlfriend is a total manipulator who can't decide what she wants, so just leaves everyone unhappy. She leaves her girlfriend for her ex-boyfriend who is generally just an annoying character and causes unrest within the band. Then she breaks up with him again, but does not get back with her ex girlfriend. I did not enjoy that story plot at all. It sounds funny, but other than the main plot the movie was great.

I'll save you the trouble
Like in "Chasing Amy" the guy gets the girl. It was a twist that my partner and I were really not interested in. She then ends up leaving him to be alone anyway. The main character is manipulative and I quote "treats everyone she loves like s@#t". The music is cool and some scenes are very sexy...then there was the guy....

This movie is about my life at its craziest-
in other words, it reminded me exactly how crazy my life is generally. (I saw it on the big screen in NYC.) Full of sex, music, zines, emotional baggage, neuroses and love tringles gone bad, I'd recommend it to any twenty-something out there who has problems with cultural and/or political norms (you know who you are). If you fit that bill, you too will likely think you're watching your life on screen. Both a critique of pop culture and, even more so, of those of us who do our best to avoid it, this movie pulls few (emotional) punches in portraying the lives of twenty-somethings "on the edge". Be prepared to laugh, to cry, to get angry, and to maybe fall in love with one (or more) of the characters, as these people will remind you of your life and of your friends, enemies, exes, and lovers (and any combination of the above you may have experienced)... but absolutely do not see it if you're not willing to laugh at yourself until it hurts. This movie closes with Ani Difranco's "Buildings and Bridges", and that song's the best summary of the plot that I could hope to offer- if you know the song, you'll know what I mean. (BTW- If you've never heard of Ani Difranco, this movie is probably not for you- unless you want to learn something about how us "subculture" freaks (& other deviants) live.) ... Read more

Reviews (3)

Slaves to the underground
I actually liked the movie alot, but oddly enough i did not like the main plot so much. There were alot of interesting characters, particularly the other members of the band, but the main characters left alot to be desired. The movie was fast paced and filmed well, with bits of humor about things completely unrelated to the actual movie plot, but I enjoyed those parts the most. especially the rant about cindy crawford being a tool. Unfortunately I found the main characters not very likeable. The leader of the band was pretty cool, but a little too hot tempered, while her girlfriend is a total manipulator who can't decide what she wants, so just leaves everyone unhappy. She leaves her girlfriend for her ex-boyfriend who is generally just an annoying character and causes unrest within the band. Then she breaks up with him again, but does not get back with her ex girlfriend. I did not enjoy that story plot at all. It sounds funny, but other than the main plot the movie was great.

I'll save you the trouble
Like in "Chasing Amy" the guy gets the girl. It was a twist that my partner and I were really not interested in. She then ends up leaving him to be alone anyway. The main character is manipulative and I quote "treats everyone she loves like s@#t". The music is cool and some scenes are very sexy...then there was the guy....

This movie is about my life at its craziest-
in other words, it reminded me exactly how crazy my life is generally. (I saw it on the big screen in NYC.) Full of sex, music, zines, emotional baggage, neuroses and love tringles gone bad, I'd recommend it to any twenty-something out there who has problems with cultural and/or political norms (you know who you are). If you fit that bill, you too will likely think you're watching your life on screen. Both a critique of pop culture and, even more so, of those of us who do our best to avoid it, this movie pulls few (emotional) punches in portraying the lives of twenty-somethings "on the edge". Be prepared to laugh, to cry, to get angry, and to maybe fall in love with one (or more) of the characters, as these people will remind you of your life and of your friends, enemies, exes, and lovers (and any combination of the above you may have experienced)... but absolutely do not see it if you're not willing to laugh at yourself until it hurts. This movie closes with Ani Difranco's "Buildings and Bridges", and that song's the best summary of the plot that I could hope to offer- if you know the song, you'll know what I mean. (BTW- If you've never heard of Ani Difranco, this movie is probably not for you- unless you want to learn something about how us "subculture" freaks (& other deviants) live.) ... Read more

Reviews (7)

It's got Mark....
And that's about it. Yes, it's little more than a display of Mark's abilities as a martial artist and his charm shines through what is basically a lousy movie. There's poor performance everywhere and plot holes even I couldn't ignore. Mark goes to the police after seeing his friend killed and the chief says there's no evidence. NO EVIDENCE???!!! What would you call a first hand account of the murder?

Ok, let's look at the good points. Um...Mark. I loved watching his various workouts, especially the one towards the end where he's standing outside the ranch house. He makes a gesture which seems to move the flock of sheep about him. Mere serendipity I assume, but effective. He then proceeds to show off some back flips and an arrow break on his neck, which he learned from his father, Al.

It's for movies like this that DVD's were invented. You can fast forward past the parts you don't like. Which sadly, are too plentiful in this movie.

Formula All the Way
The original KICKBOXER with Jean Claude Van Damme was an interesting movie that dealt with issues of overcoming one's limits. When Van Damme did not wish to reprise his role of the kickboxer, Sasha Mitchell tried valiantly in three more sequels, but his juvenile appearance and limited martial arts ability hindered his performances. Now in KICKBOXER 5, director Kristine Peterson uses Mark Dacascos, who also tries, but as with Sasha Mitchell, his acting does not convince. Part of the problem with the sequels, including this one, is that the role of the villain is at least as important as that of the hero's. In the original, Michele Quisi is Tong Po, a believable Thai kickboxing thug. Quisi was a multi-layered antagonist, who, in his kicking the wall in an early scene, set the tone that here was a brute not to be trifled with. In the sequel KB2, Quisi returns, even if Van Damme does not, and it is his performance that saves the film. In KB5, the villain is James Ryan, who simply does not look menacing enough to act as the dramatic foil to Dacascos. Ryan is simply playing out, rather than playing, the demented leader of an outlaw kickboxing federation whose inner council ought to see that their chief is leading them to ruin. You would think that any leader who kills his own minions ought to worry about their continuing loyalty. The plot, of course, is nonsense. It involves the usual absurdities of a warped thug (Ryan), who tries to collar all the world's kickboxing titles as his own personal property even as all his henchmen try to tell him that by doing so, he is compromising his (and their) other vital interests. Dacascos refuses to join Ryan's outlaw federation and spends the majority of the film battling first Ryan's inept goons then Ryan himself in a climactic concluding confrontation that seemed not climactic at all. There is absolutely nothing in KB5 that rings true or makes one want to wish for a KB6.

Kickboxer Fans Save Your Time!
Fans of the Kickboxer series will be dissapointed by this fifth installment which has nothing to do with the previous entries except for the fact that David Sloan is killed in the opening. Sasha doesn't show up, it's just a siloutte of another actor.

The characters are pretty boring and the film itself is very tame for an R-rating though Dascasos use of the word "buttface" could be a bit extreme for some.

The film could have gone without attaching the Kickboxer name to it. Even on its own two feet, this movie isn't very good and I am somewhat a fan of the lead (Mark Dascasos).

KICKBOXER 5 THE REDEPTION
VERY DISSAPPOINTING,HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE KICKBOXING SAGA,A PRODUCTION THE COULD OF DONE WITHOUT,DAVID SLOAN DIES.........LOL.COMMON REALLY EVEN I COULDNT BELIEVE IT,SEE THE MOVIE FOR A GOOD LAUGH,NOTHING ELSE.

Yes, indeed average...
...was this movie of Mark Dacascos, one of my favorite Martial Arts-actors of all time. That was one of his rookie movies in that he played a character who wants to avenge " his firned's" death (as usual in these kinds of movies) Of course this plot was immediately predictable and showed some bad acting. If Mark wouldn't have played in this movie I'd give this video 2 stars right away. But luckily it's not as halfwitted as it seems. I actually enjoyed Reeves and Croft teaming up together.

Overall I'd say Mark has done better movies like Only the Strong and Drive. ... Read more