Showing posts with label 2000s. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2000s. Show all posts

Sexual Intelligence (2005) Review

Sexual Intelligence (2005)
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
The topic was well handled in a general sense. The format was quick paced and pleasing. Many of the issues raised were interesting takes on subjects that we intuitively know and understand, but Ms. Catrell reminds us of their significance. While there is nothing earth shattering on the DVD, it does serve to reinforce a common sense view of sex and the different ways men and women approach the subject.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Sexual Intelligence (2005)

From the heat of the first look to the importance of out erotic fantasies, Kim Cattrall explores both the physical chemistry and the emotional complexity of raw sexual desire Is it possible to develop a sexual intelligence? Can we unravel the mysteries of desire and fantasy? In SEXUAL INTELLIGENCE, the actress (Sex and the City) and author (Satisfaction) who famously broadened our notions of modern sexuality, navigates a whimsical investigation into what turns us on and why. Drawing on mythology, history, master works of art, cheeky animation and candid interviews with a diverse group of sexual adventurers, sexologists and authors, Kim urges us to broaden and explore our own understanding of erotic desire--making us laugh all the while. From the glorious beaches of Cyprus--the mythical birthplace of love Goddess Aphrodite--to the site in England of a 200 year old, 26 ft long phallus to the "Secret Museum" in Naples, where the erotic treasures of ancient Pompeii have been locked away for centuries, Kim takes us on a breathless tour of sexual significance and cultural discovery. Smart, arousing, and blush-worthy, SEXUAL INTELLIGENCE is Sex 101 for adults. DVD Features: Behind-the-Scenes with the Animators; Music Video: Tegan & Sara Speak Slow; Kim Cattrall Biography; Interactive Menus; Scene Selection(16:9 Anamorphic Widescreen format)

Buy NowGet 12% OFF

Click here for more information about Sexual Intelligence (2005)

Read More...

Sasquatch (2003) Review

Sasquatch (2003)
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
This film is painfully bad. Some bad movies are so bad they're good. This one passes good and goes straight back to bad. But I did learn a few things about Sasquatch in watching this film.
I learned that Sasquatch not only starred in this film, but he edited it as well. Oh, the credits don't come out and SAY that the film was edited by Sasquatch. But from the best I can tell, Sasquatch edited the film, using a blunt instrument. Maybe a tree trunk or smooth rock.
I also learned that Sasquatch has X-ray vision and can dodge bullets. This leads me to believe that Sasquatch is the love child of Superman and Chewbacca. It's somthing I'd rather not think about, but the proof is right in the film.
All in all, this film should be avoided at all costs. There are much better Lance Henriksen B-movie vehicles you can rent/purchase instead.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Sasquatch (2003)



Buy NowGet 57% OFF

Click here for more information about Sasquatch (2003)

Read More...

Salem Witch Trials (2010) Review

Salem Witch Trials  (2010)
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
"Salem Witch Trials" is a compelling 2003 CBS mini-series that featured many familiar and veteran actors and for the most part, stayed true to the historical events that came to be known as the Salem Witch Trials.
The mini-series begins on a rather odd note - it is right in the middle of a trial where the afflicted girls [who are the ones accusing people of witchcraft]go into hysterics and start wailing and screaming, then the accused start transforming into 'demons' [with rather striking make-up and 'flying' special effects]. Thankfully, this only lasts a couple of minutes [the production could have done without it], and viewers are taken back via flashback to six months prior where the events began.
The story focuses on the Puritans residing in the village of Salem, Massachusetts, and the year is 1691. There is no charter from England and hence, the Puritans basically govern themselves without any written law. Those who commit crimes or sins are publicly humiliated [there is a scene where women deemed guilty of sinful conduct are paraded naked whilst tied to a wagon]. The family that is the focal point in this series is the Putnam family - Ann Putnam [Kirstie Alley] gives birth to a stillborn child and is full of grief. Her husband Thomas Putnam [Jay O Sanders] is a bitter man, having lost a lot of his land and wealth to others who are more entrepreneurial. They have a son and daughter and young Annie Putnam [Katie Boland] senses the tension between her parents and finds herself being neglected, hence her desire to act out as a means of gaining attention.
Things are not helped by the Reverend Parris [Henry Czerny] who in his desperate desire to maintain his standing amongst members of his congregation, convinces them that all the social unrest and calamities befalling villagers are the work of diabolical forces.
Soon, a group of girls, including Parris' own daughter and niece start crying out and acting strangely, convulsing and going into trances, and finally accusing innocent townspeople of witchcraft.Amongst the earliest accused are Sarah Good, a poor woman who begs for a living, and Tituba [Gloria Reuben] who is a slave working in the Parris household. The number of accused increases as the girls find themselves getting more attention and begin to gain a sense of power. The production convincingly portrays the social restrictions of the time and of the harsh living conditions of the Puritans, and posits several plausible theories as to the cause of the 'madness' that beset Salem village at that time - the repressed social lives of the Puritans, the lack of freedom, not much in terms of passing one's time, the desperate need for attention amongst the young, and also the politics of life in a community where villagers frequently argued and even brought lawsuits against one another over property and business.
The storyline is riveting and moves along at a steady but sure pace, building momentum as the horror unfolds - the acting is also solid and credible - Kirstie Alley's Ann Putnam is a conflicted and tortured soul. Her grief over her dead child causes her to turn to a village medicine woman, Bridgitte Bishop who is later accused as a witch, and this in turn causes her immense guilt [for turning 'away' from God]. She is by turns horrified and self-righteous at the situation in Salem. This is one of Alley's best dramatic performances to date. Henry Czerny's Rev Parris is credibly done, acting out the part of a so-called man of God who decries against self-interest whilst shamelessly practising it for self-preservation. Then there is young Katie Boland as Annie Putnam who incites revulsion for her performance as the misguided accuser.Rebecca de Mornay plays Rev Parris' wife who is mortified by the events in Salem and finally leaves her husband.
There are also veteran actors who have done an incredible job with their roles here - Shirley Maclaine plays the ill-fated Rebecca Nurse, one of the accused who also happens to be a pillar in society, a devout mother and elderly woman who maintains her faith and sense of humor in the bleakest of times. Peter Ustinov plays the Magistrate William Stoughton, a man so absorbed in proving the accused guilty that he never once questions his judgements. And there is Alan Bates playing Gvernor Sir William Phips, who initially acts the dandy and seems disinterested but who eventually realises something is seriously wrong in Salem.
The sets and costumes lend an authentic feel to the story, making the Salem of 1691-'92 come alive onscreen. All in all, this is a first-class production and will appeal to history buffs, educators [though with some nudity I'm not sure if it would be appropriate for classroom viewing] and period & historical drama fans.Highly recommended!

Click Here to see more reviews about: Salem Witch Trials (2010)



Buy NowGet 17% OFF

Click here for more information about Salem Witch Trials (2010)

Read More...

Salem's Lot - The Miniseries (2004) Review

Salem's Lot - The Miniseries (2004)
Average Reviews:

(More customer reviews)
***Warning: Spoilers Ahead***
I've always loved the novel and the 1979 miniseries. When I heard they were doing a remake in 2004, I couldn't wait! Then I found out Rob Lowe was starring. Eeeh, he was in "The Stand" a decade earlier and that managed not to suck. So I gave him the benefit of the doubt and tuned in. And in all fairness to Rob Lowe he can hardly be blamed for how awful it turned out.
Now I can understand changing around elements for "dramatic purposes" and "updating" and "adapting for television". Let's not forget the novel was written and published in the 1970's when there were no cellphones, laptop computers or Internet. It seems the fellow who adapted the novel, Peter Filardi, and went hog-wild with it. The end result is that the only the movie characters have in common with their book counterparts are the names. Ben Mears was once held captive by the Taliban? Matt Burke is gay? Susan Norton is a waitress? Did Filardi even read the novel? Then there is the problem of the very minor characters getting way, way, waaayyyy more screen time than they deserve, as in they shouldn't have been in the movie at all. Sandy McDougall, Dud Rogers, Charlie Rhodes and Ruthie Crockett are all very minor throw-away characters who don't deserve a place in the movie. Ruthie didn't even have any dialogue in the book for crying out loud!!! What is so special about these characters that they managed to get on screen and take away precious time from the real characters? This is reason why Barlow is reduced to a cameo, because Peter Filardi felt the inexplicable need to cram in as many characters as possible.
My biggest complaint is the way they handled the scene where a vampire Mike Ryerson comes back to Matt Burke's house. Instead of being a terrifying encounter with the undead it winds up a truly bizarre homo-erotic/necrophiliac encounter so completely drained of any suspense that left me scratching my head and wondering 'what the hell was that about'? Hey people, if it ain't broke don't fix it! If you had $25 million to spend on this movie why didn't you hire a writer who could actually write a suspenseful scene!! Stephen King should sue! Excuse me, I'm going to watch the 1979 version and try to put this slop out of my memory for good.

Click Here to see more reviews about: Salem's Lot - The Miniseries (2004)

The vampiric Stephen King tale returns to the small screen, 25 years after the first made-for-TV "Salem's Lot", a Tobe Hooper-directed ratings hit. This time it's Rob Lowe as a successful writer who returns to his haunted hometown. As a kid, something awful happened to him in the spooky mansion on the hill; now that he's back, the mansion is once again buzzing with evil portents. The physical production (shot in Australia) is convincing, and it's fun to see old pros such as Donald Sutherland, Rutger Hauer, and James Cromwell cutting up in juicy roles. The storytelling, however, feels oddly disjointed, as though King's sprawl had been arbitrarily hacked away rather than adapted (a few big moments are bewilderingly left offscreen). The approach misses the basic assets of a vampire story:the disbelief, the lore, the sex appeal. Instead, it feels like a random collection of bits for short attention spans. "--Robert Horton"

Buy NowGet 75% OFF

Click here for more information about Salem's Lot - The Miniseries (2004)

Read More...