tshodan Reviews

Ultimate Wolverine vs. Hulk (2013)

Read the Comic instead

[4/10 · 23 November 2013]

A wonderful comic (for older teens and up) ruined by pathetic animation techniques and weaker than normal voicing. After the nice job done after the previous Hulk animation titles such as Hulk Vs. Thor, Hulk Vs. Wolverine and Planet Hulk, I'm not sure what marvel was thinking making this crap. I have read the series and nicely the animated version follows it, but again I cant stress enough how bad the animation is. Why would you want to watch animation like this if you can read? So I recommend, go out, find the graphic novel version, and read it, and don't watch this. High points are some insight on the changes of the personality of Ultimate Hulk (which for some reason disappeared for a while in the comic) and how he comes to term with his duality, and a new theory on what Wolverines mutant powers are.

We Are Men (2013)

Awesome, needs a little time to grow

[10/10 · 18 October 2013]

Awesome cast, really funny. I do find that it's new, and as many new shows they need a little more than a few episodes to bloom.

I think people will have a hard time relating to Shaloub because they are still caught up on Monk, this is the Shaloub from Stark Raving Mad, a force of screen controlling power.

Besides that, the show is new, fresh and exciting. 4 divorced men living the life, and suffering through it. Broken, like Felix Unger and Oscar Madison before them, they will Survive.

Recently, I found out there are plans to discontinue this show, that is yet another mistake. I feel the advertising on this are misleading the show, and as for the people that didn't like this, I think they need to give it more time.

Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol (2011)

My favorite so Far , but...(Spoiler)

[8/10 · 18 January 2012]

OK this is the first time I've seen an MI movie without feeling like something was lacking. The plot was good, the little expressions of comedy and the overall feel, all good. It did not present a great remember-able villain, but at least it gave it time to focus more on the hero cast. Now for the but... There is a plot hole here so huge i could park a DC10 in it, there is a major part of the plot revolving around launch codes. The MI agents have a device which scrambles the numbers, they make fake copies and give them to the bad guy, they can trace the copies since they have an isotope on them. So the bad guys get away with the Fake copies, they never know or see the real launch codes but are being chased by the heroes as if they do, and then use the fake codes to launch a missile. How do they do this????

The Green Hornet (2011)

Way cool

[10/10 · 16 January 2011]

They hit this movie right on the head. My only disappointment was the ending was over done. The movie was full of good lines, excitement and comedy. I can't see how this movie could have been improved (except like I said earlier the ending is a little over done). Not sure where the mediocre reviews are coming from, my wife even loved this one and she is very picky on action flicks. Seth Rogen's Take on the Roll was great, lost confused millionaire not knowing what he's doing. Kato was awesome, obviously you can't replace Bruce Lee (and lord knows Hollywood has tried) but it doesn't make the new Kato boring. James Franco does a great job in a bit role, to bad there wasn't a bigger part for him. Oh well, I recommend seeing this, go with an open mind and I can't see how you won't enjoy this.

Highlander: The Source (2007 TV Movie)

I Am permanently scarred from seeing this pile of poop

[1/10 · 7 January 2011]

Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad...if you like Highlander the series , you will throw up after seeing this. What were they thinking? Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad...if you like Highlander the series , you will throw up after seeing this. What were they thinking? Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad...if you like Highlander the series , you will throw up after seeing this. What were they thinking? Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad...if you like Highlander the series , you will throw up after seeing this. What were they thinking? Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad...if you like Highlander the series , you will throw up after seeing this. What were they thinking? Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad...if you like Highlander the series , you will throw up after seeing this. What were they thinking? Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad...if you like Highlander the series , you will throw up after seeing this. What were they thinking? Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad...if you like Highlander the series , you will throw up after seeing this. What were they thinking? Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad...if you like Highlander the series , you will throw up after seeing this. What were they thinking? Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad...if you like Highlander the series , you will throw up after seeing this. What were they thinking? Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad, Bad...if you like Highlander the series , you will throw up after seeing this. What were they thinking?

The Last Airbender (2010)

P.U. (one spoiler, but if you saw the cartoon series , not really)

[2/10 · 5 July 2010]

What a hack job, they took the colorful characters, good dialog, great directing , quality plot of the cartoon and well just through it all in the cesspool. OK maybe Sokka, Katara and Zuko might be able to actually act if the director stepped up and , directed them. everyone else was atrocious, Thank God Princess Yue is dead, another 5 seconds of her on the set and i would have puked in my popcorn. I can't think of anyway to make this movie worse, well maybe M night could have played a major character, but then again he couldn't act worse than most of the cast. I clearly need to say REBOOT now before all is lost. What were they thinking when they agreed to show this movie? The effects were only second rate at best. I think the next movie should be "the people vs M night Shalam", but then again the geniuses at Nickelodeon cut the series to only 3 seasons so they could have him make this POS movie to begin with.

Underdog (2007)

Better than expected

[8/10 · 12 August 2007]

I'm not certain were all the bad reviews on this film are coming from. I can only imagine that Die hard fans of the cartoon couldn't transition to live action. This film was loads of fun and I laughed my A$$ off. With maybe a slight change in persona for some of the characters like Bar Sinister, Riff Raff and Polly, and some major improvements on Cad, it was a good representation of taking a cartoon character to the big screen. Everyone in the theater from children to adults, liked the film. My only negs where I liked the old Bar Sinister character and maybe he was a little too different for me, also (small spoiler here) I felt Jim Belushi's character should have had more to do in the end sequence. I say if you liked the cartoon, or just like the idea of a talking super hero dog, see the film!!

The Year Without a Santa Claus (2006 TV Movie)

Needed a new director, otherwise it would have been great

[6/10 · 16 December 2006]

Here it is, the script was good. (heck we've seen it before, they just stretched it out by about 30 minutes) The casting was excellent, and the Heat Vixens were, well HOT!!! So, why wasn't I thrilled I stood up to watch it??? Bad directing!!! Lack luster effects, actors not fulfilling their roles and slight variations from the script made this movie DRAG>>>> Of course since this is a made for TV NBC special, what else could you expect. Isn't this the formula they use, good script, great actors and then Blahhh??? NBC, go hire some real directors before you make these dumb a$$Ed made for TV movies and save us all the pain of hope and anticipation. PLEASE!!!!

Superman: Brainiac Attacks (2006 Video)

What was WB thinking

[5/10 · 3 July 2006]

Does the WB really believe as Kevin Smith has said, that their only goal is to sell toys? First off then they should have made better toys from the Superman movie, most of the new ones bite, but even worst was the audacity to make this film.

It was nice to have Tim Daly back on cast, and the Clark - Lois, Superman - Lois relationship was handled well, but who agreed to recast all the other voices??? Don't get me long, I'm a fan of Tara Strongs work, but she missed the Mercy role big time. And Brainic sounded, well kind a sad , but Worste of all (the movie destroyer) was a recast of Lex Luther from Clancy Brown to Powers Boothe. I mean he does a good job on Grodd, but as Luther??? He obviously ad-libs the dialog making Luther into some kind of sad Metrosexual idiot. "let's have a Luah" when he believes Superman to be dead for instance, Lex would never suggest such a thing. He would be more like, "Send the Planet and Miss Lane my deepest regrets and get my Causal Suit ready, we will need to throw a party to unveil my newest plan." If you are a Lex Luther fan, this movie will make you cry in embarrassment.

Doogal (2006)

Under rated, this was a lot of fun especially for the target audience

[8/10 · 3 July 2006]

Hey what can you say about this film, the cast was great, the plot was good and it was a lot of fun. I'm not sure why people didn't like this film. The only Bad I can find in about this film is that it seemed the movie focused on all the characters and maybe not Doogal. Maybe they should change the title to "Doogal and friends save the world." the artwork was good, the plot flowed well , John Stuart made a great bad guy.

I'm not sure I can tell you more about this film except be your own judge without giving Spoilers so thats it, rent it and let your kids decide.

Superman Returns (2006)

Superman? Ehh

[6/10 · 28 June 2006]

SPOILERS OK , this movie tries to continue where the original movie series left off (well kind of) It seems the first 2 films did take place the next 2 could have but the timing of Lois's pregnancy would come under fire.

Definitely the movie was better than I had anticipated, but as typical WB superhero mistakes go, is unfocused. Spends too much time on drawn out dialog free scenes that just drag. And with all this footage the climatic end is about as boring as watching paint dry.

Now for the acting Routh tries too hard to play Christopher Reeve and not Clark or Superman. his interaction with he other characters is kind of weak and he seems to be an idiot. he doesn't follow up on his leads on Luthor until it is too late for instance. And it takes him a while to piece together Lois's little secret Bosworth apparently doesn't know anything about who Lois Lane is, shes not a bad actress, just did not research the role (or Singer let her down) Mr Spacey delivers as Luthor. Not easy to do when you are following the shadows of Gene hackman and Clancy Brown (Yes Clancy Brown, the animated series voice who is overlooked each year in the best villains of all times awards for his portrayal of the Kurgan in the original highlander film) Marsden actually kicked butt and seemed to be the only one trying to create interaction between the stars The new Olsen was kinda lame , but Frank Langella as Perry White was quite good (except for the Cesars ghost line which he kinda left flat) The New vision that gave us a darker Metropolis was frightening for children, the new thugs for Luthor for instance actually play their roles too well for a Superhero film. (thus the PG-13 rating) On the bright side, the effects and the plot were good, just the interaction and dialog stunk up the screen.

For this I gave it a 6.

Give it a new ending, and re-shoot the interaction scenes with Lois and Clark, Lois and Superman,, Lois and Luthor and Luthor and Superman (well the last 2 were OK , but thats were the film should be longer not drawing out a 10 minute shot of crystals growing or sewers blowing up) and I could easily have given this an 8 or a 9, close Mr Singer, but no cigar, definitely a failure of the director or the final edits (hurts to say that since I loved the first 2 x--men flicks)

Cars (2006)

Wonderful film for a remake (???)

[9/10 · 19 June 2006]

SPOILERS - This movie was filled with good dialogue , a great plot and some wonderful characters. Only issue is I've already seen this move, the script is a rip off from Doc Hollywood. Heck, even the characters have counter parts from Doc Hollywood. Vialula - Sally, Dr. Benjamin Stone - Lightning McQueen , Dr. Aurelius Hogue - Doc Hudson(wow the name wasn't even original, he started off as a Judge (although I think he is also athe town doctor??)).

So basically if you liked Doc Hollywood, you should love Cars. If you're Warner bros or the writer for Doc Hollywood, you should get a lawyer.

Blade: Trinity (2004)

What the ?????

[6/10 · 3 August 2005]

Lots of Spoilers...... OK all, this movie had great potential (if you are a Blade fan), but the writer and director missed the boat. The Action was good and Snipes was his usually Blade character, but the rest of this film falls apart. First off, we have our Night stalkers who apparently (mainly Biel and Reynolds) who apparently can match strength and Speed with vampires. Come off it, mortals had no chance in the first 2 films or in the comics for that matter. Vampires in Marvel comics are typically as strong and fast as spider-man if not stronger. I can see a weapons battle between mortal and the vamps, but hand to hand combat? I don't care if your Royce Gracie, Steven Seagal and Mike Tyson rolled into one, a vampire from the Blade series is gonna hand you your A$$! Even Reynolds starts narrating the movie stating that only Blade has really been effective against the vampires, no English guys with holy water. Thats the first beef, issue 2 is make up your mind on who and what Dracula is. OK he's not the blood god, for that guys was in the first film, so he is probably an avatar of the blood god, but we are not going to tell you. Next as Dracula I'm going to sit here , hiding behind a baby from a man I don't fear and talk to him about true honor? What kind of stupidity is that, is he a noble warrior or not. And he's resurrected for what purpose? To create other day walkers and kill Blade? he never could make day walkers in the past, why do they think he can do it now? Haven't they got Blade on the ropes before they wake Dracula, why take the risk? When asked about being a day-walker Dracula states read the book, well if he did read the book he would know that all vampires can walk in daylight, but it drains their powers more quickly and makes them tired and weak. Make up your minds. Issue 3, why did we bother putting silver oxide in the ventilation shafts, it doesn't seem to kill any vampires, just pisses them off. Kind of an expensive tool of uselessness. Probably as effective as if Reynolds really did have Garlic farts.

Batman Begins (2005)

If this were given to us in 1989 I would have given it a 10

[8/10 · 21 June 2005]

For the first time we see Batman the way he was meant to be, believable. All the fancy tricks and most of the training is explained, the villains are very real people, not costumed clowns(OK pun intended). The acting was good, I'd have to say Bale hit Bruce Wayne better than any predecessor. He breathes heavy when tires, has weaknesses and is determined. He doesn't have time for a fling with Vicky Vale, he's trying to regain his company and save Gotham at the same time.

Now for the film: 1) The combat action sequences are too fast to follow, stop speeding up the motion, you went out of your way to make a realistic Batman, and now he moves lie the flash??? 2) What purpose does Rachel have again? Moss fails to have any screen presence. Her character is just dry, no good lines, no delivery. Shes kind of just there for the paycheck. Too bad, once and a while she can act, heck she convinced Tom Cruise she was attractive.

3) Should have gone with an Older Gordon (a LT) not Sgt, even the comic this is loosely based on didn't make that mistake, besides the makeup made Oldman look stupid, just leave him be. Good choice for the role, although it would have been appropriate to get into his home life just a little. We want to see where Babara comes from (Not the stupid niece of Alfred crap they tried to dump on us in the worste Batman ever "Batman and Robin") Anyhow, overall a good new view of Batman, great use of supervillains. The roles where cast very well (except Rachel as noted) Go see this film if you like the Bat

Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)

Good Enough (Some Spoilers)

[8/10 · 23 May 2005]

Certainly this is not in the league of the last 2 entries, the newest edition of Star Wars at least had legible dialogue and plot. I also wouldn't go as far as to say that Lucas has redeemed himself. A monkey could have drawn the lines to putting this one together, it practically was already written by the previous entries. Now for the good: special Effects A+, Action Sequences B+ (i felt some of the duels where obviously lacking, Grevious came off as a boring character in his fight as did Dooku. Some one please send The Emperor to a fencing class, I'm not even sure he knew which end of the saber to grab. Also how long can we pause a light saber battle so that heroes can monologue, are we supposed to believe Mace cant feel whats going on with Anakin and then wait to strike the decisive blow ) Dialogue B- (way better then Eps 1 & 2, but not nearly the classic of Ep 4 & 5) also We should have taken time to written decent lines for Padme, 3PO and Bail Organa. Plot A- over all good but what else could it have been, although too many holes left open. Apparently Jedi can only feel evil intent when it suits Lucas's need to kill them. Also there are still some contradictions between the episodes.

Over all I gave it an 8 (and complaints because I expected a 10) I think the "Clone Wars" Eps 1-3 waited a lot of time on Anakin as a child, should have had it occur when he was 13 not 10 for several reasons: Raging hormones (maybe explain his fascination with Padme, a drivers license, a little closer to Lukes age, a little more believable that his training would be side tracked by other issues (like puberty). They also should have had Anakin join the Emperor in the 2nd film and become Vader at the beginning of the 3rd. Then we could see Anakin/Vader lead the assault against the Jedi with the full power of the Dark Side as his ally. If the Dark side was such an alluring thing and so easy to turn to , why didn't Anakin slip over completely in the 2nd movie when he assaulted the Sand People?

Oh Well Enough Said, May the Force be with us all and may Somme one else do episodes 7-9 than George the amnesiac.

The Ghost Busters (1975)

Silly , but for its time frame kinda the norm for kids shows

[4 February 2005]

This Show, (Not a cartoon in anyway that I'm familiar) was designed to target 7 year old. For that age group it was entertaining and a lot of laughs. It lacked the wit of some modern Child targets shows that still have a level of interest to adults. Basically like comparing Teletubbies to Jimmy Neutron here. This show , more like the Teletubbies level. At least it reunited Larry Storch and Forrest Tucker from F-troop who tried there best in this environment. I wouldn't go out of my way to watch it now, but if it were in re-run I might turn it on to see why i actually liked it as a child. Probably the monsters, the inside jokes where so bad I remember them fighting a vampire with a wooden T-bone steak. Lucky for them it game the vampire a splinter. Got where this show was going.

Dreamcatcher (2003)

Pretty Good flik

[7/10 · 6 August 2004]

The issue with this tale lies in the following, Steven kings book had some great details on the characters and their history together that the movie just didnt have time for, on the other hand the book dragged so slowly and was so poorly written that the film had a big edge in visual effects.

Well though out story , good acting, decent effects , lack of essential character devlopement what more can be said?

NOW SPoilers:



Col Abraham is a little off the edge with his vendetta against his chosen replacement LT. Owen. They either need to build this up more or replace it.

Why Beaver, who is apparently the smartest of them as children ahs a life that falls apart is not explained.

What makes Jonsey give the student a break on cheating is not explained.

Why Henry is so suicidal is not explained.

The relevance of the Dreamcatcher to Duddits is not explained.

Needs work...

Spider-Man 2 (2004)

Phenomenal achievement by MR Raimi

[10/10 · 9 July 2004]

Light , but public spoiler... This was a well done, Spiderfan pleasing film. IF you like Spiderman, you will LOVE this film. If you don't like the superhero genre, then don't waist your money, it's way over your head and you'll spend way too much time analyzing it. Raimi has done his homework on this one and gets into the psyche of all the lead characters, a whole newer and better view of Doc Oct, definitely pegged Peter Parker, a better view of Aunt Mae, JJ , Robbie and harry. Personally, I don't like his version of MJ although Kirsten is fine in and for the role. (ok Kirsten is just fine anyway you look at it) and John Jameson was just poor (acting and presence)As a plus though William Dafoes cameo as Normans ghost is wonderful as we now introduce a 3rd potential Super villains for the third film.

The film does create a few wild theories in the Sci Fi world, but as in all good SciFi , it makes the rules and then Keeps to them. (Wow if Star Wars could only have done that in Episode I and II)

Enough said,

Enjoy the show

Hellboy (2004)

Better than Expected

[7/10 · 6 April 2004]

I wasn't expecting to like this movie in the least, Ron Perlman typically comes off as an over-rated actor and the First trailer I saw was boring.

I actually liked Perlman in this film, him and Abe really came to life and were quite entertaining. The villians were average and the silliness of the undead warrior winding himself up, a bit bizarre but cool if you leave out the undead part.

If you like comic to film type movies and are old enough to go , I reccomend this as better than daredevil and not as good as X-men.

Enjoy

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)

Excellent

[9/10 · 18 December 2003]

Some spoilers may appear:

Jackson comes thru, even the removed sequences that he took out of his script do not effect the magnitude of this epic film. The only weakness this film shows is found in its endings. While Jackson actually truncates the many endings of this tale left by Tolkien, its still long and dragged out. Im still looking forward to seeing the extended edition.

Battlestar Galactica (2003)

Interesting New Version

[7/10 · 10 December 2003]

Warning there may be some spoilers here for both Battlestar 2003 and

the old version and tv series.

As i sit back and read the very judgemental reviews written by die-hard BattleStar Galatica fans of old, i can only think, GET OVER IT!!!

While the number of action sequences was a little less then the original, the acting, plot and character development left the old series to shame.

Old Starbuck: gambles, good pilot but not realy tough. New Starbuck: Butt Kicking Pscho chick

Old Boomer: The Tokken Black guy New boomer: Yah gotta see it...

Old Galactica: has weapons it never uses New Galactica: Total war machine

Old Adama: Good Actor, morning loss of son and people, hard core approach to running Galactica New Adama: Morning loss of son and People with a Jim Kirk Attitude

also the technology now makes more sense, we have a much more plausible Baltar character, politcal issues and doubt to whether or not there even is an Earth to look for.

I gave it a 7 because the show kinda slowed down and left an open ending. They may be planning sequals, but if they dont then our story doesn't end.

The Pitts (2003)

Potential, but needs help

[24 April 2003]

Not a bad show, but not a good one either. The Pitts lacks depth. When bad stuff happens to Al Bundy, we care. There are unique interesting characters on Married with Children, and almost believable plots. The Pitts goes too far. They need to take some devlopment time, and not focus on every line as being a joke. The Characters need some character. Pitt is a loser all round, and needs a redeemable quality, his wife is sexy but sexless. Shes also kind of dumb (she'd have to be she married him) Faith, takes her situation al too well, her character needs more focus. How would being a born loser really affect an attractive , would be popular high school girl. And the Pitt boy needs more development, does he manipulate his family all the time or just in certain episodes? Also he seems old enough to want tomove on you know, friends, girls etc. when does he start acting like a 13 year old???

Again Potential, but without new direction this one wont see lucky episode #13

Daredevil (2003)

Ben Affleck cant act!

[5/10 · 23 April 2003]

Daredevil was a somewhat entertaining film, somewhat cool effects good characters, that is except for the lead. Affleck was horrible, it was like watching paint dry everytime he tried to act. Kingpin was done quite well by Clarke, surpassing expectations as he was to overcome a racial expection. Bullseye was fantastic as well. electra was alright, but in that outfit, I wasnt paying attention to her acting.

My only issue with this film, besides Affleck cant Act, was that again our director confuses which superheroes hes working with, this is DareDevil, not Spiderman. He isnt 10 times stronger and faster than a normal human, and even if you could hear a trigger being pulled, you cant dodge a machine gun.

Return to the Batcave: The Misadventures of Adam and Burt (2003 TV Movie)

Histerical, Best made for TV documentary based on an old sitcom ever

[8/10 · 11 March 2003]

This was a well written tale of the Making of the Batman Sitcom and actually reunites our heroes on a great quest as well as offers their TV shows history. Unlike the Brady's and Partridge family documentary movies we not only get a look into the past and present lives of Adam and Burt , but also get to see them back in action. Filled with Kapow's and catwomen and the Riddler(s), Batman is back ina well told , tale that not only gives us a satisfactory closing to the Batman series , but fills the modern fan in on all the hollywood tales that about them that haven't been heard in 35 years.

Kudos!!!

Brotherhood of the Wolf (2001)

A few blunders but Good Overall

[11 November 2002]

Ok so Mani can't be both an Iroquois and a Mohawk, and as for the martial arts skills they were a bit extreme for an indian. However, this movie was done fairly intelligently, with great dialogue and a decent plot. Some people claim that the plot of this movie is unoriginal, but since it is based on a 250 year old event, it is not being unoriginal, all the other movies like it are the unoriginal versions.

The action is fun, the dialogue is great, the effects are good. What more do people want? the plot is based on a historical event and is no more off base than "Young Guns" was on the Billy the kid story. No one really knows what happened in France, there were several killed beasts and even today the actual truth has not yet been revealed. Watch the movie and try to enjoy it.