Reviews

81 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Voyage in Time (1983 TV Movie)
9/10
Tarkovsky's forgotten film...
1 May 2024
When people write about Andrei Tarkovsky, they always mention that he directed seven feature films. In truth, he directed 8 feature films. This one, Tempo di Viaggio (aka Voyage in Time), was made in 1983 during pre-production for Andrei's film Nostalghia, which also came out in 1983. It was made for RAI TV, aka Italian state television. RAI TV co-financed Nostalghia. The film has been notoriously hard to find for decades. A DVD in 2000 from Facets Multimedia in Chicago was released, but it was awful. The transfer was awful with scenes that were pixelated throughout. The subtitles were badly translated as well. In 2024, the good folks at Kino Lorber released a bluray of a restored Nostalghia along with a restored version of this movie. It's the best I've ever seen it. As for the film itself, it's generally slow like all of Tarkovsky's work, but there are some stunning shots throughout and you get to see the great man talk about filmmaking along with his philosophical concerns. Casual viewers probably won't like this film that much, but Tarkovsky fans will.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
American Crime Story: The Dream Team (2016)
Season 1, Episode 3
2/10
Terrible episode, terrible series overall...
13 March 2024
Warning: Spoilers
This is one of the worst shows I've ever seen, and honestly, one of the most overrated shows in TV history. Its mediocrity is due to many reasons, but the main one is that it's all over the place thematically. It often feels like high camp, then gets overly serious and self-righteous, then get mildly satiric (showing the OJ trial as a circus, which is pretty much was at the time), then goes over the top again, etc.. It has terrible, cringey dialogue, over the top performances (Cuba Gooding Jr. And the guy who played Fred Goldman come to mind). That's coupled with terrible acting, with special mention going to David Schimmer. He is hilariously bad as Robert Kardashian. The over the top camera moves don't help either. I feel they were used to cover up the total lack of substance in this series. The series often feels cobbled together with no real flow to it, and most of the script reads like a first draft that the screenwriters (Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski) never polished. Hard to believe the 2 guys who wrote The People vs. Larry Flynt and Ed Wood wrote this inane, silly garbage. The series should have concentrated on how the DA's office screwed up a simple case and essentially let a murderer go free. Since it tries to cover so much ground, it doesn't work and is often abysmal. Why it won so many Emmys is beyond me.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Baby Snakes (1979)
10/10
A must for Zappa fans, and a great rock documentary to boot...
1 March 2024
Baby Snakes is a fantastic film, thoroughly engaging throughout its nearly 3 hour running time. If you are a Zappa fan (like me), you'll love this film more than non Zappa fans will. Even if you don't like Frank that much but love rock music, you should still see this film. It's one of the best (and most underappreciated) rock docs ever made. It's also interesting as Zappa co-produced, directed, co-edited, and even distributed it himself. It's filled with great performances (Zappa's late 70's band was one of his most creative), hilarious back stage stuff, and brilliant, surreal animation by Bruce Bickford. If you love Frank and his music, you owe it to yourself to watch this film. It's easy to find on DVD.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Zzzzzzz...it wasn't that great of a song...
3 February 2024
I can't really think of a reason that this documentary exists. The song We Are the World was a relatively big thing in the 1980's, but the song wasn't as huge as this doc claims, and honestly, the song is just OK. The whole thing was just another bunch of celebrities (granted, many of them were really talented musicians) getting together for a cause about hunger in Africa. Today, this whole thing would be called "virtue signaling", a phrase used in 2024 to describe narcissistic celebrities jumping on a bandwagon (or a fashionable cause) to make themselves feel important. This was pretty much the same thing, and the song (which is only a few minutes) isn't as awesome as this doc says it is. Even back in the day, many people mocked its cheesiness and it was pretty much forgotten about a year later. SNL and In Living Color (an 80's sketch show) did parodies of it. The fact that this doc is 96 minutes is ridiculous. This could have been easily cut down to a 30 minute documentary. My guess is that there was already a short doc on this song on MTV or VH1 back in the day. So, if you're into 80's nostalgia, go for it. Otherwise, avoid. A very self important, way too long documentary.
7 out of 72 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
An excellent short, and the last film by Godard....
21 December 2023
If you love Godard's work (which I do), you'll love this final work of his. It's typical of Godard's late period, aka from In Praise of Love through The Image Book. There is a deep sadness that penetrates these later works of Godard, and Phony Wars is no exception. It's very rueful, sad, elegiac, and often profound. In other words, Godard still had it at the end. The film is only 20 minutes long, it's mostly voice over and stills (some early scenes have no sound at all), yet it's mesmerizing and completely Godarian. It's showing in cinemas with the documentary Godard Cinema. You owe it to yourself to see this final work by one of the great masters of cinema, and to see it in a cinema. Even at 92, Godard had lost of his cinematic genius.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hot Ice (1955)
4/10
Another cut and paste Shemp short, and one of the worst...
13 September 2023
These later Shemp shorts (not including the infamous "fake Shemp" ones) are an arduous affair to watch and often depressing. This is one of the worst. It's not that it isn't funny. There are scattered laughs, but most of this short is stock footage from other Stooge shorts, and just a few minutes (around 3 minutes) of new material. It's not even a "real" remake. It's just the original film with a few new minutes added in. I feel like I'm being ripped off when I see these shorts. Granted, the budgets for the short film division at Columbia was being cut back drastically at the time, and was eventually eliminated by the late 1950's, but still, they should have done better than what they did here and on other shorts.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Phynx (1970)
8/10
Ignore the naysayers, this is worth checking out...
15 July 2023
This is a great film. Yeah, you read that right. It's what Otto Preminger's Skidoo should have been. Sure, The Phynx is dated to a large degree. It's definitely a pyschedelic, 1960's film with all those trappings, but it's often very funny, often satiric, with some of the humor dating and some of it still funny as hell. The early scenes of an agent trying to break into Albania are funny, and one of the members of the band does a beer commercial that has a hilarious punchline. There are some brilliant surreal touches throughout the film, and it has gorgeous sets and cinematography. The songs (by Lieber and Stroller) are pretty good too. The old school stars seem to be having a good time, and have some very funny dialogue along the way. It's also a funny parody of the Cold War at the time on both sides. So check this out, and ignore those who hate it. It's only 90 minutes long, and often hilarious.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Deliberate destruction of a beloved franchise....
5 July 2023
This is a deliberate, disgusting destruction of a franchise for political purposes, and it has permanently tainted everyone who was responsible for this atrocity, Bob Iger (the guy who runs Disney) and Kathleen Kennedy, the woman who has overseen the destruction of Willow, Star Wars, and now Indiana Jones, all with the blessing and cheering on from Bob Iger. The film essentially emasculates Indiana Jones, mocking him for being an old man, sadistically so, then his snarky goddaughter comes in and saves the day because she's perfect in everything she does and has never messed up in her life. I guess we should be grateful that the original version of this film never saw the light of day. Reportedly, the original cut had Indy killed off in the past, and Phoebe Waller Bridge (the most overhyped person in Hollywood history at this point) replaced Indy and took over the character permanently. After Lucasfilm showed this version to five different audiences (and who all hated it), they had to reshoot it. And let us not forget James Mangold, who, up to this point, was a respected director who has made some good films. He isn't respected as much as he once was, and his going on Twitter to trash fans and deny the rumors of reshoots (which turned out to be true) made him look petty and childish, and his reputation has taken a huge hit. He is tainted as well for directing this awful, nasty, soulless, sadistic film. This is one of the worst films in Disney history.
57 out of 87 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Native Son (2019)
2/10
Terrible film, worst adaptation of this great novel...
18 June 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Out of all 3 film adaptations of Richard Wright's magnificent book, this is the worst of the 3. There never has been a definitive adaptation. The first one (which had Richard Wright, the author of the book, as Bigger Thomas) was flawed (low budget, some amateurish acting) but was at least interesting and followed the novel closely. The 1986 version, while sanitized to a large degree, was well produced and also followed the novel closely. This one is a complete bowdlerization of the novel. Not only do they relocate the story to Cleveland (the novel and first two films took place in Chicago, and that city is essential to the story), but they drastically change the ending, leaving Bigger Thomas's girlfriend Bessie alive (she gets killed in the novel and first two films), and having Bigger get killed at the end of the film by the police. The original novel (and the 2 previous films) both ended with Bigger on trial for murder, and with him sitting alone at the end awaiting his execution. Bigger is much more complex in the book and the 2 earlier films. This film feels like PC propaganda, and it's a shame that this great novel was hijacked for political purposes, but that is in fact what happened. A shame.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
As bad as you've heard...
12 June 2023
I went into this with an open mind after hearing it was a bad film, but alas, its reputation as a bad film is warranted. It's boring, episodic, and feels like an eternity watching it, even though it's just over 2 hours. You never really get to know any of the men, and strangely enough, the only sympathetic character is the Vietnamese commander of the prison camp, which is NOT supposed to happen considering this is a pro-America/pro-Vietnam War film. This film is supposed to garner sympathy for the POW's, yet you end up liking the kommadant of the camp instead LOL. There's a lot of overly macho acting throughout the film, and the guy who plays the Cuban is awful. Way over the top like he was doing an opera. A real soldier would not have behaved like this. The man who played the Vietnamese commander of the camp gives the best performance in the film. The others are mixed. They range from good to passable to amateurish, even though there are many well known actors in the film, like Michael Moriarity. The only real emotion you feel is at the end when the prisoners are sent home. There's a reporter that's a very thinly disguised Jane Fonda (aka Hanoi Jane), and it's pretty obvious and smacks of propaganda. The film is extremely disjointed, often covering a year's time with literally 30 seconds of screen time. The film felt long and felt rushed at the same time. It's a poorly made film on an important subject. There's an interview on the DVD with John McCain, who was a POW at the Hilton, even though his character is not in the film. That's more interesting than the actual movie. Don't bother.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Masters of Horror: Pelts (2006)
Season 2, Episode 6
4/10
Lame episode from a once great horror filmmaker...
24 May 2023
Lame plot, terrible dialogue, and so over the top at times it ends up being unintentionally hilarious. There is also some bad supporting actor in this episode, and a few plot holes, mainly there are no cops that show up for most of the murders...we don't see them until the end of the episode. Overall this is another one of Argento's lame post-Opera films (in this case a TV episode), and while there's some good camera work and decent gore effects, it's still pretty lame. A shame about Argento...his early work is superb, but then he kind of lost it and no one really know why. Oh well, luckily the episode is only 60 minutes.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Oscar (1966)
7/10
Much better than its reputation...problem is overacting and some wretched dialogue
23 May 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Finally seeing this "So bad it's good" film. This is essentially a dark, film noirish film about crappy people in Hollywood and the garbage they deal with every day, including themselves. The issue is pretty much what others have said here. Boyd, who could give a decent performance when he wanted to, overacts throughout the film and many of his lines are hilarious because of this. Tony Bennett also overacts, and his narration is hilariously bad. However, the film has some excellent supporting performances throughout, with the best one going to Milton Berle, who shows depth and sadness in his role as Boyd's agent. Elanor Parker also shows depth and pathos in her role as the woman who discovers Boyd. Elke Sommer is good too, as is Jack Soo, the flippant butler of Boyd. Ernest Borgnine is great as a skeezy private detective, too. Peter Lawford's performance as a once famous actor now working as a waiter, is exceptionally poignant. By the end of the film, you feel a deep sadness for everyone, including Boyd's character, who despite being a horrible person, becomes so pathetic at the end. Bob Hope, who plays himself in the film, says at the beginning of the film "this is the night we see who we hate the most", and by the end of the film, you see all the people who Frankie (Boyd) screwed during the film clap with glee when he doesn't win the Oscar. You see those people demonstrate "who they hate the most". In fact, the film isn't about the Oscar itself but more of a melodrama that Douglas Sirk would have had a field day with during his prime.

In other words, the film, despite its reputation, is not completely without interest and has some choice moments throughout.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Cell (2000)
6/10
Would play better as a silent film because the dialogue is awful...
18 May 2023
If this film had no dialogue and we could see only the visuals, it would be a masterpiece. Tarsem's direction is superb. He comes up with some great images. Unfortunately, the screenplay is filled with terrible, cringey dialogue, and despite good actors in the film, they can't really pull it off, though they try. It might be a good idea to watch the film with the volume turned all the way down so one doesn't have to hear the terrible dialogue. A pity, because there's a lot to like in this film. It's a shame the script isn't better. A good idea for a script, but terrible in execution. So 6/10, which may be overly generous.
0 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Positive and charming, especially for Fassbinder...
12 May 2023
This is one of Fassbinder's most charming and, as someone else wrote here, positive series/films. While there are some dark moments, they are relatively few compared to his other work, and there are some downright lovely moments in the series. The main romance between Gottfried John and Hanna Schygulla is sweet and charming, and the tribulations of the workers are realistically done without being boring. There are lovely moments throughout, and you don't feel like you're being manipulated like you might in a Hollywood series. Fun fact about this series is that it's only five episodes. It was originally supposed to be eight, but the German government cut the funding due to resentments about the "controversial" Fassbinder. Ironically, the series ended up being 8 hours anyway. This was also Fassbinder's first series. He had made around 6 films or so at that point, and he wanted to get into TV because that's where most of the audience was in the 1970's. They were watching TV in West Germany instead of going to the pictures. Fassbinder knew the audiences for his films were enthusiastic but very small. He wanted a wider audience. TV was not looked down upon in 1970's Europe like it was in the US at the time, so many directors went there to make series.

This is a wonderful, charming series, and one of Fassbinder's most underrated and underappreciated shows.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Rollover (1981)
8/10
Uneven, but worth it for the fantastic ending....
7 May 2023
Warning: Spoilers
This is an uneven film, plodding at times, misused music score, but stay with it as the ending of this film is, honestly, shocking, spectacular, and completely uncompromising. I'm shocked that the studio allowed it to happen, but glad they did. The ending alone makes the film worth watching. Fonda is great in the lead role. Kristofferson is a bit miscast, though not too badly. Cronyn is great as the amoral banker who isn't really doing anything illegal, just very unethical but he gets his desserts at the end of the film. Considering we're having some bank trouble yet again in 2023, the film has hardly dated. Bankers still suck. So check out the film and stick with it. The last 20 minutes make it worth seeing.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Don's Plum (2001)
7/10
Not great, but not terrible either
2 April 2023
This film was shot in the mid 90's, and after Titanic became a hit, the makers of the film wanted to release it, but it was suppressed by Leonardo DiCaprio and (to a lesser degree) Tobey Maguire. One would think it's an embarrassing, awful film considering Leo sued the makers and tried to stop it being released. Well, guess what? It's not a great film by any means, but it's not really that embarrassing and it's your typical 90's Gen X talk fest. Basically, a bunch of Gen Xers sit around at a diner, have cigarettes, coffee, food, and talk about "edgy" topics like sex. This was the kind of stuff that was being made in that decade. Basically indie talk fests. This is typical of those films for better or worse. Those type of films often started out well but got more tiresome as they progressed and they were never as "smart" as they thought they were. This one is like that, too, but does that mean it shouldn't be seen? Of course not. It's a decently made indie movie, shot on low contrast 16mm black and white, like Kevin Smith's Clerks, which came out a year before this film was made. Why DiCaprio hated it is beyond me. It's not THAT bad, Leo.

If you're feeling nostalgic about the 90's, check it out and this will take you back to that time.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
A rare disappointment from Wiseman...
5 March 2023
This is not one of Wiseman's best films. Many people complain about how long it is and that it feels like it's going nowhere. Well, the 2nd part is correct. The film is somewhat long (143 minutes), but most of Wiseman's films run between 3-4 hours, and a few of them go longer than that. City Hall is 4 1/2 hours, and Near Death is 6 hours. This is a relatively short one. The issue is that the film feels too short, and Wiseman, uncharacteristically, cuts around too much and doesn't let his camera run on the people on the town. Part of Wiseman's genius is that he captures fascinating parts of reality in his movies, but they are often extended and some scenes run up to 20 minutes in length. Despite these extended scenes, his films are never boring and I love almost everything I've seen by him. However, in Monrovia, Indiana, he doesn't do that. He just jumps around randomly to people and events without any flow to it. It's almost like he wasn't that interested in these people, and most of the people in the film appear merely once in the picture. In his other pictures, the subjects often appear throughout the film and the films flow better. The one time Wiseman lets a scene play out is at the end when a local woman passes away. That scene runs 20 minutes or so and is the best scene in the film.

We never really get to know the town too much because of the overly episodic nature of the film and that Wiseman never bothers to get to know the people that well. One of the few disappointments from Wiseman.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
It may be anti-PC and anti-woke, but it's still not very good...
2 March 2023
Warning: Spoilers
This film has been getting noticed again because it's not a very PC film. In fact, it's the opposite of one. While that's admirable, just because your film is not PC doesn't make it a great picture. This is just another variation of Stiller's obsession with mocking Hollywood, but it's awfully smug and is filled with dated references that most viewers today aren't going to get. Stiller has been doing this since his TV show in the 1990's, and it gets tiresome very quick. Plus the whole premise of the film makes absolutely no sense. Film is behind schedule, so weak director radically reworks material and decides to shoot it guerilla style even though it's a big budget film? A real army mistakes these actors as real soldiers? Really? Come on. Anyway, the film has some amusing moments, and Downey Jr. Is hilarious in his role, but overall, it's just another smug tirade against Hollywood that isn't as funny as it thinks it is. Plus there's a lot of improv in it, and it drags the film down because it's not good improv. I saw the 2 hour director's cut and it drags in a lot of places. Very overrated film, not PC, but not very good either.
1 out of 34 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Absolutely charming short film....
26 February 2023
This is one of the best short films I've seen recently. It's so simple, yet so beautifully done and sentimental at the end without being too mawkish. All of the actors and actresses involved are perfect in their roles, especially George Reeves. Reeves is mainly known for playing Superman in the 1950's versions of the superhero (yes, darling, they had superhero movies back then too), but here he shows real depth and intelligence in this role, something he was never given credit for. Rock Hudson had a similar issue with his career. Both were genuinely good actors who were dismissed at pretty boys.

A wonderful short that was more moving and sweet than practically everything that's out at the cinema these days.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Gutfeld! (2021–2024)
8/10
Why is this guy #1 in the ratings as of 2023? Read on
17 February 2023
Many are shocked that Gutfeld is, currently (2023), the highest rated late night talk show, beating all of the competition handily. His show really isn't a late night talk show in the traditional sense. It's really just a reboot of his Red Eye show with a panel of guests discussing topics of the day. He doesn't even have on celeb guests (or rarely does). So why is he #1? Several reasons, but the main one is simple...he's trying to entertain us and make us laugh. He's not lecturing us. He's not overly political, though he mocks politicians. He doesn't talk down to his audience. He doesn't lecture his audience, either. The other 3 late night guys are so humorless and political now that people are searching for an alternative. They got one in Gutfeld. Gutfeld doesn't even have the potential audience the networks guy have (he's on cable), yet he still wins the ratings due to the simple fact he's just trying to make us laugh.

Is he brilliantly funny? Nope. Does every joke hit? Nope. Ironically (or not), when his jokes bomb, he's often funny in his reactions. Johnny Carson had a similar reaction to his bad jokes.

So is the show genius? Nah, but it is often funny and entertaining, and that's more than the other late night dudes are doing these days.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Cute film, but rainforests are stil here.
26 January 2023
This is a cute film, but we still have the rain forests with us, in fact, we still have a lot of them. They're not all gone like this film inferred they would be back in 1992.

I do wish they'd stop making this "world is going to end in the year so and so" movies because none of them actually come true. We're all still here and will remain here for the forseeable future. It's silly how many propaganda pieces fall out of Hollywood, and none of them ever really come true. We should be grateful that we still have rainforests. They're wonderful places, but stop acting like they're going to disappear. They're too large to just "disappear".
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
You can't believe all that stuff, that's a campaign promise!
26 December 2022
This is one of the funniest and incisive Stooge shorts. The Stooges weren't known for their satiric takes on politics, but this film brilliantly and hilariously skewers politics and their lies. Moe's "convention" speech, written and performed over 70 years ago, could easily be filmed today without changing a word. Moe promises a 2 hour work week (HAHA), and Shemp says that's for him. Moe responds..."you can't believe all that stuff, that's a campaign promise!".

Many Stooge shorts skewered politics from time to time, like their most famous political short, You Natzy Spy. This one isn't as great as that one, but it's pretty darn good anyway.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Brad's Status (2017)
2/10
Another brick in the career of the very overrated Mike White...
13 December 2022
This is one of the dullest films I've ever seen. It's another dud in the career of the incredibly overrated writer/director/actor Mike White (who is currently being overpraised again for his middling series The White Lotus). While not as creepy and gross as some of his other acclaimed work (like Chuck and Buck), it's very, very dull and the protagonist (played by Ben Stiller) is really a rich, spoiled guy who complains that he may "only" get 250K from his mother when she passes (proceeds from their house). It's hard to feel sympathetic to a man who thinks he's struggling in life when he only "gets" 250K from a house sale. The film moves very slowly, and not in an artistic way like art films often do. Its pacing is pretentious, desperately trying to pass itself off as something deeper than it actually is. In fact, it's downright boring and it was very hard to finish.

The only projects that White was involved in that were any good was The School of Rock and The Good Girl, and those were mainly due to the lead performances of Jack Black and Jennifer Aniston. Brad's Status is just mind numbingly tedious throughout. You never care for Stiller or his issues throughout the film, and as a result, the film is pretty much garbage.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Pest Man Wins (1951)
8/10
Mixture of old footage and new footage, but it works
11 December 2022
This is one of those "cut and paste" Stooge shorts, aka a "new" short with new footage and stock footage mixed into it. It's a remake of an earlier short with Curly (Ants in the Pantry) with Moe, Larry, and Shemp going through pretty much a scene by scene remake for the most part. They even lift pie throwing footage from In the Sweet Pie and Pie and Half Wit's Holiday (Curly's last short). So it's kind of fun to see how much footage is new footage, and how much is stock footage aka footage from other shorts. Despite the cutting and pasting, the short is still entertaining and quite funny. There's a few continuity flubs where the old footage doesn't really "mix" well with the new stuff, but it's still a good short.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hot Stuff (1956)
6/10
Pretty good remake...
17 November 2022
This is one of the "fake Shemp" shorts, aka the Stooges owed four shorts to Columbia with Shemp when Shemp passed away. So those four shorts are remakes of earlier Shemp shorts with some new footage of Moe, Larry, and a "fake Shemp" who usually has his back to the camera and leaves the scenes he's in very quickly. This one is a remake of Fuelin' Around. They change the story a bit so the Three Stooges are spies sent to steal the rocket formula unlike the original where they're just.regular guys who get caught up in mistaken identity and espionage (aka Larry is mistaken for a professor with a formula for rocket fuel). This remake, like all the "fake Shemp" remakes, is kind of pointless, but a new scene where 2 beautiful spies put the boys in their place for being fresh is hysterical and makes the short worth watching.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed