Die Hard. Warner had Lethal Weapon, Fox has Die Hard. Another one of those they don't make anymore and they're not exactly honoring the original three movies with their latest sequels.

I guess we all know the story. New York cop, John McClane visits his estranged wife Holly in Los Angeles on Christmas Eve at the Christmas party of her company, Nakatomi Plaza, which is violently interrupted by Hans Gruber, (the great and late Alan Rickman) who plans to steal 640 million dollars from their vault and McClane is the only one who is ruining their plan. Completely on his own he does whatever he can to decimate Gruber's gang and to attract attention of the authorities while running the floors up and down in his white tank top and bare feet.

Originally meant as a sequel to Commando, the 1985 film with Arnold Schwarzenegger and John McTiernan had just worked with Arnold on Predator the year before and was in his words tired of the overly muscular superheroes, he wanted to be John McClane to be the average guy who was on the wrong place at the wrong time and wanted him to be someone, who preferred to be somewhere else.

When it comes to actors a whole list of then popular action movie and television stars were considered to play John McClane, including Richard Dean Anderson. Imagine John McClane with a mullet. Richard Dean Anderson in his third to fourth season MacGyver with a machine gun in a white tank top, bare feet dropping f-bombs everywhere and shooting bad guys left and right. The role eventually went to Bruce Willis.

Annabelle Creation. The prequel of the prequel of the doll that was seen in a display case in the movie The Conjuring. Went to see it out of boredom, with no expectations in the theatre. I had seen the first Annabelle but I remember I wasn't impressed at the time, nor do I actually remember it. So with a fresh state of mind I went in and had a pretty good time. Despite the movie may not be original, the scares were good and there were a few nice touches of humor too.

Die Hard 2. "How can the same sh** happen to the same guy twice?" John McClane wonders. That's what happens when "you're the wrong guy at the wrong place at the wrong time". A year after the events of the first movie, John McClane is waiting to pick up his wife from the airport in Washington D.C. when a bunch of rogue military soldiers takes over the airport to ensure the arrival of General Esperanza, a latin-American druglord. Planes are unable to land as long as the general hasn't been secured and they start to run low on fuel. Meanwhile John McClane runs around at the airport guns blazing trying to foil their plans.

Originally this one was the one I liked the least but it grew on me over the years and is now amongst my favorites, especially the finale. McClane and villain Colonel Stuart fighting it out on the wing of a moving airplane. It's dark, it's cold, it's snowing and McClane's face is covered in blood and getting his butt kicked.

It pretty much rehashes the same plot of the first movie. Bad guys take over a building, only in this case an airport, with much more at stake, it's again Christmas Eve and again everything takes place in one night. Pretty much my favorite kind of action movies: the one night adventures.

As written in the reviews John McClane is described as the Iron Everyman. The unlikely hero of next door. The movie pretty much resembles the Obsessed epsiode but than without the villain haunting the hero. Colonel Stuart could be Murdoc and General Esperanza (Franco Nero) could be Delasora and McClane could be MacGyver and Mr. Trudeau (Fred Dalton Thompson) could be Pete. It's perfect.

Interesting fact: It appears Bonnie Bedelia (Holly McClane) is currently married to Michael MacRae (Larson, Paul Stams). She also seems to be part of the Culkin family and is the aunt of Macaulay Culkin and his brothers.

I've been looking to see Annabelle Creation, and of course It.

I went on an Indiana Jones marathon and watched all three movies. God, those movies are good. My friend and I were just talking about doing a Harry Potter marathon because I haven't seen the final movie yet.

Richard Dean Anderson was also considered to play Sonny Crockett just before Miami Vice started. If that would have happened, MacGyver, Miami Vice and Nash Bridges would not be the ones what they are now. I'm glad that never happened

Managed to get a chance to see Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2.


Continuing where the last one left off, the Guardians inadvertently come face to face with Peter's father who takes him to a world he seemingly created and he soon learns more about his past. But Gamora & newcomer Mantis detect something sinister is afoot.

This was not a good sequel. It was a great sequel. Fully charged with humor, action, special appearances and visuals to blow you away. And dont forget the 4 post credit scenes! A rare treat of fun. 4 & a half stars!

Then i got to see King Arthur Legend of the Sword.

There are many variations to the Arthurian legend. Some are more realistic than others. And then you get the ones overshadowed with pure fantasy. This is one of those. You will have to gear up to Guy Ritchie's witty dry humor in order to get this movie as its direction is similar to that of his previous work on Sherlock Holmes.

The story starts with young Arthur's evil uncle Vortigern who murders Arthur's father and takes control of the kingdom. Robbed of his birthright, Arthur grows up in a rough part of the city when by some chance of fate, he is led back to draw the mystical sword, Excalibur from a stone and reclaim his destiny.

This movie downright bombed at the box office. And in many ways i can see why. Many have varied opinions of the movie. Some loved it. Some hated it. I personally felt it was too overblown and came across as more of a hyped up version of Lord of the Rings. But morally speaking, was that the proper way to go for King Arthur? I give it 2 & a half stars.

I try not be biased by reviews and try to give everything a fair chance but some movies just simply reek of failure, you can sense it by a mile. This King Arthur seems one of them, that is not one I would easily see. I think I'd go with the 2004 version with Keira Knightley instead. But just like this version as well as that Great Wall movie with Matt Damon and the Three Musketeers from a few years back, you might wonder where the problem lies. It's like they try to revive the epic movie but fail each time dearly. Was the remake of Ben Hur really necessary? Also Exodus: Gods & Kings was not exactly a success. So where's the problem? Too much CGI? Trying to modernize it? Simply a bad script and bad actors, or worse a bad script with good actors? And why does it seem to work for movies like 300 and not for others?
Currently I think Troy was the last real good epic.

Last night I went to see Atomic Blonde. A mix of John Wick and James Bond set at the end of the cold war acted by the kickass Charlize Theron in the role of Lorraine Broughton. This is pretty much everything Bond and MacGyver dealt with: East and West Berlin, Stasi-agents, KGB, Russians, secret lists with names on it and above all, nothing is what it seems.

Totally agree. Epics of today are all about CGI. Story wise they are a little flat too. As silly as the Great Wall was however i felt a personal liking to it despite its lack of facts to the history books.

Look forward to seeing Atomic!

That's another thing. Historical accuracy. We all know they never are entirely accurate. Sometimes that's not the point at all either like the poor Gods of Egypt. A movie I enjoyed but seemed like a lot of people missed the point in. I think the one that flops the most are the ones who say they are but actually are not. I can understand changing and adjusting few things for the sake of the movie is one thing. But changing and adjusting at will and make it something it's not that is wrong. Epic movies should not be called or made as a blockbuster. In those cases story comes first and there are plenty of movies were action and story blends in so nice and others are like probably mean brainless action movies. I still need to get my hands on Kingdom of Heaven to have a new opinion about, but I think the time of the epic movie as they were made in the 50's, 90's and early 00's is passed. They think they're still making them but... I haven't seen anything decent in that genre since Troy.

Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets. Directed by Luc Besson and in the same vein as The Fifth Element. Set in the far and distant future a humanoid sea-loving species loses their planets during a war. They hide on a intergalactic metropolis called Alpha and they have lost a key element that ensures their survival as a species. One of their own was able to send a distress call to Major Valerian before dying in order to guide him to her species and to make sure they can survive and find a new home. This is actually an old school family-oriented adventure film. I sort of had a Batman Forever feeling. It's the kind of movie you would watch on a Sunday afternoon, after you've been to the family and before you go dinner and start packing for school the next day. It's a PG-13 but it's light enough 7-8-9 year olds can enjoy it too. There is action and all sort of disgusting alien kinds that would fit a cartoon. It's light and enjoyable but more of a kids movie than anything else. It was nice to see Dane DeHaan who usually plays messed up psychological roles in a different role and also Cara Delevigne seemed to have a good time. Enjoyable but I probably won't see it again.

Die Hard With A Vengeance. The last in the classic three movies of Die Hard. Five years have passed since terrorists took over the Washington airport and seven years have passed since Nakatomi. John and Holly are separated now and John returned to his hometown New York. Hard times fell on him since the separation, almost a full blown alcholic now, suspended from his work and on the verge of being fired he is called into action by a man named Simon, who wants to play a game called Simon Says. Hung over from the night before McClane answers the call by walking down Harlem in a sandwich board, still not knowing what it's all about. In one of the calls Simon says he hid bombs all over New York and if McClane doesn't do what he is told, he'll set them off. With all sorts of games and riddles, he sends McClane all over NY with a new best friend in tow to find the bombs and clues to disarm them.

If this would not be a great MacGyver episode, I don't know what is. On the contrary with the other two movies this one is set during the day instead of a full night. The stakes are even higher. From an office building to an airport to an entire city. Set on a hot late summer day with a bad hangover, solving riddles and racing against time this is I think my most favorite Die Hard movie storywise. They make it sound simple to pull of a big heist though a lot of planning is requiered but I think this movie portrays the ultimate heist. It's actually like the first movie but on much grander scale but in short you send the police on wild goose chases, steal whatever you want to steal when the coast is clear and than cause an accident to make everybody think you're already dead. Once everyone thinks you're dead, you're homefree and you won't be followed, you can just disappear.

The movie might be a little more different than the others since almost the entire first half of the movie is about riddles and being on time, so there are no (gun)fights whatsoever until little over the hour in the movie while the first fights in the first two movies happened within the first twenty minutes.

This movie was originally considered to be the fourth Lethal Weapon movie but the studio didn't want to sell. So Lethal Weapon 4 was originally supposed to be this Die Hard and even the first hour of the movie was as it was originally intended, they just changed names and locations. So pretty much imagine Mel Gibson and Danny Glover instead of Bruce Willis and Samuel L. Jackson and switch NY for L.A. and you've got a new LW4.

Also it is considered that this Die Hard simply could not be made now after 9/11 since this movie takes eerily close to that date. A late summer day, terrorism, bombs, it is a school day, Twin Towers are visible and when Samuel L. Jackson enter the station a clock points out it's a Tuesday. And according to IMDB a clock points out it's 9:11 am. But either I missed it or it is wrong as Jackson points out at the start of the movie it's ten past nine and that his nephews belong in school. By the time he enters the station it's 10:19 am.

Anyway a great one to see and of the better. This is not just another sequel but one with a very well written plot. This movie however has two endings. Originally the movie ended with Simon having gotten away with his heist and hiding somewhere in Eastern Europe. John McClane is thrown of the police force and suspected of being an accomplice of Simon. So months later McClane finds him and has a small bazooka with him that can fire both ways, they play a sort of Russian Roulette in which McClane gives Simon a few riddles of his own and with a wrong answer the bazooka fires, killing either one of them. This ending was considered too cold and heartless for McClane, so they went with the current ending in which they track down Simon in Canada. This is one of these cases in which the hero actually loses but the studios can't take it so they want another ending. I think it would be different and better sometimes that if the hero loses once in a while.

Watched Alien Covenant last night.

It was interesting... not overly great, but it was okay. Still not as good as the original Alien. Not as frightening either. However, I do feel these sequels make the Xenomorph less scary... for some odd reason.

Thats because they offer an origin to their existence. Sometimes the most frightening things work at their best without explanation. That's what they seem to miss. Prometheus for me offered just enough about the Xenomorph. Unfortunately fans wanted more Alien and less Prometheus which prompted Scott to direct this instead. And even though we could have had another Alien movie, they decided to sideline the Prometheus story to offer an explanation on how the movie links with the others.

Alien was a fun movie but i have to wonder. Did people want another Alien? Or Aliens? Because i would have chosen the latter. Also, I am one of the few that enjoyed Alien 3.

I don't know. There was a 7 year gap between Alien and Aliens. Maybe Aliens was just a dream come true for James Cameron after the success of The Terminator. And Aliens is one of those rare movies that can live up to the original one.

I think Covenant went sideways because of the fans and that the problem was not entirely Ridley Scott's fault. He was already going well into a direction and than he had to change it. But also a lot of fans were upset that Neill Blomkamp's Alien movie got canned, taking away the chance of an inspiring new sci-fi director. I was not impressed by Elysium though but the trailer of his latest short movies Firebase and Zygote looks promising. They are trying to turn Firebase into a full feature film.

Live Free Or Die Hard. The fourth Die Hard movie. 12 years have passed since Die Hard With A Vengeance. John McClane is divorced now and has a strained relationship with his daughter when he is called to pick up Matt Farrell, a young hacker, to bring him to the authorities. A job easier said than done. Farrell is being used as a pawn by Thomas Gabriel to destroy the country's infrastructure through internet terrorism. But when Gabriel is getting rid of his pawns McClane shows up and takes him in. While Farrell uses his knowledge to counteracts Gabriel's attacks, McClane has to keep the bad guys on a distance.

This was the first Die Hard I had ever seen at the movies, even though I remember seeing the poster of With A Vengeance during it's release. Anyway, when this one was released, I went to see it at the movies and I remember not being very much impressed even though there are massive explosions and great action sequences but the story is not so great and it's not about McClane at all. Also there was controversy about the rating. While the others were rated R, this one was released theatrically as PG-13. I on the other hand have the unrated version. The movie was shot as rated R but released as PG-13. That in my opinion is already a big mistake and if not a fatal one. I can understand to appeal wider audiences, to bring in more money. I don't know why they are so worried about that. If people want to see it, they'll see it, including younger people. Movies should be made for their audiences and not toned down because of the money. Of course rated R don't mean it's going to be good. But not being able to hear McClane's 'Yippie-ka-yay,' line in full glory, is just the movie's death penalty. And since when did John McClane stopped smoking? Of course new decade, new generation and overall this movie is decent enough as an action movie but this is not a classic Die Hard movie.

To be honest, I think this was Bruce Willis' last decent movie. I don't know what happened to him but he lost something, other than his hair. Even though he was never really gone unlike his other fellow action stars: Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sylvester Stallone and Mel Gibson... he always kept making movies but he never had the success again of his 80's and 90's days. His last good movie according to allmovie is Looper but several before and in the past five years, Willis didn't do anything really succesfull anymore, which I think is a shame. Maybe just like everybody else he's over the hill and needs to take some time off or he really needs a decent project to work on. His next movie is going to be a remake of Charles Bronson's Death Wish. I hope it puts him back on the map again because, he needs it.

A Good Day To Die Hard. The fifth and worst critically received entry in the Die Hard franchise. This movie is more about Jack McClane, John's son, who works with the CIA. He is about to release an elder Russian informant when the court house in Moscow get's blown up and John is again at the wrong place at the wrong time. And that's about it. There's nothing more to this movie than that. The father-son relationship is as strained as it was with his daughter in the previous movie. And against his better judgement Jack takes his father on his mission through Russia and Chernobyl. On the way they try to solve their differences. This is definitely the weakest installment of them all. The fourth movie is even pretty good compared to this one. Every franchise has their weakest installment but sometimes I think: leave well enough alone. They had three very strong movies, than the fourth on is a rung lower but this one is like two or three rungs lower. It's the shortest Die Hard of them all with 97 minutes, the director's cut is four minutes longer but cuts away the Lucy McClane scenes and I rather have her in it, just as I saw it at the movies.

So these are my scores for the Die Hard series.

Die Hard: 5 stars. The most classic one.
Die Hard 2: 4 stars. Great final fight.
Die Hard With A Vengeance: 4,5 stars. Personal favorite, best script.
Live Free Or Die Hard: 3 stars. Due to it's length at some point the movie feels stretched and a bit empty, which made me want to say: come on, guys, wrap it up.
A Good Day To Die Hard: 2 stars. Weakest entry.

Apparently a sixth movie is in the works which will be directed again by Len Wiseman: Die Hard Year One. Though the movie is still on pitch-status for the past ten months now. Current rumors are that it would be set in Japan or at New Year's Eve in 1979 and that it would be an origins story. Who was John McClane before Nakatomi? I would figure set the movie in Japan on New Year's Eve in 1979.

I don't know about Wiseman though... even though the fourth movie was still watchable, I think they should get better people as Die Hard simply deserves it. I still have hope it can redeem itself but they need better scripts and directors.

The Dark Tower. A movie about Stephen King's book series of the same name. Though I'm not familiar with the books. So with hardly any knowledge, I went to see this one and what I saw was pretty awesome. The movie gets destroyed by reviews and critics and honestly I don't know why, probably because I didn't read the books. The only thing that bothered me was the short runtime. 95 minutes? Really? For a saga existing out of 8 books with probably an even bigger mythology than Lord of the Rings, I expected something longer, at least with 40 to 50 minutes. Or maybe they were just being careful, the bigger the movie, the harder it falls. Anyway even it was said the movie was inspired on The Good, The Bad and The Ugly, I had the idea the movie was more inspired on LOTR but than set in modern times. The way they designed the Dark Tower and where it is located sure reminded me of Isengard and plenty of other obvious things that seem to come out of LOTR. It's just squeezing everything in little more than an hour and half... This could've been a great 2,5 hour movie. But like I said, they might have just been careful and perhaps more can be on the way.

The Last Boy Scout. Again one of those they don't make anymore. The writer of Lethal Weapon teams up with Die Hard-star Bruce Willis and True Romance director Tony Scott. Willis plays Joe Hallenbeck, a private investigator down on his luck. His marriage is nearly blown, his wife cheats on him, his daughter hates him and he seems to be having a drinking and gambling problem. When he accepts a job from his best friend to take care of exotic dancer Cory, things are getting stirred up. Cory gets killed right in front of her boyfriend's eyes. Joe and her boyfriend Jimmy Dix start working together in order to solve her murder case and find out things go quite deep into politics and NFL football.

This is a violent action-fest from which I had seen the trailer for years and years on my VHS-tape of Lethal Weapon 3. I consider this movie even to be a Die Hard 2,5. Released after Die Hard 2 and before Die Hard With A Vengeance. The movie is very similar to Die Hard. A guy whose marriage is almost over and kids who hate him. Only I think Joe Hallenbeck cares less about things than John McClane. He's got a comment for everything but not out of arrogance more out of anger. Hallenbeck is angry with himself and the world but he will do what he must do to solve everything and takes a lot of physical abuse in the process but this is a guy who can take it. Hallenbeck is incredibly strong, even though he considers himself as an old guy. In reality Bruce Willis was only 35 at the time. But he packs a punch and can force somebody down by grabbing their fist. The movie is pretty hard in it's violence. Maybe harder than some others.

Anyway if you're up for some real hard stuff this movie is for you. 3,5 stars.

Repossessed. The parody on The Exorcist starring Leslie Nielsen and Exorcist-star and MacGyver guest-star Linda Blair. The movie had it's jokes but also a few very weak moments which made it a drag, even if the movie hardly took 80 minutes. Linda seemed to have a great time being repossessed, she could've carried the movie along with Leslie Nielsen and it would've been a better movie if the script was more solid and didn't rely too much a songs. The way they exorcised the devil with a rock 'n roll videoclip scene was actually just plain dumb. Not great, not bad, just a little below average. 2 stars.

I watched "The Martian" this weekend.

I liked it. It's a bit like MacGyver on Mars

That is MacGyver on Mars. Too bad it was Matt Damon.

Busanhaeng or Train To Busan. A Korean zombie movie that would make George A. Romero proud. It's the horror version of MacGyver's Slow Death episode. A bunch of people: a selfish father with no time for his young daughter, the sports team of a high school, a high pregnant woman and her pushy chubby husband, two older sisters, a tricky businessman and a local bum are taking the train to Busan. On the trip one of the crew gets bitten and turns into a zombie. It spreads out over the train. When they hear the news, the whole country has been taken over by zombies. With cars full of zombies, the group tries to survive and find the next safe city.

I saw this one at the shop and it had this pull on me. When I looked up the trailer, I knew I saw it before and I bought it. The movie was done pretty nice. Great acting, right amount of drama, action and horror. I do have to say the gore was to pretty decent standards. It's not overly gore either but their plenty of it. If you look for a movie in a different language this is for you. 3,5 stars.

Watched a movie on Netflix called Demonic, which is a haunted house movie. It was... okay. Typical lame jump scares. Sheesh, they don't know how to make a decent horror movie anymore. It's kind like a less funny Ghostfacers.

I also watched Three Amigos, which was a nice nostalgia trip. I used to sing this song a lot as a kid... drove my parents nuts. lol

Love Three Amigos

Vanilla Sky. This is like the romantic version of David Lynch's directing style combined with the script of Total Recall. Tom Cruise plays David Aames who goes off the deep end after a serious car accident. A man who had everything at first: good looks, money, women, falls in love but is stalked by his latest conquest. When he comes back nothing is what it seems. A movie that sure knows how to blend certain genres: a romantic sci-fi fantasy thriller. The remake of the Spanish movie Open Your Eyes also with Penelope Cruz. I once saw that one but it's such a long time ago. I don't remember it, but I do remember not liking it. Now after seeing Vanilla Sky, I think I want to give it another chance. 4 stars.

The Truman Show. I think we all know that one. A guy is that star of his own reality show without even knowing it. Apparently the the movie brought in a new name for people who believe they actually star in their own reality show. It is called The Truman Show Syndrome or Delusional. 3 stars.

Just saw "Stoker" (2013) with Nicole Kidman, Matthew Goode and Mia Wasikowska (or whatever her name is; I can never remember ).


Short explanation of the plot via IMDb: After India's father dies, her Uncle Charlie, who she never knew existed, comes to live with her and her unstable mother. She comes to suspect this mysterious, charming man has ulterior motives and becomes increasingly infatuated with him.


It's a thriller with murder and blood. Definitely weird, but interesting characters. The acting is great. It's visually very interesting the way it was shot; and also the use of sound is very captivating.

Interesting fact: The script was written by Wentworth Miller (Prison Break).

Oh, and Lucas Till has a mini-role in it. Like 2 minutes, yet he's still in the credits in the beginning. He must have been cut out of some scenes... maybe that's why he ended up in another one of Wentworth Miller's films ("The Disappointment Room" with Kate Beckinsale from 2016).

Monster with Charlize Theron and Christina Ricci. Based on a true story about a hooker who began killing her clients. The movie is not extremely violent but it's hard on drama. Well acted and directed. 3,5 stars.

Don't say it! Doooont say it! Out of all the movies I actually wanted to see, this was the movie i ended up watching instead.

So yes. Baywatch. The movie. And for those of you that ever saw the series and enjoyed it, this will probably destroy all those precious memories. When a streak of crime starts to take over a local beach, it's lifeguards are inadvertently thrown into the mix trying to put an end to the danger. But some of these life savers are new recruits and trying to work with them is not as easy as one would expect.

Starring Dwayne Johnson, Zac Efron & Alexandra Daddario with a couple of cameos from the original cast.

The movie is flooded with sexual & toilet humor and has a nasty overuse of foul language which makes you wonder whether the producers were paying attention to the original or not. I personally never watched the original show much but did enjoy the first season. It's tone was more serious yet well balanced and was solid entertainment for its time. From the second season, the tone changed and it became a less involved series which focused more on its female cast members and their bodies. From there i didn't really watch.

For a flat comedy this might be your cup of coco but otherwise if you immortalized the show, you might be disappointed. I give it 2 stars.

From the moment I saw the trailer I knew I wouldn't watch this movie. Maybe in two years when it's on FreeTV in Germany or something.

I didn't watch he show regularly, but I've seen enough episodes throughout the years to know that it was in the same realm as MacGyver - family-friendly with a preachy undertone (e.g. against drug use) that was so typical for the 90s.

It's still on every day in Germany at the moment, right before "Beverly Hills 90210" and while the shows are very different, they sure have the same topics every now and then.

I was puzzled when I saw the trailer first and wondering why the original show makers were okay with this. A bit more comedy is fine but this is like just some other toilet-humour comedy movie. Then I'll prefer the Police Academy movies.

Baywatch wasn't that bad. Not great perhaps but not bad. Though I don't remember much of the tv-series. I've seen episodes during it's run but that's like 25 years ago. This one still had plenty of action. I think other adaptions are worse, though I have never really seen Starsky & Hutch the series for instance. You might indeed wonder what the point is about turning them all into comedies if that was not the point in the first place. They probably thought it was fun back than so let's make it a comedy. Don't forget that people who were in charge than are probably no longer in charge now. Baywatch was to me acceptable, probably because I don't recall anything from the show.

Poseidon. Wolfgang Petersen's final Hollywood movie. Another one of those underappreciated movies, starring Kurt Russell, Mike Vogel from Under The Dome, Emmy Rossum, the girl from Day After Tomorrow, Kevin Dillon and veteran actor Richard Dreyfuss. Of course we all know this was a remake of The Poseidon Adventure. The movie may have bombed at the box office, but it's not so bad. I gave it a well deserved 3 stars. It's a entertainment that's what counts and that's what it's supposed to be. Good one, Wolfgang.

I haven't seen Baywatch, and I've seen the show. I had no desire to see the movie, though I wasn't a huge fan of the original. I also heard, review wise, that it was stupid... which is sad because I like Dwayne Johnson.

But don't get me started on reboots. A part of me dies every time something I love is being "rebooted".

I watched the House on Pine Street yesterday... been kinda in a haunted house movie kick lately. It wasn't bad... interesting take on the genre.

The movie I really want to see is It. God, I hope it won't be awful... the original wasn't great either, but Tim Curry was iconic.

Never ever let reviews influence you. They're mostly 8 or 9 out ten times bad and above all wrong.

Actually, I don't. But I do read them sometimes because that's my prerogative.

That Baywatch review i did sure sent some tidal waves so to speak.

MacGyverGod I didn't say it was bad nor was it the worst movie i ever saw either. I did give it 2 stars. However if they rebooted MacGyver like this would you be pleased?

There are millions of Baywatch fans that had an expectation. If they were going to smear their bad taste in the movie they could have just called it Beach Dudes. But they didn't. They decided to redo something from the past that even children used to watch back in the day. And although those kids are adults now, their kids cant watch this. Or at least shouldn't.

Poseidon was okay to watch IMO but it couldn't touch the original Poseidon Adventure which was timeless, again IMO. Of all the Wolfgang Petersen movies, my favorites were still Neverending Story & Enemy Mine.