Wow. It’s not a movie, exactly; it’s more of a video installation of a passion play. Gibson really likes him some slo-mo, and the gore does cross the line into absurdity at times (more than …

Don’t bother. You’d get more information from the recent New York interview with Michael Alig, not to mention James St. James’s book or the Culkin movie. Full of gaps, crappy production values…skip it. (12/1/06)

Really really neat — in both senses of the word. It doesn’t over-explain; the shot set-ups are amazing without getting too obvious; there’s a black humor to it that gives the movie a shot of …

I saw it in the theater when it first came out, but I wanted to watch it again and see if I could pick up any holes or slip-ups knowing the twist from the beginning. …

It takes a while to get going, and I was sitting there like, “Okay, the movie’s only 79 minutes long. Shouldn’t something, you know, happen?” But then, when things do start happening, it’s kind of …

I love, love, LOVE the first movie, and this one isn’t as good — it takes too long to get going, the set pieces at the beginning go on too long, some of the in-jokes …

Hee. Hee hee. Hee. HAAAAA HA HA HA! It’s not a bad movie, but the ending should be creepy, and instead, it’s just funny, for two reasons: 1) Cliff Robertson’s hair. Hee. Hee hee; and …

This is the third Bette Davis movie I’ve had home from Netflix for over a month before watching, and I don’t know why I do that — she’s always so awesome and fun to watch, …

I’d expected more; it’s not really 100 minutes’ worth of movie. Grant and Bergman both look lovely (and had a few of the hottest kisses I’ve seen on film), but I think it’s a little …

Okay, “hee” is probably not the visceral response Murnau was going for. Alas: “hee.” Of course I see why it’s a seminal film, but there’s just not much point in watching it unless you’re in …