Profile for Doc Doom > Reviews

Personal Profile

Content by Doc Doom
Top Reviewer Ranking: 626,719
Helpful Votes: 5

Guidelines: Learn more about the ins and outs of Amazon Communities.

Reviews Written by
Doc Doom "Vic" (Latveria)

Page: 1 | 2 | 3
pixel
Themes for Grind
Themes for Grind
Offered by Vanderbilt CA
Price: CDN$ 90.95
4 used & new from CDN$ 68.80

5.0 out of 5 stars Insanely brilliant, May 14 2004
This review is from: Themes for Grind (Audio CD)
It's no wonder this album sort of fell off the face of the earth, since it's such a weird offering, in more ways than one.
Musically, it's an odd one, because it's not the sort of music that fits into any genre. I don't mean in the pretentious, "Niravna wasn't REALLY grunge and it wasn't REALLY Nu-Metal" sort of rhetoric crap. I mean it doesn't fit anywhere, sort of like Fred Durst in a social situation (ka-zing). It's not New Age, because it's not spiritual or intentionally relaxing. Also, it doesn't tick me off, as New Age music innately tends to.
The closest you can come it instrumental, because what it REALLY is happens to be something it actually isn't. Doesn't make sense? It's a SOUNDTRACK. To a movie that doesn't exist. Will's target statement is stated clearly in the liner notes. "Grind is a film character without a film." Each track is a different "Scene", has different tone, but falls within the same spectrum of sound as the others. For instance, John Williams on Star Wars: the Imperial Death March sounded imposing and loud, the Main Titles are sweeping and grand, the tender moments bewteen characters are subtle and sweetly inflected, but the whole style is operatic. Simliarly, "Themes for Grind" is haunting. If there was a film for this, it would probably be a very dark, film-noir-ish offering, with many moments of silence from the character. I glean this just from listening.
It's also weird in that, for master-guitarist Will Sergeant, there's no face-melting licks, no solos, no hooks, no guitar to speak of. A risk move, but it illustrates Will's creativity and his heavy contirbution to Echo and the Bunnymen. Like Mac with his superlative vocals, I always consider Will to be top of the department in guitar playing, right up there with Jimi and Keef (though a markedly different sort of badassness). I wondered what a solo guitar album would be for Will and thought this might be it. Still, interesting.
Is this album worth your time? Well, sort of like that old adage, the one that goes "You don't have to be crazy to work here, but it helps!" (HAHAHAHA! SO FUNNY!), you don't HAVE to be a Bunnyman fan to enjoy this, but it helps. There are 3 reasons to buy this:
1. If you're a completist and like the Bunnymen. Do the math. Don't forget Mac's solo work too!
2. If you want a completely unique album.
3.If you want some decent background music.
Sadly, if you're only a music dabbler, this isn't for you and isn't worth your time seeking out. Pick up the Jet album instead, or the FIght Club soundtrack, if you really want something instrumental. It's sad to see such promising album phase out of existence when I have to put up with the dreck on the radio nowadays (Even the "Classic Rock" station here plays Tesla and crappy upstart local bands which hurt my head. They're "Classic Rock" because they play a Rolling Stones/Led Zeppelin/ACDC song once a day and then pound you with 23 hours of shock-jocks and purile music. I'm sorry, I digressed.).
What would I like to see done with this album? Honestly, as a tribute to the unique nature of the music, I think it would be completely (and insanely) awesome to see a movie written for the music, sort of a backwards imagining of the movie making process. It will never happen, but one can dream. Perhaps Bunnymen.com could offer a contest or something about making a student film with the soundtrack. More likely, it'll just fade away under the tide of Drowning Pool and their ilk.

Its Not Funny
Its Not Funny
Price: CDN$ 15.57
28 used & new from CDN$ 3.74

5.0 out of 5 stars Misleading title, May 9 2004
This review is from: Its Not Funny (Audio CD)
Because it's one of the most pleasing comedy albums I've ever bought, from perhaps the most promising comedian of this generation. After buying his last album (over 2 hours long and VERY well worth picking up in addition to this release), I emitted a little a little "Hell yeah!" upon seeing I'd moseyed into the local CD boutique and saw a modest poster advertising the release and rushed over to the comedy section to secure my copy (sadly, they were all sold out of Rock Against Bush Vol. 1, which would couple this nicely).
Listening to David's latest album, a number of this struck me awed that did not from his previous works. The most major of which is that he did not repeat ANY of the material from his massive last album, which is uncanny with most comic albums. Usually with concerts released within a few years of each other, the best jokes will pop up and overlap. Not here.
The other thing that amazed me was how much more fluent his speaking and segues were. David's style of stand-up is the self-admitted "drunken-ramble", in which he stands on stage with a beer in hand and just talks. On his first CD, there were a lot of static "y'know"s and "um"s, but much less so here. Maybe he wasn't drinking as much, maybe he had a better planned set, but whatever the case, it feels like he's sitting with you at a bar having a conversation. This is very admirable and makes the album feel more personable than some other comics'.
The material now is in a similar vein as his other stuff. Stupid people, racism, new products ("THERE'S GOT TO BE A BETTER WAY!!"), and, of course politics. I might get lynched for saying this, but I think I see another Bill Hicks budding in this bespeckled man. His political views are harsh, somewhat conspiritorial, and always witty and cunning. Oh, and backed by facts. David's a very smart man and researches his material carefully. Unlike a certain government he admonishes about thier terrorisms detectoring skills. Nearly everything had me in stitches, even his non-sequitors and improvised material.
(My favorite bit on the whole CD was when a fan invited him to a concert, to which David replies, "I've got to stay in my hotel cut out up a few newspapers. A recipe for brown betty, a really funny "Family Circus". P.J. Mispronounces 'spaghetti'. He calls it 'pasketti' and -- get this -- he calles 'meatballs' 'meatBULBS'!! That's why it's going up on the fridge!" The whole thing came off the top of his head and is so fluid and seriously-delivered it slays.)
Also of note is that the CD contains a newspaper article about a Howard Dean benefit for which several anti-Bush comics performed. The article is biased and slanted (the reporter obviously is a member of the GOP) and David annotates it with clarity, cutting through the rhetoric and lies with grace and humor. A very nice touch.
If you liked this CD, try David's previous release "SHUT UP, YOU (Naughty Word) BABY!", Bill Hicks's "Rant in E-Minor", or Dennis Miller's "The White Album" (before he became Bush's pony boy). Vice versa, if you liked any of the above albums or comics, try this release.
If you DIDN'T like it ... well, perhaps you should be concentrating on the economy and the gas-prices so high that one would think it was Yahweh's sweat, Mr. President.

Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves (Special Extended Edition) (2 Discs)
Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves (Special Extended Edition) (2 Discs)
DVD ~ Kevin Costner
Price: CDN$ 22.25
42 used & new from CDN$ 0.01

3.0 out of 5 stars Classic tragedy!, Jan. 2 2004
The protagonist of this movie is the Sherriff of Nottingham. Saddled with the task of watching over his kingdom while the King is at war, he defends the land from impetulant son of a Satan-worshiper. This thief is named Robin and slimes his way into forming alliances with several peasants and a noblewoman.
A few spoilers follow
Unless you were really, really concentrating on the movie or had no foreknowledge of the tale of Robin Hood, this could pass as a servicable summary. Let me get something straight, right off the bat: I love Robin Hood. I've probably read every version from the Great Illustrated Classics to the original. So, I'm probably being more biased than necessary.
So, first, what's wrong? I'll give you a hint. It begins with a "K" and ends with "evin Costner". Don't get me wrong I like-- okay, "Dances with Wolves" was good. Everything else of his was rot (except maybe "Field of Dreams", which I keep meaning to see). Like Tom Cruise, he plays the same character in every movie. Some scenes -- like the ones with Will Scarlett -- he handles adequately. Other, he botches. And let's not discuss his "accent".
Morgan Freeman is one of my favorite actors. Sadly, while he gives his character a great presence, the writers don't give him much to do except make a point of not fighting and drinking.
Plot-wise, this film is lacking. Some parts make little sense (Robin's conversation with the evil priest, etc.). Others are too drawn out (the attack on the Nottingham fort). Some parts don't segue. As for the ending... ah, I'll get to that after I review:
What's GOOD
Alan. Rickman. Seething malice, practically spitting every word, maniacal and deliciously unpredictable, Rickman is the perfect villain (as proved in many of his other films). His character is (insanely) more likable than Robin! Robin is portrayed as being a whining little rich bully who has an awakening and tries to set things right. In the process, he upsets most fo the villagers' lives. The Sherriff is witty ("Locksley! I'll cut your heart out with a spoon!!), smart, and dangerous. I was rooting for him!
The biggest injustice in the film happens at the climax of the film, where Robin and the Sherriff face off. I will warn you, this is a spoiler, but not really if you have any sense of drama.
*SPOILER BEGINS*
ROBIN CHEATS! In no way would Locksley have won, were it not for Marion's interference. He was an incapable swordsman who got thoroughly owned and would've died twice if Marion hadn't kicked Nottingham and thrown the couch at him. And he used a hidden weapon, something no hero would do.
*SPOILER ENDS*
Now, I enjoyed the cameos. Everyone knows Sean Connery plays Richard the Lionhearted in a small scene and yes, it's nice to see, but my favorite was Robin's father, played by Brian Blessed. Who's Brian Blessed? Why, he played Richard the IV (this movie's Richard's successor) in Rowan Atkinson's "Black Adder". A very nice surprise, even if he only had a short scene.
Overall, this movie is average, typical Hoolywood fare. Rickman's performance is worth sitting through Costner's tepid acting five times over. A few decent action scenes, some humor, some tripe. If you're looking for a decent Robin Hood, try any of the other ones. The 1938 version is great, the Disney version ais more than acceptable ... I even prefered Mel Brooks's "Robin Hood: Men in Tights" to this. You have Cary Elwes who, despite being in a parody, is the perfect choice for Robin, and Dave Chapelle who is always hilarious. And heck, even the TV Movie "Princess of Thieves" has the succulent Keira Knightley (Rrrrreeaaaaagle! *a la Wayne Campbell*).

Shock And Awe Live At Oxford
Shock And Awe Live At Oxford
Price: CDN$ 31.51
23 used & new from CDN$ 4.72

5.0 out of 5 stars Little new, but worth the effort, July 29 2003
Imported this album direct from Britain, only to find it was to be released here soon. Go figure.
That said, this live recording from late '92, is another classic Hicks performance. While it incorporates mostly material heard before on "Arizona Bay", "Relentless", and "Dangerous", there are several redeeming aspects. As always, it's fun to hear Bill try out his material on a new audience (English, no less) and with different delivery. There are a few new nuggets here, mostly regarding Madonna's "Sex" book and England (it sounds like Bill was testing the waters with his "Arizona Bay" material.
Quality wise, this album falls near the bottom. Bill's voice is audible and fairly clear. Maybe it was just this particular night, maybe it was mixed improperly, but he sounds an octave higher. Additionally, the tracks don't segue cleanly, like my player was having trouble finding the next track (and this may very well have been the case).
Slightly better than "Love, Laughter & Truth" and "Flying Saucer Tour vol. 1", not quite up to par with the others (saving "Philosophy", of course), this is still a definite comedy must-have. As always, I would recommend picking up Bill's latter two albums, "Rant in E-Minor" or "Arizona Bay" if you're new to Hicks. Cover art is probably my favorite (assuming they don't change it for its release here), though.
Chronologically, I believe this comes after "Love, Laughter, & Truth" but before "Arizona Bay".

American Scream
American Scream
by Cynthia True
Edition: Paperback
15 used & new from CDN$ 0.75

3.0 out of 5 stars Lacks some substance, adds a few little nuggets, June 14 2003
This review is from: American Scream (Paperback)
"American Scream" has received a number of mixed reviews. Some call Ms. True a talentless hack. Other think this a nice look into Bill's personal life. It's somewhere in between.
I have to address my unhappiness with the work firstly. Some people say that it wasn't well written. It's not bad to the point of using monosyllabic words or run-on sentances. It merely reads like a first draft. A lot of ideas seem to lead nowhere. Some information isn't organized as well as it could be. For instance, early on it is stated that Bill admired Jay Leno. If you've heard "Rant in E-Minor", you'll hear Bill calling him a "corporate shill" and unfunny and wishing for his death. Why, then the change? I expected the insight to come in somewhere around the time "Rant" was recorded, but it was revealed much later on. And if the exchange between Bill and Jay hadn't had a linear-storytelling aspect of it, it might have been lost. That sort of thing was what was really missing: what inspired Bill. We never find out what sparked his goverment paranoia or his hate of corporations. He just "does".
As for the story itself, we get an event-listing of Bill's life. Where he went, what he did, who he was with. That's about it. Not that it's bad, it's lacking. Cynthia failed to get into the mindset of Bill, what was driving him. At most she would say things like "Bill felt he had to get this done". But never WHY.
The real merit of the book is that Ms. True peppers it with media Bill was consuming at the time. Fans all know about his affinity for Hendrix and his love for the works of Terrance McKenna, but how many knew he was a Heinlein or a Dylan fan? True lists specific books, CDs and movies Bill liked which, for someone like me, is helpful for coming to "know" the man.
All-in-all, if you're looking for the ninety-second version of Bill's life, or simply more Bill, pick this up. Completists, you don't need any motivation, pick this up. The only people who should avoid this are: casual comedy fans and casual literay fans; you'll only care about the material if you have a drive.
If you're looking for a funnier and better written (by his closest friend) of another "Comedian" (a song and dance man!), pick up "Andy Kaufman: REVEALED", by Bob Zmuda. It's hilarious, poignant, and deep.

Family Guy - Volume 1: Seasons 1 & 2
Family Guy - Volume 1: Seasons 1 & 2
DVD ~ Seth MacFarlane
Offered by Fulfillment Express CA
Price: CDN$ 70.17
71 used & new from CDN$ 0.57

5.0 out of 5 stars If only the "Simpson's" could be this consistently fresh..., June 3 2003
It's sad to think that in tne years or so, the "Off-color" humor offered here will be the norm. Ah, well. At least "Family Guy" died in its prime. And here we have the cream of the crop: the first two seasons. Let me put it this way: I'd only seen ONE episode of this several years ago and, thanks to its sporadic schedule, I saw no more. And that one episode prompted me to shell out the money needed for the first two seasons.
People compare this to the "Simpsons" and there are two camps: those that think "Family Guy" is a rip off and those that think these people are dumb. I'm of the latter category. I loved the simpsons. But the first season was pretty bad, the second was a little better. Only in its third seaons did it begin to become classic. And lately it has slipped. That said, "Family Guy" never did that, despite being dragged through the mud for being edgy.
The humor in "Family Guy" in nonsensical. It takes familiar situations and adds surreal, absurd humor to it, whereas with, say, "Simpsons" it took nonsensical plots (HOW many jobs have Marge and Homer had? At least a hundred) and added familiar humor to them. Both work. Let it go.
The cast of "Family Guy" is a gem. Peter Griffin is your typical sitcom figurehead -- fat, oafish, lazy, stupid, a borderline alcoholic. He has a lot of Homer-esque qualities minus, you know, the child abuse.
Lois always makes for a good laugh ... she seems like a typical sitcom mom, but then she and Peter will laugh like Beavis and Butthead if one of them says "meatlog".
Meg and Chris (voiced by Seth Green!) have little done with them, but Seth Green brings hilarity to dim Chris and Meg is always good for a teen-angst plot device.
And then we have the two greatest characters: Brian and Stewie. Brian is their dog who walks, talks, drinks, and hits on women. He act essentially like Wilson from "Home Improvement" were he a social drinker and a mutt. The oddity that he interacts freely with the family is addressed only once and as a throwaway joke, at that.
Stewie is barely a toddler, maniacal, matricidal, and hilarious. It's never outright clear that the family can understand him or whether h's speaking baby talk, but he gets all the best lines and subplots. Imagine a Bond villain or Dr. Evil as a child. That's Stewie.
The "Clerks" of televison, "Family Guy" is a must own for those with a willing palate. And maybe were you to watch this too often, the episodes would go the way of the "Flaming Moe": still funny, but why isn't the laughter as hard as it was the first time. But maybe not. The unexpected cameos and oddities have, upon my third time through, remained fresh. So buy this. But NO SPRINKLES! For every sprinkle I find, I shall KILL YOU!

Crystal Days (1979-1999)
Crystal Days (1979-1999)
Offered by langton_distribution
Price: CDN$ 142.88
4 used & new from CDN$ 126.15

5.0 out of 5 stars Best thing to come out of the 80's?, June 3 2003
Definitely up there with getting rid of one of the Bee Gees. What can be said about Echo and the Bunnymen? Quite simply, they're amazing. I could go on and on about how they merit more credibility than most contemporary bands, but I won't. If you're looking at this item, chances are, you already know.
As for the collection itself, it's damn near perfect. Some of the normal versions of the tracks are missing, but that is easily remedied by buying the original albums themselves. Alternate versions of already legendary songs add to the mythology that is the Bunnymen. After all, this is over 4 hours of Echo-y goodness.
Couple this with an awesome, in depth booklet about the group and you've got yourself a winner. And hey, they did! Ian (guitar/vocals) and Will(lead guitar) give commentary for tracks and suchlike. It makes for an interesting read.
The only fault I can find with this set? The packaging. And this is minor griping. First, I don't like the CD cases... they're the kind that hold the discs too snug and make it feel like you might bust it if you try to free the CD too hard. Second, the aforementioned booklet is bound to the case and, at least with mine, the glue looks like it'll be ready to drop the book after a few readings. Ah well, one buys this for the music.
As a child of the 80's (and hey,"Ocean Rain" came out the year I was born) I urge you to buy this if you've ever heard "Killing Moon". You won't regret it. While you're at it, try the Echo-inspired Coldplay.

Stephen King's The Shining (1997) (Two-Disc Special Edition)
Stephen King's The Shining (1997) (Two-Disc Special Edition)
DVD ~ Steven Weber
Offered by Fulfillment Express CA
Price: CDN$ 16.65
30 used & new from CDN$ 5.99

5.0 out of 5 stars Read the book, simple as that., May 20 2003
Anyone who blindly says Kubrick's version is "better", needs to take a couple days and read the book. Poor Stanley went for shocks as opposed to that whole road of characterization.
Is this version THE "Shining" to see? No. See them both. Kubrick's most memorable moments aren't found in the book or this version (although, I do prefer Stephen Weber's line in place of Jack's "Here's Johnny"). No elevator blood, no twins (even though they were in the book; Grady is childless here), no "All work and no play".
What's present with the miniseries is the story. Suffice to say, Jack Torrance was not a weird little guy to begin with. He did not just have a mental breakdown, as Kubrick tried to hint. There's a lot of build up and foreshadowing (the wasp nest, for instance) that was lost in the film version. Jack is a tragic character, a pawn in a battle of supernatural forces. The infamous axe has been dropped in place of its rightful predecessor, the roque (Denver croquet here) mallet. And even with four hours to "fill", some bits and pieces were lost.
Jack Nicholson versus Stephen Weber: no contest, right? Wrong. Weber gives ol' Wolf-Grin a run for his money, but what brings Jack back to the top is that when Torrance does lose it, Nicholson is more convincing. The Dick Halloran here is great, but Scatman Crothers seemed more like Dick to me. The rest of the "new" cast is an improvement. Rebecca De Morney is a perfect Wendy, far better from Shelly Duvall's homely, helpless portrayal. The new Danny has a lisp, but it's better than hearing him croak around with his finger saying "redrum".
I again prefer this version for its ending. The Kubrick version is soulless and mundane. This ending is touching and has heart. I won't give anything away, but King has added a "Ten Years Later" epilogue not present in the book and it works beautifully. If only Dreamcatcher could've been adapted this well.

The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (Special Widescreen Extended Edition) (4 Discs)
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (Special Widescreen Extended Edition) (4 Discs)
DVD ~ Elijah Wood
Offered by DealsAreUs
Price: CDN$ 59.99
23 used & new from CDN$ 0.50

3.0 out of 5 stars Mediocre, sloppy storytelling, April 10 2003
I don't care for this movie in the least. Now, don't condemn me right yet, I have viable reasons. Allow me to elucidate my thoughts a bit before you tear me apart like the good little automatons you are.
"Lord of the Rings" is considered the godfather of fantasy. It provided the basis, some of the species, and a lot of the mythology behind modern fantasy. So, you can blame it for every one of the "[Blank] of the Dragon" polluting the bookshelves today. Okay, that was a little bit of humor there. But seriously... assuming (like with those fun proofs from Geometry) that the above statement is true, that Lord of the Rings is the basis for modern fantasy, then why hasn't it stood the test of time?
Hear me out: "2001: A Space Odyssey", "Alien", and "The Matrix", these are (or, with "The Matrix", will be) what define the science-fiction genre for years to come. Why then has Lord of the Rings been copied, reused, and overdone by other authors and movie makers, and yet these movies have not been (successfully) emulated? Because they are unique. Tolkien may have made the word "hobbit" a word in the dictionary, but what does his story have to offer? I implore you to run along to the next paragraph.
Taking place after "The Hobbit", "The Fellowship of the Rings" has Frodo given the care of a magical (and of course, all-powerful, world-destructive) ring and entrusted to quest (the favorite word of fantasy authors) to Mordor to destroy it. Accompanied by his affirmative-action troupe consisting of hobbits, an elf, a dwarf, some humans, and a wizard. Just so we have a diverse cast of characters without any ... CHARACTERIZATION. Am I wrong for wanting to know more about the Ring Wraiths than I do about a whiny little hobbit? The worst part of the movie, apart from being a 3-hour "chase" movie, is that it's uneven. It builds and builds for 45 minutes, and just when one thinks there's a climax coming, it cuts to 45 minutes of melodrama, smarmy dialogue and overdone plot threads (see Liv Tyler). And then it "picks back up" for another hour and a half. Wee.
The casting gets a half-hearted vote from me. ... Frodo, no matter HOW frightening the situation is, should not look like he's hallucinating and seeing demon-bunnies. That's beyond frightened. ... The dwarf does little more than scream "We're DOOMED" every time there's something remotely threatening. The elf ... god, the elf. I always thought elves had some shred of masculinity..... Scruffy-human (Aragon) was okay, although he got little play up. I would've liked to have learned a little more about him. Shady-human (Alec Trevlyan from "Goldeneye") was really just "there".
Of course, Sir Ian McKellan totally negates all of this because ... he's Sir Ian McKellan. Hitting every single right not, he soars as Gandalf. Of course, he's only on screen for about 10 minutes. The classically trained actor gets less face-time than the pretty-boy archer. Christopher "Yes, I really could kill you" Lee is also perfect as Sorumon [sic] but again gets little more than a glorified cameo. And Sean Austin gets points because he was Rudy.
As a two-hour movie, this maybe could've been an enjoyable movie. I'll never know though. ...
I give this movie (basically) one star for McKellan and Lee, one star for that completely awesome wizard throw-down (and for seeing Elijah Wood get stabbed), and one star for Bilbo's face at the Elf Shire. ...

Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
Offered by TUNESUS
Price: CDN$ 4.64
34 used & new from CDN$ 0.01

5.0 out of 5 stars If the movies continue this way..., April 3 2003
... then mayhap I smell an Oscar on the horizon? Because this sequel was loads better than both the original and Lord of the Rings. Of course, I still have to say: READ THE BOOK(S). Each books significantly improves over the last. Reading the book is like getting the special edition DVD early, something you should not miss out on either.
Film wise, "Chamber of Secrets" stands above its competators for family films (and fantasy films) in several ways. Daniel Radcliff, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson have greatly improved since "Sorceror's Stone", so much so that their acting doesn't fault once. For such fresh actors, they actually managed to add depth to their characters, something Vin Diesel has yet to achieve. The special effects are almost top notch (as disappointed as I was with The Two Towers, Gollum was still both a better character and supurbly animated than Dobby.), although I wish the basilisk has moved a little better.
The plot is much darker than the first film, and "Chamber" is probably the second darkest of the books thus far, with "Goblet of Fire" easily taking the cake on that one. Columbus mixes drama, humor, and fantasy well enough, but he's still just missed the mark. There are some scene that were actually, I thought, improved upon from the book. Namely, the scene in Hagrid's hut after the "mud-blood" incident (Emma Watson plays this perfectly and Robby Coltrane has yet to miss a beat in any of his movies) and one of the scenes in the hospital wing (when Ron and Harry pay a visit to a friend).
The real problems I can recall lie in Columbus's concentration on the action sequences. The final confrontation seemed to drag on far longer than in the book (and it did, upon re-reading) while Lockhart and Snape, who are played by two of Hollywood's greater actors, get barely any screen time at all. They do, of course, [shine in] every scene they're in. Also, why is it that Quidditch is more fun to read about than it is to watch? And one match just isn't enough. I'd much rather see a few seconds of several matches instead of the obligatory one match. Hopefully, this can be remedied for "Azkaban".
Despite these minor faults, "Chamber of Secrets" is still an excellent movie. The DVD remains in question. Looking at the specs, it seems outcries from the shoddy first DVD have been heard. Gone is the treasure hunt to unlock the deleted scenes (less than 10 on the first and not worth it at all) every single time. This time, we get 19, cast interviews, the whole nine yards. It looks to be well worth picking up.
The Harry Potter series is one of the best fantasy series in print and a decent film adaptation. And, like it or not, it does get kids to read, unlike other fantasy films whose books are dry and boring. So until the Discworld series get greenlit for a live action movie (starring Christopher "I'm-80-and-still-scary-beyond-belief" Lee as Death), I'll stick with Harry Potter. And to think, I used to think it would be a terrible movie!

Page: 1 | 2 | 3