Keith-78
नई प्रोफ़ाइल में आपका स्वागत है
हमारे अपडेट अभी भी डेवलप हो रहे हैं. हालांकि प्रोफ़ाइलका पिछला संस्करण अब उपलब्ध नहीं है, हम सक्रिय रूप से सुधारों पर काम कर रहे हैं, और कुछ अनुपलब्ध सुविधाएं जल्द ही वापस आ जाएंगी! उनकी वापसी के लिए हमारे साथ बने रहें। इस बीच, रेटिंग विश्लेषण अभी भी हमारे iOS और Android ऐप्स पर उपलब्ध है, जो प्रोफ़ाइल पेज पर पाया जाता है. वर्ष और शैली के अनुसार अपने रेटिंग वितरण (ओं) को देखने के लिए, कृपया हमारा नया हेल्प गाइड देखें.
बैज1
बैज कमाने का तरीका जानने के लिए, यहां बैज सहायता पेज जाएं.
समीक्षाएं65
Keith-78की रेटिंग
Well, I just came back from seeing this film and I must say, it sucked. It's just another teen "slasher" film to follow in the "Scream" tradition: a bunch of dumb teenagers played by no-name actors and actresses get slashed in various, grotesque ways. Is that all Hollywood can think of anymore? This movie just makes me want to watch "Halloween" or "The Exorcist" even more. Those films are what true terror is all about. It also saddens me that James Wong, and the rest of his crew had to exploit a very sad and tragic disaster that was TWA Flight 800 in order to make this movie a "hit", and if people can't see that the first 20 minutes of the movie were based on that disaster, open your eyes. Avoid this mess at all costs. Don't waste your money.
"A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge" was released in 1985. It features an all new cast and Robert Englund back as Freddy Krueger. Jesse Walsh (Mark Patton) moves into 1428 Elm Street (Nancy Thompson's old house), where he starts having awful dreams about Freddy. It seems Krueger wants to possess Jesse in order to kill again. Right here is where the film goes WRONG. The whole idea of the original is the fact that Freddy kills his victims while they are sleeping, and that if he is brought out into the real world he'll die. This film totally contradicts what the first film was about (which is why Wes Craven didn't want anything to do with it). Now don't get me wrong, the special effects are great, and the acting is pretty good too, especially from Patton and Kim Myers as Lisa, Jesse's love interest, but I think the thing that really ruined this film was the plot, plus Freddy doesn't use his glove to kill, but knives coming from his fingers. The music is also different. Although this film does expand on the plot of the first film, with many references to it, the next film actually continues from where the first film ends, and Freddy is actually still scary in this before he started becoming goofy.
"Star Trek III: The Search For Spock" was released in 1984 and begins with the USS Enterprise returning to spacedock for repairs after the battle with Khan. Kirk (William Shatner) and his crew are trying to keep busy in dealing with the death of Spock, while his son David (Merritt Butrick) and Lt. Saavick (Robin Curtis, replacing Kirstie Alley) are reassigned to the USS Grisson and explore the newly created Genesis Planet. Admiral Kirk gets a surprise visit from Spock's father, Sarek (Mark Lenard) and learns of his "katra", or living spirit, that was planted in McCoy. Kirk disobeys orders from the Starfleet Commander, steals the Enterprise and travels to the Genesis Planet to retrieve Spock's body and return his katra. This film is great. It is not as good as TWOK but it has it's moments, especially when the Enterprise is blown to bits and we watch Kirk and his crew see it disintegrate, you sort of feel for him, his ship for all of those years, gone. Christopher Lloyd is terrific as Commander Kruge, who wants the secret of Genesis for the Klingon's own personal use. He is a nasty villian and is my second favorite in the series, he is ruthless. Leonard Nimoy only makes a cameo appearance at the end when he "lives" again. You see a lot more of him in TVH. This film is a great film which levels off the suspense, action and drama which made the it's predcessor so great. Rent it today!