Replica

I'm sure somewhere there is a formal definition of a movie. Assuming includes things like, the action was captured on film, there was a script, they were actors, they were sound, etc. Replica meets all of those criteria. However, it somehow fails to be a movie. There's very little action to capture, the script is full of plot holes and banal conversation, the actors shouldn't even really be called actors, and the sound is either nonexistent or noisy. I'm guessing that 99% of the people who have seen this watched the RiffTrax version of it. I can't imagine watching it without RiffTrax.

OK, by now the film-going public is aware how cluelessly untalented James Nguyen is as a writer and director. All his scripts are essentially identical, usually involving a salesman and his horny friend, a hot blonde, some pseudo science, and really bad special effects. Plus he always wields the video camera like your great aunt does at a family get-together -- tilted, hard to hear, and out of focus. His films have the same plot, the same house, the same recurring actors -- the same everything, over and over.

And yet I always watch his movies -- repeatedly. I think I've watched "Replica" as much as I have "Birdemic". Why? I actually kind of like "Replica", probably even more than it's more famous sibling "Birdemic". "Replica" is shorter and sillier, so it's more fun and not such a commitment. Turn off your brain, keep your expectations low, veg out, and chuckle every once in a while until it ends.

Lana Dykstra as the Doctor makes it worth viewing just for her alone. Her acting is hilarious. Half the time you can't even understand her. She's attractive for sure, I was genuinely surprised how great she looked in her bikini during the inevitable James Nguyen sex scene. I can't find anything more about her after she starred in this movie. I'm curious what she looks like now. But in all seriousness I have to give her props simply because she agreed to star in this movie for no money, she put up with James' nonsense, and she tried her best.

Words can't even BEGIN to describe what a train wreck this "movie" is! I'm pretty sure that James Nguyen either A) Never saw a good movie. B) Has a SERIOUS mental health issue or C) Lost a bet with someone,and the loser has to make a couple of HORRENDOUS movies. I thought "Birdemic" was the worst movie I have ever seen..then...good 'ol James Nguyen throws me THIS CURVEBALL?!?!?! This "movie" is (thank God) a very short watch. I just can't fathom how these "actors" got the parts for this flick??? It sure wasn't an audition...if it WAS...dear Lord,I would LOVE to see who didn't make the cut!!! The woman doctor / replica is SOOOOO BAD that it makes it actually kinda FUN to watch,and the Asian detective is probably worse than the female doctor...I was laughing SO HARD that I had to go back and see what I missed. IF you decide to watch this crapfest...one viewing should do it for you...I think seeing it once is MORE THAN enough...seriously...I think watching this "movie" more than once will lower your IQ to that IQ of a radish.

This film comes to us from the same director/writer who brought us Julie and Jack and the more well known Birdemic. Out of these three horrible films, this one ranks the worst of the trio of terror! Watch as people move about as no human being does, stammer over lines and shake profusely to indicate excitement. Listen as a bird in a cage literally chirps loudly enough to drown out the actors in the film! Be amazed by a opening credit sequence that looks like a screen saver when screen savers were first created!

The story, like most of the director's films is all over the place focusing on a salesman and a very awkward romance. He goes farther than he did with the other films, making the salesman Joe in this one literally stalk his prey and then have the horrid romance that ends in tragedy as his beloved dies in the slowest looking crash in movie history. Before the body is cold in the ground he is trying to put the moves on a new girl because she looks like his lost love and he even wants her to do her hair like the dead girl. Yeah, as I said the film has a creepy vibe.

So we get another bad film from the director who apparently never saw a real human being before because he obviously does not have the ability to direct one to act anything resembling how a real person acts. He does a good job directing real birds I guess. Joe comes across as really creepy, but the girl playing Evelyn/Claudia is cute...albeit a lousy actress!

So, if you want to watch a film where people do not act human then I suggest all three films I have mentioned. This one is the worst of the lot as it takes til nearly the end to get to the point forcing you to watch flashback scenes of absolutely mundane events that shed the light on nothing! The only thing good is seeing the lead girl in a bikini, but lets be real, you can see that and more in an adult film and quite honestly the acting is better!

At least Julie and Jack had real sets! How is it that the movie that dealt with virtual reality didn't have the virtual sets like this one did?

This film repeats multiple beats from Julie and Jack, even down to things like the salesman's sales making a turnaround and a female coworker commenting in a meeting that they heard that he got a new girlfriend and implying that's why his sales are up. The male lead in this is a worse actor than the male lead in Julie and Jack. Unlike Jack, this guy has no redeeming qualities. Jack is, for all his faults, good-looking and sweet. The guy in this film is creepy from the jump, stalking the woman he's interested in and making selfish, creepy, hurtful requests of his "new" girlfriend. Given that there was no implication that the female lead had low self-esteem, I couldn't suspend disbelief that she would date him, especially given that he's a failure in his job, awkward, stalkerish, and the woman is not only pretty but is apparently a super genius (yet another thing from Julie and Jack). Now, I sound superficial, but let's he real. In L.A? No. She could have her pick because of her career, not just her looks. Women in James' films are either just objects, mothers, or exposition devices.

James makes movies about himself, like Neil Breen and Tommy Wiseau do, except James uses white males as avatars for himself (I could say something about that as someone living in Asia, but I'll leave it.) Unfortunately, what none of the men have learned is their heroes are awkward and lame, and that ends up showing in the final product. So, here we are.