[go: up one dir, main page]

    Release calendarTop 250 moviesMost popular moviesBrowse movies by genreTop box officeShowtimes & ticketsMovie newsIndia movie spotlight
    What's on TV & streamingTop 250 TV showsMost popular TV showsBrowse TV shows by genreTV news
    What to watchLatest trailersIMDb OriginalsIMDb PicksIMDb SpotlightFamily entertainment guideIMDb Podcasts
    OscarsPride MonthAmerican Black Film FestivalSummer Watch GuideSTARmeter AwardsAwards CentralFestival CentralAll events
    Born todayMost popular celebsCelebrity news
    Help centerContributor zonePolls
For industry professionals
  • Language
  • Fully supported
  • English (United States)
    Partially supported
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Watchlist
Sign in
  • Fully supported
  • English (United States)
    Partially supported
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Use app

toclement

Joined Aug 2000
Welcome to the new profile
We're making some updates, and some features will be temporarily unavailable while we enhance your experience. The previous version will not be accessible after 7/14. Stay tuned for the upcoming relaunch.

Badges4

To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Explore badges

Reviews47

toclement's rating
Ratatouille

Ratatouille

8.1
1
  • Sep 6, 2007
  • 85th best movie of all time? Gimme a break...

    Geez, IMDb has become incredibly unreliable. There used to be a time that a high rating for a movie meant something. Nowadays it's pretty much standard fare for anything that's popular. This movie, while I can see why many would like it, is average at best. Too many people with undiscerning taste coming in here and giving 10s to every movie they watch.

    As fort he movie: Predictable, formulaic American/Hollywood approach to animation. Not very funny either (I think I gave a minor chuckle once). I'd give it a 3 or 4, but given all the 10s given by people who probably don't even watch many movies outside the Hollywood establishment.

    Oh a cute little rat! He acts like people! He talks! He has emotion! He loves his family! Give that baby a 10! And let's give American accents to all the main characters, so that the movie doesn't feel like it's really set in France.
    King Kong

    King Kong

    7.2
    2
  • Jan 6, 2006
  • About 90 minutes too long

    I have nothing against long movies. But if you're going to go to 3 hours, you better have 3 hours of material. This movie lacks the emotion of the original. The acting ranges from mediocre to horrible (Kong was the best performance of the bunch). Peter Jackson's obsession with dinosaurs, special effects, and drawn out action scenes leaves him little time (despite 3 hours) to develop the characters, create real emotional bonds where we care about them (did anyone care whether Adrien Brody or "Jimmy" got killed?). What was the point of Jimmy? Either use the story or drop it! The only characters given ample time to develop were Jack Black's (and his over-acting was too comical to be taken seriously) and Naomi Watts (who was unable to move beyond a very mediocre performance - see Fay Wray's original performance for real terror acting).

    Every action scene went on far too long. They were all too implausible to be enjoyable. A film like this requires suspension of disbelief, but you want to believe that the characters are really in danger and somehow manage to escape. What Jackson did is have characters enter a situation that they could never survive (for example being stampeded by hundreds of giant dinosaurs) and then when it was all over, they pick themselves off the ground and dust themselves off. What?

    The first hour is good, but it's all downhill after that. 4 points for a good buildup, but -2 for taking 2 hours to ruin it.
    Rock Star: INXS

    Rock Star: INXS

    7.1
    1
  • Jul 11, 2005
  • worst reality show yet

    As hard as it is for me to believe, with all of the awful reality shows out there over the past few years, this one has to take over the top spot for worst one yet. I am still wondering if this was actually just a spoof done by the SCTV gang. If Andy Kaufmann were still alive I'd be sure he was behind this. Can a rock band stoop any lower than has INXS to do such a shameful thing as this? The premise is simple and moronic. Audition a bunch of karaoke rejects to become the new lead singer of INXS, to take the place of Michael Hutchence (who committed suicide in 1997). Eight years and no hits later, the band commit the ultimate act of patheticness by subjecting themselves to auditioning a bunch of talentless wannabes to be the new lead singer of a band that is 20 years past its prime. So they trot all of these awful singers (I thought American Idol had its share of doozies) who do atrocious renditions of just about every classic (and predictable) rock song imaginable. And then they cut to the INXS band members who are seriously discussing the merits of each of these candidates. You could see better (and more original) rock performers at just about any night club in any city in the world.

    It has all the usual uncreative elements of every other reality show. Lame reality participants, lame interviews, lame host/emcee, lame "judging" of performances, and the lame booting of one participant at the end of each show. Can these shows get any more predictable? It's clearly a publicity stunt on the part of the band; a last gasp of hope at rekindling their lost stardom before they are finally buried into oblivion. Michael Hutchence, if he had any shred of dignity when alive, has to be rolling over in his grave. Not that INXS were ever a great band, but I had no idea they were this pathetic. If INXS are at all representative of what rock and roll has become, this show would be the final proof that rock and roll is once and for all, dead.
    See all reviews

    Recently viewed

    Please enable browser cookies to use this feature. Learn more.
    Get the IMDb App
    Sign in for more accessSign in for more access
    Follow IMDb on social
    Get the IMDb App
    For Android and iOS
    Get the IMDb App
    • Help
    • Site Index
    • IMDbPro
    • Box Office Mojo
    • License IMDb Data
    • Press Room
    • Advertising
    • Jobs
    • Conditions of Use
    • Privacy Policy
    • Your Ads Privacy Choices
    IMDb, an Amazon company

    © 1990-2025 by IMDb.com, Inc.