GunsmokeRocks
Joined Oct 2005
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see ratings breakdowns and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Badges3
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews9
GunsmokeRocks's rating
I, somehow, only watched the first half of the second episode, but I think I saw enough to nail it in a nutshell. Take the show "All in the Family" and turn the Bunkers into wealthy Mexican-Americans, and then replace Meathead with Darren Stevens from "Bewitched" and VOILA!, you have Rob! Also, don't bothering updating anything from either one of these two shows, because "Rob!" does not give you anything new at all. Pretty terrible show.
Gosh, I summed everything up so neatly that it is too short for IMDb guidelines so I have to think about something else that I don't like about it. I guess all I can say is that unlike other reviewers, I have no problem with Cheech Marin or Rob Schneider.
Gosh, I summed everything up so neatly that it is too short for IMDb guidelines so I have to think about something else that I don't like about it. I guess all I can say is that unlike other reviewers, I have no problem with Cheech Marin or Rob Schneider.
. It's not often that I get to see a movie on opening weekend, so I thought I would write something about it, since many of the critics on Rotten Tomatoes seem to just not get it. Some say the plot was hard to follow, it was not. Some were Southern-phobics, who had problems with Mater, I do not. Some said that they did not like the first "Cars", and that just rips away any credibility that they might have had with me.
The original "Cars" was awesome. It was a parody of ourselves using something we love the most--cars. The story was basically the same as the old Michael J. Fox flick "Doc Hollywood", but the jokes, the music and the artful animation still made it a great movie. Unfortunately, "Cars 2" , in comparison, only has the artful animation.
Most Pixar flicks have some movie or genre of movies in which they take their underlying style. For example, "A Bug's Life" uses "The Magnificent Seven", "Up" uses "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea", and "The Incredibles" take a A LOT from the Sean Connery James Bond movies. Unfortunately, they must not have gotten enough out of James Bond, because they resort much of this with "Cars 2", and the attempt is far less subtle and creative. This also contradicts all the effort made to relate personally to the cars in the previous film.
Imagine if a movie like "Cowboy vs. Aliens" was the sequel to "Dances With Wolves". It just wouldn't work. "Cars" parodied much of everyday life and "Cars 2" just turned it all into an action movie and the filmmakers should have known better! It also seems that the effort was not all there for this one either. "Cars" had some great gags and visuals placed during musical numbers throughout the film. "Cars 2" only had one of these numbers and it was pretty lame. It was song originally performed by the Cars and it wasn't even sung by them. There was very little to laugh at.
The story in itself was not too bad, but the moral in it was the weakest that Pixar has presented and still was not that different from "The Incredibles".
There was also fairly obvious scenes that were in there to boost toy sales. The product placement for State Farm was atrocious. Since when does the might Pixar have to rely on product placement? Pitiful! Finally, it's rated G, but IMO, it should really be PG. Yeah, the violence is just cars against cars, but cars are personified and killing them by blowing them up or hitting them with a death ray can still be intense.
.
The original "Cars" was awesome. It was a parody of ourselves using something we love the most--cars. The story was basically the same as the old Michael J. Fox flick "Doc Hollywood", but the jokes, the music and the artful animation still made it a great movie. Unfortunately, "Cars 2" , in comparison, only has the artful animation.
Most Pixar flicks have some movie or genre of movies in which they take their underlying style. For example, "A Bug's Life" uses "The Magnificent Seven", "Up" uses "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea", and "The Incredibles" take a A LOT from the Sean Connery James Bond movies. Unfortunately, they must not have gotten enough out of James Bond, because they resort much of this with "Cars 2", and the attempt is far less subtle and creative. This also contradicts all the effort made to relate personally to the cars in the previous film.
Imagine if a movie like "Cowboy vs. Aliens" was the sequel to "Dances With Wolves". It just wouldn't work. "Cars" parodied much of everyday life and "Cars 2" just turned it all into an action movie and the filmmakers should have known better! It also seems that the effort was not all there for this one either. "Cars" had some great gags and visuals placed during musical numbers throughout the film. "Cars 2" only had one of these numbers and it was pretty lame. It was song originally performed by the Cars and it wasn't even sung by them. There was very little to laugh at.
The story in itself was not too bad, but the moral in it was the weakest that Pixar has presented and still was not that different from "The Incredibles".
There was also fairly obvious scenes that were in there to boost toy sales. The product placement for State Farm was atrocious. Since when does the might Pixar have to rely on product placement? Pitiful! Finally, it's rated G, but IMO, it should really be PG. Yeah, the violence is just cars against cars, but cars are personified and killing them by blowing them up or hitting them with a death ray can still be intense.
.
... it's not using it.
It is basically like "House" only instead of being a team that focuses on mysterious illnesses, they specialize in organ transplants.
After seeing one episode, I really did not see much that made me want to see more. It seemed like a cookie cutter show with scenes that you've seen in medical shows over and over again. What makes medical shows interesting is the characters.
There seems to be a lot of characters in this show, but none that seem very interesting. Treat Williams is about as boring as you can get, and there are no real high points in a cast that seems talented based on past shows.
All in all, if you see Heartland, you might like it. But if you haven't seen it, then you have not missed much.
It is basically like "House" only instead of being a team that focuses on mysterious illnesses, they specialize in organ transplants.
After seeing one episode, I really did not see much that made me want to see more. It seemed like a cookie cutter show with scenes that you've seen in medical shows over and over again. What makes medical shows interesting is the characters.
There seems to be a lot of characters in this show, but none that seem very interesting. Treat Williams is about as boring as you can get, and there are no real high points in a cast that seems talented based on past shows.
All in all, if you see Heartland, you might like it. But if you haven't seen it, then you have not missed much.