Showing posts with label (Widescreen. Show all posts
Showing posts with label (Widescreen. Show all posts

Friday, September 10, 2010

Star Wars - Episode I, The Phantom Menace (Widescreen Edition)

Horror Movies Star Wars - Episode I, The Phantom Menace (Widescreen Edition)







Horror Movies List Price : $19.98

Horror Movies Offer Price :


$10.01

Horror Movies Brand : Star Wars


Horror Movies Model :


Availability : Usually ships in 1-2 business days


____________________________________________________________________________________________




Star Wars - Episode I, The Phantom Menace (Widescreen Edition) Overview


Begin your STAR WARS DVD collection with STAR WARS: Episode 1 THE PHANTOM MENACE. Packed with over six hours of additional material, including exclusive documentaries and never-before-seen deleted scenes, this 2-disc set provides the perfect showcase for the incredible detail and breathtaking scope of George Lucas's first episode in the mythic STAR WARS saga.



Star Wars - Episode I, The Phantom Menace (Widescreen Edition) Specifications


"I have a bad feeling about this," says the young Obi-Wan Kenobi (played by Ewan McGregor) in Star Wars: Episode I, The Phantom Menace as he steps off a spaceship and into the most anticipated cinematic event... well, ever. He might as well be speaking for the legions of fans of the original episodes in the Star Wars saga who can't help but secretly ask themselves: Sure, this is Star Wars, but is it my Star Wars? The original elevated moviegoers' expectations so high that it would have been impossible for any subsequent film to meet them. And as with all the Star Wars movies, The Phantom Menace features inexplicable plot twists, a fistful of loose threads, and some cheek-chewing dialogue. Han Solo's swagger is sorely missed, as is the pervading menace of heavy-breather Darth Vader. There is still way too much quasi-mystical mumbo jumbo, and some of what was fresh about Star Wars 22 years earlier feels formulaic. Yet there's much to admire. The special effects are stupendous; three worlds are populated with a mélange of creatures, flora, and horizons rendered in absolute detail. The action and battle scenes are breathtaking in their complexity. And one particular sequence of the film--the adrenaline-infused pod race through the Tatooine desert--makes the chariot race in Ben-Hur look like a Sunday stroll through the park.

Among the host of new characters, there are a few familiar walk-ons. We witness the first meeting between R2-D2 and C-3PO, Jabba the Hutt looks younger and slimmer (but not young and slim), and Yoda is as crabby as ever. Natalie Portman's stately Queen Amidala sports hairdos that make Princess Leia look dowdy and wields a mean laser. We never bond with Jedi Knight Qui-Gon Jinn (Liam Neeson), and Obi-Wan's day is yet to come. Jar Jar Binks, a cross between a Muppet, a frog, and a hippie, provides many of the movie's lighter moments, while Sith Lord Darth Maul is a formidable force. Baby-faced Anakin Skywalker (Jake Lloyd) looks too young and innocent to command the powers of the Force or wield a lightsaber (much less transmute into the future Darth Vader), but his boyish exuberance wins over skeptics.

Near the end of the movie, Palpatine, the new leader of the Republic, may be speaking for fans eagerly awaiting Episode II when he pats young Anakin on the head and says, "We will watch your career with great interest." Indeed! --Tod Nelson



Horror Movies Customer Reviews


Horror Movies Customer ReviewsBoth the service, price and, of course, the product was great. I would buy from here again without hesitation.
THANK YOU.





Horror Movies Customer ReviewsEpisode I: Phantom Menace Phantom Plot - Samurai Dave - Tokyo, japan
Let me clarify that if I'm a fan of the original three Star Wars movies, I do not hate the movie prequel of some kind of fanatical fanboy reaction. I just do not like movies because they are good films.

Defense of this film and the other two follow-up was a result of fierce anger of many disappointed fans and haters of Jar Jar Binks. Before its release, I understand that some die-hard fans have shown their loyalty to the franchise of Star Wars with the paymentout more than $ 500 to see the premiere of "Episode III: Revenge of the Sith." If you paid $ 500 for a film of shit, you have to defend, rather than admit that they have wasted a buttload of dinero.

Phantom Menace: Movie Phantom

Movie Phantom is a ghost of a plot, and characterization of a ghost. Mainly, it's just a long journey joyless mediocrity relying more on flash than substance. Like many critics and fans have noted over the years, the first three films may have had manydefects but were overall good movie with interesting characters and a plot simple but attractive.

Some people complain about "Return of the Jedi" because one of the most controversial of the original trilogy to be the introduction of the Stone Age teddy bears known as the Ewoks. However, you really have to admit that Jar Jar Binks of "Episodes I" redeems the Ewoks, at least some of these bears had the decency to die and could not understand them when they werespeak.

The original Star Wars movies have had huge success and popular support because they were grounded in ancient primordial myths that people of all generations and cultures could relate. Moreover, the first three films are nostalgic for the years 1950 and 1930 sci-fi adventure films and television series. There are a lot of just pure fun campy lines like, "I'm Luke Skywalker.'m Here to save you!"

Nothing like it in "Episode I" Dialog is appallingly poor and lifeless.The characters are uninteresting, with the exception of Darth Maul rarely - and he comes off second best to Boba Fett of the original films. character Obi-Wan, Alec Guinness' has much less screen time in "Star Wars" character practically unpronounceable Jedi Liam Neeson. Yet the death of Obi-Wan has had an impact on the public much more than the second because Obi-Wan was more of a recognizable, developed a public persona could feel for. Neeson's character I felt was a strangerthroughout the entire film, paperboard over the Jedi. I sometimes forget that he also died in the movie, his character being as it was to forget. Neeson does not blame for this. I blame poor storytelling and characterization.

Maybe I'm getting too old for the eye candy effects, but I found the CGI in the film arrogant and false. Give me the old models look awkward and alien men-in-rubber-suit. It seems that when Lucas and the company has less money and technology wereforced to be more creative. Now blessed (or cursed) with plenty of both, the end result is Jar Jar Binks, one of the most hated aides to obscure the silver screen. Regarding the battle robots are talking wimpy-looking broomsticks with guns.

The humor of "Episode I" is degrading and pandering to children primarily expressed everything from slapstick Jar Jar through gaps in terms of Buster Keaton would have been sickened. The humor of the first three film works mainlybecause there is chemistry between the characters.

The story of "Episode I" does not hold good or interest. We have a plot on a block on trade regulations (finally! Economics and sci-fi!) And a kid with extraordinary powers but possessing all the personality and charm of a piece of furniture.

Then there is the very thin sub-plot of Darth Maul that is so sub is basically a submarine. And there's just too much repetition in some scenes, such astravel underwater on Naboo, as big fish eat big fish, and too long, not-thought-it-would-end pod-racing scene. Maybe NASCAR racing fans liked it.

Overall, things happen more by blind dumb luck, rather than by force, as Anakin blow up the mother ship completely by accident. And speaking of the Force, the mystic is gone, the idea of Zen so gripped the public and the pop culture of the past. Instead we have a scientific interpretation of the Force Star Trek asa sort of blood disorder.

One of the biggest problems I had with the film was Anakin Skywalker, often lovingly referred to by many critics as "Manakin Skywalker." Jake Lloyd's acting abilities by presenting the future Darth Vader as a child is not so important that a movie complex should be devoted to it. L '"Episode I" plot could easily be reduced to about 15-20 minutes at the beginning of "Episode II: Attack of the Clones."

The story behind theprequel to the fall and the transformation of Anakin Skywalker into Darth Vader. But a child is not an interesting character for the type of general history George Lucas presented in these more recent films. I would rather have had Anakin first revealed as a young man in his mid to late teens as a flawed hero, but nice, going down slowly over the three prequels in the dark, as the result of their decisions and things outside of its control . And totally useless message should"Hurrah!" no matter how well he does something.

A few notes of concern other angry:

Because the robots in the movie need to speak aloud to one another?

Why have Hugh Quarshie All Funked as a driver for 1970 a pimp? (Referring to the Queen of Naboo's bodyguard very questionable)

Why did Obi-Wan R2D2 and C3PO forgotten in later years? Senility had Jedi? (I know the answer: They were only in movieestablish continuity inconsistent. The logic is not even an option).

And besides, why does not remember Tatooine Darth Vader? Dark Side senility?

Because the rest of the delegates Republic scrubs for a backward world like Naboo and call a new election of their leader, Supreme Chancellor Valorum (Terence Stamp)?

As is too old to 7 or 8 Jedi training? They have a training school embryo? (And just forget the fact that Luke has made somesignificant progress in a couple of years from country boy can lift objects for the home only to small Jedi superhero challenge the Emperor and Darth Vader.)

Why all the drivers look like Naboo employees close to retirement, apparently without an ounce of training for combat and only wearing safety glasses and leather baseball caps? (They seemed incapable adults in the Disney movie that hideously adorable children must build on what is actually happening.)

WhyObi-Wan did lie about his first meeting with Anakin? Anakin was not the best pilot in the galaxy when they first met, was a wet-behind the ears, 10 years, home.

Overall, Phantom Menace has been a disappointment both as a Star Wars movie and just like a period film.




Horror Movies Customer ReviewsI miss Darth Maul - Joker - Michigan
When Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace was released in May 1999, someone said that the movie sucks. Some people said they liked it, while others said it was just "OK." Well, that's how it was for eleven years. This is a film that got mixed reviews. What's my opinion of this film?

Okay, that's all.

This is a film that could have been much better, but George Lucas is botched up. There are a number of reasons, so I'll explain.


Second of all, midichlorians. Because this term was used to give a scientific explanation for theForce? Because it was explained to all the power?

Third of all, quality of wood. Many of the characters are so rigid, so wooden, and so boring. I know that political discourse is not the most exciting person in the world, but at least the characters show some emotion and personality.

Fourth of all, superior technology. Because it is the most sophisticated technology and superior technology of episodes IV, V and VI? This film is supposed to take place 40 yearsbefore Episode IV - A New Hope, but the technology seems to be more suitable for a film that takes place 40 years after Episode VI - Return of the Jedi. The only mention of Technology in The Phantom Menace is less than that of vessels that need help from a "booster" to enter hyperspace.

Fifth of all, the killing of Darth Maul. What was on Naboo? Obi-Wan Kenobi is hanging for dear life several feet below where Darth Maul is standing and looking down at him. SuddenlyKenobi lightsabre looks towards where Qui-Gon is lying on the floor. My question is this: With foot Kenobi different below the floor, as you can see lightsabre Qui-Gon from that point of view? The lightsabre is completely out of his sight. It has the X-ray vision? Another thing - Why Darth Maul just stand there looking like Kenobi leaps, grabs the lightsabre, and swipes him? Maul Kenobi had every opportunity to sneak in those few seconds.

Why wasDarth Maul killed to begin with? And 'one of my favorite characters in the entire six-film saga!

One sixth of all, Jar Jar Binks. Oooooooohhhhhhhhhhhh Jar Jar Binks. It was so annoying. He was meant to provide comic relief instead of R2D2 and C3PO, C3PO seeing that was being built at that time was not yet a partner R2D2. Instead, he alone has ruined the movie, or at least come damn close. Also, I did not find that funny. And 'dry humor was the best. Hewould appeal to kids. I truly believe that if I was seven years old when this film came out I would not Binks. Seriously. If there was a worst films of all characters of Time Hall of Fame, Jar Jar Binks would be a first ballot Hall of Famer.

Seventh of all, Anakin Skywalker. Jake Lloyd was given a script to act as the boy he was. Not entirely his fault. His character did not show any hint of possible development of part of evil in the future, even in the mostsubtly. Her character comes off as very childish and uninteresting and shallow for the most part. His interaction with Padme is embarrassing.

Eighth of all, the pod race was too long. E 'was great visually, but I get the impression that George Lucas wanted to show off just what can be done with CGI technology, Which brings me to my next point ...

Ninth of all, there were too CGI. George Lucas fell in love with CGI technology and overused it. Whytechnology in the galaxy far, far away is far more sophisticated than in the prequel episodes IV, V and VI. It makes no sense.

Overall, the film is just OK. There are some strengths in it, but the negatives outweigh the positives. Some of the positives are the soundtrack of John Williams, which I think is one of the best scores in all six movie saga, high intensity lightsabre fight with Kenobi, Jinn and Maul, and the battle scenes on Naboo arevisual impact (just pretend Jar Jar is not in those scenes). I also like a lot of costumes, such as the arsenal of Queen Amidala.

I was glad that George Lucas bounced back and went back out with Episode II - Attack of the Clones, and even better, Episode III - Revenge of the Sith.




Horror Movies Customer Reviewsmediocrity with a few enjoyable moments - Dream's Raven - USA
When this film was released in 1999, was one of the most overrated film events I had ever experienced. Too bad the movie itself is not at all. He introduced the characters and plot elements that proved important later in the series and this is good. I just wish it had it done with a story more interesting and better quality. And no Jar Jar Binks. He is the most annoying! I'm glad that all but eliminated in the other prequels. Yet, the scenes of actionAt the end were pretty sweet, and the sequence of race was exciting. Overall, I'd say this was a disappointing film.













Relate Horror Movies Products




Tuesday, August 24, 2010

The Fog (Widescreen Unrated Edition)

Horror Movies The Fog (Widescreen Unrated Edition)







Horror Movies List Price : $9.95

Horror Movies Offer Price :


$1.85

Horror Movies Brand : Sony


Horror Movies Model :


Availability : Usually ships in 1-2 business days


____________________________________________________________________________________________




The Fog (Widescreen Unrated Edition) Overview


From producer John Carpenter comes the all-new retelling of his terror classic, The Fog. Tom Welling (TV's Smallville), Maggie Grace (TV's Lost) and Selma Blair (Hellboy) star in this senses-shattering tale of demonic retribution, directed by Rupert Wainwright (Stigmata) and written by Cooper Layne. Trapped within an eerie mist, the residents of Antonio Bay have become the unwitting victims of a horrifying vengeance. One hundred years ago, a ship carrying lepers was purposely lured onto the rocky coastline and sunk, drowning all aboard. Now they're back, long-dead mariners who've waited a century for their revenge. Seeking out the decendents of those reponsible for their deaths, they lurk enshrouded within a supernatural fog of terror. Beware, any and all who stand in their way.





Horror Movies Customer Reviews


Horror Movies Customer ReviewsTom Welling, Maggie Grace and Selma Blair star in this 2005 horror
remake of John Carpenter. On it's 100th anniversary, a city
is haunted by a mysterious fog of vengeful ghosts. This remake
is pretty good, but the original is better. This DVD is beautiful photo
and extra cleaner sound. I still recommend this.



Horror Movies Customer ReviewsIt's Ok - kim reviews -
I saw this when it was in the theater years ago and I liked it. but now that I'm old and I watch it now doesn't seem to do anything for me. okay I mean there's nothing really wrong with it. I guess now wish that the film was more frightening. But as fans of Tom Tom welling and have done good work in this nothing special but it was good. and I saw the orignal and I peripherals than this but still nothing special just ok.




Horror Movies Customer ReviewsTerrible character development, contrived, retch inducing remake. - Ratspit - California, United States
I'm going to go in and out on a ledge here and say that there were a couple of positive things for the film. The camera work was pretty average, and the actors were, well, they were average. Neither here nor there. And with a story like this, having aspects Average is not good enough and it hurts as well and already disputed photos.

But what literally drag the few positive aspects of this film down is the character development of all terrible things happen where amatter of convenience, convention and forced circumstances. The author of the film is so bad that it brings everything to a terrible state. Not only does not care who lives or dies in this film, but simply does not care about what is happening at all. Although all aspects of the threatening evil they face is taken away in the film for being too humanized. Until retch inducing final.

There are many people here have described better than me. I just saw thisfilm last night (I think I paid $ 3 for it all) and that was a total waste. I was not expecting anything amazing knowing that it was a remake. But even with my low expectations, I was stunned how put together and how everything has been invented here. He was very happy it ended.

All they have done in this film was to hit the key scenes, and add some special effect again, it is striking that felt much like effects and not any kind of threat feared in the film.

One ofthe worst remake I have ever seen. And I actually liked the remake of Assault on Precinct 13.




Horror Movies Customer ReviewsI wished some fog rolled in when this was on tv - Shaun E. Phillips - london, ontario
So finally I saw this on TV and in two minutes I knew he was going to be a horrible movie, so my companion and I just made fun of it. The plot is dumb, there is no atmosphere like the original and there is nothing worse when an attempt to make a movie "I figure out what is happening 'story that ends up being just dumb dumb dumb! Its not even good enough to make fun of films D status. Only watch this if you do not taste of anything and look at what the silent film companies shootingyou ....















Relate Horror Movies Products




Thursday, June 3, 2010

The Hitcher (Widescreen Edition)

The Hitcher (Widescreen Edition) Review



To begin, I am by these idiots, give away the whole plot a tired, instead of reviewing the film. Every movie I checked out, there are at least 5 idiots who always give everything, and even talk about the film (yes, you). So, with that, read on if you're still interested.

This film is classified as a thriller / horror. I would say that is rather a action-adventure/thriller 's. Sure, you'll see blood and gore, but for the most part, this is aEdge-of-your-seat-ride of an action film. If it helps, I would say that this film has more action as a typical action movie. If you've got your typical movie, about two hours of screen time and cut all unnecessary BS jacked full of action, then you have "The Hitcher."

The plot is simple seeems, and unknown actors do not give the best performance, but the film is still great, no matter what. If you are tired of the current situation of horrorgenre films of the last eight years, then you might take pleasure in this film. During the so-called typical thriller / horror film to follow the same, predictable, lame story, this things a bit 'different. Furthermore, production, camera angles and shots are all first class. This is a film that is not painful to watch because it is not correct, shot or the sound was gone. film production was done right. How can other reviewers noted, the complaintsEverything about the story, and film production.

The Bottom Line: Kick-a ** movie you watch again and again, surely a surprise hit for me. I did not expect a new movie to be this good.

NOTE: Additional features are behind the scenes, making of movies and, for those who want it.

----" The true critic "




The Hitcher (Widescreen Edition) Overview


A road trip takes a deadly turn in this terrifying thriller about a young couple (Sophia Bush and Zachary Knighton) tormented by a psychotic hitchhiker (Sean Bean) who forces them to face their fears head-on. The open road becomes a battleground of blood and metal in the race to reveal the chilling truth about this relentless killer. No one knows who he is, what he's after, or how to stop this "truly twisted villain"*. Watch the madness unfold with intense edge-of-your-seat chase sequences drive this sinister film to a deadly ending you won't soon forget!


The Hitcher (Widescreen Edition) Specifications


20 years is a long time in the lifeline of movie plot-arc necessities. It's also a pretty big generational stretch in the lives of audience demographics, which may be part of the reason the producers of this remake of the 1986 cult horror classic felt the need to update the original spare mano-a-mano backbone into a girl-and-mano-a-mano. The Twilight Zone-ish setup is still a pretty neat idea: regular guy on a lonely highway picks up a hitchhiker who turns out to be a psychopathic killer with some very unsettling supernatural might. Fans of the original could hardly hope for a demon villain with such creepy charisma as Rutger Hauer. But Sean Bean makes a respectable replacement, with his understated stare and stewing rage that brings a new brand of hair-raising devilry to the role of hitcher John Ryder. The lone "good guy" originated by a boyish C. Thomas Howell has been upgraded to a lovesick couple. In a twisty touch, Jim (Zachary Knighton, sorta unknown) and Grace (Sophia Bush, of One Tree Hill fame) trade gender roles, with Jim turning wimpy and feminine and Grace becoming a shotgun-toting testoster-ette. The body count's a little higher and the gore factor increased by the power of 20 (years), but some of the original film's set pieces remain much the same-- body-snapping case in point being an 18-wheeler being put to use as a old-fashioned torture rack. While the original might have placed a bit more emphasis on the philosophical and existential elements of evil passing from soul to soul, it wasn't exactly an intellectual thrill ride. Likewise, 2007's The Hitcher is no art film, and it can't be faulted for choosing fright and might for audiences that are always looking for bigger and more elaborate splats for their horror entertainment buck. And if you stick out your thumb for this one, expect plenty of splat. --Ted Fry

Available at Amazon Check Price Now!




*** Product Information and Prices Stored: Jun 03, 2010 12:58:04

t shirts mens