Amazon.com

This problematic thriller boasts several inspired elements, especially intelligent, committed performances by leads Ewan McGregor and Ashley Judd, both of whom have become hot commodities. Fans should definitely investigate their incisive work here, even if McGregor and Judd's talents are ultimately cast into a lost cause.

Judd plays a black-widow serial murderer named Joanna, who is systematically seducing and killing men who, in one way or another, are outside the ordinary. (Among her victims is a blind mulimillionaire, played by Patrick Bergin, and a nasty loser portrayed, surprisingly, by Jason Priestley.)McGregor is on board as a British intelligence agent who happens to be following her. Referred to as "the Eye," McGregor's operative is a haunted man abandoned years before by his wife and daughter. His isolation is such that he holds imaginary conversations with the latter, and she advises him to take pity on Joanna and protect her even as she carries on with her monstrous mission.

That's precisely what he does, at a distance, ushering in comparisons to Hitchcock's classics about voyeurism and obsession, particularly Vertigo and Rear Window. (Allusions to Francis Coppola's TheConversation are unavoidable as well.) But despite the great material (the 1980 source novel by MarcBehm was highly praised by The New York Times) and a fascinating cast (including Geneviève Bujold and k.d. lang),Eye of the Beholder bogs down in Stephan Elliott's often thoughtless, obvious direction. Elliott (Priscilla, Queen of the Desert) grinds down several members of the cast by insisting on dreary, one-note performances, and he makes a long movie seem even longer by telegraphingstory twists and other developments long before they happen. Justice would be served if one could extract Judd and McGregor's appearances here and graft them onto a better movie, but so it goes.--Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (168)

Strangely Bewitching, Thoroughly Engrossing Film
This film is all about tone and mood and introversion. It's not the follow along plot line that we are used to in American cinema, but something much more surreal. The plot is intriguing, exciting, with the main characters capturing your interest right away as opposites with similar pain. I suppose what makes this a five star film to me is that it's like reading a really intense book (though I haven't read the book this is based on as of yet). You become submerged in the story, in the atmosphere... the credits come up and you're still trapped inside the film, full of contradicting emotions and ideas. I find that any movie that haunts me after I've seen it is rare. Having worked in a video store for four years, I've seen a great deal of movies and those rare few that can encapsulate you into thier world entirely are like strange jewels scattered among the same shelves with the usual gravel. I recommend this movie whole-heartedly, yet believe it is best viewed alone, perferably at night... might as well induldge yourself, after all it's about being in the dark, alone, watching someone else.
Don't expect anything ordinary or predictable about this plot. The characters are flawed creatures whose moves and motives change in a consistantly realistic way. The two characters actually switch roles as the film progresses. It's fascinating material.
Alright. Enough praise. Rent it. Why not? It's only a buck or two (unless you're going to some hideous chain store).
Clear your head and expect to get sucked in. Whether or not you like it or not, you'll be hypnotised...

Only one thing went right with this movie - Acting.
The movie follows Eye (Ewan McGregor)a man who just lost his wife and daughter and is a British Intelligence agent as he is put on an assignment to follow the son of a senior British Official. Along the way he finds out that the British Official's son gets murdered by a woman by the name of Joanna Eris (Ashley Judd). Eye now trails her and along the way begins to fall for her. The more he learns about her the more he realizes that she is a never ending mystery.

The acting was superb, for a film that went nowhere. It was amazing how there is little to no chemistry between Eye and Joanna. The only thing that kept me watching was Judd's acting. The movie seemed like it ended where the middle should have been. The backround information was vague on both character's part. The whole movie evolved around a chase between a killer and the man pursuing the killer the sad thing is that it went nowhere from there.

Overall:

Visuals: 3
Acting: 4
Directon: 3
Story: 3

My eyes were closed. Zzzzzzzzz!
I have to say that this movie was the worst movie I have ever seen, period. It just didn't make any sense. It probably just had hidden meaning that I never got. Don't rent it, don't buy it, don't even borrow it from anybody. Oh, and I'm not really from Greece.

You'll Shoot Your Eye Out, Kid!
You would think that with a hundred or more terrible reviews of this film posted, one might as well just leave it alone. But, no, the movie was exactly THAT bad to provoke another negative response, at least from me. Who had the brilliant idea to film a thinly plotted espionage thriller as if it was a student art film? And artsy it certainly tries to be. The plot follows a neurotic British agent across the world as he becomes more and more enamored of a sociopathic, yet emotionally wounded, femme fatale on whom he has been spying. There is no rhyme or reason, even in the wide span of human desire and emotion, to explain many of the events and incidents that happen between the two or even why, other than sheer insanity, he is drawn to her in such a creepy stalker type fashion. The movie certainly won't tell you anything. It is too "high brow" for that and would rather show you fancy camera work and snow globe after snow globe. One gets the impression that the director is trying to impress you while completely forgetting that he is filming a trashy romantic spy novel (thus the scenes with a topless Mz. Judd would be defined as being "tastefully done" and "necessary" rather than tawdry and exploitative). You may sit around and discuss the nuamces of this "film" over a latte, but it doesn't erase the fact that it is simply dull and dumb, faulty advertising or no.
Oddly enough, there is an alternate ending on the DVD which, while not redeeming the film, at least ends it in a traditional Hollywood fashion and is a little more satisfying than what those in the theater saw. It is an additional scene where Ewan meets up, rather conveniently, with his long lost daughter. It is set up in the story that he has never seen his daughter before and has had to pick out which girl was his from a school photo of an entire class. He believed so strongly that the girl he chose was the right one that she appears throughout the film as a phantom of his imagination. It actually adds quite a bit of dimension and pathos to his character to find out in the ending that was cut, that he picked the wrong girl. I felt better about the viewing after watching this until I remembered that somebody decided to cut this scene for release, probably because it gave a little too much explanation and insight to a film that tried its hardest to offer absolutely none.
Even if the whole topless issue piqued your interest a few paragraphs back, trust me, it isn't worth it. Watching paint dry isn't the same thing as viewing a painting. That statement isn't as profound as it is nonsensical--like the whole concept of this film.

WHEREIN LIES THE BEAUTY?
EYE OF THE BEHOLDER is one of those films that revels in its artistic vacuum. Sure, director Stephan Elliott gives us some moody visuals, appealing camera angles and two performances by Ashley Judd and k.d. lang that far outclass the movie. Ewan McGregor's loneliness is so telegraphed and forced he becomes a mere tool in the film. And ultimately in spite of its artistic merits, where does it end? Why would anyone fall in love with a serial killer; his wife and daughter left him--so what, life goes on. His obsession with her, in my opinion, does not justify wanting to "save" her. She's coldblooded, heartless and intrinsically selfish. Lonely--it's her choice, just as it is his. The ending...why in the world is Judd so upset that McGregor knows what she's done?
Ashley has gone on to make better movies; she's a very good actress. Too bad the script didn't use her better. ... Read more

Reviews (19)

Where's The PLOT?
Arrival was well constructed and had a plot or at least a basic plot. The acting was very well done. Now; as for Arrival 2, it would have been best for them (writers)to have remained back in another galaxy far far far away. Patrick has done much better work in the past. The visual effects were well (the scene where Patrick attempts to smash through the locked glass doors has a sense of humor. The glass door had obviously been scared! The glass door is cracked and ready to shatter before it is assaulted by Patrick's panicking throw. (Film editors miss) The writer could learn a little something from successful screen writers of such films as Alien and it's follow ups or the nightmare on Elm streets (excluding part 2 the worst). Keeping with the original story line and still able to make it a completely separate individualized movie worthy of its predecessor. Well better luck next time if you dare. It really had potential of becoming a brilliant successor. Write and learn.

Arrival is very good sci-fi; Arrival II on the other hand...
Arrival is one of the better sci-fi films of the 90's and deserves 4 stars in my book, but consider the low-budget sequel, Arrival II, a forgettable bonus.

The Arrival offers up an engrossing, paranoid and believable storyline involving aliens among us who have sinister plans for the planet, at our expense. Charlie Sheen, despite being relegated to that merely-average-actor purgatory, does a decent job as a radio astronomer working for JPL who discovers an unearthly radio message which leads him to Mexico to uncover the strange secret behind a series of mysterious power plants cropping up in third world countries, and their connection with accelerated global warming. Directory David Twohy does an admirable job with the special effects considering the low budget. This film got an undeserved bad rap. More realistic than that mindless "Armageddon"/"ID4" Hollywood dross. As for Arrival II, well, it pretty much destroys what could have been a worthy sequel.

An interesting sci fi thriller and a disappointing sequel
I think they put "The Arrival" (4 stars) and "Arrival 2" (2 stars) on the two sides of the same DVD because they knew that was the only way anybody would ever get around to watching the lame sequel to a pretty good science fiction film. In "The Arrival" writer-director David Twohy comes up with an interesting culprit to explain global warming. The 1996 thriller begins with scientist Ilana Green (Lindsay Crouse) finding something in Antarctica that should not be there. Meanwhile, the hero of our tale, radio astronomer named Zane Zaminski (Charlie Sheen with a goatee), is working on a S.E.T.I. project by looking where nobody in their right mind should be looking, in the FM band. To his surprise and the shock of his colleague, Cal (Richard Schiff), he finds something there. This could be the biggest scientific discovery of the 20th century by Zane's boss, Phil Gordian (Ron Silver), not only refuses to get excited, he destroys the evidence. Then some strange guys in suits show up to make sure they have all of the evidence.

Clearly Zane has discovered something he is not supposed to know about. But part of the problem is that he has no clue what he has stumbled upon or why it should get people killed. The other key part of the problem is that Zane is now unemployed and no longer has access to a gigantic radio telescope. So he has to, basically, build one, which is how "The Arrival" lets you know that Twohy has paid attention to the science of the story (okay, I know nothing about science and this could all be nonsense, but there is an effort being made to connect the scientific dots). Zane effective does build his own radio telescope, and if this new phase of his old obsession has made him lose his girl friend, Char (Teri Polo), at least he has Kiki (Tony T. Johnson) the smart street kid who lives next door to take up the slack.

Of course the audience gets to figure things out a bit before Zane does, but then he is distracted by the most ingenious attempts to kill someone is bath tub I have seen since "Final Destination." I checked out this film because I saw one of Twohy's more recent efforts, "Below," and again he shows some creativity in presenting the conventions of the science fiction-thriller genre. Sheen's performance is an interesting mix of paranoia and anger, sometimes switching back and forth between the two in an instance if somebody looks at him funny or is just funny looking. I did not bite on the obvious red herring as to who the ultimate villain was in "The Arrival," but I did not see the final revelation coming either, so that is a good thing. Ultimately, I did not find "The Arrival" to be a classic science fiction film, but for a modern version of the "B" movie it is very good.

Unfortunately the 1998 sequel, "The Arrival II," makes it clear from the start that things are going to go awry. We get a news report that Zane has died under mysterious circumstances while hiding out with the Eskimos. Every since Newt and Hicks were killed during the opening credits of "Aliens3" I have a visceral reaction to similar attempts to clear the decks for the new characters in the new film. However, it turns out that before his death Zane sent packets of information about the alien menace to a few key individuals, including his half-brother, Jack Addison (Patrick Muldoon). He has to be a blood relation because that makes things personal as opposed to merely being concerned with the fate of the world. Those who received the packages from beyond gathered in a meat locker, where Jack meets reporter Bridget Riordan (Jane Sibbett), and Professor Nelson Zarcoff (Michael Sarrazin). It looks like we might be assembling a team of intelligent people in key positions who will be able to work together to stop the menace. But, no, this is going to be primarily a chase film.

The biggest problem with this sequel is that once you understand what the aliens can do and where this script has them embedded in the government, then it is really game over, they win, hope you use really heavy sun screen in the world to come. But on a more intimate level as much as the first film plays fair with the science and the audience, this one insists on yanking our chains. In the first film there is a wonderful sequence where Zane, denied access to radio telescopes, creates his own by hooking up neighborhood satellite dishes that he can use in the dead of night when their owners are asleep. This might be nonsense, but in the context of the film it works. In this one Jack is a computer hacker who can work his magic on the alien computer when in "reality" he would be lucky to figure out how to turn it on let alone do significant programming.

This was Mark David Perry's first script and given the detail and flair of Twohy's original what we have here just pales in comparison, even with a gratuitous nude scene thrown into the mix early on. There is not much the actors can do with this mess and there are few times in the film when they come close to catching the appropriate emotions of the moment since the script keeps insisting they be a step behind in figuring out what is happening. As I said, the only reason to watch "The Arrival II" (a.k.a. "The Second Arrival") is that it is not that hard to flip over the DVD. However, you really would be better off just watching the first side twice.

Arrival 2-bad, but somehow still kind of watchable.
(warning: review will give spoilers for the original The Arrival, a great sci-fi thriller that I enthusiastically recommend)

The Arrival II is an unnecessary follow-up to the original, an inventive and suspenseful sci-fi thriller. Of course, unnecessary follow-ups are a rule of thumb, so a sequel to The Arrival seemed pretty inevitable, especially when you consider its ending. Too bad this "continuation" lacks all the qualities of its predecessors, namely in good writing, acting, and inspired direction. I actually purchased the Arrival II on DVD...as it was a double feature with the original. Before I even popped the film in, I was expecting ...from the first minute, so the best thing I can say is that the movie turned out to be a bit more watchable than I expected.

The Arrival II is set in Montreal, two months after the events of the original. Radio astronomer Zane Zaminski has died of an apparent heart attack, but he did manage to send out info of the alien invasion to his most trusted colleagues, as well as to his stepbrother, Jack Addison (Patrick Muldoon), and a news reporter (Jane Sibbett, Ross' lesbian ex-wife from Friends). This group becomes the targets of the aliens, until the only survivors are Muldoon and Sibbett, who go on the run together and try to expose the aliens' nefarious plans.

The Arrival II suffers distinctly from a lack of freshness, which is much needed in a sequel that's meant to continue a running story. All the material we have here is pretty much repeat. Basically, we know there are aliens out there disguised as human beings and they're whole goal is to terraform the Earth and mold it into an environment suitable for their own colonization. Oh, and let's not forget that spherical object with a strong vacuum pull.

Like the original, we've got our "intelligent" protagonist (we find this out because everyone keeps telling him he's smarter than he thinks) and blonde chick that plays as love interest. Problem is, these two are played by Patrick Muldoon and Jane Sibbett, neither of whom I've seen in anything on film or TV that suggests they can act. Muldoon is mostly expressionless, though occasionally has that "whoa, dude" act that would give Freddie Prinze, Jr. a run for his money. Sibbett is simply dreadful as the reporter. Let's put it this way, those who found Courtney Cox unconvincing as Gail Weathers in the Scream series will be shouting "Come back! All is forgiven!" The other performances aren't worth noting, except maybe Catherine Blythe, who gives the movie its sole bit of very gratuitous nudity.

The script has little to none of the intelligence of the original and it often mistakes scientific mumbo-jumbo as smart screenwriting. The plot's got a lot of twists and turns, mostly involving a guessing game of who's human and who's not. None of these little revelations are the slightest bit surprising, and they might even induce a few scoffs here and there.

The special effects on display range from pretty bad to hilariously awful, the worst bit probably being when one of the aliens reveals its true identity. There are a lot of other clunkers, such as the cheesy-looking holographic displays and the destruction of a power plant in the film's conclusion. Yeah, visual effects themselves usually don't determine a movie's quality, but they sure don't help the film here.

Directed by Kevin S. Tenney, the same guy who gave us the fun Night of the Demons, but has yet to have helmed anything worth seeing since then. For some reason, though, The Arrival II is still somewhat watchable (meaning you won't want to stab yourself in the eye), probably because the concept of aliens disguised as humans is intriguing enough on its own. Too bad this suspenseless and absurd sequel can't capitalize on the original's unique ideas.
* 1/2 out of *****

Arrival - 3 stars...Arrival II - junk! NOT PG13~~ RATED R!
...these two movies are distinctly different, and only Arrival I is PG13. Arrival II, however, is rated R and contains an unecessary and EXPLICIT SEX scene with full frontal nudity during and after. This had nothing to do with the movie plot and since it was already an enormous flop from the first one, only tended to degrade it worse. If these were separate movies, I'd keep one and trash the other. As it is, I'm stuck for having bought them as a dual dvd. Don't waste your money. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Awesome movie!!!
This movie is great, I was very entertained by it. Im a big Lundgren fan anyway, and it was cool to see him without a gun every once in awhile in a movie. The acting was very good i thought, he did awesome as he always does. The story and the plot was really awesome, and the Biblical references were great on the key and so on. God works in mysterious ways, well check this movie out its great!

Pretty Bad
This movie is really really a stinker. All the action is poorly done, and comes off even cheasier then it should. Most of the acting is horrible, and the story is bland. Nothing in this movie does what it should (hello it can't even keep its religions straight). I would say that it was because of a low budget, but the movie had $12,000,000. They could at least have made some of the fights look good, but sadly no. If you are in need of a good horror movie rent "Kolobos" or "Bloody Murder" (the latter is super cheesy and low budget but is way better then this movie). Try something else because this is a pretty lame movie. Although it is still better then "End Of Days".

worst movie I have ever seen
The people who made this movie evidently have never even seen a good movie. I work at a video store so I saw it for free, but I still feel cheated, I wasted an hour and a half.

Dolph Lundgren - The Minion
This movie is one of Dolph's best, for his acting and the general overall tone of the film, Dolph plays a knight templar, an ancient order of warrior monks, whose job it is to prevent a key falling into the hands of the devils minion, if this key falls into the hands of the minion, then satan will be unleashed and armageddon will be upon the world. The minion takes over bodies by staring into their eyes, so the potential enemy changes frequently. Anyway I recommend this film highly even if you are not a fan of lundgren, there is enough here to keep anyone entertained.

One of the best
I saw this movie when it was on tv . The movie realiy draws you in it has a dark look to it . Very well written and acted . Dolph give his best in this movie . I have not seens such well acting and writing in a movie since "fallen"! This movie is a must see for just about anyone . ... Read more

Reviews (3)

a somewhat bowdlerized tale of forbidden love...
Run the Wild Fields is well-acted and respectable, but also a little boring. It's about a woman[Whalley] whose husband is gone, fighting in WWII, and has been missing in action for some time. She's bringing up her daughter by herself on the family farm, when a mysterious stranger shows up and enters their lives. This is a familiar premise, and maybe this particular story is a useful corrective, in its own way, to Adrian Lyne-style melodramatic excess, of which you certainly can't accuse this picture. Still the kid [Alex Vega] is pretty good, in what could've been a treacly, insuffrably sweet role. The adults are ok too.

Hidden Treasure
I love buying movies that no one had heard of, just by reading the box. This one was a true find. Very sweet hidden love story and an all around wonderful movie.

Great
This film was good. I should say that it was a great aportunity for me to see this because Joanne Whalley(the mother),Sean Patrick Flanery(the stranger) has developed a very close friendship while the husband was in the war. I would recommend everyone to watch this film in order to spend some "Emotionnally" great time. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Hulk STILL Rules!
"Those guys aren't U.N."
This movie is Hogan's best, and dare I say one of the best "Commando"-esque movies out there! It's a funny movie- it just works. Check it out if you can find it. Good job Hulkster!!

best acting ever !
This is quite possibly the most entertaining movie ever made. The terrible acting, hot babes and IRA villains make this a great movie for those nights when you're wasted and hanging out with all of your buddies. Even though Hogan may be an awful actor, he is still funny as hell.

Hulk Hogan should just stick to wrestling
Man, someone needs to break the news to Hogan that he just cannot act. Aparently someone out there thinks that big guys with big muscles = big movie success (I.E. Arnold Schwarzenegger). The formula worked in Arnold's case. Well, Hulk is no Arnold by any means. Don't waste your time or money renting and please don't even consider buying this, or any Hogan movie for that matter. Now I know alot of people who have meet Hogan (He lives across the bay from Tampa in Clearwater) and they say he is nothing but a class act. Perfect father, husband and gentleman in general. Which is cool. He hasn't let his money go to his head, but he obviously hasn't spent any on acting lessons either.

Just Like Pro Wrestling
This movie is like professional wrestling - bad acting, lots of action, mindless and also entertaining. Plus it stars the wonderul Cyndy Preston. Check it out if you want a guilty pleasure.

All I can say is LAME
This has got to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen. It should be regulated to only be allowed to be played on public access channels. I think I became even dumber just from watching this. I guess I should expect that from any movie that Hulk Hogan is in :) ... Read more

Reviews (6)

weegee will scare u ....beware
this movie will scare u to never use the weegee. i watch it with my gf while eating some big macs and it makes the movie all that more interesting. what is it with this movies and big macs?

oh well....enjoy the movie but do not turn the lights off. also get some big macs while u watch it.

bad
this movie is very bad it isn't scary unless you are trying to find out why it was made. What ever happened to real suspence? we need another hitchcock!

Peter Svatek's Witchboard: The Possession
Ouija-nator Kevin Tenney hands over the directorial reins and takes a co-writer credit in a lousy film that will hopefully end this little series. Once again, if you have not seen the first two entries, do not worry, this film has nothing to do with them.

Brian (David Nerman) is a recently fired stock broker. He and his beautiful wife Julie (Locky Lambert) move into an apartment in a gothic building in order to save costs while Brian job hunts. Immediately, he meets eccentric landlord Francis (Cedric Smith), who has a strange collection of fertility artifacts and a fascination with the Ouija. He confides to Brian that he made his money by consulting the board on commodities purchases. Brian dabbles, makes some scratch, and is hooked on the nice old man.

We find out Julie is a most unlikely cultural anthropology professor. She has a cute best friend, Lisa (Donna Sarrasin), and confides in her often. One pleasant afternoon, Francis gives Brian an old ring, tells him he always wanted children, then throws himself off a balcony, impaling himself on an ornate gateway. At his funeral, Francis' crazy ex-wife bursts in and desecrates the corpse to "make sure he is dead."

So far, so good. We have a couple of gory scenes, and even a sex scene thrown in at the beginning...and then everything goes downhill.

Brian steals the Ouija board and borrows money from a shady money launderer for his next Ouija-inspired purchase. He thinks the board is wrong, and cannot pay the man back. Before Brian can tell him about the board, the crook is attacked by his own butterfly collection in an inspired but poorly realized scene. Later, Brian tries to burn the Ouija but is killed by the board. His spirit is trapped in a mirror and Francis' now evil spirit inhabits Brian's body, all in an effort to get Julie pregnant.

Evil Brian brings many of Francis' old things into his apartment, including mirrors that Good Brian can use to watch Julie. Soon, Evil Brian begins to change, much to Julie's consternation. He wants to get her pregnant, she refuses, and he makes the demon moves on Lisa. Finally, Good Brian gets Lisa to see Francis' crazy ex-wife, who tells them how to defeat Evil Brian in a goofy finale, involving the old ring, a crossbow, and bad special effects.

As with all the "Witchboard" films, the cast tries to work material that just is not there. Too many questions remain. Why did Francis pick Julie of all people? Why did Evil Brian/Francis bring all of Francis' old stuff into the apartment, knowing Good Brian would be able to communicate with Julie? The main villain is a demon, but not much more is given about who he is or where he came from. Julie is a anthropology professor, but this knowledge adds nothing to the plot. She recognizes some of the dead landlord's pieces, but that is all. The only previous knowledge that helps her defeat the villain involves an allergy to shrimp...don't ask.

Svatek's cinematography is mostly earth hues, setting off the bloody scenes. He also must rely on some really cheesy computer animated effects (like morphing), and reverse filming. The butterfly collection attack probably looked great on paper, but the budget is not there to make it convincing to the audience. The Ouija board here is the best looking of the series, black and gothic.

All in all, this entry is the worst of the three films. It came out in 1995, and there have not been any "Witchboard" monikered films since. Of course, as long as Tenney is still working in Hollywood, there is probably a germ of an idea somewhere. That is one germ I hope does not spread. I do not recommend this.

This is rated (R) for strong physical violence, mild sexual violence, gore, strong profanity, strong female nudity, strong sexual content, sexual references, and adult situations.

Fairfield, CA
Finally a movie taking place in 'the field' Fairfield, CA.

yummy goodness
I like to make love to cheeseburgers while watching this film. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Hulk STILL Rules!
"Those guys aren't U.N."
This movie is Hogan's best, and dare I say one of the best "Commando"-esque movies out there! It's a funny movie- it just works. Check it out if you can find it. Good job Hulkster!!

best acting ever !
This is quite possibly the most entertaining movie ever made. The terrible acting, hot babes and IRA villains make this a great movie for those nights when you're wasted and hanging out with all of your buddies. Even though Hogan may be an awful actor, he is still funny as hell.

Hulk Hogan should just stick to wrestling
Man, someone needs to break the news to Hogan that he just cannot act. Aparently someone out there thinks that big guys with big muscles = big movie success (I.E. Arnold Schwarzenegger). The formula worked in Arnold's case. Well, Hulk is no Arnold by any means. Don't waste your time or money renting and please don't even consider buying this, or any Hogan movie for that matter. Now I know alot of people who have meet Hogan (He lives across the bay from Tampa in Clearwater) and they say he is nothing but a class act. Perfect father, husband and gentleman in general. Which is cool. He hasn't let his money go to his head, but he obviously hasn't spent any on acting lessons either.

Just Like Pro Wrestling
This movie is like professional wrestling - bad acting, lots of action, mindless and also entertaining. Plus it stars the wonderul Cyndy Preston. Check it out if you want a guilty pleasure.

All I can say is LAME
This has got to be one of the worst movies I have ever seen. It should be regulated to only be allowed to be played on public access channels. I think I became even dumber just from watching this. I guess I should expect that from any movie that Hulk Hogan is in :) ... Read more