Reviews (202)

The DTS version rocks the home theater!
This is the first disc I bought since I got the home theater set up and this one you won't believe! Ok, I'll admit the story here is a little weak, but this isn't supposed to be a "Raging Bull" type of character study. This is a very entertaining, state of the arts effects, fun film. The sound from this DTS version is extraordinary. The separation of the 5.1 is incredible. The twister sequences will blow you away. You feel the sound and the fury! The only other disc that compares is the Saving Private Ryan one. For you home theater fanatics, this is your film.. you'll see it, hear it, and feel it. This disc also has some great extras like director commentary and a cool documentary of how it was made. All in all, it's not one of the finest 100 or 200 movies ever made, but you may find yourself watching it over and over for the experience of it! You'll love it! The movie itself is about a 3, but the DVD DTS is about a 5!

I like it anyway...
OK, I've read the other reviews...I think "Twister" is entertaining, with great CGI effects. The plot is intense, and most sub-plots are silly. Helen Hunt is beautiful, and quite a good actress. Bill Paxton is customarily hammy. Still I enjoy this film as entertainment. It's interesting to note that a lot of our current best actors today got a start in this film. Philip Seymour Hoffman, in particular, shows great flair, as well as Jeremy Davies, playing the wimp. Director Jan de Bont seems to use Alan Ruck a lot, and for good reason: He's talented. I was disappointed when Jamie Gertz won the Razz Award as "Worst Supporting Actress" in '96. I thought she gave a fine performance...her character was written to be reactionary, and I thought her every nuance was touching and sincere. As far as writing, well, some of the soap opera stuff could've been cut short. Jan de Bont, with all the films he could've chosen, showed scenes from Kubrick's "The Shining" (at the drive-in), and Cukor's "A Star is Born" (before Aunt Meg's house is blown away). If these are homages, he has good taste. And Lois Smith was solid as the aunt; I've liked her since she played Nicholson's sister in "Five Easy Pieces". A fine character actress. With this stuff in mind, I watch "Twister" often, and enjoy it each time. Why be so analytical? It was made as mass-marketed entertainment and, on that level, it succeeds. Doesn't seem to matter that it was also on quite a few "10 Best" lists in '96. I like it a lot; if you don't, maybe you should get out more...

the suck zone II
In the movie, the twister destroys a drive-in while The Shining is showing on the screen. One could only imagine that this amounted to a review of The Shining. I don't agree with this review. The Shining is a very good movie.

the suck zone
I rented this movie thinking it was going to be a remake of The Wizard of Oz. Boy what a letdown. Come to think of it I had the same experience watching Zardoz.
While watching this movie, it became clear to me that "actors" are people who have been randomly selected to get in front of a camera and pretend to do things. The characters say things like, "these satellite readings have increased in the last ten minutes" "Keep monitoring this pattern" "Ok" Then there is a tossing aside of sodas and a melee of excited, riot-like running toward vehicles. Then there is more dialog, like "We're not going to be able to intercept!" "No, we will. Hang on!" "Are you out of your mind?"
"We gotta get outta here!" "I know!" This last dialog is screamed over the sound of lots of wind. The movie appears to be about a weather phenomenon wherein lots of wind causes a general sucking effect: the script sucks, the acting sucks, the effects even pretty much suck.

The tornadoes alone save this movie.
I have had interest in the concept of severe weather for my entire life and had high expectations for the movie "Twister" and the result cuts boths ways for me.

The movie is of a married meteoroligist couple who are in the midst of getting a divorce, and have not gotten along for a very long time and they make a new invention that they believe will help them see what it looks like, inside a full blown tornado. They have ambition to deploy this new technology to disperse 'lighter than air' radio transmitters into a twister and record the signals to see what it may look like inside a tornado.

The special effects when the tornadoes strike are absolutely awesome not to mention the chase scenes especially towards the ending when the couple speed away from a tornado drive right through a house that was thrown onto the countryside road by a tornado (Impossible in real life) and the other of when a drive-in movie screen showing a snippet of the movie "The Shining" being ripped apart by a F5 tornado in the middle of the night.

"Twister" though suffers from several things and I can sometimes see where some of the detractors are coming from when regarding this movie. While the action scenes and special effects are amazing, the movie's plot lacks a good flow and the film drags on and on in several places and one scene which is just like a boring day at home would've been better left out altogether. Plus the characters are very unconvincing and lack personality.

Even for me who doesn't mind ocassional deviation from the laws of physics in movies, some of the tornadoe scenes are completely unrealistic. For example as I said earlier in a review, there is no way a twister could fling a whole house across a countryside road or even roll the whole intact house across the countryside because most houses are built on foundations and strong tornadoes in real life would shed houses into tiny pieces or otherwise reduce them to ruin. An F5 tornado would leave nothing of a house behind and can even rip the pavement off a road if the conditions warrant. \

This movie is nonetheless worth watching just for the tornadoes alone but this movie could have been a lot better than it turned out to be. While having it's share of flaws Roland Emmerich's "The Day After Tomorrow" is far superior on many levels and corrects a lot of the flaws of "Twister" in my opinion. ... Read more

Reviews (150)

2.6 out of 5
After seeing the widely-shown trailers for this film, I have to say I expected a boring Indiana Jones rip-off. Well, it DID have some annoying Jones rip-off sequences, but hey - other than that, it surpassed my expectations.

Which still doesn't mean it's good.

Very attractive Angelina Jolie returns as Lara Croft, the female Indiana Jones-type hero. This time she's after Pandora's Box. Teaming up with an "old friend" (Gerard Butler), Croft must race against time to stop multimillionaire Jonathan Reiss (Ciaran Hinds) from reaching the ancient box - if she fails, the world will fall into Reiss' hands.

The film was no more entertaining than the first film, although the action was slightly better, and the overall film was a little more well-made. The soundtrack flunks in being as good as the first, but the acting's improved (except for the "It's more powerful than you could ever imagine" - that part featured some very poor acting) and the directing's better this time 'round. You see, the film's major problem is that it has all the right stuff to make a great movie - it just never does anything with it!

I love the character of Lara Croft, and enjoyed the video games, so I hope they make another film - but please, this time, let's drop the Jones routine and just make a good movie.

Give it a chance, you just might like it.
First off, I one of the minority that enjoyed the first Tomb Raider, so I walked into this one with hopes for the best, despite what the critics were saying. Critics, huh? Who needs 'em?

Angelina Jolie is radiant as ever; she's sexy, slick, and incredibly intelligent and resourceful. The part where she sucker-punches a shark is damn cool. Needless to say, Jolie is the best part of the franchise, even if her acrobatics are unrealistically perfect.

The story and acting is improved over the first. The "Cradle of Life" plot is preposterous, of course, but how it fits into the bad guy's evil plan is pretty sinister, and it makes sense with all the real world fear of chemical and biological weaponry. The villain is less of a man of action than Iain Glen in TR1, but this new guy is more sophisticated, smarter, and meaner. Gerard Butler, though half his dialogue in incomprehensible thanks to his accent, works well as Jolie's counterpart/love interest, and his character strikes me as just the kind of guy Lara Croft is likely to fall for.

The locations are beautiful to behold, especially in China and Africa. The "sky-diving over Hong Kong" sequence is just short of drool-worthy. However, some of the interior sets are just plain bland.

The action scenes are the one downer here; Jan de Bont downshifts from Simon West's starting point, and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. I wanted more from the gunfights, which seemed lethargic. My two favorite scenes in the movie are when Lara duels with Chen Lo (she defends herself with an unloaded bayonet rifle by twirling it like a trained Marine...super badass) and the CGI "Shadow Demons" sequence, which I was originally dreading, but the way the scene is edited makes it rather cool.

If you enjoyed the first Tomb Raider, check this one out. For all its flaws, Angelina is worth it. ALL HAIL ANGELINA... ANGELINA IS YOUR QUEEN...

The best tombraider movie hits the best in dvd
I love this movie, and it's better than the first. She goes to all these places, I recommend this Movie. I'm also selling mines so e-mail me at JJ_025@lycos.com

A JOLIE GOOD SHOW
This sequel to the original is more entertaining and visually interesting than the first. Jolie returns as the indefatigable Lara Croft, aided this time by Gerard Butler (Dracula 2000, Timeline), a former Marine turned mercenary/traitor. Butler and Jolie have a fairly good comraderie, although it's definitely Jolie's move every way. Ciaran Hinds (Road to Perdition, Sum of All Fears, Veronica Guerin) makes for a sturdy villain, all grimace and spit. The movie revolves around the search for the mythical Pandora's Box; Hinds plays a viral bacteriologist who can release deadly viruses and he wants the box to let loose the contents of Pandora's box as the ultimate weapon.
Jan deBont (Speed) directs with a kinetic energy, and Alan Silvestri's score is impressive.
The ending is a real shocker in some ways; in the extras, we see an alternate ending that was less visceral.
Don't know whether this series will go on but it should have a little life left?

Better than the first
Better and more enjoyable than the first film, Lara Croft, Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life is a fun escape pure and simple. Angelina Jolie reprises her role as the video game heroine in search of a mystical orb that can lead to the discovery of Pandora's Box. A maniacal super villian (and a better one than in the first film) is on it's trail as well, so Lara has to partner up with a traitorus old ally (Gerard Butler) as she travels from Greece to Hong Kong to Africa. The stunt work is electrifying and the special effects are solid, while director Jan de Bont gives the film it's own slick look rather than the amalgam look of the first film. The unbelieveably hot Jolie is great again, but you can't help but feel that she is too good for this role. All in all, Cradle of Life is a worthy action escape, and those let down by the first film should give this a look. ... Read more

Reviews (177)

Top Notch Action Film
"Die Hard" was the prototype for the 90s action film and "Speed" remains one of the best reworkings of it. It delivers enough non-stop action and thrills to satisfy even the most-demanding action fans.

Keanu Reeves (who'd have believed it before "The Matrix"?) stars as Jack Traven, LAPD SWAT commando. Traven and his partner Harry (Jeff Daniels) battle one-thumbed mad bomber Howard Payne (Dennis Hopper) throughout nearly two hours of wall-to-wall testosterone and mayhem.

The script by virgin screenwriter Graham Yost delivers not one, but three thrilling disaster stories, accomplishing that rare Hollywood miracle of actually giving the audience more than they expected.

Reeves gives a surprisingly good performance, showing uncharacteristic confidence and ease. Daniels is largely wasted and Hopper gives his stock crazed villain performance--and once again I loved it. The always delightful Sandra Bullock, co-starring as Reeve's love interest, is excellent, giving just the right touch to her scenes.

"Speed" was a remarkable directorial debut for veteran cinematographer Jan De Bont. He obviously learned a great deal while lensing pictures for Paul Verhoeven ("Basic Instinct") and John McTiernan ("The Hunt for Red October.") The action sequences and stunts in this film are as good as any you'll see. This is one movie that really delivers.

Pop Quiz Hotshot!
Remember that Simpsons episode where Homer loops a videotape of him and the guys working while they goof off "I saw this in a movie where there was a bus and it had to keep it's SPEED above 50 and if it's SPEED dropped, the bus would explode! I think it was called: The Bus That Couldn't Slow Down!" Even Homer realises the cleverness of Jan De Bont's tautly-directed action thriller.

Starring Keanu Reeves, Sandra Bullock, Dennis Hopper and Jeff Daniels, Speed is one of those rare films that comes along every now and then that proves to be better than standard fare. Essentially one big extended action scene, the film's frenetic pace makes up for the frequent plot holes. The action never lets up, creating suspense- filled set-pieces and audience excitement. The premise of a bomb on a bus that wil explode if the speed goes below 50 makes for one far-fetched but fun thrill ride.

Keanu is the quintessential gum-chewing cool guy action hero Jack Traven who, along with Annie Porter (Bullock) tries not to get blown up by a bomb that retired cop Howard Payne (Hopper) has set on the bus to get money. The entire principal cast are great, especially Hopper, whose character is reminiscent of his crazy bad guy in Red Rock West (1992). With lines like "Poor people are crazy Jack, I'm eccentric", Hopper manages to give a good performance during his rather short screen time. Plus the added quality of the always-good Daniels is first-rate. And Keanu, now best known for The Matrix, is equally cool here.

Jan DeBont's direction makes the film a taut, entertaining action ride, and surprisingly, Bullock manages to change from nervy bus passenger to a strong character by the film's conclusion. And the pulse-driven score creates even more tension and excitement. But the film is not perfect, it's predictable at times and things get rather tedious at the end, with yet another gasping of "The track's not finished!" Minor quibbles aside, the action is impressive, and Jan DeBont's visual stylishness gives a really eye-catching look. This action-fest is one of the best.

The DVD extras are amazing, with commentaries from De Bont and the crew, extended scenes, Easter Eggs (DVD Credits, Airline Version of Bus Crash), "Inside Speed Featurettes on the location, stunts and visual effects", production Design, the original Screenplay, action Sequence Featurettes on the "Bus Jump" and "Metro Rail Crash", Multi-Angle Shots with Audio, Multi-Stream Storyboards, an interview Archive with Keanu Reeves and the cast, trailers, 11 TV Spots and production notes. Impressive stuff!

I keep coming back
SPEED has been one of the handful of movies made in the last ten years that I keep coming back to again and again when I need an action fix. I think it's partly because its premise is so impossibly simple: there's a bomb on a bus that will go boom if the bus goes below 50 miles per hour. That's it. I also think it's also because for all the noise and action, it really doesn't take itself too seriously. Everyone, even the usually sulking Jeff Daniels, appears to be having a good time. And, of course, it doesn't hurt to have the maniacal Dennis Hopper performing opposite Keanu Reeves who is properly underplaying his role as HERO.

SPEED, I admit, is a no-brainer. But if I wanted to watch something cerebral and intellectual, there are plenty of others to choose from. I mean, from which to choose.

An exciting rollercoaster ride
This film is a terrific action adventure with an appealing hero and heroine, great stunts and special effects and a psycho villain who isn't as smart as he thinks he is. The movie races along through three tense episodes involving patrons on a high-rise elevator, passengers caught on a runaway city bus and a rapid transit train coursing through the dark tunnels of the under-construction Los Angeles subway system. Good-guy Jack Traven [Keanu Reeves] gets a great assist from feisty Annie Porter [Sandra Bullock] as she guides the bus on a wild ride on LA's freeways and busy streets while crazed extortionist Howard Payne [Dennis Hopper] does his best to make sure his diabolical plan doesn't fail. Even if the picture seems to borrow elements from some popular action films, this movie is a rollercoaster ride from start to finish and fans of exciting train action sequences will really enjoy the film's endgame which is a climactic struggle between good and evil.

Lift,bus,train. 16th april 2004.
A great film for the actions. It starts off in a lift that breaks down, then it goes onto a bus that once it reaches 50mile an hour, it can't go below that speed cos there is a bomb on the bus. Then in the end, the last 2 that are on the train find a way to get off, but they can't. Superb film even if you don't like any action films and shooting films. ... Read more

Reviews (177)

Top Notch Action Film
"Die Hard" was the prototype for the 90s action film and "Speed" remains one of the best reworkings of it. It delivers enough non-stop action and thrills to satisfy even the most-demanding action fans.

Keanu Reeves (who'd have believed it before "The Matrix"?) stars as Jack Traven, LAPD SWAT commando. Traven and his partner Harry (Jeff Daniels) battle one-thumbed mad bomber Howard Payne (Dennis Hopper) throughout nearly two hours of wall-to-wall testosterone and mayhem.

The script by virgin screenwriter Graham Yost delivers not one, but three thrilling disaster stories, accomplishing that rare Hollywood miracle of actually giving the audience more than they expected.

Reeves gives a surprisingly good performance, showing uncharacteristic confidence and ease. Daniels is largely wasted and Hopper gives his stock crazed villain performance--and once again I loved it. The always delightful Sandra Bullock, co-starring as Reeve's love interest, is excellent, giving just the right touch to her scenes.

"Speed" was a remarkable directorial debut for veteran cinematographer Jan De Bont. He obviously learned a great deal while lensing pictures for Paul Verhoeven ("Basic Instinct") and John McTiernan ("The Hunt for Red October.") The action sequences and stunts in this film are as good as any you'll see. This is one movie that really delivers.

Pop Quiz Hotshot!
Remember that Simpsons episode where Homer loops a videotape of him and the guys working while they goof off "I saw this in a movie where there was a bus and it had to keep it's SPEED above 50 and if it's SPEED dropped, the bus would explode! I think it was called: The Bus That Couldn't Slow Down!" Even Homer realises the cleverness of Jan De Bont's tautly-directed action thriller.

Starring Keanu Reeves, Sandra Bullock, Dennis Hopper and Jeff Daniels, Speed is one of those rare films that comes along every now and then that proves to be better than standard fare. Essentially one big extended action scene, the film's frenetic pace makes up for the frequent plot holes. The action never lets up, creating suspense- filled set-pieces and audience excitement. The premise of a bomb on a bus that wil explode if the speed goes below 50 makes for one far-fetched but fun thrill ride.

Keanu is the quintessential gum-chewing cool guy action hero Jack Traven who, along with Annie Porter (Bullock) tries not to get blown up by a bomb that retired cop Howard Payne (Hopper) has set on the bus to get money. The entire principal cast are great, especially Hopper, whose character is reminiscent of his crazy bad guy in Red Rock West (1992). With lines like "Poor people are crazy Jack, I'm eccentric", Hopper manages to give a good performance during his rather short screen time. Plus the added quality of the always-good Daniels is first-rate. And Keanu, now best known for The Matrix, is equally cool here.

Jan DeBont's direction makes the film a taut, entertaining action ride, and surprisingly, Bullock manages to change from nervy bus passenger to a strong character by the film's conclusion. And the pulse-driven score creates even more tension and excitement. But the film is not perfect, it's predictable at times and things get rather tedious at the end, with yet another gasping of "The track's not finished!" Minor quibbles aside, the action is impressive, and Jan DeBont's visual stylishness gives a really eye-catching look. This action-fest is one of the best.

The DVD extras are amazing, with commentaries from De Bont and the crew, extended scenes, Easter Eggs (DVD Credits, Airline Version of Bus Crash), "Inside Speed Featurettes on the location, stunts and visual effects", production Design, the original Screenplay, action Sequence Featurettes on the "Bus Jump" and "Metro Rail Crash", Multi-Angle Shots with Audio, Multi-Stream Storyboards, an interview Archive with Keanu Reeves and the cast, trailers, 11 TV Spots and production notes. Impressive stuff!

I keep coming back
SPEED has been one of the handful of movies made in the last ten years that I keep coming back to again and again when I need an action fix. I think it's partly because its premise is so impossibly simple: there's a bomb on a bus that will go boom if the bus goes below 50 miles per hour. That's it. I also think it's also because for all the noise and action, it really doesn't take itself too seriously. Everyone, even the usually sulking Jeff Daniels, appears to be having a good time. And, of course, it doesn't hurt to have the maniacal Dennis Hopper performing opposite Keanu Reeves who is properly underplaying his role as HERO.

SPEED, I admit, is a no-brainer. But if I wanted to watch something cerebral and intellectual, there are plenty of others to choose from. I mean, from which to choose.

An exciting rollercoaster ride
This film is a terrific action adventure with an appealing hero and heroine, great stunts and special effects and a psycho villain who isn't as smart as he thinks he is. The movie races along through three tense episodes involving patrons on a high-rise elevator, passengers caught on a runaway city bus and a rapid transit train coursing through the dark tunnels of the under-construction Los Angeles subway system. Good-guy Jack Traven [Keanu Reeves] gets a great assist from feisty Annie Porter [Sandra Bullock] as she guides the bus on a wild ride on LA's freeways and busy streets while crazed extortionist Howard Payne [Dennis Hopper] does his best to make sure his diabolical plan doesn't fail. Even if the picture seems to borrow elements from some popular action films, this movie is a rollercoaster ride from start to finish and fans of exciting train action sequences will really enjoy the film's endgame which is a climactic struggle between good and evil.

Lift,bus,train. 16th april 2004.
A great film for the actions. It starts off in a lift that breaks down, then it goes onto a bus that once it reaches 50mile an hour, it can't go below that speed cos there is a bomb on the bus. Then in the end, the last 2 that are on the train find a way to get off, but they can't. Superb film even if you don't like any action films and shooting films. ... Read more

Reviews (94)

What was so wrong with it?
My mother and I were the only two people in the theater the day that we saw Speed 2: Cruise Control. After watching the movie, I couldn't understand why so many people hated this movie. It was not a bad movie by any account, except for some discrepancies in the destruction of the cruise ship. The movie made me laugh while also giving me a dosage of suspense, thrills, and great special effects. Sandra Bullock is always a joy to watch on screen, giving each of her movies a comic, light and happy feel. The absence of Keanu Reeves is nothing to worry about, seeing as how he didn't really bring much adventure to the first movie either. Jason Patric delivers a terrific performance, and it is Willem Dafoe's character who is the epitome of insanity and hunger for revenge. I wouldn't really listen to a lot of what people had to say: this is a comical, thrill-ride movie that will have you laughing and holding your breath.

Fast Bus 2: Big Slow Ship
Speed 2: Cruise Control (1998)
Starring: Sandra Bullock, Jason Patric, Willem Dafoe
Directed By: Jan de Bont
Rated: PG-13
Running Time: 121 minutes
___________________________________________________________

On One Hand...
"Thumps up!"
-Roger Ebert

...on the Other.
"A waterlogged sequel that'll soon be bottom-feeding with Beyond the Poseidon Adventure."
-Mike Clark, USA Today
___________________________________________________________

The Love Boat meets Air Force One

Speed 2: Cruise Control was one whacked-out movie. Throwing the thrilling dramatic elements of the first film overboard, all it has left is the action...and some dude called Jason Patric.

One sure thing that can be said about this movie is its special effects are fabulous. We're talking big money effects, including that oh-so-cool finale where the Seabourn Legend (the ship) crashes into a resort town.

___________________________________________________________

The Plot

Trouble continues to follow LA citizen Annie Porter when she and her new hubby (a stone-faced Jason Patric) book a tropical cruise on the Seabourn Legend cruise ship. A crazed computer hacker (Willem Dafoe) has taken over the ship and is setting on a course to destruction...to some sort of some tanker, I guess, that would've exploded (and ends up exploding anyway, but the ship is safe, of course). So, of course, Annie and her beau attempt (meaning they will of course succeed) to save the ship and its passengers.

__________________________________________________________

The Cast

Sandra Bullock as Annie Porter
(Speed, 28 Days, Two Weeks Notice)
Ms. Bullock, easily my favorite actress, gives a good, if not great, performance, in an iffy-at-best action movie. Speed was outstanding, and it's hard to live up to that, but Sandra OWNS this movie, pretty much.

Jason Patric as Officer Alex Shaw
(Your Friends and Neighbours, Sleepers, Narc)
For one, I have no idea who this actor is, he's new to me. And I'm not likely to see any more of his movies based on his performance in this movie. Instead of Keanu Reeve's more human performance as an LAPD cop in the first movie, Patric plays his Alex Shaw (also in the LAPD) as a traditional action hero, always stone-faced and heroic. In fact, Alex Shaw is not the most interesting character in the world. Well as long as Annie's happy...

Willem Dafoe as John Geiger
(The English Patient, eXistenZ, Spider-Man)
Dafoe takes over the psycho role, vacated (and beheaded) by Dennis Hopper in the first film. He's didn't seem evil (maybe crazy) but he is rather cool, and his plot to destroy the Seabourn Legend cruise ship was inspired. Willem Dafoe is a very talented man.

Another very good performance comes comes from deaf actress Christine Firkins, who plays a deaf teenager named Drew. This movie is notable for the fact that there's not only a deaf character, but the fact that they hired a deaf actress for the part.
___________________________________________________________

So, About the Special Effects...

The effects in this movie are very, very good (they better have been, considering its supposed $110-$150 million price tag). The ship is jaw-droppingly cool, as good as the titular vessel in Titanic...unlike that movie though, Speed 2 employed an actual cruise ship (the real Seabourn Legend) in some shots (most shots of it are computer graphics). The finale in the resort town was very, very neat (I talked about this part in the first part of this review).
___________________________________________________________

So What Did I Think?

Aside from the effects, this a pretty average action movie with pretty average performances. While nowhere near as good as the first Speed movie, this sequel is glossy, silly movie-night fun (even though it thinks its a seriously heavyweight action movie).

___________________________________________________________

not bad
ok, this sequel does not live up to the standards of the first but it is very enjoyable. Sure there can be the occasional stupid dialogue here and there, but only really by one person, Willem defoe, but he did an ok job but i didnt see it for him, i saw it for the action. The action sequences really picked up when daylight came. They are good but they should have cut them shorter a bit, only because i really wanted to feel the rush like in the first, but i love the ship running into the town and the boat blowing up in the end. I think this film would have been great if Keanu had accepted to come back and they should have kept the MA rating. sandra Bullock, good as usual, Jason Patrik, well they needed somebody to fill in and he did a good job. This film does not take itself too seriously, they made it for the fans, and i liked it, just enjoy it for what it is, a pretty decent sequel.

Speed 2 needs to slow down!
The original Speed was a different kind of movie (Who would have thought a movie that took place mainly on a bus would be so good?) that for one reason or another MANY people enjoyed. Speed 2 seems to be one of those "We liked the first one so we want a sequel!" Kind of movies, and it turned out to be pretty bad. Speed 2 actually makes a Disney sequel look GOOD.

The movie centers around our heroine Annie (her role reprised by Sandra Bullock) who is taking a driving test in the beginning of the movie to get her license back for (gasp!) speeding! She has just gotten herself out of a relationship with Jack (Who was in the first one) and is now with Alex (Jason Patric). When she finds out that Alex works for the same squad that Jack works for she isn't too happy with that.

Later Alex decides to take Annie on a cruise and when they do things start off fine and dandy until a mad bomber (William Dafoe) by the name of Geiger takes over the cruise ship trapping a few passengers on board.

Let's put this one thing aside, Keanu Reeves didn't show up in this film. Surprisingly enough this one thing is what starts the film slide into ruin. Jason Patric and Sandra Bullock don't really have a whole lot of chemistry. It isn't as well developed as it was in the first Speed movie. I'm sure that even if Keanu Reeves had appeared in this movie it wouldn't have saved it from becoming a mess anyhow.

William Dafoe doesn't make for the greatest villian either (who would've thought that five years later he'd be the Green Goblin in the blockbuster hit: Spider Man?). He has the potential to be a great mad bomber but somehow he misses what the bomber in the first movie had. That would be his lack of remorse and intelligence.

Speed 2 doesn't keep on the edge of your seat like the first movie did. Speed 2 is like a Disney Sequel, not good enough for the theater. Speed 2 I can honestly say was a bad movie. An under developed plot put along with some pretty under developed characters make this movie seem like garbage.

I don't recommend this movie to anyone who liked the first one. Those who enjoyed the first movie probably won't like this one.

Defiantly not as Good as the first
it was alright, but i can't say it was better or as good as the first. i strongly recommend watching the first, then watching the second. ... Read more

Description

In LARA CROFT TOMB RAIDER –THE CRADLE OF LIFE, Pandora’s Box is said to house the most unspeakable evil ever known, and it is hidden in Africa in an area known as "The Cradle Of Life."Now, it is up to Lara Croft to find the infamous box before it falls into the hands of a maniacal Nobel Prize-winning scientist (Hinds), who’s intent on harnessing the evil power.Facing her greatest challenges yet, the intrepid tomb raider travels the world on a spectacular adventure that takes her to such exotic places as Hong Kong, Kenya, Tanzania, Greece and the Great Wall of China. ... Read more

Reviews (150)

2.6 out of 5
After seeing the widely-shown trailers for this film, I have to say I expected a boring Indiana Jones rip-off. Well, it DID have some annoying Jones rip-off sequences, but hey - other than that, it surpassed my expectations.

Which still doesn't mean it's good.

Very attractive Angelina Jolie returns as Lara Croft, the female Indiana Jones-type hero. This time she's after Pandora's Box. Teaming up with an "old friend" (Gerard Butler), Croft must race against time to stop multimillionaire Jonathan Reiss (Ciaran Hinds) from reaching the ancient box - if she fails, the world will fall into Reiss' hands.

The film was no more entertaining than the first film, although the action was slightly better, and the overall film was a little more well-made. The soundtrack flunks in being as good as the first, but the acting's improved (except for the "It's more powerful than you could ever imagine" - that part featured some very poor acting) and the directing's better this time 'round. You see, the film's major problem is that it has all the right stuff to make a great movie - it just never does anything with it!

I love the character of Lara Croft, and enjoyed the video games, so I hope they make another film - but please, this time, let's drop the Jones routine and just make a good movie.

Give it a chance, you just might like it.
First off, I one of the minority that enjoyed the first Tomb Raider, so I walked into this one with hopes for the best, despite what the critics were saying. Critics, huh? Who needs 'em?

Angelina Jolie is radiant as ever; she's sexy, slick, and incredibly intelligent and resourceful. The part where she sucker-punches a shark is damn cool. Needless to say, Jolie is the best part of the franchise, even if her acrobatics are unrealistically perfect.

The story and acting is improved over the first. The "Cradle of Life" plot is preposterous, of course, but how it fits into the bad guy's evil plan is pretty sinister, and it makes sense with all the real world fear of chemical and biological weaponry. The villain is less of a man of action than Iain Glen in TR1, but this new guy is more sophisticated, smarter, and meaner. Gerard Butler, though half his dialogue in incomprehensible thanks to his accent, works well as Jolie's counterpart/love interest, and his character strikes me as just the kind of guy Lara Croft is likely to fall for.

The locations are beautiful to behold, especially in China and Africa. The "sky-diving over Hong Kong" sequence is just short of drool-worthy. However, some of the interior sets are just plain bland.

The action scenes are the one downer here; Jan de Bont downshifts from Simon West's starting point, and sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. I wanted more from the gunfights, which seemed lethargic. My two favorite scenes in the movie are when Lara duels with Chen Lo (she defends herself with an unloaded bayonet rifle by twirling it like a trained Marine...super badass) and the CGI "Shadow Demons" sequence, which I was originally dreading, but the way the scene is edited makes it rather cool.

If you enjoyed the first Tomb Raider, check this one out. For all its flaws, Angelina is worth it. ALL HAIL ANGELINA... ANGELINA IS YOUR QUEEN...

The best tombraider movie hits the best in dvd
I love this movie, and it's better than the first. She goes to all these places, I recommend this Movie. I'm also selling mines so e-mail me at JJ_025@lycos.com

A JOLIE GOOD SHOW
This sequel to the original is more entertaining and visually interesting than the first. Jolie returns as the indefatigable Lara Croft, aided this time by Gerard Butler (Dracula 2000, Timeline), a former Marine turned mercenary/traitor. Butler and Jolie have a fairly good comraderie, although it's definitely Jolie's move every way. Ciaran Hinds (Road to Perdition, Sum of All Fears, Veronica Guerin) makes for a sturdy villain, all grimace and spit. The movie revolves around the search for the mythical Pandora's Box; Hinds plays a viral bacteriologist who can release deadly viruses and he wants the box to let loose the contents of Pandora's box as the ultimate weapon.
Jan deBont (Speed) directs with a kinetic energy, and Alan Silvestri's score is impressive.
The ending is a real shocker in some ways; in the extras, we see an alternate ending that was less visceral.
Don't know whether this series will go on but it should have a little life left?

Better than the first
Better and more enjoyable than the first film, Lara Croft, Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life is a fun escape pure and simple. Angelina Jolie reprises her role as the video game heroine in search of a mystical orb that can lead to the discovery of Pandora's Box. A maniacal super villian (and a better one than in the first film) is on it's trail as well, so Lara has to partner up with a traitorus old ally (Gerard Butler) as she travels from Greece to Hong Kong to Africa. The stunt work is electrifying and the special effects are solid, while director Jan de Bont gives the film it's own slick look rather than the amalgam look of the first film. The unbelieveably hot Jolie is great again, but you can't help but feel that she is too good for this role. All in all, Cradle of Life is a worthy action escape, and those let down by the first film should give this a look. ... Read more

Reviews (202)

The DTS version rocks the home theater!
This is the first disc I bought since I got the home theater set up and this one you won't believe! Ok, I'll admit the story here is a little weak, but this isn't supposed to be a "Raging Bull" type of character study. This is a very entertaining, state of the arts effects, fun film. The sound from this DTS version is extraordinary. The separation of the 5.1 is incredible. The twister sequences will blow you away. You feel the sound and the fury! The only other disc that compares is the Saving Private Ryan one. For you home theater fanatics, this is your film.. you'll see it, hear it, and feel it. This disc also has some great extras like director commentary and a cool documentary of how it was made. All in all, it's not one of the finest 100 or 200 movies ever made, but you may find yourself watching it over and over for the experience of it! You'll love it! The movie itself is about a 3, but the DVD DTS is about a 5!

I like it anyway...
OK, I've read the other reviews...I think "Twister" is entertaining, with great CGI effects. The plot is intense, and most sub-plots are silly. Helen Hunt is beautiful, and quite a good actress. Bill Paxton is customarily hammy. Still I enjoy this film as entertainment. It's interesting to note that a lot of our current best actors today got a start in this film. Philip Seymour Hoffman, in particular, shows great flair, as well as Jeremy Davies, playing the wimp. Director Jan de Bont seems to use Alan Ruck a lot, and for good reason: He's talented. I was disappointed when Jamie Gertz won the Razz Award as "Worst Supporting Actress" in '96. I thought she gave a fine performance...her character was written to be reactionary, and I thought her every nuance was touching and sincere. As far as writing, well, some of the soap opera stuff could've been cut short. Jan de Bont, with all the films he could've chosen, showed scenes from Kubrick's "The Shining" (at the drive-in), and Cukor's "A Star is Born" (before Aunt Meg's house is blown away). If these are homages, he has good taste. And Lois Smith was solid as the aunt; I've liked her since she played Nicholson's sister in "Five Easy Pieces". A fine character actress. With this stuff in mind, I watch "Twister" often, and enjoy it each time. Why be so analytical? It was made as mass-marketed entertainment and, on that level, it succeeds. Doesn't seem to matter that it was also on quite a few "10 Best" lists in '96. I like it a lot; if you don't, maybe you should get out more...

the suck zone II
In the movie, the twister destroys a drive-in while The Shining is showing on the screen. One could only imagine that this amounted to a review of The Shining. I don't agree with this review. The Shining is a very good movie.

the suck zone
I rented this movie thinking it was going to be a remake of The Wizard of Oz. Boy what a letdown. Come to think of it I had the same experience watching Zardoz.
While watching this movie, it became clear to me that "actors" are people who have been randomly selected to get in front of a camera and pretend to do things. The characters say things like, "these satellite readings have increased in the last ten minutes" "Keep monitoring this pattern" "Ok" Then there is a tossing aside of sodas and a melee of excited, riot-like running toward vehicles. Then there is more dialog, like "We're not going to be able to intercept!" "No, we will. Hang on!" "Are you out of your mind?"
"We gotta get outta here!" "I know!" This last dialog is screamed over the sound of lots of wind. The movie appears to be about a weather phenomenon wherein lots of wind causes a general sucking effect: the script sucks, the acting sucks, the effects even pretty much suck.

The tornadoes alone save this movie.
I have had interest in the concept of severe weather for my entire life and had high expectations for the movie "Twister" and the result cuts boths ways for me.

The movie is of a married meteoroligist couple who are in the midst of getting a divorce, and have not gotten along for a very long time and they make a new invention that they believe will help them see what it looks like, inside a full blown tornado. They have ambition to deploy this new technology to disperse 'lighter than air' radio transmitters into a twister and record the signals to see what it may look like inside a tornado.

The special effects when the tornadoes strike are absolutely awesome not to mention the chase scenes especially towards the ending when the couple speed away from a tornado drive right through a house that was thrown onto the countryside road by a tornado (Impossible in real life) and the other of when a drive-in movie screen showing a snippet of the movie "The Shining" being ripped apart by a F5 tornado in the middle of the night.

"Twister" though suffers from several things and I can sometimes see where some of the detractors are coming from when regarding this movie. While the action scenes and special effects are amazing, the movie's plot lacks a good flow and the film drags on and on in several places and one scene which is just like a boring day at home would've been better left out altogether. Plus the characters are very unconvincing and lack personality.

Even for me who doesn't mind ocassional deviation from the laws of physics in movies, some of the tornadoe scenes are completely unrealistic. For example as I said earlier in a review, there is no way a twister could fling a whole house across a countryside road or even roll the whole intact house across the countryside because most houses are built on foundations and strong tornadoes in real life would shed houses into tiny pieces or otherwise reduce them to ruin. An F5 tornado would leave nothing of a house behind and can even rip the pavement off a road if the conditions warrant. \

This movie is nonetheless worth watching just for the tornadoes alone but this movie could have been a lot better than it turned out to be. While having it's share of flaws Roland Emmerich's "The Day After Tomorrow" is far superior on many levels and corrects a lot of the flaws of "Twister" in my opinion. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Suffering from the extreme bad luck of being released at the same time as the low-budget The Blair Witch Project, this adaptation of The Haunting of Hill House attempts to update Shirley Jackson's psychologically terrifying ghost story to the era of big-budget, computerized special effects. Does it work? Well, let's just say that showing isn't exactly the same as telling. A prime example of bloated studio filmmaking, The Haunting telegraphs all its frights so blatantly that it forsakes any of Jackson's subtle horrors for the remedial scares of a clunky carnival ride. The story remains basically the same, with four people called to an old mansion for experiments in the supernatural, but instead of getting inside the heads of its main characters (as the 1963 adaptation by Robert Wise did so well), Jan DeBont's film deserts character development for the huge, glorious set design provided by Eugenio Zanetti (Restoration). Thus, instead of a well-drawn story you get... a well-drawn house, one that four very talented and underutilized actors--Lili Taylor, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Liam Neeson, and Owen Wilson--wander around in endlessly (as Zeta-Jones puts it, the house is "sort of Charles Foster Kane meets the Munsters"). Taylor, as the hypersensitive Nell, is the unknowing lynchpin in the battle between good and bad ghosts and gets saddled with most of the expository dialogue of the mansion's gothic backstory. Zeta-Jones (showing some spark) and Neeson (showing none) are sadly reduced to providing reactionary shots of the film's disastrous climax, which mixes hapless new-age affirmations with computer-generated effects of ghosts and exploding windows, walls, doors, etc. For this haunted-house story, take a quick tour of the breathtaking rooms, but definitely don't stay the night. --Mark Englehart ... Read more

Reviews (324)

This HAUNTING is a flop
Being a fan of horror movies and having never seen the original 1963 film, I found myself eager to catch this remake, which looked interesting from the theatrical trailer. However, I could have never been more mistaken. THE HAUNTING, with its expensive special effects and large budget, looks more like a 'tamed' episode from TV's Goosebumps than an actual feature film. What's worse is that this incredibly dull chiller lacks what many of these types of films require to work...chills! Infact, the only scary thing about this flick is how DreamWorks managed to green-light this expensive dud into production. The paper-thin plot finds a psychological researcher tricking a group of people to staying a night at a haunted mansion in hopes of studying them and their reactions. While the cast seems promising, they are surprisingly wasted...Neeson especially, with Catherine Zeta Jones offering a pretty face to look at, but nothing more. And surprisingly, I never thought that director Jan DeBont could top the horrendous Speed 2: Cruise Control, but once again I was wrong. All in all, THE HAUNTING was one of 1999's biggest Hollywood disappointments and, in my opinion, I would seriously consider that you walk passed this one at the video store. DROUGH!

Not frightening, not anything
There are 2 good things in this movie-

(1) Bruce Dern, who plays the groundskeeper and who, in about 3 lines and 20 seconds, out-acts everyone else in the film, even though they get hours. Bruce Dern should have been the star of this film. He's got more talent in his left nostril than the rest of the cast have in their whole bodies. He's of the old school like Donald Sutherland, and he is squandered in this film. The director is like a prospector who puts the mud in his pocket and leaves the gold behind.

(2) The mansion itself, which is extraordinarily beautiful, but probably only a bunch of sets. Still, it's lovely.

Nothing else in this movie is remotely interesting or frightening. The screenplay reads as if it were written by a junior high student.

Artistic Masterpiece
Whether this movie was true enough to the book or not, I don't know. What I do know is that it's awesome and very well-made. The actors did a great job, the special effects were wonderful, and the creepy-yet gothicly beautiful house-simply couldn't have been better. I'm not sorry I watched it. It's worth every minute and every penny.

IF IT AIN'T BROKEN, DON'T FIX IT
"The Haunting" with Julie Harris was so good--even better for its black and white medium, which enhances the sense of the macabre and general off-kilterness of the set. Why don't they remake "The Wizard Of Oz?" Now, there's a picture that could be made MUCH pertier with modern cinematography. The cheap set and old theatre-style acting throw a damper on what's still is a great universal story.

Beware of Evil Capitalists (and ghost movies about them)
Some day Lili Taylor will land that role in a film which will show the world what a high-calibre actress she really is. THE HAUNTING is not that film. What a thankless part for Ms. Lili. What a thankless film. The scariest thing about this movie must have been the bill for the c.g.i. effects that the studio received. I mean, the movie had a moment or two of tension, but on the whole, I was bored.

There was nothing new here: the fury of an evil, dead capitalist and the pain inflicted on his mostly children workers--and his family--just can't seem to get out of the house. So! The evil men do does live on! How original! I'm reaching for sarcasm which is never pretty, so I will end here. This movie was the pits. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Anybody seen Keanu? The action star of Speed opted outof this overbearing sequel, which finds costar Sandra Bullock in love withanother guy (Jason Patric) and in trouble aboard a cruise ship underthe control ofa mad extortionist (Willem Dafoe). Speed director Jan de Bontis back at the helm for part 2, but even he seems to have forgottenthat what made the first film work was the simplicity of its hook(the bomb, the bus that can'tdrive below 50 mph, the handful of sympathetic passengers, etc.).Speed 2 isall about hugeness: big ship, lots of places to get into trouble, and so on.Even with an eye-popping, endless finale of the vessel crashing into port (andcausing mondo destruction), there is nothing about this movie that is remotelyas involving as its predecessor. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (94)

What was so wrong with it?
My mother and I were the only two people in the theater the day that we saw Speed 2: Cruise Control. After watching the movie, I couldn't understand why so many people hated this movie. It was not a bad movie by any account, except for some discrepancies in the destruction of the cruise ship. The movie made me laugh while also giving me a dosage of suspense, thrills, and great special effects. Sandra Bullock is always a joy to watch on screen, giving each of her movies a comic, light and happy feel. The absence of Keanu Reeves is nothing to worry about, seeing as how he didn't really bring much adventure to the first movie either. Jason Patric delivers a terrific performance, and it is Willem Dafoe's character who is the epitome of insanity and hunger for revenge. I wouldn't really listen to a lot of what people had to say: this is a comical, thrill-ride movie that will have you laughing and holding your breath.

Fast Bus 2: Big Slow Ship
Speed 2: Cruise Control (1998)
Starring: Sandra Bullock, Jason Patric, Willem Dafoe
Directed By: Jan de Bont
Rated: PG-13
Running Time: 121 minutes
___________________________________________________________

On One Hand...
"Thumps up!"
-Roger Ebert

...on the Other.
"A waterlogged sequel that'll soon be bottom-feeding with Beyond the Poseidon Adventure."
-Mike Clark, USA Today
___________________________________________________________

The Love Boat meets Air Force One

Speed 2: Cruise Control was one whacked-out movie. Throwing the thrilling dramatic elements of the first film overboard, all it has left is the action...and some dude called Jason Patric.

One sure thing that can be said about this movie is its special effects are fabulous. We're talking big money effects, including that oh-so-cool finale where the Seabourn Legend (the ship) crashes into a resort town.

___________________________________________________________

The Plot

Trouble continues to follow LA citizen Annie Porter when she and her new hubby (a stone-faced Jason Patric) book a tropical cruise on the Seabourn Legend cruise ship. A crazed computer hacker (Willem Dafoe) has taken over the ship and is setting on a course to destruction...to some sort of some tanker, I guess, that would've exploded (and ends up exploding anyway, but the ship is safe, of course). So, of course, Annie and her beau attempt (meaning they will of course succeed) to save the ship and its passengers.

__________________________________________________________

The Cast

Sandra Bullock as Annie Porter
(Speed, 28 Days, Two Weeks Notice)
Ms. Bullock, easily my favorite actress, gives a good, if not great, performance, in an iffy-at-best action movie. Speed was outstanding, and it's hard to live up to that, but Sandra OWNS this movie, pretty much.

Jason Patric as Officer Alex Shaw
(Your Friends and Neighbours, Sleepers, Narc)
For one, I have no idea who this actor is, he's new to me. And I'm not likely to see any more of his movies based on his performance in this movie. Instead of Keanu Reeve's more human performance as an LAPD cop in the first movie, Patric plays his Alex Shaw (also in the LAPD) as a traditional action hero, always stone-faced and heroic. In fact, Alex Shaw is not the most interesting character in the world. Well as long as Annie's happy...

Willem Dafoe as John Geiger
(The English Patient, eXistenZ, Spider-Man)
Dafoe takes over the psycho role, vacated (and beheaded) by Dennis Hopper in the first film. He's didn't seem evil (maybe crazy) but he is rather cool, and his plot to destroy the Seabourn Legend cruise ship was inspired. Willem Dafoe is a very talented man.

Another very good performance comes comes from deaf actress Christine Firkins, who plays a deaf teenager named Drew. This movie is notable for the fact that there's not only a deaf character, but the fact that they hired a deaf actress for the part.
___________________________________________________________

So, About the Special Effects...

The effects in this movie are very, very good (they better have been, considering its supposed $110-$150 million price tag). The ship is jaw-droppingly cool, as good as the titular vessel in Titanic...unlike that movie though, Speed 2 employed an actual cruise ship (the real Seabourn Legend) in some shots (most shots of it are computer graphics). The finale in the resort town was very, very neat (I talked about this part in the first part of this review).
___________________________________________________________

So What Did I Think?

Aside from the effects, this a pretty average action movie with pretty average performances. While nowhere near as good as the first Speed movie, this sequel is glossy, silly movie-night fun (even though it thinks its a seriously heavyweight action movie).

___________________________________________________________

not bad
ok, this sequel does not live up to the standards of the first but it is very enjoyable. Sure there can be the occasional stupid dialogue here and there, but only really by one person, Willem defoe, but he did an ok job but i didnt see it for him, i saw it for the action. The action sequences really picked up when daylight came. They are good but they should have cut them shorter a bit, only because i really wanted to feel the rush like in the first, but i love the ship running into the town and the boat blowing up in the end. I think this film would have been great if Keanu had accepted to come back and they should have kept the MA rating. sandra Bullock, good as usual, Jason Patrik, well they needed somebody to fill in and he did a good job. This film does not take itself too seriously, they made it for the fans, and i liked it, just enjoy it for what it is, a pretty decent sequel.

Speed 2 needs to slow down!
The original Speed was a different kind of movie (Who would have thought a movie that took place mainly on a bus would be so good?) that for one reason or another MANY people enjoyed. Speed 2 seems to be one of those "We liked the first one so we want a sequel!" Kind of movies, and it turned out to be pretty bad. Speed 2 actually makes a Disney sequel look GOOD.

The movie centers around our heroine Annie (her role reprised by Sandra Bullock) who is taking a driving test in the beginning of the movie to get her license back for (gasp!) speeding! She has just gotten herself out of a relationship with Jack (Who was in the first one) and is now with Alex (Jason Patric). When she finds out that Alex works for the same squad that Jack works for she isn't too happy with that.

Later Alex decides to take Annie on a cruise and when they do things start off fine and dandy until a mad bomber (William Dafoe) by the name of Geiger takes over the cruise ship trapping a few passengers on board.

Let's put this one thing aside, Keanu Reeves didn't show up in this film. Surprisingly enough this one thing is what starts the film slide into ruin. Jason Patric and Sandra Bullock don't really have a whole lot of chemistry. It isn't as well developed as it was in the first Speed movie. I'm sure that even if Keanu Reeves had appeared in this movie it wouldn't have saved it from becoming a mess anyhow.

William Dafoe doesn't make for the greatest villian either (who would've thought that five years later he'd be the Green Goblin in the blockbuster hit: Spider Man?). He has the potential to be a great mad bomber but somehow he misses what the bomber in the first movie had. That would be his lack of remorse and intelligence.

Speed 2 doesn't keep on the edge of your seat like the first movie did. Speed 2 is like a Disney Sequel, not good enough for the theater. Speed 2 I can honestly say was a bad movie. An under developed plot put along with some pretty under developed characters make this movie seem like garbage.

I don't recommend this movie to anyone who liked the first one. Those who enjoyed the first movie probably won't like this one.

Defiantly not as Good as the first
it was alright, but i can't say it was better or as good as the first. i strongly recommend watching the first, then watching the second. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Twister was a mega-million-dollar blockbuster--helmed by a director (Dutchman Jan de Bont) hot off another scorcher hit (Speed)--that flaunted state-of-the-art digital effects and featured a popular leading actress (Helen Hunt) who would win an Academy Award for her next film (As Good As It Gets). But ask anybody who's seen it and they'll tell you who the real star of Twister is: the cow. Not to give anything away, but the cow is one of those inspired little touches (like, say, Bronson Pinchot's career-making cameo in Beverly Hills Cop) that adds a touch of personality to a gigantic Hollywood production. The story is blown out the window after an impressive prologue in which Hunt's character, as a little girl, witnesses her daddy being sucked into a tornado. Basically, Hunt and Bill Paxton are thrill-seeking meteorologists chasing twisters in order to study them (and help warn people of them, of course) with a new technology they've developed. If you thought the Kansas tornado in The Wizard of Oz was every bit as scary as the Wicked Witch of the West, then this may be the movie for you. --Jim Emerson ... Read more

Reviews (202)

The DTS version rocks the home theater!
This is the first disc I bought since I got the home theater set up and this one you won't believe! Ok, I'll admit the story here is a little weak, but this isn't supposed to be a "Raging Bull" type of character study. This is a very entertaining, state of the arts effects, fun film. The sound from this DTS version is extraordinary. The separation of the 5.1 is incredible. The twister sequences will blow you away. You feel the sound and the fury! The only other disc that compares is the Saving Private Ryan one. For you home theater fanatics, this is your film.. you'll see it, hear it, and feel it. This disc also has some great extras like director commentary and a cool documentary of how it was made. All in all, it's not one of the finest 100 or 200 movies ever made, but you may find yourself watching it over and over for the experience of it! You'll love it! The movie itself is about a 3, but the DVD DTS is about a 5!

I like it anyway...
OK, I've read the other reviews...I think "Twister" is entertaining, with great CGI effects. The plot is intense, and most sub-plots are silly. Helen Hunt is beautiful, and quite a good actress. Bill Paxton is customarily hammy. Still I enjoy this film as entertainment. It's interesting to note that a lot of our current best actors today got a start in this film. Philip Seymour Hoffman, in particular, shows great flair, as well as Jeremy Davies, playing the wimp. Director Jan de Bont seems to use Alan Ruck a lot, and for good reason: He's talented. I was disappointed when Jamie Gertz won the Razz Award as "Worst Supporting Actress" in '96. I thought she gave a fine performance...her character was written to be reactionary, and I thought her every nuance was touching and sincere. As far as writing, well, some of the soap opera stuff could've been cut short. Jan de Bont, with all the films he could've chosen, showed scenes from Kubrick's "The Shining" (at the drive-in), and Cukor's "A Star is Born" (before Aunt Meg's house is blown away). If these are homages, he has good taste. And Lois Smith was solid as the aunt; I've liked her since she played Nicholson's sister in "Five Easy Pieces". A fine character actress. With this stuff in mind, I watch "Twister" often, and enjoy it each time. Why be so analytical? It was made as mass-marketed entertainment and, on that level, it succeeds. Doesn't seem to matter that it was also on quite a few "10 Best" lists in '96. I like it a lot; if you don't, maybe you should get out more...

the suck zone II
In the movie, the twister destroys a drive-in while The Shining is showing on the screen. One could only imagine that this amounted to a review of The Shining. I don't agree with this review. The Shining is a very good movie.

the suck zone
I rented this movie thinking it was going to be a remake of The Wizard of Oz. Boy what a letdown. Come to think of it I had the same experience watching Zardoz.
While watching this movie, it became clear to me that "actors" are people who have been randomly selected to get in front of a camera and pretend to do things. The characters say things like, "these satellite readings have increased in the last ten minutes" "Keep monitoring this pattern" "Ok" Then there is a tossing aside of sodas and a melee of excited, riot-like running toward vehicles. Then there is more dialog, like "We're not going to be able to intercept!" "No, we will. Hang on!" "Are you out of your mind?"
"We gotta get outta here!" "I know!" This last dialog is screamed over the sound of lots of wind. The movie appears to be about a weather phenomenon wherein lots of wind causes a general sucking effect: the script sucks, the acting sucks, the effects even pretty much suck.

The tornadoes alone save this movie.
I have had interest in the concept of severe weather for my entire life and had high expectations for the movie "Twister" and the result cuts boths ways for me.

The movie is of a married meteoroligist couple who are in the midst of getting a divorce, and have not gotten along for a very long time and they make a new invention that they believe will help them see what it looks like, inside a full blown tornado. They have ambition to deploy this new technology to disperse 'lighter than air' radio transmitters into a twister and record the signals to see what it may look like inside a tornado.

The special effects when the tornadoes strike are absolutely awesome not to mention the chase scenes especially towards the ending when the couple speed away from a tornado drive right through a house that was thrown onto the countryside road by a tornado (Impossible in real life) and the other of when a drive-in movie screen showing a snippet of the movie "The Shining" being ripped apart by a F5 tornado in the middle of the night.

"Twister" though suffers from several things and I can sometimes see where some of the detractors are coming from when regarding this movie. While the action scenes and special effects are amazing, the movie's plot lacks a good flow and the film drags on and on in several places and one scene which is just like a boring day at home would've been better left out altogether. Plus the characters are very unconvincing and lack personality.

Even for me who doesn't mind ocassional deviation from the laws of physics in movies, some of the tornadoe scenes are completely unrealistic. For example as I said earlier in a review, there is no way a twister could fling a whole house across a countryside road or even roll the whole intact house across the countryside because most houses are built on foundations and strong tornadoes in real life would shed houses into tiny pieces or otherwise reduce them to ruin. An F5 tornado would leave nothing of a house behind and can even rip the pavement off a road if the conditions warrant. \

This movie is nonetheless worth watching just for the tornadoes alone but this movie could have been a lot better than it turned out to be. While having it's share of flaws Roland Emmerich's "The Day After Tomorrow" is far superior on many levels and corrects a lot of the flaws of "Twister" in my opinion. ... Read more

Reviews (324)

This HAUNTING is a flop
Being a fan of horror movies and having never seen the original 1963 film, I found myself eager to catch this remake, which looked interesting from the theatrical trailer. However, I could have never been more mistaken. THE HAUNTING, with its expensive special effects and large budget, looks more like a 'tamed' episode from TV's Goosebumps than an actual feature film. What's worse is that this incredibly dull chiller lacks what many of these types of films require to work...chills! Infact, the only scary thing about this flick is how DreamWorks managed to green-light this expensive dud into production. The paper-thin plot finds a psychological researcher tricking a group of people to staying a night at a haunted mansion in hopes of studying them and their reactions. While the cast seems promising, they are surprisingly wasted...Neeson especially, with Catherine Zeta Jones offering a pretty face to look at, but nothing more. And surprisingly, I never thought that director Jan DeBont could top the horrendous Speed 2: Cruise Control, but once again I was wrong. All in all, THE HAUNTING was one of 1999's biggest Hollywood disappointments and, in my opinion, I would seriously consider that you walk passed this one at the video store. DROUGH!

Not frightening, not anything
There are 2 good things in this movie-

(1) Bruce Dern, who plays the groundskeeper and who, in about 3 lines and 20 seconds, out-acts everyone else in the film, even though they get hours. Bruce Dern should have been the star of this film. He's got more talent in his left nostril than the rest of the cast have in their whole bodies. He's of the old school like Donald Sutherland, and he is squandered in this film. The director is like a prospector who puts the mud in his pocket and leaves the gold behind.

(2) The mansion itself, which is extraordinarily beautiful, but probably only a bunch of sets. Still, it's lovely.

Nothing else in this movie is remotely interesting or frightening. The screenplay reads as if it were written by a junior high student.

Artistic Masterpiece
Whether this movie was true enough to the book or not, I don't know. What I do know is that it's awesome and very well-made. The actors did a great job, the special effects were wonderful, and the creepy-yet gothicly beautiful house-simply couldn't have been better. I'm not sorry I watched it. It's worth every minute and every penny.

IF IT AIN'T BROKEN, DON'T FIX IT
"The Haunting" with Julie Harris was so good--even better for its black and white medium, which enhances the sense of the macabre and general off-kilterness of the set. Why don't they remake "The Wizard Of Oz?" Now, there's a picture that could be made MUCH pertier with modern cinematography. The cheap set and old theatre-style acting throw a damper on what's still is a great universal story.

Beware of Evil Capitalists (and ghost movies about them)
Some day Lili Taylor will land that role in a film which will show the world what a high-calibre actress she really is. THE HAUNTING is not that film. What a thankless part for Ms. Lili. What a thankless film. The scariest thing about this movie must have been the bill for the c.g.i. effects that the studio received. I mean, the movie had a moment or two of tension, but on the whole, I was bored.

There was nothing new here: the fury of an evil, dead capitalist and the pain inflicted on his mostly children workers--and his family--just can't seem to get out of the house. So! The evil men do does live on! How original! I'm reaching for sarcasm which is never pretty, so I will end here. This movie was the pits. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

The BEST!
Speed is my favorite Sandra Bullock movie. She is just...phenominal in it. And Keanu Reeves...what a hunk!!
The way they put this film together was great: the stunts, the action, the suspense and thrill of it all! Jan DeBont needs to get back together with Sandra to do another action movie. That would be cool!! I CANNOT think of another movie that is better that Speed! It's definitely #1 on my list.

Depends on which one you want!
Let's face it, Speed(5 stars) is a wonderful Action movie, problably the best Action movie of the year, but Speed 2(3 stars) doesn't live up to the original as well as I thought it would. The movie would be so much better if Keanu Reeves reprised his role as Jack Traven. Dennis Hopper was a great villian in the original.

Best Action of the 90's.
Despite what some may say, these two films offer an endless supply of edge-of-your-seat action, some of the most amazing stunts, and very good special effects. THE ACTION FILMS OF THE 90's!

What is it with the people?
Ok, let me guess ... You saw Speed and thought it was a great movie? Or at least you heard it was great movie. Well, it is - bet ya! And now you heard people talking - Speed 2 is a terrible movie, the winner of the golden raspberry (the worst movie of the year). So, why buy it, especially when it is a set?

Ok, let me set it straight. Speed 2 isn't a bad movie - it just isn't as good as Speed 1. The story of Speed 2 is dumb (as in every other action movie - take Eraser, or M:I-2), but it makes a nice background for the action and nobody ever goes to see an action-flick for the story. And if we are honest than even Speed 1 didn't have that much of a great story - it isn't so much better than the stroy of the second movie.

What counts is action, and you get plenty of it here. It's the same class of action as in Speed, with a different playground. You get even the cute Sandra Bullock and a cute Jason Patrick (instead of Keanu Reeves). In addition you get a little bit of romance, 'cause the character of Jason Patrick wants to marry the character of Sandra Bullock ...

Ok, so, are missing anything for an action movie? I am not! Just 'cause Speed was such a surprise and a overaverage action-flick, was everybody expecting the same from Speed 2 ... And it was impossible to fulfill, or at least it didn't work out. So in this packet, we have a great action movies on DVD (Speed = 5 stars) and an average action movie (Speed 2 = 4 stars). And 'cause it's just the two normal DVDs you can buy separately in one box, the rating is 4 stars! Buy it, if you love Sandra Bullock/Jason Patrick and if you love good action!!! ... Read more