Reviews

At first when i heard that they where gonna make a Simpsons movie, i was thrilled. The name of Simpsons always brought me back to that happy time in the start of the 90ties, where the Simpsons was fresh.

But generally The Simpsons have gone down hill since season 13, and that can also be seen in this movie.

The story-line, the bad-guys and jokes are things we have seen in the show, one way or the other. There is no new thing in this movie, it just ends with status-que. Though that can be good for some shows, it just that they could at least have revealed some more secrets or shadow sides of our characters, but the makers of the movie chose not to do this. They chose just to recycle a lot of stuff from the old shows and change bits of things, and then put them together - so they lasted over one hour. Its not impressive, not at all.

Also all the hippie-elements of this show was also why i left the Simpsons back in the 13th season. And it is still here, in the movie. First of all, there is all the anti-pollution thing in the plot - thats just so smug. Its so irritating, and better-knowing-kinda teaching we get there. But we really don't care. That is what the whole picture is about: hippie-stuff from green-peace. You could easily tell that the creators of this show are very left-wing. Not that there is anything wrong with that, its just that people that are too political gets too preachy in their messages in the entertainment, its the same with Simpsons (no wonder family guy IS a better show). The worst smug-hippie-thing in this awful movie was when Lisa is talking to Milhouse at the first time, before the non-Bono-Irish-kid is introduced. Milhouse claims that he cares for the environment, but then Nelson comes and threatens him to take it back. The message is clear: all those who do not agree with the hippie-socialists-creators of the Simpsons, that Global Warming is a fact, is a Nazi. Whether Global warming is true or not, i don't care, but i just don't want to see such green-peace-hippie-bull-crap in a movie that i want to get entertained by.

This movie is just too smug, too hippie-infested. What trash. 3/10 Nuff said!

As the Summary says: An Evening with Kevin Smith 2: Evening Harder (2006) is, in my opinion, Not as funny as the first one - but still very funny.

I expected something like the first one, and i got it. And that is it.

In An Evening with Kevin Smith 1 (AEWKS-1) there was a lot of funny stories from Hollywood, I.E. the Tim Burton, Jon Peters and Prince stories. Those kind of stories i missed in AEWKS-2 - there was a little about Prince, but that was it. Because the bit Kevin Smith did about Jon Peters was one of the funniest bits I've ever watched, i was kinda hopping for such things.

But Thankfully Kevin Smith is also a good Stand-Up-Comedian. So there was a lot to compensate for my false hopes. I really loved his parody of Lord Of the Rings, though he had used it on am American Talk Show and Clerks 2. The whole part in England was the coolest bit - i like Canada also, but the British bit was just so much cooler. Especially when Smith had fun with that British Chick, who worked in a Comic-store..... that is every time Smith improvises, it is funny. He made fun of her accent - and i loved it, because he did in a very friendly way.

But i still enjoyed it - long time.

I gave the first An Evening with Kevin Smith 10/10.

An Evening with Kevin Smith 2: Evening Harder will get 8/10. Because it is still very funny. The only things i didn't like, was that they used to much time on big stand-up-bits, instead of the more improvised things in AEWKS-1. There was too little Hollywood-gossip - but i guess it is because Smith is more political now, and wants to be friends with some in Hollywood, and therefore will not Bash any people, who he can possible work with in the future.

8/10 - 'nuff said.

Oh Yeah: Snooch To the Nooch.

I once also believed that the Americans did not land on the moon.

Partly because of this documentary.

Much footage from the moon can very well be fake. That is because the could not film there, supposedly, because there was too hot and too cold.

And then there is the thing about the wind on the flag.....

But then there is the big problem: The Astronauts took home kilos of rocks from the moon - about 400 KILOGRAMMES. And the rocks ARE FROM THE MOON. The rocks have been spread around the world to all countries to further science. And there are for a fact from the moon, all laboratories from around the world has confirmed it: The isotopes of the basic elements of the rock could never have come from earth - only the moon.

How do all you crack-put-theorists explain that?

How come that many professors and astronomers from around all believe that USA did go to the moon??? Can you explain that (the only ones who disbelieve all this are all out off a job, and needs money)

Then it came to pass: Alex Jones made his flawed documentary about the consequences of 9/11. First of all you can from the start see that Alex Jones has his own political agenda against President George Bush, and he misuses the documentary-form as his weapon against his foe. Let us get one thing strait: Alex Jones must be the most bias film-maker ever. The whole so called "documentary" is all about coming up with unlikely unintelligent reasons for 9/11. All the theories in this "documentary" are laughable and too complex to be true. The most outrageous theory in this "documentary" is that the planes, that flew into WTC 9/11 were actually remote-controlled by CIA (doesn't it all sound so laughable, of course it is). First of all it is not technical possible, secondly the pilots would have stopped it, thirdly the passengers would have noticed if there weren't any pilots or if they were over New York instead of their original destination and stopped the plane. Then the "documentary" also claims that extreme Islamists (Al Quaida) never could conceive a plan to hit the USA that hard – by that claim Alex Jones takes away all notions that people from the Middle East actually can think for them selves (that is funny that Alex Jones wrongfully claims this, when Extreme Islamist blow them selves up every day in Iraq). Alex Jones once again denies undeniable facts, cause everybody must have seen the videos after 9/11 were Al Quaida and Osama Bin Laden talks about 9/11 and praises the extreme Islamists who did I, and he also talks about that he, as an engineer, knew that all the jet fuel (kerasin) would slowly spread on the floor where the planes hit, here the jet fuel slowly burned and reached such a high temperature that the metal that held the building together bended and melted, and the building collapsed. This is what happened, and many people around the world saw Osama Bin Laden talk about it. Alex Jones arrogantly claims that it was CIA that steered the airplanes into WTC, and that the fuel couldn't burn so long (even though it can). He further more claims that it must have been CIA's bombs that blew WTC up. His evidence is that Iron melts at 3000 degrees, he says that the fuel couldn't have melted this because fuel burns instantly – I don't know were to start: as I said jet fuel is very different than normal gasoline – it DOES NOT BURN INSTANTLY. From then on I knew that Alex Jones would lie about everything else in the "documentary". Further of his "evidence" that it was bombs and airplanes that smashed WTC is that after the building had fallen over, rescue workers stood close to the metal and dug into the ground, Jones wrongfully claims that the metal would be to hot (3000 degrees) for any human to approach: but had it not dawned to Jones that metal cool quite rapidly and that it was hours later that the rescue workers arrived? Of course it didn't: I doubt that Alex Jones knows much about basic physics (cause if you did, you would laugh of his claims). Secondly: it was only a little part of the very long metal frame that became so hot – NOT THE WHOLE SKELETON.

If I should write up all the flaws of this "documentary" I would have a book the size of the bible.

I kept saying to my self: "does Alex Jones really mean this?" I am afraid he does. The only thing I am glad of was when I saw the credits, and it was revealed that Alex Jones was the main source and driving force behind the "documentary" – that means that there aren't any clever people who wanted to work with such a flawed filmmaker as Alex Jones. In my opinion you must lack certain logic skills, if you believe in Alex Jones' "documentary". Furthermore: if you believe in the Alex Jones' "documentary", you must logically also believe in UFO's, pixies, Santa Claus and that Elvis lives. But personally I don't think this is a "documentary", it must be a Science Fiction movie instead – disguised as a documentary, because the claims in this "documentary" are just too laughable to be taken seriously by any with a technical education (like I have: engineer). But as Science Fiction it is good, but totally flawed. I prefer Star Wars episode III revenge of the Sith – which has the same themes (it is just much more realistic).

When i first saw this documentary I was appalled - i was very angry with the American government (under Richard Nixon). In popular culture it is many times suggested that the Americans faked the lunar-missions. Many people believed that the Apollo-missions were filmed in a studio in area 51. And when i saw this documentary i was fully convinced. In the doc Kubricks widow Christiana Kubrick, astronaut Buzz Aldrin, Alexander Haig, Richard Helms, Henry Kissinger and even Donald Rumsfeld all admit more or less that the moon-landings were a hoax. But when saw it a second time I wasn't so sure about the doc was a real doc or not. In the end of the doc - when the credits are shown - we are shown outtakes of the doc. In the outtakes there are scenes were you easy can see that the people are not taking this seriously. There is one scene were Donald Rumsfeld laughs and ask the film crew: "I thought you were a real documentary". And it is also revealed that many of the men, who in the documentary are portrayed as experts and witnesses, are in fact actors. The truth came to me a year or two later, when I in a science magazine read that the documentary was made merely to show how easy it is to manipulate and fool people to think certain things.

I once also believed that the Americans did not land on the moon.

Partly because of this documentary.

Much footage from the moon can very well be fake. That is because the could not film there, supposedly, because there was too hot and too cold.

And then there is the thing about the wind on the flag.....

But then there is the big problem: The Astronauts took home hundreds of kilos of rocks from the moon - KILOS. And the rocks ARE FROM THE MOON. The rocks have been spread around the world to all countries to further science. And there are for a fact from the moon, all laboratories from around the world has confirmed it: The isotopes of the basic elements of the rock could never have come from earth - only the moon.

How do all you crack-put-theorists explain that?

How come that many professors and astronomers from around all believe that USA did go to the moon??? Can you explain that (the only ones who disbelieve all this are all out off a job, and needs money)

At first when I heard that I was enraged. I was angry that the doc fooled me so easily. But when i cooled down I began to think. This is a very good doc to show to people and then tell them later it is a hoax. Because then they will learn not to trust everything they hear. The doc is very good made - and everyone deserves to see