Release calendarTop 250 moviesMost popular moviesBrowse movies by genreTop box officeShowtimes & ticketsMovie newsIndia movie spotlight
    What's on TV & streamingTop 250 TV showsMost popular TV showsBrowse TV shows by genreTV news
    What to watchLatest trailersIMDb OriginalsIMDb PicksIMDb SpotlightFamily entertainment guideIMDb Podcasts
    OscarsHoliday Watch GuideGotham AwardsSTARmeter AwardsAwards CentralFestival CentralAll events
    Born todayMost popular celebsCelebrity news
    Help centerContributor zonePolls
For industry professionals
  • Language
  • Fully supported
  • English (United States)
    Partially supported
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Watchlist
Sign in
  • Fully supported
  • English (United States)
    Partially supported
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Use app

Rafacus

Joined Jul 2005

Badges2

To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Explore badges

Reviews27

Rafacus's rating
Charlie's Angels

Charlie's Angels

4.4
8
  • Sep 21, 2011
  • Needless to say I have Angels fever and I hope to see more

    More than just pretty faces, Charlie's Angels features the talents of Annie Ilonzeh as Kate (a former corrupt Miami police officer), Rachael Taylor as Abigail (rich girl turned naughty thief), Nadine Velazquez as Gloria (a disgraced Marine Corps Lt.) and Minka Kelly as Eve (a street racer). Ramon Rodriguez plays the computer hacking Bosley and Robert Wagner plays Charlie, or more honestly "the voice of Charlie" providing the Angels with missions, guidance and kudos for a job well done.

    We all know the formula and the background being that this is the 3rd foray into this remake but I honestly feel that this time they've struck gold.

    This was an excellent pilot from beginning to end. While the acting was spotty – through Ilonzeh's obvious nervousness and Taylor's seeming to "try too hard", it eventually evens out and the chemistry is better than expected. Though Minka Kelly still felt like an outcast towards the end of the episode, it leaves you wanting to see the girls do more and if I am not the only one feeling this way, we are sure to see some more.
    Conan the Barbarian

    Conan the Barbarian

    5.2
  • Aug 18, 2011
  • An honest Conan review without Arnold comparisons

    While the story of Conan The Barbarian in this Marcus Nispel version cannot hold a candle to the John Milius original, it doesn't mean that on its own it isn't a good movie.

    The problem with rehashing anything is the inevitable and misleading comparisons that are done whenever critique is asked.

    My only thoughts were the same as when I watched the original: Why aren't his eyes icy blue, his eyes should be icy blue?! Why's his hair not jet black?! You know... the silly, miniature details that the nerds whine about.

    Ron Perlman as Conan's father was an amazing portrayal, besides Momoa he was probably the best part of this movie. The villains unfortunately came off as more comical than imposing which will rub many moviegoers wrongly especially after having a bad guy like James Earl Jones' Thulsa Doom headline the 1984 Conan.

    A major downside is the pacing was so quick and ridiculous – the movie came off like a highlight reel where Momoa's Conan shows you how to kick butt, coddle wenches and exact revenge.

    Could it be better? Yes a million times over, yes and with our palate being used to such goodies in Sword and Sorcery such as The Lord of The Rings trilogy, I am afraid that the majority of critics will dump on this movie like nobody's business.

    Still, there is something there and when you see Momoa dance with the blade, you will forget the bland backdrop of a story, the cartoon character of a villain and the unimpressive damsel in distress who plays his side (Rachel Nichols).
    Clash of the Titans

    Clash of the Titans

    5.8
    5
  • Apr 1, 2010
  • Sorry but this 2010 version lacks character

    I do not know what is worse about this new Clash of Titans, the laziness in them not studying Greek mythology, or the laziness in keeping things relevant to the time period or mythos. Actually I know exactly what it is, it's the absolute waste of Liam Neeson and Ralph Fiennes, whose talents and characters was the only shining light in a dark movie of shallow characters, shoddy CGI and light speed pacing.

    It seems that people have forgotten the Greek mythology whose influence has made many a movie and tale as lovable as the original Clash of The Titans. Call me a nerd for being a tad too much into this but my annoyance started when the movie begins with a conveniently hacked up and incorrect story version of the Gods' win over the Titans to rule earth. I do understand the abstract nature of this movie and the reality that this particular Perseus (Sam Worthington) was not the one of the ancient poems. But something about the matter-of-fact nature of the narration rubbed me the wrong way.

    The armor and clothing is dark or black, there are no colors. The people or relevant armor that rang true of ancient Greece is not here. What we get instead is the X-Men treatment, black on everything and a mixture of armor and architecture of cultures that come about hundreds of years after the time of the Gods. Maybe Zeus wished in some steel from medieval Europe and haircuts from the modern day Armed Forces? He is all-powerful after-all, let's say he did, just so I can shut up about it.

    Aww screw it, I can't ignore these things! Seeing Zeus (Liam Neeson) walk away from his throne in a type of mock plate mail armor, reminded me of his role as Gawain in Excalibur. Why was he dressed like a medieval knight in a movie about ancient Greece I wondered? This is not to say that the other Gods were much better off either, Apollo in golden standard was also in a form of scale mail and so was Poseidon (Danny Huston) who is replaced in relevance with the new owner of the Kraken, Hades (Ralph Fiennes). How does this make sense that an obvious water creature is owned by the king of the Underworld? Who cares right!?

    Perseus, again in ancient Greece sporting a buzz cut reminiscent of a Marine or a Roman Legionnaire was only second in lack of relevance to him actually being played by Sam Worthington. Sorry folks, Jake Sully did not show up to play this time. Gone is the likable kid from the original who grows in front of our eyes from a boy gifted by the gods to champion them, into a man who is bold and clever enough to take on the gorgon Medusa and topple the champion of Poseidon. No we get a Perseus who is simply not in the right time period, mindset or character to either be believable or formidable. When Io (Gemma Arterton) basically takes his hand and teaches him how to kill Medusa (Natalia Vodionova) it summed his character up very well. This is not the brave Perseus of the original, not by a long shot.

    Ralph Fiennes as the bent and ultra dark Hades was a great character, his low, gritty voice and dramatic entrances made him extremely scary. The satyr-like Calibos (Jason Fleming) who chased Perseus and made his life hell in the original is reinvented in this as a jilted lover, whose body has been turned into some sort of demon, albeit not a satyr. Io is the replacement for the lovely goddess Athena, whose wit and metallic owl of the original were mainstays in our memory of its charm. Io is beautiful but she is no Athena, and thanks to the pacing which made this 2 hour movie seem like 30 minutes, you get no true feeling of familiarity with her or the other beauty in the movie, the princess Andromeda (Alexa Davalos).

    I really wanted Clash of The Titans to be great, and based on the high votes I see on the web, it's apparent that super fast pacing and lack of character development is positive right now. Maybe I am too old school and like to learn the personalities, histories etc. of my heroes but what can I say? For me the inaccuracies, pacing and shallow nature of this 2010 Clash of The Titans makes for a bad movie – which by the way is another to take full advantage of the 3D fad going on since Avatar. This makes me wonder about Sam Worthington and his range, or lack thereof, and why Liam Neeson thought that it was a good movie to be a part of. The trailers had me salivating, especially at the Kraken, yet upon seeing it at the end, I was already done with the movie.

    Of all the characters and wasted talent, I must say that chief soldier Draco (Mads Mikkelsen) was my favorite. His portrayal of a grizzled, old wartime soldier was well done. Despite the pacing issues, we got enough of his character and history to go from hating him to respecting, then finally liking him.

    If you own the original Clash of The Titans and you bemoan the campy, cheesy humor or the extremely dated special effects. You will find yourself forgetting its faults in lieu of its character; because for all the 3D effects, expensive CGI and acting talent, this 2010 version lacks character and I am sorry but no amount of 3D debris flying in my face can make that a good movie for me.

    SpicyMovieDogs.com
    See all reviews

    Recently viewed

    Please enable browser cookies to use this feature. Learn more.
    Get the IMDb App
    Sign in for more accessSign in for more access
    Follow IMDb on social
    Get the IMDb App
    For Android and iOS
    Get the IMDb App
    • Help
    • Site Index
    • IMDbPro
    • Box Office Mojo
    • License IMDb Data
    • Press Room
    • Advertising
    • Jobs
    • Conditions of Use
    • Privacy Policy
    • Your Ads Privacy Choices
    IMDb, an Amazon company

    © 1990-2025 by IMDb.com, Inc.