Reviews

5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
The Jogger (1984)
i liked it
2 October 2004
I liked this short subject because it gave the viewers a lot of excitement, i don't want to criticize IMDb, but the last time i saw this picture, the cast at the end said that Tom Morga was the jogger not Dave Schmidt. Terry O'quinn was great as the victim, but i think that somebody his size compared to the jogger's size could easily fight him off. The show was enjoyable anyway. The ending was a little strange but i will not give that away. I hope it comes on again soon. I really liked it it keeps you watching. The plot is that an unknown jogger is terrorizing a middle-aged man out for a morning jog under doctors orders or he will die if he doesn't lose weight.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Stepfather 3 (1992 TV Movie)
unusual movie
10 September 2004
You know, i sort of liked this one even though Terry O'Quinn wasn't in it. The things i liked about this is the brilliant idea of plastic surgery on a killer's face, and the way Robert Wightman portrayed the stepfather as a Terry O'Quinn Wannabe. When I first saw this one i kind of laughed at who played the stepfather because the last time i saw Wightman was when he replaced Richard Thomas as John Boy Walton, so in the long run John Boy Walton is playing the stepfather who seemed to be of a goofy version of O'Quinn, but on the other hand, perhaps if he was crazy enough to take the role of John Boy Walton i guess he would be crazy enough to play a psychotic perfect family man. Just keep all that in mind when you ask why they would choose Wightman as the stepfather. As for the rest of the cast, Priscilla Barnes did not seem to be the vulnerable victim, it looked like Season Hubley had that part. David Tom was cast perfectly as the son, but did they really have to put him in a wheelchair. John Ingle as the priest was no surprise because he played a priest a lot. I give this one 6 out of 10
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
good follow up
10 September 2004
For all the producers and directors who want to do a follow up of a movie take lessons from these guys who made stepfather 2. This is an awesome follow up. Picking up where the original left off. Now for the cast: Terry O'Quinn doesn't seem to be as maniacal in this one, but he was still great, Meg Foster is Great as the unsuspecting victim, Jonathan Brandis overacted a little but it wasn't bad, and Mutchell Laurence is wonderful as the ex husband, and caroline williams was decent as Meg Foster's suspicious friend.. This movie will keep you watching to see what happens next. They should have ended it with this one. I give this movie a 9 out of 10 stars.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Based on a true story
10 September 2004
This movie was based on a true story. Back in the 1950's a man named John List murdered his wife and kids and married into another family with no father and he was eventually caught. This movie is on a similar basis. This has to one of the best films of the 1980's. Terry O'Quinn is absolutely brilliant as the psychotic stepfather, in other movies you wouldn't think of him as a psychopath like that. Shelley Hack was a bad choice for the wife, the role was unfit for her, in my opinion they should of gotten somebody more dramatic (you choose who), and Jill Schoelen was superb as the daughter, possibly her best film, she played the role as if she lived it before. Charles Lanyer as the psychiatrist was an absolute bore, he should have played the reporter. Stephen Shellen was good as the vengeful brother in law and finally Blu Mankuma as the cop (so what else is knew) seemed like he didn't care about the case. If you want to see a great thriller based on an actual story watch this. I give this 10 out of 10
32 out of 50 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Time Walker (1982)
stupid but fascinating
10 September 2004
This movie is borderline stupid and fascinating. I admit that the story was fascinating, but it hardly made sense. The acting could have been better. Look for Warrington Gillette(Jason part 2) in a brief role as Stanley, the girl's friend from school. James Karen seemed out of character in this movie, as a matter of fact the whole cast seemed out of place. I accidentally turned this movie on some years ago and attempted to follow it through. There is nothing in this movie that the mystery science theatre 3000 should have done. All that was missing was the talking mechanical dog and the talking gumball machine and the man talking through the whole movie.
6 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed