Don_Mac

This cartoon -- directed by the great Bob Clampett -- is one of the best Bugs Bunny cartoons ever (IMO). In the "Western" storyline, our favorite hare is the Masked Marauder, stealing carrots from Victory Gardens (they had those in the Wild Wild West?!??) and being pursued by the not-so-bright Red Hot Rider (his horse is smarter than he is!). Bugs, as he does with Elmer, then proceeds to have fun tripping up this adversary. This classic cartoon dates from Clampett's -- and Warner's -- golden age of the 1940's, a time in which the wildly hilarious "Warner Style" reached it's peak. This one is a must for any Bugs Bunny fan.

A lot of the comments here are full of exaggerated praise for this film. And most of those comments are coming from people who are fans of the singer Bjork. But if, like me, you think Bjork is completely weird and her music is awful, then read the rest of this review, because this will be your fair warning about the film "Dancer in the Dark".

"Dancer in the Dark" is from Danish director Lars von Trier and may be the most unwatchable film of the past few years. It stars Bjork in an over-praised performance, because she really doesn't have a screen presence at all and is overshadowed by any one of her co-stars (i.e. people who actually can act) in any scenes in which they are together. Bjork plays a character who may be the most pathetic character in film history and who's foolishness leads to her fate in a depressing plot, which is both ludicrous and manipulative as it leads to an unrealistic outcome that only a sadistic screenwriter and director could force-feed to an audience. As for filmmaking, the movie is shot in a shaky-camera style reminiscent of bad home movies and absolutely guaranteed to promote nausea. This shaky-camera look that dominates the movie, though, is occasionally broken up by colorful fantasy musical numbers, which have two major flaws: (1) they are not staged very well, and (2) they contain Bjork's music (which, as I said earlier, is pretty awful).

Some claim this movie broke new ground. If having a completely pathetic lead character, bad musical numbers, a ridiculously contrived and depressing plot, nausea-inducing camera work, and lacking any entertainment value whatsoever is new ground, then yes, this movie does break new ground. It's also completely unwatchable, but there are a lot of unwatchable movies, so it wasn't breaking any new ground in that regard.

** You have been WARNED. Now watch, if you must, at your own risk **

This is one stupid movie! I wasn't expecting great art or anything, just a fun summer movie. But this movie is nothing but loud -- yet excitement-free -- car races and a lot of people posing. The plot is a note-for-note rehash of the Keanu Reeves movie "Point Break (1991)" although with cars instead of surfboards & parachutes, and much more ineptly done. (And Keanu, as bad an actor as he is, could act rings around the awful lead of this flick.) This does have Vin Diesel -- but as good as he is in anything, it's not enough to elevate this mess. With this, someone has achieved the unimaginable: they've actually made a movie that's dumber, more abrasive and more annoying than the Jerry Bruckheimer version of "Gone in 60 Seconds". This is easily one of the worst studio films of the past year.