Movies I've Streamed Outside of Netflix

Pros: Not quite so-bad-it's-good, but not boring.

Cons: Utterly formulaic; cheesy flashback scenes (I docked a quarter of a star just for those, they were that bad); "Abbey" the missing 16-year-old is an irritating (not to mention rather idiotic) little brat (she sneaks out and drives far, far away to meet her Internet "boyfriend", who just happens to play a very significant role in the long-ago death of her father); Abbey's Concerned Mother acts exactly like every other Lifetime movie mom.

(3.5/10)

Pros: Yet another PASSABLE Lifetime movie that I made it all the way through without drifting off to sleep.

Cons: It's also yet another (beyond) forgettable Lifetime movie -- sure, I might have watched it all the way through, but even if you begged for details and waved money in front of my face, I wouldn't be able to tell you most of what happened.

(3.5/10)

(Originally watched in the theater in 1997)

Pros: Passes the time; slight nostalgic appeal; Matthew Broderick is decent; New York City setting.

Cons: The characters are stalker-ish and very, very, very unlikable.

(Originally watched in the theater in 2015 -- several months later, I came across it on YouTube, thought "what the heck", and watched it a second time)

Pros: Good performance by Harrison Ford (and the actor who plays the younger version of him actually looks quite a bit like him) as well as by Ellen Burstyn and Kathy Baker (Blake Lively doesn't act all that different in the title role than she does as "Serena van der Woodsen" -- that said, I suppose she's fine, too); fairly original story; set partly in Sonoma County, California (even though it was really filmed in Canada; I still appreciated the "shout-out" to the county where my father spent his childhood); and on a more shallow note, some pretty outfits. Oh, yeah, Adaline's dog is cute.

Cons: Some plot holes and such, but the narration is the most glaring "con" (enough to significantly detract from the movie) -- not only does the narrator's voice sound oddly like that of a teacher reading a story out loud to young children, didn't the filmmakers ever learn that rule about "show, not tell"?

Pros: Pretty good cast (Kevin Bacon, Brendan Fraser, Andy Garcia, etc. -- although none of them are at their best); some nice cinematography; a few scenes are... somewhat interesting, I guess.

Cons: Pretentious and, for the most part, dull as dishwater. (I've seen duller and more pretentious movies, but still...)

(Originally watched on television, sometime in the late 1990's or early 2000's)

Pros: Pretty good cast (more or less); very "90's" in a mildly amusing way (enough for me to grant it an extra half-star); most of the scenes take place inside a radio station (and because I've worked at radio stations, I can "relate").

Cons: Extremely dumb overall; characters are obnoxious and not very likable -- ESPECIALLY not Amy Locane's character "Kayla", who's beyond grating, and practically abusive to her stupid boyfriend, "Chazz" (Brendan Fraser, sporting a ridiculous long, blonde wig).

(Originally watched on television -- I think I saw it when it first aired on TV, back in 1999)

Pros: It's a little bit better than the 2014 version of 'Annie' (not that that's much of an accomplishment); the first half is ... better than the second half.

Cons: Over-rated; performances aren't all that impressive; and even though it's supposedly more faithful to the stage production of 'Annie' than the 1982 movie, it's nowhere NEAR as entertaining as that version!

Pros: New York City setting... and, uh... familiar story (even though they get it all wrong!). I suppose it's not boring, either -- however, I wouldn't exactly call it "entertaining". Oh, and it's better than director Will Gluck's earlier film, 'Easy A' (ugh; see below), but so are 99.999999% of all the other movies that have ever been made.

Cons: Everything else! Poorly acted (Cameron Diaz in particular makes a REALLY terrible Miss Hannigan); the songs are awful and only get worse as the movie progresses; the wink-wink nudge-nudge references to previous adaptations of the story are just awkward; and WHY is Annie gratuitously illiterate?!

Pros: Susan Sarandon gives an okay (if predictable) performance; the movie didn't put me to sleep.

Cons: It's still fairly boring throughout and VERY forgettable; Natalie Portman's character is a whiny, unlikable brat; Sarandon's character, while slightly more tolerable, failed to win me over (despite her okay performance); overall, very Lifetime-esque, and not in a good way. (I'm not even sure why I watched this.)

(I think I originally watched at least the beginning of this in 2004, on Lifetime or some other television channel, when I was in Austin, Texas. Or maybe I just watched some special about it -- obviously, whatever I watched back then made SUCH an impression. Anyway...)

Pros: Not as atrocious as it could have been; the scenes with young "Audrey Hepburn" (regardless of whether or not they're accurate) are decent enough as far as TV movies go.

Cons: Jennifer Love Hewitt (as Hepburn) tries, but... fails (miserably); WAY too long and boring in its second half!

Pros: What's not to like? Fun, classic, nostalgic movie with great performances! (And yes, oddly enough, I watched this for the first time in 2015 -- although I might have seen bits and pieces of it when I was younger.)

Cons: I'm not sure that this counts as an actual "con" -- but, although I enjoyed the movie, I didn't LOVE it as much as some do (and I definitely wouldn't complain if I had to watch it again, but it's also not the kind of movie that I feel the need to watch over and over).

(Originally watched at school in 1990; see below)

Pros: Reasonably entertaining sequel (I actually first saw this one back in my 6th grade English class, when it was still fairly new, and more than 25 years before I finally watched the first 'Back to the Future' in its entirety; while I barely remember watching Part II the first time around, from what I *do* recall, even back then I found it "reasonably entertaining"); kind of funny to see "2015" as portrayed in the movie.

Cons: Not as entertaining or memorable as the first 'Back to the Future'; a little too chaotic.

Pros: It kept my attention while watching (I suppose), albeit not necessarily in a positive way (in any case, I didn't fall asleep); one or two pop culture references made me snicker a little bit.

Cons: LOATHSOME main character, played by Cameron Diaz (who was probably supposed to make me "love" her, "despite" the character's many obviously negative traits; I didn't); Justin Timberlake irritates (and don't "act", Justin Timberlake); not the least bit funny; I was tempted to rate it only half a star, but on top of everything else, the movie isn't exactly memorable -- and thus, I don't recall anything being bad enough for me to grant the lowest possible rating (that said, it's still VERY bad).

Pros: Three stars might be a bit of a stretch, since as far as storylines go, this is pretty typical Lifetime network fare; however, compared to other "based on a true story" TV movies, 'Black and Blue' is certainly one of the better ones (I first stumbled across it on YouTube and, while watching, assumed it to be a small, indie film; I was honestly somewhat surprised while reading reviews of it afterward to learn it was "just" a TV movie); good performances by Mary Stuart Masterson, Anthony LaPaglia, and Sam Robards.

Cons: I wasn't THAT surprised to find out it was a TV movie (again, it definitely has a "Lifetime"-y feel); Masterson's onscreen son is kind of a brat.

Pros: Dumb (to say the least) but in a totally guilty pleasure sort of way; much more entertaining than I expected it to be; amusingly "90's"; Brendan Fraser (who vaguely reminds me of Tom Hanks in this role; he even sort of looks like Hanks here) makes "Adam" quite likable and for the most part endearing (an accomplishment, since I imagine the character COULD have come across as rather nauseating); Christopher Walken and Sissy Spacek are also fun to watch as Adam's parents (who are almost as delightfully dorky as their son).

Cons: Alicia Silverstone grates somewhat as "Eve" (*eyeroll*), though I "got used to her" by the end of the movie (I still would have preferred to see less "Adam and Eve", and more of Adam and his parents in the bomb shelter!); Dave Foley is a little irritating (and basically thankless) as Eve's stereotypically flamboyant "G.B.F."/roommate (that said, he does have a couple of scenes with Adam that made me snicker -- but NOT the scene where they dance around to "Y.M.C.A.", which is fortunately brief but still made me groan); although I mostly liked Adam, he borders on nauseatingly "cute" (or whatever he's supposed to be) in the "Y.M.C.A." scene -- as well as in the scene where he first sees the ocean (the swing dance scene, on the other hand, is so hammy and so very "90's" that it amused me); the "leave my elevator alone!" cult scenes are mildly funny but at least parts of those scenes probably could have been cut, as they seemed to take up a bit too much screen time.

Pros: Um, it was nice to see Nina Siemaszko in a role again (granted, in one so very brief and thankless that her character doesn't even have a name; I actually didn't even recognize "Las Vegas Detective" as Nina Siemaszko while watching -- I merely thought she looked familiar -- until I checked the cast list on IMDb, after barely making it through this incredibly boring movie).

Cons: One of the dullest and most slow-moving films that I've ever seen! I guess I technically didn't "hate" it; I would have had to CARE to hate it, but the story, characters, and performances all failed to engage me (I'll give "Las Vegas Detective" a pass on that since she only has about two lines). Lifetime's 'Bling Ring' (for all its atrocious acting) is an absolute laugh riot in comparison.

Pros: I guess the "road trip" aspect; Arizona (where much of the movie is set) looks pretty onscreen.

Cons: Uninteresting and not very appealing characters (stupid "Holly" is a smidge more watchable than her two BFF's; that doesn't mean that I liked her); Bonnie Raitt's terrible cover of Roy Orbison's "You Got It" (from the soundtrack); practically every scene in the movie screams "this is a scripted chick flick!", rather than feeling authentic (especially "Robin's" illness -- and the "touching" scene where Whoopi Goldberg's "Jane" sings her own version of "You Got It" to Robin, which was obviously supposed to tug at my heartstrings; instead, it merely made my eyes roll).

Pros: For a Lifetime movie that follows the usual formula (dumb girl poses nude for her boyfriend, who posts the photos on a "revenge porn" website after they break up; perverts begin to stalk the girl and her Concerned Mom; Concerned Mom eventually saves the day), it manages to pass the "mindlessly entertaining" test.

Cons: That doesn't mean that it's actually GOOD; in fact, the acting in this one stands out as especially poor (the screenplay's no prize, either -- and as for the title, could it be any more generic?).

Pros: Kept me watching; better than the horrendously awful 'Bring It On: All or Nothing' (I haven't seen any other movies in this franchise -- and am not shedding tears over that fact).

Cons: Despite a few moderately... semi-entertaining scenes, most of the movie is just dumb (also, in some parts, quite dull); the characters are annoying, and have equally annoying names (such as "Torrance" and "Big Red").

Pros: Nothing stands out as AWFUL; New York City setting.

Cons: Yawn! Justin Long lacks personality (at least in this role; he could be overflowing with charisma in other roles, for all I know, but I'm not sure if I've seen him in anything else) and Evan Rachel Wood's character is (again) too much of a "manic pixie dream girl." Peter Dinklage (whom I've enjoyed in other movies) is kind of irritating, and Brendan Fraser's character has about two lines and could have been played by a stranger off the street.

(Originally watched at school in about 1996)

Pros: Fantastic performance by Robert Downey, Jr. as Charlie Chaplin (he should have won the Oscar he was nominated for); great supporting cast; interesting look at Chaplin's life; all in all, a very well-made film.

Cons: Perhaps a tad overlong.

(Originally watched at school in about 1996; see below)

Pros: Entertainingly dramatic; that "One" song is pretty catchy; New York City setting; I remember it was quite fun to watch with my snarky classmates back when I first saw the movie (in my junior year of high school) -- and it still held up pretty well when I finally watched it again in 2015.

Cons: Some of the acting... isn't the greatest (although Michael Douglas's performance is fine); apparently this film version doesn't hold a candle to the Broadway production -- but since I've never seen 'A Chorus Line' on Broadway (or any other show on Broadway, for that matter), the movie version works for me!

Pros: Oh, I don't know -- I suppose I've seen worse.

Cons: I enjoy the Cinderella fairy tale (and love the animated Disney version -- which is the only other film adaptation that I've seen besides this one and some silly tv movie "based" on Cinderella called 'If the Shoe Fits'), but who knew that the story could be so BORING? (Or so poorly acted?) Hilary Duff and Chad Michael Murray together lack chemistry and individually lack charisma, and Jennifer Coolidge just... needs to stop appearing in movies that I watch.

Pros: The story (the movie's about the Ariel Castro kidnappings; I think it's based on Michelle Knight's book?) is handled fairly well, considering that the film was produced by Lifetime.

Cons: It still feels somewhat uncomfortable to watch; while she doesn't really give a bad performance here, I tend to find Taryn Manning (who plays Knight) slightly off-putting (and I had a hard time not seeing her as "Pennsatucky").

Pros: Semi-entertaining, for being one of the more absurd Lifetime films.

Cons: Ludicrous plot about a (very Botoxy-looking) doctor who voluntarily checks into a mental institution one day under the pretense that she's been hired to work there -- only to soon discover (much to her horror) that she was tricked. The doctor has actually been committed (get it?) as a PATIENT, and now she can't leave. Le gasp! She tries to escape a couple of times, but pretty much just goes along with it, and ... silly and unrealistic things happen. I first saw this a couple of years or so ago, but didn't remember until I was already well into my second viewing that I'd seen it before (because it's THAT memorable).

Fun fact: 'Committed' is based on a novel by Susan Claudia; IMDb shows that another movie with the same title, based on the same novel, was made in 1991. The 1991 version's overall IMDb rating is a whopping 4.9 (in comparison, this 2011 version scores an impressive 5.4!).

(3.5/10)

Pros: You know the other movies on this list where I note "I've seen worse" and "New York City setting" as "pros"? The same goes for this lame movie. (Hey, seeing New York City onscreen -- even if in an otherwise blah film -- is always a "pro"!)

Cons: Dull; not the guilty pleasure that I sort of hoped it would be; and EXTREMELY forgettable!

Pros: Not as bad as it could have been; not quite "good" enough to call a guilty pleasure, either, but it sort of feels like something I would have "loved" (or at least genuinely enjoyed) had it been released back when I was a kid or "tween"; in short, basically harmless (it's also partly set in New York City!).

Cons: Harmless, but eyerollingly silly (especially the very special subplot about the alcoholic pop star); cringeworthy music by Lindsay Lohan, who also stars in this cinematic gem.

(Originally watched in the theater in 1994)

Pros: Good performances; some 90's nostalgic appeal; still held up fairly well in 2015 (I hadn't seen it for about 20 years prior to my most recent viewing).

Cons: No glaring flaws come to mind; all in all, though, 'Corrina, Corrina' is another "good but not great" film.

(Originally watched on DVD in about 2005)

Pros: Nice to see Matt Dillon and Brendan Fraser in the same movie (but if they appear in another movie together, I really hope it's better than this one and 'Pawn Shop Chronicles'; see below); also nice to see Ken Garito (whom I remember from "The Heights") in the cast list, although I can't say that I remember his character (who probably has about a line); and, um... uh... director Paul Haggis later "blew" from Scientology (not that that really has anything to do with 'Crash', but I'm trying to think of nice things to say!).

Cons: I remembered from my original viewing that 'Crash' was kind of stupid, but I'd forgotten that so much of it was so utterly DULL (in fact, this time, it lulled me to sleep); many scenes are also overly dramatic (and not even in a funny way); characters fail to engage (including Dillon's and Fraser's, despite the former's Oscar nomination; why for this movie, when he's made far better ones? Why did this win Best Picture -- why was it even NOMINATED?); Sandra Bullock irritates, as usual.

I'm tempted to rate only one star, but even with all its flaws, I suppose I didn't DESPISE 'Crash'; that said, I certainly didn't enjoy it very much, either!

Pros: Bad in an amusing way; reminded me of a cross between a Lifetime movie and something that would have played on USA Up All Night

Cons: Ridiculous; less than stellar acting; reminded me of a cross between a Lifetime movie and something that would have played on USA Up All Night (it was, in fact, released directly to DVD/Blu-Ray).

Pros: Kept me watching until the end; decent-enough performances from the leads.

Cons: "Meh" overall; I dislike Oprah Winfrey enough that even just her name attached to this makes me like it a little bit less (her "intro" at the beginning doesn't help, either; but at least she doesn't appear in the actual movie).

Pros: Passes the time and remains more-or-less entertaining throughout (although it's essentially just a knockoff of another Lifetime movie from two years earlier -- see 'Nightmare Nanny').

Cons: Doesn't really work as a "parody", which is what I think it's supposed to be -- it simply feels like run-of-the-mill (and not all that memorable) Lifetime fare.

Not sure if this is a Pro or a Con: While I tend not to care for "A-list" stars Kristen Wiig and (especially not) Will Ferrell, they didn't bother me too much here -- both actors play their (generic) roles "straight" and thus neither of them leaves much of an impression one way or the other. Jessica Lowndes actually stands out more as the sweet-and-innocent-on-the-surface-yet-secretly-evil (what? in a Lifetime movie?!) villainess of the week; however, Lowndes is basically rehashing her role from yet another Lifetime classic (see 'A Mother's Nightmare') -- and in both that movie and this one, her character pretty much just comes across as a slightly more psychotic version of "Adrianna Tate-Duncan."

(4.5/10)

Pros: Well -- the sheer bizarreness of watching Barry "Greg Brady" Williams, Dustin "Screech" Diamond, Danny "Danny Partridge" Bondaduce, and others (including David Spade as the stupid title character) sit around a table discussing such things as the famous characters they played, and how to pronounce Brendan Fraser's last name (Fraser -- pronounced Fray-zer -- has a random cameo in an earlier scene, awkwardly along with his now ex-wife Afton Smith, who comes across as rather snotty in her brief onscreen appearance) ... is, I guess, a "pro"? Same with the silly musical number performed by a HUGE chorus full of former child stars at the end of the movie (but don't swear, Marcia Brady!).

Cons: For the most part, the movie is every bit as dumb and unfunny as it looks; "Dickie" is highly irritating and vaguely creepy (especially when he's living with a "hot" mom and her two young kids, rediscovering his lost childhood so that he can be more convincing in Rob Reiner's new movie, or whatever such ridiculousness -- these scenes take up at least half of the movie); Dickie's hideous catchphrase ("nuckin' futs" -- like that would have really become a catchphrase, especially from a child actor).

Pros: Not... QUITE as bad as 'Borat'; I might have snickered once or twice; Kevin Corrigan and Ben Kingsley appear in it (WHY, I'm not sure -- you can do better, Kevin and Ben!); New York City setting.

Cons: Again, while not as obnoxiously unfunny as 'Borat' (or as, say, 'The Interview'), this one still isn't NEARLY as clever as it thinks it is; and, regarding the underlying political theme, could Aladeen's speech to his little hippie girlfriend in the movie's climactic scene (about why he suddenly "loves America") be any less subtle? Could you hammer me over the head a little harder with that, Sacha Baron Cohen? I'm still not sure what you were trying to say ... but I'm sure it was just a heartfelt and sincere love speech from a dictator to a hippie and not some kind of "ironic" statement, right?

Pros: Fine, I confess -- it's entertaining. Even for a Lifetime movie, this one's on the trashy side; but the teacher played by Josie Davis (looking rather... "under the knife"-ish) is amusingly pathetic (she falls in love with her student -- just like Mary Kay LeTourneau! Only "at least" this teacher's young obsession is a high-school senior; he might even be 18, and legal! But what about his girlfriend, another student? Maybe Teacher can keep her out of the way by giving her a bad grade and making her do extra homework!); the script laughably bad ("you're ugly!" says a voice inside the dirty teacher's head as she gazes mournfully at her reflection in the mirror; why won't Danny love her back anymore?!); and the shocking twists and turns (uh-oh, Miss Matson -- *spoiler alert!* -- "accidentally" ran Danny over with her car, and now he's dead! Will she get away with framing Danny's girlfriend for his murder?) about as suspenseful as a cereal commercial.

Cons: It's a Lifetime movie called 'Dirty Teacher'... need I say more?

Pros: Reasonably engaging; very good performance by Lili Taylor (the late River Phoenix is fine as her co-star, but I thought that Taylor did a better job as his "ugly" joke-victim-turned-sort-of-love-interest; perhaps I'm just judging Phoenix by his character, though, whom I really didn't care for); great soundtrack of sixties songs (the film is set during the Vietnam Era).

Cons: Drags at times; also (as mentioned above) I didn't like or even particularly care about the "Eddie Birdlace" character (and, seeing as how he and Taylor's "Rose" are really the only two prominent characters in the movie, I grew kind of tired of watching him by the end of the film -- even after he returned to Rose, which I suppose was nice of him; it still didn't change my opinion of him).

Fun fact: 'Dogfight' marked the big-screen debut of Brendan Fraser -- who has one (very ugly) line, and is credited as "Brendon" Fraser (ha).

Pros: Okay-enough performances; moderately engaging (in a predictable sort of way); New York City setting.

Cons: Contrived; not very realistic; ultimately forgettable (that silly "I'll never teeelll!" line used in the trailer was more memorable than the movie itself; I remember the trailer, but can barely recall the actual scene where that line was "spookily" uttered).

Pros: Passes the time while watching; kind of reminded me of teen movies of the 80's and 90's (I guess that's a "pro"?).

Cons: REALLY stupid; the main "high school" character (played by Mae Whitman) looks well into her 20's (Whitmoan was, in fact, well into her 20's); not particularly memorable, overall.

Pros: Just like many TV movies about eating disorders, this one's entertaining enough ... you know, in a mindless sort of way. (Plus, it's set in New York City!)

Cons: Ballet dancer (Kimberly McCullough, whom I mostly know as "Deena" from "The Shield") gets accepted into a prestigious school in New York City and is told to lose weight -- you know where this is going. In other words, predictable. (And basically blends together with other TV movies about eating disorders. This one's not as classic as 'For the Love of Nancy'; but it's definitely better than that one with the bulimic girl whose mother is played by Mare Winningham, whatever that one was called -- oh yeah, 'Sharing the Secret' [see below]. Talk about forgettable! 'Dying to Dance' is positively riveting in comparison.)

Pros: Absolutely none (this was one of the worst movies that I've ever seen, period). I've enjoyed Stanley Tucci and Patricia Clarkson in other films; but here, they're almost as annoying as everybody else involved (besides, why are they even in this mess? What were they thinking?!).

Cons: Overrated; poorly-written script filled with too many pop culture references that feel more like the screenwriter inserting his own personal tastes rather than actual dialogue; characters range from dull to despicable (NONE of them are likable) -- and, for the icing on the cake (wait -- that's an insult to icing...and cake), boring enough to eventually put me to sleep!

(for more, see the 'reviews' tab on my profile)

(I might have originally watched this when it aired on TV as a Hallmark Hall of Fame movie back in 1997, but I don't remember for sure.)

Pros: There are worse TV movies (and other movies) out there.

Cons: Really unremarkable; I had to Google it to remember what it was even about.

Pros: Lame and silly, yet harmless -- and VERY "90's" (case in point: there's a montage set to "I'm Too Sexy"); Sean Astin makes a convincing dork (even if he doesn't really look like a teenager); the obviously choreographed dance at the end.

Cons: Pauly Shore; annoying lines such as "Don't wheeze the juice!"; it's a movie about two high school geeks who find a caveman in a backyard and manage to pass the caveman off as an exchange student (with none of their parents or teachers ever suspecting a thing!).

(for more, see the 'reviews' tab on my profile)

Pros: Better than most of its negative reviews suggest (I don't disagree that it feels like a TV movie, which seems to be the biggest complaint from people who rate it down, but so what? It would be a well-made TV movie, and either way it's still better than a lot of the crap that plays in theaters); good cast and performances (Harrison Ford and Brendan Fraser don't really show us anything new here -- Ford's scientist character scowls and acts crabby throughout most of the movie, while Fraser plays the real-life John Crowley as affable guy/loving dad -- still, both Ford and Fraser are solid in these roles; and it's nice to see Courtney B. Vance and Alan Ruck show up in supporting turns); informative about Pompe's disease; I enjoyed seeing different locations in the Pacific Northwest (where the movie was shot, and at least partly set).

Cons: Drags just a bit in the middle; some of the science and medical stuff might go over one's head.

Pros: A plot so very absurd and unrealistic that it's *almost* funny (mean and abusive husband/father gets thrown out, then has extensive plastic surgery -- just like in 'The Stepfather 3'! -- except, unlike in that movie, this dad doesn't start over in a new town; he goes right back to his wife and daughter so that he can stalk them. Naturally, he pretends to be somebody else; and naturally they're so stupid that they don't even recognize him. Although maybe I shouldn't judge them, seeing as how whomever plays "post-surgery" dad looks absolutely nothing like Eric Roberts, who plays "pre-surgery" dad.)

Cons: Forgettable enough that *even after* googling 'A Fatal Obsession' (after seeing that I'd rated it), I had to struggle to recall which Lifetime movie it was (and it's not like that clever title helped matters much). Once I finally put it together, I remembered that the movie wasn't necessarily boring (I even managed to remember a few specific scenes, and I know that it kept my attention throughout); still, any story that revolves around a character undergoing extreme plastic surgery for the sole purpose of wreaking havoc almost REQUIRES that it be "so-bad-it's-good", and this movie never quite reaches that level.

(3.5/10)

(Originally watched sometime around 1986 -- I *think* I saw it in the theater, but I don't remember for sure. I've certainly seen it MANY times since then; and I recently watched it yet another time after coming across it on YouTube, just for fun -- even though I also own the DVD, and could have just popped that in!)

Pros: VERY nostalgic -- a classic of my childhood, and of the 1980's in general; the scenes with "Navigator" flying around in the spaceship are especially epic (I still flash back to this movie whenever I hear "I Get Around" by the Beach Boys).

Cons: "Navigator", aka "David" has a very whiny voice -- and frequently uses it ("I'm just a kid!" "I want to go HOME!"); it takes while to get to the best part of the movie (David's flight!).

Fun fact: Apparently, a remake of 'Flight of the Navigator' has been in development for several years (WHY? I have no idea, but just... no); however, it seems to be stalled. Which is probably a good thing.

(This aired on Lifetime as 'The Bride He Bought Online', which is also what it was called when I streamed it on YouTube and what it used to be listed as on the Internet Movie Database; I have no idea why it's NOW showing as 'Flirting with Madness'. I know that Lifetime often changes the titles of its movies, for whatever reason - but don't they usually do that before the movie airs? *shrug*)

Pros: Although FAR from a masterpiece, this one's not quite as cheesy as one might expect -- in fact, it's one of the better Lifetime movies. As creepy as he was, I even sympathized a bit with poor, "ugly" John (a sad and lonely man who seeks revenge on two awful teen girls -- and their slightly-less-awful friend -- after the two mean girls play a cruel "joke" on him: they invent a mail-order bride, get John to fall in love with her and send "her" money, lure him to the airport to "meet" her, then watch from a distance laughing as John stands around the airport clutching a bouquet of flowers and waiting nervously for his true love, who will of course never show. As if that's not bad enough -- later the witches post video footage of John at the airport on their stupid prank blog along with disparaging remarks. The One With The Conscience doesn't really participate in all of this, by the way; but she doesn't do anything to stop her friends, either -- and after John somehow finds the prank blog and is magically able to trace it back to the worst of the girls, he kidnaps all three of them and holds them hostage.) I'll go ahead and admit that the ending surprised me (at least the first time I watched. I'm slightly embarrassed to admit this, but 'The Bride He Bought Online' -- or 'Flirting with Madness', or whatever it's called -- is entertaining enough that I wound up watching it not once, but TWICE!).

Cons: Well, it's still a Lifetime movie; and while the four main characters kept me fairly engaged, I couldn't have cared less about any of the other characters (such as John's prostitute neighbor, who has at least three more scenes than necessary; and just what was she doing in her final scene, anyway? Trying to help John, or rescue the girls, or what?)

(5.5/10)

(Originally watched on video in about 1993)

Pros: Decent performances by Mel Gibson and Jamie Lee Curtis (also by a young Walton Goggins in his REALLY IMPORTANT role as "Gate MP"; at least he has a line or two, and it's fun to see Walton in one of his earliest onscreen appearances); passes the time, more or less; some 90's nostalgic appeal.

Cons: Elijah Wood (who wasn't a very cute or appealing child actor; perhaps that's why I don't particularly care for him as an adult actor, either); slightly dull at times; all in all, rather "average."

Pros: Uh...

Cons: Cheap-looking, unfunny, and DULL! So much so that I couldn't make it all the way through.

Pros: Sufficiently interesting "documentary style" film about teen bullying; fairly well done for what it is, BUT...

Cons: The ending kind of ruined the movie for me -- I wasn't convinced that "Avery" (the bully) would have this -- *spoiler alert!* -- huge change of heart, just from watching herself on video (and speaking of the video footage that leads to Avery's breakthrough -- although there's an explanation in the film, it still felt a bit "convenient" that there would be all this footage of Avery bullying Jessica, and that so many people would have access to it); also, I know it's intentional but Avery is EXTREMELY unlikable throughout the film (making her sudden change of heart at the end even less convincing).

(4.5/10)

Pros: Interesting and well-made documentary; exposes the crazy and disturbing world of Scientology; angered Scientologists.

Cons: Most if not all of the information presented is already out there (I haven't yet read the book on which this film is based; however, I've watched other programs and read quite a bit about Scientology, so nothing in 'Going Clear' was really "new" to me).