One star Amazon reviews of classic movies, music and literature. Today we take a look at Catcher in the Rye:

I am very open minded when it comes to literature (I even read through Mein Kampf without any objection) but I just hated this book! If it wasn’t required reading, I would have stopped on the fourth page! I think Salinger could have done much better!

This book is pathetic. Many people called it a “classic.” It’s the book that killed John Lennon. Oswald had a copy. So I thought “What the heck?” I then embarked on four hours of my life spent reading this complete testacle sack of a book; four hours I will never get back, I might add. The long and short of it is: the writing style is mundane and repetative, the crude language, while could be seen as “liberating” considering the time in which the book was written, becomes more numbing than anything else thereby losing its effect on the reader, and to wrap it all up, the boy is so unbelievably annoying, you find yourself applauding the pimp for slapping the crap out of him. The only reason this book survived to the present day is more because of the folklore surrounding it, rather than the book itself.
J.R.R. Tolkien said to C.S. Lewis concerning Lewis’s first book “Clive, people who are willing to use the word ‘bunk’ are going to call this book ‘bunk.’ They don’t know any better.” I am an educated man, and to call The Catcher in the Rye “bunk” is to give it far too high a praise.

THIS BOOK WAS HORRIBLE. I AM IN HIGH SCHOOL AND WE HAD TO READ IT IN ONE OF MY ENGLISH CLASSES. WE WERE TOLD THAT PEOPLE WANTED TO BAN IT AND I TOTALLY AGREE. HOLDEN WAS JUST THIS LOW DOWN DEPRESSED PERSON THAT ALWAYS FELT SORRY FOR HIMSELF. PLUS THIS BOOK HAD TOO MUCH BAD LANGUAGE AND SEXUAL CONTENT IN IT. I’M NOT THE TYPE OF TEENAGER EVERYONE THINKS ABOUT. I DON’T SWEAR,DO DRUGS OR SLEEP AROUND. BUT WHEN I READ THIS BOOK, I FELT LIKE SWEARING BECAUSE THE WORDS WERE CARVED INTO MY MEMORY. AND THEN WE HAD TO WRITE A PAPER ON IT USING WORDS HOLDEN USED. I DIDN’T USE ANY SWEAR WORDS AND GOT A BAD GRADE ON IT. THIS BOOK REALLY MADE ME MAD. I WOULDN’T HAVE READ IT BUT I HAD TO FOR SCHOOL. DO NOT READ IT!!!!!!

I have heard about this ‘brilliant” work of literture for many years. But until now have never read it. After reading it, I never missed anything. This is nothing but a priviledge wuss trying to be something that he never will be–a mature useful part of society. He constantly whines, projects his uselessness on others and has little to no ability to see that the phoniness his so hates in others is nothing but his own personality reflecting back to him. if he had to actually be responably for one second of his life and didn’t live of the wealth of his parents, maybe just maybe he might amount to something. I wish I had the time i spent on reading this dreck back.

My god, probably the most boring, inconsequential book I ever read. Thank god it’s a short one though. Spare yourself the trouble and read what wiki has to say about it, you won’t take away anything else from this piece of ****. The book makes fun of “Phony” people, well, I say the “Phony” people are all those who recommend this book. They only do it so they don’t feel so bad they were the only ones that read it, kind of like the emperor’s clothes.

Having said that, I dare you to find a book that says “… and all”, “…kills me” and “depressed” more times than this one.

I don’t know, maybe it’s just me, maybe I missed something, but I thought this was the most pointless, boring, and redundant book I ever read. There was no climax; there was no meaning. The supposed “conflict” was non-existent. Just heed my advice: Don’t read the book. Heck, even if you do, I’m sure you’ll throw it out after the first 10 pages.

I must say that this is one of the most pointless books I have ever read. It seems to appeal to the “typical teenager” who thinks the world is full of hypocrites. The book itself holds no redeeming qualities at all and served no purpose except to waste my time.

I’ve always wondered what about this book makes it a classic so I borrowed it from a friend and got ready to be entertained. But I was sorely and thoroughly dissappointed. I can’t believe this guy actually suckered a publishing house into actually printing this piece of garbage. Unles they did it as an example of just how NOT to write a book. There is no plot, no real character development and the language is instantly droll. If I hadn’t borrowed this book I would have been angry at having been swindled out of good money. Don’t waste your time.

This book was a complete waste of paper. It had some interesting points but, it had no plot. It also turned out to be a major dissappointment because it ended so poorly. It should have been some elaborate lie that he had thought up while telling his sister. His parents should have played a bigger role in the book. The one part I did like was him talking to his brother.

What a load of over-hyped rubbish.The main character seems to just have a problem with everything. I can’t believe I read the whole book, I was waiting for it to get good then, all of a sudden, it was finished ! Some people need to wake up and smell the coffee and this guy’s one of them.

I don’t see how so many people rated this book so highly. I spent precious time reading this, that I’ll never get back. If you want to waste your time reading about some stupid, snotty kid’s boring experience in New York, then go ahead, read it. This book is not a classic and all copies should be burned out of existence, they really should.

Would have rather read something else. I really didn’t like the book. To me the ending just stoped and it left many questions unanswered. Holdens constant whining and complaining really bugged me, and it drove me nuts how he would always repeat himself over and over again. One part that I liked is when he is at home with Phoebe, and they are in her room dancing to the music. Other then that part, the book didn’t interest me that much.

I thought the book was going to be a good read. WEll the book was ok at the begining. As it got further, no plot developed. Reading what Holden was saying got real frustrating because he kepts saying the same things over and over. Like the words. PHONY.. and he used the word “REALLY” 1,000,000 times too many. “I told you I am crazy. I really am.” that line is in the book about 500 times. And aren’t authors suppose to stay on the subject? I found my self skipping over pages at a time, while holden tried to explain something in the past.. Very boring. I wouldn’t recomend reading this garbage. Yea its a classic but who the hell cares it SUCKED!

Holden Caulfield is just a puling spoiled rich brat whinging about a lot of kak. The biggest ‘phony’ in the book is Holden Caulfield. This book’s popularity is due to it’s protagonist’s foul language, which is less pungent than mine was in High School.

This is the worst book I have read in a long time. It’s full of complaints and Holden doing stupid things. Reading it a waste of time. It will put you in a nasty mood and make you feel like there’s less to life than you originally thought. It was reccommended to me by a teacher and I was ready to slap her when I finished the book. I can’t find justification for it being called a classic.

This book was full of profanity and pointless dialogue. It didn’t live up to any of my expectations or my fellow student’s expectations. Catcher In the Rye should not be a classic novel. I strongly suggest looking for a different book that doesn’t constantly refer to Prostitution and loneliness.

If you’re fascinated by the ruminations of some whiny rich kid who thinks the world owes him a living as he ponders Central Park ducks and goes whore-chasing, then maybe you might like this book. No wonder Salinger has kept hidden from the public so long

Perhaps I am too old for it (I am 26) but I found the book extremely boring. Three days in the empty life of a teenager simply do not interest me. Moreover the book is written in a very irritating teenagerish slang. If your novel is about an ox, you should not write as an ox would.

the book is nothing but a democratic self centered view of life. i could care less about reading a book with a cry-baby wining about his life. this is the type of action that drags this country into the black hole of depression. if a book moves a person and it does not have the words holy bible on the front of it, it shows how lost the person it “moved” really is.

I think this book stinks. there were too many stupid curse words. that’s why i disliked this book. if this book is for young adults then why does the author encourage the usage of curse words.

This is a classic example of a book that would be much better as a movie. It really is just a watered down, tame Dawson’s Creek episode. Salinger doesn’t know how to write dialogue or project teenager’s emotions, but some of the visuals and situations would play out well in a film. I could see this starring Freddie Prinze Jr. This screwy book should be stripped from the shelves and turned into a WB show, maybe it could replace Dawson. Two thumbs down, Salinger.

Hi, I’ve read this book, and I must say that I have read the damage that it caused, according to stories I have read. This book was linked with the murders of John Lennon, and actress Rebecca Schaeffer. How could this book be around, when so many nutcases use it for such things?

This is a disgusting, filthy book that should, God-willing, NEVER infect another child’s mind

A 1651 favorable reviews, who the hell could disagree ? Well I’ll try..
Been working in the various college bookstores since 1968, I had a chance to read a few pages from this book. Its literary quality is not that great, the emotional harmony with the increasingly more infantile american public signals the takeover of teeagers of the public life. We all saw the results. This is the basic affect of liberalism, with no positive vision of a possible action. However, even after 9/11/01, my son is compelled by the New York State to read this second rate fiction, alongside with ” The Chocolate War”, “Lisa Bright and Dark” and other “pulp-fictiony” type of “STUFF”.
How about some Faulkner, Hemingway, Dreiser, Dos Passos, Vidal, even Zane.

FIRST OF ALL, IGNORE THE ONE STAR, AMAZON DIDN’T HAVE A SETTING FOR NO STARS. I had to read this trash for school in my ninth grade year. I took a neutral approach, if not a little bit positive, for the book before I read it. I had one of those beatnik teachers who wanted to find the hidden meanings in this worthless waste of time. We were searching in a dark room for a black cat that wasn’t there. There are no hidden meanings in this book, nor are there any sort of points or end destination. Nor will you find anything worthwhile except for the brief moments of shock value when the author uses curses or talks about sex. I have read many books and frankly, this is the worst trash I have set my eyes on. SAVE YOURSELF FROM THIS TRASH, READ CLASSIC LITERATURE!

This was a terrible book! Why is it so interesting to hear about a boy who keeps flunking out of school, is let loose in New York, and can only think about sex? I don’t see why this is such a classic.

I never heard of this book before our daughter said she had to read it for high school English. As soon as the teacher started reading it in class our daughter said it was dumb, she wanted out of English class ,I want to quit school, and why do I have to listen to my teacher read all this foul language including the F word repeatedly. We said you don’t and pulled her from the class. Christian or not if you have any moral compass at all Catcher in the Rye is a book to avoid. The book inspired the murderer of John Lennon. It talks about and seems to condone all sorts of sin,including prostitution. drunkeness, lying,blasphemy, and fornication.It is a very depressing book and is filled with foul language on every page. It doesn’t edify or build up the reader to become a better citizen or self governing individual.It makes every attempt to drag you down to its level, the gutter. The Bible says whatsoever things are honest, true, just , pure, lovely, and of good report, if there be any virtue, think on these things . You can’t think on these things reading “goddamn “245 times in a 200+ page book. Beware Parents. Don’t fall for the line that its on the schools approved reading list or that it is a literary ‘classic’. This book is filth ,pure and simple. Its a sad commentary on our times that it is taught in our public schools. I had to give it a one star rating but it really doesn’t rate to be opened let alone read.

One star Amazon reviews of classic movies, music and literature. Today we take a look at Charlie and the Chocolate Factory:

Dahl is a sadistic creep who was severely abused as a child. From reading his Dahl’s biography “boy” it’s easy to see where he, and so many other British authors, get their twisted ideas from; the harsh and cruel British Gulags aka boarding schools.
Roald Dahl loves to write stories about tormented, punished, starving, suffering children (and adults for that matter, too). I don’t think British people like children, period.

This book is for ADULTS THAT DO NOT LIKE KIDS. All the kids are bad besides Charlie Bucket, and for some odd reason all the adults besides the Buckets are fat. All the kids get punished because they do something wrong. Everyone makes mistakes, and there are bad words in the book that should not be used. So that is why I rate this book with one star, and if I could rate it lower I would.

I thought this book was not very good. Nobody died because of the oompa-loompa. The characters were very stupid. I didn’t like augustus because he ate to much. The arguing was o.k.

I read this book when I was young and was disturbed by it. It is not a kid’s book. It is a book by an adult ABOUT children, not FOR children.

This book paints a very negative picture of children. With the exception of the main character, all of the children are bad and are punished in cruel ways for their faults. Are most children fundementally bad and deserving terrible punishment, at the moment they least expect it? This book suggests it (especially to a child who might be reading it and cannot understand what “social commentary” is yet). This book fits right in with the Omen and Rosemary’s Baby. It is a child-exploitation story.

I recommend this book to adults who do not like children.

I think this book was boring its not as good as the movie. Ithink the movie was better then the book.

I don’t begrudge Charlie and his spiritual journey with Grandpa Joe, or his final reward. But there’s nothing in the book of redeeming value for girls to identify with, unless one counts long-winded railing against spoilt kids with very bad habits?

The underlying message of this book is that girls have no part in larger adventures and rewards, that men and boys and male Oompa Loompas run the show. Mothers are either shrill, hysterical harpies or passive, feckless shadows.

This was a good storie for people who like Umpa Lumpas.Charlie is a super duper silly evil man.The dad has been a big fat meany grumpy dad.The Charlie has been eating to much chocolates.The dad has been being a meany to everyone in town.That thee brother has been being a big fatbig big big big big fat fat fat meany.

One star Amazon reviews of classic movies, music and literature. Today we take a look at Revolver:

What can you say about The Beatles? The best thing I can think of is that they came from Liverpool. But given that noone of them even cared about football, never mind Everton, I won’t even say that’s a good thing. The Beatles is in my opinion the worst band in history. OK everyone was totally loaded on crack and drugs in the 60′ies, but surely you’ve all woken up by now??? It’s pathetic! Every single song. Yellow Submarine is an embarrasment to the human race. It’s the kind of song you thought was hillariously bad even in children school. If you like music then don’t even consider buying a Beatles record.

This is certainly one of the poorest albums ever made. No track can be considered outstanding. The musical prowess of the Beatles, never strong at the best of times,(witness the abysmal guitar and drum “solo’s” on “The End”, is laid painfully bare on this album. Without the energy of their early songs, these tracks hang by the slimmest of melodies and the weakest musical hooks.

Revolver is the Beatles’ weakest album, worse than Yellow Submarine.It displays poor production by George Martin and superficial songwriting, although George’s contributions are far better than John’s. Ringo’s influence is felt strongly on this album. Revolver does the Beatles’ reputation irreparable damage, and it was also their least influential work. A candidate for the worst album of all time by any artist.

I won’t even mention taxman, as an earlier reviewer put it, hearing multi-millionaires complaining about their tax bills is appalling.

Thankfully I am no longer blind and can see this album for what it really is, regardless of how many critics tell you it is great, use your own ears and determine the truth.

One star.

There is flat out one good song on this album – “Taxman”. It is one of the worst albums ever recorded by a decent band.

I love Old school Music, Marvin Gaye, Stevie Wonder, The rolling Stones and The beatles are some of my Favorite artists But what’s up with the Hype? This album is so outdated and poorly produced that it’s a sham to give it more than one star. Any one who thinks this is the MOST groundbraking “Album EVER” Doesnt know anything about music, must be sleeping or living in the past. I know good music when I hear it But this is truly one of the worst albums I’ve ever heard.

After Listning to Lame songs like “Love to you” “Tommorow Never Knows” My ears basically started bleeding. A truly weak and dissapoiting effort, Even HELP! is better.

One star Amazon reviews of classic movies, music and literature. Today we take a look at The Old Man and the Sea:

What was the point in this book? The guy sat in a boat for God knows how many days to catch this fish. Yeah, happy day, good for him, but who cares?!

I couldn’t have cared less what happened to the old man, the fish, the boat, or Ernest Hemmingway. It was a titanic struggle to get through the book–way harder than anything the old man had to face. James Joyce does stream of consciousness a whole lot better–and I hate Joyce’s writing too.

If you are an average Joe looking for a good book to read, this is not for you. I found this book to be repetitive and everything is always linked to something else. It seems to drag on with descriptions and may seem as if it could be written in a few pages. If you are the a literature junky, the type that cannot get enough symbolism and loves to sit around and analyze stories trying to find a hidden meaning this book will delight you, but if you want a book with suspense, mystery and a decent ending stay away.

There was about one hundred pages about a fish. Why would anyone care that much about a fish? If the story had a little more action and a little less about the mans’ cramped hand, it would be a tiny bit better. If you wanted to read a book about a fish, this is the book for you.

This book is very boring. In the beginning it didn’t even spark my interest. Because the book was written without chapters, it is kind of hard to tell whats what and whos who. I fell aslleep every 10 minutes, or made up an excuse to do something else. There is no suspense or adventure, but only an old guy talking to himself. This book is written nicely, but only in one way-(thats where the 1 star came from)-because you could picture all this in your head, because of his very descriptive writing

Have you ever watched anyone fish? Pretty boring, isn’t it? Well, just imagine how much more boring it would be to read about somebody else fishing. That should give you a sense of how mind-numbing an experience it is to read “The Old Man and the Sea.” I am not ignorant of its deep religious symbolism. It is certainly a profound story, but it also happens to be a very dull one.

“The Old Man and the Sea” should be changed to “The Old Man and the Snore.” This book doesn’t even deserve 1 star. Symbolism is flowing faster than a faucet in this book, so be prepared. Read this book when you are wide-awake, as you may fall asleep when the Old Man is talking to himself, when he is alone at sea. Again, this is another book I do not understand why is required reading in high school, as I got nothing out of it but a good nap. I do not recommend.

This “novel” was the worst “piece of literature” I have ever read. If you can spare yourself from the agony of reading a hundred or so pages about an old man and a fish, than do so. This book brought the worst period of my life to a dramatic climax. I was more miserable reading this book than when my wife divorced me and my parents disowned me. I now have no one but at least I don’t have to read this book anymore. Thank you god.

The Old Man and the Sea is short and sweet, and also it is so boring that the pages are repetitive of the same details. I could have skipped some and not to miss a thing. By the time the Old Man gets to slay fish and sharks, he is feeling like a hero at the end of the day. To me, he is just a loser who happened to kill bunch of animals to prove his worth. Come on, get a life. All in all, The Old Man and the Sea is a dull read.

Hemingway apes “Moby Dick,” recasting Ahab as a “black sheep” shaman who constantly yearns for his overly emotional boy slave and has self-destructive tendencies he takes out on his loved ones and those who seek to possess said loved ones. Everything is emptiness, like brainpans fried away, ornaments without luster.

At least Idaho Spud keeps his aimless ramblings brief, unlike the constipated “A Moveable Feast,” in which Papa Longstocking trained a spotlight on the mundanity of social hour at the writers guild.

Slow.Slow.Slow.
Enough said
I really wanted to burn Hemingway alive (but…that’s out of the question)
Plot was awfully developed.

This book sucks. Only a depressed person would like this book. The old man is lonely and keeps trying to fish but doesn’t catch any. It’s like that old saying, if you put your mind to it you can accomplish anything, but this old man failed. Only a depressed person would like it

Negative infinity stars.

One star Amazon reviews of classic movies, music and literature. Today we take a look at The Scarlet Letter:

This book is like a bad soap. No action. No drama. Very predictable. It is about a woman who cheated on her husband with another man. The baby dad is the preacher. Why the couple couldn’t have gotten a divorce is beyond me.

I’m sure I would be able to understand the vivid descriptions and symbolism in this book much better, if Hawthorne were not writing in some sort of moon man language. I don’t know about the production of narcotics in the 1800′s, but I honestly think that Hawthorne wasn’t on a natural high if you know what I’m saying.

It is my invariably correct opinion that the so-called author responsible for this overly extravagant and flamboyant style of writing should be dragged into the street and summarily executed, with EXTREME prejudice, for crimes against humanity and the English language.

Throughout this entire book, one part of my brain was in a state of wonder, trying to imagine how anyone could make a book about scandal, sin, adultery, public shame and cowardice so dull. To finish the book was a test of will, and was accomplished because I hate to leave things undone.

I just thought it didn’t do a very good job of saying what it was trying to say. It was unnecessarily vague (what is the reason behind trying to confuse somebody?), wordy, high-flown and just too big. The story could have been told more effectively as a short story, even half the length. I don’t reccommend.

I’ll admit right up front that I am stupid. I would rather enjoy a book instead of try to find my way through the maze of confusing, endless prose that Hawthorne uses. I found myself empathizing more with Chillingworth than Dimmesdale. A book should NOT have to be dissected and disscussed to be understood!!!

Yes the writing is poetic…but the book says the same thing over and over. I didn’t feel like I learned anything from reading this book, the characters are rather flat and the symbols are far too obvious and there is too many of them. It’s like Hawrthorne had a contest with himself to see how many symbols he could cram in.

This is probably the most confusing and worst book I have ever read! The author uses incredibly large words and you constantly have to use a dictionary or else you most likely won’t know hat you are reading.

Aghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, this the worst book i’ve ever read, I consider myself open to all fine lterature but I absolutely hate this book. But the writing is superb!

The pain brought on by this archaicly verbose peice of literary kindling is so great that, while reading, I was greatly tempted to gouge out my eyes to prevent any future encounters with Mr. Hawthorne’s “work”. Please, for the love of all things sacred USE CLIFFNOTES!!! It will save you from years of therapy. I am scarred for live. My soul will be tormented after death and i will be forced to walk the earth in search for reconciliation.

I would not inflict this story upon my worst enemy

One star Amazon reviews of classic movies, music and literature. Today we take a look at Rocky:

This movie is just 2 hours of sylvetster stalonne rambling on about something or other(probally homosexuallity) and i for one was more impressed with rocky 3 cause it had Mr. T

The main reason why I gave this movie 1 star is because the showdown between Rocky and Apollo Creed at the end is very disappointing. I was expecting a big climatic boxing match, but I was appalled at just how boring and short it was. Rocky didn’t even win the damn World Heavyweight Championship belt from Apollo Creed because the referee stopped the contest too soon. Right before the credits at the very end of the movie, Rocky looks so retarded screaming, “Adrian!” over and over again. What a lackluster conclusion. I’ve heard people tell me how the climax of this movie gave them goosebumps. Well guess what? I didn’t get one single goosebump! The ending to this movie sucked! Nearly everybody else seems to think that this movie is just the greatest thing they’ve ever seen, but I don’t.

I bought this because of the fact that the DVD cover said ” Nominated for 10 acadamy awards!” This movie is aweful! 1 star is giving it too much credit. I love Sly Stallone but his acting was too painful to watch. I went to bed after suffering through the first hour. My wife informed me that it didn’t get any better. If this movie were to be released in this day and age, it wouldn’t have a chance!

This has got to be the worst film I have ever seen in my life. I cant believe that there is more that one in the series. I absolutly hated it. I have never liked a film with Sylvester Stallone in it. Have you seen his mother, You cant tell them apart when there standing next to each other.

I dislike all of the Rocky Movies. I’m sorry, but they are all mindless, and Sylvester Stalone is annoying, and can’t act. One star is giving this movie way too much credit.

I know many think this was a great movie but it’s not for me

Stallones accent doesn’t help either. Strange enough the sequels were far better. The problem with this film is that it drags too much.

One star Amazon reviews of classic movies, music and literature. Today we take a look at The Breakfast Club:

This is without a doubt one of the dumbest and worst films ever made. I came of age during the 80s and even I can’t sit through it. Terrible performances, breathtakingly silly dialogue, and gawdawful music. Is to film what Wang Chung was to music. A real super-duper-pooper.

OK in all seriousnessity…this movie has a misnomer. It really should just be called “The Lunch/Snack Time Club” because did anyone but me catch the fact that all the significant events occurred..DURING LUNCH/SNACK TIME?? helllo! it wouldn’t even qualify for the brunch club!

Sometime between 1967 and 1970 pictures started to stink more and more. But for about 15 more years at least they had solid storyline. Then in 1985 with the premiere of the Brat-Pack pictures (beginning with this one)pictures sucked and no longer had solid storyline. As for this film. I rest my case. The story which is (only!!!) about teenagers in detention wouldn’t have made a z-picture in Hollywood back in the 1950′s. As for the dialogue well, it’s weird to say the least. The film is pretty pointless!

This movie is terrible! I’m clueless why it’s so popular. I’ve never seen so much concentrated whining a movie. Please don’t waste your time by seeing this one.

When did dysfunction become something you celebrate with evening family screenings on the courthouse lawn with funny hats, foam-filled chairs, sacs of nutritionless substances and an out-of-place Husker Du reference? Or is it? I like to split up into three sections and go zooming across the screen, feet up like hooks, tail grinding in the gravy. How does a director even convince human beings to act in such a manner? Hi, have you heard, I’m the nerd. Then they show it at the retro soc hop iGasm. And you take your disillusioned significant other, palms pasty, hands clasped awkwardly and tight, reaching toward one last empty grasp at what is now long past, becoming a biased memory. You know what a breakfast club is? It’s where you compare the size of your sausages and — ladies in da hizzo — your eggs.

John Hughes can script and direct very well and proved that with”Pretty in Pink: and “16 Candles”. Legend has it that he cranked out the screenplay to “Breakfast Club” in two days, and I think it really shows. With exception of Anthony Michael Hall, the players are all poorly cast. Molly Ringwald is pretty and talented, but not pretty or talented enough to make an impression as a spoiled teen queen. Nor are Nelson and Estevez buyable as class stoner and class jock. Kids this age are often shallow, but the roles here have all the real depth of a leaky baby pool.
Worse than the poor casting is Hughes’ “reach-to-be-deep” script. This group of kids are supposed to jointly reach profound conclusions about their lives and themsleves in the matter of a few hours of detention. It’s a try-too-hard grasp at brilliance that cheapens the viewer and writer both.

With the small cast and lack of location shots, I’m amazed that I’ve never read about some high school drama club doing a stage production of this disaster. In any case, I’ve got a Breakfast Club DVD I’ll never watch again – I’ll post it under “Used & New” above.

One star Amazon reviews of classic movies, music and literature. Today we take a look at Animal Farm:

This book is disgraceful! It is the worst book ever! It really stinks! All it has is animals that run around and say “Comrade!”
Good grief!

Of all the things I have ever read! What a terrible and unrealistic story. I mean, how can animals talk? I have a parrot that talks but not in complete sentences. And besides the pigs run the show in this and if it really happened the cats would run things because everyone knows that cats are born leaders. Anyway, I wouldn’t reccomend this book to my worst enemy. I read this book to my nephew, Simon and he started crying and now he is afraid of pigs and horses because he says that they will rise up and establish a totalitarianist state and will rule over us. Ughhhh! It gives me a head ache.

This book was terible. I was forced into reading this book in school. Which is no surprise, this is exactly the kind of book our government wants to force people to read, so they hand it to schools, and try to force us to read it. This book was written by a insane man named George Orwell, who hated society, and displayed that by bashing humanity, and making people look like lower lifeforms than animals. He used pigs to potray govermnent officials (which isn’t a bad choice if you ask me), horses for hard working people, dogs as SS troops, etc… Throught this entire book, he constantly tries to show that humans are sick people, that will corrupt no matter what happens. To be honest I think this man is crazy and needs to be locked up.

the book ‘animal farm’ was not very good. we read it in english, and the book is so boring i almost fell asleep reading it. george orwell must be old. i do not recommend this book to anyone.. try watching tv instead. but dont watch the movie, its worse than the book.

Perhaps the worst book I have ever layed eyes on. I can’t stand this kind of unrealistic plot, (whose ever heard of pigs giving lectures about politics). If I weren’t having to read this for English 10 I could be digging into a true classic and my holidays would be much more enjoyable.

This book sucks so bad I couldn’t even get through it. I quit reading it before chapter three. I would not recommend this book to anyone you will waste your time and in the end or whenever you throw it away you’ll be asking yourself who would write a book with talking animals?

The book ANIMAL FARM was a deceitful and untrue book. It was full of lies implying that socialism was wrong to the reader who didn’t read meaning into George Orwell’s book. Some people may say that the book was a great acheivement and made us get rid of communism and socialism, but they may have also watched the movie. The movie ANIMAL FARM made the book seem 100 times better than it actually was. There may be people in the world who have absolutely no taste, and have a great love for the book Animal Farm, but if you have any sense you will do anything to get out of reading the book, including burning the book.

This is george orwells take on the russian revolution that tells lies and myths after another. I would suggest that others read historical tracts to reveal Orwells obivious bias and work for the british ruling class. He maligns the great achievements of the working class in the soviet union to animalism, also how human can change and create a better society. Eventhough the SU had its imperections and finally in the 1950s returned to capitalism(which they called socialism).

For all of you out there that see this book as a classic, I’m sorry, but it was the most incoherent gibberish I have ever read in my life. I was forced to read it for an english class, and I found it nearly impossible to finish. It drags on and I don’t think it sets a good example. It deters people from standing up for their rights, making it seem like revolution always ends in failure.

This book is, without a doubt, the most over rated “classic” I have ever read. It’s not like there are multiple themes and ideas up for discussion here. The book has one point that it beats to death over and over again. Why anybody would ever need Cliffs notes to figure out what the book is about is beyond me. If you read the first 20 pages, you already know how the book is going to end. What, you mean the pigs gave themselves even MORE power? Shocking! I never saw that one coming! Save your energy for a book worth reading.

Its is so annoying to see liberals writing books in politics, and i dont care who they attack- Liberals hate everybody else. Stupid guy had to express his feelings and whine about Russia. Okay Russia was bad, but this is just annoying. I didnt learn anything new, and even if i did i probably wouldnt care. A kid who reads this is going to be shocked at what he reads, no magic, just boring old crap.

Did Al Gore direct this? I was just you know, curious because the animals are talking and stuff and they even have like, this hierarchy of power and things don’t make sense like that. This is an anti goverment film but all I hear is Total arin ism which gets to be useful when instilled in the drinking water of places like Africa. Well we gave them animals to eat and they just turned them loose in fields and never fed them and they died. This book is co-written I think by Gore and Moore, but who knows I mean anymore you cannot figure out who is who, but I am Cathy and I escaped from Taurine and this is my review of Animal Farm. Oh, and even if you give a pig pickles it will still attack you if it is hungry!

One star Amazon reviews of classic movies, music and literature. Today we take a look at Psycho:

This has got to be the worst movie ever. A plot about a guy that keeps his dead mother’s body around and kills people in the shower. Lame

I have never watched a horror movie so dull as the original black and white Psycho. Nothing in the film is scary and the soundtrack is repetitive and not extremely memorable. The acting is very mediocre and I would suggest the remake anyday. I’ll never understand what the big fuss is, the movie stinks. I’d choose Halloween anyday and It bothers me that people have the audacity to say Halloween is a remake or some kind of copy of Psycho. Halloween may have the character name Sam Loomis–but they are com-pletely different characters. It also has the daughter of Janet Leigh, but Jamie Lee Curtis is much more convincing and just because you the daughter of an actress, it doesn’t mean you do the same movies. Hello people, Psycho is merely a boring suspense film(they never show anything in full graphic footage) and I’d recommend Dressed To Kill(a Psycho rip-off made way better), Carrie, Halloween, The Guardian, and even A Nightmare On Elm Street anyday before this lame excuse for a horror film.

Hitchcock himself would never have been successful with this movie in the 90s. The truth of the matter is, people who say they love classic films over today’s films(eg. Casablanca, Citizen Kane) say it to give the impression they are intelligent film connoiseurs.

Well, I can’t state how much I feel this movie is too overrated and medicore at best. It isn’t scary and it is not exciting or violent. The story is very retarded about a man that fulfiles his position as his dead mother and keeps her body in the basement. Ohhhh, how interesting, this is exactly the kind of movie I’d want to show to my intelligent teachers or friends. Yea right. There are no good effects, the acting, story, B and W color, and sets are lame and the let’s find Marion sub plot is boring. No I am not one of those teenagers obsesed with blood or gore and FX, I apreciated the bloodless halloween and Rosemary’s Baby (and non-horror films)with interest and admiration. People are always raving that Psycho paved the way for horror movies of the eightess but the truth is that Halloween ignited the formula and copy cats. There wasn’t many horror movies in the 60′s or 70′s so how could Psycho cause this “formalic” version of horror movies. It couldn’t because it wasn’t formalic, it was just stupid. Anyhow, a story about killers were bound to come up forth with or without Psycho. And if you think the shower sequence was scary then i must ask you, WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN????????

This movie was so un-scary that the only reason it is a ‘horror’ film is the dishonor it gave to the name Hitchcock. All the ‘shower scene’ did for me was give me a roaring migrane with all that squalking and squeaking.

this is so stupid i could puke!a movie based on the exploits of ed gaines.hes also the inspiration for red dragon and some other silence of the lambs.hes the guy in texas chainsaw massacre.norman bates is only created from ed.norman runs this hotel and kills whoever comes there.his dead mom is in his head encouraging him all the way.he thinks hes a chick and even dresses up like one to kill.not for the kids unless youd like them to have aids.cross dressing and prison can both point you in the right direction if thats something youre interested in.im not.f!2k that!its obviously a horror film.in fact,theres the famous shower scene where he hacks this chick up in a shower.dont get your hopes up,theres no nudity,only a silloutte of the 2 bodies and tiny little spatter of blood.it was the most violent scene in the world at the time.

The only admittance I can muster for this video is that it was probably influential in its day. However, all the praise heaped on Psycho is basically garnered from that and has very little to go on, in reality. Nowadays, this movie looks incredibly homemade and, at times boring, especially during the parts where it is obvious Hitchcock is trying to build “tension.” Plus, it’s in black-and-white, which makes a movie look old right away. When Hitchcock tries to bring in the “psychological” element to the movie, it looks even worse, because it is dreadfully apparent that he has no idea what he’s talking about. Thankfully, someone decided to remake this movie, but that wasn’t very astonishing either, since everyone already knows from this movie what the story will be. Save your money and go to the theater to see any horror movie you want–it’s guaranteed to be more believable than this one.

I had expected a really good movie from Psycho because I had heard so much good things about it. I didn’t ghet what I wanted, because this film is just terrible. The way the camera was shot was stupid cupid, the director could of done soo much better, the acting was terrible, the music gave me a headache and the screenplay and special effects were silly and made the film boring to look at.

This film is so boring and in the shower scene it was obviously Bates the wig even from shadow was awful. SEE THE REMAKE FAR MORE ENTERTAINING!

One star Amazon reviews of classic movies, music and literature. Today we take a look at Jaws:

This movie is SOOOOOOOOOO bad! By far, the most overrated movie of the 70′s. What’s the big deal? And how many times can you say “Shark attack! Get out of the water!” in five minutes? Well, find out when and IF you rent this crap, even though everyone of Earth has seen it already.

They don’t show the shark until 5 minutes to the end of the movie, either! Every time a scary or suspenseful part comes, it turns out to be a fish or something in the water, but not the shark.

I can’t understand why JAWS continously pops up on ‘Greatest Horror Movie’
lists and critiques…it is NOT great, NOT a horror (more like horrible),
and while it IS a movie, it’s just not all that good to me. I guess most people like it because it has a lot of names involved with it. Maybe I’m biased because I am not a swimmer and have never been into water sports, but I just find it extremely boring after the first attack or two. There are far better movies as far as I am concerned…JAWS is one of my least favorite films, never liked it even as a kid.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind was AWESOME. JAWS was horrible! Cheesy special effects,atrocious acting,URGH!

Literally, the only remote credability I can see from this movie is Spielberg directing.

Professional move script writers agreed with me that the plot of this movie is very thin, and here’s a perfect example.

Basically, the plot goes round in circles with people (who don’t even qualify as minor characters) getting killed off by a shark while nobody cares… I mean, knows that this is happening. But THEN, later on someone dies in front of everybody. So because they all saw this, nobody goes in the ocean at that beach anymore and the movie ends, right? Well, no. Because this is only about 40-50 minutes in, three idiots begin hunting the shark with a boat, despite the fact that nobody with any semblence of a brain would be swimming near that beach. In other words, not only does the plot make no sense, but THE ENTIRE SECOND HALF OF THIS MOVIE IS FILLER.

By far the worst thing about this is that it is an adaptation of a novel (written by Peter Benchley, if I’m not mistaken). This means that Peter Benchley actually managed to drag out this boring, black-and-white, thinly-plotted storyline, without characters* anyone actually cares about, for several hundred pages. Well, either that of Pter Benchley wrote a GOOD novel and it got turned into this garbage.

* = well, okay, there were about thirty-five minutes in which Chief Brody was non-boring

What can I say. This movie is not only stupid, but also insensitive. Along with the fact that the acting was terrible, and the music was cheesy, I need to add something else. I am, along with being a big cat, hyena, and wolf lover, also a shark lover. Sharks are both cool and beautiful. This piece of trash shows sharks as something they are not-bloodthirsty, sadistic killers who kill for fun and destroy anything they please. Hey, humans. How about the fact that over 1,000,000 sharks died because of humans, but only 100 humans died because of sharks? How about the fact that sharks have difficulties and feelings just like we do? How about the fact that this movie is an attempt to make people hate sharks, when they should be helping them? As far as I’m concerned, anyone who likes this movie is insensitive to the cruelties sharks have had to go through. A message to the director Steven Speilberg-YOU MAKE ME SICK!!!!!!!!!! If it were up to me, every copy of this movie and any other movie meant to make hate to any cool predator would be rocketed into space forever. And I don’t give a (BEEP)that many people liked this movie. They just don’t see what I see. I can’t believe I ever watched this stupid s–t. If you are a shark lover, or an animal lover of any sort, do not see this movie. It is just another way to represent sharks as evil. And Steven Spielberg is a jerk. A very big jerk. Boy, how he makes me PUKE! Anyway, nuff said. Don’t see this work of insensitivity.

Come on. Why do people consider this a classic? Why do people consider this good?

I’ve watched it so many times, trying to find a redeeming quality SOMEWHERE in it, but I just can’t! And it frustrates me how people proclaim it a great movie and a classic, and it’s a terrible movie! Of course, I realize this is just my opinion, and I’m not masquerading it as anything more, but come on, now. Why is it so great? Why is it so suspenseful? I just don’t get it.

At least ‘One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest’ beat it for Best Picture.