Comparing this film with the first rather than the second is not really an insult; both were good. Just not, by comparison with the second film, exceptional.

By and large I found the movie entertaining, and perhaps one of the better films aimed at children in past months.

Overall, this is an enjoyable story, of somewhat more, I think, than merely historic value.

X-Files fans in particular may find the movie quite enjoyable.

Expect little. Enjoy what you get.

All criticisms aside, I think my opinion of this story can best be described by the fact that I read it three times in the first two weeks after I bought it.

If you wait for the final plot twist, you’ll lose your place in line at the cineplex rest room.

I’m not one of the world’s great Robinson fans. But I genuinely enjoyed this novel.

As so often happens, some viewers will go in expecting Halle Berry to play another Academy Award role, in the Best Movie of the Year. Sorry, they will be disappointed. And some will go in expecting nothing but some light entertainment, and they may get a bit more than they bargained for.

An interesting and fairly well-done detective story set in a science-fictional background.

Not a bad film, overall. If I had to rate it on the same scale as Pols, I’d give it a “B-” or maybe a “B”.

The science leaves something to be desired.

In this film, Rasputin is somehow still alive, and working to call back a bunch of Narsty Old Elder Gods With Big Tentacles from their imprisonment in space.

Ultimately, the story is about love ― what is it? Hormones? A set of memories that can be zapped? Or something deeper and harder to get rid of?

An interesting, fast-moving, action-filled John Woo film.

The movie’s name was perhaps not ill-chosen but certainly as incorrectly descriptive of the theme as Spielberg’s “Poltergeist” was in its time.

Movies made from Michael Crichton’s novels are doomed to be second-rate. “Timeline” is not an exception.

I came close to falling asleep in the first fifteen minutes of the film.

Time will flow in such a way as to make it possible to produce a sequel in any lucrative film franchise.

If you think you’re going to see another Night of the Living Dead, perhaps convinced by reviewers or trailers, forget it.

All in all, the movie is a lot better than it could have been.

A pleasant way to pass an afternoon, if disaster flicks are your cup of tea.

This includes elements of a number of earlier works, put together, mixed around, and presented in a slightly new way.

The story did not strike me as particularly strong. There is some philosophizing about the effects of nature vs. nurture, but it is all fairly weak.

I doubt whether anybody who’s not an aficionado of the series would find these books particularly interesting, but four of them should be read by those who are fans.

Or will we, as in real life, be left only with more questions?

I think that Stevenson, were he alive today, would not be terribly upset by what the Disney people have done with his story. In fact, he might be willing to stay for a second showing.

This is David Weber having a little bit of fun with his character, whose life is evidently modelled upon that of Horatio Hornblower, given a sex-change operation and moved a couple of thousand years into the future.

This is a series about people and high-tech; but the series seems to be more about the people than about the high-tech.

Prediction: few “legs” on this one, despite the collaboration of Shyamalan and the ever-popular Gibson. It’s a “TV movie” — i.e., what effects it has on the viewer will be as pronounced when he’s lying on his bed watching it on the tube as when he’s sitting in stadium seating watching it on the wide screen. Probably best to treat it as such.

It was an enjoyable and fast moving film — again in the tradition of the fictional British holding out indomitably against unspeakable odds.

It’s an excellent film, with a good story (what else are we to expect from Dick?), good acting, fun action scenes, convoluted plot, and fine pacing.

There are films for which I might say, “I cannot recommend this film too highly.” For this one, I’ll say the same thing, but hold the last two words. It’s living proof that you shouldn’t make a sequel just for the sake of making a sequel.

The major flaw in the film is that, far too often, the special effects overwhelm the story. As a person who loves a movie with lots of explosions, I probably shouldn’t say that, but …

Worth seeing on the wide screen. For that matter, worth seeing a second time on the wide screen. Maybe even a third — I haven’t quite decided yet.

In the end, I suspect that most people will watch this series more for Lex than for Clark and his powers or for the Smallville weirdness.

Although this film will (and should) win no Academy Awards, it’s a fun way to spend an afternoon.

About a sixth of the film is given over to preliminaries, and half of it to a training program to allow the characters to prepare themselves for the rigors of flight in the shuttle. By my arithmetical calculations, this leaves about a third of the film for the actual flight into space.

Add a whole bunch of computer-generated special animation effects, and you have a film that is worth spending an evening to see.

Was it a good film? If you like advances in film technology, don’t demand much meat in your plot, and have some small children along, yes, it was an excellent film.

Actually, Travolta does a creditable job in this film, given the material he has to work with … On the other hand …

As an SF book, this would have been pleasant, enjoyable and thought-provoking, but overall nothing spectacular. As a movie, IMHO it stands head and shoulders above movies of a similar type.

The “trilogy,” though it largely covers this single campaign, is, in terms of time covered, actually a single novel separated from its two sequels, which themselves make up an independent unit, by about a decade.

Vance is a writer less about phenomena or about great historical events than about people facing up to what we might consider relatively minor problems, largely personal ones.

One of the most enjoyable — though far from humorous — animations that I’ve seen in quite a while

“Question reality” seems to be a movie buzzword for this season, just as “asteroid” was in 1998.

Unfortunately, when we take our eyes away from the effects and look at the story, we find that it has been seriously slighted.

Star Trek: Insurrection not only has a plot, but also some really bad guys, and a few enjoyable special effects.

When ID4 ended, you tended to say: “What? It’s over already?” Two hours into Armageddon, you tended to shake your watch to see if it was broken

I will only say that this film owes very much indeed to Jurassic Park, Blue Thunder, and even a bit to King Kong.