Say New Message

Refer to this Message

Cancel this message

Translation into Japanese

Hi Willie, Simon & all,

Willie, you are 100% right...it is Seiko's portrayal as a bad girl (and the
way she looks in the movie) that got me. And yes, "her part is weak"...
mainly because the entire script is very poorly written...but she does so much
by working with so little. It whets the appetite for what she could do in a
big budget movie with GREAT actors and a GREAT script (and I don't mean 30
seconds of yelling "I Want To Go Shopping" in "Armageddon," either).

The movie itself is bad, bad, bad, BAD...unbelievable story, poor scripting,
there is one reason and one reason alone to see this movie and that is the
fact that is is "Seiko Eye Candy." If Seiko were not in the movie, the DVD
would still have some value as a Frisbee, or for skeet shooting, or as a
drink coaster on your coffee table so that beverages would not leave 
unsightly rings. The movie wants to be a sexy, action packed thriller set in
the high-tech computer world, but it can never be more than it is: a very,
very bad movie directed by John Travolta's brother. Joey Travolta directs as
well as Sylvester Stallone's brother Frank sings. So, ask yourself this
question: How many Frank Stallone CDs do YOU own?

BAD, bad, bad, bad, bad, thoroughly incompetent movie that includes a healthy
amount of footage featuring a GREAT LOOKING bad girl Seiko (that was my
review of the film in 25 words or less)...:-)

Best regards,

Mike

Date:10/8/1998. Willie 's message 

>Personally, I have to agree with Shopgirl and Simon on this one. (sorry Mike!)
>I know we cannot deny Seiko's performance in this role, but the movie plot is 
>poor and her part is weak.  Perhaps, Mike saw something in her that I don't.
>Gotta admit though that she delivers the part as a bad girl in this movie.