JxSxPx is using Listal to create lists, share images get recommendations and much more
Points: 188273    19 Followers


About me

I'm Jason. I'm a film, literary and pop culture enthusiast. Got a soft spot and deep love for animation, comics and nerdy things that go in tandem with them.


3 votes
Favorite movies (249 items)
Movie list by JxSxPx
Last updated 2 weeks, 3 days ago
Favorite Actors & Actresses (100 items)
Person list by JxSxPx
Last updated 1 month ago
Favorite music (101 items)
Music list by JxSxPx
Last updated 1 month ago
8 votes
VH1’s 100 Greatest Women in Music (100 items)
Person list by JxSxPx
Published 5 years, 5 months ago 3 comments
1 votes
Favorite TV Shows (40 items)
Tv list by JxSxPx
Published 6 years, 7 months ago

Recent reviews

All reviews - Movies (578) - TV Shows (54) - Books (3) - Music (118)


Posted : 1 month ago on 29 April 2015 07:29 (A review of Wild)

For a few years after her Oscar win in 2006, Reese Witherspoon seemed to have gotten lost in easy paycheck romantic comedies and dramatic roles that seemed aimed at recapturing prestige. 2014 may just be the course-correct year for her, producing a mixed bag in Gone Girl, turning in solid supporting work in Inherent Vice and Mud, and in Wild delivering an emotionally stripped down and raw performance. It’s a great return to form, and I’m happy to see her back in fighting form. (Election has given her a lifetime pass of goodwill for me.)

Wild, adapted by Nick Hornby from Cheryl Strayed’s memoir, tells the story of one person’s emotional and spiritual rebirth after overcoming a series of debilitating personal issues and addictions. Haunting over the film is the spectre of Strayed’s mother, played in minimal screen time with maximum honest and impact by Laura Dern, and the memories that flood back to her at random moments of her heroin addiction, sex addiction, and broken marriage.

At times Jean-Marc Vallée makes overly artistic choices that feel tonally at odds with the material, much like his previous effort Dallas Buyers Club. But Wild is an infinitely better movie than that offensive bit of white savior cinema. The symbols of the fox and diseased horse are on the nose, but he wisely taps into Hornby’s obsession with how music and literature influence our personal lives. Various songs and pieces of literature weave in and out of Strayed’s memories, bringing about images of her joys and sorrows.

Dern and Witherspoon turn in some very fine work. Dern in particular only has about ten minutes worth of screen time, but she lingers in your mind. An actress who is capable of both great restraint and the ability to go manically broad, Dern here appears to emotional strip down to the very basics, effectively becoming the bruised soul of the entire film. Witherspoon must carry the entire film on her shoulders, and she makes it look effortless. She easily reveals deep pools of fury, rage, and self-destruction before flipping the script and witnessing this woman’s healing journey. Witherspoon never shows all of her cards, preferring to lay them down slowly and with deliberate, methodical purpose. At the very end, Wild reveals a hopeful spirit trying valiantly to fight against the endless hurt that has taken residence in her soul. It’s a moving piece of work.

0 comments, Reply to this entry


Posted : 1 month ago on 29 April 2015 07:29 (A review of Boyhood)

An incredibly ambitious film about the most simplistic of things: growing up. Twelve long years in the making, Boyhood contains many scenes of universal truth, and while it’s not perfect, it is something special.

Boyhood’s major problem is one of too many stories going on at once, a trimming of the fat would have tightened up some of the narrative flab. Namely a completely needless subplot involving a Mexican gardener who returns later on in the film to thank his white lady savior. It’s an awkward moment, and I’m not sure what it’s supposed to inspire in the audience aside from making me cringe.

But I found this to be Boyhood’s lone major stumbling block. What is so attractive about Boyhood is how it finds the meaningful and sublime moments in the mire of the everydayness. Growing up is something everyone does, and everyone does it a little differently, but there’s certain universal truths to be found here. First love, divorce, trying to form your own identity, gaining more observance of the outside world – we’ve all been there, and Boyhood documents these transitions.

The most poetic moments, and the ones I felt the most emotional attachment towards, were the ones involving the mother, played with honesty and soulful integrity by Patricia Arquette. Many of these quiet scenes between a single mother and her young son reminded me of my own childhood. Arquette is an actress I’ve never really warmed up towards much in the past, but here she absolutely knocked me flat on my feet. Her deep reservoirs of inner strength run dry in a scene late in the film in which she wonders what will come next for her now that her children are grown and on their own. She doesn’t get the splashy parental role like Ethan Hawke’s amiable slack father, but she is the film’s consistently beating heart, the sturdy rock around which her kids mature and develop.

Yes, Boyhood is a series of vignettes without a central narrative, and the closest the film comes to conventional narrative is when an alcoholic step-father is introduced. Besides this midsection, the film peaks in at random moments between 2002 to 2013. The other family members play more major roles in the earlier sequences, but as our boy grows up and gets more agency, they fall into the background. So in real life, so it goes in the cinema. It’s a strange experiment, and I suppose I could see why some would respond negatively towards it, but it touched me very deeply and I got a lot out of the experience.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

The Imitation Game

Posted : 1 month ago on 29 April 2015 04:56 (A review of The Imitation Game)

The term “prestige film” isn’t inherently a bad thing. The concept of a film made to appeal to a broad adult audience – not the worst thing imaginable. It’s just when those films condescend to the audience, downplay the realities, and present the material in as ham-fisted a manner as possible that it becomes an issue.

Behold, The Imitation Game, a film that gives the impression of having been rolled out of the Weinstein assembly line to achieve maximum Oscar impact. This doesn’t feel like a truly thought-out story, but like cherry-picked themes and moments cobbled together to give the impression that they’re saying something important.

This is the kind that gives the term “prestige film” a bad reputation. An awkward mixture of repressed homosexuality, brilliant man does good deed, spy film, and sensitive portrait of a misfit, The Imitation Game tries to hit as many boxes as possible without focusing in on the more interesting or historically accurate ones.

Alan Turing’s homosexuality was a major factor in his life, and the film merely plays lip service towards. He is but another in a long line of gay characters in film or television who is gay in name only, heaven forbid we ever see him engage in his sexuality. If you know even the slightest bit of truth about Turing and his life, you will see why this is offensive. This is truly a poorly handled major bit of historical fact and character development that is white-washed over.

Even more troublesome is the way that Turing’s brilliance and homosexuality are treated as symptoms of his being slightly autistic. The real Turing was not, nor was he treated so poorly by his real-life contemporaries. These story telling choices are just plain odd. The real man was fascinating enough, so why did they feel the need to change him so completely?

The lone saving grace of this film are the two main performances from Benedict Cumberbatch and Keira Knightley. However, neither one of them deserved award season consideration, as both of these performances have a general sense of being seen and done before by both actors. Cumberbatch in particular appears to be resting on a variation of Sherlock here, resting on a series of blinks and vocal tics instead of digging deeper into the truth. Knightley is solid, but her part is so underwritten, essentially playing Robin to Cumberbatch’s Batman.

Handsome looking, but unbelievably dull, The Imitation Game also traffics in moments that read as pure fiction. A long series of scenes in which these code breakers are deciding which groups of people get to live or die to try and hide information from the Germans reeks of Hollywood artifice. And no amount of lovely production design or period-accurate costumes can mask this. So here we have a film that infantilizes the main character’s homosexuality, commits obvious historical inaccuracies, and is an exercise in mass tedium (which is incidentally what I nicknamed the somehow Oscar nominated director, Morten Tyldum). Of course it got nominated a bunch during awards season, but thank god it (mostly) lost all of its races. Maybe even the Academy is getting tired of this particular strain of BBC-lite prestige bullshit.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

The Theory of Everything

Posted : 1 month ago on 29 April 2015 04:56 (A review of The Theory of Everything)

Dear god, was this year’s Oscar theme the year of incredibly dull films about white dudes? Granted, The Theory of Everything is one of the better films to come out of that particular genre this past year, but it’s still only merely adequate. It’s a good film about an interesting subject, and like many of the others released in the 2014 awards season, it tackles that interesting subject in as easily digestible a way as possible.

Based on the book by his ex-wife, Jane, The Theory of Everything tells of Stephen Hawking’s college education, long-suffering marriage, intellectual pursuits, and eventual celebrity. Ironically, despite being based upon her book, Jane is often cast to the side of the inner emotional turmoil going on in the story, and frequently reduced to the long-suffering wife role.

The film’s treatment of massively complicated mathematical and scientific formulas in a simplistic manner doesn’t bother me. It would be hard to gain interest if they were talked about as they truly are, so simplifying them are audience participation isn’t one of the major problems I have with the film. No, it’s the too often on-the-nose symbolism that irks me. Hawking’s obsession with spherical shapes and rotund images liter the film, like he can’t go a few minutes without noticing a swirling galaxy in his tea cup.

I suppose I should be thankful that a biopic is trying valiantly to even indulge in a stylistic flourish when the genre so often adheres to risk aversion as a matter of principal. But whereas similar films like The Imitation Game contort their stories into grossly misrepresentative and artless shapes, The Theory of Everything at least manages to acknowledge the complicated emotions at play, even if they do sometimes feel more fully developed from Stephen Hawking’s perspective.

Biopics are also a typical excuse for an actor to demonstrate their stuff. Think of how Charlize Theron forever shed the pretty, vapid girlfriend/wife roles she was stuck playing by going full-tilt as a serial killer in Monster, or the way that Forest Whittaker finally got some overdue recognition by smothering his innate likability with crazed despotic rule in The Last King of Scotland. Similarly, Eddie Redmayne finally gets a role that shows what he is made of as an actor. I’ve found him to be solid and dependable in other things, even if the material was beneath him like My Week with Marilyn, but he truly exhudes extraordinary depths of characterization and emotive acting in this. Frequently he can only capture the rascally spirit that still burns within the broken body with just a twinkle in his eyes. While my preference would have been for the comeback kid Michael Keaton (I have an eternal soft-spot in my heart for him as my childhood Batman and Beetlejuice), Redmayne is a worthy Best Actor winner.

Given less to do is Felicity Jones. I thought she was fabulous in Like Crazy, but she occasionally seems out of her element here. In later scenes where her character has to age, she lacks the gravitas (and age make-up) to believably play a middle-aged woman. Jones is undone by looking eternally like the fresh-faced and perky college student we first meet her as in the film. An odd choice on someone’s part, and while she’s never less-than-good, she’s also never truly soaring to the same heights as Redmayne. This might have something to do with the fact that she’s shuffled off to the sidelines for long stretches, and when she is given a chance to emote it becomes distracting to notice that she has not been aged up like her co-stars who have been aged at least somewhat.

Perhaps the biggest sin of The Theory of Everything is how it dances around so many of the topics, ripe for emotional plundering, hanging in the air. Jane’s emotional frustrations? Merely given lip-service. Extramarital affairs? Treated far too chastely. It’s a very safe, sanded-down variation of the events as widely known. It didn’t need to be. Somewhere lurking in The Theory of Everything’s lovely amber glow is a much better film about the realities of living and loving someone with an incurable illness, of falling out of love with each other, and a story that captures more complicated emotions in fullness. It’s not a bad film, it’s just the blandest one that could have been made out of these parts.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Two Days, One Night

Posted : 1 month ago on 28 April 2015 08:49 (A review of Two Days, One Night)

Ever since rightfully winning the Best Actress Oscar over front-runner Julie Christie in 2008, Marion Cotillard has continually delivered a series of strong post-Oscar performances without getting a second nomination. Her lack of another nomination was becoming questionable, how could they ignore so talented and dynamic an actress as Cotillard? Her lack of a nomination for Rust & Bone was particularly egregious.

So thank god for the Dardenne brothers and their film Two Days, One Night, a portrait of hope overcoming desperation and depression. The film is a winner, telling the story of a factory worker (Cotillard) who must beg her former co-workers for her job back. The catch is that they can either vote to have a big bonus, or they can give up that bonus and give her back her job. Knowing that she has a few votes for herself already lined up, she must go out and try to win over more of them.

Cotillard’s character has fallen hard into her depressive state, and this mission is as much about convincing them she can do it as it is about convincing herself. Resigned to popping anti-depressants and napping away most of the day, Cotillard’s Sandra is working mother and wife struggling to regain her sense of normalcy. As she continues on with her quest, gaining some ground and losing out for a variety of reasons that are no less valid than her desperate situation, a sense of urgency and emergency arises. We become deeply involved and concerned about whether Sandra is truly capable of returning to work, gaining the necessary number of votes, of being able to function once again.

As Two Days, One Night heads towards its conclusion, with a 50/50 chance of her goal happening, we also see a change in her. By performing this task, which seems so easy to someone who has never struggled with depression but it’s a herculean effort to her, Sandra begins to regain some of her hope and confidence. The final moments register a personal victory. We can see the exact moment in which her will to live, her wanting to fight again for another day is reignited. Cotillard’s face and the grace with which Dardenne’s get us there is a joyful note to end the film on. To borrow a phrase from Roberta Flack, it’s a moment that kills us softly with its song.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Gone Girl

Posted : 1 month ago on 28 April 2015 08:49 (A review of Gone Girl)

While pithy, the description of Gone Girl as the best Lifetime movie ever made is not without its merits. This to indulges in the worst, shrillest, most salacious moments of a narrative that frequently feels all too ridiculous. Moments of satire are painfully obvious, the black humor frequently falls limp in front of David Fincher’s meticulous, cold, but unbelievably glossy direction.

On paper, this reads as an unequivocal success, but something got lost along the way. Perhaps it’s that third act which takes a hard turn into territory that if played better by Ben Affleck would have sold it, but his performance never quite sells the sense that these two awful characters deserve the hell hole of their own making. It’s not that he’s too likable for the role, it’s just that he doesn’t seem comfortable delving into the darker, hateful aspects of the character required to really make it work.

In stark contrast, Rosamund Pike is the only thing worth seeing in this movie. The movie might be handsomely made trash, but Pike’s poisonous leading lady is an immaculately crafted piece of work. Completely unafraid of the ugliness at the heart of her character, Pike reveals levels of commitment and dramatic depths that are frightening to behold. Her ice queen is a deceiving, cunning, but not nearly as smart as she thinks she is sociopath of the highest order. Pike single-handedly saves Gone Girl from being pure tedium to get through.

Although, to be fair, the first two-thirds of Gone Girl aren’t without their merits, but a sudden act of violence shatters the narrative and it never properly recovers. Once this act occurs, the story takes a hard turn into wildly unbelievable and poorly thought-out scenes which stretch out for far too long. The film’s climax seems to never end, and the final ending it gives us is wildly unsatisfying. Somewhere along the way, Gone Girl lost the plot.

Gone Girl’s supporting players are the only other highlight. Neil Patrick Harris and Tyler Perry (yes, THAT Tyler Perry) turn in the best work. Harris is carving out a nice little niche for himself as disturbed, obsessive characters between this and his minor role in American Horror Story: Freak Show. Perry is a major surprise, he really goes for it with his character’s questionable ethics and behavior as Affleck’s defense attorney. Carrie Coon and Kim Dickens are the only other supporting players who make an impression, as Affleck’s twin sister and the major police officer investigating the case. Sela Ward is offered a minor role as a major player in the TV news business, I wanted to see more of her.

But not every supporting player is playing in the same key, and tone is never the strongest point in Gone Girl. Missi Pyle’s Nancy Grace-like character feels too broadly drawn, more like something you would see on SNL. A strange complaint to make about a character clearly inspired by Nancy Grace, but every time she’s onscreen the entirety of her performance feels too smirking, too winking at the audience to ask if they get the joke. We get it. A similar thing happens with Casey Wilson’s eternally pregnant nosey neighbor, Patrick Fugit’s dimwitted police officer, Lola Kirke and Boyd Holbrook as pair of country bumpkins. However committed to the material these various players may be, and Fugit, Kirke and Holbrook are fine, the film doesn’t know what tone to strike with these various voices. This leaves their work in some grey zone, the actors are fine, but the scenes are clearly meant to be satirical, yet they don’t land on their feet.

Perhaps Fincher was just the wrong hand to guide this material. His films are dark, engrossing, moody, but they aren’t exactly known for humor. And he falters in the face of the more satirical elements of the tale. Gone Girl is all scorched earth, but Fincher is a wintery flame, and the two different tones and styles end up snuffing each other out.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

Still Alice

Posted : 1 month ago on 28 April 2015 08:49 (A review of Still Alice)

Sometimes a bit too tasteful and generic, but when Still Alice narrows its focus down to how this exact family and woman in particular deal with her diagnosis and eventually descent, it's deeply moving stuff. Praise for much of it working goes to Julianne Moore’s central performance and Kristen Stewart’s sober, quiet supporting work as her youngest daughter.

Too often though Still Alice focuses on the abstract reality of living with a degenerative disease and not the day-to-day grind. The story draws us in the most when it reveals how linguist professor Alice deals with the betrayal of her mind, or the emotional drainage that her husband is feeling. Numerous scenes that display the ugly, naked emotions are deeply felt and quite affecting. It’s just that they’re surrounded by moments that feel like a checklist from this kind of melodrama instead of organically emerging from the narrative.

Case in point, Kate Bosworth and Hunter Parrish appear as Alice’s older children, but they’re missing in action for much of the running time. Moore really only interacts with Alec Baldwin as her dutiful and supportive husband, and Stewart as her actress daughter. Baldwin and Stewart nail their respective roles, a scene late in the film in which has an emotional breakdown in front of Stewart lingers as one of the few times when Still Alice shakes off the prestige and goes for the real, gritty, ugly drama.

Still Alice works so successfully because of Julianne Moore. Always a dependable actress, she’s delivered a gallery of troubled wives and mothers of dynamic range. And her work here is just as good as her beloved turns in Magnolia or The End of the Affair. She makes Alice into a real person, and her final moment with Stewart is a gut-punch. It’s also the final scene of the film, so while Still Alice may have stumbled along its way towards the finish line, it finishes on a very strong note.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

The Day the Earth Stood Still

Posted : 1 month ago on 28 April 2015 04:17 (A review of The Day the Earth Stood Still)

I do believe that The Day the Earth Stood Still deserves some credit for crafting a science-fiction story that prefers to move along at a slower, more deliberate pace. It’s a science-fiction film that explores elements of humanism and a call for peace and understanding. But that’s about where my enthusiasm for this film begins and ends.

The cast is game, the effects are top-notch for their era, and it’s beautifully shot, but it’s also tepid, high-minded, and a bit of a bore to get through. The symbolism gets a bit heavy-handed at numerous turns, Klaatu (Michael Rennie) plays out like an outer-space Jesus, bringing about a peaceful gospel and call to forming a loving brotherhood of man. Except that he also threatens that humanity either gets its shit together, or face destruction. This doesn’t really brush against the religious symbolism. What else does God do a lot of in the Bible than demand obedience of his whims or threaten dire consequences for disobedience?

Yet the film also demands that the world learn to get on with each other in a peaceful cohabitation. Here is a film made during the height of paranoia in the Cold War that questions what the hell are we doing, and offers a jaundiced view of where we might be headed if we continue on this path. The narrative gets muddled, and the pace gets a lost tedious if you try to critically think about the confused religious allegory married to the call for peace. It works decently enough as a message movie, and there’s things to admire here, yet I’m not entirely sold on its status as a beloved classic.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

The Thief of Bagdad

Posted : 1 month ago on 28 April 2015 04:17 (A review of The Thief of Bagdad)

Douglas Fairbanks, one of the great founding fathers of cinema, introduced numerous characters to the silver screen – Robin Hood, Zorro, the Three Musketeers, and in this film, he brought the flavor and images of the Arabian Nights to vivid life. The Thief of Bagdad is pure spectacle and lavish production design, held together by Fairbanks’ live-wire and stunt-heavy central performance.

Despite not being the director of this material, Fairbanks feels like the main guiding hand of this production. Great movie stars had a talent for doing this, warping directors and material into their great personas. The outcomes varied, but Fairbanks and director Raoul Walsh crafted something truly magical with The Thief of Bagdad.

Narrative coherence and deep substance is not its main concern, and occasionally the bloated running time does make some of it a little heavy to work through, but the journey is beyond worth it. Fairbanks plays Ahmed, a thief who lives by his wits, who uses a magic rope to steal from the caliph. While pilfering the palace, he spots the caliph’s beautiful daughter, and falls in love. Wanting to see her again, he steals various items to make him appear to be a wealthy suitor. And the plot keeps swirling on, throwing in a Mongol prince plotting to conquer the city, a traitorous slave girl, a flying carpet, a horse with wings, and numerous other set pieces that linger in the imagination.

While the 1940 remake may have streamlined the film’s various plot strands and cohered into a more manageable plot line, that doesn’t mean the original doesn’t hold its own against that highly revered classic. William Cameron Menzies production design is a thing of grandiosity and opulence, creating a magical kingdom which could only exist in the movies. This is probably the strongest selling point of the movie, along with the special effects work that, for the time, were as forward-thinking and seamless as the work in modern films like Gravity.

The greatest of all special effects may be Fairbanks’ physicality, as he does daring stunts and feats that often feel like he’s thumbing his nose at gravity and the laws of physics. These things never seem to apply to him, he exists as lightning in human form. He moves with a feline grace in some moments, but in others he bounces around like he’s what would happen if a rubber ball gained sentience and mobility.

Most of the supporting players recede into the background, mainly Fairbanks’ romantic interest, Julanne Johnston. Johnston looks stunning in her various costumes, but she’s given little to do aside from this. The lone supporting player who makes a lasting impression is Anna May Wong as the duplicitous slave girl. Beautiful and deadly, she’s a toxic snake hidden in a tranquil and lovely garden. She makes the most of her screen time and leaves you wanting more from her. She does a similar thing in Shanghai Express, and gets to generate intense sexual chemistry with Marlene Dietrich in that film as well.

A lot of time, effort, love, and care went into the production of this film. In 1924, it flopped, but time has only been kind and loving to it. It now stands as possibly the greatest film that Fairbanks made. A masterpiece of spectacle and pure entertainment. Here is a fairy tale land that never existed outside of the movies, an enchantment which demonstrates the transported and transformative powers of the cinema.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

A Day at the Races

Posted : 1 month ago on 28 April 2015 04:17 (A review of A Day at the Races)

Groucho Marx considered A Night at the Opera and A Day at the Races to be the best films that the Marx Brothers ever made. I’ll grant that Opera is probably their last masterpiece, but A Day at the Races is the first film in which the cracks begin to show in their formula.

Their run of films at Paramount, beginning with The Cocoanuts and ending with Duck Soup, were a stunning display of anarchic glee, gleefully leaving behind typical narrative structure in favor of a series of gags and tricky word play. Once they transferred to MGM, they were forced to play second-fiddle to bland romantic leads and lost their brother Zeppo along the way. Zeppo’s winking performance as the bland romantic lead was in perfect alignment with his brother’s various forms of anarchy, and replacing him cause the group to lose a bit of its magic.

It sounds like I hated A Day at the Races, and I didn’t. It’s perfectly winning, even if it doesn’t hold up quite as well as Duck Soup or Horse Feathers. What I noticed while watching this film is that the routine formula of the films they made at MGM were solidifying.

Irving Thalberg brought the Marx Brothers to MGM and told them that their assault on propriety in all of its various forms made them unlikable to general audiences, and they needed to realign their brand. Enter in his bright idea to make them supporting players in their own films, despite being billed as the main act. They would help pretty, conventional leads, typically lower-level players in MGM’s pantheon of stars, and obtain happiness and romance. These films weren’t bad, but they were limiting in highlighting the best of what the Marx Brothers had to offer.

None of the other films they made were bad, but they weren’t as magical. A Day at the Races is the last film they made that could be considered a classic. For me, it’s definitely second-tier, but it’s still damn enjoyable. Except for a scene in which the brothers perform a routine in blackface, an ugly reminder of things that were once considered perfectly fine in mass entertainments.

A Day at the Races tells a swirling and complicated story about the brothers helping out Maureen O’Sullivan (one of their best leading ladies in the post-Paramount years) obtain the money to keep her sanitarium open by betting on horse racing. Granted, Allan Jones is a bit of a lead-balloon, but Margaret Dumont is back in fine form and gets to be highly animated in several sequences. A particularly hilarious medical examination involving the Marx Brothers and Dumont is an absolute standout. And when A Day at the Races ends, it feels like the closing chapter of the classic years. The films after this would contain sparkling moments, but pound-for-pound they wouldn’t reach the comedic heights of these earlier years.

0 comments, Reply to this entry

« Prev12 3 4 5 6 7 » 17 » 76 Next »


Favorite - View all
My movies page

Rated 1021 movies


Favorite - View all
My tv page

Rated 100 tv


Top rated
My games page

Rated 19 games


Favorite - View all
My music page

Rated 498 music


Favorite - View all
My books page

Rated 233 books
Favorite Authors


Top rated
My dvds page

Rated 15 dvds

My feed

JxSxPx posted 4 images

10 hours, 32 minutes ago
11 hours, 30 minutes ago
JxSxPx posted 10 images [View All]

11 hours, 38 minutes ago
JxSxPx posted a image

1 day, 11 hours ago
JxSxPx posted a image

1 day, 14 hours ago
JxSxPx posted 7 images [View All]

2 days, 18 hours ago
3 days, 11 hours ago
JxSxPx posted a image

3 days, 21 hours ago
The Rocketeer
 The Rocketeer 8/10
4 days, 18 hours ago
JxSxPx posted 9 images [View All]

4 days, 19 hours ago
Easy to Love
 Easy to Love 8/10
1 week ago
1 week, 2 days ago
1 week, 3 days ago
JxSxPx posted 3 images

1 week, 5 days ago
1 week, 5 days ago
JxSxPx posted a image

1 week, 6 days ago
Easy to Wed
 Easy to Wed 5/10
1 week, 6 days ago
2 weeks ago
JxSxPx posted a image

2 weeks ago
JxSxPx posted 5 images [View All]

2 weeks ago
2 weeks, 2 days ago
JxSxPx posted 5 images [View All]

2 weeks, 4 days ago
JxSxPx added 2 items to their collection
Christmas in Connecticut

have watched


It Happened on 5th Avenue


2 weeks, 4 days ago
JxSxPx posted a image

2 weeks, 5 days ago
JxSxPx voted for an image

2 weeks, 5 days ago
2 weeks, 5 days ago
JxSxPx posted 5 images [View All]

2 weeks, 6 days ago
JxSxPx posted 2 images

3 weeks, 4 days ago
JxSxPx posted 3 images

3 weeks, 5 days ago
JxSxPx posted 13 images [View All]

3 weeks, 5 days ago

« Prev12 3 4 5 6 7 » 17 » 31 Next »


Posted: 1 year, 7 months ago at Oct 26 17:23
Posted: 2 years, 1 month ago at Apr 8 14:36
hi friend check out my new list .
hope you like it and thanks for your
Posted: 2 years, 2 months ago at Mar 30 14:02
This might just sound schize, but thanks for re-writing my "Pocahontas" review-- saves me the trouble of figuring it all out *again* myself, a-hahahaha....
Posted: 2 years, 2 months ago at Mar 18 22:57
Thanks for participating in my lists.
Sorry, but you can't do another top, really sorry.
But thanks.
Posted: 2 years, 2 months ago at Mar 10 18:22
Thanks for taking part in my musicals list!

I also know how you feel, I found it hard to limit my choices down to 10.
Posted: 2 years, 4 months ago at Jan 19 23:47
hey friend check out my new list. hope you like it
Posted: 2 years, 5 months ago at Dec 21 16:14
Hello there! I enjoyed your review of Dracula and took myself the freedom to link it to my Universal Horror Films - Best to Worst list. Hope you're fine with that!
Posted: 2 years, 10 months ago at Jul 21 2:52
Thank u 4 your comment on the muses list. Suggestion added.
Posted: 3 years, 4 months ago at Jan 27 21:05
I'm working on a new project. Maybe you can check it out and help me. From which State are you from? and in which State are you living right now?


(I may have asked you this already earlier, in this case, apology for the inconvenience!)
Posted: 3 years, 10 months ago at Jul 16 13:06
I'm working on a new project. Maybe you can check it out and help me. From which State are you from? and in which State are you living right now?

Posted: 4 years, 6 months ago at Nov 18 1:19
O.O Thanks!!
Posted: 6 years, 4 months ago at Jan 12 20:17
cool reviews =]
Posted: 6 years, 6 months ago at Nov 15 17:51
Posted: 6 years, 9 months ago at Aug 12 18:48
Hey man, I see you're pretty new, I'm loving the reviews though! Great job.