Amazon.com

The brilliant writer-director Mike Leigh (Topsy-Turvy, Secrets and Lies, Naked) has crafted an utterly compelling movie about one of the most controversial of topics. An irrepressibly hopeful housecleaner in 1950s London named Vera Drake (Imelda Staunton, Antonia and Jane, Shakespeare in Love) mothers everyone around her, from her own family to helpless shut-ins and lonely men living in tiny, isolated apartments. None of these people know that Vera also helps young women get rid of unwanted pregnancies, until the police appear and tear her world apart. Vera Drake isn't just an inspired character portrait; through simple and straightforward scenes, the movie weaves a quiet but mesmerizing portrait of how people--both wealthy and poor--cope with adversity. Though wrenching, Vera Drake has too much life to be depressing. Leigh is deservedly famous for his work with actors; every character brims with truth and Staunton's performance deserves every award it could possibly win. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (50)

** Subtly Beautiful **
The main actress (Imelda Staunton) who plays the charachter Vera Drake did a fine job in this movie.The movie does not hit you over the head with moral preaching about abortion ... it gives you very subtle emotions based on how those around Vera Drake respond to what she is doing when she is found out.There is no happy ending here.It is not a feel good movie, but just the same it is beautiful.I believe Imelda Staunton was nominated for an Oscar for this role.Hillary Swank (who I love) won the Best Actress Oscar this year for her role in Million Dollar Baby (another fabulous movie).I'd say between the two of them, its a tough call.

Incredible film
Genre: Drama, Foreign (English language)

Genre Grade: A

Final Grade: A

This was an amazing film about a nice little old lady doing something she believed was right. She was so innocent in her ways that she did not realize the gravity of what she was doing. Or perhaps she did but truly did not feel any remorse or wrongdoing in what she did. The acting from Imelda Staunton was superb (no wonder she was nominated for so many awards), and the story itself is extremely sad but holds a powerful message. It offers no strong conclusion, but leaves it up to the viewer to decide whether the fate of Vera Drake was fair or not.

I have my own views on abortion (which most of you know that I am strongly against it), but I can't help but appreciate the message this movie brings forth. It reminded me of The Cider House Rules in that its message gave some hint to how pro-choice people feel. It is important to me to understand controversial issues before making firm opinions on them, but even then I am never for sure, because I strongly believe that it is up to the individual to believe what they wish to believe. I am anti-abortion, but I don't think my views should be enforced on people who feel differently.

Sorry for the social commentary, I realize this is only supposed to be a movie review. Just pass it off as bad journalism.

Overwhelming
This is an important movie about the moral dilemma posed by abortion. Abortions, legal or illegal, have always been performed, and women from all social strata, have always found themselves in need of a helping hand, whether the law upheld that kind of help at particular times or not. The movie shows this by juxtaposing the women whom Vera Drake helps, who cannot pay for abortion, with those who can pay to have an abortion done by a doctor, or by showing that in some cases at least, abortion cannot be totally repudiated. We witness two such cases in the film as one woman becomes pregnant, we understand, after a man forces himself on her, or as another woman, who already has seven children, and whose husband just doesn't understand how consuming this is, cannot have an eighth. The film convincingly shows how women have to deal with their problems in secrecy, in back chambers, and continue to live life as usual and pretend that these things don't happen.

Vera Drake is a kind and generous woman, too kind and too generous, the movie shows, for the world surrounding her, the cruelty of which is encapsulated in the woman who procures "clients" for her, pocketing money from these women without Vera's knowledge, as well as doing Vera the favour of selling her various food products (such as sugar) of which, we understand, there was a shortage in those postwar years.

Imelda Staunton gives an overwhelming performance, exhibiting Vera's kindness, reliability, generosity, naivete, heartbreak, sense of shame, and, finally, despair, with great credibility. I agree with some of the other reviewers who state that the movie doesn't try to take sides. And yet I think that the police detective and the woman police constable's kindness to Vera suggest that they feel sympathy for her and even understand what she did and why she did it. I especially felt that as a woman, the female PC knows that this is a problem all women are in danger of encountering, and this could be a pointer towards interpretation of the movie. I don't know whether this is what the director intended to suggest, but I think that this is something that came across, the way I saw it at least. This is possibly one aspect of the strength of this film, that it allows for this interpretation.

All performances were riveting and convincing, the cinematography superb, the 50s austerity convincingly recreated. As some reviewers have already noted, the film is quite bleak and depressing. It is supposed to be, given the subject that it treats. It is a matter of the viewer coming prepared for a film which tackles a hard to swallow, painful, yet central,social issue. The series of abortions that Vera performs is emotionally draining, though not graphic, and the end is demoralizing. But all the more realistic and powerful in being so.

I highly recommend the film, provided the viewer knows what to expect. It's not meant to be a feel good movie, but a movie to make one think and debate. It may depress you to some extent, but I don't think it will leave you indifferent. Personally, I felt that the film is subtly but convincingly suggesting that there is no use trying to pretend that abortions don't happen / shouldn't happen,won't happen, and that the law and society do not / did not have the compassion necessary to deal with this problem faced by women. You may come to a different conclusion, but the point is that the film is strong enough to provoke discussion and possibly disagreement amongst its viewers.

Masterful
What a difficult pleasure "Vera Drake" is.It is a film that has great acting and writing, yet deals with a controversial subject that is no less hard to approach now than it was in 1950, when the story takes place.The word "abortion" isn't even mentioned until the film is near it's end, but the watcher knows precisely what is being dealt with long before that.

Imelda Staunton is truly powerful in the title role, a simple woman who only wants to help others.As soon as she appears on the screen, one is drawn into her life and family.We follow Vera as she does what she can to make life easier for those around her. We see the consequences of Vera's "assistance" in areas that the world she lived in hadn't figured out how to deal with yet. In the end, I left the film wondering why we still haven't come to grips with this issue 55 years after the events in this film took place.

this movie is so beautiful
I always thought that this movie was going to be bad and boring, but I was wrong, this one is brilliant, it's very special for it's content, Imelda makes a great performance, it's plot is very dramatic,it's so beautiful, if you are looking for good drama don't miss this one. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Tony Kushner's prize-winning play Angels in America became thedefining theatrical event of the 1990s, an astonishing mix of philosophy,politics, and vibrant gay soap opera that summed up the Reagan era for anentire generation of theater-goers. Post-9/11 wouldseem to be too late for a film version--philosophy and politics don'talways age well--but this 2003 HBO adaptation, ably directed by Mike Nichols(The Graduate), provides a time capsule of the '80s and reveals thedeep emotional subcurrents that will give the play lasting power.

The story centers around Prior Walter(Justin Kirk) and Louis Ironson (Ben Shenkman), a gay couple that fallsapart when Prior grows ill as a result of AIDS. But cancer is not the onlything invading Prior's life: He begins to have religious visions of anangel (Emma Thompson, Sense and Sensibility) announcing that he isa prophet. Louis, who doesn't cope well with disease and suggestions ofmortality, leaves and starts a relationship with Joe Pitt (PatrickWilson), a closeted Mormon who works for Roy Cohn (Al Pacino, Dog DayAfternoon)--the real-life right-wing lawyer, notorious for hisruthless behind-the-scenes machinations. Add in Joe's depressed andhallucinating wife Harper (Mary Louise Parker, Fried GreenTomatoes), his determined but open-minded mother Hannah (Meryl Streep,Adaptation), a fierce drag queen/nurse named Belize (JeffreyWright, Basquiat, reprising his celebrated performance from theBroadway production), and you've still only begun to discover the wealthof characters and storylines in Kushner's ambitious work.

Thepowerhouse cast (also featuring James Cromwell, Michael Gambon, and SimonCallow) is uniformly superb. The script has its weaknesses--some of thefantastic elements, including Prior's journey to Heaven towards the end,fall flat--but even what doesn't work is bristling with ideas and aferocious desire to capture human existence in this time and place.--Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (20)

A profound human dimension amid the politics and pain
A jaw-dropping film adaptation of Tony Kushner's epic, 5-hour play, which was a defining artistic statement documenting the political and social upheaval that AIDS-HIV disease brought to America's gay community and to the wider America around it. Mixing agitprop and camp with magical realism and utter, heart-rending, pathos, Kushner and director Mike Nichols bring the story to the screen in a big, big way, with all-around amazing performances by a perfectly cast ensemble. Al Pacino gets to chew up yards of scenery in his portrayal of the sleazy, venal, far-rightwing attorney Roy Cohn (who acted as Joe McCarthy's point man in the infamous 1950s prosecution of "atom spies" Julius and Ethel Rosenberg) and for once, all of Pacino's high-decibel yelling pays off with some real dramatic ooompf.

There are a lot of things that you could comment on in this play -- the exploration of Jewish-American assimilation, the powerful reaffirmation of a supposedly marginalized leftist perspective, etc. -- but the most profound insight Kushner has to offer is about who the real redeeming angels will have to be in our nation's coming cultural reconciliation. The humanity that he is able to impart into the character of the middle-American Mormon, Mother Pitt (played faultlessly by Meryl Streep), is a marvel of modern political drama: and it rings undeniably true. Pushing past our narrowly defined social and political "roles," and into our shared humanity, is the only road open to folks who want to see America's moral and ethical core liberated from the ideological intrusions of the religious far-right, and the resulting frustrated anger of the disenfranchised middle-liberal-left. In a strictly us-vs-them world view, Mother Pitt would be derided by those on the we're-here-we're-queer Left... but as many people have learned, particularly amid the devastating upheavals of the HIV crisis, our real emotional lives are (ideally) not ruled by dogma. Mother Pitt isn't just a caring parent, she's also a kind, pragmatic person, and for her, the most pragmatic choice when confronted with an epidemic, is to simply offer sympathy and solace. What could be more natural? Let's hope her example prevails.

The CITIZEN KANE of the Modern Era
My expectations were high when I learned that HBO was going to spend over $60 million on an adaptation of Tony Kushner's extraordinary 6-hour epic play, but I could nt have imagined that the resulting film would move to the top of my list of best films ever made in the United States - but that is precisely what Angels in America has done.

Streep and Pacino deliver the finest performances of their careers here (Streep in 4 roles!). Emma Thompson is radiant. And the performances of Jeffrey Wright, Mary-Louise Parker, Justin Kirk and Ben Shenkman positively shine.

And the WRITING and DIRECTION! As close to Shakespearean as any American work I have ever read. And scenes that captivate in their composition and lighting, in their structure and their content. And a magical blending of profundity, humor, pathos, tragedy, and ultimately, the triumph of the human spirit over desperation and resignation. A musical score to match the high levels of word and vision.

In short, this film is nothing short of miraculous. All who worked on this masterpiece should be proud of their achievement. Angels in America stands as testimony to what the human mind can accomplish at its finest and most creative.

Simply the best movie I've seen in years....
HBO should've released this movie in movie theaters. I saw it at the Castro Theatre in San Francisco and it was a fantastic experience. Seeing it on TV is great, but.... Oh well, just enjoy! The acting, story, and filmography are amazing.

awesome
I started to watch the series using the on demand feature of our cable company and then it went away before I got to watch the whole thing. I can't wait to get the dvd so I can finish watching it and have it to watch again and again. Having been around when this was all going down makes this series really hit home. The acting is superb as are the special effects.

beyond wonderful
If they had released this movie in the theaters, there would not have been enough Academy awards to give to the writer, the director, and the wonderful cast. Who should get Best Actor? Al Pacino as the loathesome Roy Cohn or Justin Kirk as the dying Prior Walter? Who should get Best Actress? Meryl Streep as the practical, compassionate Mormon housewife, or Emma Thompson as the beautiful, terrifying angel? This series had me riveted to the TV set. I could not do anything but watch. Get this movie. You owe it to yourself to witness one of the major artistic events of the decade. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Delivering exactly what its title promises, this celebration of stupidity was Jim Carrey's 1994 follow-up to Ace Ventura: Pet Detective and The Mask. The film pairs the rubber- faced wacky man with Jeff Daniels as the not-so-dynamic duo of Lloyd and Harry, dunderheads who come into the possession of a briefcase containing ransom money that is intended for Mob-connected kidnappers.Lauren Holly costars as the woman who lost the briefcase, and with whom Carrey falls in love (both in real life and as his moronic on-screen character). As Lloyd and Harry make a mad dash to return the briefcase (never aware of its contents), the bumbling buddies attract Mobsters, cops, and trouble galore.This lowbrow laugh-a-thon scores some solid hits for hilarity, but with gags involving ill-fated parakeets, buxom bimbos, and an overdose of laxatives, be prepared to put your brain--and good taste--on hold. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (257)

Best (and funniesr) movie ever made!
I'll tell you, flat out, perfectly honest, i've seen this movie about.... oh, say 60, maybe 70 times, i can recite the whole movie from memory, and have noticed every single joke possibly concievable from this movie. SO whi is it, that every time I watch it, I crack up hysterically every 20 seconns? it because of the shear genius of Lloyd Christmas'(Carrey) utter stupidity, because of Harry Dunn's(Daniels) complete lack of any common sense. The movie isnt like other comedies, you know, the ones you buy, laugh at them once, watch it again, and say,"Why did I even think of buyin' this?" Well this movie, about two complete idiots, who have been best friends all their life, aqcuire a briefcase that was left in an air terminal by the prettiest woman Lloyd has ever seen. Now Lloyd and a reluctant Harry travel cross country, from Providence to Aspen, just to return the briefcase. Along the way, they'll unkowingly run into kidnappers, "laid back country folk" as Lloyd would say, and more than one police squad, just to return a briefcase that they dont even know whats in it, or the entire womans name! You have to see it!

It's supposed to be dumb, people!
I don't why many movie critics from the past and the present critically panned this film. It's freakin' hilarious! It paved the way for disgusting comedies like THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY and SCARY MOVIE. By the way, the Farrelly brothers, who masterly directed this film, also did MARY.

Anyway, DUMB & DUMBER will leave in hesterics! Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels are amazingly stupid as characters Lloyd and Harry. The two lovable losers from Rhode Island go cross country to Aspen, Colorado to return a loaded briefcase to a woman named Mary (Lauren Holly), whom Lloyd is in love with. But the two dimwits don't know that assassins are on theyre' tail to retrieve the briefcase! Ok, everyone know's the storyline, so let's talk about the humor in the film.

One of my favorite scenes in the film is when a cop pulls Harry and Lloyd for a speed ticket, and unknowingly drinks a beer bottle with Lloyd's yerin in it. Funny! And when the dipstick Harry sticks his tongue to a frozen pole (borrowed liberally from A CHRISTMAS STORY) and experiences horrible diahorea. Sounds crude, but it's movie magic at its best. Oh yeah, the scene where Lloyd accidently killing a endangered snow owl, and saying the line "Boy this party really died", is a classic Carrey moment.

If your a fan of Carrey and the Farrelly Brothers, or like disgusting comedies, or just simply a moron, you'll love this film! One of Carrey's best!

Hilariously funny comedy classic!
I was absolutely appalled at how horrible the prequel "When Harry Met Lloyd" was when released in 2003 so I went back to the original from 1994 and let me tell you, it is still a really funny and witful comedy classic.

Jeff Daniels and Jim Carrey are an amazing team starring as two really low-wealth bums in the run-down slums of the east coast rustbelt and when Lloyd Christmas (Jim Carrey) is a taxi driver at the airport, an attractive woman (Lauren Holly) accidentally leaves behind an important suitcase with important material and now Harry along with his longtime dim-witted friend Harry Dunn try to compete to win her heart over and go all the way to Aspen, Colorado to return the suitcase to her but they are unaware that they are being persued by a criminal couple involved in a criminal crime ring.

This movie is just plain funny and while certainly not a masterpiece by any means, it is nonetheless a memorable movie by both of the lead actors and Daniels and Carrey are a wonderful comedy duo team and a pity taht Derek Richardson and Eric Christian Olsen could not take notice of how well the former two did on this original movie.

This is a movie that warrants taking off the thinking cap for a while and get out the soda and popcorn and share a laugh with your friends.

Just hilarious!
By far Jim Carrey's best film he has ever done in his entire life. Even if you can't stand him, you can't help laughing in this. The film is about Lloyd (Jim Carrey) and Harry (Jeff Daniels, who is equally as funny). Lloyd is at his Limo driving job and he picks a woman up to take to the airport. But he falls deeply in love with her, and when he drops her off, she forgets to take her briefcase and Lloyd chases after her... but he just misses her (an excellent scene!). So, he doesn't know what to do with the case. He persuades his friend Harry to go out in their car to find her and give it back to her. Harry soon says: "ok" and they headto Aspen to return the case. But the case isn't what the seem it is to be, and they could be the wrong guys to have hold of it.

The film has just so many out-ragious scenes, including a scene in a restaurant were they fill this guys' bruger up with spicy peppers and he heats up when he takes a bite. The film does come to one of those endings were the villain shows up and it gets less funny and more serious.

So, right from the very minute this starts you'll be laughing. Any words that come out from Harry or Llyod's mouth is just so hilarious.

The Jim Carrey Show (guest-starring Jeff Daniels)
Harry and Lloyd (Jeff Daniels and Jim Carrey) are bosom buddies and undoubtedly the two most stupid human beings on the face of the earth. They get involved in a kidnap-for-ransom scheme that prompts them to undertake a cross-country drive to Aspen, Colorado. Along the way, there are plenty of comic episodes.

Although Jeff Daniels is great, Jim Carrey really carries this movie. He is absolutely incredible. I suppose that every generation needs its own Jerry Lewis, but Carrey out-Jerry-Lewises the original. His energy, flexibility, and unerring instinct for the madcap are quite amazing, and I think that future generations will remember him as a great comedian. Check out the fight scene in the restaurant, for example, and notice how many long, unbroken shots comprise it. This film is lowbrow to be sure, but it cracks me up every time. What more can you really ask from a comedy? ... Read more

Reviews (83)

I CAN SEE!! I CAN SEE!! or TURN THOSE MACHINES BACK ON!!
Trading Places. One of THE ALL TIME BEST films of the careers of Dan Ackroyd and Eddie Murphy. Finally coming to DVD. I thought Paramount was gonna torture us and never release it. What should be some extras that Paramount should put in? Well, The scene where Mr. Beeks gets the crop report and poisons the guard should be included. Actually, The Internet Movie Database has a great listing of the left out and alternate scenes. Look for Trading Places and check out the Trivia and Alt. Versions sections.

A fine cast backs up Dan and Eddie. Ralph Bellemy, Dan Ameche, Denholm Elliot (God Rest Their Souls), Jamie Lee Curtis (In her sexy Breakthrough Role), & Paul Gleason (His portrayal of Clarence Beeks could be how he got to be in The Breakfest Club). And great Cameos by Bo Diddley, Al Frankin & Tom Davis, and a rare small part by James Belushi (Possibly at Dan's Request). And who can forget the Landis trademarks like the still picture montages and of course "See You Next Wednesday".

I just know once I pop the DVD in my player, I'll be screaming at the end with Don Ameche, "TURN THOSE MACHINES BACK ON!! TURN THOSE MACHINES BACK ON!!"

Good Day Mr. Duke.

Social statement beyond the comedy
I first saw this film in the theatres in 1983, and I loved it! It is still one of my favorites, one that I can't help but watch whenever it comes on television. I wasn't until I was much older that I understood what a profound social message it gave out. Does someone's surroundings and circumstances influence the type of person they will become? Or is it in the genes whether they succeed or fail? We see the question answered in John Landis' "Trading Places". Yes, it's a comedy, one of the funniest of the 1980s. But it also makes you look at something deeper.

The plot focuses on two men: a privileged and successful (but uptight and snobbish) Philadelphia commodities broker, Louis Winthorpe (Dan Ackroyd) and a down and out street hustler, Billy Ray Valentine (Eddie Murphy). Through a twist of fate during the holiday season, these two cross paths and a bet between two elderly but crafty rich brothers, played wonderfully by Don Ameche and Ralph Bellamy (for the insane amount of ONE DOLLAR), will answer the questions posed above. How so? By taking away everything the rich commodities broker worked for (and inherited) with a brilliantly orchestrated scandal where he is publically humiliated and arrested in front of his peers -- and giving it all to the former street hustler, who blossoms under the guiding hand of the two rich brothers into a respected and efficient executive. Meanwhile, Louis continues to spiral downward into a world he had never known: jail, poverty, drugs, homelessness and crime -- but one that Billy Ray had been all too familiar with. But little do either men know, that both of their situations were going to be temporary because it was just an "experiment".

Jamie Lee Curtis, up until she had done "Trading Places", had played in so many slasher movies, she was crowned as queen of that genre. But in this movie she convincingly plays a sexy, good-hearted lady of the evening who befriends Louis and helps him get back on his feet. Eventually these two get together.

The ending is a hilarious tale of revenge and triumph, and if you have never seen this movie (don't see how anyone could've missed this), I urge you to check it out! Non-stop laughs are a guarantee! Excellent, all around.

movie
You ever wonder what the others live like? Well you'll see when a rich white man and a poor black man switch lives based on a one dollar bet. Classic movie!

Must have in your DVD collection
This is a classic. That is all there is to say.

A very very funny movie
Buy this movie it is so funny your stomach will hurt and your eyes will be blood shot. ... Read more

Reviews (70)

"Everybody wants to be a cat"
I would have to give this 5 stars for the movie and 2 stars for the rest of the dvd. The Aristcats could also be called a sequel to 101 Dalmations, but this time it is only 4 cats that has to find thier way home instead of 15. Then you enter an ally cat name Thomas O'Malley thas aksed for help in return to the city of Paris in 1910. This movie took the Disney animators almost 4 years to make. Looks like every animators are still from Walt Disney days including Frank Thomas (who at the time of this writing) is still alive, but not very active, in fact looks like the last movie he worked on is The Fox and the Hound. As the movie opens, a woman named Madame Adelaide Bonfamille (Hermoine Baddeley) has come hom to her mansion, and awaits her lawyer (Charles Lane) to do her will in which, because of she has no living relatives, she decides to leave her house to her cats, and after the cats die, then the house goes to her butler Edgar (Roddy Maude-Roxby), and when Edgar over hears Madame's plane over a speaker, he decides to kid nap her cat Duchess (Eva Garbor) and kitness Marie (Liz English), Berlioz (Dean Clark), Toulouse (Gary Dubin), and he does that. And the Duchess and the kitness along with an alley cat named Thomas O'Malloy (Phill Harris), they make thier journey into Paris. This film was orginnlay intented to be a live action movie, but then somebody or somehow it got changed to an animated movie. And maybe some day a live action movie of this may be made, but if that does happen, for now you have this cartoon movie. This movie is a must for Disney or animated movie fans.

"Lady & the Tramp" for aileurophiles
(That's cat-lovers, by the way.) Disney here remakes his canine classic with feline leads and succeeds wonderfully. Duchess (voiced by Eva Gabor) is the pampered pet who (with her three kittens, Marie, Berlioz, and Toulouse) is forced out into the cruel world, and O'Malley (Phil Harris) the gallant alley cat who comes to their rescue and wins her love. Unlike the original, here we find a genuine villain--Edgar (Roddy Maude-Roxby), butler to Duchess's wealthy "Madame," who stands to inherit her estate after the cats have lived out their lives, and wants to hurry things up so he can get the money while he's still able to enjoy it. With the help of Froufrou the carriage horse (Nancy Kulp), Roquefort the mouse (Sterling Holloway), and Scat Cat (Scatman Crothers) and his (jazz) band of Alley Cats, O'Malley succeeds in foiling Edgar's plot, and Edgar gets his just desserts. True, the two hound dogs Napoleon and Lafayette (Pat Buttram and George Lindsey) are a bit over-the-top (where are they supposed to be from, the South of France?), but they do provide a laugh-out-loud comic interlude. With humor and suspense aplenty and a delightful array of characters, this movie might even convert the cat-haters in the family. Definitely one of my favorites.

The Purr-fect Film
This may be one of the best Disney movies that I have ever seen!The movie is about some of the rarest kinds of cats you could find just about anywhere in the world. The story shows some tips on how to respect oters, How to share, and how to show others how much you care about them. If you havent seen this movie, then plan to see it. This movie is for everyone, no matter how young you are, or how old you get.

One the Best Disney Films EVER!
I love everything about this movie. Ava Gabor is wonderful as the voice of Duchess. The kittens in the story are sooo sweet. This is a must have for anyone who is a true Disney fan.

No Aging, cute cats
How is it that Disney movies don't seem to age? Even Snow White seems pretty normal nowadays. The Aristocats is not the best, prettiest or funniest Disney movie ever made but people who like sweet cats will enjoy the drawing of the cute little cats in this movie.

The drawing of the people is very realistic and the animals all have their own personality, the jazzy alley-cats are my favorites. It's about 80 minutes long so perfect for young children. ... Read more

Reviews (553)

'28 Days Later' is an above average zombie flick
The makers of '28 Days Later' claim to redefine the zombie film genre with this offering, and by this standard, they've certainly failed. '28 Days Later' doesn't cover any new ground, but it is a good film of its type, and features real characters instead of the usual comic book/video game caricatures, ala 'Resident Evil' and 'Matrix: Reloaded.'

Appropriately, this film starts out on a violent, ironic note, and then proceeds to the 'waking up in a lonely hell' scene. The beginning is very artsy-- and unlike other films of the same type, I felt like I was following a real person through the expected post-apocalyptic landscape. (Yes, the buildings are still there-- it's the people who've been ruined.) Of course this wasn't anything I hadn't seen or read before. The entire film reeks of Stephen King's 'The Shining,' and follows firmly in the footsteps of 'Night of the Living Dead' and its sequals. As the film progresses, it loses some of its artsy flavor, and focuses on the hopes and fears of the characters.

The characters in this film aren't particularly charismatic, but they're believable. That's a refreshing change from the usual MTV influenced garbage I've come to expect.

By the end of the picture, you've learned the same lessons you'll learn by watching the superior 'Night of the Living Dead:' 1/To fight the zombies, human beings must band together, and 2/human beings banding together doesn't always work, because at the end of the day it's the living who are the real monsters.

Like I said, this picture doesn't cover any new ground; but it is a worthy addition to the pantheon of zombie films, and I recommend it. It is a little long, but the soundtrack's pretty good.

You'll like it, if you aren't looking for another feelingless action film.

Tour de Force. But for the ending, a 5.
It's easy to get numbed by the movies that dominate the theaters. Those that are entertaining, tend to be mildly so. Those that have even slightest provocative content ordinarily end in silliness, or, worse yet, overwrought self-parody. But when I was least expecting it, 28 Days Later hit me like a baseball bat across the side of the head. Except for an ending that seemed tacked on and unnecessary (I would have much preferred an ending where there is dramatic freeze frame--you'll know it when you see it--about 5 to 10 minutes before the real ending), this is film that is a wonder of excellent acting, fine storytelling, and profound intellectual metaphor. And it couldn't be more timely with the media echoing with tales of super-bugs, monkey pox, ebola, and SARS. But this movie isn't about a virus, it's about human nature. About who and what we really are. And how quickly that true nature could be revealed if a thread-bare social structure were to unravel for ANY reason.

You should simply watch this movie. Pay attention to the low-budget artistry that abounds (it is pitch perfect), the gorgeous cinematography, and the sets. And to who the real monsters are. I kept thinking about the riots in this country, and how they reveal something about how close we are to being brutal animals--and that we do a great job of tricking ourselves into believing that we're more than acquisitive brutes. Keep hope alive, I suppose.

Familiar but Well Directed Sci-Fi/Horror Thriller.
A Young Man (Cillian Murphy), who woke up in a Hostipal Bed, who been in a Coma for a Month. That young man, since He's awake. He finds that that he's all alone in London, slowly finding out there was an Epidemic happen, when he was asleep. When it's turns night, Strange People that come out of the dark and they hunt for Humans. Those strange people have been infected by a disease that came from an animal, a man made virus that makes people absolutely mad. While the young man is seeking for help, he finds himself with a group of survivors (Naomie Harris, Megan Burns & Brandan Gleeson) that would do anything for survival.

Directed by Danny Boyle (A Life Less Ordinary, Shallow Grave, Transpotting) made a visionary, creepy, science-fiction/horror film that was shot in digital video. This film is lacking in Originality but the film is vivid and the film's plot is familiar to "The Omega Man" (First Half of the Film) and "Day of the Dead" (Second Half of the Film). This movie ended being a Box Office Hit and Critics even liked this film! The film did so well in fact, that it was briefly re-released with an bleaker alternate ending (Which is in the DVD). Since the Visual Style of the Film is Moody and Dark, DVD has an grainy but sharp anamorphic Widescreen (1.85:1) transfer and an strong-Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound. DVD has an Commentary Track by the Director:Boyle and Screenwriter:Alex Garland, Deleted Scenes with/without Commenatary by the filmmakers, 3 Alternate Endings and more. One of the most unique films of 2003, do not miss this one. Garland, who wrote the film is also a Novelist and Writer for Boyle's Previous Film-The Beach. Grade:A-.

"28 Days Later" is a bit slow
For all the hype this wasnt that great a story.Its about a few people left to fight off crazy insane humans who have been infected from a lab accident and roam the country killing the uninfected humans.That sounds like a pretty cool storyline except there was way too much of the main characters sitting around telling us their hopes and dreams and not enough good old killing and maiming.
For this infection to have swept the country there sure didnt seem to be the thousands of crazy infected wild people we should expect to see.In fact the humans we follow in the film carried a baseball bat and a machete to fend off these crazies.So there is a lot of nonsensical stuff in this film and not enough gore and insane violence that I expected.The last half of the film goes off on a tangent ,not about fighting the insane people,but of the heroes trying to get away from a militia leader and his pack of horny underlings.Predictable stuff where the "military men want our women and we must fight for their honor" kinda crapola. A lame bit of business in what was advertized to be a cool zombie type film.
Very few cool effects in this film and minimal gore and mild suspense make this film one to pass on unless you have nothing better to do.

hard to rate, big holes but something new
This is a really hard one to rate. The thing is that it's been so long since a good zombie movie came along that it was an okay movie for me and will thrill many lovers of that genre (I know, not classic zombies, blah, blah). But a person can't help but be bothered by the constant holes in the script.Aside from the holes in the script, one thing that's starting to bother me about movies period anymore is that it seems 4 out of 5 movies these days excepting comedies and dramas have to have a token "badass lady". I'm not arguing for helpless female characters, but seriously my wife and I rented 3 movies the other day and all three feature women proving their as tough as the men (one of the other 2 was Daredevil where his new girlfriend beats his ass twice despite having no superpowers of her own). After awhile that gets old as you watch movie after movie devote 20% of the runtime to establishing the toughness of the female characters.Then you have the holes that other reviewers mention, and I'll add a couple:The infected are obsessed with nothing save committing acts of violence yet are able to focus their violence solely on non-infected people.The infected vomit blood constantly and aren't concerned with eating or drinking, yet it apparently takes 56 days for them to begin dying, and then only from starvation. The virus incubates in about 20 seconds. Well, anyway I'll stop there but the minus is the holes in the script and the plus is that they were there partly out of necessity arising from trying to create something unique without directly ripping off other plague or zombie films. ... Read more

Reviews (36)

A movie that made a big splash
"Splash" was a big hit when it first hit the screens back in the 80's and it's still fairly popular today. A man (Tom Hanks) that has been waiting to find the right woman for a long time finally finds her. But there's one problem that he doesn't understand until he really gets to know her, she's a mermaid (Daryl Hannah). How will a man and a mermaid work it out and stay together?

"Splash" is a real entertaining movie and it's not all drama. It tells a story of true love and it does have a lot of drama in it, but it also has a little bit of comedy to it in some parts, and most of that is credit to one of the best comedy actors ever, John Candy, who plays as Tom Hanks's brother. If you like good movies, I definitely recommend getting "Splash." It's bound to make a big splash while you watch it.

One Of My All Time Favourite Comedys!
I will never forget the first time I saw the movie "Splash". It was in California 6 years ago and I watched the tape with my cousin. I thought it was so creative and the acting was so good. It was also a very humorous and did have a few sad parts in it, but all in all, I still liked it and watched it as many times as I could on TV because it was on alot. I then ended up buying my own copy. Ok, enough about me, let me tell you a bit about the storyline

Tom Hanks plays Allen Bauer, a single bachelor who is looking for a love. After a boating accident, he is rescued by a mermaid (Daryl Hannah) and falls in love with her and names her Madison. For he thinks she is a normal, everyday American woman, he has no clue he is dating a mermaid who has 6 days to have legs and not fins!!! Of course this film has lots and lots of surprises, it never tires me out when I watch it!

What a film! No wonder why it is a classic! Rated PG for Language.

SWEET, FUNNY, ROMANTIC, ORIGINAL, WHAT ELSE CAN YOU ASK FOR?
Usually when I hear "an 80's comedy" I really hear "a silly, gross, stupid comedy"...but not this time my friends, because "Splash" is one of the funniest films of the 1980s. You see, it really has it all: funny jokes, tender moments, romance, an intelligent script, and a very charismatic cast.

In "Splash" we can see a very young Tom Hanks (in his comedic period), a promising Darryl Hannah (she didn't quite reach stardom, but in this movie she is great), a hilarious John Candy (in one of his finest and funniest performances), and Eugene Levy, he plays a wacky and clueless scientist.

"Splash" is a movie that effectively combines comedy with romance and fantasy, perhaps the movie succeeded so well because the people involved in the film were youthful and energetic, and they put their hearts in the making of "Splash". This movie is highly recommendable.

Hilarious romantic comedy
I just watched Splash over the weekend on video, for the umpteenth time and I have to say is one of my all time favourite comedies. It still has me laughing out loud and makes me want to weep over the romantic scenes.

A young Tom Hanks plays Allen Bauer, a fruit wholesaler who has just been dumped by his girlfriend. He goes off to Cape Cod one evening after getting drunk and is rescued by a naked beautiful girl (Daryl Hannah) when he falls into the sea. The naked beautiful girl later arrives in New York at the Statue of Liberty in search of Allen whom she also saved from drowning many years ago when they were children. Allen immediately falls for her and spends the happiest days of his life steaming up his appartment and seeing the sights of New York. The only problem is the naked beautiful girl (now named Madison) is in fact a mermaid but Allen doesn't know this.

She has six whole days to stay with Allen and then she must return to the sea. Allen thinks that Madison is an illegal immigrant and offers to marry her so that she can stay with him. She refuses at first and then accepts his offer but before she can tell him her big secret she is exposed to the whole world by a scientist (Eugene Levy) that she is a mermaid. Allen is shocked and backs away from Madison but later realises his mistake and with his brother (John Candy) and the help of Eugene Levy they save her from imprisonment by the scientists.

John Candy who plays Allen's playboy brother is absolutely hilarious. His character is literally larger than life. The comic timing between Tom Hanks and John Candy is spot on. Daryl Hannah is also great as the mermaid who learns to be human in literally a few days. There are some brilliant laugh out loud scenes such as when Daryl Hannah is at Bloomingdales watching television for 6 hours to educate herself in the English language and when she's in a restaurant eating lobster including the shell. There are some great lines aswell such as when Allen mentions about getting married and having children and Madison innocently asks what kind.

Splash is a timeless comedy and is highly recommended to all those who love a bit of romance along with a good laugh.

Lealing

A "Slash" of a Romantic Comedy!
Here's a true piece of Hollywood Candy, a sweet as they come! An 8-year old boy falls off of a tour boat at Cape Cod and is saved from drowning by what appears to be a little girl mermaid. The boy never forgets about what happened that day, although everyone insists he was hallucinating.

Years later, now a man (and played by Tom Hanks), another trip to Cape Cod brings a dejavu: Hanks falls off of a tour boat and is rescued by an all grown mermaid (played by Daryl Hannah). Could it be the same mermaid that saved him when he was a boy? -- The mermaid has normal legs when kept dry, but once douced with water, the legs turn into fish finns. Hannah is able to conseal her true identity, until a "bad guy" exposes her. There are complications, but eventually everything comes up roses.

One great scene is where the grown up mermaid spends 6 hours in the electronics department of a store, and learns the English language fluently by watching tv non-stop. Cute! -- This film is very entertaining and helps us feel compassion for anyone who is somehow different from what society considers the norm. The somewhat predictable ending is beautiful! Highly recommended, especially to the hopelessly romantic cinema enthusiasts out there!***** ... Read more

Reviews (1130)

Saving Private Ryan DVD: Definitive Movie on D-Day
This was an awe-inspiring, horrific and honest portrayal of the D-Day landing and the extraordinary sacrifices made by ordinary individuals. Spielberg's hand-held in your face film technique immerses the viewer into the action. Without a doubt, Speilberg's depiction of the landing on Normandy Beach is one the most intense battle scenes ever filmed.

It is no less than a sheer masterpiece of filmaking. It is a well-researched, authentic anti-war statement that stands as a tribute to those individuals who endured horrific circumstances and literally saved the free world from tyranny.

Saving Private Ryan accomplishes what Schindler's list did in regard to the holocaust and what Oliver Stone's Platoon accomplished in its statement on Vietnam.

In addition, Spielberg has not only paid a deserving tribute to the veterans of World War II, he has also produced an excellent anti-war film that deglorifies warfare. There was nothing romantic about being butchered on the battlefield. If there is a hell, the D-Day veterans have already been there.

Saving Private Ryan is without a doubt one of the most honest, realistic combat movies ever made. Although Spielberg may not have gotten it all down in regard to the war with Germany; his depiction in regard to Normandy Beach and D-Day are right on target!

A terrifically powerful film
"Saving Private Ryan" is probably the best World War 2 movie ever made. The cast is excellent, and the cinematography unparalleled. The use of the hand-held, filtered camera during the battle scenes brings Capa's D-Day photographs to life. The story is simple--eight men are sent to find another soldier behind enemy lines--yet powerful by that very virtue. It is full of brilliant cinematic moments, such as the segueway after the horrific opening D-Day sequence: The screen goes blank for a second, and we hear the layered sounds of typewriters clicking like machine guns as Army typists write next of kin letters...Raindrops falling, then falling faster and dissolving into the sound of gunfire...
Throughout the film, we are shown many aspects of combat: the depersonalization which occurs in battle (Hanks' Captain Miller staring paralyzed at the carnage around him on the Normandy beach for a moment, then stoically replacing his blood-filled helmet); the tragedy of a single death (Giovanni Ribisi's Wade calling for his mother as he dies--the most realistic and moving depiction of death in cinema, to me...); heroism and cowardice. The music is great, the characters vividly drawn, the historical details perfect.

Steven Spielberg made this film as a tribute to his father, who served as a radio operator in the Pacific theater. His first film, made when he was thirteen, was a war story (in which he was allowed to use real airplanes at a nearby airbase for some of the shots). He'd been thinking of making a big film like this for a long time, and it is rewarding to watch.

Surprisingly impressive, stands out among war movies
Most of us expect a low-rate, pointless and overall tacky war movie from today's money-hungry industry, but SPR has done well in distancing itself from our presumptions. If you've never seen it before, than you'll be surprised at how well the movie is puit together. Aside from the usual modern-day method of pumping a movie full of A-List actors, a predictable script, less-than-impressive direction, irrelevent acting, and the overall novelty that one can come to expect of supposed dramas of today's glamour industry.

The story follows Captain John H. Miller and his team, including a sniper, a medic, an Arab, a surly private, and an acceptable Vin Diesel, to rescue James F. Ryan, a private in a paratrooper squad whose three brothers have been killed in action. A mission susceptible to much protest, and ultimately one that will cost many lives.

Everything about the movies feels as if it was done right. The overall atmosphere feels right, and it makes you feel as if you're sitting inside the movie--you can almost feel the moisture of the air seething through your clothes or the subtle sunshine warm your shoulders and forehead. The acting is very good as well, although you can spot some parts where improvement wouldn't hurt and it at times feels tacky and stunted. The direction is done well, as the actors can easily pass as soldiers, but the aforementioned cut corners could bring you away from the total immersion and feeling.

Saving Private Ryan is very worthwhile, and any war movie buff in his right mind would praise it as innovative and a revival of the genre.

Guts and gory
Does anyone still believe WWII was the good war, and that cynicism, spin control and U.S. brutality were born in Vietnam? If so, Steven Spielberg's visceral re-creation of the Secend World War experience will be a shocker: The film's battle scenes are anarchic, bloody, frenzied and studded with atrocious acts. Screenwriter Robert Rodat's script (based loosly on an actual incident and heavily indebted to historian Stephen Ambrose), however, sticks to familiar ground. Battled-scarred Captain Miller (Tom Hanks) is sent on a special mission to retrieve one Private Ryan (Matt Damon), who merits heric efforts because he's the sole survivor of four enlisted brothers, and his safe return is conceived as a home-front morale booster. Miller's hand-picked squadron is a checklist of war-movie types--hard-nosed sergeant (Tom Sizemore); decent private (Vin Diesel); Brooklyn wiseass (Edward Burns), introspective medic (Giovanni Ribsi); tough Jew (Adam Goldberg); pious Southern sharpshooter (Barry Pepper); and bookish corporal (Jeremy Davis) with no frontline experience--whose destinies follow a well-worn path. The exception is the GI who clings to the hope that war exposes the hidden strength in men, and instead has the worst wrenched out of him in a scene that elicits scattered applause but seems designed to evoke a mixture of pity and contempt. The movie's greatest strength lies in phenomenal performances that reach from the leads right down to the smallest supporting roles: Hanks' affability is worked under Miller's hardened skin, and Damon gives Ryan a boyish determination ans convincing as it is naive. Spielberg does some of his best work (the pointless preasent-day framing sequence notwithstanding), but follows in distinguished footsteps: Among the films that should'nt be lost in the rush to praise are Samuel Fuller's harrowing BIG RED ONE, whose credo--"The only glory in war is surviving"-- could be the movie's own.

You ARE There...
I watched SAVING PRIVATE RYAN not knowing what to expect. I'm not a big war movie fan, my taste running more toward horror / sci-fi / comedy. Within seconds I was totally engrossed in this all-too-real depiction of WW II. The bullets ripping men apart, the panic, the frantic kill-or-be-killed atmosphere, the almost continuous chaos, interrupted only briefly by spurts of calm, all added up to one joltingly great movie classic! Tom Hanks, Tom Sizemore, and every castmember is believable and human. There are no cigar-chomping superheroes in this story, just regular guys in an overwhelmingly dire situation (I felt like even I could be one of them). Spielberg tears off the sugary coating of the typical war film, revealing the squirming guts beneath. Pulling zero punches, he shows us war up close and disturbingly personal. Still, SPR is filled with warmth, humor, and that sense of brotherhood that would risk so much for one soldier. I love this movie and cannot recommend it highly enough... ... Read more

Amazon.com

One of the most endearing and intelligent romantic comedies of the '90s, the Oscar-winning Shakespeare in Love is filled with such good will, sunny romance, snappy one-liners, and devilish cleverness that it's absolutely irresistible. With tongue placed firmly in cheek, at its outset the film tracks young Will Shakespeare's overwrought battle with writer's block and the efforts of theater owner Philip Henslowe (Geoffrey Rush, in rare form) to stage Will's latest comedy, Romeo and Ethel, the Pirate's Daughter. Jokey comedy, though, soon takes a backseat to ravishing romance when the beautiful Viola De Lesseps (Gwyneth Paltrow) disguises herself as a young man to wangle herself an audition in the all-male cast, and wins both the part of Romeo and, after much misunderstanding, the playwright's heart. Soon enough, Will's pirate comedy becomes the beautiful, tragic Romeo and Juliet, reflecting the agony and ecstasy of Will and Viola's romance--he's married and she's set to marry the slimy Lord Wessex (Colin Firth) in the near future.

The way that Oscar-winning screenwriters Marc Norman and Tom Stoppard enfold their story within the parameters of Romeo and Juliet (and even Twelfth Night) is nothing short of brilliant--it would take a Shakespearean scholar to dissect the innumerable parallels, oft-quoted lines, plot developments, and thematic borrowings. And most amazingly, Norman and Stoppard haven't forgotten to entertain their audience in addition to riding a Shakespearean roller coaster, with director John Madden (Mrs. Brown) reigning in his huge ensemble with rollicking energy. Along the way there are small gems to be found, including Judi Dench's eight-minute, Oscar-winning turn as a truly regal Queen Elizabeth, but the key element of Shakespeare in Love's success rests on the milky-white shoulders of its two stars. Fiennes, inexplicably overlooked at Oscar time, is a dashing, heartfelt Will, and as for Best Actress winner Paltrow, well, nothing she'd done before could have prepared viewers for how amazing she is here. Breathtakingly beautiful, fiercely intelligent, strong-willed, and lovestruck--it's a performance worthy of Shakespeare in more ways than one. By the film's end, you'll be thoroughly won over--and brushing up your Shakespeare with newfound ardor. --Mark Englehart ... Read more

Reviews (456)

Not of an age, but for all time. And better on DVD
Purists who turn up their noses at Shakespeare in Love don't know what they're talking about - or rather, don't know what they're missing. This was, after all, written by Tom Stoppard, author of some of the very best plays of modern times (Arcadia, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead - the latter filmed with Gary Oldman and Tim Roth). He's done a splendid job of balancing accessibility with genuine wit. The screenplay is littered with allusions to the bard's works, and gives some great - albeit hypothetical - insights into how and why he wrote.

Beyond that, in true Shakespearean style, we are offered the "play within the play" - in this case Romeo and Juliet. Excellent editing gives us just enough to convey the mood of an Elizabethan performance, leaving us wanting more. This film does a great job of broadening the appeal of the most popular writer.

And don't miss the topical in-jokes - the "cabby" rowing the boat, and especially Glenda Jackson saying she knows what it's like to do a man's job (she plays "M" in the Bond movies). Bill S. would have approved. High praise indeed.

Top-Ten Romance, and One of the Most Clever Screenplays!
"Shakespeare in Love" is a triumph, pure and simple. With screenwriters Tom Stoppard and Marc Norman at the top of their game and feeding immortal lines to a top-notch cast, "Shakespeare in Love" could not fail to succeed.

The film opens with young Will Shakespeare (Joseph Fiennes) struggling with writer's block . . . he is clearly not yet the magnificent WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE (insert trumpets here), the world's most famous writer. Indeed, the top playwright of the age is Kit Marlowe (Rupert Everett), as Shakespeare is reminded several times. And young Will is also hopelessly infatuated with Rosaline, a woman completely unworthy of his affections.

After some psychotherapy that anticipates Freud, Will is no better. Still, heavily in debt, Will attempts to stage his next opus, "Romeo and Ethel, the Pirate's Daughter." Working with Henslowe (Geoffrey Rush, who would have stolen a lesser film with his perfect performance), who's also heavily in debt, Will seems headed for disaster.

That is, until he sees his muse, young Viola de Lesseps (Gwyneth Paltrow, never better). Smitten, young Will begins to write the romantic poetry that becomes "Romeo and Juliet." Viola, who recognizes Will's genius, meets Will through some classic Shakespearean disguises and mistaken identities. Of course, Viola is betrothed to a true slug, Lord Wessex (a plump Colin Firth), who plans to take her to Virginia in seek his fortune across the sea -- essentially sending her into exile.

Despite the roadblocks, Will and Viola are soon hopelessly in love. Viola, daring to breach the silly rule that only men can play parts on stage, has taken the role of Romeo by day. By night, Will and Viola write Will's most romantic play together.

"SIL" keeps the wheels turning mighty fast, and one of the joys of watching this movie over and over is catching a quick joke that you didn't get the first time around.

It's also a pleasure to watch this stellar cast go through its paces. While Judi Dench won her Oscar for her surprisingly brief performance as Queen Elizabeth, other actors turn in equally entertaining performances. Tom Wilkinson, Simon Callow, Martin Clunes, and Imelda Staunton each bring amazing proficiency to the supporting cast, and even the much-maligned appearance of Ben Affleck elevates the movie -- he is perfectly cast as a self-absorbed theater star (first line -- "What is the play, and what is my part?"). Affleck's comeuppance, when he realizes that he, as Mercutio, doesn't have the title role, is handled wonderfully well.

This is simply a movie that doesn't miss a trick. The film is shot beautifully, the extravagent costuming gets at the ridiculous conformity that we associate with jolly old England (and makes the torrid romance of Will and Viola that much more intimate), and the music is uplifting.

The film's final shot, as Viola walks along the beach and we realize that we've just seen the birth of arguably Shakespeare's greatest heroine, Viola of "Twelfth Night," is a masterpiece of powerful understatement.

This movie is simply a must for the film library!

A GOOFY YET DELICIOUSLY SEDUCTIVE ROMANTIC COMEDY!
The DVD casing claimed in big bold letters "Best Screenplay" Academy Award winner. I can surely see why! Must have been some deviously creative team that crafted this crisp comic period-piece.

The film is really two love stories: one a bawdy romance between two smitten humans, and the other an ode to the art of theatre. The writers'/director's love for showmanship is loud and evident throughout the brilliant screenplay, and if you're a fan of wordplay in any way, well then this is a surefire delight.

Both Paltrow and Fienners turn in lusciously romantic performances in their respective roles -- she pulls off the formidable order of gender-switching without a hitch, and he has just the right pitches and patterns for a young, struggling Shakespeare. Geoffrey Rush is magnetic as usual.

Don't be fooled by the Elizabethan accoutrements, this film and its arsenal of laconic quips could easily shoot several contemporary romances to dust. Buy this one in fact, don't just rent, it quite comfortably stands the test of more than one viewing..

Rush in an unforgettable role
Although Geoffrey Rush is not the star of the film, he delivers a memorable performance, as usual. Fiennes does, also. The costuming is very beautiful, and the humour is delightful. Highly reccommended.

Emotionally Fraudulent and Morally Offensive NON-Love Story
Before I start out, I should say that I am NOT one of those people who think they have to deride "Shakespeare in Love" because it's a "chick flick" and therefore unworthy(?!) of Oscars. Nor do I feel the need to condemn it for winning Best Picture over "Saving Private Ryan," as so many have done. I certainly do have a beef in that regard -- and it's that my own favorite film of 1998, "The Truman Show," wasn't even nominated for Best Picture! But none of these things have anything to do with my loathing for "Shakespeare in Love." My beef is solely with the offensive nature of the film itself. It's advertised as a love story, but is emotionally and morally empty when it comes to any notion of love.

You could see the writers straining to convince us that those two awesomely idiotic characters, Will and Viola, were really deserving to be the inspiration for "Romeo and Juliet." The film wanted to show that "the truth and nature of love" so magnificently expressed in Shakespeare's play resulted from this casual (and to my mind very unromantic) affair between a lying weasel of a married man, and an apparently dimwitted girl who can't be bothered to decide whether she wants to marry him or not, though she's being forced into marriage with a man she hates.

Starting out by having a man needing to fall in love for a mercenary reason -- so he can finish his play -- and then conveniently having him decide that the first pretty girl who comes along is the love of his life, doesn't strike me as a convincing way to start a love story. Did writers Marc Norman and Tom Stoppard really stop to think this out? From the beginning we know he's using this girl, and they never find a convincing way to show us that this ever changes.

The worst line in the film, to my mind, comes right after their first soft-core sex scene. Viola murmurs: "I never would have believed that there could be something better than a play -- even your play!" Will: "Huh?" Well, there goes any possible higher emotional or spiritual aspect to their relationship.

This is the deepest flaw in the movie (which was otherwise well acted, gorgeously shot and beautifully costumed). I could not enjoy it or buy into it in the slightest because the fundamental conception of the filmmakers was based on modern notions of love that don't go beyond the purely physical. Descriptions of love in Western literature have at least on occasion gone much deeper than that. The Will in "Shakespeare in Love" not only couldn't have written "Romeo and Juliet"'s dramatic sonnet "If I profane with my unworthiest hand this holy shrine. . ." he wouldn't even have been able to understand it.

Not to mention the glamorization of a man's adultery, and the strenuous attempts to avoid all the real-life emotional ramifications of such an action, in favor of a feel-good justification of it, in spite of the obvious harm to the young virginal woman who was used by a cad. But it's excused and made to seem no real harm, by having her anger abated by thinking Will is dead, then readily going back to him when she discovers he's alive (a cheap dramatic trick if I ever saw one). Above all, no matter what a real Elizabethan girl's attitude miught have been, Viola is made to adopt the "modern" attitude (love is just a "stolen season").

I think there actually could have been a believable story in the idea of Shakespeare falling in love while writing "Romeo and Juliet." Why not start with the historical fact that Shakespeare didn't even make up the plot of the play at all, much less make it up out of his own love life? In fact, "Romeo and Juliet" was an Italian novella that had gone the rounds of Europe, had been turned into a French play, an English poem and at least one preceding English play. What if Shakespeare finds himself adapting this love story, not believing in love, then actually falls in love in a way that resembles the plot of "Romeo and Juliet"? I think it would have been nice if he had fallen in love with a virgin like Viola, realized in all conscience he couldn't take advantage of her, and wrote his play out of his frustrated love, which he turns into art. I think it would have been more convincing. But of course then it wouldn't have been a Miramax film . . . ... Read more

Reviews (30)

Star-Studded Recounting of Legendary Nazi Trials
This star-studded film vividly captures the characters on all 3 sides of the spectrum: The accused, the victims, and the international tribunal judging the perpetrators of unspeakable atrocities against fellow human beings. It is shocking to see how many of the people responsible for the gruesome deaths of millions justified their actions.

After hearing witnesses who often were tortured, mamed by sadistic doctors, and had their loved ones murdered, I can not grasp the fact that the majority of those on trial were released after serving minimal prison terms. Some of them are still among us, while millions of victims lie in their graves at the hands of an evil minority!

Stellar performances by an International cast. Most noteworthy are Montgomery Clift and Judy Garland as testifying victims, Maximilian Schell as Prosecutor (Oscar Winner), Marlene Dietrich as wife of a defendant, and an elderly Spencer Tracy, trying to make sense of it all.

Effective use of B&W photography, first rate sets and costumes, along with many other production values, make this a timeless Classic. Although considerd over-long by some, I recommend this film to be shown to high school classes as a reminder that these things happened in a not so distant past.*****

SCHELL, TRACY, GARLAND, LANCASTER, CLIFT & WIDMARK GREAT!
This is a superb film by Stanley Kramer with an unbelievably great cast at the height of their craft. Each of the legendary actors were at the top of their performances in the reinactment of the Judge's Trial at Nuremberg. The world was tired of the Nuremberg trials. This one was a mopping up operation. Against a backdrop of an escalating Cold War with the Soviet Union, the selling out of justice by prominent Nazi judges serving the Third Reich is put on trial. Spencer Tracey plays Judge Dan Haywood, a retired Maine circuit court judge brought out of mothballs to serve as the chief justice. Amazingly, the usual action actor Burt Lancaster plays the top Nazi judge who at first does not recognize the Nuremberg tribunal's authority to judge him. For some mysterious reason, critics over the years failed to acknowledge the tremendous acting job he did in convincingly carrying off what was perhaps this film's most dynamic character change. However, my personal favorite was Maximillian Schell whose quintessential Germanic Hans Rolfe, the defense attorney released the full range of this incredible actor's virtuosity. For this he deservedly won an Academy Award Oscar.

One thousand words are not enough to celebrate this timeless film: Judy Garland (in perhaps her last film role) delivers a heartbreaking middle aging Irene Hoffman, reliving her experiences of Nazi cruelty on the witness stand; once again. However, not very good was the young Canadian actor, William Shatner playing Army Captain Byers, the aide de camp to Judge Haywood (Tracy). [The Starship Enterprise didn't seem to improve Shatner's skills any.] Richard Widmark (the moody, hostile prosecutor) and Montgomery Clift [who begged for the role he was willing to play without pay!] were excellent. Clift plays a slightly retarded German laborer, sterilized by Nazi doctors because of his mental slowness. This is among the very best films made by Kramer in the decade of the 1960s. Amazingly, it was released one year after INHERIT THE WIND, another Tracy-Kramer classic!

MASTERPIECE
What happens when Stanley Kramer teams Tracy, Dietrich, Garland, Schell, Clift, Lancaster and Widmark in a drama based on the trials in pos-war Nuremberg??? It`s vintage Hollywood; still 1 IF not THE BEST about the horrors from World War II ..... The film should be in every school-library across the world

MASTERPIECE
What happens when Stanley Kraner teams Tracy, Dietrich, Garland, Schell, Clift, Lancaster and Widmark in a drama based on the trials in pos-war Nuremberg??? It`s vintage Hollywood; still 1 IF not THE BEST about the horrors from World War II ..... The film should be in every school-library across the world

Wooooooooow
Ok, you`ll get Garland, Dietrich, Clift, Tracy, Widmark & Schell - the production headed by Stanley Kramer.... the result is pure Hollywood vintage combined with horrors from the 2nd World War??? But indeed; it is a masterpiece.... It should be in every school-library all over the world:-) ... Read more

Description

He said he'd be back.This time experience T2 like never before!Go EXTREME with the best picture and sound ever!ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER returns as the Terminator in this explosive action-adventure spectacle.Now he's one of the good guys, sent back in time to protect John Connor, the boy destined to lead the freedom fighters of the future.LINDA HAMILTON reprises her role as Sarah Connor, John's mother, a quintessential survivor who has been institutionalized for her warning of the nuclear holocaust she knows is inevitable.Together, the threesome must find a way to stop the ultimate enemy - the T-1000, the most lethal Terminator ever created.Co-written, produced and directed by James Cameron ("The Terminator," "Aliens," "Titanic), this visual tour de force is also a touching story of survival. ... Read more

Reviews (595)

T2 eXtreme:Nice case,nice extras,AMAZING image/sound quality
This is a truly wonderful dvd. If you own a home theatre system or seek the highest quality in dvd image and sound, this is the dvd for you. The high defenition version of the film is only playable with a high-end PC, but the special edition and theatrical versions on the tv are a big improvement on the 'ultimate edition dvd'. This is due to the brand new high quality transfer. The extras aren't amazing, but their pretty good. There is a documentary on T2's effect on the film industry and an 8 minute featurette on 'Life on the Set'. There is some great new DVD-ROM content though. There's a great little morphing program which takes a while to master seeing as there are few instructions. There is also a fun T-800 'FX Studio' in which you shoot at your imported digital photos to reveal your friend's or granny's endoskull. There is also a 'Skynet Combat Chassis Designer'. I haven't a clue what this is as I haven't used it yet, but I think it's some kind of online game. I have read several reviews with complaints about the metal outer case, but I had no problem whatsoever. The only advise I can give is to push in the front and back of the sleeve when taking the inner case out. It comes out no-problemo. If I had to choose betweem the 'Ultimate Edition' and the 'Extreme edition', I'd stick with Extreme. If however, I didn't have a dolby sound system and/or a widescreen tv, I'd take the 'Ultimate' (Way more Extras) - Oh, and by the way, the movie itself is probably one of the best films ever made.

The Ultimate And The Extreme
I was upset when Artisan announced yet another version of T2 (I think this makes 3 reissues but I lost count). Why? For those of us out there, who consider ourselves DVD-Philles, most of us already own the "Ultimate Edition"of T2, which is pretty dang cool in its right. I made up my mind. I wasn't going to fall into that trap. I was burned by The Mummy and American Pie and learned the hard way-not again

Having said that...Once I heard that writer/director James Cameron and co writer William Wisher had recorded a new audio commentary for the film. I have to hand it to Artisan..this was a shrewd move. One of the minor quibbles I had with the previous release of T2, was its audio commentary. As good as it was to have a lot of contributors, the last time out, I could tell that the track was just "pieced together" from different parts of the disc. Most of the info on the track was just "lifted" This was the only downer on the "ultimate edition" The "new" is very good and worth a listen. As for the film, the 2 disc "extreme edition", has both the special extended cut, and as an "Easter Egg", the theatrical cut as well. I have to admit, the look of the T-1000 (Robert Patrick) and his morphing looks pristine, as does the original Terminator (Arnold Schwarzenegger). But I would also caution that the High Definition Digital transfer will only look like a real improvment if you have the equipment to handle the technology. Luckily, for me, I have a friend with an updated system, but it's still not the top of the line

As for the other extras in the set, they are just ok. There are 2 new retrospective documentaries. One one the film's ground breaking effects; The other, is a "life on the set" montage, while the film was still in production. You can also build your own Terminator and track its progress online, and rounding out the set's extras is a graphic fact track about all things Terminator.

With this edition, be warned, you lose many of the extras found on the previous edition. But the Cameron/Wisher audio commentary is still quite a draw. Mega fans of T2 should have both, while others should think carefully, Ultimate wins for its extra content, while Extreme gets points for a great commentary--I have both for now...I still don't like multple special edition DVD's of the same film

one of the if not the best sequel ever!
in this sequel to the awesome original,arnold is a good guy sent back to protect john conner.another newer model of terminater comes after them.this t-1000 is made from quasi-liquid metal.it can be solid or liquid as needed.johns mom sarah decides to go and waste the dude who found the original terminaters hand and was largely responsible for the eventual takeover by the machines.this is a bit much for smaller kids.the action is incredible in this one.the first part was a indt film.this one cost 80 million dollars and made 78 million in its first weekend.it is the best of the 3 id say.if you are squeamish,you might want to go see bambi instead.belive it or not,its even emotional in a spot or 2.sara isnt a tenny bopper in this one but a dykey rambo bitch.her shrink isnt around long,but while he is,he is very obnoxious.of course he lived.it seems the guy in any movie who really needs killed,never gets it.sara deserved an award for this one.she did an awesome job playing a psycho with a lot on her mind.the message is no fate but what we make.in part 3 youll see that just isnt true,but i alredy knew that.intensity galore!sara plays a very intense character.all the action,the nukes,it freakin rocks!this is arnolds best!the special effects kick ass too.they made a 3rd.im hoping for a 4th also.but since it takes 10 years for another sequel,id better not hold my breath.and,by the way,who cares if arnolds to old.cant they find another musclehead to play some sort of new terminater?its do-able.we know it.hollywood knows it.so get off your lazy asses and make it already.i belive its about time for the big showdown between machine and man.

The Epitome of Action Films
We are all too familiar with the story of this movie, so I will spare you the details. "The Terminator" was a sleeper sci-fi hit that was a rarity in its genre. Movie-goers were beginning to see sci-fi films that rose above others in the genre and even other genres. "Alien", "Blade Runner", "Star Wars", and, the film that started the revolution, "2001: A Space Odyessy". What made "Terminator" so different was not just another bleak view of the future, but a tense, edgy thriller with some damn fine writing. But while it took an effort to make films like those, it took a greater one to make a sequel. "Aliens", "The Empire Strikes Back", and very few others accomplished this task successfully. As for "T2", unless you've been living under a rock, we all know how well it did. This is definitely the best of the series (in my opinion at least) and definitely one of the best action movies to grace the face of our planet. This is the movie that also started the trend of making action movies with ridiculously huge budgets and paying action stars ridiculously huge salaries. But T2 delivers, with a great story, stunning visuals, and Schwarzenegger in his prime. Plus who can forget Brad Fiedel's synthetic score which has been parodied numerous times?
Why another DVD though? This film has been put on DVD almost as many times as "Independence Day". Special features are somewhat reserved here, so what justifies another release? DVD producer Van Ling answers the question in a quaint little insert about how new technology has developed since the last T2 transfer. They can now present T2 the way it should be, digitally mastered from a 1080p, 24sf digital telecline transfer for "superior video and audio quality". This release of T2 is aimed toward the home theater crowd. All that confusing talk means that the picture is presented with more clarity.
And the sound is just awesome. The DTS track has been dropped from the "Ultimate Edition" in exchange for a Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround EX track and a Dolby headphone track. If you have the technology, try to watch a DVD with a DTS track whenever possible. In the case of this DVD, there's only the Dolby 5.1 EX track. But the track on this "Extreme DVD" defies both the Dolby and DTS tracks from the "Ultimate Edition". It takes full advantage of a dimensional sound field.
The goodies here are minimal; a SFX documentary, a behind the scenes montage, and a few DVD-ROM goodies that I didn't bother to try. But there is the original version of the film available to Windows Media Player 9 users on the second disc. You can watch it on the first disc as well, it's disguised as an easter egg. On the main menu of Disc 1, hit the right button five times while highlighting "Play Extended Version". There's also an enhanced mode with behind the scnes and there's a spankin new commentary by James Cameron himself.
But the question remains; is this DVD worth buying? It really boils down to what your reasons are for buying this new DVD. If you don't own the film, yes. If you're troubled by the mediocre video quality of either of the first two releases, then yes. If you want Cameron's commentary and other new supplements, yes. And if you want to playback T2 in HD on your PC (and even if you find that your computer equipment is currently insufficient for HD playback), yes. But if you want extensive behind the scenes, you might want to stick with your "Ultimate Edition". This "Extreme Edition" delivers though, despite falling short in the behind the scenes section.

awesome
okay. I just saw this movie and its the best movie ever made and james cameron is the best director ever.Now lately I keep reading all this comotion between the extreme version and the ultimate version. Well i'd pick the extreme. The reason I didnt pick the ultimate is because even though it has great quality its probley nothing close to the picture and sound on the extreme version. I also didnt pick it because its to hard to find. I picked extreme for many reasons. Lets start with the picture and sound its awesome nothing else to say. It also has an also metal case that I heard ruins the dvd inside it but still its awesome. Now as a previous reviewer said extreme dosent have the special extended edition well I dont really care {no offence to the previous reviewer who wrote that} because it only has 2 minutes of more footage {litterly} I think the scene of the t-1000 searching johns room is cool and I wouldent mind that in the movie but the special extended edition ruins the ending with a new "happy ending". Be warned its ruins the ending to the best movie ever. Even though the origian ending on the special edition is good enough. People say that the new happy ending stops a sequel. But see I do