Reviews (85)

It's Good to Be Mel Brooks
When this film first appeared more than 20 years ago, it temporarily threatened to replace world history courses in schools, colleges, and universities. Of course, that didn't happen. Probably just as well, given the fact that screenwriter, producer, and director Mel Brooks never wrote, produced, and directed Part II and its eagerly-awaited portrayals of "Jews in Space" and "Hitler on Ice." There are historians' homes in which Brooks is still not welcome. In any event, what we have in Part I is a combination of five extended sketches: The Dawn of Man, The Stone Age, The Spanish Inquisition, The Bible, and The Future. Inevitably there are some gaps.

Brooks appears in several different roles while (in fact) portraying himself: Moses, Comicus, Torquemada, and King Lou. Other members of the Brooks Ensemble Company include Madeline Kahn (Empress Nympho), Cloris Leachman (Madame de Farge), Harvey Korman (Count de Monet), Ron Carey (Swiftus), Andreas Voutsinas (Béarnaise), and Shecky Green (Marcus Vindictus). Brooks has assembled a cast of thousands. The production values are remarkably good. However, as in other Brooks films such as Blazing Saddles and High Anxiety, the quality of the humor varies from Brilliant & Inspired (e.g. King Lou professing love of "the little people" while shooting at airborn peasants who have been launched as targets: "Pull!") to Oh No (e.g. Moses reducing the number of Commandments to Ten by dropping/breaking one of three tablets while descending Mount Sinai, and, Jesus becoming confused by use of his name as an expletive). Brooks is an incurable gagster and punster. More often than not, the humor in this film works. But when it doesn't....

Several clever touches. For example, beginning the film with a parody of 2001: A Space Odyssey, with Orson Welles providing the voice-over. Also, it is fun to play the equivalent of "Where's Waldo" by trying to spot familiar actors in supporting roles such as Bea Arthur (Clerk), Charlie Callas (Soothsayer), Jack Carter (Rat Vendor), Sid Caesar (Chief Caveman), John Gavin (Marche), Ronny Graham (Oedipus), Nigel Hawthorne (Official), John Hillerman (Rich Man), Hugh Hefner (Entrepreneur), Barry Levinson (Column Salesman), Spike Milligan (Monsieur Rimbaud), Howard Morris (Court Spokesman), Jan Murray (Nothing Vendor), and Henny Youngman (Chemist). As I said, a cast of thousands...if not more.

Brooks' best films, those most effectively developed, are The Producers and Young Frankenstein, the latter being a remarkably respectful version of several earlier films. All comics are thieves. The best comics steal from the best sources. I thought about that when I saw this film again recently, wondering if Brooks' History of the World -- Part I was in any way influenced by The Story of Mankind (1957), a film based on Henrik Willem Van Loon's bestseller. For purposes of parody, The Story of Mankind would be an excellent target of opportunity. Those among its diverse cast of thousands (if not more) include Charles Coburn (Hippocrates), Ronald Colman (The Spirit of Man), Cedric Hardwicke (High Judge), Dennis Hopper (Napoleon), Hedy Lamarr (Joan of Arc), Peter Lorre (Nero), Virginia Mayo (Cleopatra), Chico Marx (Monk), Harpo Marx (Isaac Newton), Groucho Marx (Peter Minuit), Agnes Moorehead (Elizabeth I), Vincent Price (The Devil), and Cesar Romero (Spanish Envoy). Whenever a list of the Ten Most Pretentious Movies Ever Made is formulated, The Story of Mankind is frequently and deservedly given serious consideration.

Despite its several flaws, The History of the World -- Part I remains a generally entertaining, at times hilarious film. Whenever I see it again, I feel eager anticipation as I await its strongest scenes, willing to endure its weakest meanwhile. To me at least, the previews for Part II (which conclude Part I) suggest why Brooks resembles the Little Girl with The Curl: "When she's good, she's very very good but when she's bad...."

Mel Brooks at his Bawdy Best
Mel Brooks is at the top of his game with this hilarious spoof on world history beginning with the Stone Age and touching on subjects all the way through the French Revolution. While much of the humor is far from sophisticated, it doesn't diminish the fact that the film is just plain funny!

Lots of comedic actors, great and small, make side-splitting appearances in the film, including Sid Ceasar, Harvey Korman, Dom DeLuise, Bea Arthur, Madeline Kahn, Cloris Leachman, Jackie Mason, and Gregory Hines.

The beauty of Brooks' scathing spoofs of historical events and figures is that the humor is timeless, holding up just as well in 2004 as it did when the film was originally released in 1981. If you have never seen or heard of this film, rent or buy it now, as you have missed an iconic movie. I've even heard of European History professors using Brooks' wacky take on the Spanish Inquisition in their history classes.

When it comes to bawdy satire, Mel Brooks found it "good to be the King" in the 1970s and 80s!

written by David Laing, not Julia Laing
One of Mel Brook's finest movies, in this one, he sets out to parody history, from the Stone Age, to the French Revolution. The first time period is the Stone Age, where we see the first homosapien and homosexual marriage, and discover how music was invented. Next, in a very short bit, we see Moses coming down from a mountain with the 15 commandments, until he drops one slab, and it becomes the 10 commandments. The next era is the Roman Empire, where after Philatipis[or something like that] gets a gig to do comedy for Caescar, he offends, the emporer, so him and his new found friend must fight each other to the death, but instead stop fighting and try to escape from Rome. The 4th era is by far the funniest, and the most offensive, The Spanish Inquisition. So in a musical extravaganza, we see how the Catholics tried to convert the Jews to become Catholics, and in the last part, we behold the French Revolution, and one of the greatest lines in this movie. So, see this hilarious movie, but if you are easily offended, then do not see this. The only thing that aggravates me was that Brooks had a part 2 planned out, but it was never released. At the end of the movie, we get a preview of the unreleased History of The World part 2.

History has never been more hilarious.
I wasn't familiar with History of the World until someone recommended that I see it. I knew a little of who Mel Brooks was and had seen Young Frankenstein so I knew this might be good. Now I think it is one of the funniest movies ever, a genius spoof of world history troughout different period of time. You get to see prehistoric man invent art, and along with the first art came the first art critic. We see the real story behind Moses and the Ten Commandments. The best part to me was the part about the Roman times, when Comicus the stand up philosopher is introduced. I was laughing long and hard when Comicus gets a job as waiter at the Last Supper. Also spoofed are the Spanish Inquisition and the French Revolution.

History of the World is a great movie that features a terrific cast including Mel Brooks, Gregory Hines, Madeline Kahn, Harvey Korman and Sid Caesar. There are others, but together they give an entertaining perspective into some of history's most important events. There are also countless quotes from the movie that will stick with you for a long time after you hear them. This is something I recommend seeing, as even after 23 years it still seems as fresh as ever with the humor it provides.

Nobody Expects the (Musical) Spanish Inquisition
Probably the success of MONTY PYTHON'S LIFE OF BRIAN two years earlier was the inspiration for Mel Brooks' HISTORY OF THE WORLD - PART I (A year earlier Python/'Brian' probably also inspired the also lesser ripoff WHOLLY MOSES). One reason are many of the biblical spoofs in this episodic movie. A lot of this is pretty lame especially during the Dom Deluise as Nero sequence that seems to go on forever. The only funny thing to come out of this is the classic line "When you die at the Palace..you really die!". Included is a scene outside of the actual Las Vegas casino Ceasar's Palace with Roman citizens going into it as if it is actually in ancient Rome. The rest of this particular sequence seems to come right out of Richard Lester's/Zero Mostel's A FUNNY THING HAPPENED TO ME ON THE WAY TO THE FORUM only it is not very funny. There are a couple inspired gags (i.e. The Spanish Inquisition- the musical,Moses receiving the 15..er, 10 Commandments, and a tribute to Esther Williams/MGM musical aqua dancing extravaganzas featuring bathing beauty nuns) in the rest of the film, but they are not very memorable. Whereas Monty Python's 'BRIAN' was deemed sacrilegious (at least in 1979) and brilliantly irreverent, 'HISTORY' is just plain dumb. Brooks' seemed to lose his touch starting with this film and would continue with SPACEBALLS,ROBIN HOOD MEN IN TIGHTS and DRACULA DEAD AND LOVING IT etc. Overall, a general waste of celluloid,talent, and time. ... Read more

Reviews (177)

The Depths Of Depp
Johnny Depp plays George Jung, your every day man turned multi-millionaire drug dealer. The amazing journey starts with just a bit of weed going to people on the beach, soon he and his friends are working their way to Mexico in major exports. After a brief stop in jail Depp changes from marijuana to cocaine. Soon Depp has so much money he can't fit anymore in his house. It is in this time he meets his wife-to-be decently played by Penelope Cruz. A mishap with his wife later and he is in jail again. The part about this film that sets it apart from most drug movies is that it shows the highlights of the illegal exchange business but it also shows the bottoming out. The other thing it has is a connection with the characters. You actually begin to feel for Depp as he is separated from the one thing that he loves in his life, his daughter. Franka Potente (Run Lola Run) and Paul Rubin (Pee Wee Herman) also have roles in this film that has heart and substance(s).

Strong Powder
BLOW is based on the true story of George Jung (Johnny Depp). In the 70s and 80s, Jung was the single largest importer of Columbian cocaine, to the United States. Therefore, he alone, changed America, and helped to create the "drug culture" in this nation. At the film's center is the partnership between Jung and Pablo Escobar, (Cliff Curtis) and how they operated, with and against each other. It really is true what others have said about Depp's performance in the film. He doesn't let this highly complex role intimidate him. He pulls it off brilliantly. He scenes with Penelope Cruz are pure magic. Directed by the late Ted Demme, BLOW offers viewers an inside look into how some people got very rich off of other people's addiction to drugs. Even though some have blasted the film because, in their opinion, it glorifies drug use, I see it more as an anti drug film. Having said that, dont expect an overt anti-drug message in the movie either. My take on it is that the "message" hides as a subtext as an implied theme. If the film does have any connection to any indictment against drugs, that comes from the fact that Demme died last year from apparently using the stuff himself.

The DVD is part of New Line Cinema's Infinifilm series. Like all other discs in the series, it is packed with extras, allowing viewers to have more of an interactive experience, while watching the film. Hearing Demme talk about drugs on the commentary track with Jung, may unsettle some, given what happened to him, but there really isn't much of that on the track. The deleted scenes don't really add much to the film and were properly edited out of the picture. The Ted Demme Production Diary is cool because it takes us through how movies are made (I always enjoy that stuff). Rounding out the standard features are trailers, filmographies, and a Nikka Costa Music Video. The disc also has a few DVD-ROM extras. The Infinifilm extras include interviews with Jung conducted by Demme, a trivia track, among others. Use of the Infinifilm mode gives you access to these features for a unique look at BLOW.

Thanks to powerful performances and solid, well produced extras, BLOW is a Highly Recommended film/DVD **** and a half stars.

Blow is about the life of Mr. George Jung from childhood to
his final drug bust for which he is still serving time. Johnny Depp carries this movie very well, like all movies about gangs or drugs or anything crime related, this movie starts off with everything going well and then everything starting to go downhill again, it is a true story, obviously with quite a bit of Hollywood fabrication but none the less, it inspires sympathy for the characters, I for one am someone who isn't really a very emotional person when it comes to movies, at least I don't think so, but this movie brought a tear or two to my eye, especially the ending, where Depp recited a poem written by Jung and it is the saddest thing, the special features are quite amazing, I would recommend this movie to people over 14 because it does have an R rating which is due to a lot of language, drug content, extremely brief nudity and some violence here and there. Enjoy.

extras no good
I rated this movie 5 stars, until I got a load of the DVD extras. These extras actually serve to drag down the enjoyment of the movie. First, there are the "character outtakes" whatever that term is supposed to mean. These consist of various characters being interviewed about George Jung - the character, not the real person. They say poorly thought out and inarticulate things like, "This guy... he's like... this guy don't care what anybody thinks, you know?" My impression was that the actors just got in front of a camera "in character" and extemporized. The results are pretty ghastly. Also, there is the jailhouse interview that director Ted Demme makes of George Jung, the real person. This is also pretty disedifying, consisting at the end of Demme sitting next to Jung on a bench and saying similarly inarticulate and poorly thought out things, like, "Yeah, its like schoolteachers make minimum wage and there's truckdrivers making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year..." Now, I am an ex-schoolteacher and though I did not make a mint at my job I certainly did not make "minimum wage" and I worked for one of the most underfunded school districts in the country. One has the impression of being a witness to a guy blowing his mouth off on the balcony of somebody's post-college get-together. Not pretty. How Demme ever got people to trust him with millions of dollars remains a mystery: the man is simply not preposessing intellectually. Also, his world is morally vague and equivocal. He tells Jung he takes a non-judgemental stance to his crimes and then says that he himself has skeletons in the closet, its just that his are not so well known. Now, I kind of doubt that Ted Demme is himself a serious criminal who has simply evaded discovery. But that is what he is in effect implying, in bad faith to George Jung - a hardcore criminal. The real implication is that any degree of malfeasance is equivalent to any other. If one man has smuggled enormous quantities of drugs, and another man has left the cap off his toothpaste well, they're pretty much the same: we all do bad things. Interestingly, the stance that Demme takes is NOT that what Jung did was not morally wrong. His stance is that, though it was wrong, so what? I can respect and perhaps agree with someone who says that smuggling drugs, though illegal, is not immoral. I can understand the argument that by and large it is an utter liberal myth that anybody is forced to use drugs by anybody else. Peer pressure? One gravitates to "peers" with similar interests. If you get into drugs and your friends don't, you find new friends: druggie friends. This happened in my circle of friends and I have seen it happen first-hand. I had many druggie and non druggie friends and I never saw anybody use drugs who did not want to. And there is simply no substance so addictive that it turns a straight arrow into a degenerate against the straight arrow's will and inclination. Drugs simply help you along in the direction you are inclined.
All this being said, I can agree with someone who does not morally judge George Jung. Personally I am morally indifferent to his actions. But this is not the same thing as saying that what he did was wrong but so what we all do bad things. If I once ignored a parking ticket, is this the same thing as being a murderer? I suspect that Demme's thus cozying up to Jung actually lowered him in Jung's regard.

Luff ist der drug
Let me be clear, this is a great film. It actually reassures me that all movies are not garbage. But for me the best part of the movie is Franka Potente's performance as Barbara, a comely stew who, so far as I can tell, is not supposed to be German. It is a special pleasure for me to watch Franka Potente, with her thick Cherrrmann accent, ya? trying to speak in a vey zat iss recognizeable as chust typical yanqui American dialect. I also thrilled to her performance in The Bourne Identity, hearing her deliver such lines as, "But he vas chust shining us all on" like the Munchen-frau she is. Yeah, I'll get all liquored up on Spaten Premium, or maybe even brave the forbidding slopes of the Optimator, then I'll hunker down for a triple-bill of Run Lola Run, Bourne Identity, and Blow. Its like my own private Oktoberfest that I chust by myself heff got going on, ya?
unt ich bein auss. ... Read more

Reviews (113)

Disney's Pocahontas Gold Collection DVD
Pocahontas is a good tale that deserves to have the Disney name. While far from the most entertaining in the Disney library, this one does have some of the most spectacular animation and imagery then any of them! The film is definatley not for the very young, there is much war violence (superficial, yes, but it's still there), including some blood-free shot wounds. The story is much more mature oriented, with Pocahontas trying to end the war between her people and the white-men for the sake of her love for John Smith.

The film has many songs, but only a few stand out - -Oscar Award Winner "Colors Of The Wind" is one of them, "Around the River Bend", and "If I Never Knew You" is the other - - the rest are catchy, but unmemorable numbers.

The "Gold Classic Collection" DVD edition of the 1995 film, has a mediocre picture. There is constant grain, and it is rarely perfectly clear. On the plus side, the animation is still able to be appreciated and the Dolby Digital 5.1 mix is good.

Again, this is NOT the Disney movie to show little kids (it would probably be a complete fly-by for them), but it does have much appeal to an older audience who can appreciate the animation, and the Oscar- winning music. A true modern masterpiece.

POCAHONTAS DVD REVIEW: What happened to the video???
I suppose this movie has a more meaning for me due to a past romance and the this to be the movie we shared, so I enjoyed it. Sure, Disney knows how to take some part of history and make it so fictional but one of the things I like about this movie is the detail they put into Pocahontas facial expressions. That feature always caught me.

Anyway, you either like the animation or you don't. The audio is very well done. No major sound effects but the music and the dialogue is the main things for this film. What about the video? The video is a shock. Where Tarzan bursts with a radiance of colors, not Pocahontas. What happened during the transfer? It's like a transfer from a video tape seen 10 times before. Not acceptable with a DVD! I can't believe the colors aren't superb.

Extras...well, I guess after the fans were upset that Disney didn't include any extras in their previous releases, now they are with their "Gold Collections". I like how the DVD has the two music videos especially "Colors of the Wind" by Vanessa Williams. There are a lot of trailers before the movies which you can fortunately skip over, a trivia game and DVD storybook like the Tarzan DVD and a fun with nature booklet which they should of added to the DVD. Otherwise it's better than what we got before from older Disney DVD's. So, we have the movie at above average, the special features in the C to C- range and the DVD Overall probably a B-/C+.

Otherwise, for a DVD from Disney, this movie deserved better. A better video transfer and they could at least added the making of Pocahontas or something. (sigh)...

Anyway, if you want to watch Pocahontas, get the DVD version. Even those it's VHS quality, you get those extras and good sound. If you don't care about the extras and just want to see the movie, then the VHS might be your thing.

Politically-correct racism
I wish my children had never seen this movie, but since I made the mistake of trusting Disney and since it reappears on TV frequently, I've used it as an opportunity to talk about the blatant (but politically-correct) racism woven through it. My point to my children: racism is wrong, no matter who it's directed at (a point that goes directly against the main theme of the movie).

In this movie, there is one and only one exception to the rule that all Native Americans are good and all English are bad. John Smith is the exception that proves the rule - other than him, all British are evil (and crude, dirty, greedy, etc.). The Native Americans aren't all quite perfect but all come around in the end, while the English are clearly rotten to the core, and the world would be a better place if they were all gone.

Get this movie for your children IF you want to teach them to use skin color as a way of predicting good versus evil. And don't worry, they won't get the wrong, racist lesson that dark skin is bad - they'll get the politically-correct lesson, that people with white skin are bad.

Disney produces yet another inaccurate cartoon...
As always, Disney provides us with an hour-glass shaped, beautifully dashing, ever accomodating heroine, and a strong, handsome, brave, conquering hero; a romance story that is historically inaccurate, romanticized, racist, and sexist. "Pocahontas" was not her real name, and she was about ten years old. According to LEGEND, she saved John Smith's life - the woman of color saves the white man, while falling in love with him. According to REAL history, he was brought in to the village, well-fed and well-treated. Most likely, she simply talked with him while he was in her village. There was NO romantic relationship. She was actually kidnapped a few years later and held for ransom in Jamestown. She died of a White Man's disease. Disney has created a cartoon "Romeo & Juliet" story for children, and what hurts my heart the most is that people really believe that the Disney version is true. There are so many un-truths in the world, especially in our Media, and "Pocahontas" is one of them.

Love Story with a touch of History
In reality Pocahontas was the wife of another white settler named John Rolfe. She later became Lady Rebecca. We can say she fell in love with John Smith but their love story didn't workout.
The story of Pocahontas repesents us all Americans. That no matter how you look like, Black or White we are all foreigners on this land.The original Americans are the American Indians, cause they are already here when Columbus discovered America.As for this movie itself, I love it especially the music. ... Read more

Reviews (30)

Hollywood Classic
This film starts with the 1685 Duke of Monmouth rebellion. The battle of Sedgemoor rages in the background as Errol Flynn's character is wrongly accused of supporting the rebels. King James II is portrayed as an arrogant prince, something which most Protestants of the day would have agreed with, and which Hollywood does not seem to deny. James, while detached, was not the cold hearted fool we see here. But this is only a minor point. The film has historic interest, portraying England as it does during the 1680s, the reign of James II before the advent of the Glorious Revolution which sees him removed in favor of William III of Orange and Queen Mary. The movie only touches on these political developments, but its interesting to see them as factors in the background.

The rest is pure Hollywood adventure with fiction playing havoc with fact! Still, the movie is so entertaining and classy that we don't mind a few historical gaffes. Flynn is elegant in his first major role, and Olivia Dehavland is strikingly beautiful. Hard to beleive she was only 18 when this film was made. The rest of the supporting cast may be a bit standard for a 1930s production, but they pull their weight well with all the cute touches of the day. The production value of the film appears more impressive than it actually was. The fast pace combined with clever plot makes for a classic of its kind. The French as perenial villins may strike a chord with today! For period swashbuckling, romance and class, you won't find better than here.

Blood! Blood! ......And A Film Legend Was Born
"Classic", is written all over this legendary Warner Brothers production from Hollywood's heyday in the 1930's. A fine literary source in the novel by Rafael Sabatini formed the basis for what was to become easily one of the best loved pirate tales ever filmed by a Hollywood Studio. Many (myself included) believe that "Captain Blood", is THE definitive swashbuckling adventure and contains everything to satisfy the pirate enthusiast, from a dashing leading man fighting for justice in a corrupt world,a beautiful damsel in distress to be rescued by the hero, lively swordplay, brilliantly staged sea battles, and the essential quota of villianous characters to add spice to the drama. "Captain Blood", was as well a "first", in many ways. Firstly it marked the breakthrough role for Tasmanian born Errol Flynn who was perfect for the role of Dr. Peter Blood, a man of good character wrongly condemmed to a life of slavery for helping tend the injuries of a rebel soldier in the corrupt England of James 2nd. Also this film marked the first teaming of Flynn with rising young actress Olivia de Havilland and the two went on to work beautifully together in eight films over the next seven years earning them immortality as one of filmdom's most unforgettable screen couples.

It's hard to imagine nowadays anyone but Errol Flynn in the role of Captain Blood but he was not even considered in the original casting of the film being an almost complete unknown at the time. Robert Donat was set to play the lead but had to withdraw due to illness and Jack Warner took a considerable gamble in casting the untried Australian actor in the lead of one of the studios biggest productions for the year. Once the decision was made however the rest as they say was film history as Errol Flynn swashed and buckled his way to Hollywood stardom in a stunning debut which helped make "Captain Blood", one of the years most successful films and helped gain it a nomination as Best Picture of the year. "Captain Blood", relates the story of Irish Doctor Peter Blood who is called out to tend the wounds of a rebel soldier fighting the corrupt governement of King James 2nd. Caught at the scene Peter is imprisoned as a rebel of the crown and in a sham court hearing is condemmed to a life of slavery in the infamous colony of Port Royal. Suffering brutality under the cruel Planatation owner Col. Bishop (Lionel Atwill in a masterfully evil role) Peter has the chance to escape when Port Royal is attacked by the Spanish. He forms a crew with his men and together they head out to sea on a stolen ship to become pirates with no country to call home. Very soon the name of "Captain Blood" is infamous throughout the Carribean and no ship Spanish, French, or English is safe from his looting. Making an uneasy alliance with French Pirate Capt. Levasseur(Basil Rathbone in a small but effective role) Peter finds his loyalties tested when Levasseur captures Arabella (de Havilland) the niece of Col. Bishop who Peter loves, as she returns to Port Royal with Lord Willoughby (Henry Stephenson). Fighting a duel to the death with Levasseur over Arabella's safety, Peter learns from Lord Willoughby the King James has been driven out of England and the new King William 3rd has not only pardoned Peter and his men but also offered them places in his navy. Returning to Port Royal the men find the port under attack from the Spanish and Captain Blood now fighting for King and Country in a exciting finale manages to defeat the Spanish invasion and save Port Royal from falling into enemy hands. For his great service to the crown King William then makes Peter the new govener of Port Royal much to the distress of his old enemy Col. Bishop but to the utter joy of Arabella who now plans to marry Peter at the happy conclusion.

Errol flynn had no peer when it came to these types of dashing adventure roles. His performance here and in such classics as "The Adventures of Robin Hood", and "The Sea Hawk", certainly saw him in his element being ideally cast. He teamed perfectly with Olivia de Havilland, he all bravado, masculinity and dashing energy, while she was the epitome of the demure refined young lady waiting for love. "Captain Blood", however is peopled with some other great acting talent that must not be forgotten under the bright light of Errol Flynn's screen charisma. Lionel Atwill excels as the cruel Col. Bishop in a tailor made role and character actors Donald Meek and especially George Hassell as the comical gout ridden Gov. Steed are both excellent in their smaller parts that help give "Captain Blood", some of its fine acting moments. Directed with usual high energy by Michael Curtiz, he manages to extract a marvellous performance out of the still largely inexperienced Flynn. Theirs was a definite hate relationship as the two loathed each other but by some miracle produced consistently excellent work together.The visuals of the film are first rate with the superbly staged sea battles unrivalled in their authentic look. Erich Wolfgang Korngold furnished another of his rousing musical scores that succeeds in really adding a high level of excitment to all the action secquences in "Captain Blood".

"Captain Blood", makes for ideal entertainment of the old fashioned kind and is a perfect example of Errol Flynn's great screen presence in a role idealy suited to him. Here we see him and Olivia de Havilland in the full bloom of their youthful vibrance in an exciting tale of adventure and romance,with good winning out over evil. It's Hollywood filmmaking of the old school and it is sure to leave you cheering as the good Captain romances his ladylove and fights against corruption and cruelty on the High Seas. Enjoy!

Simon Davis
Now that I have read Simon Davis' review, I dont have to watch the film?

Actually , I have seen the film a few times..and I can only add that Lionel Atwill pouts as well as any actor I have seen and Mr Rathbone begins his legacy as one of the great screen villians

CP

Shine on
Captain Blood is a great film, let alone a tremendous pirate film. There's something about the plot that has a certain resonance today as much as that of Robin Hood, namely that age-old sense of justice triumphing over rigid law and order, of robbing the rich to feed the poor. Yet Captain Blood is a little rougher edged, a little crueler in its machinations. Peter Blood (Flynn) is a well-meaning doctor who happens to aid the wrong side in one of Britain's innumerable civil wars, and is sentenced into slavery in the outer colonies along with a pack of other unfortunates. Right from the moment you see him level his icy gaze at the consumptive, soon-to-be dead Royal judge who passed the sentence, you know this party is just getting started.

Hollywood has used the 'good-man-wronged' scenario countless times since this movie, but rarely to such effect. Battered, beaten, but never broken, Dr. Peter Blood transforms into Captain Blood, the terror of the high seas that crushes his enemies without ever letting anyone affect his high-minded moral core. It was not his choice to become an outlaw, but if he has to become one, he will be the best one there ever was. Redemption, honor, and love all make their appearances in the fine script enacted by a worthy cast, but at every point Blood is a man in control of, and therefore responsible for, his own destiny. It's a great film and one you definitely should check out.

A great buccaneer epic.
I think that this is one of the greatest action - adventure films and perhaps the greatest adventure-epic film about pirates ,ever made in cinema's history. Adapted from Raffael Sabbatini's homonymous novel, "Captain Blood" introduced 26 years old Australian-born actor Errol Flynn, in Hollywood as a great star and it was the first of a movie-series that granted him the title of "swashbucklers's king".The film also created Flynn's image (solidified in the next years) as the dashing young romantic adventurer hero who always saves the day. Flynn plays the Irish doctor Peter Blood who becomes the handsome gentleman rogue pirate of the Caribbean with bravado and charisma ,appearing his great talent that made him a legend. But here we can locate some historical inaccuracy , (an inheritance of 19th century's romantic literature ) because the real pirates were quite repulsive, poor , illiterate and not fascinating and educated sea knights. The historical background on the contrary is quite accurate and very interesting. The film beggins in 1685 when Duke of Monmouth organised an unsuccessfull rebellion and portrays England during the 1680s, the reign of James II before the advent of the Glorious Revolution which sees him removed in favor of William III of Orange and Queen Mary. An other notable point is that the film portrays pro-catholic King James II as an evil and cruel tyrannical persona ,a fact that might be seen as a film's pro-protestant position on history, yet don't forget that this story is adapted from a novel and this was Sabbatini's view on historical facts.
Curtiz's direction is excellent and impressive,especially at the great terrific sea battle which is amazing. Olivia de Havilland is brilland and adorable as Flynn's sweet love interest ,with astonishing beauty. Even she is only 19 years old ,she plays her role with maturity and high professional capability. Basil Rathbone is perfect as the villain-fond of women French pirate Levasseur (and as swordfighter) using a peculiar french accent . Lionel Atwill as de Havilland's uncle is very convincing as a brutal plantation owner who finally reconciles with Captain Blood (Errol Flynn).You have also to notice the great performances by the actors who compose Captain Blood's crew. They're really charming.
A must-see high entertaining master piece epic. I give it all the stars I can . Enjoy it and love it. ... Read more

Amazon.com

After the Sunset may not be the greatest jewel-heist caper comedy ever made, but it sure is easy on the eyes. Shifting back into his crowd-pleasing Rush Hour mode, director Brett Ratner kicks off the action with a rousing chase scene that pretty much describes the entire film: utter nonsense, but adequately enjoyable. Things get very sunny thereafter, when FBI agent Woody Harrelson lands in the Bahamas to track down ace diamond thief Pierce Brosnan and his lovely accomplice Salma Hayek, whom he suspects of planning their next big heist on a cruise ship. A Bahamian gangster (Don Cheadle) wants in on the action, and the whole thing's about as fluffy as an Elmo doll and just as harmless, especially when you consider Hayek's revealing wardrobe (which, thankfully, distracts from Brosnan's less-than-Bond-like physique). There's an abundance of witty banter between everyone, and the tropical locations make After the Sunset a balmy, vicarious vacation. Critics weren't exactly kind to this breezy dose of popcorn entertainment, but it's an agreeable time-killer and an instant cure for seasonal affective disorder, even if the comedic chemistry leaves something to be desired. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (45)

Better Than I Expected
This isn't really a caper film, which is one reason I enjoyed it more than I thought I would.Sure, it has some of the elements of the Hollywood caper movie--the debonaire, super-clever and super-successful thief, the cop out to thwart him, exotic locations--but the movie isn't really about will-he-pull-it-off-or-won't-he.It's more of a cat-and-mouse buddy movie.That the heists are utterly implausible, to the point of being ridiculous (as they are in most caper movies, like Oceans's Eleven and Ocean's 12) doesn't matter as much, because it's not what the movie focuses on.

Instead, we get a lot of cute banter and bonding between Harrelson and Brosnan, who are fun to watch.There are some good, low-brow laughs in this movie--they are enough for me.I laughed out loud, for instance, when during the fishing scene Harrelson is putting tanning lotion on Brosnan's back, and Brosnan says, "My pole!" and Harrelson pulls back with disgust and says, "No way, I'm only doing your back!" (Of course, Brosnan meant, Look at the pole; I caught something.)There are other, similar crude jokes and sight gags.

Both men are good in their roles, and fun to watch.The female roles in the movie seem incidental, a formulaic requirement of Hollywood movies, and are never really developed beyond that basic requirement.And what is Don Cheadle, a great actor, doing in such a miniscule role?Anyone could have done his rolel he's sadly wasted.Chris Penn has an amusing cameo...but my goodness, has he gotten fat.I remember seeing him in movies in the 80's, before he starting hitting the Big Macs.You don't often see an actor let himself go like that.

Commercial for Bahama Tourism Starring...
After the Sunset is a fluffy piffle that is almost always beautiful to look at, but emptier than the nutritional content of cotton candy.

Pierce Brosnan and Salma Hayek make a good-looking couple, and the movie actually TRIES to address a theoretical dilemma that is infrequently brought up in movies.If a rich and successful criminal retires, what do they do?If, presumably, part of why they were a criminal in the first place is for the thrill of it, how can they be content simply retiring?If being a thief is both your job AND your hobby, what do you do after the last "big one"?The only film I can think of that showed the boring lethargy that sets in on a successful criminal is the end of "Scarface" when Al Pacino is lying around in the marble tub of his palatial bathroom, smoking a cigar and cursing at his wife and buddy.

But I digress.After the Sunset would be familiar territory if the only movies you had seen were the "Ocean's 11" remake(s).It's a "steal the jewel" caper.It tries to be a comedy, but Brosnan and Woody Harrelson don't have the comic chemistry we've seen both of them have in other work. Harrelson appears as the FBI agent who has been repeatedly burned by Brosnan, and wants to get his revenge.It follows the film cliche where the lawman is "hot on the trail" of the criminal - a la "Heat", etc., but instead of an edgy relationship between the Thief and the Lawman we get a bumbling comic relationship between Brosnan and Harrelson.

The "star" of the film is the way it looks, and much of that is owed to the Bahamanian resort standing in for paradise.The movie made me want to go there - but it didn't make me want to ever see this film again.

Our family has been in manure for three generations!
Did I miss something?Was there a contest going through all the Grade Schools of America to find the best story for acclaimed director Bret Ratner to bring to the silver screen?If so, why wasn't there a calendar made for those who didn't make the final cut?Oh, wait, apparently children did not write this film, but instead a guy that wrote for the TELEVISION SERIES the Weakest Link.That surely makes him ready by all means to tackle the caper genre and inherit a big payday ... right?You are the weakest link ... good-bye.This movie was a disaster from the beginning.With cardboard acting, an aging (and girth growing) sex symbol, and a corny ending that incorporated nothing that we were shown through the entire film, it is a big wonder how After the Sunset ever saw the illustrious "green-light".Perhaps it was the size of Salma's boo ... name, or perhaps the fact that Pierce Brosnan's The Thomas Crown Affair was such a cult film, or maybe because Don Cheadle was in it, because it had really no pull with just Woody headlining.So, how did this film get made?This film targeted pre-teen boys and retirement communities, and with their great pull, the financing behind this film became very easy.

This was a caper film right?We are supposed to go on this roller coaster ride of who's conning whom, coupled with lies, deceit, and a surprise ending that will make you want to rewatch from the beginning to experience anything that you missed.That is the focus, goal, and overall tone that a film like this should have followed.Instead, Ratner decided to just make a movie without any sort of excitement or drive.As I watched this film, I never once felt excited about the plot.Why?Because there was nobody getting me excited.The acting in this film was well below par for anything that Hollywood has released.Pierce tries, but just can't seem to capture the essence of the film.There is no little demon inside you rooting for anything.Salma's role was basically for eye-candy.She provided nothing spectacular either.I can literally say the same for Woody and Cheadle as well.Here we have strong actors doing absolutely nothing during the course of about two hours.These characters never drive the plot, they bring nothing but clichés to the table, and by the end we really don't have any true grasp as to whom they are.Honestly, cardboard cutouts could have replaced the actual actors and After the Sunset would have been a better film.There was no depth to the characters, no emotion, no structure, just the simple direction of "step here, say your line, step here, look surprised".It was embarrassing for all that were involved.

I think a major flaw to this film was that Ratner did not fully understand, or was prepared, for the caper genre.From the opening moments until the end of the film, you can tell that Ratner is just trying to use his friends in the industry and show the world that he has some power as well.I say this because I saw no true direction or moment of impressiveness where he defines himself as a director.He reuses the same ideas throughout the entire film, he doesn't give anything strong to his players, and nothing stood out in this movie.Sure, it was a beautiful location, but am I to believe that Salma spend a majority of the film building a deck for them to sit on?Am I to believe that Pierce is still a sex symbol even with a HUGE gut sticking out?Am I to believe that Cheadle is a bad guy/imported American who is at the top of the community?Finally, am I to believe that Pierce could still move as quickly as Ratner defined?I swear that in the final unclimactic moments of this film, I could hear Pierce doing some heavy breathing to get from point A to point B.Maybe he isn't ready for the next Bond role.

So, without a good story, or decent characters, maybe there was some humor in it that could pull us away from the sour sensation cultivating in your mouth.Well, guess who is placed in to do the humor element? Woody Harrelson.Now, I don't mind Woody, but in this role, he just wasn't believable and his humor was so cliché that I had trouble believing that he brought anything to this character.He literally plagiarized his entire role.Teachers, and film viewers of the world, should be very upset with him.Instead of bringing a new twist to his character, he resorted to weird sex humor, skimpy bully humor, and that ever-popular drunken humor while fishing that is sure to make that senile woman in the front burst out with laughter. To me it was pathetic and a worthless attempt to make a joke out of already dead film.

Overall, this was a massive disappointment.Here you had a decent director, some strong players, but the worst story ever written by a man who wrote for a game show.Which piece does not fit?There was this huge sense of apathy throughout this entire film and clichés riddled it that I just couldn't get past.Brosnan had trouble with this film, and I couldn't tell if it was because he just didn't care, or because he was working with such low-talent that his heart just wasn't in it.The ending hurt as well.There was no excitement or intensity, just plain ... "here it is ... like it or not".I personally couldn't digest this film with its poor acting and below-par story.This may be a good film for some that are not familiar with the caper genre, but for me it was just hogwash.

Grade: * out of *****

I Liked It
I liked this movie alot. I watched it twice. I really enjoyed the little twist it had at the end.

AFTER THE BOREDOM! (21/2 ) STARS
Where the hell was the action in this movie! It started off
decent, then went down hill from there. The only thing that
kept me watching this lame script, was Salma Hayek! I gave the
movie 1 1/2 stars, and Salmas body 1 extra diserved star! ... Read more

Reviews (24)

Overlong, but worth seeing
Original little gem about love, hypnosis, and reincarnation all queezed into the package of a bright, colorful musical. Yves Montand plays a college professor who begins hypnosis treatment on Daisy (Barbra Streisand) in order to help her stop smoking. While under, he discovers she lived a former life as a 19th century vixen who was stood up by her husband and beheaded for treason. The doctor slowly falls in love with the woman of the past, while, in the present, Daisy (unaware of her former exsistance) falls in love with him.

Big-budgeted film was a box office flop when first released, but it's actually pretty enjoyable. The offbeat story line and the public's sudden lack of interest in musicals are the probably the main reason for the film's failure.

As a Barbra Streisand fan I must say that she is great even though this film is far from her best. She is adorable as Daisy and divinely sensual as the gold digger from England that she ecomes once hypnotized. Montand is a little too stuffy and mechanical as Dr. Charbot, but he and Streisand do share some chemistry.

Streisand's good, Montand is acceptale, but on the whole the movie is was too long and even a bit forced at times. Still, it worth seeing. The costumes and sets are beautiful, the ending is sweet, and there are some great songs.

Bottom line: the movie's cute, often funny, occasionally silly and sometimes moving.

Wonderful Movie the Whole Family Can Enjoy!
This has always been one of my favorite Barbra movies. ESP and reincarnation might be old hat now, but back in 1970 they were hot topics and you could count on controversy when they were discussed. I don't care much for Yves Montand, but the guy that plays Robert is very fine, even as a fine young dandy from 200 years ago! I've heard all about this movie from different sources over the years, and I think it's wonderful that Barbra was pregnant during the filming (you'd never know), that she was allowed to keep the clothes, that she played the part at cost instead of an increased fee (just after Funny Girl), and that she wasn't even the person the film was written for, but Audrey Hepburn. Again, this is an enjoyable film--remember it's a musical and the songs are very catching, don't be surprised if you find yourself humming one of the songs after you've seen the movie!

WIDESCREEN DVD PLEEEEESE !!!!!
This beautiful little gem needs to be on DVD period. The color is absolutely fabulous, the costumes beautiful. It's a colorfull cleaned up snip-et of 60's style. My favorite Barbra Striesand musical. And for those of who believe in re-incarnation or even just like to toy with the concept it is enjoyable fun.

Barbara is simply Marvy! Damn the pretentious Frenchman!
A great movie directed by a fantastic director. All this and more made in spite of Paramount's choice for one of the century's most horrid leading actors. Two words..."Yves Montand" I would certainly like to know who was responsible for telling Yves that he could act. Luckily for us, Barbara's comedic timimg and on screen presence distracts us from Yves witty droll and cardboard persona. Much of the films salvation has to be given to the credit of Vincente Minnelli, who has directed many wonderful & memorable movies such as "Meet me in St Louis" It is also a wonderful treat to see a young and handsome (yes I said handsome.. if you can believe that) Jack Nicholson who plays one of Daisy's neighbors. What's most intresting about Jack's character, is that there was a sense of ambiguity about his sexual orientation. A definite first for the Jackster! I give this movie 5 stars even though Yves is in it. The story, art direction and musical numbers are just fabulous. Besides we all know that anyone who buys this movie, certainly isn't purchasing it on account of the leading man. Now when is Paramount going to release this on DVD? Hello? Paramount? Are you listening? Hello? Is anyone awake over there?....

"Is anything else comin' off?"
This was one of the very last of the lavish screen musicals to be made in the classic mode, and, by the time of it's early 1970 theatrical release, it already seemed tired and dated. This is why it is somewhat shocking that, when viewed today, ON A CLEAR DAY is not only tremendously entertaining, but that it's also possibly the most underrated film of both director Vincent Minnelli and star Barbra Streisand. The film's reincarnation theme was pretty cutting-edge back in the early-seventies, and it still feels unique even today. The film received fair-to-negative reviews from critics at the time, and even though it proved to be a modest hit at the box office, it has been long forgotten by the general public, and it even goes unlisted on many of Streisand's selected filmographies. This is a shame, for Streisand's highly impressive dual performance may prove to be a revelation for some of her admirers and critics alike.

Like the film itself, Streisand is at her very best in the film's frequent flashbacks. Not only does she look absolutely beautiful as Melinda in Cecil DeVille's many elaborate costumes, but her Regency- era poise and accent are completely flawless. However, the film isn't absolutely perfect. Though Streisand's gives one of her most likable performances as kooky Daisy (her character's present-day incarnation), her "modern-day" wardrobe is a little too extreme. I realize that the costume designers wanted to draw a sharp contrast between Daisy and Melinda, but they went a little too far and ended up making Daisy look too buffoonish. They didn't need to go to such lengths with her garish "contemporary" wardrobe - Streisand's convincing performance alone is enough to make the contrast believable. Yves Montad is acceptable in his role - I don't believe he really deserved all of the criticism that he's received over the years, yet I do find his performance to rather stiff, and am convinced that many other actors could have done more with the part. Jack Nicholson, Bob Newhart, and John Richardson appear in small supporting roles, but they all feel rather underused.

However, there's something about the Streisand-Minnelli pairing that seems to have brought out the best in the two legendary talents. The flashback segments in particular provide the perfect showcase for Minnelli's imaginative visuals, and these are also the very scenes that allow Streisand to stretch the most as an actress. In particular, the "Love And All The Trimmings" sequence is easily one of the best moments that Minnelli ever captured on film, and Streisand has rarely been more intensely seductive than in this one sequence. Score-wise, the soaring title song is the only real classic of the eight Lenner-Lowe compositions, but a few of the others (the comic "Go To Sleep," the gorgeous "He Isn't You") are nearly as great. Bottom line: ON A CLEAR DAY is a film that's usually funny, sometimes touching, and always inventive and enjoyable. It's undervalued gem if there ever was one. ... Read more

Reviews (453)

An OK movie for my favorite book
POA was my favorite book of the sieries. but in the movie, i have MANY complaints.

Things that were left out

-cho chang
-how sirius got out of azkaban
-how sirius betrayed lily and james (no mention of fidelius)
-no mention of word secret keeper
-who moony wormtail padfoot and prongs are
-why sirius hates lupin, james, sirius
-why crookshanks was attacking scabbers
-why all of a sudden sirius isn't the bad guy
-why sirius tried to attack ron (oh wait, that never happened)
-that ron and peter pettigrew were in the paper is why sirius broke out of azkaban
-what hogsmeade is
-why there is a tunnel from the whomping willow to the shrieking shack
-connection between the stag patronus and "prongs"
-draco malfoy is the slytherin seeker

things that were changed
-hermione shows up late to everyclass. come on it's HERMIONE.
-the firebolt comes later
-much more interaction between past selves and future selves in time turner sequence. (made harry being his father predictable instead of shocking)
-the patronus was just lame (looked like an atomic bomb or those superballs on dragonballZ)

basically i think the movie was really good as long as i don't think about it being the same as the book.

parts of it were really good. i'm just kind of annoyed that i knew the book too well to really enjoy it. i sppent most of my time going "that never happened" (harry serching for peter pettigrew)

Marvelous Mischief!
I have not read the books yet because I like to be surprised. So I only view the movie on it's own merits.

The third installment was indeed a pleasant one. A new director,Alfonso Cuarón, handled the performances perfectly. Daniel Radcliffe ...Harry Potter is becoming a fine actor and he is great in this movie. He loses his temper with his Aunt and he plays the scene brilliantly.
Gary Oldman ...Sirius Black is always so great that you don't know it is him until the credits.
Rupert Grint ...Ron Weasley is very funny.
Emma Watson ...Hermione Granger has become a fantastic young actress and her character is strong and confident and also caring which makes her a great role model.
Alan Rickman ...Professor Severus Snape, Robbie Coltrane ...Rubeus Hagrid, and the new Dumbledore were superb as well. (I was sad to learn that the original Dumbledore, who was wonderful, has died.)

The visuals of Hogwarts and it's grounds were beautiful and for me the high point was flight of the Hippogriff with Harry. The Hippogriff was an amazing creation.

I reccomend the movie even if you are a total muggle.

Well Done!
I am an avid Harry Potter fan and I have read all the books at least four times each. I think that the "Prisoner" movie was done much better than the first two. To start, it shows how the magic world is changing for Harry and how it will continue to change as the story unfolds throughout the future novels. It's important to point out that the new director has been known in the past to put a dark spin on his interpretations in movies. But I thought that this dark point of view is what is needed at this point in order to show that Harry and co. are no longer children and are entering into more dangerous territory. Although the director did edit some parts of the book that I would have like to see, I think the movie overall does a great job in showcasing the future of the series. I think the actors are really starting to come into their own and showing more depth in their interpretations of the characters. I love to see how comfortable they are with each other in this film and to see how they are growing with these characters. Overall, I think this movie is great and I can't wait to see "Goblet". Although I do agree that "Goblet" should be longer or made into a two part movie because to edit book four too much will ruin the movie and movie goers that don't read the books will be completely lost then.

Some people just don't get it...
One of the joys about the Harry Potter series is that the style of the books matures with the characters. This is finally true with the movies as well. Yes, this is a much darker film than the first 2...so is the book. Yes, Harry, Ron and Hermione act more like real teenagers and less like 1950's television children. There were choices made in this film that were risky, but in my opinion the risk paid off! This is the perfect progression in the films of Harry Potter!

new look to a changing story
I thought the newest Harry Potter movie was VERY WELL DONE. A new look for an ever changing story line. Why would anyone want to watch a movie thats done exactly like the first two? Change it up a bit and keep the audiance wondering how their favorite books are going to be brought to screen. It doesnt hurt to have many peoples different views bring a great book to screen in another way then the first two. As long as the story gets told, isnt that all that matters? ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

This restored, animated valentine to the Beatles offers viewersthe rare chance to see a work that's been substantially improved by its technical facelift, not just supersized with extra footage. Recognizing that its song-studded soundtrack alone makes Yellow Submarine a video annuity, United Artists has lavished a frame-by-frame refurbishment of the original feature, while replacing its original monaural audio tracks with a meticulously reconstructed stereo mix that actually refines legendary original album versions.

What emerges is a vivid time capsule of the late '60s and a minor milestone in animation. The music represents the quartet's zenith--Rubber Soul, Revolver, and Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band. The story line, cobbled together by producer Al Brodax and a committee of writers, is a broad, feather-light allegory set in idyllic Pepperland, where the gentle citizens are threatened by the nasty, music-hating Blue Meanies and their surreal arsenal of henchmen, with the Beatles enlisted to thwart the bad guys. Visually, designer Heinz Edelmann mixes the biomorphic squiggles, day-glo palette, and Beardsley-esque portraits of Peter Max with rotoscoped still photographs and film; Edelmann's animated collages also nod to Andy Warhol and Magritte in properly psychedelic fashion, which works wonderfully with such terrific songs.

High orthodox Beatlemaniacs can still grouse that the animated Fab Four are (literally) flat archetypes, but that's missing the sheer bloom of the music or the giddy, campy fun of the visuals. Making sense of the story is second to submerging blissfully in the sights and sounds of this video treat. --Sam Sutherland ... Read more

Reviews (211)

Masterful restoration of 60's Classic
After reading the New York Times article about the restoration process for Yellow Submarine, I had high hopes for this DVD. I was not disappointed.

The color saturation is sumptuous. There are some imperfections, but on the whole this is a first class restoration. If you want appreciate the restoration, look at the original theatrical trailer or the "making of" documentary extras.

The re-mastered audio brings new complexity and detail to familiar Beatle material (even on my strictly middlebrow home entertainment system). The opening a cappella chorus of "Nowhere Man" sounded like it was recorded yesterday.

For a generation that has not seen this film, Yellow Submarine is a perfect time capsule for 60's psychedelic era. The film begins in under the sea in Pepperland, an idyllic musical community, which is attacked by the music-hating Blue Meanies. "Young Fred" manages to escape the attack in the Yellow Submarine, which takes him to England. He recruits the Beatles to return with him to Pepperland to join the battle between the forces of order (the Blue Meanies) and the forces of creativity and love. The plot is pretty much as hokey as it sounds, but it is merely a vehicle for the music, humor, surrealism, artistic and social sensibilities of the psychedelic 60's. And it is there that the movie emphatically succeeds.

The animation is certainly not as sophisticated as some more modern efforts, but it stands up remarkably well. There was a lot of revolutionary (for the 60's) integration of animation and live action. The colors are gorgeous. Visually, this is still a very entertaining film.

If you don't like the Beatles music, or are bored by animation, stay away. If you are on the fence about getting this DVD, buy it. You won't be disappointed. And if you love the Beatles, this DVD should move to the top of your list.

Fab
More of a series of Beatles videos than a film, this is excellent for what it is, and it has Beatles music in it, so it can't be bad. I'd forgotten how good 'Nowhere Man' was, in particular, until I saw this again on DVD. George Harrison does a really good guitar solo near the beginning of the song, so top marks to George. The other songs are usually described as lightweight throwaways, although I think that's a bit harsh. 'Hey Bulldog' is fun, and although 'Only a Northern Song' and 'It's All Too Much' aren't as good as 'Eleanor Rigby', they fit the images very well. 'All Together Now' is dire, though. The extra DVD bits are nice to have, but not really worth buying the disc for on their own. The 'Making of' documentary is from 1968, doesn't tell you much, and only goes on for 17 minutes. The commentary is a bit dull too, and Heinz Edelmann only appears for five minutes at the end. The 'isolated music score' simply turns off the speaking voices and sound effects - you don't actually get the full soundtrack in order, you get snatches of George Martin's instrumental music and the Beatles' songs. The remastering is a bit iffy in places - there are film scratches and blobs were there shouldn't be any - and although it could be my speakers, the Beatles' dialogue seems to be drowned out by the orchestral score. As for the film, you've probably already seen it. It looks and sounds wonderful, but it has a long, dull bit in the middle; there isn't really much of a plot; and I still can't make out what the Beatles are saying most of the time. But that's just me. The bit at the end, where the Beatles appear, makes me wince, as they seem so self-conscious and embarrassed.

My daughter is 5 and loves it!
I never thought the movie was great until my 5 year old started watching it. I am hooked (or re-hooked on the Beatles). The music and images are far better than anything on TV. Sure, squint your eyes (or ears) real hard and find some type of references to the 60's - but the're not there if you simply enjoy the feast.

My daughter now hums the songs, we have a Beatles poster in her room - - an no more Sponge Bob, Scooby Doo, or those Princesses. YEA!

The music was great but the movie wasn't
I just don't get why people love the movie. Yes, the music in it is exeltnet and it did introduce three new great Beatles songs (All Together Now, Only a Northern Song, and Hey Bulldog) but the music OUTDOES the movie. I don't care what other people say, the animation is bad, and the plot is confusing. The movie is really just an excuse to get the Fab Four back on the big screen. They were barly involved anyway. They added three new songs and didn't even do the voices of their characters. THe movie is decent and is worth watching once. I give it three stars becasue the music is good and I like the message that good will always win over evil and greed (even if it has been proven wrong by big corperations taking over everything and MTV manipulating everyone ages 7 - 17 its nice to think good will win out in the end.) If you want a good Bealtes movie I recamend A Hard Day's Night.

Perfect for those that keep the inner child alive
Turn off your mind
Relax and
Float down stream

¿Do you wanna watch a movie...
with no blood, no bad words, no nudes, no witchery, no romance, and... no Hollywood?

Sounds boring?

Well, my nephews love this movie. Perhaps it's because it's quite the same style as Sesame Street cartoons. I love it, too. But my pop-music-fan brother... He just can't stand it. It's too psychedelic for his simple mind. Some of my friends hate it, too. But strangely, kids love it! Could it be that there is a something about appreciating this kind of things that most adults seem to loose when they grow up?

If you still can appreciate things like you did when you were a child, you'll love this one. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Both epic and intimate, A Very Long Engagement reunites Audrey Tautou and Jean-Pierre Jeunet, the star and director of the hugely popular Amelie. A young woman named Mathilde (Tautou, Happenstance)separated from her lover by World War I refuses to believe he's been killed and launches an investigation into his fate--an investigation that spins in all directions, creating dozens of miniature stories (including that of an Italian prostitute avenging the death of her own lover by elaborate means) that shift to and fro in time. The dazzling curlicues of narrative put brutality and tenderness back to back, shifting between crushing inevitabilities and miraculous rescues with deft storytelling skill and the lush visual style of the director of Delicatessen and The City of Lost Children. Through it all, Tautou--fierce and luminous--anchors the movie effortlessly. She's among the most emotionally engaging actresses in cinema, with the kind of expressive beauty that transcends language. A gorgeous, far-reaching film; the huge cast also includes Jodie Foster (The Silence of the Lambs), Gaspard Ulliel (Strayed), and Dominique Pinon (Alien: Resurrection). --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (30)

Ridiculous comments!
I can't help but commenting on the review featured below posted by: Vyto Stoskus "Bookroom regarding the film `A very long engagement'. I respect the fact that the film is not everybody's cup of tea (I personally think it's a masterpiece) in the end, it's all a matter of tastes. But suggesting the French people stick to making comedy because (apparently) it's what they do best is the most ridiculous comment I have ever heard. Some people sadly (and it's a shame) don't much about French cinema!

flying bodies
90% flying corpses and those--bleeding to death--about to be corpses. Great showcase for the make-up dept. 10% storyline: amnesia--big hairy deal. Aren't there any more stories worth telling? Shame on everyone associated with such travesty. The French should stick to what they do best--comedy. Or maybe this was and they're laughing at all us suckers who spent our money and an interminable 2 hours+ watching their multimillion dollar joke on us.

A great artistic film!
Once more the French fertile imagination decides to make a real punch demostration of superb good taste and charm picture, get its goals without apparent effort. The dinamism and engaging script won't let you down. You will face and be part of this sensible drama in search for a love in the middle of the First War. Pierre Jeunet employs the War only as a big frame to tell us a love story and the inexhaustive hope that feeds the soul of Audrey Tautoo, a twenty years old girl who never gives up for his love's life. She suffered of polio in her early childhood but that is not any obstacle to prevail in what she believes.
The script is real web that will involve several secondary stories but the whole ensamble is conceived as a huge watch mechanism, so well articulated and filled of intelligent doses of black humor all the way.
Andre Dussollier, Jodie Foster, Dominique Pinon and all the cast is simply outstanding. The crude war sequences are admirably well filmed, loaded with intense realism and profound humanity before any other circumstance. Jeunet does not judge, he just only watchs and presents the kindness and the abominable horror of certain human beings not only in the War but far beyond the War field. The destroyed indult letter of Poincaré that never came, will work as a complex fixed idea of revenge because the life of these five men will be narrowed linked.
If you like the artistic films, if you want to enjoy of a whole film, without fissures that face you with the reality of those years you will enjoy this one. No doubt just a second and go for this artwork.
Nowadays the lovely, funny and expresive face of Audrey Tautoo. Jeune as Stanley Donen with the other Audrey, and at least fifty million people in the world are simply bewithced with her charisma and outstanding presence. Undoubtedly she would seem to fill the long long time expected emptiness left by the other Audrey, at last.
Pierre Jeunet's handle camera is just equalled by Terry Gilliam in what rapture travellings and close up concern.
A must in your collection.

Sustaining Plot and High Film Art
This film reminds us of how films can be made, with care and sincerity. Each scene renders a time and place with vivid imagery and authentic treatment. The acting is excellent, and story compelling, and editing and directing inspired. It may have deserved the Oscar for best picture last year.

Simply Engaging Story about Love That Prevails
To make a filmed version of French bestselling novel 'A Very Long Engagement' has been THE dream of director Jean-Pieere Jeunet, best known for international hit 'Amelie.'Now Warner Brothers, who owned the right of the book, agreed to co-produce the film with the star Audrey Tautou, and now this is the result of this Hollywood studio's wise decision.Thank you, Warner Bros.

But the film is definitely French, in language and in style, and the story begins NOT with the endearing characters in Paris, but with the rain-soaked trenches during the time of WW1.Five soliders are being court-marshalled for wounding themselves, and they are sentenced to be expelled into the no man's land, the terrirory between the German and French lines.One of them happens to be young Manech (Gasper Ulliel, 100% different from 'Strayed'), who received a terrible shock during the last battle.

But the true protagonist is Matilde (Tautou radiently beautiful as ever).She was in love with Manech, and still is even after the war is over, and the five soliders are supposed to be dead.However, Matilde believes that her love is still alive.Believing in her unfailing intuition, she doggedly follows the traces of the witnesses and clues that are scattered all over France while she needs a wheelchair to travel.

A word of warning first; unlike 'Amelie' in which everything looked charming (but in fact it is not though), some parts of 'A Very Long Engagement,' especially the war scenes, are very violent, though not too graphic.And don't forget that there are some killings (by one mysterious lady Tina).But her MOs are so ingenious that you may be rather fascinated to see them.

The film is well-crafted in whatever way you may think of -- gracefully Gothic visuals, rousing music score (by Angelo Paralamenti known for David Lynch films), and first-rate acting (including by one Jodie Foster speaking French.And she was once in a French film 'Blood of the Others' by Claude Chabrol, so that's no surprsing matter).At the end credit you will find many names familiar to French film fans -- Tcheky Karyo, Jean-Claude Dreyfuss, Dominique Pinon, and ... but making a list may be pointless after all.

For the star of the film is Audrey Tautou as Matilde.Every audience will fall for her, and be impressed with her strong acting as the independent heroine.Though the film looks awfully whimsical at times with so many characters and incidents, she remains the pivotical presence all through thefilm.

The original novel is written by veteran Sebastian Japrisot, who died one year before the film was completed.(Many of his books had been filmed, 'Rider on the Rain' for example.)As they compressed so many things in the original into 130 minute film, 'A Very Long Engagement' suffers from very confusing relations between so many characters.In book, we can stop and think; in film, well, you can stop your DVD player, but I'D rather not.Let the film keep on telling its story, and enjoy the world of Jeunet's visual genius.You never get bored with the strikingly original images he presents. ... Read more

Reviews (470)

VERY funny and original
Yeah, the F-word is uttered about 500 times, the lead character is either drinking or smoking grass all the time, and the core plot was probably written on a couple bar napkins at 2:00 a.m. But this is a laugh-out-loud masterpiece, full of both subtle humor and farce/slapstick. To those who are tired of unfunny Hollywood comedies (does the name "Adam Sandler" mean anything to you?), this is a breath of fresh air. Marvelously inventive in its concept and presentation, with dialogue that almost demands that you watch the movies again. The fact that I came of age in the 60s and was a dedicated stoner for a number of years undoubtedly enhanced my appreciation of this flick. But anyone with a taste for over-the-top humor and quirky characters will love it. While Jeff Bridges was quite good, John Goodman's character is the most memorable in recent memory. BTW, after seeing this movie, you'll never be able to think of the drink "white russian" without laughing.

A very interesting movie..
You wouldn't expect anything lesser from the makers of Fargo and Raising Arizona, arguably two fantastic movies in their own right. The B L is a freaky comedy without any situational plot in particular but weirdly engaging in the theme and its treatment nevertheless.

It's about a man named Jeff Lebowski, who calls himself the Dude, and is described by the narrator as the laziest man in LA County. He lives only to go bowling, but is mistaken for a millionaire named the Big Lebowski, with funny consequences. The Dude is played by Jeff Bridges with a goatee, a potbelly, a ponytail and a pair of Bermuda shorts so large they may have been borrowed from his best friend and bowling teammate, Walter Sobchak (John Goodman). Their other teammate is Donny (Steve Buscemi), who may not be very bright, but it's hard be sure since he never is allowed to complete a sentence.

Los Angeles in this film is a zoo of peculiar characters. One of the funniest is a Latino bowler named Jesus (John Turturro), who is seen going door to door in his neighborhood on the sort of mission you read about, but never picture anyone actually performing. The Dude tends to have colorful hallucinations when he's socked in the jaw or pounded on the head, which happens often, and one of them involves a musical comedy sequence inspired by Busby Berkeley. (It includes the first point-of-view shot in history from inside a bowling ball.)

Some may complain The Big Lebowski rushes in all directions and never ends up anywhere. That isn't the film's flaw, but its style -- ala "Go" and "Swingers". The Dude, who smokes a lot of pot and guzzles White Russians made with half-and-half, starts every day filled with resolve, but his plans gradually dissolve into a haze of missed opportunities and missed intentions. Most people lead lives with a third act. The Dude lives days without evenings.

Definitely a light hearted allround enjoyable movie -- something that deserves more than 9 reviews at Amazon! (as of this writing)

gay
this movie really sucks hairy old fat balls. what kind of trashy filth is this? it dosen't even make sence.

Times like these call for a Big Lebowski.
While I haven't seen the latest Coen Brothers films, like Intolerable Cruelty (2003) or The Lady Killers (2004), I have seen all their movies since O Brother, Where Art Thou? (2000), and I can say I've never been disappointed, and that certainly holds true for The Big Lebowski (1998), the film, not received well by the critics, they made after their Oscar winning film Fargo (1996). While it may not have been a critical success, it is one of my favorite films, and one the rarely gathers dust on my shelf, as I've seen it a few times.

The film boasts quite a cast of actors including Jeff Bridges, John Goodman, Jullianne Moore, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Tara Reid, Ben Gazzara, Sam Elliot along with a few veterans of previous Coen brothers films like Steve Buscemi, John Tuturro, and Peter Stormere. So what is the film about? Well, I'll tell you...The film, which takes place in California in the early 90's, starts off with a little expository by a narrator known as The Stranger (Sam Elliot) giving us a little detail about the main character, Jeffery Lebowski aka The Dude, played by Bridges, who seems to have put on a bit of weight for the role, and sports long hair much like that he had when he was in the 1976 flopperino remake of King Kong. Anyway, the first thing you notice about The Dude is he is extremely laid back, very possibly a casualty of the California counterculture of the 60's and early 70's who seems perfectly content to take each day as it comes. While returning to his modest rental home one night, he finds two thuggish men waiting for him, one who soon acquaints The Dude's head with the inside of The Dude's toilet, while the other decides to despoil The Dude's living room rug in the manner of a unhousebroken dog. Seems these two men work for a smut peddler named Jackie Treehorn, and are looking to collect money owed to Mr. Treehorn by Jeffery Lebowski's wife, Bunny (Reid). Only thing is they got the wrong Jeffery Lebowski. Seeking reimbursement for his rug, The Dude visits the other Jeffery Lebowski, an older, well-to-do wheelchair bound man whose young trophy wife seems to have amassed quite a debt to a number of people, including Mr. Treehorn. This meeting sets into motion a complicated series of events including kidnapping which evolves into a mystery, a ransom request for one million dollars, a suitcase of dirty underwear, a stolen car, an altercation with nihilists, various beatings, guns, a bowling tournament, interpretive dance, a sexual liaison, a ferret, some drugs, painting in the nude, the removal of a toe, a wicky drug-induced dream sequence, copious amounts of profanity and even a death, all with The Dude right smack in the middle.

Jeff Bridges is wonderful as The Dude, a laid back individual with a self awareness few possess having to deal with harshness put upon him by circumstances just always a bit out of his control. He ends up basically going with the flow, finally stumbling on a moment of clarity as the mystery resolves itself. The funniest scenes usually involve The Dude, his friend and bowling teammate Walter Sobchek (Goodman), and fellow friend Donny (Buscemi) as their conversations, riddled with ludicrous tangents, usually devolve into heated debates and personal attacks, usually with Donny getting the worst of it. One of the things I like so much about this film is there is just so much going on, much of which may seem unrelated to the main plot, but I think it's purposeful, weaving an thick, intricate, colorful tapestry right before your eyes and definitely requires numerous viewings, just to soak it all up. There is definitely a beginning, a middle, and an end here, but the path between is very convoluted at times, but not confusing, if that makes sense. Normally I dislike dream sequences in films, as they often tend to be a mish mash of stylistic tripe, but the one in this film was truly enjoyable and laden with symbolism relating to the events preceding it, and even utilizes a song I consider to be a classic in that of Just Dropped In (To See What Condition My Condition Was In) by Kenny Rogers and the First Edition. It was funny, because the core of the story is based on a mystery, but I spent little time in trying to decipher it, as I was so intrigued with everything that was going on, the related and seemingly unrelated material. A word of warning, though, as I've mentioned before, there is a good amount of profanity throughout the film, so if you are easily offended, you might steer clear of this movie.

The film is offered in both wide screen and full screen format, and the picture quality is good, but not as good as I would have expected with such a recent release. Some scenes seemed a bit dark, and there was a slight fuzziness at times, but nothing very notable unless you are seated very close to the screen (I normally refrain from getting so picky, but I've seen this film a number of times). Special features are pretty slim, including a 30-minute interview with the Coen brothers on the making of the film, along with a teaser trailer and cast biographies. I didn't care for presentation much, as after putting the disc in your player, you are directed to pick a format, wide screen or full screen, and the movie would start playing, skipping entirely over the menu, presenting it only after completion of the film, or by pressing the menu button on the remote. This is most common on older or extremely cheap releases (this was originally released in 1998, and then again in 2003 with no enhancements or changes). If any film was ripe for an enhanced special edition re-release, this is it.

Cookieman108

The Coens at their best
I saw this when it came out and didn't get it. After Fargo, The Big L just seemed like a loser's mystery that never went anywhere. A year later my friends are cracking me up doing movie quotes and it helped me see it in a new light. The movie is hilarious! It's awkward at first because the Coens are messing with you, setting up expectations and constantly doing something else instead. Once you're in on the game, sit back, make a white russian, and let the funny happen. ... Read more

Description

Young, ambitious gunman Nobody (Terence Hill) sets his eye on his idol, gunslinger Jack Beauregard (Henry Fonda), who's intent on sailing off into retirement. ... Read more

Reviews (68)

A Sergio Leone Production..
For those who haven't seen this flick, it is a great movie in a semi-Leone style. Terence Hill and Fonda are most suitably cast in a story of an aging gunfighter who is planning to retire and a younger man who has idloized him his whole life.

For those looking to upgrade, the transfer on this new Image dvd release is FAR SUPERIOR to the older WHAM dvd release.

No extras at all but the main menu does feature several actual scenes from the film with Morricone's score playing in the background.No theatrical trailer.

It is said that Leone himself actually directed two or three scenes from the movie.Reason enough to buy.Give it a watch and see if you can identify the Leone directed scenes...

A classic that's often overlooked
I am reviewing the movie as opposed to the dvd itself. Afterall, it is the movie that we buy the dvd, not all the extras. Now, the movie is really a classic shot with all the campiness of the time. Henry Fonda plays an aging gunfighter looking to get out from under his reputation. Trinity plays an up and coming gunfighter wanting the attention but also has a dream of seeing Henry Fonda single handeling taking on the Wild Bunch, a hundred of the toughest riding outlaws the west has ever seen. The whole movie builds to this moment as Trinity's character leads Henry Fonda into his taking on the Wild Bunch. I consider this one of the great moments in any Western. So if you like your Westerns with drama and a sense of humor, this movie is well worth the money to view.

not exactly a normal movie
The plot is a little convoluted and unclear for the first part of this flick and by about half way I was beginning to wonder if it is one of those films that dumb folk claim to understand so they can appears smart. The quip about Sam Peckinpah (a beautiful name in Navajo) and reference to The Wild Bunch help keep the story interesting. Unlike what another reviewer was saying it actually does make perfect sense and by the end it all comes together nicely.

The cinematography, as in most all Leone flicks, is fantastic and Ennio Morricone's soundtrack is wonderful albeit a little odd. I'm used to hearing his soundtracks in a much more serious way but it is obvious he has put an almost childlike/childish slant on this one which is again... a little odd.

If this is a comedy why do parts of the score, combined with absolutely desolate cinematography, invoke some very sorrowful feelings? This film is almost unique in that it successfully brings comedy into a moral drama and, in the end, comes up with something that isn't contradictory and really lame. This is a surprisingly good movie.

Like finding buried treasure.
I remember catching this on TV late at night sometime back in the late seventies. I was mesmerized by the whole movie, at once a spoof of all the "quick-draw" westerns, a nod and a tribute to Henry Fonda, a wonderful vehicle for Terence Hill's special talents and comedic gifts, and a wonderfully overblown and melodramatic soundtrack that is nonetheless simply perfect.The small scene with the story about a bird told while playing pool is worth the price alone, and the interaction between Hill and Fonda is superb. I spent the next twenty years keeping an eye out for it. I finally caught it on TV again a few years back and taped it to VHS, but it was a low quality signal so it is not a very good tape. It was still more wondrous than the first time I caught it, and I am thrilled to be able to find it on DVD.

Wanna see my quick draw?Wanna see it again?
Director: Tonino Valerii, Sergio Leone
Format: Color
Studio: Jef Films Int.
Video Release Date: September 29, 1997

Cast:

Terence Hill ... Nobody
Henry Fonda ... Jack Beauregard
Jean Martin ... Sullivan
Piero Lulli ... Sheriff
Mario Brega ... Pedro
Marc Mazza ... Don John
Benito Stefanelli ... Porteley
Alexander Allerson
Rainer Peets ... Big Gun
Franco Angrisano ... Ferroviere
Tommy Polgár
Antonio Palombi
Hubert Mittendorf
Emil Feist
Carla Mancini ... Mother
Luigi Antonio Guerra ... Official
Angelo Novi
R.G. Armstrong ... Honest John
Leo Gordon ... Red
Steve Kanaly ... False barber
Geoffrey Lewis ... Leader of the Wild Bunch
Antoine Saint-John ... Scape
Neil Summers ... Squirrel
Karl Braun ... Jim

This is a spoof of all the 'quick draw' Westerns, and about time!
Jack Beauregard (Henry Fonda) is a notorious gunslinger--the stuff legends are made of--and the hero of Nobody (Terence Hill) who has idolized him all his life.Nobody has the dream of seeing Beauregard hold off the entire Wild Bunch, numbering 150 or so hard cases, single-handedly, so that his name will go down in history.His idol, however, is reluctant to fuifill his wish.

Of course, Nobody is no slouch with a shootin' iron, either, as he demonstrates.

This is a hilarious film, with a great many funny moments, and a surprise ending.I thought it was great, and I hope it entertains you also.

Joseph (Joe) Pierre
author of Handguns and Freedom...their care and maintenance
and other books



... Read more

Description

Australia's breathtaking Victoria Alps set the backdrop for this spectacular epic saga. Tom Burlinson and Sigrid Thornton, two of Australia's brightest film talents, star in a fast-paced, action-packed story of a stormy romance caught up in a violent feud between landowners. Acclaimed actor Brian Dennehy (LEGAL EAGLES, COCOON) gives a gripping performance as the powerful patriarch determined to keep them apart. Visually unforgettable and packed with rugged adventure and masterful stuntwork, RETURN TO SNOWY RIVER is a thrilling and memorable film! ... Read more

Reviews (34)

The Man from Snowy River is Back!
The man from Snowy River is back! After a few years trying to earn money to marry Jessica Harrison (Sigrid Thornton), Jim Craig (Tom Burlinson) returns to Snowy River. But he finds that a lot of things have changed. The succesful ranchers and bankers want to buy up all of the land of the beautiful Australian mountains where he was brought up. He also finds that Jessica's father, Harrison (Brian Dennehy) wants her to marry Alistair Patton (Nicholas Eadie), son of landowner Patton Sr. (Rhys McConnochie). With a sort of silent feud between the landowners and the mountain men going on, Jim and Jessica must decide if they're love is worth firing up the feud even worse.

As most of the cases, I prefer the first movie to "Return to Snowy River" though I think they both deserve 5 stars. One of the reasons is I enjoy the first one more is that Kirk Douglas played Harrison in the first movie. Yes, Brian Dennehy was superb in that role, I still like Kirk Douglas.

All right, to the fine parts of the movie. Beautiful and magnificent scenery of the Australian mountains! Excellent acting by all actors and actresses, the suspense, action, and adventure will keep you on the edge of your seats! And Tom Burlinson sure know how to ride when he performs some pretty cool stunts while riding horses. Especially the earlier part of the movie where he proves that he can certainly ride better than Nicholas Eadie who plays the part of the jealous bad guy for Jessica's affection.

I recommend this movie along with the first movie, "The Man from Snowy River". These movies are classics and one of the family movies I watch at home. Can't be missed!

The Man from Snowy River is Back!
The man from Snowy River is back! After a few years trying to earn money to marry Jessica Harrison (Sigrid Thornton), Jim Craig (Tom Burlinson) returns to Snowy River. But he finds that a lot of things have changed. The succesful ranchers and bankers want to buy up all of the land of the beautiful Australian mountains where he was brought up. He also finds that Jessica's father, Harrison (Brian Dennehy) wants her to marry Alistair Patton (Nicholas Eadie), son of landowner Patton Sr. (Rhys McConnochie). With a sort of silent feud between the landowners and the mountain men going on, Jim and Jessica must decide if they're love is worth firing up the feud even worse.

As most of the cases, I prefer the first movie to "Return to Snowy River" though I think they both deserve 5 stars. One of the reasons is I enjoy the first one more is that Kirk Douglas played Harrison in the first movie. Yes, Brian Dennehy was superb in that role, I still like Kirk Douglas.

All right, to the fine parts of the movie. Beautiful and magnificent scenery of the Australian mountains! Excellent acting by all actors and actresses, the suspense, action, and adventure will keep you on the edge of your seats! And Tom Burlinson sure know how to ride when he performs some pretty cool stunts while riding horses. Especially the earlier part of the movie where he proves that he can certainly ride better than Nicholas Eadie who plays the part of the jealous bad guy for Jessica's affection.

I recommend this movie along with the first movie, "The Man from Snowy River". These movies are classics and one of the family movies I watch at home. Can't be missed!

The Snowy River Movies are awesome!!
I've seen both 'The Man From Snowy River' and 'Return to Snowy River' and loved them both. They are wholesome movies to watch with a lot of action, but not violent. Whenever we had sleepovers these were the movies to watch. I definetly recommend watching 'The Man from Snowy River' first though. The scenery is beautiful, the cast is great, Kirk Douglas playing double roles is always good. The story line, and if you love horses this is a movie for you. It's a movie for all ages and both guys and girls. It's not a total 'chick flick' or a 'guys' movie.

Return to Snowy River
THis move WAS very exciting BUT it was also a terrible one as at least ONE horse was REALLY killed in the filming. They tripped the little buckskin horse and he did not survive his tumble down the hill!

A Letdown
Like many sequels, it disappoints. Tom Burlinson and Sigrid Thornton did nice work as the lovers Jim Craig and Jessica Harrison. Brian Dennehy stepped ably into the shoes of Kirk Douglas as Harrison. The scenery is glorious and the action and riding quite cool. Notable was Jim Craig's unique demonstration around the skill at arms course after meeting his new rival.

So, what is the problem? It simply lacked the movie magic and spark and, perhaps, storyteller's art which made the "The Man from Snowy River" a success. I have watched "The Man from Snowy River" many times over many years, and still love it. I have watched "Return to Snowy River" perhaps twice. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Decades before the Hollywood film industry became famous for megabudget disaster and science fiction spectaculars, the studios of Southern California (and particularly Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer) were renowned for a uniquely American (and nearly extinct) kind of picture known as The Musical. Indeed, when the prestigious British film magazine Sight & Sound conducts its international critics poll in the second year of every decade, this 1952 MGM picture is the American musical that consistently ranks among the 10 best movies ever made. It's not only a great song-and-dance piece starring Gene Kelly, Donald O'Connor, and a sprightly Debbie Reynolds; it's also an affectionately funny insider spoof about the film industry's uneasy transition from silent pictures to "talkies." Kelly plays debonair star Don Lockwood, whose leading lady Lina Lamont (Jean Hagen) has a screechy voice hilariously ill-suited to the new technology (and her glamorous screen image). Among the musical highlights: O'Connor's knockout "Make 'Em Laugh"; the big "Broadway Melody" production number; and, best of all, that charming little title ditty in which Kelly makes movie magic on a drenched set with nothing but a few puddles, a lamppost, and an umbrella. --Jim Emerson ... Read more

Reviews (223)

The Citizen Kane of musicals
So many films in my collection are "important", "serious", "disturbing", or "great", and as much as I treasure them (films like Citizen Kane, Vertigo, and Ran), there is only so much self-importance a person can take before the pores fairly scream out for something just plain fun; something slight, buoyant, silly, and full of energy. Singin' in the Rain is just that kind of movie. The funny part is, I generally HATE musicals!

In 1951, Gene Kelly and Stanley Donen took a collection of songs by Arthur Freed and Nacio Herb Brown and - assisted by a pitch-perfect screenplay from the writing team of Adolph Green and Betty Comden - sculpted one of the great classic fusions of popular cinematic art and precision dance craft. It is the Citizen Kane of musicals: a virtual catalog of musical film technique, executed flawlessly.

But that alone would not be enough to separate Singin' in the Rain from the kind of musical I can't stand (which is to say, just about every other musical ever made). No, what makes this one special is that it knows what it is and celebrates it. It never for a moment asks you to forget you're watching a movie and then grinds to a screeching halt for the musical number. Instead, it deconstructs itself before your very eyes (and ears) as a razor-sharp, self-aware satire of the movie industry - as well as a joyous expression of the pure ecstasy of great song and dance. In that sense, it is one of the few so-called musicals that actually achieves a genuine symbiosis of drama, music, and kinetic performance art.

If all this sounds rather gushing and pretentious, so be it. This is great film-making. It is Rolex Oyster Perpetual film-making. This DVD edition sparkles with ultra-saturated colors, digitally remixed Dolby 5.1 sound, and some terrific extras (even if you're not particularly into musicals).

My favorite sequence is the eerily fluid dance work between Gene Kelly and Cyd Charisse against a Dali-esque background near the end of the film. Charisse is spellbinding as she trails a gravity-defying veil that must be 30 feet long. It hangs in the air, suspended by wind machines as she uses her extraordinary dance skill (and fantastic legs) to affect a wordless seduction of Kelly's naive, love-struck hero. Great stuff.

Even if you don't think of yourself as the "musical type", give Singin' in the Rain a try. After all that heavy, bitter, existential cinema, it makes one helluva fine dessert.

THE GREAT AMERICAN MUSICAL
Once upon a time there was a place called HOLLYWOOD. It wasn't just a town or even an industry, it was a state of mind. They didn't call the studios Dream Factories for nothing. This film is the epitome of the musical art and craft. This is a real "Movie Movie," made entirely on the MGM lot. The real creme de la creme of MGM contributed to it's creation; produced by Arthur Freed, starring Gene Kelly (with a brilliant turn by the dazzling ,long-legged Cyd Charisse), contract players like Debbie Reynolds and Kathleen Freeman (still going strong, currently appearing on Broadway in "The Full Monty") with costumes by my favorite designer Walter Plunkett (Gone With The Wind, 7 Brides For 7 Brothers, etc). Check out the sumptuous designs for the "Beautiful Girls" number and the outrageous spider dress at the opening night party. The real lowdown is that Jean Hagen and Donald O'Connor practically steal the show from the leads in possibly the best performances of their careers. This film is pure joy. The script by Comden and Green is not only clever but actually goofs on a real period of transition of the American film from silent to talkie.It is also a brilliant job of recycling a trunkload of old songs. This happy film has the courage to do what American musicals and comedies do best: be silly and make you forget you troubles for an hour and a half. Next time you are in bed with the flu or trying to get over a miserable love affair, take a look at Singing In The Rain. It can't help but curl up the corners of your mouth and drive the clouds away.

Wonderful Musical with Terrific Dancing -- a Trifle Dated
"Singin' in the Rain" is the definitive Hollywood musical, and charms and delights our 21st century audiences despite the (very few) characteristics of the genre that don't hold up quite so well.

There are so many high points to this movie -- the amazing cast, the songs, the choreography, and, most surprisingly, the satirical send-up of Hollywood and the "star system."

The plot is well-known. Silent film star couple, Don Lockwood (Gene Kelly, who also co-directed with Stanley Donen) and Lina Lamont (Jean Hagen) are America's sweethearts. At a Hollywood premiere of their latest romance, breathless fans ignore sidekick Cosmo Brown (Donald O'Connor, in perhaps the best sidekick performance in film history) and scream in delight as Lockwood and Lamont pander to their adoration. Nobody, however, seems to notice that the gorgeous Lamont never speaks . . .

Her imposed silence Lamont has a voice that recalls a cat with its tail caught in a wringer, although Lamont is such a "dumb blonde" (bless Hagen -- nobody ever played this stereotype better!) that she is blissfully unaware of her screech. No matter, 'cause it's the silent film era, right? Wrong! Progress brings in "The Jazz Singer" and the era of "talkies." No longer will clever staging of press events suffice.

Soon, Don Lockwood is staring career meltdown in the face as the first Lockwood-Lamont "talkie" sends the audience into hysterics. Not only is Lamont's screech audibly offensive, they can't keep the sound synchronized to the film, and the sound editing even when in synch is as amateurish as a high-school film production.

What to do? Fortunately, Lockwood had fallen for young, beautiful Kathy Selden (a teenage Debbie Reynolds), a starlet in the making. Cosmo comes up with the idea of dubbing Selden's voice for Lamont's, and all is fixed . . . or not. Lamont, an imbecile but smart enough to know her value, insists on ruining Selden's career to preserve her own . . . and so on and so forth.

The plot, ingenious as it is, is really secondary. The main delight in this movie is the amazing dancin' and singin' that the performers offer up. While most of it is pretty silly, campy stuff (particularly the Kelly-O'Connor set pieces), they simply dazzle. Kelly is the most robust, athletic dancer of his generation, and O'Connor, well, the man doesn't have a bone in his body. While the movie's most famous scene comes from Kelly splashing in puddles during the title track, the most amazing dance number has to be O'Connor's comic flailings in "Make 'Em Laugh," where he runs up walls, flirts with a mannequin, and generally pulls out all stops.

Debbie Reynolds does a magnificent job keeping up with these two giants, and is generally a pleasure to watch, even though she's clearly outclassed as a hoofer.

While some great old films seem to get better with age (think "Casablanca," "Gone With the Wind," and "Citizen Kane"), "Singin' in the Rain" is an American classic that does not hold up quite so well in some minor respects. For example, when breaking into choreographed step, Kelly, O'Connor, and Reynolds sometimes appear too rigid, with smiles frozen on their faces, which is incongruous to those raised on more modern musicals like "Moulin Rouge," where the dancers take a more naturalistic, emotional approach to their dancing. The dancing in "Singin'" holds up, but the performers were constrained by the expectations of their audiences, which somehow demanded that the performers "look pleasant" while dancing.

Still, "Singin' in the Rain" remains one of the best tonics to a foul mood ever . . . I defy you to watch this movie and not feel a smile creeping over your face.

The Best Musical Comedy Ever Produced!
I fell in love with this film when I was seven years old; I watched it on a B&W television on "The Early Show" in NY (circa 1957 or 1958). I didn't know who any of the stars were - it didn't matter. It was magic to me. From the Hollywood opening (dignity, always dignity), the romp of the elocution lessons (Moses supposes his toes are roses!), and the trial and mostly error of trying to record the sound ("I can't make love to a BUSH!") when the gorgeous leading lady has a voice that rivals nails on a blackboard, all the way to the grown man dancing in the rain and the final rising curtain - pure magic. In glorious black and white - at the time, I didn't even know it HAD colour! I decided then and there, this was my absolute all-time favourite movie. (One of the highlights of my adult life was seeing this wonder on a full, big screen at a revival in the 1970s.) I have seen many films since then; I have reviewed them for friends & family, written reviews for a monthly entertainment publication. I have an extensive collection of my own (VHS & DVD). I know a lot more about films and production values now.

"Singin'in the Rain" remains my all-time favourite film. (No surprise, this.) It's not just another one of "those MGM musicals." It was released in 1952. Dated stuff? Not a bit. Unlike the marvelous "An American in Paris," which was done as a contemporary film to its time, "Singin' in the Rain" is a period film, and it's based in fact.

This film (which started out to be a western for Howard Keel) takes a fond and loving look at the birthpains of the sound film (the "talkies). Set in 1927, with authentic equipment from MGM's own history (Debbie Reynolds drives Andy Hardy's old jalopy, the microphones are real), it details the frantic efforts to get on the sound bandwagon - no one was completely sure of the new technology. What makes the plot classic is the basis in fact. Many silent stars had totally unacceptable voices or speech (too nasal, unintelligible foreign accents, too high, too low, etc.) for sound production. The songs used were true to the period.

Then we have the performers. Jean Hagen was nominated for an Academy Award for her role of Lina Lamont. The character (whose voice you don't hear for the first 10+ minutes of the film, although she's on-screen) is a one-of-a-kind. [Side note: the voice dubbing Lina's line is actually Hagen's normal voice, not that of Debbie Reynold's Kathy Selden.] Reynolds does an admirable job - it couldn't have been easy keeping up with her two male co-stars. It's still a joy to see Donald O'Connor's "Make 'em Laugh," and wonderful to see Gene Kelly teamed with a good male partner for "Fit as a Fiddle" and "Moses". Gene Kelly is, and always shall be, the best and this was done at his peak.

Of course, for anyone who has been living in the back of a cave under a rock (or too young to appreciate it), the title number is a delight. It looks like one continuous take, it is so smooth. This was not the first appearance of the song, but it's the one we all remember. The sheer exuberance of Kelly's performance carries us right along with him.

The extras with this set are valued items for anyone like me who is interested in the backstory of the era and this film in particular. And don't fuss for a widescreen version. This is the way it was. And now it always will be.

Thoroughly entertaining musical
I have to say first of all that I am *not* at all a fan of musicals (or comedies for that matter) - I am a drama fan. I have seen a few musicals here and there over the years and tried to like them - such as 1964's "My Fair Lady" and 1961's "West Side Story." I liked both of them *somewhat,* but not too much - because I have always strongly preferred films that are realistic --> in real life, people don't burst into song when they are in one particular circumstance or another. Yet, I couldn't help enjoying myself with a smile on my face as I watched this film that landed so high (#10) on AFI's list of the top 100 American films of all time. Donald O'Connor, in particular, as Cosmo, was so perfectly cast in his role. The film was at times hilarious and at times wonderfully romantic. I definitely would recommend everyone to try this film out. B+. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Exceptionally moving but not the least bit sentimental, Concert for George is a splendid tribute to the late George Harrison, whose contributions to the Beatles were so often hidden in the long shadows of John Lennon and Paul McCartney. A year to the day after Harrison's November 29, 2001 death, Eric Clapton assembled some musicians--people who had played with Harrison and known him intimately, including McCartney, Ringo Starr, and Tom Petty--to perform his music at London's Royal Albert Hall. They take on not just the predictable ("My Sweet Lord" and "Something," beautifully sung by Billy Preston and Sir Paul, respectively), but also lesser-known fare like "Old Brown Shoe" and "Beware of Darkness," all to superbly empathetic effect. But the tune most likely to make you misty-eyed is "While My Guitar Gently Weeps," which brings together three of the five musicians who played on the original recording: Ringo on drums, Clapton replicating his own classic solo, and McCartney playing piano and harmonizing with Clapton's lead vocal. Concert for George enjoyed a brief theatrical release, but even those who caught it on the big screen will delight in this two-disc DVD edition. Disc 1 features the complete concert (sans interview and rehearsal footage, but with a few additional songs and in the original running order), while disc 2 contains the theatrical version and some additional backstage and photo material. All in all, a beautiful piece of work. Wish you were here, George--but man, what a way to be missed. --Sam Graham ... Read more

Reviews (214)

A Splendid Musical Memorial.
On Nov 29th 2002, the Royal Albert Hall played host to "The Concert For George", in which all the proceeds went to some of George Harrisons favorite charities. Organized by his widow Olivia, son Dhani and Eric Clapton, this all-star celebration of the life and music of George Harrison, proves to be both somber and happy, as friends and musicians play touching covers of some of Georges biggest hits. Just like the "Concert For Banglsdesh", the show starts of with an indian music session, which features a full orchestra of eastern and western musicians, playing songs composed by his friend and mentor, Ravi Shankar. The real treat is watching his daughter Anoushka, play the sitar. She was the centerpiece of the entire performance. She was simply phenominal, proving that she is indeed, like her father, a master of the sitar. The rock n roll side of the show opened up with Jeff Lynne singing "I Want To Tell You", which set the tone for the rest of the show, in which the all-star cast played one Harrison tune after another with genuine feeling from the heart. Dhani Harrison played rhythm acoustic and electric guitar during the entire show, and is the splitting image of his father. The guest list reads like a who's who of music. Besides Clapton, You will see Jools Holland,Tom Petty,Billy Preston,Ringo Starr,Paul McCartney,Gary Brooker,Jim Capaldi and great session people like, Jim Keltner,Ray Cooper,Jim Horn,Tom Scott,Albert Lee,Klaus Voormann,Chris Stainton,Henry Spinetti and Andy Fairweather Low. Some of the highlights include, Billy Prestons take on "My Sweet Lord" and "Isn't It A Pity", Tom Petty doing "Handle With Care", Paul McCartney and Clapton on "Something" and "While My Guitar Gently Weeps". Overall, I must say that you can tell, that a lot of effort went into this production, as evident by the wonderful sound and picture quality as well as the handsome packaging that the DVD is housed in. Hearing Joe Brown end the show with an emotional "I'll See You In My Dreams", instead of an obligatory all-star encore jam, is what George Harrison was all about. He was a simple man, who loved melodies, valued his privacy over his celebrity and always lent a helping hand to those less fortunate. I highly recommend this DVD to one and all.

COULDN'T BE MUCH BETTER!
This should be the model for all concert DVD's. Disc two contains the theatrical version while disc one has the complete show from beginning to end. As much as I love "Back In The U.S," I wish they had packaged it in this manner. The audio and video are simply superb, couldn't have been better. The packaging is great, with the tri-fold containing the discs and booklet inside a sleeve. I can think of only one drawback to the DVD. It would have been nice to have included a biography of all the onstage performers from the concert. There are so many that I'm not familiar with. The show was taped in the 133 year old Royal Albert Hall in London on the first anniversary of George's death, November 29, 2002. The concert opens with Olivia lighting candles and then Eric Clapton walks out, speaks briefly, then introduces Ravi Shankar, who says a few words. Anoushka Shankar(Ravi's daughter and the half-sister of Norah Jones) plays an 8 minute piece on the sitar. I enjoy Indian music and she is as beautiful as she is talented. Then she and others accompany Jeff Lynne on "The Inner Light." I particularly enjoy this number. This is followed by a long piece written by Ravi, called "Arpan." He wrote this in tribute to George and both the Indian and Western orchestras play on it. Eric Clapton joins in late on the acoustic guitar. There are moments that I enjoy but overall, I didn't care for this number. I don't care for the next segment at all.I've never cared for Monty Python and their contribution to the show was boring and vulgar, as usual. BTW, although it isn't mentioned to the audience, Tom Hanks is part of their act. Next, the Pop music portion opens with ''I Want to Tell You.'' The instrumentation and vocals are great on this tune. A few highlights from this segment would be....."Here Comes The Sun"-Joe Brown"Horse To The Water''-Sam Brown(Joe's daughter)"Taxman"-Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers"Honey Don't"-Ringo"For You Blue"-Paul McCartney"Something"-It's great when the Clapper and Macca do a brief duet on this one."My Sweet Lord"-Billy Preston This track is simply awesome. Billy sings better than ever. As a Christian, I can't agree with the Hindu aspects of this tune, but I must admit the melody is beautiful."Wah Wah"-Everybody plays on this, but the primary vocal is done by Jeff Lynne, who does a great job."I'll See You In My Dreams"-Joe Brown is incredible on this old standard. It's very poignant as the confetti falls and the camera switches to a giant photo in the arena of a young George holding a guitar. Eric Clapton is great as the emcee, but I only wish that Paul and Ringo had played a bigger part in the show. It would also have been great if George Martin and Pattie could have been there and maybe said a few words. It's really eerie seeing George's son, Dhani onstage playing the guitar. He has a strong resemblance to his father. I recommend this excellent DVD to any Beatles or George fan. I guarantee, you will watch it again and again and........

Unreal
No question, this is the best of the best. The recording is exceptional, and just when you think it's over, Wah-Wah takes over. You will clap your hands to the beat of about 6 drummers including Ringo - a classic for you and your kids. Don't miss it.

Most requested DVD in Mott's Pub
This DVD concert never comes across as a sad Memorial concert for the late great George Harrison, more of a celebration of the life ,love, music ,and most of all faith of a wonderful human being.During George Harrison's tragically short life he touched many people. Obviously he was one of the lovable Moptops from Liverpool ,who's music and attitude changed the world as we know it. He also started the charity music culture with his concert for Bangla Desh in 1971. ( Would there have been a Live Aid etc with out the Charity concert held for the starving people of Bangla Desh if he had not been for George Harrison's groundbreaking concert a decade before?0 He almost single handedly made the world AWARE of whole new cultures from the Asia. Not forgetting his own solo career, at first the most successful Beatle to go solo, his first releases back in 1970 went to Number One all over the world with his magnificent triple album " All Things Must Pass",and the single taken from it " My Sweet Lord''.
George also formed Handmade movies which saved the masterpiece " The Life Of Brian " by Monty Python ( George actually has a walk on part as the Mayor if you look closely.) the world would definitely be a sadder place without that little Python masterpiece.
This double DVD package has the first DVD devoted to the whole concert in it's correct running order, so that all of us that were not able to be there on that magical night at the Albert Hall in London on November 29 2002 can get an inkling of what was going on . The second DVD gives you snippets of the concert intererspersed with interviews from Georges friends,rehearsals and backstage footage ,interesting and sometimes hilarious stuff. There is over 2 hours and twenty minutes of material on DVD Two , whilst the concert on Disc One lasts for nearly 2 1/2 hours.
There are too many musical highlights to mention them all. But before I list the group of friends that turned up to celebrate Georges life ,and what songs they decided to play, I shall try to point out a few.
The concert starts out with a specially composed piece by Ravi Shankar written for George 'Aspan',where what I can only call a blend of Asian Folk/Orchestra meets western influences the results are quite stunning, with Ravi's daughter playing the sitar as beautifully as she looks , and she is very beautiful, matching Eric Clapton when he joins her on acoustic guitar. The Monty Python team, get on stage for two songs, the wonderful irreverence of the songs would have had George rolling around the aisles in laughter, notice also Tom Hanks the movie star having the time of his life as a Mountie in the chorus line.Eric Clapton does a wonderful job as musical director as well as contributing some stunning guitar work ,especially in recreating his solo from" My Guitar Gently Weeps '' from the Beatles 'White Album'. Poor Ringo barely keeping his emotions under control whilst singing 'Photograph'. It is also the first time that Paul McCartney , Billy Preston and Ringo Starr have all performed on the same stage together since a certain legendary roof top concert over thirty years ago.Although the concert would not of been the same without Paul McCartney, he for once does not dominate proceedings leaving plenty of room for others to shine ,and shine they do. George Harrison' son Dhani himself a fine musician is often allowed center stage.Whilst George Harrison's old mucker Joe Brown brings the concert to an emotional climax. The set from Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers in the middle of the second section is simply stunning. Tom Petty was in George Harrison's other group the Traveling Wilburys with Bob Dylan, Jeff Lynne,and Roy Orbison.Look out for the guitar solo from Albert Lee during " Honey Don't" it raises the Albert Hall Roof a few inches higher.The singing of Sam Brown and Gary Brooker are as ever highlights of any concert.
This DVD delivers in every possible aspect,and would not disappoint anybody with even a passing interest in the life and times of George Harrison. There is also a double CD of this concert which is nice to have whilst driving the car , but you get so much more with the DVD.
By Mott the Dog. Edited by Ella Crew.

for George
Absolutely brilliant. Clapton, Lynne, Joe Brown, Petty, Ringo and all definately celebrated George's anniversary. Monty Python was rather cheeky but always is and we wouldn't want him any other way. ... Read more

Amazon.com

You get two hostage crises for the price of one in Hostage, an overwrought but otherwise involving thriller grounded by Bruce Willis's solid lead performance. Making a dramatic pit-stop on his way to Die Hard 4, Willis plays a traumatized former Los Angeles hostage negotiator, now working as a nearly-divorced police chief in sleepy Ventura County, California. Willis suddenly finds himself amidst two potentially deadly stand-offs when a trio of hapless teenagers seize hostages in the fortress-like home of an accountant (Kevin Pollack) whose connections to organized crime result in Willis struggling to rescue his estranged wife and daughter, who are being held hostage by faceless thugs at an undisclosed location. Having directed two of Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell video games, director Florent Siri brings plenty of slick, competent filmmaking to Willis's desperate dilemma, and the film boasts a gritty, graphic style that draws attention away from implausible plot twists. The bothersome, over-the-top performances by the teenaged villains also slightly compromise this gloomy but emotionally gripping adaptation of Robert Crais's novel, named as one of Amazon.com's best books of 2001. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (25)

WORST OF WILLIS
I DID NOT HAVE HIGH HOPES FOR THAT MOVIE.BUT AT LEAST IT IS A WILLIS MOVIE I SAID TO MYSELF.IT WAS MUCH LOWER THAN EXPECTED.THE THEME WAS INTRIGUING BUT THE SCRIPT IS HORRIBLE.YOU DO NOT KNOW WHO IS WHO.THERE ARE THOSE VILLAINS YOU DO NOT KNOW TO WHICH ORGANISATION BELONGS,A PYSCHO KID WHO STARS ALL AND OVERWHELMINGLY TAKE CARE OF ALL PROFESSIONAL KILLERS.A FATHER IN A LETHAL CONDITION WHO GETS WELL MY A MAGIC!! INJECTION.A KID WHO KNOWS ALL SECRET PASSAGES OF A RATHER COMPLICATED BUILDING.
ALOT OF SOUND AND VISUAL EFFECTS HAS BEEN USED TO COVER THE SHAME BUT UNNECESARLY HEAD BLOWING.AND THE STORY END WITH A LOT OF LOOSE ENDS.
SORRY MR.WILLIS BUT THIS IS YOUR WORST MOVIE EVER.MY SECOND WORST AFTER K.COSTNER'S POSTMAN.

WILLIS IS GREAT!!!
devistated by a hostage situation which resulted in the deaths of a young mother and her child, LAPD negotiator jeff talley (willis) exits los angeles for a low profile job as chief of police in the low-crime town of bristo camino in ventura county.
when three delinquent teenagers follow a family home intending to steal their car, they inadvertantly pick the wrong house on the wrong day. the trio find themselves trapped in a multi-million dollar compound on the outskirts of town owned by an accountant. panicked, the teenagers take the family hostage, placing tally in exactly the kind of situation he never wanted to face again. soon after, talley readily hands authority of the hostage situation over to the ventura county sheriffs department and leaves the scene. after it becomes clear that the sheriffs department cannot handle the crisis, talley is forced to resume the command he had abandoned where the stakes quickley evolve into a hostage situation far more volitile and terrifying than anything he could ever imagine.
based on the novel by robert crais.

Wait for the Video
Hostage begins with Bruce Willis as a LAPD hostage negotiator, and not a very good one at that. In the opening sequence, Jeff Talley (Willis) waves off a SWAT sniper from killing a would-be assassin, while raising a sign stating, "No one dies today". Well someone forgot to inform the killer, because moments later the killer, the killer's wife and kid were all dead. Oooops......

Flash forward one year later. Talley is now the chief of police in the hick town of Bristo Camino, CA. He is separated form his wife, but they still meet for weekends. He has issues with his teenage daughter. Talley's life to this point really sucks. But wait there's more.

Three high-school dropout stoners are casing possible car jack-able vehicles, when one of them recognizes a fellow student riding with her family in an Escalade. Bingo! The three punks follow their prize home, only to have the silent alarm on the house tripped, while they're in the middle of their heist. This in turn, sets up another hostage situation. (Did we have any doubts?)

Talley, however, after reporting to the scene of the crime upon receiving reports of an officer being down; turns jurisdiction over to the state authorities. Only after Talley receives a phone call for one of the hostage victims, and has his family kidnapped; does he return to the scene of the crime to negotiate for the victim's freedom.

In a completely unrelated storyline, Kevin Pollack (the hostage family's father) is an accountant for some underworld organization (i.e. drug lords, dirty cops, etc.). Who these people are is never revealed to the audience. However, he has encrypted the entire underworld banking information onto a "Heaven Can Wait" disc, which is located within the confines of the house. The house which is now surrounded by cops, television camera, etc. Talley's family has been kidnapped by the underworld villains in order to motivate Talley (Willis) to retrieve this banking disc from the house; without anyone else finding out.

There are several loose ends in this film that are foreshadowed, but never come into play. For example, the movie makes a point to introduce two "Heaven Can Wait" DVD boxes; however, neither comes into play. Talley negotiates to keep $1 million dollars of the accountant's money for himself; again, it doesn't come into play. Lastly, who is this villainous group seeking the banking disc? With the way the film ended, doesn't anyone fear that they might be back?

Anyways, this is definitely a film worth waiting for. I bought this movie on a disc with four others, all for the low, low price of $5. So I really can't complain all that much.

http://farisreel.com

Waste of time!!!!
OK, this movie is just terrible.In my opinion movies can get away with a lot. if they are great action movies then they dont need a great plot to be good movies, and vice versa.If they are suspense movies they dont need amazing special effects or ground breaking science fiction.But what a slow moving suspense "thriller' needs is content!!!Be very clear, this not an action movie, maybe for about 15 minutes at the end, but for 1 hour and 45 minutes this is suppose to be a plot based thriller, a situational drama.

I am not going to go into a recap of the movie(thats why this is a "review" and not a "recap").The main villians in the movies have no background given on them whatsoever, ni fact you dont even know who the agency controlling all the moves is EVER!!!Who is the kid thats controling everything inside the hostage situation?I wish I could tell you, but all I can say is he's some messed up punk kid, but what normal person kidnaps a total stranger, so of course hes really messed up.The movie does nothing to establish a reason that anything in the movie happen, except that the "voice on the other end of the phone" says so.

This movie tried to tackle too much. You get two hostage situations in the plot, but never really know anything about either one of them. The result is that you are left with two stories that you have no idea what or why anything happened in either one of them.Although I have not read the book, I am sure, like so often happens with book movies, the background required to really get into the movie was cut out to save time, BAD MOVE!!!

The other beef I had with this movie was the whole Virgin Mary thing with the young girl in the movie.I mean it was a little, and when I say a little I mean way, over the top.I hate when artsy directors throw things into a movie that have nothing to do with the plot or story, but just want to show their pseudo-creativity.

Not just good ~~~~ GREAT!
Not going to relate the whole movie for you but will simply say that if you like action and Bruce Willis you better see this FOR SURE!
Best performance by Willis that I've seen yet, guy really can act which I hadn't seen to this degree before.
Kept me on the edge of my seat the whole time! ... Read more

Reviews (172)

Probably the Greatest Western Ever!
A few years ago I had the opportunity to speak personally with Robert Urich about his role as ill-fated Jake Spoon in the epic western Lonesome Dove. Simply put, he said that it was "the most fun I have ever had making a movie. Think of it. Riding and shooting every day with two of the greatest western stars ever: Robert Duvall and Tommy Lee Jones! I won't have that much fun ever again!" I am sure that he could have gone on for hours but, unfortunately, time would not permit. The look on his face and the light in his eyes said it all. Tragically Urich passed away a year or two thereafter.

The legend and the story live on in the Pulitzer Prize winning book by Larry McMurty and in this faithful video depiction of the classic story.

A star-studded cast, headed by Duvall, Jones and Urich, along with one of the most beautiful western soundtracks ever composed make Lonesome Dove a viewing experience that you will enjoy time and again.

One of the best things ever done for television.
Although the phrase "made for television" conjures up the images of the tabloid story of the week and women-in-peril films; Larry McMurtry's epic novel "Lonesome Dove" would not have been given justice in any other format. Television allowed that magnificent work to be brought to life in some form resembling the novel. The six hour running time enabled character and storyline development that would not have been possible if the novel had been adapted for theaters.

Although it does have the jarring breaks that marked where a commericial interuption had once been and it's share of television stars (Urich, Shroeder, Corbin); "Lonesome Dove" is movie big. Big stars. Wonderful cinematography. Great locations. An authentic look. A terrific score. The producers, cast, crew, and director went the full measure to ensure that this movie did not look or feel like a "movie of the week" production.

Personally, I believe it, along with "Roots," to be the finest work ever done in the medium of television. It really does make you feel for its characters. The viewer will cheer and hope for them, and when tragedy occurs, as it does throughout the film, it will shake the viewer. Nobody is safe: comic relief characters, children, and, even, experienced Rangers. McMurtry drives home the message that death in the Old West could occur to anyone at anytime with shocking suddenness. In the end, Captain Call looks back and remembers his friends and comrades who did not return with him. As he does, tears come to the eyes of this taciturn character; and rest assured he is joined by many in the viewing audience.

The Return of the Western
It's ironic that the western, a staple of TV until sci-fi eclipsed its presence, would find its home again on the small screen during a time when big budget westerns seemed to be biting the dust to space opera blockbusters. And that it would take an Australian to realize it. Director Simon Wincer's big-vista understanding of the genre is apparent throughout "Lonesome Dove," which also features some great performances by screen familiars Robert Duvall and Tommy Lee Jones, even if the latter too often looks like a scowling Kenny Rogers here. This tale of an arduous cattle drive by two retired lawmen has the sweep and grist of such classics as "True Grit," "Red River," and "Once Upon a Time in the West," with which it shares many elements (the conversational style, the brutal drive, and the buddy relationship, respectively, the most obvious). And while "Lonesome Dove" doesn't really say anything new about the old west, it is entertaining and fares better compared to many westerns past in terms of presenting the ethnic diversity that history records. Look for many bravura--and few corny--moments like Captain Call's (Jones) reaction to a cavalry scout's whipping of Call's alleged son (a likable but sometimes too aw-shucks Rick Shroeder), MacCrae's (Duvall) gutsy stand against a pack of outlaws, and the touching and remarkably in-character last goodbye between the leads. Basil Poledouris, an underrated composer, provides a solid score. Of the episodes, only one stands out as pedestrian, making this a pretty good choice for viewers who want to savor their entertainment choice.

Yes, it is 360 minutes, not 240.
240 minutes refers to the much shorter Return to Lonesome Dove mini-series. There is nowhere on the the Amazon website that the original series of Lonesome Dove DVD set is only 240 minutes, it is 360 minutes.

By the way, my daughter and I loved this series when it was on TV and I purchased the multi-tape set VHS way back when. But the last tape was bad and Cabin Fever, the manufacturers/publishers, would not replace my bad tape (they never even answered my mail except to tell me how to order the set), so, now that I have the DVD version, I finally have a complete set of watchable scenes.

Sorry SD, you're wrong. It's not complete. Check IMDb.
I'm sorry to have to point out to those of you who think this is the complete version, but if you go to IMDb and look up Lonesome Dove, you will find that it has a 384 minute running time. Amazon's version is listed at only 240 minutes. That's over two hours difference from the original film, and no, we're not talking about commercials.
So unless Amazon has their listed time wrong and it is actually a full 6.4 hours, you've been duped. I wouldn't pay for less than the original length film.

So, the question stands for those of you who actually bought this DVD, was it 6.4 hours long, or only 4 hours long? ... Read more

Description

Treachery.Madness. Murder.The story of Hamlet has been told for 400 years...but it's never been told like this!Mel Gibson (the Mad Max and Lethal Weapon films) takes on his richest part to date, the title role in a dynamic new version of Shakespeare's Hamlet.Directed by Franco Zeffirelli (Romeo and Juliet, Jesus of Nazareth), the location-shot production has a sumptuous look that won Academy Award nominations for Art Direction and Costume Design.Gibson plays the prince of medieval-era Denmark, who senses treachery behind his royal father's death.Glenn Close (Fatal Attraction, Dangerous Liaisons) plays Hamlet's mother Gertrude, all too dangerously entangled in that treachery.A brilliant supporting cast, including Alan Bates as Claudius, Paul Scofield as the ghost of Hamlet's father, Ian Holm as Polonius and Helena Bonham-Carter as Ophelia, adds its powerful presence to this immortal tale of high adventure and evil deeds.Big, bold and heroic, this is a vivid and virile Hamlet for the modern age and all time. ... Read more

Reviews (124)

To Thine Own Self Be True...
While this is a complex movie that demands your full attention, this has to be one of my favorite Shakespeare plays. It is beautifully acted out in a gorgeous castle filled with tapestries and everything you would imagine a castle to be from the candlelight to the dimly lit spiral staircases.

The most enjoyable scenes are when Hamlet expresses his thoughts in soliloquies and gives insight into what his character is feeling. Mel Gibson becomes Hamlet and I thought this was perhaps some of his best acting ever! Glenn Close is exceptional as Gertrude, the incestuous mother. The uneasiness and distrust in Denmark since King Hamlet's death and Queen Gertrude's remarriage sets the mood for the rest of the movie.

The story begins on the outer ramparts of Elsinore castle. A ghost appears and Hamlet, speaks to his deceased father. The ghost asks Hamlet to revenge his "most foul, strange, and unnatural murder." Hamlet then deviously plots a psychological revenge by putting on a play in which a scene portrays the actual murder of his father.

"I'll have grounds
More relative than this-the play's the thing
Wherein I'll catch the conscience of the King." -Hamlet, Act 2, 603-605

Once guilt takes hold of the King, the pieces of the puzzle start to fit together and you realize that one immoral action only makes another wrong even more probable.

Throughout the play, Hamlet shows his intellectual superiority and states his case by saying: "Do you think I am easier to be played on than a pipe?" While he desires to have the upper hand until the end, he cannot of course know all the intentions of those around him nor can he escape his own fate.

An Unforgettable story that made an impression on me in school and still holds a
certain fascination for me. Did Hamlet ever really love Ophelia? That is the question.

"It is in my memory locked." -Ophelia

hamlet
The movie Hamlet directed by Franco Zefferelli is a historical drama, based on the popular Shakespearean Tragedy. Zefferelli decided to retain the name Hamlet, which I think could be modified to be more effective. Theoretically, a title is a microcosm of the theme, which 'Hamlet' doesn't really accomplish; a title that can foreshadow the theme of the play will be more formidable. Perhaps the director could have excerpted one of the dominant quotes out of the play, the most famous being "To be or not to be". This would have at least given a foreshadowing to the indecision seen by the tragic hero throughout the plot. Generally speaking, the movie was well done and I comment the director for his concise but accurate representation of Shakespeare's 'Hamlet'.
On the whole the actors depicted the roles of their characters quite well. Hamlet played by the Australian, Mel Gibson took command of his part, and captivated the viewers with his emotional conversations, as well as addition of humor and a masculine vigor to Hamlet. He portrayed his part with a great deal enthusiasm, bringing the play to life. The royal couple played by Alan Bates and Glenn Close, as king Claudius and queen Gertrude respectfully, were able to capture the conduct of a monarchial leadership, of the middle ages with little difficulty. Claudius displayed an exceptional representation of a lusty, murderous king. The minor characters such as Ian Holm as Polonius, Nathaniel Parker as Laertes, and Helena Bonham Carter as Ophelia gave considerable support to the leading characters, as they were subtly but effectively able to dictate the plot.
Hamlet is noted as one of Franco Zeffirelli's best productions as he recreated yet another Shakespeare masterpiece. He took a conventional approach to this production of Hamlet as he kept with the mindset most people would have to character and setting, in other words he tried not to give any surprises. Zeffirelli's main goal was to create a lighthearted enjoyable movie that would appeal to the general public who don't have the time and stamina for Branagh's four-hour version. In keeping with typical Shakespearean movies the director chose a soundtrack consisting of classical pieces, which is suitable for what he was trying to achieve. Little special effects were used, which may be a major flaw when trying to grasp the attention of modern day viewers, perhaps he could have included some more dynamic effects, especially with the ghost who appeared almost as though he was a living character.
This movie is a concise version of the original text and has left out and/or shortened many scenes keeping only the ones necessary to tell the story. I really liked the way he incorporated old Hamlet's funeral in the beginning and the voyage to England. However, there were a few scenes like the fight between Laertes and Hamlet in the graveyard, which could have been further accented. The major flaw I observed in the movie when compared to the book was the exclusion of the sub-plot with Fortinbras and the Norwegian influence. This led to the ambiguity the viewers were left in once the movie ended, as there was no hint to the outcome of Denmark.

best film version i've seen (and i've seen them all!)
through my endeavors i've had to read Hamlet 7 times (twice my senior year of high-school). much as i don't like Shakespeare this play is part of my life.

The Olivier version is more accurate to the stage version but the camera techiniques are over-blown and hokey (circling the swords before the duel to see which one is tipped, it made me dizzy). the Branagh version, while creative in it's set up (modernizing it to imerial Russia), and using the entire text, complete with Prince Fortinbras of Norway, is SO long and SO over-acted (especially on the part of Branagh) that i needed a nap after i saw it. and i choose not even to dignify the Ethan Hawke version it was so terrible.

This one is my favorite, all the scenes which are cut aren't necessary for the forwarding of the plot in my humble opinion (the opening scene with the palace guards meeting the dead kingis cut yet horatio's explaination of this happening later in the movie is sufficient). Gibson chooses to play Hamlet as insane (that decision is left to the director) and as i am in the camp that Hamlet IS insane, you could also see why i favor this version. Glenn Close is EXCELLENT as Gertrude as is Helena Bonham-Carter as Ophelia.

solid performances with a great cast, what more does a 400 year old play need?

Mel has captured Hamlet's soul
What a masterpiece. As much as I love Braveheart, I truly think this is Mel Gibson's finest work. It throws all over attempts into shadow, including the great Lawrence Olivier and certainly Kenneth Branaugh or Ethan Hawke. So often the female characters are reduced to cardboard mock-ups of feminine ideals of the Shakespearean age. Not here! Ofelia and Gertrude have souls and minds to probe, filled with as many dark secrets as Hamlet himself. I could never say enough about the caliber of this film. Suffice it to say that it is THE Hamlet of the ages and worth a look as well as a few dollars to own it.

A great BRIEF history of The Bard's greatest Play
There are two main versions that currently work the best in getting a feel for this play, Gibson's & Brannaugh's. Gibson's is very much stripped down to focusing on the three main character's. It does loose a lot by this device, but it does gain considerably in that the viewer doesn't have to shift through all the sub-plots. Brannaugh's, however is far more complete & I would consider it far more the best " study " version of the play. If you've read the play ( & this is the reason I give it 5 stars ), Gibson's version is great beause you can fill in the blanks quite easily & nothing is lost. The Ghost is by far better in Gibson's version ( remember, this is not a ghost in the modern sense, so it's important not to judge by appearences ), & the interplay between them in their first meeting is just amazing. However, the politics of the play suffers badly, in my opinion, becuase many of the characters in the sub-plots are missing, especially Polonius' machinations....however, he certainly DIES better in Gibson's version. I personally like this version & I am impressed with all the actors. If this had been the entire play, I think it would definitely have given Brannaugh's version a run for it's money, but being so stripped down, I feel the actuall story suffers greatly. As one reviewer put it, a CLIFT NOTES verion, with which I must agree. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The premier DVD of one of Cartoon Network’s hottest commodities is a compilation of six Ed, Edd n Eddy episodes from its debut 1999 season, brandishing its unique style of adolescent schtick from creator Danny Antonucci ("Lupo the Butcher," "The Brothers Grunt"). School’s out and this trio of Eds are beating the heat in the best way they know how:concocting their next scam while avoiding life’s greatest mystery--girls.Whether babysitting Ed’s demanding sister in "Sir Ed-a-lot," or contending for the best swimming hole in "Hot-Buttered Ed," these musketeers of puberty always get the last word. The best of the bunch is "Avast Ye Eds," where the boys launch their newest entrepreneurial endeavor, "Eddy’s Creek Cruise Line" only to come under attack by a racy raft of pirates, the Kanker Sisters ("Alas, the sea is a cruel mistress"). Antonucci’s gag-driven cartoons are well-crafted animations replete with witty dialogue, vibrant colors, and creative storylines, hinting at influences as far-reaching as Buster Keaton, Hal Roach, Mack Sennett, Vaudeville, and "The Three Stooges."(Ages 8 and older) --Lynn Gibson ... Read more

Reviews (16)

This DVD Might Be The Best!
Great TV show!!! I love Ed, Edd n Eddy, it is really funny.
I rated it 5 stars because this DVD might be the best, but I
didn't have this DVD yet. In this DVD, you will find the Eds'
special features included "Club Ed: The Rules and Regulations,"
next is "Plank's Perspective," after that is The Plank music video, "My Best Friend Plank." Plus, the DVD has a Cartoon Network bonus: The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy in "Nursery Crime." There are six Ed-isodes and don't forget to see all the Eds' Ed-ventures. You will love this DVD, you will like all their Ed-ventures.

I'm so ED-cited !!!
When I first heard of Ed, Edd n Eddy on the Cartoon Network, I thought it was something I wouldn't be interested in. However, when I first laid eyes on the show itself first hand, I never thought it was so FUNNY ! That's why I have dedicated this series the funniest show I have ever seen. I always laugh out loud watching each episode. Also, I've wondered when the Eds were coming out on a DVD or something. Now they are !

This DVD has six of my favorite ED-isodes including the one where they barter a bunch of stuff in order to get an egg and the one where they trade identities.

Plus, the bonus features include a Billy & Mandy episode where the two get embroiled in some Story Book Land. Next we have "Club Ed: The Rules and Regulations." This feature has some of the important rules of being an Ed, so to speak. The feature "Plank's Perspective" is basically a character introduction for those who aren't too familar to the show hosted by Jonny 2x4 himself. And lastly, the DVD has the music video "My Best Friend Plank," a song dedicated to that wooden chum we all know and love.

I wonder when the next DVD will come out ? Maybe the next one will have the ED-isode where the Eds and Kankers get "married," or the one where Eddy gets a pimple, or the one where Plank's parents come to visit. And the bonus features will include that other Ed, Edd n Eddy music video. I'm not sure what the song is called, but the scenario is entitled, "The Incredible Shrinking Day." Well, who knows ?

So if you like single-D's goofy quotes and antics, double-D's wit and wisdom, Eddy's bad scamming, the other kids and what they do, or just like the sight of their wiggly outlines (if you look at the characters real close), then this DVD is just for you. And don't forget to keep an eye out for "the original Boys of Summer" every day on the Cartoon Network.

This DVD Might Be The Best!
This DVD might be the best because I like Ed, Edd n Eddy.
I can't wait to buy this one! I think this one will be really
funny. If you buy this thing, I hope you not feel bored. Ed, Edd n Eddy fans will love this EXCEPT the ones who doesn't like
Ed, Edd n Eddy.

MY FIRST REVEIW WAS A HORRIBLE MISTAKE
THIS DVD WAS GREAT. IT WAS TEN TIMES BETTER THEN THE TV SERIES.
I WON'T LET DOWN HPH. I LIKED THE PART WHERE ED PUSHED DOUBLE D ON THE TIRE SWING. IN AVAST YE EDS. YOU GOTTA LIKE THIS DVD. IT'S FUNNY, AND THE ANAMATION IS BREATH TAKING.

THE ED,EDD,N EDDY DVD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
To let you know I am going to buy it as soon as it comes out.The reason is that IT IS GOING TO BE THE BEST!!!!!Here is why...

ED:ED can not be not funny!He is the funniest guy EVER!!!There is not a single saying that he says that is not funny!!!!!

EDD:He is always funny when he does every thing that ED and EDDY do.

EDDY:EDDY can be funny by his dally scam. His scams are funny because it always turns out, that he doesn't get one quarter.

These are things that are just about the EDS,but if you want to see KEVIN,JONNY,NASS,SHARA,and the rest of the culdesac,then I think you should get this DVD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ... Read more

Reviews (1388)

Quentin Tarantino's Tribute &...
The guy is very creative in displaying a story in a very original structure and media. Kill Bill is a cult movie fan's greatest dream come true. Everything is in there from good old Western Coybow movies to the cinema of the east slapped together. For the sterotypical "white" person who only consumes the blockbuster hits of what ever popoular trend is out, this movie may appear silly or confusing to a degree of laughter. Thats the beauty of this movie, it shows us which movie watchers are out there. In the theaters I caught a lot of white people laughing at the asian sequences of the film and they were also dumbfounded by the special appearances of the actors from Wild Zero, Ichi the Killer, Battle Royale, and Suicide Circle to name a few. (i was hoping to see Tekashi Kitano) The only special appearnce of a star they would know is "David carra..whats his name...? the guys from that Kung-Fu show...yeah." A lot of people failed to see the element of honor that was displayed in both films between characters which was a very beautiful element. The action sequences were directed very well so that it made up for a lot of the actor martial arts flaws such as akward positions and hyper extended punches, so there are little moments killed.

One sad thing though is that Kill Bill Vol.2 had a trailer for the 2002 film HERO, which is now going to hit theaters here that did it injustes. They stated that the movie was presented by Quentin Tarantino, but I've overheard many reactions of people thinking that it is directed by Quentin Tarantino rather than the truth (Zhang Yimou). Plus the trailer gave the art film a false representation of an epic war film, many may be disapointed. So are movies like Kill Bill building bridges with Hollywood and Asia or are they just going to jokingly stereotype Asian films and cuture in an unfair way? Fans and crowds shall tell in time.

Oh and by the way, I don't want to sound like "white" people are not cool, I use the term "white" for the typical stereotyping day by day american. As far as stereotypes go, sometimes people enjoy becoming part of it and making it obviously true. I look forward to one day the stereotypes are non existant and everyhting in around our lives is understood for what it is and not what it looks like on the surface.

Maiming and decapitation are never fun. Until now...
Oh, the joy of being a movie geek. This year has been a tremendous blessing for all of the human race, or just us film fanatics, as the movie gods have listened to all our prayers to deliver cinematic goodness. One of these that came as a major grace is called "Kill Bill: Volume One", the latest offering from the dark, perverted but brilliant mind of Quentin Tarantino. Last seen under the spotlight in 1997 with "Jackie Brown", we have been painfully awaiting his next move throughout a six-year-span. Well, time finally came upon us and the wait is definitely worth it.

Appropriately entitled "Kill Bill", Tarantino tells a simple revenge story, albeit through his usual non-linear storytelling structure, about a lanky blonde woman (played by the invigorating Uma Thurman) only known as "The Bride" a.k.a. "Black Mamba" who wakes up from a coma to exact revenge on her former assassin group called "The Deadly Viper Assassination Squad" lead by Bill (David Carradine), who aren't really happy of her decision to quit and marry someone in El Paso, Texas. Hence, bloody carnage ensues as Bill and the gang made of eclectic members-Budd, Vernita Green, Elle Driver and Oren-Ishii-massacres The Bride's family and guests on her wedding day, including her unborn baby. Bill saves her for last and shoots her head (on what could be one of the most startling introductions in a movie). Thinking that she's dead, they leave her cold in her blood-splattered wedding dress, which is a terrible mistake on their part, as The Bride gets up from her hospital bed after four years with furious determination and will to destroy every single one of the perpetrators, saving the best for last, which is, of course, Bill, proving that as far as justice goes, it can easily get very poetic.

However, this is only half of the story, as Miramix, the film distributor, and Tarantino himself decided to cut the three-hour long movie in half and released them four months apart. That being said, I am very sure that Volume Two will be as equally brutal and vigorously entertaining to what I've seen four times in the theaters (Yes, four times! It's that good!)

"Kill Bill: Volume One" is perhaps the most violent American movie ever (and I've seen a lot of movies). It can be easily be used as an example of how the morals of the Western world have dramatically fallen in the 21st century. But it's most important to know that this movie was made as an ode to those rare, odd, cheesy and absurd kung-fu, Western, exploitation, slasher and grindhouse movies we usually see gathering dust in the cult section of a video store or occasionally seen playing on television at 3 in the morning. Kill Bill: Volume One on the surface looks like a very empty fluff made to only shock the already seemingly desensitized viewers, but underneath, it is really a very intelligent piece of art. Intelligent in a sense that it knows the rules of the cinema: it knows it audiences are and doesn't give a damn thing or two to those who don't want to get involved. For instance, The Bride wears a yellow jumpsuit during the last hour of the movie. To the uninitiated, it's just a striking sexy vintage number. To those in the know, it's a replica of Bruce Lee's tracking jumpsuit from his 1979 movie Game of Death. And this is just only a fraction of Tarantino's endless references, in-jokes and homages to old and obscure cinema. From Brian DePalma to Godzilla, from giallo films to Japanese animations, God knows what else are there he injected. I say this movie is an entire pop culture of pop culture.

Even without this quality, it's still deliciously entertaining, boldly creative and visually arresting, it's safe to say that this is an instant classic. No, this is not an Oscar-winning movie, let alone be nominated. But not everything has to have a deep storyline with complex characters to be a great film. This movie has no substance and as empty as a dead shell. But it's an amazingly great film, nonetheless. The fact of the matter is that Tarantino made this with great respect, love and passion of the medium, that he practically utilizes everything to its full advantage from complicated camera shots (the long tracking shot of The Bride going to the washroom is incredible), beautiful cinematography (the claustrophobic and filthy Hospital environment, the beautifully exotic and bright Japanese backdrop), the amazing eclectic selections of music (from Nancy Sinatra's "Bang, Bang" to "The Green Hornet" theme song) and the excellently choreographed fight scenes as if we're watching an amazing, exhausting ballet dance with swords. Oh yeah, and the beautiful gushing of the blood and gore like water coming down from Niagara Falls.

"Kill Bill: Volume One" is an extravagant, highly-stylized, ultra-energized, uber-violent piece of celluloid. It's made up of a world were grativity is without law, violence is sheer poetry, pissed-off Caucasian women likes to play with samura swords, and even assassins have feelings. It's a world where obscure 1970's disco music goes perfectly seamless along with the motion of decapitation and maiming.

Oh what fun!

Aside from that movie that left me with tears featuring hobbits and wizards and that fetus-looking boy-fish who seems to say the word "Precciooooooussssss...." a lot, this year belongs to Kill Bill: Volume One (and I cannot wait for Volume 2!)

Thank you, Tarantino for your sick and twisted mind.

great movie
i loved this film! great STYLE, great action, great story. and very funny. i loved the use of zamfir's famous tune for the samurai scene! it's a delicious homage (or parody?!) of various genres - japanese samurai (esp kurosawa), chinese kung fu, american spaghetti westerns. wonderful.

HOLLYWOOD Tarantino??
Great movie I have to say, paying respect to crazy asian cinema. My only gripe is Uma Therman being in the movie. I would have like to see Quinten dig up and unknown actor or maybe some B movie or expoitation actress. And although I like Lucy Lu I can think of a hundred different asian actresses that would have fit the role better. ANyway, great movie! If you like this movie check out any movie by Takashi Miike like: Iche the Killer, Dead or Alive, Dead or Alive 2, Dead or Alive Final, Audition, Shark Skin Man and Peach Hip Girl.... any one of these movies makes KILL BILL look like a Walt Disney film!!

5 stars for SONNY CHIBA and GORDAN LEU!!!!!
I just saw this movie on DVD after not getting a chance to see this in the theaters. 5 stars for Gordan Leu and Sonny Chiba!! Awsome to see these 2 great legends of asian cinema! I remember seeing Gorden Leu as a kid from just about EVERY great Shaw Bros. kung fu flick! And Sonny Chiba? ..... Cmon! The Japanese James Bond!? Excellent casting. Great flick!! ... Read more

Description

The final battle for Middle-earth begins. Frodo and Sam, led by Gollum, continue their dangerous mission toward the fires of Mount Doom in order to destroy the One Ring. Aragorn struggles to fulfill his legacy as he leads his outnumbered followers against the growing power of the Dark Lord Sauron, so that the Ring-bearer may complete his quest. ... Read more

Reviews (941)

The new "King" of film
The heavily-anticipated film adaptions of J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Lord of the Rings" began in 2001 with THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING, a truly extraodinary film. In 2002, it was continued with THE TWO TOWERS, which topped THE FELLOWSHIP. And now, in 2003, we have THE RETURN OF THE KING - a film which rules all others. Here, ladies and gentlemen, is a serious candidate for best movie ever made.

The first part of the film is actually taken from the novel of "The Two Towers". We find Pippin (Billy Boyd) being taken to Gondor by Gandalf (Ian McKellen), who hopes to prevent war there by counselling stubborn, angry Denethor (John Noble). At the same time, Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), Legolas (Orlando Bloom), and Gimli (John Rhys-Davies) lead King Theoden's (Bernard Hill) men into battle.

Meanwhile, as they approach the outskirts of Mordor, Frodo (Elijah Wood) and Sam's (Sean Astin) friendship is tested as the scheming Gollum (voice of Andy Serkis) leads the two into a trap. All looks dark for the forces of good.

RETURN OF THE KING goes beyond words. Adventurous story, terrific acting, perfect direction, flawless visuals - it is a perfect film. Peter Jackson has done an outstanding job of bringing Tolkien's beloved fantasy tales to the screen. I can think of no one who could do it better.

Howard Shore once again contributes the film's score. He creates here music that is more beautiful than the previous two films', much less forceful, with the exact feeling of hopeless surrounding it as is with the movie's characters. This is almost certainly Shore's best score.

The acting is terrific, better than the first films, if such a thing is possible. We see more of the characters which were paid lesser attention to in the previous installments. Gollum's character is almost completely re-done.

There is no doubt that about 90% of the people who see this movie will shed a tear or too. There are some dramatic, emotional moments to the film, but most of the crying going on will just be because we've come to the end of a magnificent, beautiful journey - which has become one of the most important in cinematic history.

THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE RETURN OF THE KING is a triumph of modern moviemaking. It goes past the previous two, seemingly unbeatable films to become a serious candidate for the greatest film of all-time. It is sheer brilliance. The Lord of the Rings has been a beautiful experience. It is sad it has finally come to an end. At least it has an ending fit for a king.

The first masterpiece of the trilogy - astonishing!
It goes without saying that I have not been a huge fan of the LOTR series at all. The first film is corny and overdrawn, and most of The Two Towers suffers from what many middle sections of 2-hour movies do - the 2nd act drag. Only at the end of The Two Towers do Frodo and Sam and the gang really feel like they're becoming fleshed-out characters and not just action figures charging a castle wall. If you look closely at the end of Towers, it's Sam's speech to Frodo about the possibility of them becoming legends that the movie begins to whisper of what's to come, and what has come to pass in The Return of the King is...well...astounding. I tell you, reader, if you're not terribly fond of The Lord of the Rings, it is the compelling, deeply-moving final film that shows of what director Peter Jackson is truly capable.

Actor Andy Serkis's Gollum has been a joy to watch ever since he appeared on screen in Towers, even despite constant ribbing by Saturday Night Live and the fact that, yeah, he does sound a little silly when he menacingly screeches "My preciousssssssss!" every few minutes. The Return of the King takes a moment to bring additional depth and meaning to Gollum's character by showing his first discovery of the ring even before "The Return of the King" logo graces the screen. Luckily, Gollum is not the only character in the film that is made into a living, breathing, three-dimensional being and not a comic book caricature. The whole film seems to take on a lush, heavy air of true dramatic consequence that seemed to be holding back before.

Frodo and Sam are ever-so-closer to reaching Mordor; Aragorn is coming ever-so-closer to his destiny as, well, look at the title; and (in the most inspiringly great plot move of the film) Merry, Pippin, and Eowyn show their capacity for uncanny acts of heroism they've had in them all along. In addition, Gandalf kicks more Middle Earth butt like he was born to do while protecting Pippin (who is thought to have the ring), and the time for the final battle for the Middle Earth comes nearer by the minute. It seems like a lot is going on, but this third film is remarkably the easiest to follow and also the most accessible. The third film also has a few huge advantages that work in its favor: (1) it actually has an end (and what an ending!), (2) the characters have had more than 6 screen hours to develop, so they're at their peaks here, and (3) the tension leading to that do-it-or-die moment is worth two years of waiting. It's more obvious than ever by King that all three movies are just one big movie chopped into three parts, but that means that this is the equivalent of a no-holds-barred, all-the-stops-out, slam-bang finale of a 2-hour movie -- and that's exactly what it feels like.

The Battle of Helm's deep looks like nothing compared to the steadily-climaxing action of The Return of the King. Unlike some of the scenes in the first two films, the action seems to have a purpose here, and this reviewer will admit - I alternated between tears and the giddy excitement of a schoolboy throughout most of the movie. I'm sure that will be a common reaction. At the same time, Frodo's greed for the ring, and how it affects his relationship with Sam reminded me of The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. Elijah Wood is no Bogie, but he certainly can conjure up that all-encompassing greed when he wants to. I may get annoyed when he says "Mr. Frodo," but Sean Astin's Sam is really a standout character here - he's kind of been the 2nd string sidekick in the past two, but he actually gets the honor of carrying the film to its remarkably quiet and moving finale even after displaying his prodigious talent as a young actor in the tense Mordor sequence. This may sound like a blanket comment, but everyone is simply fantastic in the film - even when they've been not-so-much earlier.

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King is a compelling tale of redemption and heroism, and in a way, it has redeemed itself through this smashingly fantastic film.Yes, it does slip in a few moments (most notably at the very end, when it could end about 6 different times, but give Jackson some slack - it had to be hard to let go of it), but I really don't feel it was detrimental to the end result of the movie at all. The last 20 minutes or so, even when it's doing the ending fakeouts, it's a tearjerker - not only for what it means for the third film, but for what it means for the trilogy as a whole. I found myself smiling through being choked up at the end in one of the great scenes of the whole 10 hours of the epic: a group of people (I won't say who, for it might spoil things for those die-hard fans out there) sit around a table in a tavern clutching their ale and simply sit in silence. They've been through so much that words won't work. At times, I wonder if words will even work to describe what a great feat of American filmmaking The Return of the King is. I can give only this: Congratulations, Peter Jackson, you've made a masterpiece. Grade: A

The crowning touch to an amazing trilogy!!
The only bad thing I can say about this movie is that it's the last one. Oh yeah, and it isn't the extended version DVD. I had to buy this movie even though I knew a better version was coming out before Christmas; it's just too good to wait that long. Although I loved the movie, I did have one complaint: the whole Saruman plotline is wrapped up in a really odd way. (Peter Jackson promises that this will be rectified in the extended version.) The extras on this DVD aren't anything special, but I don't buy DVDs for the extras. If you loved the first two Lord of the Rings movies, you'll definitely love this one too!!

A Masterpiece Beyond Description
It is impossible to fairly credit the genius and masterpiece that this movie is in a few short words. Each movie in my opinion, has been better than the last, making for an epic third movie.

To begin with, the acting. People have said that the acting in each of the three movies has never been exceptionall, hence only one Oscar nomination to an actor/actress out of all three movies, (That was Ian McKellan FOTR.) However in this third installment there are several actors who must be recognized for their achievments, namely Sean Astin as Sam, and again Ian McKellan as Gandalf. Sam's incredible acting with his relationship with Frodo draws sympathy and emotion from me every time I see the movie. And Gandalf, with his several stirring speeches, both mostly to Pipin, are a a great acting performance worthy of recognition. Honorable mention must also go to Viggo Mortensen as Aragorn and Bernard Hill, who plays Theoden extremely well.

Next a look at the visual aspect of the movie. In a sense of the natural beauty of the film, it is incredible. All three films incorporate a level of beauty and grandeur hard to find in many films. New Zealands fresh and exotic landscapes are always present throught the film, and can often take ones breath away. One scene in particular is that of the lighting of the beacons, as Peter Jackson takes the viewer on a spectacular ride over snowy mountains and sweeping valleys. The shot itself is not only a testiment to the amazing cinemetography and editing of the movie, but also the amazing beauty of New Zealand that is presented through the entire film.
However as with the first two movies, The Return of the King's visual aspect relies not only on New Zelands beauty and Peter Jackson's camera moves, but also upon the amazing digital and visual effects that are integrated seamlessly throughout the movie. The Weta Digital visual effects team that brought to life such creatures as Gollem and Treebeard, have created the benchmark by which all visual effects will likely be judged from here on. Their ability to make a digital thing like Gollem who exists in a computer resonate emotion and feeling is a work of true genius. The visual effects shine not only in the obvious areas such as Gollum, but in the subtle effects that can barely be noticed; shadows formed by digital creatures that aren't there, lighting effects that create a mood in the scene that is otherwise non-existent. All of these things have been worked together so will with the real-time footage and acting, that you end up never knowing what is real and what is digital.

Everytime I watch the movie, I never am bored. Peter Jackson has made a perfect blend of drama, emotion, action, even some humor and romance, that the movie never grows old. Scenes such as Faramir's ride towards Osgiliath and death, the charge of the Rohiram upon Pelennor fields, the last battle in front of the Black gate, while Frodo and Sam struggle up Mount Doom, just to name a few, are beautifully done and are implanted in my mind forever.

The Lord of the Rings trilogy, which ended with this rousing finale, has created a pop culture phenomenon that will no doubt last for many years to come. If you haven't seen by all means must buy or rent this DVD. If you have, then I suggest the same thing, buy it. You won't be sorry you did.

I WATCH THIS WHEN I CANT FALL ASLEEP
NOPE, I JUST DONT SEE HOW PEOPLE LOVE THIS MOVIE. BUT I TELL YOU THIS THE THE HOLLYWOOD MEDIA FAVORS THIS MOVIE ALOT, AND SO DO THE PEOPLE FOLLOW.WELL PEOPLE ARE DIFFERENT I GUESS.BUT I WALKED OUT OF THE THEATERS ON THIS ONE. WENT TO WATCH A BETTER MOVIE.GOOD SPECIAL EFFECTS THOUGH. ... Read more