Reviews (105)

Save the Last Dance For Me
A clever late 90's Japanese film with English subtitles about ballroom dance lessons. No, this isn't your Arthur Murray dance studio. The cast is a memorable diverse, intriguing, group of characters taking dance lessons. Since the Japanese are reserved about public intimacy, dance lessons should be of a clandestine nature. The consensus in the movie is that men are considered losers if they take dance lessons or is it "just a reason to hold a woman in your arms."

The story focuses on Mr. Shugyima, a workacholic who spots an attractive woman through a window. Burdened with a mortgage and life's pressures, he seeks dance lessons to get closer.

Another character, a balding, quirky, looney Japanese/Latino, Mr. Aoki, has been dancing for five years, he wears a long frizzy wig piled loosely on his head because he believes the wig gives him inspiration to be like his idol, Donny Burns, a Latin dance king. The funny contortionist facial movements work equally with his suave, cool, bawdy dance numbers. He comes across like a combination Don Juan and Madonna striking a pose! A dance partner offends him when she refuses to dance with him as he dances "creepy."

An unusual treat is the Drifter's song "Save the Last Dance For Me." It is the only English lyrical song, quite fitting for the occasion. This movie is a gem, full of humor and silliness. See it!......MzRizz.

"Shall We Dansu?"-great story and cast!
This has to be the best Japanese movie I've ever seen and my all time favorite! It's the story of a 40 something year-old salaryman who, after seemingly attaining all his goals in life, a wife and child, a company position with a bright future and a new house, begins to ponder if there's more to life than just the "9 to 5" grind and mortgage payments. During his train rides home from work, he notices a beautiful young woman standing in front of the window of a dance school. What happens after that might seem obvious, but me believe it's not...Even if you don't understand one word of Japanese, the subtitled version, like the touching story are so well written, that you'll want to watch it over and over again. I hope the rumors of this movie coming out in U.S. theatres are true because it's sure to be a hit, until then i'll be waiting for this one on DVD! Aoki-san Gambatte!

to dance is to be free!!!!
This is the tale of Sugiyama, a Japanese "salaryman" who, in the tradition of modern-day Japan, essentially lives to work depsite the boredom and neglect of his family. On his morning commute aboard the train, he sees a beautiful dance instructor in he classroom. He decides to sign up and finds a life outside the office and his family via dancing. His wife hires a detective to find out what he is doing and why he smells like perfume when he gets back.

The great thing about this movie, and what I believe is true for everyone in every nation, is that everyone needs a passion that has absolutely nothing to do with their job or any of the skills required for it. Something to do just for the sake of enjoying yourself. As his coworker and fellow dance fanatic Aoki says, it makes him feel free.

The fact that they have to hide their hobby at work is hilarious. Aoki says their improved posture is a dead giveaway. They are caught ballroom dancing in the men's room so Sugiyama pretends he has just fainted and Aoki happened to catch him.

Humorous with a message, this is a great flick.

Gai-jin rates Shall We Dance as Ichi-ban (number one) Movie
I first saw Shall We Dance? on the big screen and was captivated by its storyline and cast of characters. I felt then, as I do now, that this was a film out of the ordinary. Viewers can relate to the various personalities and their dreams or desires. Because I am an expatriate living in Japan, I enjoyed the glimpse into the daily lives of my neighbors. Ichi-ban movie...a heart-warming story that you won't get tired watching over and over again. It needs to come on DVD a.s.a.p.

Save the Last Dance for me!!
This is a clever late 90's Japanese film with English subtitles about ballroom dance lessons. No, this isn't your Arthur Murray dance studio. The subtitles are very easy to read and clearly defined. The cast is a memorable diverse, intriguing, group of characters taking dance lessons.

Since the Japanese are reserved about public intimacy, dance lessons are of a clandestine nature. The consensus here is that men are considered losers if they take dance lessons or lessons are just a reason to hold a woman in your arms.

The story focus is on Mr. Shugiyama, an overworked middle-aged man with a wife, daughter at home. From his commute, he spots a beautiful woman in a window as she teaches her students dance steps.

His intention is to meet the girl, but she blatantly tells him that she takes this serious and if he is there just to meet her, then he should not take lessons. She adamantly informs him that this is a classroom, not a disco. To "save face", he hangs in there and learns to dance rather than become a failure.

The array of characters:
A balding, quirky, Mr. Aoki, has been dancing for five years, he wears a long frizzy wig piled loosely on his head because he believes the wig gives him inspiration to be like his idol, Donny Burns, a Latin dance king. While he dances, he gives these funny facial movements that equate with his suave, cool, bawdy dance numbers. He comes across like a combination Don Juan and Madonna striking a pose! He is known to dance "creepy."

An extremely shy and reserved heavy-set man with thick glasses gets his fulfillment learning to dance. He becomes alive once he learns the steps.

Also, an abrasive dance instructor who isn't afraid to spew her insults when needed and she trades verbal jabs with the male customers.

As the movie reaches the climax, a number of dance halls and amateur dance contests are held.

An unusual treat is the Drifter's song "Save the Last Dance For Me." It is the only English lyrical song, quite fitting for the occasion. This movie is a gem, full of humor and silliness. See it!......MzRizz. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The daughter of legendary British actor John Mills and novelist Mary Hayley Bell (as well as the sister of actress Juliet Mills), young Hayley Mills broke the surface of fame at the tender age of 12, starring opposite her father in the thriller Tiger Bay. That film, along with a Berlin Film Festival award, was enough to attract the attention of Walt Disney, who promptly signed her to a five-year contract and put her in the starring role of Pollyanna. After wringing hearts and nabbing a special Oscar, Mills segued into the comedy thing--for double the fun--in The Parent Trap, the 1961 farce in which she played twins, separated at birth, who scheme to reunite their biological parents (Maureen O'Hara and Brian Keith, both surprisingly sexy for a Disney movie). On the brink of adolescence, Mills was a saucy role model for children of the Kennedy era: cute, endearing and, above all, wholesome despite her sneaky ways--everyone's meddlesome sister. Easily stepping into the Disney child-star gap as the original Mouseketeers were (literally) outgrowing their uniforms, Mills was the studio's live-action bread and butter for a brief moment in time, and The Parent Trap still remains her best vehicle, a classic now to adults who came of age during the early '60s. It also pioneered the processed split-screen technique, which while not seamless was revolutionary and exciting enough that, upon seeing the initial results, Uncle Walt asked the filmmakers to shoot more scenes in which Mills played opposite herself. --Mark Englehart ... Read more

Reviews (97)

A Fun, Spirited Adventure Starring Hayley Mills
In the original movie, The Parent Trap, Hayley Mills stars, twice! As twins, not knowing about each other's existence, who meet at a summer camp where they immedietly dislike eachother, until, of course, they discover that they are twins. In the course of all this, they switch places in attempt to reunite their parents, played by Maureen O'Hara and Brian Keith. A fun movie to watch. Though perhaps not quite as colorful as the new version, it is a nice addition to your video collection, especially to compare to the new one. A must see movie that your whole family will enjoy.

"Let's Get Together,Yeah,Yeah,Yeah!"
"The Parent Trap" tells the story of two girls at summer camp: Sharon McKendrick and Susan Evers(both played by Hayley Mills). Their parents got divorced and took both of them separately. Maureen O'Hara plays Margaret McKendrick,and the late Brian Keith plays Mitchell Evers. The song that Hayley sings in the movie was a # 1 hit for her in 1961: "Let's Get Together" is written by Richard M. Sherman and Robert B. Sherman,who also wrote the title song sung by Tommy Sands and Annette Funicello. Hayley Mills also reprised the roles of Sharon and Susan in "The Parent Trap II" (1986),"The Parent Trap III"(1989),and "The Parent Trap Hawaaian Honeymoon"(1989). Lindsay Lohan took Mills' roles in the remake of "The Parent Trap"(1998).

Help, I'm seeing Double........
I love this movie. Both versions arwe great. The first one, with Haley Mills, has the song,"lets get together yeah yeah yeah, why don't you and I combine.." and the second one with Lindsay Lohan, has the song "There She Goes" And there are some other diffrences. Like in the new one, there is the lizard fiasco. I'm pretty sure that wasn't in the old one. But they are both good. if I wer you I wouldn't chose. I'd get both.:)

Hayley to the Rescue
This was the highest grossing box office success in America in 1961 and if there isn't a statue of Hayley Mills in Disneyland there oughta be. Her successive hits for Walter and Roy Disney bailed them out of a tight spot financially. Ms. Mills effortless adolescent charm is backed by two first rate performers in Brian Keith and Maureen O'Hara and neither was ever better. The plot about separated twins is older than Shakespeare and doesn't bear too close examination, but the theme of a re-kindled love and re-united family is one very few of us can resist. Highly recommended.

Special features are wonderful
Of course this is a wonderful Disney family film. I'm in my twenties, and I can remember watching this movie since I was a toddler. Since I'm sure you know how great the movie is and can read other reviews for that, I'll concentrate on the special features of this DVD, some of which aren't even mentioned above.

• "Caught in the Act: The Making of the Parent Trap" is a good documentary (about 30 minutes), including interviews with Hayley Mills, Maureen O'Hara, director David Swift, Joanna Barnes, and more. It provides a lot of background details on how the idea for the film came about, selecting the cast, fine-tuning the screenplay, etc.

• "Disney Legend: Hayley Mills" is a 25-minute feature all about Hayley, and it's quite good. It includes photos and home movies from her childhood as well as interviews with Hayley, Maureen O'Hara, Dean Jones, Kevin Corcoran, David Swift, Nancy Olson, and others she worked with at Disney. Hayley talks about her family, her experiences at Disney, and her departure from that Disney image in the late '60s.

• "Seeing Double" is a short feature on the split-screen technology that allowed viewers to see two images of Hayley Mills side by side at once. This technology was quite innovative and experimental at the time, but it worked beautifully.

• The Sherman Brothers featurette is a short but interesting bit of facts and trivia on two men who wrote songs for many memorable Disney films, including "Mary Poppins" and "The Parent Trap."

• "Lost Treasures: Who's the Twin?" is an interesting feature about Susan Henning, the girl who played the double for Hayley Mills in the film (in scenes with the camera over her shoulder or to her back). Now that I know to look for her, I can plainly see in several profile shots that the other twin is NOT Hayley. Watch the fight scene at the dance closely too. Henning is a warm presence and gives some little-known facts about the film and about Walt Disney.

• "Let's Get Together" is a music video of the two Hayleys singing the song from the movie.

• The Donald Duck animated cartoon, "Donald's Double Trouble," is a Disney short filmed a few years before this movie, but it's a cute bonus.

• Other special features include theatrical trailers, TV spots, radio spots, a lengthy Parent Trap photo gallery, and a 1961 Disney studio album.

• The film's audio commentary by Hayley Mills and director David Swift is also a great feature. Hayley reveals many interesting tidbits about her experiences on the film, her relationships with her costars and Walt Disney, and how she views the film today. Swift offers his own recollections on Hayley's performance and other background information on the film. For example, the scene where Brian Keith finds the bra hanging on his shower was almost censored!

The widescreen transfer is wonderful. I'd never seen this film in its original aspect ratio, so this was a treat. The abundance of special features make this DVD edition truly wonderful. (I had no problems with it playing in my DVD player, either.) This is simply a fun family film that you can watch over and over. I know, because I have for the past 20 years. ... Read more

Reviews (135)

Warriors Come Out To Play!
This 1979 Walter Hill Film is said to be based upon a real Coney Island street gangs events. The ficticious gang the Warriors heads on the Subway to the Bronx from the most distant part of Brooklyn to meet the head of a gang named (Cyrus). Once in a Bronx Park, Gang Leader (Cyrus) preaches that if every gang in the city would unite, they could take over. During this speech Cyrus get's shot and a Warrior member is accused of the murder. Mayhem then breaks loose as Cops move in and the Warriors have to make it back to Brooklyn via Subway with all gangs hunting for them. Thus begins the urban nightmare when trains had graffitti and gangs fought with bats and switchblades. If this story is based on some real experinces the real gang from Coney Island were truly Warriors. For those unfamiliar 28 miles on the subway in the middle of the night with the cops and gangs chasing you makes the wild west seem like Disneyland. The plot is silly but the movie makes up for it with it's comic book like action and the ability to touch the fear of any urbanites. From gangs made up wearing Yankee Baseball Uniforms to Gangs on Skates the chase scenes are great. An emotional statement accompanies a suprise ending. This movie was a sleeper, partially because theatres would refuse to show it due to it's instigation of violence. As I was growing up not far from the movies origin I was put under the impression that this story depicted some true experiences. No gang related film ever came close to this urban rollercoaster ride.

COME OUT TO PLAAYY YAAA!
I remember when I first saw the "Warriors" back in 79, I was hooked on the realization and authenticity of NYC gang life that was portrayed on screen.It isn't your average gang movie where a bunch of punks is menacing innocent folks for 94 minutes. This cult classic gives you: a superb story plot,real NYC locations especially Coney Island(no Hollywood movie studios),creativity in the wardrobes of various gangs(some scary/funny),great fighting scenes(no guns-good ole fashioned punches,kicks,bats & switchblades) and very memorable one-liner dialogues."CAN YOU DIG IT,COME OUT TO PLAYY-YAA and CAN YOU COUNT SUCKAS" is repeated still to this day from us average folks and even some of todays rappers.I'm from NYC and I enjoyed the scenery and grittiness of this movie-subways stations and cars sprawled with graffiti & the huge corridors of the IND lines.The subway scenes cannot get any more real than that.From Cyrus's magnetic speech,the shooting which started the pandemonium,the twists and turbulent flight home and the final justice given to the Rogues the "Warriors" is magnetic and fascinating to watch.I just bought the VHS copy today and I'm gonna watch it over and over again! It's also good to watch with a couple of friends especially if they grew up in that time.Generation X may think it's funny/corny compared to the violence and gangs we have today.Finally,the beginning of the movie where they are being introduced is cut out unfortuna tely but this collectors' item is good enough to place in my "Movie Hall of Fame".can you dig it,Can You Dig It,CAN YOU DIG IT!

classic
This film brings back some wicked good memories... I give it 4 stars for content, (music, cast, story) and an extra star for the memories. Is it an award winning dialogue filled film with award winning performances? No, but it was well made and when you want to go back to the late 70s early 80s jump in your time machine(dvd player) and pop in this film , it is a way of time traveling back to this time period and rewatching how it was.

dont miss
One of my favorite films,"the warriors" recalls a more simple time,when gangs were cool and they didnt carry automatic weapons,and they did the fighting with bats and fists.Its an excellent trip through a single night in new york city.The armies of the night number 100,000;they outnumber the police 5 to 1; tonight they're after the warriors-a street gang blamed unfairly for a rival gang leaders death.dont miss this classic ride.

Warrriorrssss....Come out to playyyyyyyayy
LMAO....This movie owned badly. It came out a long time ago, but I saw it on DVD about a month ago. Gangs from the 70's are sooooooooo much different than gangs today. Like we might have bloods, and crips today. But the gangs back then actually had meaning, and a concept. A nice example is the Orphans. They all dressed up in raggidy !@# clothing, and kept to themselves. They had a gang like, they all dressed up in baseball uniforms, and wielded bats as weapons. Also, guns were rare back then. I mean some people had guns, but when the term "Are you packing" was said, people had whatever they can fight with. 2X4, Bath, Pipes, Bricks. Thats real....lol ... Read more

Reviews (10)

Douglas Sirk's Magical Unrealism & the Lost Art of Melodrama
On the surface, John Stahl's 1934 version of IMITATION OF LIFE and Douglas Sirk's later adaptation in 1959 appear quite similar. Based on the novel by Fannie Hurst (originally published in 1933), each of the two film renditions renders the story of a young woman divided between two worlds and her desperate search for her true identity. While Stahl's rather understated approach accomplishes the translation of Hurst's penetrating tale onto the screen with commendable proficiency, it is Sirk who improves upon it, amplifying the story into a masterful and illuminating social drama by exercising the devices of the melodrama to underscore and mine the significant issues of racial prejudice, fumbled motherhood, and materialism in American society in the 1950s.

Putting the "direct" in director, Sirk triumphs with his unabashedly frank portrayal of racial hatred in his adaptation. He also uses color to great and conspicuous advantage to identify the immense social divide between blacks and whites in the film. In deep contrast to the white hearse carrying Annie's body, the very white-appearing "family" of Lora, Susie, Steve, and Sarah Jane are relegated to follow from behind in a black limousine. The black versus white theme displays the opposing magnetic forces between which the biracial Sarah Jane finds herself caught. She is attracted to the white side of life but is naturally pulled toward the black side despite constant resistance. Ironically, only when she finally gives in to the latter's natural gravitational force is she positioned by default and virtually blended into the white domain, fundamentally due to the loss of her only perceptible black affiliation: her birth mother. (A fascinating point: This daughter's appearance at her mother's funeral is inspired by a similar scene in Stahl's version, but in fact the daughter in Hurst's novel doesn't return for the funeral; she has moved to Bolivia with a white man who has no clue about her black heritage).

Sirk also succeeds at accentuating the momentous tug-of-war between a woman's desire to have a successful career and her domestic accountability in the context of the 1950s. Sarah Jane possesses an ambition to get more out of life than what her hereditary role has assigned her, which makes her a lot like the career-ambitious Lora. Likewise, Susie is just as submissive to the cards life has dealt her as Annie is. Lora becomes an unwitting role model for Sarah Jane, and Annie an equally unwitting surrogate mother for Susie. Like Lora's emotionally empty acting career, Sarah Jane's sham of a white existence fails to provide her with the love she so desperately needs, something she eventually recognizes she cannot truly "live" without. For Annie, life in this fleshly world is a mere imitation of the real life that awaits her in Heaven. The exorbitance of Annie's funeral testifies to the emotional price paid with the loss of such a benevolent human being.

Because Sirk's production style is so excessively augmented, the messages concerning social issues that 1950s viewers would rather not face directly are discreetly concealed in a fashion that makes such propositions easier for them to swallow. Sirk's interiors are extremely over the top, and his exteriors are so fake one cannot help but know they are not real, providing the film with a sense of "magical unrealism." Only in this artificial sense of reality can viewers accept the contrived closure given to the social problems that embody the film's plot.

By riveting viewers' attention to the glamorous lifestyle Lora attains through career ambition, Sirk zeroes in on the genuine desires of women of the 1950s, particularly housewives or women who retreated from the workforce after WWII ended and their men returned home to resume their roles as the primary breadwinners. Having tasted the rewards of working outside the home, 1950s women dreamed of more than their contemporary home-based existence.

Ultimately, Sirk points out that people in life are forced to make choices based on the situations in which they find themselves. All people are, in some way, like Sarah Jane, stuck in a position wanting or needing more out of life than what has been provided freely. To obtain what they yearn for means sacrificing part of their own needs or wants. No one, he asserts, can realistically have it all, no matter how much they try to overcome the partitions that fabricate the very structure of society. Humans make choices in life based on what is most important to them. Annie believes life isn't much without the giving of love to the people around her. Like the message behind the theme song of Sirk's adaptation, Annie trusts in the notion that "every day would be gray and incomplete without the one you love." Lora seems to learn this truth about life near the end of the film, when she puts her career on hold so she can be with Steve and Susie on a full-time basis. (Interestingly, Hurst's novel ends with the white daughter falling in love with her mother's beau, much to the mother's horrific surprise.) Sarah Jane, however, learns this lesson too late, never to recover the time she could have spent bonding with her now-deceased mother.

Altogether, through his lavishly synthetic and ornate scenery, Sirk yields a high-pitched melody upon the dramatic canvas of life in his implosive acculturation of Hurst's tale of women struggling to find themselves in a complex world. In the end, he holds up his version of IMITATION OF LIFE as a mirror to his audience, showing them who they are and, perhaps more importantly, who they are not.

My Favorite Movie
Everytime someone ask me what is my favorite movie and I tell them "Imitation of Life" and they are amazed. Why do I say this movie? The story is amazing and I love how the Mother is loving and caring to her daughter inspite of her daughter's rejection of her race and her mother. I love the relationship between the mothers and the daughters. This movie is a must have.

Imitation of Life 1934/1959: GREAT COLLECTOR ITEM
I love the movie Imitation of Life. Although I had never seen the 1934 version before, I loved just as much I did the 1959 version. I watch this movie all the time and think that it's a movie that everyone should see. The message that the movie shows just how hard and the lengths that people will go to fit in into a society that tells them that they must look and act a certian way. This is a item that everyone should have in their DVD collection and I reccommand it to everyone.

Glad its only an Imitation
Douglas Sirk's Imitation of Life is a parody of an earlier film by John Stahl. The film portrays a struggling white actress who befriends a homeless black woman, and they end up living together. The black woman, Annie, takes on the rols of maid, servant, and nanny for the white woman Miss Laura and her daughter Susie. Annie's daughter Sarah Jane is half white, and throughout the film we see her attempt, time and time again, to "pass" as a white girl. Through the technique of gestic acting, or over acting, certain themes and messages in the film are impressed upon us over and over again. Miss Laura, for example is a struggling actress looking for work. She seems to be the picture of beauty and femininity. In John Berger's book, "Ways of Seeing,"he brings up the notion of the surveyor and the surveyed. This refers to the manner in which women are looked at and watched by the male eye. They then internalize that look and begin to see themselves as men want them to be, and begin to act accordingly. Throughout the film, we watch Miss Laura being surveyed, and eventually we see her internalize the look. At first she is watched and photographed by her future love interest Mr. Steve. He takes a picture of her at the very beginning of the film when she has lost her daughter and is frantically searching for her. In his picture she is a concerned mother. There are very few times in the film when Miss Laura seems to actually think about Susie. Mr. Steve, though, has framed her as a mother and wife from the very start. There is part of her that wants to fit into Mr. Steve's vision, but she first feels that she must pursue her career. Later on in the film Miss Laura and Mr. Steve are reunited. It is at this point when Miss Laura internalizes Mr. Steve's vision and begins to survey herself as she had been surveyed by Mr. Steve throughout the film. She gives up her career to become the housewife and mother that Mr. Steve had always seen her as. Another theme that become blaringly obvious in this film has to do with the intersection of race, class, and gender. We see this most clearly in Sarah Jane's character. In Smith's article she discusses the need to "pass" as a white person because of racism that is present in a dominantly white society, as well as in reaction to the discrimination against people of color. Sarah Jane struggles throughout this film, beause she has spent her life living in Susie's shadow. She sees all of the advantages Susie has because of her successful mother, and she is constantly jealous of her white privileged life. Try as she might, Sarah Jane can never break away from the intersecting characteristics that make her who she is. She tries to pass as
a white girl who is trying to make it on her own, but she cannot break away from her black roots. Thankfully this film is only an imitation of life and not the way that people really behave. The gestic acting is painful to watch but it does do the job of getting Sirk's messages across loud and clear.

Great Double Feature. Great Value. Disappointing Transfers
I was very excited to hear about the release of the two versions of Imitation Of Life together on the same DVD. I had never seen the 1934 version and found it to be an equally enjoyable film as the 1959 one, although quite different (the main character is an entrepreneur versus an actress in the '59 version). The transfer for the 1934 version is decent considering it's age. I was more disappointed with the 1959 one. Granted, it was filmed in Eastman Color so one could not expect Technicolor brilliance, but the transfer is grainy and faded. To make matters worse, the layer change occurs at the worst possible place, as someone is running down the stairs (as with all DVD's, there is a slight pause at that time). This is very jarring; what was the engineer thinking? Layer changes ideally should be placed between a fade-out and a fade-in of scenes. Considering the price and the content, I would reccomend this DVD if you can ignore it's flaws. ... Read more

Amazon.com

It's tempting to call this harrowing picture a World War II version of All Quiet on the Western Front: both films take the perspective of ordinary German soldiers at ground level. Stalingrad surveys the misery of the battle of Stalingrad, the winter siege that cost the lives of almost one and a half million people, Russian defenders and German invaders alike. Not unlike Spielberg's approach to Saving Private Ryan, German director Joseph Vilsmaier rarely steps outside the action to comment on the higher purpose of the war, assuming the audience is aware of the evil of the Nazi regime. Instead, we simply follow a group of soldiers as they endure a series of gut-wrenching episodes, events which have the tang of authenticity and horror. Vilsmaier has a taste for symbolism and surreal touches, which only add to the unsettling sense of insanity this movie conjures up so well. --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (149)

Best war movie I've ever seen
I liked this movie from the very start. Not only does it give the viewer an eye-opener into how ordinary German soldiers thought (not all or even most Germans were Nazi fanatics and anti-Semite but Hollywood doesn't know or care) but it offers something different from typical American propaganda. The combat scenes are as powerful as the opening of Saving Private Ryan (a good movie until the end, when the heroic Yanks defeat the evil Krauts) but we know that it will all be a waste and for nothing, and what's worse, Hitler or the senior officers don't even care (neither do American leaders, but they keep a lid on that kind of stuff).
I don't need to say much about the film itself (there are other reviews for that) but I will say that this film does an excellent job at showing how the fighting at Stalingrad was, and how the German army struggled to gain Hitler his Lebensraum. It displays the character's slow realization that their cause is lost and their reaction, which would happen to just about any soldier in any army (yes, even the Waffen-SS, uh, the U.S. Marines).

All in all, an excellent movie.

A balanced account of the German Soldier in WWII
It seems to me that so-called "Anti-war" movies make the best accounts of warfare and "Stalingrad" is no exception. This acclaimed anti-war film delivers solid acting and characters with depth, excluding the two-dimension Military Police Captain, who fulfills the obligatory role of as the film's token "true Nazi" (there had to be at least one!). Aside from that, I'm hard-pressed to name another movie that portrays the German soldier in World War II with such historical accuracy and objective portrayal. Military history buffs will appreciate the attention given to uniforms and the correct organization of the unit in the film as an Engineer battalion with an attached Feldgendarmerie company. (Though in the English version, the translators botched this, choosing to translate "Sturmpioniere" to the politically pejorative "Stormtroopers" rather than the more accurate "Assault Engineers") Real Russian T34s, magnetic anti-tank mines, a PAK 40 and a host of other authentic equipment make the setting for the tale believable.

But the movie is more than an active display of 1942 militaria. It is an intensely human tale of person within the soldier. For me, the film was strongly reminiscent of Guy Sajer's "Forgotten Soldier", particularly in capturing the deadly misery of the Russian winter and the daily lot of the common soldier. "Stalingrad" will be of interest to military viewers for leader professional development training. In particular, the film is solid precursor to values training and discussions of the boundaries of duty, selfless sacrifice, and loyalty.

I am extremely pleased to add this film in my collection and thank you for the opportunity to recommend it further.

About as much fun as being there.
"Stalingrad" is the most depressing film I've ever seen. Mind you, I didn't think a story about the death of 260,000 German soldiers would be as uplifting as, say, "The Sound of Music" but this movie pulls out all the stops in an effort to leave the viewer a quivering, glassy-eyed emotional pulp.

Made by the same producers who gave us the seminal "Das Boot" I found it not in that league. The film is overlong, sterotypical, and spends too much time cramming postwar German conscience pangs down the viewer's throat. Moreover, the last hour or so reminds me of those interminable scenes from "Born on the Fourth of July" that seem more interested in punishing the audience than advancing the story. The battle for, and siege of, Stalingrad, was no doubt an experience of horror and misery beyond the power of words or images to describe it, but what I was hoping for here was a German version of "Saving Private Ryan" -- high on combat and confusion, short on moralizing. Unfortunately, all postwar German cinema is filtered through the same revisionist political opinions; this explains why all German war movies inevitably leave you with the feeling like you've been punched in the stomach or clubbed over the head. After about an hour I was hoisting my own flag of surrender; but the pummeling continued.

The scene at the airfield, for example, when the wounded men are trying desperately to get out on the last transports, is very hard to watch. From what I've read, however, it seems that discipline in the Stalingrad pocket was maintained until the bitter end, and the airfield scene may more resemble how the producers of the film wanted history to unfold rather than the actual way it did. In fact, the 90,000 men who lived to surrender (all but 5,000 of whom died in captivity) did so only when they were completely out of fuel, medicine, and ammunition, and had no other means to resist; but the producers, of course, permit to trace of pride in military accomplishment to enter into their film.

Most American movies and television portray the Germans in World War II as heel-clicking cartoon idiots ("I know nutink! Nutink!"). Most German war movies portray the Germans as either villainous martinet Nazis, or cynical disbelievers who carry arms only for Germany and not for Hitler or the Party. In fact, the record shows that the Germans overwhelmingly trusted Hitler and were deeply inspired by his ideology. It is this fact, and not what was done in the name of National Socialism, that seems to sit very hard in the modern German stomach.

What's my motivation to buy this dvd?
Why does this dvd have an english (dubbed) soundtrack only. It was obviously made in german (like Das Boot), so why no german soundtrack available? Surely some people would prefer to watch the film in the original german soundtrack with english subtitles. But no subtitles either! What were the people who compiled this dvd thinking! Why not include the original soundtrack. Surely this was available.
One of the best parts of the film, a scene showing the platoon listening to a speech by Hitler (the actual recording) over an improvised radio, also has no subtitles! So good luck to anyone who would have been interested in knowing what the speech was about.

If ever there was a film that could benefit from rudimentary features like a choice of language or subtitles - this is it.

Probably one of my favourate war films. Probably the worst DVD in my collection.

The way war should be shown : Vivid and Horrifying
I had never heard of this film untill I spotted this DVD out of the corner of my eye in the store and bought it, and I am glad I did. This movie has surpassed any previous depiction of the stress and hardship's that the common soldier and civilian alike faced in WW2 that I have ever seen and I felt this is also the first war movie to take the glory out of battle and replace it with the truth "war is hell".

I like many other reviewer's here have seen the endless stream of documentories about stalingrad and have heard the accounts from veteran's of the battle and about the horror and suffering that wen't on, but I feel that the word's and tear's from these veteran's never quite sunk in. After seeing this movie I feel like the pain that was depicted has allowed the words of these veteran's to finnally sink in and I have a new understanding of just what these men had endured...and yet I feel like I still dont know the whole truth.

This film has a permanent home in my collection....I only regret that this movie was not embraced by the U.S. film industry and shown to a wide audience a long time ago....I recommend that anyone who is fan of war movie's or just curious about the war that changed the world.... this is a movie that you cannot pass up seeing. ... Read more

Description

A poor little boy wins a ticket to visit the inside of a mysterious and magical chocolate factory. When he experiences the wonders inside the factory, the boy discovers that the entire visit is a test of his character. ... Read more

Reviews (224)

Candy is dandy, but liquor is quicker. ;)
1971's "Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory" is a colorful cult classic that includes both a witty score and a morality tale. Based on the children's novel by Roald Dahl, the story concerns Charlie Bucket (Peter Ostrum), a poor yet virtuous paperboy who dreams of a better life. With no father, no money, and four bedridden grandparents to support, Charlie's future seems bleak. However, that changes when a contest is started by the town's mysterious candymaker, Willy Wonka (Gene Wilder): 5 Golden Tickets are hidden among the billions of Wonka bars sold all over the world. The lucky buyers who find the tickets will get a lifetime supply of chocolate AND an exclusive tour through the factory. The first half of the movie shows the worldwide hysteria that results from the frantic search for the Tickets. Eventually, four winners are revealed one by one: Veruca Salt (Julie Dawn Cole) is Great Britain's ultimate spoiled brat. Augustus Gloop (Michael Bollner) is a chubby German who considers eating his most favorite hobby. Violet Beauregarde (Denise Nickerson) bears the rude, disgusting habit of constantly chewing gum. Mike Teevee (Paris Themmen) is a cowboy couch potato who bears a distorted view on reality. When Charlie himself discovers the final ticket, he and his Grandpa Joe (Jack Albertson) both enter the factory to savor the marvelous surprises awaiting them. However, temptation comes into play: Wonka's sinister rival Arthur Slugworth (Gunter Meisner) has offered each of the children $10,000 in exchange for an Everlasting Gobstopper, a brand new product Mr. Wonka was working on.
In the latter half of the film, viewers will meet Gene Wilder's Willy Wonka, whose elusive persona and literary quotes make him strangely appealing. Is this man lying or is he telling the truth? In addition, audiences (old and young alike) will catch the delightful sights of orange-faced Oompa-Loompas, a nightmarish Boat Ride, Fizzy Lifting drinks that cause drinkers to float away, and quadruple-size Geese that lay octruple-size eggs! Throughout the journey, the group's four nasty children (and their equally despicable parents), are eliminated one by one in gruesome yet amusing ways: The gluttonous Augustus falls into a chocolate river and is sucked into a boiler. Violet samples a 3-course-dinner gum (despite Wonka's warnings) and inflates into a gigantic blueberry. When Veruca Salt attempts to steal a Golden Goose, she falls into a garbage chute, one that happens to lead down to the furnace! After trying to get photographed onto Wonka's giant T.V. camera, Mike Teevee is shrunk down to the size of a pen; the only way to restore his size is by stretching him out on a taffy-pulling machine! With imaginative sets, clever confections, and pleasant tunes like "Candyman," "Pure Imagination," and "Cheer Up, Charlie," this movie was made to entertain adults first and children afterwards. It's a guilty pleasure to college graduates, much like H.R. Puffenstuff.
I chose to give this film four stars because I felt that a couple of mistakes were made. For one thing, the nature of Wonka's factory is a little too candy-coated; Roald Dahl himself wanted to have the story as a Grimm fairytale, not a wholesome musical. Also, I personally think that the scene involving the Wonkamobile should have been cut out. The device, which is fueled by gingerale, gingerpop, gingerbeer, and double-bubble burp-a-cola (among other carbonated fluids), really doesn't have anything to do with the story. As a result, it's a little too distracting.
Now that Tim Burton plans to reimagine the tale, I am gleefully anticipating what alterations he plans to make.

Timeless classic!
(Spoiler included) I watched this movie on TV for rhe first time when I was 6 years old and I haven't outgrown it since! It is a wonderful story about the power of imagination and how good things eventually come to those who do the right things.
The movie is based on the Roald Dahl book "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory." Willy Wonka is an eccentric candy maker who starts a contest offering a factory tour to five lucky winners who find a golden ticket in their Wonka bars. One of them is Charlie Bucket, an impoverished, but good natured, child who hopes for a better future for himself, his mother and his four grandparents. The other four winners are nasty obnoxious and bratty children. Augustus Gloop is an overeating glutton, Violet Beauregard is a gum chewing fanatic with no manners (digging up her nose while talking about how disgusting spitting is), Veruca Salt is a spoiled brat who wants everything she sees and whines until she gets it and Mike Teavee is a television addict with a smart mouth. One by one, they are eventually done in by their bad habits. Augustus falls into the chocolate river against Wonka's protests and is sucked into a pipe, Violet chews a piece of Wonka's "meal gum," once again against his objections, and turns purple and blows up into a giant blueberry, Veruca goes on a tantrum when Wonka tells her she can't have one of his giant geese and she falls down a garbage chute and Mike wants to be on television so badly, he willingly gets zapped into the size of an insect by Wonka's TV camera. Charlie, by being the respectable child that he is and by not compromising his integrity, not only completes the tour, he wins a prize beyond his wildest dreams.

The parents make it obvious why their children are so impish. When the children get into trouble at the factory, the parents blame Wonka instead of the kids' own bratty behavior. From the moment they step into the factory, they're complaining and finding fault with everything Wonka does and they take things way too seriously (much like the critics of this film)! I bet if the Oompa Loompas, with their wisdom, raised these little demons, they'd be much better.

Don't miss this film. It is not only a fun to watch diversion from reality, the messages are very timely and it makes you think about the good that still exists in this world. The critics and nitpickers may not get it but anyone who watches with an open mind and doesn't take it too seriouly will.

Still a great one!
OK, I know you are saying to yourself, that movie is ancient ~ my kid wouldn't enjoy it. Well, trust me your kid will enjoy it. It is a great movie! For all who may have missed it over the years (is there anyone out there?), the story is about a giant chocolate factory run by a never seen owner (Wilder). Over the years of the factory's operation he has become quite the legend. He decides to open the factory to a few lucky winners of a contest ~ all but one of the winning kids are truly rotten. And as all good stories go, the bad kids get their just "desserts" (sorry, couldn't resist the pun) leaving the good kid to win. A lot of good lessons taught about sharing, greed, gluttony and theft. Pop some popcorn and enjoy it with your kid; you'll be glad you did.

A Great Metaphor for Life
"Charlie and the Chocolate Factory" was my favorite book as a child, this movie remains a favorite of mine even to this day.

This film was made back in 1971 and is very simple in its style. The special effects are see-through and campy but the story line is a facinating metaphor for life that is forever timeless in its message. Willy Wonka is the creative genius who becomes a recluse in his chocolate factory because of society and its greed and malice. But he never loses his belief that someone in the world exists who can still believe in imagination and dreams. He finds this person in Charlie, a poor child who lives with his mother and four grandparents in a dirty basement home. Charlie has every reason to become dispirited and negative yet he remains a shining light of great positivity regardless of his circumstances. I suspect his attitude comes from the fact that his Grandfather Joe always supports his dreams, the boy never has to hear the word "can't"!

The chocolate factory holds a contest and several children, including Charlie, get invited behind the doors with Willy Wonka. While on tour they are tested with fame, fortune, greed and honesty until one by one they succumb to the failure of a human heart. All except Charlie, who keeps a smile on his face and wonder in his eyes while being faced with the simple adversities that cause the other children to fail. Sadly I feel the parents are to blame creating children who thrive on material wealth, constant TV watching, gorging on food, and looking for constant attention. The parents of the children who fail refuse to believe in the dream of Willy Wonka surrounding the atomsphere with doubt and negative beliefs. How could anyone survive under such circumstances?

The Chocolate Factory is filled with wonder, color and silly songs. Regardless of your age it will satisfy your sweet tooth and fill even a hardened heart. It certainly brings to life how parent's affect their children with their own actions and attitudes. Telling a child they "can't" accomplish all that they imagine only assists in stopping the world from greatness. Don't be afraid to dream!

Candy is dandy...
The film is based on a much-loved children's book, 'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory', by Roald Dahl. Dahl wasn't always happy with the changes made between his book and the film, and wasn't always consulted on them. Today probably more people are familiar with the film sequence of events than the book. Charlie is a down-on-his-luck boy who is nonetheless optimistic and happy. He and his mother work to tend for their bed-ridden family members, all living together in a one-room home.

One day there is an annoucement that Wonka is going to open his factory to visitors, to be chosen more or less at random through finding the Golden Tickets, contained in Wonka bars (a brilliant marketing device back then). Scenes of shoppers' frenzy are shown all around with world, including a Wonka delivery van shown arriving at the White House.

The five golden tickets are found all around the world - the first one in Dusselheim, Germany, by the fat boy, Augustus Gloop (played by Michael Boliner, who is now a tax accountant in Munich, and is still rather large). The second ticket was found in the UK, by spoiled brat, Veruca Salt (Julie Dawn Cole, the only Wonka child still acting), whose father, Roy Kinnear, is a well-known actor in British cinema. The third ticket was found in the USA, by gum-chewing Violet Beauregarde (Denise Nickerson, now an accountant at a nuclear plant in Colorado), whose used-car-salesman father was played by Leonard Stone (who was selected over Jim Bakus). The fourth ticket was also won in the USA, by Mike Teevee (Paris Themmen, considered a real brat by most of the cast and crew); his frantic mother was played by Dodo Denny (later Nora Denny), who was one of the few minor characters in the film to consistently act after this film. The final ticket at first is reported to be won by some shady businessman from Paraguay, but in the end, that is proven to be a forgery. Of course, Charlie buys a Wonka Bar expecting nothing, and gets the ticket.

An ominous figure, Slugworth (the arch-enemy of Wonka - who knew chocolate makers also made arch-enemies?), appears to each of the winners, whispering in their ears. Charlie is also confronted, and promised a reward should he bring Slugworth an example of Wonka's latest creation, the Everlasting Gobstopper. One wonders why (a) any candy maker would make a candy that never wears out (thus defeating re-sales), and (b) why Slugworth can't just buy one himself when they are released, analyse it and ruin his own factory the same way? But I digress... Gunter Meisner, a very prolific German actor, played the villain, who wasn't in the book (nor was the 'gobstopper plot').

The grand day of the event, the winners enter the factory with great fanfare, meeting Wonka (Gene Wilder) for the first time, and get the first taste of his bizarre sense of theatre. (It is reported not only Wilder's idea for the limping/somersault introduction to the crowd, but also a condition of his accepting the role.) From that point on, what was truth? It is ironic that Wonka's entrance doesn't occur until the film is half over. What we remember of the film comes after this, but over half the film is actually set-up. This is rather like the Wizard of Oz, where most of the film is done before we see 'the major character', although admittedly Wonka is far more prominent than Oz's balloonist.

Wonka, the man of mystery, only ever became even more of a mystery as the tour progressed. He is constantly switching his words ('we have so much time and so little to do'), and there are surprises at every turn. Wonka borrows a lot of his key phrases (Ogden Nash, Shakespeare, Oscar Wilde) and there are a lot of fantasy-inspired elements (Alice in Wonderland, Lord of the Rings).

At each major scene, something ghastly seems to happen, but in epic-fantasy form, it doesn't seem to matter to the majority, who proceed onward with their quest. In the chocolate room, Augustus Gloop meets his untimely exit from the factory by falling in the chocolate river. Violet turns into a blueberry by chewing experimental gum, and has to be squeezed (squoozed?). Veruca, in the room with the geese who lay the golden eggs, turns out to be a bad egg herself, but has a sporting chance of going down a chute with an inactive furnace. Mike Teevee shrinks in the Wonka version of the Star Trek transporter beam, leaving in the end only Charlie, who is denied his prize of a lifetime of chocolate for a minor infraction.

It would seem that Wonka had a sinister side in many ways - the boat that carries the prize winners only seated eight, implying that Wonka knew someone would be missing. The Wonkamobile only had seats for four guests. Of course, the children apparently all had sinister sides, too, including Charlie, until the end. None of them let Wonka know of their Slugworth contact.

In the end, we never know what becomes of the fallen questers - we are led to believe that in this candy factory they got their just desserts. The Oompa-Loompas put the moral to each downfall in song, with a 1970s karaoke-type presentation of the lyrics as they sing. In the end, of course, goodness and justice win out, as the factory is given to Charlie after his act of unwarranted kindness toward Wonka.

Director Stuart always saw this film as a 'realistic' fantasy film. Those things that are not over the top are very ordinary. The people are not superheroes, and the situations, while fantastic, are not beyond the credible. Stuart also did his best for 'real' reaction - the kids had never seen Gene Wilder before his appearance at the door, the chocolate room in the factory, or the Oompa-Loompas prior to the first scene, either, so their reactions are more natural.

A great film for children and adults! ... Read more

Reviews (213)

2 thumbs down
I found John Hughes' 1985 movie The Breakfast Club to be an extremely generalized, heavy handed, piece of trite filmmaking that may or may not have been relevant to teenagers fifteen years ago, but is certainly nowhere near on target now.
Obviously it was by design that his five main characters were one-dimensional character sketches of so-called 'traditional' high school stereotypes. You have Andy the jock (Emilio Estevez), Claire the princess (Molly Ringwald, a John Hughes staple), Bender the criminal (Judd Nelson), Brian the nerd (Anthony Michael Hall), and Allison the basket case (Ally Sheedy). In my opinion, for Hughes to insinuate that these five people come from completely different backgrounds and had absolutely no contact with each other or anyone else from their particular 'type' during school is just plain silly. For example, it is quite likely that Claire and Andy, being popular people, would know each other, or at least that princesses and jocks would interact on a regular basis. Same thing goes for Bender and Allison as social outcasts. Only Brian, being the brain, would logically be shunned by all other classes.
For another thing, these categories have little relevance today because in today's modern society, and indeed this has always been true, teens simply cannot be categorized and labeled, even by their peers, in this manner. I myself saw elements of my personality in every one of the characters, and neither I nor anyone I know would fit neatly into these stereotypes.
The last thing I'm going to gripe about in this review is, logically enough, the ending. For a film that tried so hard to be edgy, the denouement was awfully hackneyed and predictable. Four out of the five characters hook up at the end? Gosh, I never saw that coming! Also, the treatment of Allison was laughable. This girl has serious psychological issues that have been with her all her life, but all she needs is a little makeup, a nice dress, and a clean-cut boyfriend to set her to rights? I don't think so, pal. Willful suspension of disbelief is all fine and good, but to trivialize Allison's pain and emotional trauma in this manner is irresponsible and does a disservice to those young people who do identify with her character. I think that's enough bashing for this film; while it had its moments, it certainly is by no means the 'classic' that it is reputed to be.

One for the ages
This movie is a classic and it will stand the test of time. This is the second "teen coming of age" installment from John Hues, and round 2 for Molly Ringwald and Anthony Michael Hall. The first installment, Sixteen Candles, was more of a sexual coming of age movie whereas The Breakfast Club is more of a coming of age for one's character and social awareness. Where they are "teetering" with; do they stay with the social allegiances of their perspective pack, or do they listen to that inner voice...the voice of reason, maturity and human compassion that's not bound to any "click". I also like the choice of actors here; I think they all fit like pieces in a puzzle and make their characters totally believable. I am in the same age range as almost the entire cast and I was a senior in High school when this film came out. Allot of reviews seem to put this film within the Junior High crowd but I feel it's much more mature than that. The very message that it's trying to get across isn't understood in real life until we get close to 18 or so. The story is simple; 5 kids have to come into school on a Saturday for detention. At first they try to segregate themselves according to their school social standings. Inevitably they find out that they are more alike than they ever thought. The movie, in my eyes, is broken into 3 parts; the first part is pure character development. This is where you (the viewer) get to know each person they way they are supposed to be seen with their everyday face. At first, they act the way they think they should act, and stand up for what they always had, with out question or defiance. They stay true to their cause never steering away for a second. The second part of the film is where the movie itself develops. These 5 separate entities realize that they are variations of the same person. They have the same desires and anguishes. Their pressures and stresses are the same even though it's generated from very different sources.
The jock (Emilio Estevez) has the pressure to be on top of his sport (wrestling). In return for this he gets attention from his dad, coaches and keeps his standing within his social group. This is his priority in life and he doesn't stray.
The Princess (Molly Ringwald) has to conform and obey the rules of her social group in order to be accepted and keep her standing within the group. She keeps her eyes closed; mouth shut and goes along for the ride.
The Metal Head/criminal (Judd Nelson) is an angry guy! He wears the physical and mental scars of growing up in an abusive house. He hates most people, like the ones Emilio and Molly play, because in his eyes, they have had a free ticket and earned nothing...things are handed to them because of their social and/or economical standings. On the other hand, he feels that he's on a whole other plain because his eyes have been beaten open and he was forced to grow up a little faster than he wanted too or was ready too. I feel that Judd Nelson's character is the most crucial to the movie. He is the key to this whole new self-awareness for everyone, including himself.
The nerd (Anthony Michael Hall) is the quintessential geek. His every woken moment is spent learning. He hides behind his grades and in fact, he wants to be more accepted by the "cooler" groups. He also is a little "cocky" about his better grades and academically superiority to the other people in the room.
The weirdo (Ally Sheedy) is a loner and an outcast. She doesn't have friends that we (the viewers) know of. Because her parents ignore her, She feels ugly and without a place in the world. She is starving for positive attention. I think her character was needed in this movie to balance off the cast. It would have left out a very critical part of teen angst!
Richard Vernon (Paul Gleason) is the "Villain" of the movie. To the kids, he represents the out of touch older generation and the mean spirited, high testosterone adult. For Richard Vernon, these kids are the source of his anger and agony. He has lost touch with the younger generation for 1 reason, he got older...and the older you get, the harder it is to relate to youth. Youth recycles right before your eyes, but you keep getting older. His character is the key that releases these kids. He helps them to strip away the blindfolds and to take a fresh look at every thing and everyone (including themselves).

This leads to the 3rd and final part of the movie. Where they cleanse themselves of all the pentad up anger and prejudices. When the kids realize that they all have the same goal, they were just taking different roads to reach it. I highly recommend The Breakfast Club and it should go down as one of the all time great teenage movie!

A little time - a little perspective
I first saw this movie at a cinema in Austin in March, 1985. Just a year out of high school, I thought this was a deep, moving motion picture with a quality cast that really showed the feelings of different groups of students in schools. I could relate to the characters.

Move forward more than 19 years. This movie has not aged well. I read on the IMDB that John Hughes wrote this script in two days. After watching this movie again, I find that very easy to believe. It is horrible! - and this coming from a man who loves all things 80's! Was Judd Nelson about 35 when he made that movie? He looks about 20 years older than Anthony Michael Hall. Unbelievable characters and dialogue. Then they tie it up nice and neat at the end - with 2 unlikely couples pairing off leading us to believe there's no social caste in high schools.

With the small cast and lack of location shots, I'm amazed that I've never read about some high school drama club doing a stage production of this disaster. In any case, I've got a Breakfast Club DVD I'll never watch again - I'll post it used "New & Used" above.

Still relevant after all these years
Some question the durability of "The Breakfast Club," saying that the themes and plotlines do not hold up in today's teen society. As a 15-year-old, I would like to say that that is thoroughly untrue. 19 years after its release, "The Breakfast Club" is still a truthful, relateable account of teenagers and their personalities, and the ways in which they interact with each other. Sure, the stereotypes of the characters may be a bit exaggerated -- but that's necessary in order to get the point across. Watching this movie, I feel as if I know these people, or at least I've run across them at one point in my high school career.

The plot, as most people know, involves five different kids being assigned Saturday detention together. Each kid represents a typical high school stereotype -- a princess (Molly Ringwald), a jock (Emilio Estevez), a brain (Anthony Michael Hall), a basket case (the excellent Ally Sheedy), and a criminal (Judd Nelson). At the beginning of the day, none of them know each other, except for the princess and the jock. Throughout the day, they learn more about each other and work at tearing down the stereotypes that pit them against each other. As for the reviewer who said this isn't realistic that they would open up so much to each other -- it absolutely is. Put five kids into a room without an adult for nine hours, and they will talk about anything.

The beauty of this movie is the depth of the characters beyond the stereotypes -- particularly the nerd, Brian, who as we find out in the movie has problems well beyond what people think of him. He is the one that I most relate to in the movie. Watch "The Breakfast Club," and see who you most relate to. It's a great experience. Beyond the social commentary aspect, it's also just a funny movie. The jokes come at breakneck speed, especially for the first half of the movie (before it gets somewhat serious). The actors are also very enjoyable in their roles, particularly Ally Sheedy and Anthony Michael Hall. Highly recommended.

Must have to any collection.
The quintessential John Hughes film. I remember in my English class my junior year (1987) we had to analyze this movie. Only 2 years after it's release it was had all the qualities needed for a class analysis. I will spare you the report that I did back then.

Since then I have watched this movie at least once a year (and contrary to popular believe it is not for the panty shot). The characters are very well done. There is something that anyone who went through high school can relate to, even if we fit more than just one character. The interactions between the teens towards each other and then towards the principal as a group is classic. It's got love, teen angst, popular kids, geeks, dweebs, outcasts and the ever popular kid that doesn't fit in but always tries to get the attention. Nothing like dumping out your bag for people to go through to get attention.

Of course you can't forget the star cast of strong 80's actors, Emilio Estevez (Andrew 'Andy') Anthony Michael Hall (Brian) Judd Nelson (John Bender) Molly Ringwald (Claire) Ally Sheedy (Allison) and Paul Gleason (Principal). Great acting, John's look at teenagers and a great script all make for a very enjoyable look at the interactions and 'attitude' typical of the high school years.

I truly could go on about this movie but I won't. I'll just say that this is a much have for any movie buff and if you haven't seen it you must. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

Good adaptation of a cute novel
This is a pretty good adaptation of Cara Lockwood's novel of the same name, although as any book to movie transition, a lot of left on the cutting room floor. But what is captured is the chemistry of the leads, Lauren and Nick, as well as the deviousness of the psycho-bride, Darla.

Basically, it is the story of a harried wedding planner in the middle of a divorce who meets the fireman of her dreams, only to discover that he may be the groom in an upcoming wedding.

Really charming and romantic!

Theme song
I liked the movie very much it is very nice.

Would like to know who sings the song The way you look tonight in this movie.

Sincerely,

Mirella C. Zequeira

Read the book!
I saw this movie and it's OK, the plot it's a little different in the book but I think they did a good job with it. However, I HIGHLY recomend reading the book. The book it's great, very funny & entertaining, once you start reading it you dont want to put it down!

cheep take off
This movie is an open take off of Jlo's "The wedding planner". But it plays the story better then the latter. A happy, light movie. Nothing unpleasant goes on.You know how it will end, you just have to sit back and see what extra plot twists they can throw in before it finally winds down to the inevitable. (Girl gets guy, leaves mean boss lady. Nasty girl gets whats coming to her.)This movie never achieves greatness, but neither does it strive for it. There is something to be said for films such as this. They don't offend anyone, and if you like this sort of movie, it will make you happy. It is what it is: A happy chick flick. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

A note-perfect cinematic event whose immortality was assured from itsopening night, Amadeus is an unlikely candidate for the director's-cuttreatment. Like one of Mozart's operas, the multiple Oscar-winning theatricalversion seemed perfectly formed from the outset--ideal casting, costumes, sets,cinematography, lighting, screenplay, music, music, music--so the reinstatementof an extra 20 minutes simply risks adding "too many notes." Yet though thisextended cut can hardly be said to improve a picture that needed no improvement,it does at least flesh out a couple of small subplots and shed new light oncertain key scenes. Here we learn why Constanze Mozart bears such ill willtowards Salieri when she discovers him at her husband's deathbed, and we seedeeper into the reasons why Mozart has no students. The structure of the pictureis otherwise unaltered.

The director's cut of Amadeus finally accords this masterful work the DVDtreatment it deserves. The handsome anamorphic widescreen picture is accompaniedby a choice of Dolby 5.1 or Dolby stereo sound options, and it's all containedon one side of the disc. Director Milos Forman and writer Peter Shaffer providea chatty though sporadic commentary, but they're obviously still too mesmerizedby the movie to do much more than offer the odd anecdote. The second disccontains an excellent new hour-long "making of" documentary, with contributionsfrom Forman, Shaffer, Sir Neville Marriner, and all the main actors, taking inthe scriptwriting, choice of music, casting, and problems involved in filming inCommunist Czechoslovakia with half the crew and extras working for the SecretPolice. --Mark Walker ... Read more

Reviews (363)

Rock Me Amadeus
Milos Forman's Amadeus is a hugely entertaining adaptation of Peter Shaffer's play. The movie is told in flashback style from the memory of Antonio Salieri. Salieri was a successful and popular composer who was a rival of Mozart's. History has speculated on the death of Mozart and some people are of the opinion that Salieri had a hand in his death (possibly even murdered him). The film explores this angle of the legend. Salieri is consumed by his jealousy and hatred of the infantile Mozart. Mozart is a musical genius, but a wild spending and is always looking for the next good time. His operas are utterly brilliant, but are unsuccessful. He is in constant debt. Salieri concocts a plan for Mozart to compose a requiem. This work is actually planned as Mozart's own requiem. Mozart is shown as slowly going mad and at the end of the film, Salieri helps him by writing the musical score down for a very weak Mozart. The morning after Mozart and Salieri work together, Mozart is found dead and we are left speculating whether he died through natural causes or if Salieri did something to him. F. Murray Abrham is absolutely amazing as Salieri. He brings across the jealousy and hatred, but doesn't make Salieri a fiend. He has major respect for Mozart's musical talents, but doesn't understand why God would give them to such an obvious heathen. Tom Hulce is equally as good as Mozart. He plays him with a reckless abandon and in an over the top fashion that is perfectly suited for the role. The film took home the 1984 Best Picture Oscar, Mr. Forman won Best Director and Mr. Abrham beat out Mr. Hulce for Best Actor. This was a case where a tie would have been more than appropriate. The new director's cut adds 20 minutes of footage, but the real standout is the remastered sound. The Dolby 5.1 version brings alive the sounds of Mozart in brilliant detail.

Memorable cinematic achievement gets a new look
I was way too young to have seen AMADEUS in its original cinematic release (unfortunately), but it's not hard to see why it not only took home the Best Picture Oscar, but caused a rebirth of "Mozart mania". The story, although fictionalized, is an intriguing one. Salieri, the pious man who prayed to God to be given sublime musical talent, has to face the fact that God has given it to Mozart, who is exuberant, childish, and bawdy. Salieri's subsequent jealousy drives the entire movie. You can see his character becoming more and more consumed by his extremely negative feelings. The character of Mozart, on the other hand, is fun, even though the real Mozart wasn't really that over-the-top. I might add, however, that the distinguishing giggle is actually historically accurate. Listen to the commentary on the DVD and Peter Shaffer himself even mentions something to that effect. Although it was delightful to see the film in its entirety, I could see why some of the scenes were deleted. They simply weren't that strong or they distracted the viewer from the main focus. The only real complaint I had was that there weren't more extras. It does have the commentary, the original trailer, and the short featurette which consists of various people looking back at making the film, but I would have liked to have seen an actual "making of" documentary from around the time the film was being made. Overall, though, a worthy addition to any movie collection.

a mythical, fabulous portrait of genius
Peter Shaffer wrote the "Amadeus" screenplay based on his play, which is a quirky, fanciful vision of Mozart and Salieri, and how God gave Mozart the gift of musical genius despite his character flaws, but bypassed Salieri, who tried to strike a deal with the Almighty, vowing pious devotion, if He would only grant him brilliance and fame.
F. Murray Abraham is marvelous portraying Salieri's pride and envy, and having to suffer the indignity of mediocrity; the part garnered him a Best Actor Oscar and a Golden Globe, among other awards, and as Mozart, Tom Hulce is stupendous, with his high pitched raucous giggle, fluffy wigs, and energetic appeal.
Others in the cast of note are Elizabeth Berridge, excellent as Mozart's wife Constanza, and Roy Dotrice as his stern father Leopold.

The biggest star of the film however, is the music...the glorious sounds of Mozart's operas, and his magnificent Requiem. Many of my favorite scenes are depicted, from the ballet music from "The Marriage of Figaro", to "Don Giovanni a cenar teco", as well as portions of "The Marriage of Figaro", "The Magic Flute", and much more.
Some of the great voices heard are Samuel Ramey (Figaro), Richard Stilwell (Count Almaviva / Don Giovanni), June Anderson (Queen of the Night), Brian Kay (Papageno) and Gillian Fisher (Papagena), though the parts on screen are played by actors, and not those singing.

Twyla Tharp's choreography is fresh and exhilarating, Miroslav Ondricek's cinematography is exquisite, and Milos Forman's direction imaginative and well paced.
As well as Best Actor, the Academy bestowed Oscars for Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Picture, Best Director, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Art Direction/Set Decoration, Best Costume Design, Best Makeup, Best Sound, all well deserved.
Total running time is 160 minutes.

As close to "perfect' as a movie can get
When I saw this movie in its original release in 1984, it was only due to the fact that I was dragged to the theatre. (A movie about Mozart -- BORING!!) I have never been so quick to change my mind. From the opening moments, hearing F. Murray Abraham shout out the word "MOZART" I was hooked, and my eyes never waivered from the screen. I anxiously awaited the release of this Director's Cut, due primarly to the extras that were purported to be included. The extras more than deliver on their promise.

Not only did I get the joy of watching once again one of the best movies to have ever been released -- to remember how enthralled I was by the performances of Tom Hulce, F. Murray Abraham and Elizabeth Berridge (unfortunately, most reviewers tend to exclude her contribution to this movie, but her performance as Constanza, Mozart's wife, is as powerful as the others) -- but the extras (behind the scenes, the commentaries) added to my delight.

I truly find it hard to put into words how wonderful this movie is. I have spent the last 20 years telling people "Trust me, just watch it, and you will understand what I am talking about." It is more than just a grand journey through the worlds of these two men (yes, granted, told from a "movie" point-of-view). The entire package, from the scenery, the costumes, the story and THE MUSIC, THE MUSIC, THE MUSIC!!! shows you how a movie should and can be produced. Even if you can't stand classical music, you will adore the wonder that is Mozart.

Please -- I'm begging you -- WATCH THIS MOVIE. You will NOT be disappointed!!!

Love it, warts and all
I loved "Amadeus" the first time I saw it and every time thereafter, on tape, DVD and now in this DVD package. It is a very great film, exceptionally worthy of its Oscars, and the role of a lifetime for Tom Hulse. The operatic and musical scenes in this film succeed on a scale never seen before. The finale of "Don Giovanni" is better in this movie than in the two live performances I've seen and the performance Herbert von Karajan led that was shown on PBS in 1990. The direction, acting, script and locations are all sumptuous. It apparently does not follow the play on which it is based, but artistic difference is the basis of enjoyment. Having said all this, I would caution viewers not to judge the real-life Mozart by the portrayal of Hulse in this film. The real Mozart, I have read, was a prudish workaholic that would never go out drinking with his buddies. He also played by the rules of the day and adored Salieri, respecting his role as the musical director in Vienna. Still, it's fair to set history aside in a work of art this fine. Anyone that likes great music or great movies will enjoy this. ... Read more

Reviews (39)

Vault Disney DVD packed with extras for a low price
What a fantastic DVD this is. The Vault Disney series is wonderful, and I hope they give more films the same treatment soon. Not only is the film beautifully restored (in its original 2:35:1 theatrical aspect ratio, and with 5.1 THX surround sound), but the DVD itself is packed with delightful extras.

There's a documentary about making "Swiss Family Robinson" that is nearly 50 minutes long and contains interviews with Sir John Mills, James MacArthur, Tommy Kirk, and Kevin Corcoran. There's a commentary track with the latter three contributing comments about the film. There's an additional interview with MacArthur about his film work, the original theatrical trailer and television spots, radio spots, the entire story album that came out with the film, a Donald Duck cartoon, and more! If you like "Swiss Family Robinson," get this DVD -- even if you already have the VHS tape. It's worth it just to finally have a widescreen version of this family-friendly classic (the better to view the wonderful island vistas), even if you don't figure all of the wonderful extras into the bargain.

this LOADED dvd deserves more than 5 stars
I strongly reccommend! This has to be one of the most fun family films Walt Disney ever made. And the 2 disc DVD treatment that Disney gave this film is perfect. It is Widescreen first of all, maybe it is the first widescreen release outside of theatres ever done for the film. And what a diffenrence in makes in the beautiful island vistas of the film. The DVD transfer itself is well done, with lush colors, great image and depth, great sound, it just sparkles.

The movie was filmed on location on the tropical island of Tobago. While the production went way over budget, Walt did not get mad at the time since the film was worth it. Featuring loads of animals, comedy, action, suspense, pirates, and tropical scenery this was a hard adventure film to beat. And similar to the role the Nautilus filled in "20,000 Leagues Below the Sea", the treehouse becoems a star in it's own right. The invenetive home designed by the castaways from the ship salvage is incredible to behold. An audio commentary as an alternate track features comments from casr and crew.

The extras on this DVD are what really make it a treasure, and they are not all listed here at Amazon or even on the packaging. You have to hunt it down and get creative with your remote. So let me help by telling you what to look for if you buy this... For starters they have the original cartoon that was released with the movie, "Sea Salts" allowing you to see this with the kids the way that it is meant to be seen. There is a 2 minute "1960 Disney Studio Album", a montage of projects, attractions, shows, and films being made and released that year. Next we have 23 minutes from an old Walt Disney television episode titled "Escape to Paradise", that includes the parts of that episode that show the making of the film. Up next is original 1960 movie theatre trailers for the film, and 1960 televison spots. Then there are "Storyboard to Scene Comparisons"; a seperate "Storyboard Gallery"; and a 2 minute "Production Gallery" of photo stills from behind the scenes at location. Another gallery of production stills; "Biographies" on 8 principle actors; and "Concept Art" on the film design work.

A featurette titled "Adventure in the Making" was made just for this set, and at 49:00 minutes long it is very complete, with recent interviews of the original cast and crew. There is great behind the scenes footage in this piece, and the folks regale us with funny stories. Peter Elleshaw (matte artist), Ken Annakin (director), Danny Lee (special effects), and actors John Mills, Tommy Kirk, Kevin Corcoran are all here. ANOTHER short 4 minute featurette that was also made just for this set is "Swiss Family Treehouse" narrated by Hayley Mills, it is the pre-opening footage and the actual Opening Ceremony of the Swiss Family Robinson's Treehouse (now gone) at the Disneyland Park. Walt is really enjoying himself in this must see footage.

Included on the set is a very nice 12 minute interview with James MacArthur, who appeared in this film and 3 others for Disney along with a TV movie. This features great video as well. There is a "Pirates" music video of clips from Disney films, tv shows, cartoons, and the theme park to the tune of "Yo HO Yo HO A Pirates Life For Me". Another unusual feature has 20 minutes of excerpts from the 1940 non-disney version of the film.

The set has Audio Archives set to photos from the film, including 2 Interactive SOund Studios, 2 songs from the film, original 1960 radio spots, and the soundtrack of the original merchandise Storybook Album released on LP in 1960.

I really enjoyed this DVD, I wish all the really good classic Disney films got at least some of this kingly treatment. They are the best studio about protecting their old source material, archives, etc, and are in the best position to place intruiging extras with the movie. Thank YOU Disney for this compilation that really honors this gem of a film the way it should be!!!!

Good Movie.
This is a really good movie. Especially for little kids.... but hey, we're all little kids at heart, except for scrooge, but it's still a good movie. Both versions, new and old.

ALL AGES
This is a classic for all ages. We have watched the video over and over as a family and now need it in DVD. From my 3 yr. old niece, to my now teenage son, and my husband and I, and even my parents, it continues to draw us in. I believe its lure is that everyone can find a character to identify with, and long to prove their mettle on the island. I love introducing new generations to this tale.

Don't waste your time or money
Don't bother wasting your time or money on this movie. I don't care about the quality of the cinematography, the quality of the story is what is lacking. From the elmination of Jack, one of the Robinson children, to the blatant disregard for absolutely any speck of information from the book, this film will make you cringe in horror. Rather, go get the original book, and curl up with your family and read. It's a better use of your time than watching this garbage. It doesn't deserve the one star I was forced to give it. ...