Amazon.com

An elite U.S. counter-terrorism squad loses a member while decimating half of Paris in the reckless pursuit of Middle Eastern maniacs; a Broadway actor with a traumatic childhood secret is naturally hired to replace him. Oh--and they're all marionettes. South Park maestros Trey Parker and Matt Stone (along with co-writer Pam Brady) came up with this shameless satire of pea-brained Hollywood action flicks and even smaller-minded global politics, so don't expect subtlety or even a hint of good taste. Team America is soon on the trail of North Korea's evil Kim Jong Il, who treats us to a tender song about his loneliness before ensnaring Alec Baldwin and the rest of the oblivious Film Actors Guild (F.A.G. for short) in a plot to blow up every major city on the planet. Just as the mindless squad cheerfully demolishes everything in sight, so do director Parker and company. Throwing punches Left, Right, and in-between, the movie's politics leave no turn un-stoned; there's even time to bludgeon the musical Rent. It's offensive, irresponsible comic anarchy seemingly made by sniggering little boys. Painfully funny sniggering little boys.--Steve Wiecking ... Read more

Reviews (249)

"Team America"....f*ck yes.
Alot of people will dig this movie. It's accessable to mainstream audiences whether or not they get beyond the surface humor that might have linked "Team America" back to "Basketball", but it's also damn smart on so many different levels. There's the obvious connotations of the marionettes, but they've done so much more than strip bare the Hollywood blockbusters that too many people can watch with a straight face while the rest of us stand outside the theater gagging; they've displayed the cheesiness that seeped out of michael bay movies into the modern American mentallity. During no other 20th century war has cliche fiction had so many striking similarities to our hero-enemy soap opera ideas of what liberty is. But is the patriotism of the right really reminiscent of the hot blooded Reagan-era action flicks this film spoofs? Is the media role-playing of the left the result of Hollywood refusing to leave childish namecalling and immature ideology to elementary school playgrounds? Well, it's never seemed so familiar and never felt so much like there's been a mudslinging contest with the tactics and wit of a simple puppet show going on right under our noses.

"From the Guys who brought you SouthPark"...
That says it all right there, if you are unfamiliar with the now infamous landmark of the Comedy Central channel on cable, 'Southpark' are basically poorly drawn children characters that curse and make bodily function jokes at each other all day. The aim of it's creators is to basically smash every barrier of good taste and offend every group in society that they can, but where do you go from there? Team America functions along the same lines. The puppets in here are amazingly filmed, and I would recommend you see the way they look on screen. However, only see this film if you are a liberal and have a healthy sense of humor. There are a lot of infantile jokes, gross out humor and some very, very offensive material, often in poor taste. There's plenty of harsh language and this film is definitely not for children. I don't offend easily, but I even turned away during the puppet making love scene, in which they mimic all sexual positions and then go too far I feel, in showing the puppets deficate and urinate on each other. The premise of the film is obviously poking fun at Bush and the war on terror and a thinly veiled way of saying that we often poke our nose in other countries affairs. No one is left unoffended in this film. I would mainly say that if you like that Southpark
type of humor, this is your film. If that type of humor offends you, stay far away from this film.

Disgusting!
I thought this movie was going to be very funny, but I should have known better, being created by the people of south park. This was one of the worst things I have ever seen. The movie was filthy, the language grotesque, extremely perverse and total garbage!
The creators, producers and anyone involved in this movie should be extremely ashamed of themselves.
This movie should have been rated X or XXX.
If this is your version of what America should be then i feel terribly sorry for you.
Even if this IS your type of movie, it wasn't even funny.
Don't subject yourself to watching this blight on humanity.
0 starts!

I have not laughed as hard all year as I did at the scene...
...involving all the vomit. The sex scene got all the attention from critics and pundits but for my money, the extended regurgitation scene took the prize.I realize some people probably found it disgusting but they were probably watching the wrong movie.

And maybe I'm just jaded but I actually didn't think it was as raunchy as it's rep proclaimed.There's actually kind of a sweet undercurrent to the whole thing, despite the fact that it's basically making fun of the left, right and everyone in between.

Another highlight: Kim Jong Il's musical number.In fact, all the songs were dead-on parodies.You really have to pay attention to pop country anthems to nail them the way Parker and Stone did.

The extra features on the disc are pretty good, too.I never thought watching puppeteers could be so interesting.

Kinda Funny
3 and a half stars for me, please. There is no real reason for this to be uncensored, but it just did not turn out to be as funny as I hoped. Don't get me wrong...it's still entertaining. This is how things are when you mix terrorism with celebrities and Kim Jong Il with marionettes. That's it. All I can really say is that I'm at a total loss to describe this movie. I can relate most to Kim Jong Il's feelings............


"MATT DAMON!!" ... Read more

Amazon.com

Like a Hardy Boys mystery on steroids, National Treasure offers popcorn thrills and enough boyish charm to overcome its rampant silliness. Although it was roundly criticized as a poor man's rip-off of Raiders of the Lost Ark and The Da Vinci Code, it's entertaining on its own ludicrous terms, and Nicolas Cage proves once again that one actor's infectious enthusiasm can compensate for a multitude of movie sins. The contrived plot involves Cage's present-day quest for the ancient treasure of the Knights Templar, kept secret through the ages by Freemasons past and present. Finding the treasure requires the theft of the Declaration of Independence (there are crucial treasure clues on the back, of course!), so you can add "caper comedy" to this Jerry Bruckheimer production's multi-genre appeal. Nobody will ever accuse director Jon Turtletaub of artistic ambition, but you've got to admit he serves up an enjoyable dose of PG-rated entertainment, full of musty clues, skeletons, deep tunnels, and harmless adventure in the old-school tradition. It's a load of hokum, but it's fun hokum, and that makes all the difference. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (263)

Entertaining movie!
Imagine a cross between "Indiana Jones" and "Mission Impossible" and you have some idea of what's in store for you with this movie.Nicholas Cage plays the current generation of a family which long ago was given the secret of the location of the Knight's Templar treasure.Succeeding generations of the family have hunted for the treasure with no success.Cage takes the hunt one step further and discovers that vital clues are on the back of the Declaration of Independence.Unfortunately some of the men who were originally helping him look for the treasure have decided that they want it all to themselves and they plan to get to the Declaration before he does.Throw in a beautiful government agent and an amusing sidekick and you have all of the ingredients for an entertaining evening.Enjoy!

A Fun Movie
I liked this movie. Lots of adventure, history and it reminds me of the Indiana Jones Trilogy. Some of it is a little formulaic and you might roll your eyes when 200+ year old torches light up like they were made yesterday, but the story is intriguing and gets your attention. If you don't know the story line by now it involves Cage as Benjamin Franklin Gates whose Family has been convinced about a massive treasure older than colonized America, hidden away during the revolutionary years. Through each succeding clue he finally learns that there is a map on the back of the Declarition of Independance, the only drawback is his partner has turned on him and is going to steal it for himself. No on in the government will listen to him, so Gates decides he'll steal it first to protect the document and the treasure. Lots of High-Tech action, spooky Mason intrigue and history, although some of it is a little questionable. All in all, definetely recommended.

Accomplishes An Entertaining Goal
One of the first things taught at journalism schools is that most "news stories" are to be written at a 6th grade level of education - the editorial page is the place for more erudite discussion.National Treasure is written at a level that would make the "average" person think "hey, that's pretty clever!", keeping in mind that the "average" person might not know that Benjamin Franklin wrote anonymous letters to newspapers while a teenager under the name "Silence Dogood". (He wrote hundreds of OTHER letters under other fictitious names as well and, given the piddling state of education in the U.S. I'd guess that the "average" person doesn't know that Old Ben was also "Poor Richard" or even know what his almanac was all about.) But I digress. Some people love to trash things that they think aren't up to their level, and so "National Treasure" didn't receive stellar reviews from the professional critics. I think it's safe to say the movie wasn't made for professional critics.

It's an entertaining little adventure and anyone who claims that it has no clever parts must be very clever indeed.Much of the movie is a historical scavenger hunt that the founding fathers have laid out for the person who can decipher the clues - with the treasure of the Templar Knights at the end of the rainbow.One of the first clues is carved into the stem of a meerschaum pipe. The stem of the pipe detaches from the carved bowl, andhas raised etchings.Our hero figures out that these etchings are intended to be used like an ink stamp, so he pricks his finger to use his blood as ink and rolls the pipe stem out to reveal the next clue.I thought that was pretty clever.

The hero, Benjamin Franklin Gates, is the Grandson of John Adams Gates, and the Gates have been thought of as the mad scientists of American History because every generation has handed down the story of the hidden treasure and spends decades of their life trying to find the treasure, or at least get other historians to take them seriously.The plot takes them to Washington (to steal the Declaration of Independence in a concise little caper that's at least as clever as the one in "After the Sunset", and THAT was SUPPOSED to be a "caper" movie.) Ben has an assistant named Riley who serves two purposes: to add clever little comments like "so who wants to go down the creepy tunnel first?" and to provide someone that Ben can give exposition to: such as who Silence Dogood was.Diane Kruger is the love interest - a Washington Ph.D. who works at the National Archives.She's the pretty face used to represent all the keepers of the Declaration of Independence.Sean Bean is a rival treasure hunter and the movie goes to great lengths to show that Heroic Ben is only after the treasure for it's historical significance while Bean's Ian is only out for the money.Harvey Keitel plays the FBI agent who becomes interested after the Declaration is stolen, but he's little more than a plot marker himself.A couple of times he gets to say "SOMEBODY's going to prison."

Hmmmm... Will good Ben or Evil Ian be the one going to prison?Will Ben and company find the magnificent treasure? For the answers to those questions check out National Treasure.... but is it too much of a clue if I tell you it's a Disney movie?

Fun for the WHOLE family!
It is very unusual to find action films in today's society that is appropriate for kids and adults alike. That is just one reason that I was thrilled to see National Treasure. It has the wit and humor one would expect from a Disney film as well as a lot of action and adventure thrills, but steers clear of gratuitous language and violence. If you like "Indiana Jones" or "Pirates of the Carribean", this film is a must see. Be sure to bring your kids, though, because they're sure to love it too!

national treasure
this is avery good movie, i watched it last night. the things that ben(nicholas cage) does are hard to predict and the story has many twists. i would recomend renting this movie because it is not as goodf the second time around and there after because you now what is going to happen ... Read more

Description

ELVIS BY THE PRESLEYS, a new entertainment special that will feature a collection of new, intimate interviews with his former wife, Priscilla Beaulieu Presley, and their daughter, Lisa Marie Presley, includes exclusive, never-before-seen television performances, photographs from the Presley Estate archives and Presley family home movies.

In the special, Priscilla and Lisa Marie speak with unguarded candor about their lives with the legendary Elvis Presley and offer an intimate look at their family and private life. Rare interviews with Elvis's first cousin, Patsy Presley Geranen, and Priscilla's parents, Ann and Paul Beaulieu, are also featured.

Vintage, never-before-seen performance footage will be interwoven with photographs from the Presley Estate archives and press coverage of Elvis over the years. Private home movies of the Presley family illustrate and illuminate his story with vivid detail, honest insight and great warmth. Different aspects of Elvis's life, including his tours, his time in Hollywood and his home life, are depicted with the insight that only his family can bring. His career ups and downs, his kindness and generosity and his human frailties are all brought to light as well as a reflection on his place in entertainment history and his enduring legacy. ... Read more

Reviews (17)

The Humanizing Of The King
There is probably no single entertainer in our American culture that has been profiled more in recordings, TV specials, books, etc. than Elvis Presley, the undisputed King of Rock And Roll.In fact, the amount of Elvis literature over the years would probably fill an entire bookstore.Much of it, of course, is quite tawdry and has almost always focused more on the King's many eccentricities than the fact he had a life and that he touched millions.

But ELVIS BY THE PRESLEYS is a different matter altogether.For this time around, we get to a much deeper side of Elvis through the people that knew him best, including former Memphis Mafia member Jerry Schilling, and most especially Elvis' wife Priscilla and daughter Lisa Marie.All here testify to the kind of person that the press constantly ignored while he was alive, and still do even close to twenty-eight years after his untimely demise at age 42.Through home movie footage of him, and the time he met his future wife Priscilla while stationed in Germany during his Army years, we see Elvis still as the King until the bitter end, but also the human being he always tried to be first and foremost.

We see his explosive entry onto the American scene in the mid-1950s.We witness his return from Army life.We witness his struggle with all the formulaic B-movies the Colonel forced him to make in the 1960s at the expense of making real recordings or far superior films.We see his extraordinary comeback of 1968.And at the end, of course, we see a very unhealthy-looking Elvis in the late spring of 1977 nevertheless giving everything he has left in him onstage, putting his own stamp on "My Way."

Both Priscilla and Lisa Marie are very candid but unsensationalistic in the way they describe the problems Elvis had, both with the Colonel's often questionable business decisions (made at the expense of Elvis' health and creativity) and his struggle with prescription medication, a struggle that he sadly lost.But they also hold Elvis in the highest regard, as a great husband and father, and a tireless giver who never stopped giving and who never stopped caring.I had the utmost respect for Elvis before, as the greatest pop music icon America has ever had.After ELVIS BY THE PRESLEYS, I have an even greater respect for him as a human being.It is high time that the world know the human being that the King really was.

finally....
have seen many "ELVIS" biographies and "secrets of...". however, this one coming from the only 2 surviving women in his life that matter, priscilla and lisa marie, has the ring of authenticity to it.saw the broadcast and will definitely buy the dvd.however, what about the previous movie w/john rhys meyers?he looked more like ELVIS than any of the other men who've played him over the years, but the dude can't dance.for my money, the best of all the ELVIS bios is still the first, featuring kurt russell.no one's done it better and captured the personality, as well as the moves.when will this classic be released on dvd?i've been waiting forever(or at least since 1979) for this one!

O.K. , but....
This is another creative way of making money. Same old story with same old stuff except for a few home movie clips which were shown over and over again. The documentary is mostly about the "Elvis-Priscilla" times. Maybe you (not me) might like to know the fact that Elvis & Priscilla once used LSD or that he would not make love to her anymore...blah...blah...blah...

I wish for a documentary by Scotty Moore or the other musicians that toured and recorded with Elvis during the early years. That's what I am interested: the young, the energetic and creative ELVIS.

Can't Help Falling in Love with Elvis!
What a wonderful tribute! I have loved Elvis since the age of 5 (my age, not his)and it has been a love affair that has never diminished even after 40 years.I was lucky enough to spend 8 days in Memphis last year and seeing the home movies during the special was surreal as I had just been in those rooms! The holiday dinner was touching. I have seen Priscilla talk about Elvis several times, and each and every time I listen to her I truly believe she still has a great amount of love for him. The companion book and CD are fabulous additions to the entire experience- I think that this type of documentary was long overdue and I for one am grateful that is was put out on DVD so quickly, but I also think that a VHS edition should also have been made available as some people still have a VCR and have not converted to DVD- Everyone should have the opportunity to see this poignant view of the King!

Elvis's family talks about life with him
I taped this special when it aired last Friday, and I finnaly got to see it yesterday. And I can't believe that it has been released on dvd already, and it should be bound to be on vhs too. That had to be either same time, or quicker time then when the Freinds series final arrived on dvd. Elvis Presley's ex-wife Priscilla Presley reminisces about her life with Elvis Presley. Also featured is their only daugther Lisa Marie, along with Priscialla's step father and mother Paul and Ann Beaulieu, and one of his best friends also talks during this special, but this especily minus other of his freinds like Charlie Hodge, and Joe Esposito. If you love the king, this migth be a dvd to add to your colelction, but please check it out first before you add it on. Elvis Presley, his father, and Elvis' manger Tom Parker, are seen on and heard on tape. I just and laways have to wonder what happened between Elvis and Hollywood, after he returned from the army, since before he left that he had 3 dramas, and his first movie which was a western, before he got stuck doing this musical comedies, and very rearely had a drama since. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Released in conjunction with a two-disc deluxe edition of Elvis: Aloha from Hawaii, the three-disc deluxe edition of Elvis's '68 Comeback Special is another incredible treasure trove of footage documenting a high point of the King's career and a milestone of televised musical performances.Taped and broadcast in 1968 after Elvis had seemingly abandoned live performing in favor of a movie career, the '68 Comeback Special was a remarkably intimate show, Elvis singing his old songs on a small stage, often alone, surrounded on all sides by a rapt audience.The show's numbers fall into three general categories: the black leather stand-up shows, in which Elvis performs solo on stage; the black leather sit-down shows, in which Elvis jams with former bandmates Scotty Moore and D.J. Fontana and others; and big production numbers, often overdone and now looking as dated as any other 1960s variety show.

In addition to the complete, uncut TV special (with the bordello number that was deemed too daring for TV), this DVD set includes both of the original stand-up shows and both of the original sit-down shows (the first was released mostly complete as One Night with You), and multiple takes of numerous production numbers.The numerous glitches and stumbles of the production numbers have limited replay value, but the complete stand-up and sit-down sessions are like gold for those who couldn't get enough of them during the 73-minute television special.Decades after the original telecast, Elvis has made another comeback.--David Horiuchi ... Read more

Reviews (46)

Absolute Must Have!
This three dvd set is amazing! You get to experience all four live NBC studio performances. (The 2 complete sit down jam sessions and 2 complete stand up performances) The highlight of the first stand up performance is when Elvis asks for his electric guitar, starts strumming the blues riff to "Baby What You Want Me To Do" and all of a sudden, the house band joins in for a smoking jam session! Elvis, being a total Rock Star, in black leather, playing lead guitar in an unplanned blues jam! How cool is that! Most people don't realize that Elvis is actually a descent guitar player. The sit down performaces clearly prove this. Elvis plays Scotty Moore's electric guitar throughout most of the two shows, while the other guys play "unplugged". Other highlights include the extra, unused footage to the production numbers. You get a sneak peek of serious flirtation between sexy actress/dancer Susan Henning and Elvis. (Something was going on there!) Seven hours of historic Elvis at his coolest!

Sensational!
Sensational is the word that comes to mind while browsing through the new "Elvis - The '68 Comeback Special (Deluxe Edition DVD)". This 3-disc set assembles all the footage related to the famous '68 Comeback Special. A great deal of the material shown is released here for the first time in its entirety, or released for the first time pure and simple.

While some parts, delightful as they are, will definitely be for Elvis fans only (the takes and raw components of the production numbers on disc 3), the bulk of this set is essential watching for any rock enthusiast - the two sit-down shows, the two stand-up shows, and the adapted NBC TV special as it was originally aired on December 3, 1968, represent not only some of Elvis's finest moments of his whole career, but are nothing less than some of the most exciting rock gigs ever filmed. Watching these shows now, in great remastered sound (there's choice between Dolby stereo and Dolby 5.1) and unseen picture quality, and realizing that they have been in the vaults for more than 35 years, one can but wonder why it took them so long to release them. In his emphatic effort to reinvent himself, Elvis continually transcends the limitations of space and time, revealing along the way as only he could what rock 'n' roll is all about - and we have a true classic performance on our hands.

You can now watch some 7 hours of it. Not to be missed.

(In the European issue of this set "It Hurts Me" has been erroneously left out on the Original Broadcast Version of the Comeback Special.)

If You Only Get One Elvis DVD, This One Should Be IT!!
This DVD shows Elvis at his Best! You can just see the music flowing through him by watching his face and his whole body. Then, you have an insight into why his voice has so much strength and feeling. You can listen to and enjoy cds and albums, but you don't get the total picture until you see him sing. It's like going to a live Elvis concert in the comfort of your living room, with the ability to play it over and over.

This is the one to have!! I'm writing this having watched ONLY ONE of the three included dvds. If this first dvd was the only one in this package, it would have still been well worth the price.

Personally, I like the unedited 'sit-down' and 'stand-up' performances BETTER than the edited, packaged TV Special. But, it's all here, allowing you to pick and choose your own favorite cuts.

Buy It!

Great but lacking
I purchased this DVD to get a complete copy of the show, But this set is still missing parts. In the Guitar Man
production It Hurts Me is still missing from this disk but list it on the package as being there. I was not happy when I found this out. It is not the complete package it is made out to be.
I will copy my Laser disc version to DVD, This will be the only way to ever get the complete show.

A TRAP in order to get your money
I am giving one star because this DVD is not what they advertised: ..."everything in its complete, raw form". It is missing the production "It Hurts Me"... And yes, it hurt me when I found out after expending too much money for it.

This is the 3rd time it happens. The people behind the Elvis Enterprises are dishonest and they are laughing at us, in order to get the money. Next time, I will not rush and buy the next Elvis product on Ebay for a lot less money.

In the "68 Comeback Special" you will see a gorgeous, energetic, Elvis; specially when he is singing with his original small group. It is a little bit annoying the full band that he uses for other songs. The horns are too loud and harsh. I agree with Paul McCartney when he said that Elvis was better with a small band than with a full orchestra ...and definitely I agree with Scotty Moore when he stated... "68 Comeback Special: A Farewell Performance" ... Read more

Amazon.com

Meet the Parents found such tremendous success in the chemistry produced by the contrasting personalities of stars Robert De Niro and Ben Stiller that the film's creators went for broke with the same formula again in Meet the Fockers. This time around, Jack and Dina Byrnes (De Niro and Blythe Danner) climb into Jack's new kevlar-lined RV with daughter Pam (Teri Polo), soon-to-be son-in-law Gaylord (Stiller), and Jack's infant grandson from his other daughter for the trip to Florida to meet Gaylord's parents, Bernie and Roz Focker (Dustin Hoffman and Barbra Streisand in a casting coup). The potential in-laws are, of course, the opposite of Jack, a pair of randy, touchy-feely fun-lovers. The rest of the movie is pretty much a sitcom: put Bernie and Roz together with Jack, and watch the in-laws clash as Gaylord squirms. As with the original, there is a sense of joy in watching these actors take on their roles with obvious relish, and the Hoffman-Streisand-Stiller triumvirate is likeable enough to draw you in. But the formula doesn't work as well in Fockers mostly because much of the humor is based on two obvious gimmicks: Gaylord Focker's name, and the fact that Streisand's character is a sex therapist. As a result, the movie itself is more contrived and predictable, and a lot less fun than the original. The casting is grand, but one wishes more thought was put into the script.--Dan Vancini ... Read more

Reviews (189)

Since the movie is so impossibly boring...
and cliché, and predictable and tongue-in-cheek, and trited, and mindless, I'm going to summarize this movie as:
Utter Waste of Money and Time.
There's nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing positive to say about this movie. They were pushing it with the first one, however, it was passable and watchable. This sequel is one that should have never put out. It's so enclosed in its idiocy that it obfuscates the acting value of thespians of great caliber. Avoid!

Don't Believe the Negativity...It's Hilarious
I'm so tired of everyone looking for Shakespearian perfection in every film, bottom line, it's a dumb comedy, so turn your pompous search for meaningful dialogue and great script-writing
off and enjoy the laughs. It's a comedy, not Macbeth. I kept hearing how horrible it was, well guess what, surprise, surprise
the critics were wrong again! If you enjoyed the first film, you'll love the second, it was every bit as funny, if not funnier. I don't laugh easy either, but it had me rolling most of the film, in tears laughing at times. I know when to be critical and when to put the brain on pause and just enjoy a good old fashioned laugh. It has that Farelly Brothers-type gross out humor, if you enjoy that sort of thing which I do, then you'll enjoy this. If not, go rent 'Annie Hall,' and spend needless hours pining over the film's lighting and set direction, you know, 'the important things in film'...rolls eyes.

please, not a third time!
Gee, it's pretty sad to see actors of this caliber, who've been in so many memorable movies, get mired in this kind of horrible dreck.

But, this is what really offended me:in "Meet the Parents" there was one trained animal to provide a few cute jokes.In this sequel, not only did they feel the need to throw in a pathetic looking dogfor a few more "America's Funniest Videos" style laughs, they effectively used a child in the role of a third "trained animal".Sick.They must have figured that it worked well with "Mini-Me" in the "Austin Powers" sequel, so why not stick Robert DeNiro with a similar sidekick?The people who made this movie deserve a swift kick (or two) in the pants.

Clash of the Icons
Moviegoers flocked to "Meet the Fockers," making this star-studded sequel to "Meet the Parents" a box-office smash. Now that Gaylord "Greg" Focker (Ben Stiller) and his fiancée Pam Byrnes (Teri Polo) are finally getting married, it's time for Pam's conservative parents (Robert De Niro and Blythe Danner) to meet Greg's freewheeling parents (Dustin Hoffman and Barbra Streisand). De Niro is once again terrific as Jack Byrnes, the suspicious ex-CIA operative (though Jack's obsession with the "circle of trust" has grown a bit tiresome). Stiller reprises one of his most humorous--and appealing--screen personas as the beleaguered male nurse. Hoffman gives the films best performance as Bernie Focker, a frisky lawyer-turned-househusband and Streisand is especially funny as Roz Focker, a straightforward sex therapist for seniors. Blythe Danner and Teri Polo are wonderful in their supporting roles and Owen Wilson's cameo appearance is a hoot. The DVD extras include deleted scenes, bloopers, and a Matt Lauer interview with the cast.

Total Mind Pollution... I would rather not give any stars
Listen to the people who didn't like this movie.I LOVED the first movie and watched it several times.The first movie had some crudeness in it, but most of the humor was just plain funny.This movie was nothing but crudeness and I think my IQ went down just by sitting through it.If you enjoyed this movie, you are extremely immature.There are some very funny movies out there, they just don't need to be as crude as this one.I think I only laughed once during the movie and I don't even remember when that was because most of the time I was sitting there debating on whether or not I should just turn the movie off. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Like a Hardy Boys mystery on steroids, National Treasure offers popcorn thrills and enough boyish charm to overcome its rampant silliness. Although it was roundly criticized as a poor man's rip-off of Raiders of the Lost Ark and The Da Vinci Code, it's entertaining on its own ludicrous terms, and Nicolas Cage proves once again that one actor's infectious enthusiasm can compensate for a multitude of movie sins. The contrived plot involves Cage's present-day quest for the ancient treasure of the Knights Templar, kept secret through the ages by Freemasons past and present. Finding the treasure requires the theft of the Declaration of Independence (there are crucial treasure clues on the back, of course!), so you can add "caper comedy" to this Jerry Bruckheimer production's multi-genre appeal. Nobody will ever accuse director Jon Turtletaub of artistic ambition, but you've got to admit he serves up an enjoyable dose of PG-rated entertainment, full of musty clues, skeletons, deep tunnels, and harmless adventure in the old-school tradition. It's a load of hokum, but it's fun hokum, and that makes all the difference. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (263)

Entertaining movie!
Imagine a cross between "Indiana Jones" and "Mission Impossible" and you have some idea of what's in store for you with this movie.Nicholas Cage plays the current generation of a family which long ago was given the secret of the location of the Knight's Templar treasure.Succeeding generations of the family have hunted for the treasure with no success.Cage takes the hunt one step further and discovers that vital clues are on the back of the Declaration of Independence.Unfortunately some of the men who were originally helping him look for the treasure have decided that they want it all to themselves and they plan to get to the Declaration before he does.Throw in a beautiful government agent and an amusing sidekick and you have all of the ingredients for an entertaining evening.Enjoy!

A Fun Movie
I liked this movie. Lots of adventure, history and it reminds me of the Indiana Jones Trilogy. Some of it is a little formulaic and you might roll your eyes when 200+ year old torches light up like they were made yesterday, but the story is intriguing and gets your attention. If you don't know the story line by now it involves Cage as Benjamin Franklin Gates whose Family has been convinced about a massive treasure older than colonized America, hidden away during the revolutionary years. Through each succeding clue he finally learns that there is a map on the back of the Declarition of Independance, the only drawback is his partner has turned on him and is going to steal it for himself. No on in the government will listen to him, so Gates decides he'll steal it first to protect the document and the treasure. Lots of High-Tech action, spooky Mason intrigue and history, although some of it is a little questionable. All in all, definetely recommended.

Accomplishes An Entertaining Goal
One of the first things taught at journalism schools is that most "news stories" are to be written at a 6th grade level of education - the editorial page is the place for more erudite discussion.National Treasure is written at a level that would make the "average" person think "hey, that's pretty clever!", keeping in mind that the "average" person might not know that Benjamin Franklin wrote anonymous letters to newspapers while a teenager under the name "Silence Dogood". (He wrote hundreds of OTHER letters under other fictitious names as well and, given the piddling state of education in the U.S. I'd guess that the "average" person doesn't know that Old Ben was also "Poor Richard" or even know what his almanac was all about.) But I digress. Some people love to trash things that they think aren't up to their level, and so "National Treasure" didn't receive stellar reviews from the professional critics. I think it's safe to say the movie wasn't made for professional critics.

It's an entertaining little adventure and anyone who claims that it has no clever parts must be very clever indeed.Much of the movie is a historical scavenger hunt that the founding fathers have laid out for the person who can decipher the clues - with the treasure of the Templar Knights at the end of the rainbow.One of the first clues is carved into the stem of a meerschaum pipe. The stem of the pipe detaches from the carved bowl, andhas raised etchings.Our hero figures out that these etchings are intended to be used like an ink stamp, so he pricks his finger to use his blood as ink and rolls the pipe stem out to reveal the next clue.I thought that was pretty clever.

The hero, Benjamin Franklin Gates, is the Grandson of John Adams Gates, and the Gates have been thought of as the mad scientists of American History because every generation has handed down the story of the hidden treasure and spends decades of their life trying to find the treasure, or at least get other historians to take them seriously.The plot takes them to Washington (to steal the Declaration of Independence in a concise little caper that's at least as clever as the one in "After the Sunset", and THAT was SUPPOSED to be a "caper" movie.) Ben has an assistant named Riley who serves two purposes: to add clever little comments like "so who wants to go down the creepy tunnel first?" and to provide someone that Ben can give exposition to: such as who Silence Dogood was.Diane Kruger is the love interest - a Washington Ph.D. who works at the National Archives.She's the pretty face used to represent all the keepers of the Declaration of Independence.Sean Bean is a rival treasure hunter and the movie goes to great lengths to show that Heroic Ben is only after the treasure for it's historical significance while Bean's Ian is only out for the money.Harvey Keitel plays the FBI agent who becomes interested after the Declaration is stolen, but he's little more than a plot marker himself.A couple of times he gets to say "SOMEBODY's going to prison."

Hmmmm... Will good Ben or Evil Ian be the one going to prison?Will Ben and company find the magnificent treasure? For the answers to those questions check out National Treasure.... but is it too much of a clue if I tell you it's a Disney movie?

Fun for the WHOLE family!
It is very unusual to find action films in today's society that is appropriate for kids and adults alike. That is just one reason that I was thrilled to see National Treasure. It has the wit and humor one would expect from a Disney film as well as a lot of action and adventure thrills, but steers clear of gratuitous language and violence. If you like "Indiana Jones" or "Pirates of the Carribean", this film is a must see. Be sure to bring your kids, though, because they're sure to love it too!

national treasure
this is avery good movie, i watched it last night. the things that ben(nicholas cage) does are hard to predict and the story has many twists. i would recomend renting this movie because it is not as goodf the second time around and there after because you now what is going to happen ... Read more

Reviews (463)

If there was ever an offer you couldn't refuse, it's this!
Francis Ford Coppola and Paramount Home Entertainment held a press conference and street fair in Brooklyn, and yours truly was there! The exciting news, of course, was announcing the release of THE GODFATHER DVD COLLECTION on October 9, 2001! If the preview of the set is any indication, then I must say this will be the crown jewel in any DVD collection!

The three films will only be released together in this set. The Godfather and The Godfather Part III will each be on one disc, and The Godfather Part II will take two discs. The first of the good news? Francis Coppola has recorded full-lenth audio commentaries for all three films!

But wait, there's a fifth disc that will blow your socks off! Check this out -- the bonus disc contains 3+ hours worth of special features, including: > "The Godfather Family: A Look Inside" documentary > "Francis Coppola's Notebook", an inside look at taking the book to screen! > "On Location" with production designer Dean Tavoularis! > "The Godfather Behind The Scenes" 1971 featurette! > "The Cinematography of The Godfather"! > "The Music of The Godfather" -- two featurettes! > "Coppola and Puzo on Screenwriting"! > Storyboards from GF2 and GF3! > "The Corleone Family Tree" character and cast bios! > Academy Award® acceptance speeches! > Photo galleries with captions! > Theatrical trailers! > Filmmaker bios! > Corleone Family timeline, with real-life events mixed in! > Never-seen alternate opening of GF3! > And "all" of the extra footage found in the televised Godfather Saga!

The picture quality looked fantastic -- Coppola's American Zoetrope did a wonderful job restoring the films! From what I could tell, the sound quality was perfect, and the on-screen menus looked great. And the DVD packaging looks very nice.

All three films are in widescreen format with English 5.1 surround sound, French mono, and English subtitles.

Perhaps the only "bad" news I heard was that there were no plans at this point to release the chronological version on DVD. Francis said that the films were meant to be seen with the flashbacks, and I tend to agree. The biggest plus of having The Godfather Trilogy or Epic on tape, or watching The Godfather Saga on TV, was all the extra footage included. Well, the bonus disc in The Godfather DVD Collection contains "all" of the extra footage, and even something we've never seen anywhere before: an alternate opening for The Godfather Part III. Francis didn't give a firm "no" though; he cited technical reasons for not being able to include all the extra footage on DVD: the different scenes are in various levels of production ("they weren't mixed and scored"), making it difficult to add them seemlessly with today's technology. Maybe, but they seemed to be okay in the boxed sets and on TV to me.

Do yourself a favor and order the biggest DVD release of all time!

The Godfather Series: Movies You CANNOT Refuse.
What can one say about The Godfather series? All three films were masterpieces. Classics. Part One told the tale of Vito Corleone played by Marlon Brando--the Mafia Don of a family in the 40's and 50's, which eventually is head by his son, Michael (Al Pacino) in the sequel. Part Two also tells the story of Vito as a young man in Sicily played by Robert DeNiro. In the final installment set about twenty years after the original, Michael's dreams of becoming legit are countered by his trigger-happy nephew (Andy Garcia), along with new and opposing foes that make it impossible to go straight and leave his crime backround behind. To quote Pacino: "Just when I think I'm out, they pull me back in," and countless other lines will be quoted for years to come. The performances are absolutely perfect, the screenplay and direction are superb by Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola. What more can I say? You must watch all three to appreciate just how great these movies are. At three hours apiece they would be great fun for a rainy day. Pop them in at 8 in the morning and by 6 you'll be a member of the family. Part One is my favorite. Check out GoodFellas, another one of the best films of all time.

A Classic
Ah, the music, the scenery, the horse's head...

Belonging to a family headed by two German matriarchs who married two Italian guys, watching The Godfather every year or so was a family tradition. I felt like I knew the Corleones and loved them, never mind they knocked off a few people who deserved it now and then. This mixed feeling is what makes the series so fascinating.

The story is really about four men - Marlon Brando/Robert de Niro as Don Vito Corleone, the ultimate old-school mob boss, and his three sons - James Caan a force of nature as hotheaded Sonny, who lives to regret going to his sister's rescue one fateful day; John Cazale heartbreaking as Fredo, who's existence depends on his mother's continued good health after he makes the worst mistake of his life, and, most of all, Al Pacino; bonechilling as Michael, who outlives them all but lives to wish he hadn't.

The first movie has most of the cliches - the Italian wedding, the "sleeping with the fishes" line, the amazing baptism/massacre scene, and Brando's whole performance. The second ostensibly deals with the respective rises of Vito and Michael to power and Michael's gripping cat-and-mouse game with wily old Hyman Roth, but I'll bet what everyone never forgets about this one is what happens to poor Fredo. If Michael hasn't lost his soul by the end of Part I, he's lost it by the end of Part II. Part III was inevitable, I suppose, but there's really nothing else to say. A good movie, yes, but the other two are so great that it's almost an anticlimax.

Coppola's legacy enclosed with others
While the original film ranked #2 on the AFI's list of 100 Greatest Movies (#1 being Citizen Kane), many film buffs, afficionados, and audiences believed that the first Godfather film deserves that #1 spot. How many people do you know who know some of those famous quotes like, "I'm gonna' make him an offer he can't refuse," or "Never take sides against the family again, ever..." A few maybe? Or perhaps you grew up in an Italian family like mine and your father can translate the Italian for you while you watch? Now how many people can quote Citizen Kane beyond, "Rooooosebuuuud...."

Despite the excellence of the first film, it is my opinion that Godfather part 2 delves deeper into the family, more into the two-toned life that Michael Corleone orchestrates between the family business and his family. Nowhere is this more apparent than with the relationship he cultivates between himself and Hyman Roth (wonderful performance by Lee Strasberg), cementing the old adage that you keep your friends close and your enemies closer. On the surface they are friends, behind closed doors they are co-conspirators, between each other they are close friends and confidants. Beneath it all, in the depths of each man's heart, they are mortal enemies, Corleone ultimately the victor. The whole movie is a mounting tension between the two, reaching heights as when Hyman fumes over the death of a great man, Mo Green, whom Corleone had killed in the first film. In the end, Hyman becomes just another victim, mowed down by a Corleone footman.

The court proceedings are shot in a way that transmits the claustrophobia and morose tedium of the justice system back in the days of McCarthyism (the eras align somewhat, both post-war 1950's). The court is crowded, people line the walls, journalists write furiously in the heat of the courtroom, in the background, people walk in and out of the proceedings like is was a Wal-Mart. People speak into microphones, their voices drone in the hollow, sparse room.

And then Michael Corleone has his own brother killed. Many would say this is when Michael gives himself over fully to the title "Godfather." This is actually one of the central themes of the first film, when exactly does Michael become Godfather? The first film has a wonderful moment where, in the family office (the predominant colors are brown and orange), Brando gets out of his chair, moves over to the side of the office, Michael gets up from the couch on the other side, moves to the desk, and sits in his fathers chair. This is when Michael becomes Godfather in my opinion, but Coppola is good enough to give us more moments that question exactly, "When?"

Coppola's film legacy lies within this box set, as does Pacino's, Brando's, Caan's, and Duvall's. DeNiro managed to go off and do other things, his legacy lies somewhere else, but to the aforementioned actors, they have never done another film or role as well as what they did in the Godfather films. You don't realize it until you pop in the bonus disc, but composer's Nino Rota and Carmine Coppola also put their legacy into this film with the music. Who can forget Rota's seven-note theme that opens and closes the film? Carmine Coppola adds a more Italiano flavor to the music in the flashback scenes featuring DeNiro as a young Vito Andolini (a.k.a. Don Corleone in the first film).

There's so much to go over, the least of which is film #3. But the contents of the other three discs justifies the cost, which could actually be higher. But really, this collection is an offer you can't refuse, or do I have to put a gun to your head??

Godfather collection~ a def. 5 stars
personally, I thought Godfather II was the best out of the three films. I loved the fact that the movie kept fading from Michael's reign as Godfather to Vito Corleone's in 1920s New York and his olive oil (wink wink) business. great storytelling on Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Copolla's respective parts in II.
Godfather was a classic, no mistake in that..what's weird is that the movie makes the audience love the mafia...never have I seen the mafia world portrayed from the inside out so unbelievably.
part III was a bit disappointing...really made us want more of Michael Corleone and the rest of the family. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Like its predecessor Ocean's Eleven, Ocean's Twelve is a piffle of a caper, a preposterous plot given juice and vitality by a combination of movie star glamour and the exuberant filmmaking skill of director Steven Soderbergh (Out of Sight, The Limey). The heist hijinks of the first film come to roost for a team of eleven thieves (including the glossy mugs of Brad Pitt, Matt Damon, Bernie Mac, and Don Cheadle), who find themselves pursued not only by the guy they robbed (silky Andy Garcia), but also by a top-notch detective (plush Catherine Zeta-Jones) and a jealous master thief (well-oiled Vincent Cassel) who wants to prove that team leader Danny Ocean (dapper George Clooney) isn't the best in the field. As if all that star power weren't enough--and the eternally coltish Julia Roberts also returns as Ocean's wife--one movie star cameo raises the movie's combined wattage to absurd proportions. But all these handsome faces are matched by Soderbergh's visual flash, cunning editing, and excellent use of Amsterdam, Paris, and Rome, among other highly decorative locations. The whole affair should collapse under the weight of its own silliness, but somehow it doesn't--the movie's raffish spirit and offhand wit soar along, providing lightweight but undeniable entertainment. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (197)

Please spare us Ocean's Thirteen
Genre: Comedy, Mystery

Genre Grade: A-

Final Grade: B-

This was a good follow-up to the first movie, although it did not even get close to matching the thrill of it. The story was MUCH weaker in this one, most of it contrived so confusingly that when you find out the outcome you are mad at how they took such an easy way out. You either like the tricks they do in this movie or you feel cheated. Or you feel a little of both, as I did.

I can't say much about the plot because there are so many spoilers, but I will say there is a big surprise with one of the characters from the first movie that is quite funny. Some people hated it (one of the "cheap" moments) but I thought it was great. There are many plot holes but director Soderbourgh keeps you so interested in the characters and flashy style of the movie that you might not even notice them. No other director could get away with it, that's for sure.

There is mild controversy over who, exactly, is Ocean's twelfth member. I honestly can't say 100% for sure because there are three people who could be considered as such. But there is one person who seems a little more likely to be that person because of a certain...event?

In conclusion, I hope that if Soderbourgh decides to give us another helping of this franchise that he gets a much more clever story for Ocean's Thirteen...

The real theft;steal your money with a bad sequel!
Hollywood returns to "independent" type cuts, erroneously assuming that it is the latest cash crop craze.So they hire youngsters to waste film and money shooting scenes that distract from quality dialogue, acting, and storyline.This is an excellent example of how NOT to make a movie.Don't waste your time unless you are a film student wishing to learn from others' mistakes.Not worth the price of popcorn!

Don't Waste Your Money
This movie should never have been made. It was dull and unispiring. The acting seemed forced and rather then everyone playing a part, a few characters were seen through out and nothing more. If you truly liked Ocean's 11 then leave it at that. My personal recommendation is that you do not watch this movie and rather just stick with the first film. You will be better off by far.

Save your money
Wow - what a bad movie. The all-star cast needs to exercice better judgment before accepting parts like these. The favorite side characters you'll remember from the first movie and played by solid/enjoyable actors (Don Cheadle, Bernie Mac, etc...) are left with meaningless lines and no part to play. Brad Pitt's on camera eating habits in the first movie were something to smile at, in this one, it's simply annoying. Julia Roberts pretending to be Julia Roberts - what a stretch for the writers! The camera action is exhausting and attempts to add pace to a movie that does not have any. The plot is so twisted, it's unbelievable and ... without any interest. Soderbegh has done some excellent movies - this is probably his worst. Save your money, don't fall for the marketing hype. If you want Clooney at his clever and charming best, get "Out of Sight". If you want some good Soderbergh (nice camera work, interesting cinematography), get "Traffic". And I can't come up with something decent to suggest for Pitt since "Seven" or "Fight Club".

Much better than expected
Quite a few people I know told me the movie wasn't good so I didn't go see it on big screen. Now that I've watched in on DVD, surprisingly I quite like it and actually think it's as good as its prequel [in a different way though].

I like the combination of light action, romance, comedy, and a bit of suspense here. The strongest point of the movie must be a medley of huge stars [Clooney, Pitt, Damon, Garcia, Zeta Jones,Roberts]. Even supporting actors are all first-class! All of them play their parts really really well and even the supporting cast could hold their own against the big actors. It is amazing that you can feel a burst of energy and charms from these people in almost every scence. I actually felt like watching a celebrity party in a way, LOL.

Another thing I like in the movie is the sizzling romance. They didn't even have to use cheap sex scenes to tell the story. The chemistry between Clooney and Roberts is okay and the Pitt-Jones pairing is just incredible.

More good things: neat script with lots of funny quirky lines, good editing and delicious outfitting [but well we all know that Clooney, Pitt, Damon, Zeta Jones, and Roberts would look good even if they wore paperbags!]

Okay, now the weak points: The plot is kinda weak and not very believable. The movie could be confusing at times. I had to watch it twice to pick up some of the details. Also, those who go in expecting series of action would surely be disappointed. There is not a single violent scene in the movie if I remember correctly. The suspense element is not too good either. What else, there is not a whole lot of high tech gadgets for this Ocean's 12. Maybe these are why some people don't like this sequel as much as Ocean's 11.

So to sum it up, I think it's a fun movie if you watch it as a romantic comedy. The movie can't quite boast its action and suspense elements though.

Recommendation: Rent it and you'll get good two hours of entertainment. I bought the DVD just because I like many many funny scenes in the movie and wouldn't mind watching them over and over again.



... Read more

Amazon.com

Even skeptical fans of the Blade franchise will enjoy sinking their teeth into Blade: Trinity. The law of diminishing returns is in full effect here, and the franchise is wearing out its welcome, but let's face it: any movie that features Jessica Biel as an ass-kicking vampire slayer and Parker Posey--yes, Parker Posey!--as a vamping vampire villainess can't be all bad, right? Those lovely ladies bring equal measures of relief and grief to Blade, the half-human, half-vampire once again played, with tongue more firmly in stone-cold cheek, by Wesley Snipes. With series writer David S. Goyer in the director's chair, the film is calculated for mainstream appeal, trading suspenseful horror for campy humor and choppy, nonsensical action. The franchise still offers some intriguing ideas, however, including Drake (Dominic Purcell), the original vampire, whose blood contains the secret that could destroy all blood-suckers in a plot that incorporates a sinister "blood farm" where humans are held--and drained--in suspended animation. And Biel's wise-cracking sidekick (Ryan Reynolds) in her cadre of "Nightstalkers" provides comic relief in a series that's grown increasingly dour. All of which makes Blade: Trinity a love-it-or-hate-it sequel... supposedly the last in a trilogy, but the ending suggests otherwise. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (174)

Royal road　copy cats
Interesting!
Matrix..Japanimation..Zombie..Vampire...
This movie has plagiarized grand various movies.
But it's funny on the contraly.
It is a movie interesting for seeing without considering anything.

Van Wilder Saves The Day
After the doodie-fest that was 'Blade 1' and 'Blade 2', I was expecting another log to squirt out of the turd factory when I stuck in 'Blade Trinity'.I was surprised to see that this entry wasn't as completely stinky as its predecessors.

Thankfully 'Blade Trinity' has pushed the most annoying character in the series into a nearly supporting role.That role is Wesley Snipes' Blade.With his totally 1991 haircut, cheesy outfits, and lame one-liners Snipes has played three times now the most irritating and completely lame superhero ever.But thankfully we don't have to put up with him excessively in this flick like we did in the first two.

Now, pushing Blade's character into a supporting role is the addition of Van Wilder and 7th Heaven.I wasn't expecting too much out of either of them but they pleasantly surprised me.Van Wilder is pretty funny with his constantly homosexual-related humor and 7th Heaven, while basically there to be eye candy, isn't too bad playing the hot chick role.And as an added bonus is comedian Patton Oswalt in a supporting role as lame-o Blade's gun supplier.

The overall plot is super-lame though:ohhh, Dracula has returned...again.Like we haven't seen this before in numerous other films.The action scenes are pretty average and the script isn't that good(save for Van Wilder's lines).And as another added bonus you get to see Kris Kristofferson die.Awesome.Now, we just have to wait for him to get gunned down in real life.

Regardless, the addition of new cast members revitilized this excessively lame franchise.Maybe one day there will be a 'Blade 4' only Wesley Snipes will not be in it.

Not a bad movie, but put together poor
i bought this movie and was very excited.as i normally do, i decided to watch the orginal version and skip the one that had added content.to my great suprise my dvd player kept pausing to cut out the added scenes.sometimes dvds mess up a bit between chapters but this was rediculous.i have a very good dvd player so i know that wasn't the problem.for shame on NewLine.they use to be so good at their dvds and now they've become mediocre.

Ok, but not great
This installment was not the greatest one of the three, but with the help of Jessica Beil it managed to perform somewhat. It is not bad, but needed more action. Also despite what others say Parker Posey was a terrible choice for the lead vampire villian. Her acting is subpar at best. In almost any scene her presence served only to drag things down. This is supposed to be the last one, but as usual the ending says otherwise. Although considering all vampires die in this one except Blade I wonder who they are going to hunt.

The Best Blade Yet!
Wow! That's all i can say...Wow! THis movie was way higher than what i expected. It wasn't even on my "To Do" List to see it but when i did, i went back to the theater again, and i was just as amazed! ... Read more

Amazon.com

A smart and savvy (albeit highly stylized) look at the single lives of four thirtysomething Manhattan women, Sex and the City: The Complete Second Season builds on the foundation of its first season with plot arcs that are both hilarious and heartfelt, taking the show from breakout hit to true pop-culture phenomenon. Relationship epiphanies coexist happily alongside farcical plots and zingy one-liners, resulting in emotionally satisfying episodes that feature the sharp kind of character-defining dialogue that seems to have disappeared from the rest of TV long ago. When last we left the NYC gals, Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker) had just broken up with a commitment-phobic Mr. Big (Chris Noth), but fans of Noth's seductive-yet-distant rake didn't have to wait long until he was back in the picture, as he and Carrie tried to make another go of it. Their relationship evolution, from reunion to second breakup, provides the core of the second season. The fittingly titled and keenly observed episode "Evolution" found Carrie trying to leave a few feminine belongings at Mr. Big's apartment with little success, charting the challenges and limits of intimacy. And the season's finale, "Ex and the City," was a melancholy goodbye for Carrie and Big that took its cue from The Way We Were. It wasn't all angst, though: among other adventures, Charlotte (Kristin Davis) puzzles over whether one of her beaus was "gay-straight" or "straight-gay"; Miranda (Cynthia Nixon) tries to date a guy who insists on having sex only in places where they might get caught; and Samantha (the exquisite Kim Cattrall) copes with dates who range from, um, not big enough to far too big--with numerous stops in between. Through it all, the four actresses cohered into a solid ensemble that played on their complex relationships among themselves as well as with men; in two short years, Parker and company became one of the best TV casts in over a decade. And to top it all off, the second season offers 18 episodes, six more than the first. Sometimes size really can make a difference! --Mark Englehart ... Read more

Reviews (140)

An easy addiction!
What's fascinating is the wide appeal of SATC! I know straight and gay men and women of all ages who watched the HBO version, and I found myself hooked on the DVD's.

Parts of each character are realistic, but ultimately there's an element of satire and "over-the-top" that keeps the reader hooked. (...)

And in Season 2, Big comes across as a really decent guy. He accompanies Carrie to a wedding of a couple he doesn't know and to a dinner with her friends. And she comes across as high maintenance. She can't read between the lines to see how much he cares for her so she keeps pushing for more. (...).

I believe the episodes work best when they're light-hearted and playful, such as 20-somethings vs. 30-somethings.

(...)."

Sometimes I think SATC is a litmus test for personalities. Everyone who watches sees something different. Some like Samantha best, others like her least. And some viewers focus on the clothes.

What hooks viewers, I think , is the three-dimensional qualities of the four main characters, and even of Big. They have real flaws as well as great virtues. And they have enough money and career stability to spend all their energies on relationships. Sometimes it's exhausting just to watch the quest, but the writers make sure it's never dull.

Sex and the City-Second Season (a guilty pleasure)
The Sex and the City-Second Season is a great item for those who don't have cable TV (unlike me). I get HBO just to watch these shows. Most of the year I don't have HBO, but when June comes, I rush to get it. I have all of the second and third season on tape, but this is a great gift idea for friends. I will probably buy this for one of my family and friends for birthdays or holidays. The great thing about this show is that every woman can see a little bit of herself in every one of the characters. Carrie (Sarah Jessica Parker) is the character I most relate to because of her fashion sense and her personality (very similar to mine). Samantha (Kim Catrall) is the woman that most women vilify, but wish they were like. She is so bold, daring and downright outrageous. There is a little Samantha in everyone. Miranda is the workaholic of the bunch who seeks perfection in everyone in everything. She is bold like Samantha, but in a different way. Charlotte is the one who you find endearing. Her search for her Prince Charming with a Madison Avenue job and Park Avenue apartment is something to watch. She goes through so many frogs, it is hilarious to watch.

The second season includes Carrie & Big getting back together and breaking up again (can they ever make up their minds?!), Miranda having a real relationship (with Steve, a bartender), Samantha having a relationship (oh my stars!) with the perfect guy (except for one "little" thing), and Charlotte dating so many guys (your head will spin) and not keeping any of them. It is a whirlwind of laughs, a few tears, and more, more, more.

This show has all of the elements that keep you tuning in. This is a must buy for all the non-HBOers out there. Buy it!!!

4 ho's, 5 stars
On the surface, this is the story of 4 floozies who complain that no one wants to marry them. They spend their time jumping in and out of beds with the idea that this is the path to matrimony. Someone should have recommended that they read the book "Who Moved My Cheese?" Somehow, though each of these women are portrayed as smart and successful in the businessworld, they exhibit no inkling over the plain fact that steady, reliable men don't marry ho's. Bed them, yes, but marry them? No.

It then occurred to me after watching a number of these episodes that it is really the story of 4 gay queens looking for a gay partner. At least that is the way it is written. Seen through this prism, the show is actually more poignant. The show -- through its characters -- strives to champion promiscuity as a virtue. And isn't this really at the heart of the gay ideology? But what makes the show so good is that the writers never insert love into the equation. These 4 selfish people constantly indulge in sex, but it is plain that none really have their hearts in it. They bemoan the lack of men who would love them, but they themselves withold their own love. Stingy with offering out their heart, they trade affection for something they do not value, their own bodies.

My first experiance with the show was in 1/2 drops every 6 months or so on HBO. But the DVD format allows one to watch the episodes back-to-back. With my infrequent viewings I was impressed with the glamour and adventurousness of the stars. But with seeing the shows back-to-back, the loneliness, neediness, and desparation exhibited by the ladies pops to the surface. There is nothing glamorous about their lives. Commendably, sex isn't depicted as an answer, but more as a drug to take the edge off of their main concern, their inability to win the heart of a man. Intentional or not, it is this truth that makes the show as good as it is.

Oh, by the way, the show got cancelled because the 4 ladies just got too old for their make-up to hide. They probably stayed on 2 seasons too long, but at least they got out when they did. How long could anyone watch 4 old ho's whine on about how they missed the boat?

great show but. . .the dvd sucks
I LOVE sex and the city I am very sad about the ending of the series, but this DVD is horrible(not the actual show but everything else about it). First, of all the caseing is this flimsy plastic material, which breaks easily. Second, there is not play all function of the discs, so if you are trying to watch the dvd all the way through, you have to choose each episode and click play twice(it goes to a synposis first) Last of all there are no special features at all, how can there be no outtakes? if you like s&c the second season is one of my favorite but the dvd can be very fustrating sometimes

Really sucks you in, then rips your heart in two!
This is the season where you really get drawn into the romance between Carrie and Big. When it works, it's really fun to watch, but when it falls apart....you want to just slap Carrie upside the head for being such an idiot! She really did bring a lot of the problems she had with Big on herself. Couldn't just enjoy a good thing when she had it. Oh well! Eventually I'll have to buy the whole darn series on DVD, but I'm going to pace myself. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Rarely has The Merchant of Venice, one of Shakespeare's most complex plays, looked as ravishingly sumptuous as in this adaptation, directed by Michael Radford (Il Postino). In a decadent version of renaissance Venice, a young nobleman named Bassanio (Joseph Fiennes, Shakespeare in Love) seeks to woo the lovely Portia (newcomer Lynn Collins), but lacks the money to travel to her estate. He seeks support from his friend, the merchant Antonio (Jeremy Irons, Reversal of Fortune); Antonio's fortune is tied up in sea ventures, so the merchant offers to borrow money from a Jewish moneylender, Shylock (Al Pacino, Dog Day Afternoon). But Shylock holds a grudge against Antonio, who has routinely treated the Jew with contempt, and demands that if the debt is not repaid in three months, the price will be a pound of Antonio's flesh.

The Merchant of Venice is famous as a "problem play"--the gritty matters of moneylending and anti-Semitism sit uncomfortably beside the fairy tale elements of Portia and Bassanio's romance, and some twists of the plot can seem arbitrary or even cruel. The strength of Radford's intelligent and passionate interpretation is that he and the excellent cast invest the play's opposing facets with full emotional weight, thus making every question the play raises acute and inescapable. Irons is particularly compelling; kindness and blind prejudice sit side by side in his breast, rendering the clashes in his character as vivid as those in the play itself. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (38)

"How Sweet the Moonlight Sleeps"
This is, generally, a very satisfying filming of a very problematic play.Director Radford, who also adapted the screenplay, deserves credit for his bold choices in casting and for his not shying away from some of the more troublesome aspects of the text.Is Pacino a successful Shylock?I think so, although by way of Brooklyn.He is especially powerful in the famous courtroom scene, which otherwise comes dangerously close to being exploitative on the screen.There is much to recommend here, including a stellar supporting cast.Few actors can hold their own next to Pacino, but Lynn Collins comes close.After an unfortunate entrance as the young lawyer (she looks uncomfortably like Sonny Chiba), Collins makes us forget the incongruities in her role and attend, instead, to Portia's masterful polemics.The quality of makeup is not strained!(Collins, by the way, is an actress from Texas, but this does not become an issue.She has been linked romantically with Keanu Reeves, her costar in "Il Mare."Perhaps these two will at some point treat us to a film of "Anthony and Cleopatra"?--another of Shakespeare's plays that has been criminally neglected by Hollywood.)Other actors worthy of mention are MacKenzie Crook and Ron Cook as the younger and older Gobbos, and Kris Marshall and John Sessions as Gratiano and Salerio.Heather ("Kinsey") Goldenhersh as Nerissa and Allan Corduner as Tubal are also fine.Several up-and-coming young actors appear in supporting roles, including Tony Schiena, Julian Nest, and Tom Leick, who is soon to be seen in "House of Boys," with a screenplay by J.T. LeRoy.

I have given the film 4 stars, but I would like to give the DVD itself 5. Watching the film, I had many questions for the director--for instance, why are certain scenes deleted, while others are out of sequence?--and I'm happy to say that most all of these are answered in the delightful director's commentary, for which Michael Radford is joined by Lynn Collins.I learned a lot about the rationale behind certain casting and directorial choices and came to appreciate the film itself better as a result.For example, the director has choreographed certain scenes to reflect a love triangle among Antonio, Portia, and Bassanio, something that is heavily debated in Shakespearan criticism.Radford even gives us a rationale for his having asked the actresses playing prostitutes to appear with their breasts exposed!See this film, certainly; it has many qualities to recommend it, not the least of which are a lovely soundtrack by Jocelyn Pook and location filming in both Venice and Luxemburg.But, to get the whole experience, see it on DVD and then watch the director's commentary.

Not Bad
Good sets.Good costumes.Al appears to be reading from cue cards off camera in some scenes, although I think he plays a believable part. I wish Jeremy could speak up a little. No subtitles in English, only French; kinda dumb isn't it?

Pacino and Shakespeare save this movie from itself
Shakespeare's lines will carry any movie above the waterline, and the same can be said of Pacino's acting. They both make this movie presentable and even excellent at times. However, the angle of the movie seems to be one of contradiction to the text, beginning with the introductory text prior to the film's dialogue (text from the Director NOT Shakespeare). This text attempts to excuse the very play itself for its characterization of Christians and the Jew, Shylock. If the play needed an intro, Shakespeare would have written a prologue. It certainly works to bias the audience in a way. The other attempt to do this is several scenes where the "Christian" characters are carousing in a bawdy house with a bunch of half-naked prostitutes. Clearly, the director attempts to make a martyr of Shylock and hypocrites of all the non-Jew characters: however Shakespeare's text is what it is. The nudity is utterly unnecessary and detracts from the integrity of the play--plus it cannot now be shown to young people.

Other than those detractions, I think the film is excellent. The trial scene is superb and brings the tension of the moment to life. Besides Pacino the other actors do a fine job. Unfortunately, though I am a lover of Shakespeare, I would not want to watch this again.

Author of "Shakespeare on Spirituality: Life-Changing Wisdom from Shakespeare's Plays"

gratuitous nudity
While this film is a relatively accurate and well acted version of the Shakespeare play, it has nudity in it where none is called for. This makes it unusable in the American classroom and cheapens the play itself.

Great production of a play that is hard to like!
This is an outstanding production of the one work of Shakespeare that is the most difficult to like.It is impossible to get around the anti-Semitism.This production tries very hard to put the anti-Semitism in context and I think to tone it down, but in the end it is impossible to eliminate it.To some extent Shylock is being punished for being vindictive and not showing mercy, but it is impossible to ignore that in the end the play seems to celebrate Shylock's foced conversion to Christianity.

Al Pacino's performance is disconcerting as he seems to be playing Shylock with a New Yawk accent.But Lynne Collins is truly oustanding as Portia.This version of Merchant really shines in the comic portion of the story where Portia masquerades as a man and successfully entreats Bassanio to give up his wedding ring (which he had earlier promised Portia he would never part with).This is one of the few Shakespearean productions I have seen where a woman masquerading as a man is actually credible.

The settings, costumes, and photography are all spectacular.I found I was able to focus on the positive elements and not get bogged down with the more distressing parts of the plot.But I sympathize with those who find the anti-Semitic aspects of the story too distressing. ... Read more

Amazon.com

One of the best films of 2004, Kinsey pays tribute to the flawed but honorable man who revolutionized our understanding of human sexuality. As played by Liam Neeson in writer-director Bill Condon's excellent film biography, Indiana University researcher Alfred Kinsey was so consumed by statistical measurements of human sexual activity that he almost completely overlooked the substantial role of emotions and their effect on human behavior. This made him an ideal researcher and science celebrity who revealed that sexual behaviors previously considered deviant and even harmful (homosexuality, oral sex, etc.) are in fact common and essentially normal in the realm of human experience, but whose obsession with scientific method frequently placed him at odds with his understanding wife (superbly played by Laura Linney) and research assistants. In presenting Kinsey as a driven social misfit, Condon's film gives Neeson one of his finest roles while revealing the depth of Kinsey's own humanity, and the incalculable benefit his research had on our collective sexual enlightenment. With humor, charm, and intelligence, Kinsey shines a light where darkness once prevailed. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (66)

Pretentious Attempt
In retrospection, Kinsey is over-rated. It rides on the 21st century's fetish of sexuality and pretends to be another "Beautiful Mind" but fails and flops. It is one of those pretentious artistic attempt.

Truth or Perversity?
This became more and more difficult to watch as the movie went along.A selected biography in the style of Ray or Delovely, but quite a different choice of subject matter.

Kinsey's father set the tone of Kinsey's own life, with a certainty that becomes obnoxious.The certainty that he knows what the answer is, in this case to the issues of human sexuality and its associated ignorance and taboos, and as with all people who think they know, there is a fall.At the time that Kinsey was achieving his fame there were restrictions on the entire subject of sex practices and sex mores.It stands to reason that the only people who were working in this area were strange themselves, or at least unconventional.That's where I had difficulty.Were Kinsey and his associates really as perverse as they appeared in the movie?Or were their banter and actions exaggerated for the sake of a good story.

I found no sympathy for Kinsey nor for anyone else in the movie.And some of the conclusions that they reached seem so counter-intuitive that they defy belief.I didn't know whether they were trying to find truth or to present perversity.

Potent Film with Certain Foundation for Heated Debate...
Galileo Galilei and scientists alike announced through in-depth research that the Earth was not flat and faced heavy persecution.Their different thinking broke the standards of the 16th century pious beliefs, which had been used a long time before scientists questioned the validity and reliability in what they observed.This offended the Catholic Church who proclaimed that they held the highest truth, a truth deeply rooted in unquestioned morality.The questioning of the religious beliefs triggered a witch-hunt of the scientists that disagreed with the moral teachings of the Catholic Church.However, the truth eventually emerged, as Galileo's theories are still the instruments of current astronomical research that continues to evolve the human existence beyond the earth.

The Catholic Church and Lutheran Church persecuted people with different ideas of Christianity.Those who desired to exercise their own freedom of religion sought refuge in America where they could exercise their freedom to express their own ideas of religion.After the War of Independence, the founding fathers formed the Congress that drafted the 10 amendments.The first amendment brings the people freedom of speech, which includes religion.However, the very same ideas that sought freedom in America later turned from being the persecuted to the persecutor, as these notions harassed new different thinkers.The notion of cyclical history comes to mind when scientists like Alfred Kinsey are being silenced based on morality and unfounded facts.

Kinsey (Liam Neeson), a biologist, was brought up under strict puritan rules, as his father consistently proclaimed being the ultimate source of knowledge.In a sense he grew up with similar persecuting standards as Galileo, but instead of conforming to the rules he broke the bond with his father when he accepted a partial scholarship to Bowdoin to study biology.Kinsey's father wanted him to become an engineer, which has a certain level of irony to it, as his father believed that all modern inventions at the beginning of the 20th century were evil.The pursuit of the biology degree brought him through Harvard to Indiana University where he took a position as an assistant professor while studying stag beetles and later the American Cynipidae also known as the gall wasp.

Years of research and collecting the American Cynipidae allowed Kinsey to meticulously catalogue his gall wasp library.During this time Kinsey met his wife Clara (Laura Linney) with whom he had three children.However, before having the children they had difficulties in the bedroom, as Clara assumed it was because they physically would not fit together.This was an unacceptable answer for Kinsey who approached the problem, as if there were an answer, which there was.It simply was painful for Clara to have sex as her hymen was too thick, and with a quick procedure by a doctor she had this fixed.Consequently, Kinsey continued to help other couples with problems of sexual nature, but realized that he did not have any real answers to the questions that were posed to him.

In the 1940s, Kinsey got his chance to do teach a marriage course in regards to sex and the social aspects of sex between husbands and wives.As the class went on his interest deepened through the vast number of questions people asked in regards to sex.This concluded in Kinsey beginning to research the taboo ridden topic, which so many have been taught to avoid at all costs except for the purpose of having children.Kinsey opposed the abstinence with his statement, "society has interfered with what should be a normal biological development..."

The sex research forced Kinsey to travel uncharted waters, as he had to find a way to collect data that were valid and reliable.Through this process he design an interview style that had to be nonjudgmental in order for the interviewee to reveal everything without having to feel any negative feelings.This process gave them surprising facts about sex, as they also encountered homosexuality, extramarital affairs, and premarital affairs.They also found evidence of deviant sexual practices, which most of the society rightfully did not tolerate such as pedophilia.An important note to this is that Kinsey was only collecting data, he did not advocate harmful sexual practices.However, in the eyes of the society Kinsey was in the end drawn into the mud, as much of his intentions was misunderstood.

Nonetheless, Kinsey helped breaking the ice of the forbidden issue that in the end opened up the society to understanding this hushed, but normal behavior.If Kinsey did not push the envelope the society might have continued its intolerance towards sexual issues, an intolerance that would force many to hide their true identity in the fear of repercussions and prejudice based on hatred and fear.For example, John Edgar Hoover created a profiling center for homosexuals and other undesirables.The very same intolerance would function as a shield that would have protected many of the Catholic priests that have been uncovered to molest children.It is thanks to Kinsey and researchers alike that it has become acceptable to discuss this taboo topic in media, where horrendous crimes such as child molesting can be caught.Yet, there are still many who believe that Kinsey was wrong to do what he did, and they are naturally free to have their own opinions.As they should let the truth be unveiled from darkness and not let erotophobia, i.e., learned negative emotional response to information of sexual nature, affect any decision-making that could help human beings discover a better future.

Kinsey is a political and potent film that will undoubtedly make many feel awkward and uncomfortable.Yet, it is also an important film, as it displays the importance of learning the truth and not hiding behind groundless rules and laws based on fictionalized morality.The film also has historical value to our contemporary society where many laws often are passed based on morality, which ends up hurting a fraction of the society and slows the progress of humanity.When this happens, history seems to be have drifted into oblivion as prejudice and intolerance continues to haunt the society.Hopefully, the film Kinsey offers an opportunity for debate and insightfulness, and not continued narrow-mindedness.

On balance, a positive contribution to human understanding
Alfred Kinsey did a great service to the study of sex.Yes, some of his methodologies were suspect, "self-selection" throwing a monkey-wrench in the whole randomization requirement.His subjects were perhaps not the most representative sampling of the population.Furthermore, he and his staff became too personally involved in the work.His assistants comprised a sort of swinger's club.Kinsey could be faulted for not having anticipated the conflicts brought about by such activities among colleagues.

Unfortunately, these aspects of his life and the film will obscure - for many - the more significant meaning of his work: Bringing the discussion of sex out of the dark corners of human consciousness and into the light.Also, by removing the shame factor from sex, a natural healthy aspect of the human animal, Kinsey legitimized the scientific study of sex.

As far as the film per se, I was impressed with the honesty of the piece.Contrary to what some reviewers have said, this film does not make Kinsey a hero.It rightly credits him for his work, yet reveals a conflicted, troubled psyche at the same time as Kinsey tries to navigate the line between his objective scientific observation and his subjective sexual experiences.This blurring is where Kinsey erred.

Interesting insight into groundbreaking study
Alfred Kinsey was a pioneer in the study of human sexuality. He was a professor at Indiana University and spent the first 20 years of his career studying an insect, the "gall wasp." This movie, starring Liam Neeson in the title role, depicts Dr. Kinsey as having an obsession with his study of the gall wasp, collecting hundreds of thousands of specimens and devoting his life to studying this species. Tapped to teach a course on marriage and the family, Kinsey developed an interest in human sexuality and he bacame as obsessive in this study as he was in his earlier endeavor. He was driven and pushed his staff hard. He employed interviewers who spoke with thousands of people in taking sexual histories. Kinsey was very hands on as he personally instructed his staff on how to put subjects at ease as they conducted the interviews.

Dr. Kinsey was the son of a morally strict father, convincingly played by John Lithgow. Neeson's depecition of Dr. Kinsey shows the results of this upbringing. His characterization of Kinsey comes across as very stiff and uptight. He is not one to really let his hair down yet, in his groundbreaking study, there is no taboo that he is unwilling to explore. Indeed, he explores his own sexuality as he has an extramarital gay affair. Despite serious misgivings at first, his wife, played by Laura Linney, is accepting.

The studies were very controversial, having been done in the 1940s, long before the "sexual revolution." Some people found his findings to be very liberating in that they discovered that they were not alone in their sexual feelings. Other people were shocked, believing that the subject was taboo and should not be discussed. There is one brief scene in which a woman, who agonized over her lesbian inclinations, was liberated by Dr. Kinsey's findings and, thereby allowed herself to enter into a relationship. Others, including Kinsey's father, were scandalized. Ultimately, however, Kinsey's father allows himself to be interviewed by his son and reveals his own, painful secrets of a repressed childhood.

We live in a more sexually open era than we did, generations ago. This movie gives an insight into one of the reasons this is so. I recommend this dvd. ... Read more

Reviews (10)

They can't release it soon enough
So, this is it. The final episodes of the final season of Sex and the City. Yes, it is expensive buying all of these DVDs, but what fan can afford NOT to relive the experience? It all ends with a trip to Paris that cannot be missed....with a late-breaking return of Mr. Big....or perhaps not? How will it end and who will it be? Carrie, Miranda, Charlotte, and Samantha say goodbye to their fans in these final episodes. This is a must-see DVD--for those who already know how it ends and desperately need to relive it, and more importantly, for those who didn't get to see it the first time around.

A fitting farewell
I think Sex in the City is such good girl-therapy. This series is seriously about how important female relationships are. Guys came and went through the series, but the constant remained...the friendship of Carrie, Charlotte, Miranda and Samantha. I loved how they didn't always agree with each other, but they were supportive 100% of the time. These DVDs are worth the money...they will supply hours of laughter, tears and hope. It was so fun to see what everyone wore and how many pairs of Manolo's Carrie went through in a season. It was a fun, feel good series....and I will miss it.

A Perfect End To A Perfect Show
I am VERY MUCH looking forward to this last collection. I watched all 8 of the last episodes with sadness and joy.

Carrie continues her relationship with "The Russian" and in the end finds true love where she didn't expect it.
Charlotte finally has the relationship she wants and gets her "baby" in a unexpected way.
Miranda finally settles down with Steve and by the end of the season becomes the beautiful woman we always new she could be.
Samantha deals with cancer and finds true love and monogomy with Smith.
Big finally opens up his heart and goes to drastic measures to get the woman he really loves.

It's a wonderful end and I hope that there will really be a movie that we can go see in the theaters. Here's hoping!!

End of an era
I love all of these DVD sets. I have them all. I started watching them while stationed overseas where I could not get the current seasons and I couldn't stop watching them on after the other. I was deployed during this last part of season 6 and have been dying to see it ever since. I am deployed again and keep checking the internet to find out when it will be released.

I was disapointed that the season was split in two. I bought part I thinking that it was the whole season and refused to watch it until I got to my current location. I was so disapointed that I didn't have the complete season.

So what about the price.. I love these sets and this is the last one.

SATC Season 6; part 2
Look, I moved and lost HBO at the most critical moment... Right before the remaining season 6; part 2 episodes started. I love all of it. Not just for the very funny comedy, incredible fashion, and life antidotes, but for the clear display of social commentary!
I've purchased all seasons 1-6 thus far and I need to complete my collection. The money I've spent is worth the soon-to-be classic television. I don't want it to be lost forever, so please keep your negative comments to yourself! If you don't like it, just ignore it and leave the rest of us SATC fans to our peace! ... Read more

Amazon.com

Nowadays it's rare to find a movie that pays attention to human weakness as well as strength, and that sees a whole person as having both. When a sports magazine gets bought by a media conglomerate, an ad sales executive named Dave Foreman (Dennis Quaid, The Rookie) finds himself playing second-in-command to Carter Duryea, a hotshot barely half his age (Topher Grace, Win a Date with Tad Hamilton!) whose marriage has just fallen apart. One evening Carter invites himself over to Dave's house to escape his loneliness, where he meets Dave's daughter Alex (Scarlett Johansson, Lost in Translation). The two strike immediate sparks and when they run into each other later in the city, a relationship begins--which they discreetly keep from Dave. But the heart of the movie is not in its plot, but in the way that Dave responds to the news that his wife is pregnant, or how Carter tries to fortify his self-image with a new car. These aren't jokes; the actors inhabit these moments fully and turn them into psychological events. Quaid plays Dave as a simple man, but his straightforwardness feels genuine (rather than a failure of the writer's imagination). Grace and Johansson have terrific chemistry as lovers, but so do Grace and Quaid, both as rivals and as a substitute father and son. In Good Company isn't likely to win any awards, but it's honest and honorable; there's a core of truth to its characters and their problems aren't resolved too neatly. Sometimes, that's worth watching. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (59)

Moral Fable Never Gets Sappy
Dennis Quaid plays a 51-year-old father of two daughters and head of a sales division for a sporting magazine. After a buyout, he is demoted and has a new boss, a 26-year-old coffee-drinking yuppie full of corporate speak and blind ambition who falls in love with Quaid's gorgeous daughter. The father's self-worth is tested savagely in this comic film which, exploring the absurdity and brutality of the corporate world, actually has a moral message about integrity and being true to yourself. It's rare that a comedy is both funny and packed with moral meaning as it attempts to find redemption for the father and his new boss. For a darker look at corporate life with no redemption for the characters, check out the bleak and nihilistic In the Company of Men by Neil LeBute.

Not exactly what I expected.
Dennis Quaid gives a magnificent performance as a long-time salesman who's proud of his work, and who suddenly loses his status when he gets demoted. Topher Grace plays the new boss, and he's terrific as an obnoxious but charming kid on a power trip. Quaid and Grace's awkward, amusing, and (eventually) fond friendship is the crux of the film, and the best reason to see it. The movie's flaws: First, it's slow at times, I expected more inter-office interaction. Second, for a film about cold corporations and job insecurity, the comedy is less sharp than it could be. It's almost as if the movie is too light for its subject. Characters get laid off but you never see how it would hurt their families. The only really bad thing that happens to anyone is that they have to take out a second mortgage! Another reason the comedy is so lightweight is that there no major bad guys to make fun of. Quaid and Grace (who lays off Quaid's colleagues) represent different business philosophies, but they're both essentially good-hearted. Only one or two characters are slightly villainous, and they're on screen for just a couple minutes.

An Excellent satire
"In Good Company" is a lovely movie - part romance, part drama, part satire. It strays occasionally into the obvious, but, overall, it's enormously entertaining. While the satire and drama elements are marred by pat endings, the romance part is given a blissfully hopeful, rather than a happy, ending.

Dan [Dennis Quaid] is a high powered advertising executive at a big sports magazine. At age 52, he's at the top of his game. Out of nowhere, his company is bought by a media conglomerate headed by a billionaire megalomaniac. To Dan's horror, his new boss is a 26-year old kid named Carter [Topher Grace]. In typical early 21st Century fashion, Carter has arrived through sheer ambition and charm. He has zero experience in advertising. Carter does, however, have some experience in romance. He meets and falls deeply in love with Alex [Scarlett Johansson]. As fate would have it. Alex is Dan's daughter.

The acting here is superior. Quaid was nominated for a Best Actor Oscar. Johansson is one of the best young actresses working today. The revelation is Grace, prior to this best known for his role in a hit sitcom. Here he creates one of the more memorable movie characters in recent movies.

Funny and original
Genre: Indie Comedy

Genre Grade: B+

Final Grade: B

This movie was disguised as somewhat more of a romantic comedy, but it indeed was not. It did have some of that in it, but mostly the movie was about the connection of a younger, naive boss taking on the older, experienced salesman. There was some hilarious moments and some really cheesy, odd ones too, but overall it had a good feel to it and was a good movie. The best part about this movie was the music - from The Shins, Damien Rice, and Iron & Wine. Unfortunately, Iron & Wine is the only bad that appears on the soundtrack to the movie. Bad mistake!

On a side note, this movie does not have a cliche Hollywood ending, but rather a more realistic approach to a very possible situation. Some people may not like the ending because of that, but I applaud the creators of this film for doing what they did. Wandering outside the box is something more movies should do these days. I would compare this movie to Garden State, and while Garden State may have seemingly followed the Hollywood guidelines more than this film did, I just think it was more appropriate in that film, because of the depth of the connection between Zach Braff and Natalie Portman. I don't think Scarlett Johannson and Topher Grace shared as much of a connection. Or maybe they did, but that was not the entire focus of this movie.

Not the greatest movie!
Kind of cute. I really thought I would have liked this movie, it was really great until the end of it.They could have done better on the end, kind of cheap.It definetly deserves three stars. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The nation's top-rated program got back to basics for its fourth season. The personal lives of the Las Vegas crime scene investigators would take more of a backseat to the stories themselves: the victims, the cases, the criminals. After a successful operation, William Peterson's Gil Grissom has regained his hearing--and his Manhunter-era beard--and is back in fighting form. "You're like your old self," Captain Brass (Paul Guilfoyle) notes in "All for Our Country." Just in time, as he'll soon be promoting one of his staff to lead CSI, and it's between Sara Sidle (Jorja Fox) and Nick Stokes (George Eads). He also has a new politically minded sheriff with which to contend, Rory Atwater (24's Xander Berkeley). The latter will make his first of several appearances in "Invisible Evidence," while the results of Grissom's lead CSI decision will be revealed in "No More Bets."

That said, one CSI will enjoy a bit of a personal life this season--Catherine Willows (Marg Helgenberger), who'll begin seeing nightclub owner Chris Bezich (Nicholas Lea, Krycek from The X-Files) in "Early Rollout." The other CSIs, particularly the re-energized Grissom, will remain as married to their jobs as ever--although the latter's unspoken interest in Sara will be tested in "Butterflied."

Other episodes of note include "Feeling the Heat," with Stacy Edwards and Arye Gross, "Jackpot," with Henry Czerny and Re-Animator's Jeffrey Combs, and the instantly infamous "Fur and Loathing," which was written by Jerry Stahl (Permanent Midnight) and centers on the death of a "furry." As Grissom explains to Willows, "furries" are a "tribe of people who prefer to interact as furry animals." Stahl also penned "Getting Off," about the death of a clown, and continues to come up with some of this still-groundbreaking series' most colorful scenarios. --Kathleen C. Fennessy ... Read more

Amazon.com

Meet the Parents found such tremendous success in the chemistry produced by the contrasting personalities of stars Robert De Niro and Ben Stiller that the film's creators went for broke with the same formula again in Meet the Fockers. This time around, Jack and Dina Byrnes (De Niro and Blythe Danner) climb into Jack's new kevlar-lined RV with daughter Pam (Teri Polo), soon-to-be son-in-law Gaylord (Stiller), and Jack's infant grandson from his other daughter for the trip to Florida to meet Gaylord's parents, Bernie and Roz Focker (Dustin Hoffman and Barbra Streisand in a casting coup). The potential in-laws are, of course, the opposite of Jack, a pair of randy, touchy-feely fun-lovers. The rest of the movie is pretty much a sitcom: put Bernie and Roz together with Jack, and watch the in-laws clash as Gaylord squirms. As with the original, there is a sense of joy in watching these actors take on their roles with obvious relish, and the Hoffman-Streisand-Stiller triumvirate is likeable enough to draw you in. But the formula doesn't work as well in Fockers mostly because much of the humor is based on two obvious gimmicks: Gaylord Focker's name, and the fact that Streisand's character is a sex therapist. As a result, the movie itself is more contrived and predictable, and a lot less fun than the original. The casting is grand, but one wishes more thought was put into the script.--Dan Vancini ... Read more

Reviews (189)

Since the movie is so impossibly boring...
and cliché, and predictable and tongue-in-cheek, and trited, and mindless, I'm going to summarize this movie as:
Utter Waste of Money and Time.
There's nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing positive to say about this movie. They were pushing it with the first one, however, it was passable and watchable. This sequel is one that should have never put out. It's so enclosed in its idiocy that it obfuscates the acting value of thespians of great caliber. Avoid!

Don't Believe the Negativity...It's Hilarious
I'm so tired of everyone looking for Shakespearian perfection in every film, bottom line, it's a dumb comedy, so turn your pompous search for meaningful dialogue and great script-writing
off and enjoy the laughs. It's a comedy, not Macbeth. I kept hearing how horrible it was, well guess what, surprise, surprise
the critics were wrong again! If you enjoyed the first film, you'll love the second, it was every bit as funny, if not funnier. I don't laugh easy either, but it had me rolling most of the film, in tears laughing at times. I know when to be critical and when to put the brain on pause and just enjoy a good old fashioned laugh. It has that Farelly Brothers-type gross out humor, if you enjoy that sort of thing which I do, then you'll enjoy this. If not, go rent 'Annie Hall,' and spend needless hours pining over the film's lighting and set direction, you know, 'the important things in film'...rolls eyes.

please, not a third time!
Gee, it's pretty sad to see actors of this caliber, who've been in so many memorable movies, get mired in this kind of horrible dreck.

But, this is what really offended me:in "Meet the Parents" there was one trained animal to provide a few cute jokes.In this sequel, not only did they feel the need to throw in a pathetic looking dogfor a few more "America's Funniest Videos" style laughs, they effectively used a child in the role of a third "trained animal".Sick.They must have figured that it worked well with "Mini-Me" in the "Austin Powers" sequel, so why not stick Robert DeNiro with a similar sidekick?The people who made this movie deserve a swift kick (or two) in the pants.

Clash of the Icons
Moviegoers flocked to "Meet the Fockers," making this star-studded sequel to "Meet the Parents" a box-office smash. Now that Gaylord "Greg" Focker (Ben Stiller) and his fiancée Pam Byrnes (Teri Polo) are finally getting married, it's time for Pam's conservative parents (Robert De Niro and Blythe Danner) to meet Greg's freewheeling parents (Dustin Hoffman and Barbra Streisand). De Niro is once again terrific as Jack Byrnes, the suspicious ex-CIA operative (though Jack's obsession with the "circle of trust" has grown a bit tiresome). Stiller reprises one of his most humorous--and appealing--screen personas as the beleaguered male nurse. Hoffman gives the films best performance as Bernie Focker, a frisky lawyer-turned-househusband and Streisand is especially funny as Roz Focker, a straightforward sex therapist for seniors. Blythe Danner and Teri Polo are wonderful in their supporting roles and Owen Wilson's cameo appearance is a hoot. The DVD extras include deleted scenes, bloopers, and a Matt Lauer interview with the cast.

Total Mind Pollution... I would rather not give any stars
Listen to the people who didn't like this movie.I LOVED the first movie and watched it several times.The first movie had some crudeness in it, but most of the humor was just plain funny.This movie was nothing but crudeness and I think my IQ went down just by sitting through it.If you enjoyed this movie, you are extremely immature.There are some very funny movies out there, they just don't need to be as crude as this one.I think I only laughed once during the movie and I don't even remember when that was because most of the time I was sitting there debating on whether or not I should just turn the movie off. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Murder, and its tale-telling aftermath, is the compelling subject of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation. Since it premiered on CBS on October 6, 2000, CSI was a ratings triumph, spawning a spinoff (CSI: Miami) and positioning itself for long-term success. As the first season demonstrates, creator Anthony Zuiker's foolproof formula was established early on, bolstered by a fine ensemble cast and requiring minimal tweaking as the season progressed; its Las Vegas-based "criminalists" eventually became "CSI" steeped in the scientific minutiae of forensic investigation, but the series arrived essentially intact, with an irresistible (and seemingly inexhaustible) supply of corpses and the mysteries that surround them. Influenced by the graphic precedent of movies like Seven and Kiss the Girls, CSI matches morbidity with dispassionate methodology; viewers are so fascinated by the investigative process that they're unfazed by intimate autopsies and internal (i.e., digitally animated) views of traumatized flesh, bone, and sinew.

While keeping abreast of cutting-edge technologies, CSI combines the ingenuity (and fallibility) of villains with the appealing humanity of its heroes. CSI director and entomologist Gil Grissom (played by series coproducer William Petersen) is introverted but ethically intense; he's both mentor and moral compass for his night-shift team, including a former stripper-turned-CSI (Marg Helgenberger); a recovering gambler (Gary Dourdan); an eager ace (George Eads) with room for improvement; a workaholic (Jorja Fox) who can't always remain emotionally detached from her cases; and a chief detective (Paul Guilfoyle) who's a necessary link to police procedure. Like The X-Files, CSI supports its characters with feature-film production values, employing a Rashomon structure that turns murder into a progressively accurate study of cause and effect. Script quality is consistently high ("Blood Drops" and "Unfriendly Skies" are exceptional), direction is slick and sophisticated, and the mysteries are complex enough to invite multiple viewings. Despite a regrettable shortage of DVD features, CSI's inaugural season remains addictively worthy of its lofty reputation. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (84)

An absolute hit!
CSI is my absolute favorite show on television as of right now. When I saw that they had DVD sets out, I knew I had to have them. I got CSI Season 1 for a Christmas gift and I'm almost through it already!
The DVD set is a decent price for what's on it and it includes 6 disks.

The Episodes on the disk are as follows:

Pilot
Cool Change
Crate and Burial
Pledging Mr. Johnson
Friends and Lovers
Who Are You?
Blood Drops
Anonymous
Unfriendly Skies
Sex, Lies and Larvae
I-15 Murders

Farenheit 932
Boom
To Halve and to Hold
Table Stakes
Too Tough to Die
Face Lift
$35K OBO
Gentle Gentle
Sounds of Silence
Justice is Served
Evaluation Day
Strip Strangler

The only down about the DVD is the fact that it doesn't have much bonus material. But other than that I highly recommend purchasing this DVD. This season has the best episodes throughout the run of this show. The First Season is what made CSI as popular as it is! So go out there and get your hands on this DVD. If you are as much of a CSI lover as I am, you won't be disappointed!

The best television you can find!
Finally after three years, CBS and Paramount are realeasing the complete first season of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation. I have been watching every episode since the first and have enjoyed almost every one! Now, with this six disc set, i can watch the first season over and over again which has some of the best classic episodes.

Pilot
Cool Change
Crate 'n Burial
Plegding Mr. Johnson
Friends & Lovers
Who Are You?
Blood Drops
Anonymous
Unfriendly Skies
Sex, Lies, and Larvae
I-15 Murders
Farenheit 932
Boom
To Halve and to Hold
Table Stakes
Too Tough to Die
Face Lift
$35K O.B.O.
Gentle, Gentle
Sounds of Silence
Justice is Served
Evaluation Day
The Strip Strangler

These are the 23 episodes of the first season that will be included.
I have taped (on VHS) every single episode since the third episode of the series, but now i can watch them with much better quality. This is by far the best show on television!

Off To a Great Start
Although i just started watching CSI around the episode "I-15 Murders" it's my favorite show ever. I basically started watching it because my grandparents would tell me how cool and interesting the show is. I watched the episode i mentioned above and was just blown away the special effects especially for a show that just started were incredible.Over time watching this show i really liked the characters of Nick and Sara (George Eads, Jorja Fox)beacuse first of all Nick is soo good looking and really dedicated to what he does and Sara is a tough chick and i love that when a show has a tough female character. My favorite episodes are "Unfriendly Skies" and "Sex, Lies and Larve"basically because i feel they are great Sara episodes and show what CSI is all about.Sometimes the first episodes aren't that great when a show starts off but CSI's doesn't fail to be anything but excelent. Even if you've just heard about CSI and never watched and episode it's worth buying at any price the show is just that great.

CSI improves over time, but this was a great start.
Oh how I love C.S.I., even though it's getting watered down by spin offs, the original stays true. C.S.I. had some rocky beginnings, but the first season is still worth owning. Alot of the backstory comes from the first season, so if you watch it over and over again *like myself* you'll want to own this. There are some great episodes in this pack, that you'll want to watch again and again.

As Near To The Real Thing As You Can Get
When I first started watching Columbo, I often wanted to be a detective. When I first started watching Mike Hammer, I often wanted to be a detective. When I watched Magnum P.I., I often wanted to be a detective. Now I watch CSI, and I do not want to be a detective. In fact, after watching one episode, I went up to a guy I went to school with who is now a coroner, shook his hand and told him he was the better man. I told him he had more guts than I did, in that I would not ever want his job. This is not a TV show for those (like myself) who cannot eat pizza after seeing someone's charred body, as is sometimes seen on the show. CSI holds no punches. Shows like Columbo, Mike Hammer, and Magnum, while at times are bloody, give the viewer a more "romantic side" of the occupation so to speak, while CSI gives you an almost raw view of what it is really like to work in the detective field. In short, detective work really isn't a glamorous occupation. If someone's brains are blown out, CSI shows you up close, all the little noodles (which of course remind me of purple macaroni, thus disgusting me from eating macaroni for awhile). If a lady has her eyeball fall out, they show the eyeball up close (do you get the picture?) Still, this is a show that is very intriguing. Of course you want to watch it to find out if they catch the murderer(IF it is a murder, which on this program, sometimes it is not). Like most any detective show, it's the CSI teams' expertise in the field and their luck, that helps them put the pieces together, and CSI does it in such a manner as to make MOST of their shows believable. And the reason I stress MOST, is that sometimes, their shows do tend to go out there. I have beyond perfect vision in one eye, and perfect vision in the other, and even I would have a hard time seeing some of the things they seem to spot a mile away with their mini flashlights. But even with this one flaw, CSI is a show I look forward to watching week after week. I also love CSI Miami. CSI gets its entertainment value from the relief of the cases being solved. The first season of CSI was superb at the worst. It blew Law & Order out of the water, and continues to do so. CSI combines forensic science with action, drama, suspense, horror, occasional comedy (in the right moment) and intrigue. I would not recommend it for viewers under the age of 16 for the fact of the gore, and sometimes racy scenes. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Four extremely beautiful people do extremely horrible things to one another in Closer, Mike Nichols' pungent adaptation of Patrick Marber's play that easily marks the Oscar-winning director's best work in years. Anna (Julia Roberts) is a photographer who specializes in portraits of strangers; Dan (Jude Law) is an obituary writer struggling to become a novelist; Alice (Natalie Portman) is an American stripper freshly arrived in London after a bad relationship; and Larry (Clive Owen) is a dermatologist who finds love under the most unlikely of circumstances. When their paths cross it's a dizzying supernova of emotions, as Nichols and Marber adroitly construct various scenes out of their lives that pair them again and again in various permutations of passion, heartbreak, anger, sadness, vengeance, pleading, deception, and most importantly, brutal honesty. It's only until you're more than halfway through the movie that you'll have to ask yourself exactly why you are watching such a beautifully tragic tale, as Closer is basically the ickiest, grossest, most dysfunctional parts of all your past relationships strung together into one movie. Ultimately, it falls to the four actors to draw you deeper into the story; all succeed relatively, but it's Law and Owen whose characters will cut you to the quick. Law proves that yet again he's most adept at playing charming, amoral bastards with manipulative streaks, and Owen is nothing short of brilliant as the character most turned on by the energy inherent in destructive relationships--whether he's on the giving or receiving end. --Mark Englehart ... Read more

Reviews (259)

4 great actors, 4 great stars
This is the story of four people: two men and two women. It souds plain simple, but the story is not so. It is not the typical story of a love quadrangle. It's a story of power, pride, self-confidence and, of course, love.

The greatest and the lowest of human condition. All for love, but all for gaining the higher respect and best appearance in front of the rest of the world.

The story is fantastic but, what to say of the actors? It is not only Portmann to take care. I think Julia Roberts makes her best acting ever. Jude Law is plain correct but Clive Owen is the great discovery for me. It is clear that this is "a film for actors", to show the best of them and they really succeed.

The only problem is that these two facts (story and acting) hide a poor direction and some minor aspects. Personally, I think the producer did the budget and realized he has nothing to spend in such details.

But it is a very recommendable movie to spend the afternoon at home. I saw it in the cinema and I had such a great impression that I hired it to see it again (and I haven't done it in more than ten times).

Shockingly Disappointing
I don't understand how anyone could enjoy this film.It was by far the worst movie I've seen this year.In fact, it was so bad that I doubt I'll be able to enjoy watching the main 4 actors ever again.

Although some people feel that watching 4 people destroy each other is beautiful, I find it to be depressing.This movie is about 4 "lovers" who use each other uncaringly, cry a lot, use the "f" word multiple times in every sentence, and who are completely unlikeable.It's like the director thought that having 4 beautiful people in a film was enough.I love a good drama, but this wasn't even close.

The plot is as shallow as the characters.The ending is very silly; we find out information that the film makers thought would create a "Usual Suspects" type of ending, but it all falls flat and seems contrived.Amazon has many better DVDs for sale than this garbage.

Mike Nichols at his best...
Genre: Dark Romance

Genre Grade: A+

Final Grade: A

This was a great movie - except it's possibly one of the most verbally sexual movies I've ever seen - but I can handle a little sex talk! There were about, I dunno, eight people or so who walked out of the movie because of the offensive language and sex talk. This movie breaks many barriers and talks about problems in relationships and tries to take a closer look at the raw emotions of affairs. The acting was Oscar-worthy from each person, Clive Owen coming out on top in my opinion. Natalie Portman was amazing as well, and Julia Roberts actually gives the audience something new.

This movie is extremely depressing, and is not a date movie unless you want to walk away feeling hopeless. It leaves us with a despairing look at humanity and our own desires, and the film brings to light things that are normally left in the bedroom or simply remain unspoken. Definitely worth seeing just for the performances (especially the amazing encounter between Julia Roberts and Clive Owen, and then later the discussion between Jude Law and Clive Owen), the AMAZING dialogue, and just because of the fact that Mike Nichols directed it.

Great Performances save this film!
This movie is hard to follow.No question about that.Most movies that are adapted from Broadway plays don't fair well on screen unless they're made from the classic playwrights (Tennessee Williams, David Mamet, Eugene O'Neill, etc.).Many of the negative reviews here on Amazon.com expecting more action are justified.However, I found the movie to be better than expected.Mike Nichols is one of Hollywood's finest directors.And with four of the best actors around, he does very will with the challenging subject matter.Natalie Portman has become the "Harrison Ford" of the Star Wars genre by breaking out into a great Oscar nominated role.British TV star Clive Owen also breaks free of his shell with his excellent performance.Juila Roberts & Jude Law round out this excellent cast.If you can stay with it for the performances, you'll be amused.

One of the worst movies I've ever seen
I was really excited about seeing this, since it got such good reviews. Boy, was I surprised. This movie is so depressing, with everyone cheating on each other and getting hurt. There was a review that said that this is a real love story, but if that's true we all might as well throw in the towel. If you like feeling like you want to slit your wrists, then watch the movie. If not, definitely look elsewhere. ... Read more

Reviews (1926)

The force is strong with this one.
Star[]Wars! The series has come back into full swing with 'Attack of the Clones.' Everything that 'Phantom Menace' tried to be and more, we return to the rollicking space adventure that made the first three classics. Don't pay attention to the negitive reviews, aside from a little cheese covered romance the goods are delivered in great fashion. 'Attack..' is packed with extremely well lensed action set pieces that remind the viewer of the summer of 1980. The acting is decent and works for the material provided...I mean, this is Star Wars not Shakespere and lines are delivered with intended monotonality; lightsabers speak louder than words and emotion a Jedi does not crave. I found this film to be better than 'Return of the Jedi' due to its return to the swashbuckling action/adverture of the first two movies sans cute little talking kid friendly creatures that help generate mechandise sales for the toddler marketing target group. The special effects are outstanding of course, and the sound effects were really cool. The story was decent enough to get you to care what happens to the heroes and dislike the villians (finally, villians. That seemed to be missing from episode one save Darth Maul who was way underused). All around an excellent chapter in the saga and a great movie in itself. This film makes you look forward to the next installment and the man himself-Darth Vader. Thanks, George for reigniting the magic that was, and is, Star Wars.

the best of the star wars movies
in this one,yoda fights.this is truly awesome.anakan is growing up.he goes to get his mom from slavery but shes been killed by these nasty little monsters.so he goes genocidal on them all.ben is tring to teach anakan but hes learning way faster than normal and is quite the showoff.the kids will like it.it is the last full length movie of the set.there is an animated short film after this part called clone wars.the last one is due out next summer.just anybody bwill like it.the chick is a young teen ans ends up being anakans girlfriend.i dont know what you heard but this is an all time great.the special effects are cool.this movie is a classic!

Big Trouble In Little Greece: Attack Of The Kung Fu Robots
If I were a movie director and for some reason I decided to undertake the project of making the most grotesque parody and mockery ever made of the original Star Wars trilogy, I would do the following:

First, I would open the movie where the main character of the movie -The Jedi- freefalls some 10,000 stories in a sprawling metropolis, all the while narrowly missing multitudes of careening hovercrafts which literally filled the sky, only to finally land safely inside one of them just in the nick of time, nanoseconds before he was about to slam into the ground.

Secondly, I would include the most bland, personality-less, emotionally-uninspiring actors and actresses I could find. Also, I would incorporate pseudo-Greek cultural and archeological elements throughout the movie (which had no relevancy to the sci-fi theme of the movie) so as to confuse the viewer as to what planet...or planets the movie was taking place in...or what universe and epoch(s) for that matter. I'd include several pseudo-romantic scenes where there wasn't an iota of emotion or chemistry between the two love birds and whose forced, stimulated 'romantic scenes' seemed to serve no purpose, either.

I would then attempt to completely destroy...annhilate the original Star Wars's sacred notion of the force -as being stimulated and channeled by spirituality and mind over matter- and any drama associated with it as well. MY notion would be that the measure of one's force can be determined by analyzing mitochondrial DNA samples to tally the number of antibodies present in the protoplasm.

Next, I would blow away the concept of the original Star Wars's wimpy 2-jedi battle scenes with an epic magnitude-12 mega battle scene which consisted of 10,000 jedis and 100,000 jedi foes engaged in flipping-through the-air somersault kung fu moves that render the likes of "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" and all '70s special-effects-laden Chinese kung fu flics obsolete. You thought that Luke Skywalker jumping 10 feet out of a carbon freeze container was cool? Could Luke Skywalker stay airborne for 10 seconds all the while throwing barrages of backroundhouse kicks and punches? Screw that punchless Luke Skywalker single-blade lightsaber. Behold, I introduce the double-edged light saber which all jedis are equipped with. FULLY FUNCTIONAL AND OPERATIONAL. Only an elite and intelligent class of human being can be a jedi? Not anymore. Any living, crawling, oozing intelligence-devoid parasite, wingless bat or orc -of any gender-can be a jedi.

Finally, I would end the movie with Kung Fu/Force-Master Yoda defeating the Master Evil Jedi with triple and quintuple cartwheel backroundhouse kicks and punches, while airborne, and lightning-fast Tae Kwan Do slaps and curled finger combinations that would put Jackie Chan to shame. The very last scene of the movie would end with the Evil Jedi Master becoming so angry, because of his defeat, that his head grew to the size of a large balloon, then exploded with the force of 20 grenades. Maybe I'd include that scene only in the UNCUT version.

The result: The sci-fi sequel to "Big Trouble in Little China" -Big Trouble in Little Greece: Attack Of The Kung Fu Robots...or as some people may prefer to call it -Star Wars II: Attack Of The Clones.

My Take on Mr. Lucas
OK, here's my rant. I'll keep it brief (unlike some other reviewers)

Best Parts:
1. Phantom Menace - Pod Race, Darth Maul
2. Attack of the Clones - Yoda's lightsaber flight

That's it. Everything else in these films is an utter joke. I could go on for many paragraphs, but I'll spare you. You gotta realize that there was a reason George didn't direct Empire or Jedi. He's an awful director. He has no ear for dialogue. The newer digital film process looks really awful. Only good ol' George could manage to waste the talents of Christopher Lee, Sam Jackson, Ewan McGregor, and Natalie Portman. And I think Hayden Christensen is the only other actor who possesses Keanu Reeves' atrocious wooden technique. His Anakin doesn't possess darkness, just stupidity. I hope Lucas gets a tumor in that fat double chin of his. If you don't like it, sue me. He's destroyed the meaning of my childhood favorites, so the hell with him. Do you really think the next film is going to make up for it? Only if it's about four hours long and is directed by someone else.

Star Wars is Star Wars-No matter what anyone thinks
I am writing on behalf of all the Star Wars movies. Sure the prequals aren't life changing but they still make the cut worthy of the title Star Wars.Back in the 70s/early 80s America needed a major facelift. We had nothin to look foward to anymore and just went by living. The movies out back then were dark and dreary. our common mythology had faded into the closet. Then came Star Wars. It was just supposed to be another space family film that would eventually be forgotten about. We were decieved. What George Lucas put on this Earth was meant to be. He dragged us out of the gutter and gave us something to talk about. People had a place to escape to and run away from there troubles. It wasn't like your average cowboy movie where you know the outcome and the setting. It was a strange galaxy with weird looking creatures and strange spaceships. It was all so real and lifelike. It was the total opposite of Star Trek. It was cool. People wanted more. They got two more. Each delivering there own set of memories. The lines became legendary. The sound of a light saber instantly recognizable. Movies nowadays are always borrwing lines and plots of other movies. Star Wars only borrowed one thing. Creativity. The Star Wars story was pulled out of mid-air. It wasn't like George Lucas said he wanted to make a space movie kind of like an old western. He created the idea of A Space Saga Trilogy. He's the one who threw us into this exciting new world called Star Wars. Fans wanted more. They got comics and books. then Star Wars movies were no more. They were still in the movies. Oter movies had borrowed lines and plots for their own. Thats why Star Wars is pop culture ICON. That is what the prequals lack. When someone comes up yo you with a stick in one hand and is waving it around they don't say "Watch out Count Dooku". They say watch out Darth Vader. The prequals are good movies but they aren't life changing like the Classics. If the prequals came first people wouldn't be walking around saying Look A destroyer droid. They don't have the trademark line like they do in the Classics. They didn't create new famous lines, they just took them from the old ones. As a movie I would give Phantom Menace and AOTC a 4 Star award. As a Star Wars film I would give it 2. The negative two is for lack of creativity. The OT is so popular because of what it was nd what it was created as. George did'nt give us that sense of story and herics like he did with the OT. George didn't create the OT because he wanted to tell a story for himself. He made it for us. For Episode one we weren't thrown into this new world with weird craetures and memorable charecters. In a sense of story The prequals fit nicely with the OT. But for a regular movie It gives us nothing to remember and say over and over again and to instantly recognize as Star Wars. I know it is hard to repeat what happened in the 70s/80s but there was nothing George Lucas could do about it. The Prequals are out in a world where evereything has already happened and didn't ignite the flame as the OT did. The Phantom Menace just continued in the name of Star Wars. The OT are just such good movies in themselves and it just doesn't matter which one you see first. They are all memorable. Don't get me wrong, the prequals are good movies and definantly worthy in the name of Star Wars but they are just thrown in with all the other movies which were created around one movie-Star Wars. Other movies wouldn't be the same without there Star Wars moment. That is why when in the movie Just Married Sarah(Brittany Murphy) asks Tom(Ashton Kutcher) if he ever dreamed of anything more glorious in his childhood than his wedding night, he flashes back to when he was playing lightsabers on the playground with other kids to the famous tune that Changed The World. Da da da DAAAA daa-you know the rest!
"Remember, the Force will be with you, Always" ... Read more