Reviews (259)

Who Ever THought of This Film was an Insane Genius
Whomever came up with the concept for this film needs very serious mental evaluation; A love story about a guy with scissors for hands? But perhaps we will put that aside for now becasue the movie is simply stupendous. Edward ScissorHands is one of my all time favorite movies, I assume this goes for many others as well, becasue i have never found someone who didnt like this movie. It appeals to the strange geek inside us all who just wants to be accepted for what he is. For an overview of the movie read the summary amazon has provided, i will talk only about the dvd. THe extras are quite neat with commentary tracks, production art, and best of all some old Burton shorts. Vincent is a great clayamtion thing about a kid trying to be vincent price, it reminded me of beetlejuice, visually. Frankenweenie is kinda dumb and boring, but its about a kid who brings his dog back to life. THe image clarity is fantastic, as is the sound on this disc. It has some really cool animated menus too. So go buy it. You might wanna see it first though becasue it is pretty strange. Bottom line is if you like Burton films, you will love this one. (I still have a little trouble seeing that kid from the breakfast club as a bad guy, but whatta gonna do?)

fantastic DVD, even better movie
Edward Scissorhands is quite simply the best fairy tale never told. This is Tim Burton in his eccentric prime, and his presence is palpable in every arena of this beautiful and personal film. The inventive art direction is perhaps the most memorable aspect of that presence, most notably in the pastel palette that covers everything from the ingenius solid-color costumes to the quaint neighborhood/town our characters inhabit.

The genius of this movie is more far-reaching than that. Everything fits seamlessly together--from Danny Elfman's quirky score to Stefan Czapsky's meticulous camera work to an entire cast full of nuanced performances... the list goes on and on. While this film's acting gem is Diane Weist in the role of the sweet and overly altruistic mother, Johnny Depp plays the titular role in a beautifully understated performance. Similarly, Winona Ryder wonderfully (and blondly) embodies young beauty and Alan Arkin turns in a comedic yet touching performance as the sometimes-overbearing father. The ensemble cast is flawless, complementing the quirky but ultimately realistic tone.

Perhaps the best aspect of this movie is that it achieves its goals with amazing subtlety--the overt themes of "being different", family, and (let's not forget) love are constantly driven into cliché these days, but Edward Scissorhands accomplishes it all with a snip, not a stab.

This 10th Anniversary Edition DVD is everything this movie deserves--insightful commentaries from Tim Burton AND Danny Elfman and an interesting featurette, along with the concept art, trailers, TV Spots, and scene selection we've all come to expect. (The Interactive 3-D Menus are priceless!)

This is just one of those positively timeless, life-affirming movies that belongs in everyone's collection.

A true work of art!
This has certainly got to be one of Burton's most imaginative creations. I can't remember a movie be that puzzlling, and yet so interesting and fun. Only Jonny Depp could prouduce such a voice, and performance. And that hair! Well, that was just the final icing on the cake. Let's face it. It's not easy to act the part of a lonly anodroid,and especially one that looked on with curiosity one moment and hated the next. Horror king, Vincint Price does a good job too as Edward's maker. Who is despreat for companionship. I laughed, I cried, then I laughed some more. All in all, this is not that bad of a movie.

A Beautiful Movie
I first saw this movie not so long ago and I fell in love with it. It is a beautiful story with very sad moments as well as exciting ones. Burton and Depp make a great team. This is one of the most moving movies I have ever seen. It tells the story of Edward (Depp), a person created by an inventor (Vincent Price)who passed on just before he had a chance to amputate Edward's scissorhands. Edward lived alone in a castle until sweet-hearted Avon lady Peg Boggs(Dianne Wiest)comes and takes him to her home to live with her family. A must see for Tim Burton fans and anyone who enjoys a magical time watching a movie. I have recently bought this DVD and I love it. I give Edward Scissorhands two big thumbs way up and 100 stars. I hope my review has helped you.

masterpiece
i just realised that "Edward Scissorhands" is one of my favourite films. it has so much power. Tim Burton's storytelling, it is magnificent. his imagination is so great. the way he portrays his characters is so unique. every character is very distinct. like characters in his other works: Jack Skellingon, Ichbod Crane, Edward Bloom, Betelgeuse. now let's talk about the acting. johnny depp was magnificent. you could sense his emotion, even though he barely talks, as he portrays a lost, innocent, confused child. his make-up is excellent too. yes, he does look like a freak. but he looks good. and Winona Ryder. she's such a good actress. and can you say "pretty?" and oh! the set design and cinematography. the use of colour to expose the contrast between the two worlds. the pastel versus the dark castle. and the town! oh my. it is a dreamland. did you know that it is an actual neighborhood in Florida? one more thing. Danny Elfman's score is superb! ... Read more

Reviews (144)

The greatest Rock N' Roll Film of all time.
From start to finish this film captures everything that is, or was, rock n' roll.You have Blues with Muddy Waters, Eric clapton and Paul Butterfield.You have Rockabilly with Ronnie Hawkins. You have Countryfied rock with Neil Young ,Joni Mitchell and Emmylou Harris. Then there is the soul of The Staple Singers and Van Morrison.The singer/songwriting of Neil Diamond.Last but not least, Bob Dylan.Who shows up at the end of the movie to put it all together with the stars of the show, THE BAND.All the styles mentioned above can be found in any given BAND song. I highly doubt that if you are reading this that you are unfamiller with the music of The Band. MArtin Scorsese does a great job of capturing the raw emotion that could take place at a real rock n' roll show. I could go on forever, but I won't. The main reason I'm writng this is to say that Robbie and Mr. Scorsese are finally getting together to work on the DVD Version of this fantastic document. No word on when it is to be released, but I will be one of the first persons to buy a copy and you should be too.

ONE WORD - AWESOME
This film's music has had a lasting effect on me from when I first saw it with my father at the movie theater as a young teenager, through the time I could not wait to get back to the states from my summer vacation to listen to the LP again, to this day as I order the DVD.

A few highlights; 1. Rick Danko's soulful and honest singing of "It Makes No Difference", "Stagefright" and many others. God bless his soul. 2. Levon Helm's "americana personified" singing on "The Night They Drove Ole Dixie Down" and his perfect drumming. 3. Dylan's God-like presence and powerful performance. 4. Vann Morrison's deep and electrifying performance that raised the hair on my arms. 5. Neil Young's sincerity with a haunting behind the scenes Joni Mitchell singing "Helpless, Helpless". 6. Clapton showing his usual class by letting Robbie outduel him in their guitar solos. 7. Robbie Robertson's guitar on Van's song "Caravan" and many others. 8. Garth Hudson's unique keyboards and Richard Manuel's spirited piano and singing.

[Forget] the imperfections, this is a musical masterpiece, showcasing many of the greatest musical talents of the last 40 years. The Band are simply one of the greats of all time. John X. Condos

Presentation overshadows music
I must say I'm not a huge fan of The Band, but I like "Before the Flood". However, I was amazed at how poorly The Band played, and sang even worse, in this, their farewell concert. It is hard to believe they had played together for 17 years.

Even the guests, such as Bob Dylan, seemed to use their worst voice. Only Eric Clapton was really any good, though Van Morrison was acceptable. Otherwise, fairly embarrassing musical performances. At the end, *everybody* is onstage singing "I Shall Be Released" - killing an otherwise nice song.

Obviously Scorsese got all the good film people and photographers to work on the project, and it was well done. So well done that the presentation outshines the music.

There are some nice extras, including multiple commentaries. Hard to recommend it unless you are truly a Band fan.

Not bad for a fiver
I got this DVD at my brother's recommendation for a fiver in Heathrow Airport, and it was good value at that. Good American music and a very well shot concert movie (well, it is Scorsese!) The interview sequences are intersting and as a Chaucer fan I delighted at the intro to the Canterbury Tales being read out. I was unfamiliar with the group's music before seeing this, and whilst they aren't a patch on Creedence Clearwater Revival I still admire their music. An interesting insight to a little segment of rock history.

when the best rock band and movie director collide ...
It's a worn-out formula nowadays. Bob Dylan did it, Chuck Berry did it, and Luciano Pavarotti does it all the time. They also do it every time somebody dies, and in this case you don't even have to be a musician. Yeah, I'm talking about that dreary event, the celebration concert with guest musician buddies. But there are exceptions to the rule, and this is definitely the case here.

To celebrate that they were quitting the 'god---n impossible' life on the road after 16 years, The Band gave a farewell concert in San Francisco, on Thanksgiving Day, 1976. To join them, they invited artists who represented the rich and varied array of styles that went into their musical melting pot: Rock'n' Roll, Blues, Folk, New Orleans R'n'B, Country, Gospel, Rockabilly ... who would sing their own numbers backed up by them. They, noblesse oblige, brought in their first mentor, Ronnie Hawkings, a man who sure knows how to entice a teenager into joining a rock'n'roll band, and Bob Dylan, of course, (who had just released Blood on the Tracks and Desire), Joni Mitchell (The Hissing of Summer Lawns and Hejira her most recent albums), Neil Young (Tonight's the Night and Zuma were his latest solo efforts), Muddy Waters (who would release Hard Again, his best late day work the following year), and many, many more I have no space here to mention. All top-notch and in their musical prime. Well, and Neil Diamond.

The result was a concert that can only be described as dazzling and magical. The Band do ecstatic versions of some of their best songs and the guest appereances are also amazing, Van Morrison does what's probably the best version ever of Caravan, Muddy Waters proves why he is the M-A-N, chile, The Staple Singers send a shiver up your spine that can rend you comatose for life, and Robbie Robertson and Eric Clapton bring the house down with their scorching six-strings and then they burn the ruins to ashes. All this just to quote a few. But I have a minor complaint here, the movie only features one song (The Shape I'm in) sung by Richard Manuel, one of the most soulful and moving singers that ever walked the face of the earth. This gives the newcomer a somewhat off-balanced account of how vocal duties were shared in The Band, as one can deduct that Levon Helm sang almost everything with a little help from his friends Rick and Richard. And Levon is darn good, but Richard is the shhh ....sheer top of the heap.

Casting these trifles aside, the movie is a masterpiece. Direcrted by a Martin Scorsese in a state of grace (those were the days of Taxi Driver and Raging Bull), and beautifully darkly photographed by Michael Chapman (Taxi Driver, Raging Bull), Michael W. Watkins (later X-Files direcror and producer), and Vilmos Zsigmond (Close Encounters of the Third Kind, The Deer Hunter, Heaven's Gate), this was to be more than your average rock concert documentary.

The filmmakers were set on an ambitious goal, to show what it is and what does it feel to play great music. And they achieved it in such a way that we mere mortals get to feel what it is to be up there on the stage, enraptured, playing that great music to an enthusiastic and receptive crowd. The featurette that is one of the DVD bonus add-ons shows how Scorsese had these sheets of paper with the lyrics of each song to be played written down in one column, the main moments of each performance in another (when a singer would join in the chorus, or the guitar solo was to begin, or a special part of the lyric would be sung, etc), and the camera shots and movements for each moment in a third column. This is called making the best of the means of your art instead of just doing anything that would do, and it shows on the screen in a way that leaves you breathless. Watching Scorsese frantically directing the movie like a tightrope walker with no net to fall down on must've been worth another documentary. They had only one take for everything, mind that, and I guess that's what might have attracted such a brave and audacious director as Scorsese: Jumping into the unstopping swirling midst of life and trying to extract art out of it with just spotlights and cameras. Souns enticing, isnt't it? And for no money nor any promises of getting more you-know-what than Frank Sinatra. ... Read more

Reviews (155)

Great Entertainment, but . . .
George C. Scott's portrayal of General George S. Patton is outstanding in capturing the essense of the man; so much so that one thinks of Scott when considering the historic Patton! Scott's deep voice better fits the profane and volcanic nature of the General, who was "blessed" with a high and squeaky voice! A classic war film that provides great entertainment with each viewing. That said, I must take exception with a reviewer who lauded the film's accuracy. It is anything but historically accurate. The overall timeline is correct, but anyone who has read a book on Patton (especially the "Patton Papers") will spot the dramatic license taken by the Hollywood producers. Just to name a few: Patton knew that he would command Third Army before he left the Mediteranean for England. In the film, he wasn't told until after D-Day! Another: the entire exchange between Patton and Montgomery in Messina was fabricated; as was the competition between the two for Messina. This said, "Patton" remains one of my favorite movies, and I recommend it to anyone. Just have that book ready on the coffee table (also available from Amazon!)

Not the best war movie, but great character study
It may be treasonous to suggest that Patton is a flawed WW2 movie, although it is leaps and bounds the best character study ever developed inside a war movie. Not for nothing was this Nixon's favorite flick. George C. Scott justly deserved an Oscar for his portrayal of the hugely idiosyncratic Patton. I was 14 when I first saw it, and it was a real eye-opener for someone who (growing up in the military) thought all Army generals were bland smiley Eisenhower clones.

Scott's Patton is sensational, and manipulates the audience into a genuine love-hate relationship with the man. He was a tyrant, but soft-skinned. He was a brilliant tactician who was respected above all others by the Germans. He was also a mean, petty, competitive SOB who could waste soldier's lives to feed his ego, and with primitive political sensibilities - kind of an American Arik Sharon.

Flaws? Well... the movie certainly blitzes through WW2 history. Near the end of the film, the flim shows Patton's troopers rescuing the surrounded 101st Airborne at Bastogne (December 1944), and suddenly, it's May 1945. This skips over perhaps Patton's worst moment, when in 1945 he ordered a small task force to penetrate far behind German lines to attempt a rescue of his son-in law languishing in a POW camp (he was captured during the Kassarine Pass battles). The mission was a dramatic and costly failure.

I did have problems with the other significant generals portrayed in the movie. Montgomery was pompous, but he did pull the British through in North Africa. In Patton, he has few redeeming features. Karl Maulden's Omar Bradley is just too nice for a four-star general - probably because the real Bradley served as a technical consultant for the movie, which must have stirred interesting emotions in the man. The real Bradley experienced a real love-hate relationship with the flashy, tempermental Patton.

The biggest flaw in Patton is technical. Like the earlier film, "Battle of the Bulge", American tankers drive 1950's tanks (Chafees?), and the Germans get bigger American tanks. (In unlikely movies like Kelly's Heroes, they used real Shermans). This is way before "Private Ryan", so the battle scenes are dramatic enough but do not have the punch of recent movies.

The real reason for "Patton" is the man, not the battles. In this, the movie surpasses "MacArthur" and similar biopics. And this definitely has the best music score of any war movie. So maybe it gets a "five" after all.

Decent Film/No Frills DVD
It's to the much-deserved credit of the underrated George C. Scott--simply brilliant here--and director Franklin Schaffner that the celebrated general of "Patton's" title comes across more the tragic hero and less the right-wing nutjob, especially considering that the film debuted in 1970. "Patton" is worth a look for that bit of storytelling finesse alone, but the film offers much more, effectively examining both the highs and lows of the headstrong general's World War II days. Though it lacks the poetic grandeur of epics like "Lawrence of Arabia" or "How the West Was Won," "Patton" nonetheless operates on a big scale, and Scott's larger-than-life portrayal is never obscured by the production's legions of soldiers or frequent changes of scenery. The script, co-written by Francis Ford Coppola, stays focused on the professional aspects of Patton's life--his devotion to duty, command, and career--and wisely avoids bogging down with diversions into romance or family life. Some might find such an approach imbalanced, but most viewers will likely enjoy the "purity" of what is, for lack of a better term, a satisfying "guy's story." Look for Karl Malden in a great supporting role as Omar Bradley, and enjoy Jerry Goldsmith's bombastic score, rivaled only by John Williams' Indiana Jones overtures. Still, "Patton" is not without faults. Military buffs may bemoan some technical inaccuracies, such as using tanks that don't fit the historical period; at times, the characterizations devolve into caricature, especially that of British General Montgomery; and some of Patton's borderline psychotic behavior--his various rages and obsessions with dreams and reincarnation--seem too easily dismissed as colorful idiosyncracies. The DVD itself is rather bare for a film that received many Oscars, perhaps the biggest flaw of all.

GREATEST WAR FILM EVER MADE
In 1970, two films juxtaposed each other. "Patton" was an unlikely winner of eight Oscars. The pacifist Scott for all practical purposes took his Buck Turgidson character and refined him into the real-life Patton. In interviews, Scott said he found his research of Patton revealed an unbalanced man, but on screen Scott nailed him as the vainglorious, brilliant, driven warmonger he was. Steiger was offered the role first but turned it down because it glorified war. Vietnam was absolutely at its apex. It was very surprising that Hollywood would make such a film at that time. But director Frankin Schaffner had served under Patton, and after making "The Planet of the Apes" had the clout to call his shots. The film did not get America behind the war, but it did cause Nixon to start bombing Cambodia because the Patton story convinced him to get tough. The screenwriter, oddly enough, was Francis Ford Coppola, who may have done himself a turn. Coppola was no war lover, and wrote "Patton" as a man obsessed with war ("God help me, I love it so"), deluded by visions of Napoleonic grandeur mixed with Episcopalian Christianity and karmic reincarnation. The intent may have been to show a psychotic military man, to de-mask his heroism, and this may have been what prompted Scott to play it. From page to screen there are virtually no changes, but if Coppola was trying to put down the military by showing Patton's human warts, the result was a brilliant work that now is one of, if not the most, conservative pictures ever made. Watching "Patton" stirs wonderful pride in two countries (Great Britain is prominent in the film) that were tough enough to stand up to the Nazis when the rest of the world cowered in victimhood. Karl Malden's Omar Bradley is Patton's perfect foil, as is the Bernard Law Montgomery character. The film saved Coppola, who was about to be fired as "The Godfather" director. When he won the Oscar for "Patton", it gave him too much clout to get the axe.

(...)

WORTH SEEING JUST FOR THE OPENING SPEECH
In this post-9/11 world everyone should see this film if only to see and hear the famous speech Patton gave to his troops, opening the film. He starts out by saying that no one ever won a war by dying for his country. One wins a war by getting the guy on the other side to die for HIS (other) country. The Islamic terrorist plaguing the world today all say they want to die. Patton would say that he is glad to oblige them.

Just a warning, don't expect to learn anything about the conduct of the Second World War from this film. It is first and formost a character study of Patton, the man, and I can't praise George C. Scott enough for his stupendous performance. It is rare in history that an actor adapts so well to the role he is playing. ... Read more

Reviews (62)

Great 70's movie
I used to watch Convoy over and over as a kid. It is unfortunate that it is not being produced on DVD or VHS considering how many movies not nearly as entertaining are being marketed. I think if you didn't see it when it first came out you'd find it silly and dated today, but I feel to those of us who saw it initially growing up, it is a classic. Modeled after a catchy country western song by C.W. McCall and with stars such as Kris Kristofferson, Ali McGraw, Burt Young and Ernest Borgnine, I'm surprised it is so obscure. It has some great 70's car/truck chase and crash scenes and a good soundtrack. Hopefully it will come out of moratorium soon and be available.

Breaker-19
CONVOY is the best trucker movie of all time. I've watched this movie 1000's of times when I was a kid and I enjoy it even more now. This movie has action, comedy and romance. Kris Kristofferson was great in this movie, he really brought out the excitement of being a truck driver. As for Ali MacGraw, she was also great and beautiful co-star. The director, Sam Peckinpah did an excellent job capturing the essence of truck driving. After so many years of searching for this movie I finally have a copy of my own thanks to Amazon.com. I'm impatiently waiting for it to come out on DVD(extended verison)....

Convoy
I bought the VHS version of the movie going off the other reviews listed.I received it yesterday and watched it twice.The quality is excellent.No fuzzy picture or sound.If you want a copy of this old classic movie,get one on video.

CONVOY
i havn't played my copy yet. the dvd i got, came from half.com which is a letterbox version, not digitally remastered and released by PACIFIC FAMILY ENTERTAINMENT. i paid less than $5.00 brand new.

The old days
When you seee this movie, you will realinze how life in America was not anoying. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

"Blessed are the cheesemakers," a wise man once said. Or maybe not. But the point is Monty Python's Life of Brian is a religious satire that does not target specific religions or religious leaders (like, say, Jesus of Nazareth). Instead, it pokes fun at the mindless and fanatical among their followers--it's an attack on religious zealotry and hypocrisy--things that that fellow from Nazareth didn't particularly care for either. Nevertheless, at the time of its release in 1979, those who hadn't seen it considered it to be quite "controversial."

Life of Brian, you see, is about a chap named Brian (Graham Chapman) born December 25 in a hovel not far from a soon-to-be-famous Bethlehem manger. Brian is mistaken for the messiah and, therefore, manipulated, abused, and exploited by various religious and political factions. And it's really, really funny. Particularly memorable bits include the brassy Shirley Bassey/James Bond-like title song; the bitter rivalry between the anti-Roman resistance groups, the Judean People's Front and the People's Front of Judea; Michael Palin's turn as a lisping, risible Pontius Pilate; Brian urging a throng of false-idol worshippers to think for themselves--to which they reply en masse "Yes, we must think for ourselves!"; the fact that everything Brian does, including losing his sandal in an attempt to flee these wackos, is interpreted as "a sign." Life of Brian is not only one of Monty Python's funniest achievements, it's also the group's sharpest and smartest sustained satire. Blessed are the Pythons. --Jim Emerson ... Read more

Reviews (186)

Holy Hilarity!
Life of Brian is not as well known by the movie going public as Monty Python?s classic "Monty Python and the Holy Grail", but it is definitely is as, or maybe even funnier than Holy Grail. This is especially true for people who are familiar with the Biblical stories it pokes fun at. It is perfect satire, for nothing is sacred and everything is a joke.

The story revolves around Brian, a very unlucky resident of Judea who just happened to be born the same day the Christ child was born. Missing his chance at glory, Brian lives his life selling animal parts at the Coliseum, dominated by a violent mother who is very "friendly" to the Roman occupiers. The rest of Brian's environment is inhabited by a very wild bunch. The neo- or archo-Marxist group, the People's Front of Judea, battles the Romans daily by holding meeting after violent meeting, plotting against the legions and their arch rivals, the Judean People's Front. The Romans, on the other hand, are led by the Pontius Pilate, who, contrary to Biblical reports, has quite a lisp and an endearing sense of stupidity. When Brian rebels against his mother and joins up with the wild band of revolutionaries, his life is changed forever. Quite by accident, Brian is then thought to be the messiah, although he is quite reluctant in his leadership.

Satirically, this movie is absolutely ruthless. Everything is skewered, everything. The performances are all fantastic, especially that of John Cleese, who is just the man in this movie, playing about six separate characters. Joke after joke hits the viewer, which results in just non-stop humor. It's just a wonderful movie by the Python pioneers who really revolutionized comedy. The Criterion DVD edition is great, with tons of hilarious extras that are worth the price on their own. To the people that use this to either justify their atheism or believe it to be an attack on their religion, calm down. It's a comedy for God's sake, why do the opinions of some British comedians affect your outlook on life? Just laugh damn it!

Great extras on this Python DVD
THE LIFE OF BRIAN has remained one of my favorite Python flicks after the glow of the Holy Grail began to wear thin from overuse. If you're considering purchasing this movie, you've probably seen the movie already and are a Monty Python fan. If not, get ready for one of Python's most sacrilegious and hilarious movies of their collection! If you are easily offended, you might think twice. However, the satire here is equally distributed and is not aimed so much at religion itself but moreso at the amusing ways in which people can behave "under the influence" of zealotry.

I thoroughly enjoyed rewatching the movie, but it was a great surprise to find that this DVD comes packed with some great bonus materials. Several full-length, revealing interviews with the cast go into more Python history than just that surrounding this flick. And a rather large collection of scenes cut from the final release are also quite interesting.

The video and audio quality seem to be on par with most of the other DVD movies I've seen so far, despite the film's age.

All in all, a great addition to any Python collection.

Is nothing sacred? NO! And that's why this is a riot!
Irreverent, brilliant, ingenius... I'm getting all these words out of the way now before I forget them! Even though I'll probably use them a dozen times!

The funniest thing to come from England since The Stamp Act, Monty Python's Flying Circus could always be depended upon to provide the world with brilliantly twisted humor. The LIFE OF BRIAN is no less a comic masterpiece than anything else these boys have done. Ostensibly a parody of the life of Jesus, LIFE OF BRIAN is a hilarious attack on liberalism, conservatism, colonialism, individualism, communalism, organized religion, disorganized religion, fanaticism, feminism... take your pick of any of a hundred topics. It doesn't matter, it's still brilliant. And the script and direction holds it perfectly all together, even if there's a space ship chase sequence thrown in for the hell of it.

Once again, the members of MPFC each play several roles and every viewer has his or her favorites, so what the hell, I'll mention mine. Michael Palin, while playing a wonderfully foppy Pontius Pilate, is equally hilarious as a twitchy, hyperactive leper that Jesus had cured. Instead of being grateful, he complains that his rehabilitation has ruined his livelihood as a beggar. (Speaking of rehabilitation, Palin plays the part like a junkie in need of a fix.) John Cleese has several great moments, but his role as a Centurion turned sadistic Latin teacher is nothing short of genius. Everyone who has studied Latin will be beside themselves during this scene. And Terry Jones as Brian's mom still stuns me 25 years later. "My Brian is not the messiah! He's a very naughty, naughty boy."

Monty Python's LIFE OF BRIAN is irreverent, brilliant, and ingenius and this edition, complete with outtakes, behind-the-scenes footage, and interviews make this package worth the price. Whether you are an individual or not, "Monty Python's Life of Brian - Criterion Collection" will save your comic soul.

a review of a movie
A brilliant movie with a brilliant finale.

funny but wheres Bodge?
This is a very funny movie. It takes place int he Stone Age. About a guy named Brian and this is his life. Most of the humor is because his name is brian and people confuse him for somebody else. "I'm not so anso I'm Brian." Also there is a very funny moment when a man says his wife is called Continual Buttocks (a butocks is a bottom) or soemthing. Some of the humor is called toilet humor that I'm not a fan of. My friends and I only thought that Bodge would have looked great in this film with his beard and BRITISH accent!!! Where was he? He would have been perfect! ... Read more

Reviews (59)

Elegant and Powerful Communist Propaganda
This movie is a visual feast. The Chinese government spared no expense in creating it; all-star director Yimou Zhang apparently had everything at his disposal: a super star (Jet Li), an excellent supporting cast, unlimited costume expenses, and the full array of Hollywood digital imagery. More than just action and elegant Chinese cultural imagery, this film is a bold statement to the world: China is once again its cultural center.

Unfortunately, money does not always buy happiness. Despite the beautiful imagery, the story is brazenly unoriginal, taking its principle technique from Kurasawa's 1950 breakout film Rashomon, and much of its wuxia energy from Ang Lee's Taiwanese sensation of 2000, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon. To the simple-minded, I think it fails as an action picture, and to the sophisticated, its moral push is far from certainly digestible. Neither do any of the actors succeed in endearing themselves to us. Its greatest strength is its beautiful imagery.

I recently watched Alexander Nevsky, the famous Soviet propaganda film. Viewed today, its intent is obvious and clumsily applied. I watched Ying Xiong, or "Hero", well into the second hour before I realized that I was watching a modern version of that same old communist template. What are the messages here?
A) Look Out: China is bigger than life and is ready to take its rightful place as the center of the world.
B) All under Heaven: union is not bad, it is in fact noble and unselfish, supporting the common good (Cantonese Hong Kong and Mandarin Taiwan take note).
C) The National Government is working for the common good: "They call me a tyrant", the emperor says scornfully, as he laments the fact they ignore the burdens he must bear for their own good.
The film tries to appeal to the values of common decency in order to support these latter two points: killing is wrong, selfish grudges are wrong, excessive resentment is wrong, etc. It seems to accept and mildly promote individualism, although not allowing it to trump collectivism.

I admit that even as an American, I cannot quickly digest these complex moral questions and make an immediate assessment as to their worthiness. For a Chinese person, I assume this film has been even more powerful. The pride evoked from its bold nationalist statement may further push them towards accord. Hence its value as propaganda has probably been quite strong. I think that ultimately the value of this film as a classic will be decided by the prevalent answer to these moral questions, and my suspicion is that history will not look favorably on the direction in which it pushes viewers to think.

An intimate epic
"Hero" is a very ambitious film, attempting to combine quiet introspective philosophy with visually stunning action and pageantry. It is like an intimate epic. The scope is grand to say the least, with full armies on the march as well as intense and magical personal duels, all of which serves as decoration to the Buddhist philosophy being put forward.

It is very beautiful, and this is probably the first thing to be noticed. The various elements, actors, scenery and colors all combine to create a visual splendor. It is a very painterly movie, a feast for the eyes. Specifically, color is used to create moods and to differentiate the various storylines. If the visuals are painterly, then the Martial Arts are dancerly, along the same line as "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon," to which inevitable comparisons must be drawn. The actors are equally beautiful as well, and "Hero, truly a feast for the eyes, could probably be enjoyed in this manner, without any dialog.

Storywise, it is a variation on the familiar "Rashomon" theme of "what is the truth?" The same story is told and re-told, each time moving closer to the purity of truth, and with truth comes enlightenment. This is an intimate tale, a quiet verbal duel between an Emperor, so fearsome and lonely than no human can approach within one hundred paces of him, and a nameless subject, who might just be a true hero. Between them, a story is told of epic engagements, artists and warriors, and what is actually worth fighting and dying for.

I won't spoil too much of the story, as part of "Hero's" strength and insight lies in discovery. That is not to say that it is full of surprises and twist endings, but rather that, like all Buddhist insight, the answer of the movies riddle lies as much in the viewer as in the actors.

rebuttal to JUSTAREADER & Other Naysayers
Western movie studios like to spoonfeed the story to the audience and have an ending that provides closure. Asian movies tend to be more ambigious & leave the conclusion more open-ended to allow the audience to walk away "thinking" about the consequences of the actions of the movie characters.

The wire kung fu is meant to be an expression of the inner turmoils that play within the character's heart and mind. Suspending your belief in reality would have to take place to accept the incredibly artistic fight scenes in this movie or just about every other action movie ever made like Spiderman or ID4. At least enjoy the beautiful camera work and use of colors in this movie instead of thinking about "too many pretentious but self-indulgent thought-to-be poetically beautified scenes".

The "peking opera styled slow talking dialogue" is used effectively in my opinion. JUSTAREADER may not be a fan of this type of dialog but everybody has their own opinion.

Zhang Yimou used the story of the Qin Emperor only as an outlet much like Passions of the Christ. Many will not agree with the portrayal of the Qin Emperor in Hero or the portrayal of Christ in Passions but it made its point.

I agree that the Qin Emperor is not as "benevolent" as Hero suggests but this is a fictional story meant to convey the conflicts of the characters - the sacrifices made for self and country and the eternal question "does the ends justify the means"?

Boring movies don't move the audience and just passes 2 hours of their lives. It's the reaction I get after attempting to watch Dreamcatcher, Road Trip, or Day After Tommorrow.

Great movies provoke a reaction from the audience. This is a great movie with great visuals and cinematography. It got a reaction out of the "love it" and "hate it" camp! It wasn't a simple "love it" or "hate it" review.

Some of the best movies and music are derivatives of others. Example: Led Zeppelin and Aerosmith just borrowed from the blues and garage rock; Hero borrows from Rashomon; the list can go on and on forever. So to call Hero an unoriginal movie is an oxymoron because every movie copies from earlier movies.

Not all westerners are "simple-minded". People who just want simple Kung Fu movie or action movie with no plot will be bored to death and will find the movie "too complicated for westerners." For those of us who want something more than movies like Garfield or Starsky & Hutch will more than likely enjoy Hero.

Must see
This is a truly beautiful film. I own the import version and this film delivers on all scores. Maggie Cheung and Tony Leung give outstanding performances as the two lovers Flying Snow and Broken Sword. Jet Li is fantastic as Nameless.
If you love Hong Kong cinema this is a must see

too poetically unfocused, too complicated for the westerners
this is a very dark but also very pretentiously directed and performed swordsmanship movie. the chinese philosophy would put off mucho western viewers, 'cause the values in the orient and what we got in the west are totally different, i.e., the ends justify the means, or the means justify the ends. to not to assassin a tyrant and allow him a great opportunity to conquer all the other small feudal warlords and unify the whole china, in a larger vision, might save more peoples' lives than letting all the warlords killing each other and their subjects year after year....so what's the choice of the way-too-deep philosophic assassin in the last second and to face a doomed consequence? the director has tried too hard to express his own montage philosophy, his own interpretation of what should be done and only by himself in such genre to surpass the crappy oscar winning crouching tiger had achieved only one thing: a somehow and somewhat boring staged show instead of an exciting movie, with too many slow motion scenes, too many wired suspension, too many pretentious but self-indulgent thought-to-be poetically beautified scenes, with a too narrow minded and one-sided chinese philosophy delivered in a peking opera styled slow talking dialogue to grandize the butchering tyrant of all time in ancient china who later became the only role model of the modern time chairman mao, conquered all the warlords and took the advantage of generalismo chiang kai-shek's enduring war against the invading japanese of the world war II, and later the pathetic and horrible cultrual revolution in china, the rude-awakening of the chinese holocaust.
this is somewhat a mediocre and even a quite lousy film made and should not be made by the legendary chang yi-mou. ... Read more

Reviews (38)

Wonderful, But Still Missing...Something
This is a wonderful, even classic, adaptation of Franz Werfel's haunting, heartbreaking story of the Lourdes apparitions. The cinematography is excellent, the characters are handled with respect and realistic flair, and Jennifer Jones seems to be channeling Bernadette Soubirous in convincing fashion. The film's flaws? Sentimentalism in some cases bogs it down, especially when the angelic choirs start to sing lauds as the 'vision' makes its appearance. Corny to the extreme, if you ask me. The initial moment of the apparition was a stark and frightening one for Bernadette, according to the gathered records of the incident(s), not an experience accompanied by cheery seraphic warblings. This scene should have been filmed in a stark manner, to capture the surprise, abruptness, initial terror, and realism of the experience. Secondly, the actual Virgin Mary figure (played by a somewhat plumpish Linda Darnell) is also a bit garish: she resembles any of the cheesy, cheap, grotesque plaster "Mary" lawn ornaments that are the hallmark of Catholic kitsch.This stereotypical Mary is an unfortunate cop-out. The film makes no attempt to capture the haunting dignity and true historical nature of Bernadette's visitor, whom the seeress herself described in early testimony as "ou petito damizelo"--a "little pixie-girl," no more than 13 or 14 years of age and certainly not maternal in any way whatsoever. What the film DOES successfully capture is the impact of the many miraculous, mysterious events that descended upon a real town, among real people. It also captures a glimpse of the special, undeniable love shared between Bernadette and the enigmatic being who revealed herself only (and perhaps with a wistful sense of irony) as 'the Immaculate Conception.' A fine, fine film and worth owning for anyone of pure heart.

INSPIRING FILM - DISMAL TRANSFER
"The Song of Bernadette" is a film that by all accounts should distill into a religious pot boiler. And yet there is something haunting, awe inspiring and yes, even stirring about this tale of a child, Bernadette Soubirous (Jennifer Jones) who, after witnessing visions of the Virgin Mary, begins to have miracles performed in the small French town of Lourdes. Jones is angelic, tenderly conveying the warmth, innocence and poignancy of someone truly touched by the hand of God. Anne Revere is cast as Bernadette's non-believer mother. Vincent Price turns in a wicked performance as the town magistrate who, weary that Bernadette's claims will insight religious fervor, threatens the child with imprisonment unless she ceases with her visions. Charles Bickford and Gladys Cooper give outstanding performances as the skeptical priest and nun who come to believe that Bernadette is divinely inspired. Truly, this is a film that requires a whole box of Kleenex to get through. It is haunting, stirring and overall life affirming.

However, the transfer from Fox is poor, even though it improves upon previous VHS and Laserdisc versions. Though the B&W picture exhibits sharpness and better balancing of the gray scale the image is digitally harsh and suffers from an excessive amount of film grain. Aliasing and shimmering of fine details is evident throughout. Pixelization is another down fall. The audio has been cleaned up and is well presented.
Extras include a Jennifer Jones Biography, an audio commentary, a Movietones trailer, some Fox promotional stuff for other movies in their classic series, a restoration film to video comparison that proves that at least some work was done on the transfer before sending it out to DVD and this film's original theatrical trailer.

The Song of Bernadette
This movie had a deep and profound impact on me when I first watched it on television as a young teen. It is beautifully done a real tribute to film making. The acting is outstanding and I fully believed and empathized with young Bernadette as portrayed by Jennifer Jones. I was a protestant at the time I first watched the movie. The effect it had on me sent me on a journey that eventually lead me to Medjugorje and then to becomimg Catholic. I strongly would recommend this film to everyone. It is beautiful, moving, very touching, a profound experience for all who have an open heart.

Excellent
Written by a Jewish man, The Song of Bernadette, is wonderfully brought to the big screen. Typical of old black and white "Hollywood". Very well acted, full bodied characters. A great family movie.

Universal Thematic Appeal
The Song of Bernadette begins with the classic quote, "For those who believe in God, no explanation is necesary. For those who don't, no explanation is possible."

That having been said, one need not be religious to enjoy this film. What makes the movie so enjoyable is that it contains man's universal struggle with religion and his sense of meaning. Vincent Price does an excellent job of portraying the fatalistic expert, while Church officials are accurately protrayed as questioners - but not outright denyers - of the possibility of miraculous events.

Jennifer Jones is fantastic, and accurately portrays the reported humble nature of St. Bernadette.

Definitely one to see at least once. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Disney's 1986 Flight of the Navigator combines a strong ensemble cast and classic '80s soundtrack with dazzling special effects for a high-flying sci-fi adventure. While searching for his little brother in the woods, 12-year-old David Freeman (Joey Cramer) falls down a ravine and is knocked unconscious. After what seems like minutes, he returns home, only to discover that eight years have passed since he was declared missing and presumed dead. Even more mystifying is that David hasn't aged, nor can he account for the time lapse. Meanwhile, NASA officials stumble upon a futuristic spacecraft and are determined to assess what David knows about it by locking him in a top-secret lab for scanning and testing. His only chance of escape is in the spacecraft manned by Max, a wisecracking robot. Cramer gives an earnest performance, which overcomes an imperfect script, while enough one-liners and imaginative animation will keep families engaged. Watch for Sarah Jessica Parker in one of her first film appearances. Rated PG for language. (Ages 6 and older) --Lynn Gibson ... Read more

Reviews (53)

One of my favorites as a kid
I waited a long time for this to come out on dvd. Bugs me that the companies don't get it right the first time though. They release the dvd with no extras what so ever just so they can release a special edition a few months later. Disney did the same thing with Tron. I'm sure they have a lot of stuff they could've put on this dvd but they chose otherwise. I would've liked to see some trailers at least and it doesn't even look like it has any.

Anyway Flight of the Navigator is a great movie for the whole family. It's under-rated and a lot of people might not even have heard of it. It's about a boy who's accidently sent to the future by an alien space ship. When he finds his family they wonder why he hasn't aged a day. Scientists then run tests on him to find out where he was. He decides to escape and find a way back to the past and getting a ride on the space ship is the only way back. Once he gets on the ship is when the movie turns more goofy as the alien is voiced by Paul Reubens (Pee Herman) after all. The movie is still tons of fun and it does have some clever science fiction in it too for a kids movie. So eventhough the dvd has no extras what so ever the movie itself is worth checking out.

Reminiscent of the best of the Heinlein young adult novels..
Flight of the Navigator is a far better movie than we'd have a right to suspect.

Plot spoiler if you read further:

A few minutes into this film, 12-year-old David Freeman (Joey Cramer) is on an
errand to retrieve his 8-year-old brother, Jeff, when he falls into a gulley and is
knocked out. Regaining consciousness, David returns to his house, thinking only a
few minutes have passed, and instead of his parents and brother finds a locked
door and an elderly couple living there.

Taken to the police station, David is identified by computer records as a boy
reported missing eight years before. Despite the fact that he hasn't aged, he's taken
to the Freeman's at a different house nearby, and when he sees his parents
obviously older, he faints. He returns to consciousness again on a gurney on his
way to a hospital bed. A few minutes later, while his parents are called out of the
room by a somber-faced doctor, David is left alone with his brother Jeff -- who is
now 16.

This is ostensibly a Disney movie for kids -- and later on there is a lot of comedic
Disney hijinks -- but the first half hour of the movie, as David and his family deal
with the trauma of his time relocation, are some of the most heart-rending and
chilling sequences I've seen in any film.

Spoiler over.

This movie reminded me of some of the time-relativity sequences in Robert A.
Heinlein's novel, Time for the Stars. The characters are well written and the actors
do an excellent job, particularly in the scenes between Joey Cramer and Matt
Adler, as 16-year-old Jeff. The distraught parents, Cliff de Young and Veronica
Cartwright, are also excellent -- and Howard Hesseman and Sarah Jessica Parker
round out a great supporting cast.

Special kudos are due to Paul Reubens (best known for his character Pee Wee
Herman) who was originally credited under his own name for lending his voice to a
major character in this film, but had his name removed from the credits, replaced
by the pseudonym "Pall Mall," after Reubens was arrested for alleged indecent
exposure committed in a movie theater seat. (I've never understood how Reubens
was convinced to plead "no contest" to the charge, after theater security cameras
showed him in the lobby buying popcorn at the time of the alleged offense.)
Considering that Disney's Hollywood Pictures division released Powder, directed
by a convicted and confessed child molester, Disney should show some backbone
and restore Reubens real name to the credits.

If you can get ahold of this movie, see it -- and maybe Disney will see fit to release
it again -- on DVD, I hope.

One of the Greatest Family Movies of all time!
This is one of the greatest family movies I have ever seen. I saw it in the theatre in 1986 (twice). I purchased the video as soon as it was released and will now purchase the DVD. I'm so glad it is finally available. If you are looking for a wonderful movie to watch with your family...this is the one to buy!

wtf!!!
get this strictly for the boy's trippy,lsd addicted little buddy that rides on his shoulder!what a little tripper!!!

One of My Favorites as a Child, now on DVD!!!
Flight of the Navigator certainly brings back wonderful memories, of childhood in the summertime eating hotdogs and drinking soda on a sunday night. This Disney flick about a boy's journey mysterious journey through time was long overdue on DVD!! Ofcourse we cannot forget that Sarah Jessica Parker has a prominent role! And isn't Paul Reubens, (aka Pee Wee Herman) the voice of the alien navigator??

The Picture and Sound quality are excellent, as compared to that old VHS copy we all have! Presented in 1:85:1 Aspect Ratio Widescreen. The DVD is lacking any real special features, like "The Making of" or "Commentaries" but it is a wonderful addition to that nostalgic childhood collection. ... Read more

Reviews (630)

one of the best comedies ever and dvd extras to rave about!
This is what dvds were invented for -- there are so many great features here! So in addition to seeing one of the funniest movies ever made, you can be entertained for hours with the extras, and the extras are terrific: subtitles in English, French or Spanish; audio track choices -- English (the original mono or a brand new full stereo version), French, a directors' (Gilliam and Jones) track or a commentary track with Cleese, Idle and Palin; a copy of the script overlaid on the film; a painstaking, hilarious Henry the IV-ish subtitle for those who don't like the film; a hard-of-hearing feature; killer rabbit easter eggs; animated menus using Gilliam's original animation; karaoke renditions of 'Knights of the Round Table', 'Sir Robin' and the 'Monks Chant'; a delightful 45 minute visit to the locations with Jones and Palin; an educational film about the 'other' uses of coconuts; Japanese versions of the French Castle and Knights Who Say Ni scenes, including references to the 'holy sake cup'; a 1974 BBC Film Night visit to a location site during filming; photos of tickets, press releases, reviews, posters, production stills and original artwork; trailers; cast credits (Palin played over a dozen parts!) with pictures of each character; a Lego knights version of the Camelot scene; pictures of sketches that were never used (a killer snail?!); a web link.

A lot of effort went into this special edition dvd, and it shows. I particularly enjoyed seeing Jones and Palin visit locations. They were in a jolly mood, their comments are interspersed with film footage, and they meet affectionate and funny fans along the way.

If you like this film you will love this dvd version; if you love the film, you wil adore this two-dvd set. An essential item for your collection.

Highest recommendation.

I Never Thought Looking For A Shrubbery Would Be This Fun!!
In the early 1970's the Monty Python troop (Michael Palin, Graham Chapman, Eric Idle, John Cleese, Terry Gilliam, and Terry Jones) stars from the immensely popular television series Monty Python's Flying Circus began producing, with the help of a fundraising concert headlined by Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd (You lie!! No, I didn't!), initial photography on what would later become (from all my extensive years of movie watching) the single most unforgivably sidesplitting, enormously irreverent, shrewdly perceptive, unremittingly uproariously aggressive, gruesomely hysterical, and endlessly quotable comedies EVER. Not even Mel Brooks's Best Efforts (The Producers, Blazing Saddles, Young Frankenstein) comes very close to the revolutionary medieval merriment sustained in this royal purebred of cult classics. BAR NONE. No contest here.

Endlessly stockpiled with hauntingly hysterical sketches that will probably never leave your mind (no matter how hard you try) including, The Knights Who Say Nei, The Self-Abusing Monks (Eah aay ess eay dom eay nay), The Black Knight, The Trojan Rabbit, the Ever-Appearing Verbally Abusing French (I don't want to talk to you no more!!!), The Enchanter Named Tim, The Killer Bunny, The Bridge of Death (What is the capital of Hysteria?), The Old Woman Named Dennis, and so many countless more great sketches to include here that I'd die trying. Monty and Python and the Holy Grail remains an ever-enriching mirthful cult-classic that just seems to improve with age. Since Columbia has a bountifully hefty new special edition of the Holy Grail out now there should be no excuse, if you've never seen it (I think I'll go for a walk!!), just drop everything your doing (including Bringing Out Your Dead) and go experience this life changing movie today. You won't be disappointed, just tell them the Knight Not Appearing In This Film sent you, and they'll know what to do.

As for the options on the special edition here's a run-down:

Disc One: -"21st Anniversary" cut of the film running an extra 24 seconds; -Anamorphic Widescreen; -Dolby 5.1 track; -Original Mono Track; -Audio commentary with Terry Gilliam, Terry Jones, John Cleese, Eric Idle and Michael Palin; -subtitles "for people who don't like the film" (you get the text from Shakespeare's Henry IV instead); -an "on-screen screenplay" feature which lets you read the screenplay as you watch the film; -"Follow the Killer Rabbit" feature;

Disc Two: "Three Mindless Sing-Alongs"; -"The Quest for the Holy Grail Locations" featurette; -"How to Use Your Coconuts" educational film; -"Monty Python and the Holy Grail in Japanese" (with English subtitles); -the BBC Film Night special "On Location with the Pythons; -an interactive cast directory; -still galleries with Terry Gilliam's original sketches and behind-the-scenes photos; -"A Load Of Rubbish" with mystery items; -unused ideas and other material; -two trailers
and web-links.

Both discs represent the absolute final word resource for EVERYTHING and I do mean everything you'd need to know about the Python's greatest film. An Absolute Necessity for any Python Fan!!

P.S. You can't base a system of government just because some watery tart threw a sword at you.

What are you going to do, bleed on me?
excellent. Possibly the funniest movie ever made. Who could forget such a line as "I fart in your general direction. Your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of eldeberries." This is a great movie and a great dvd edition that gives it justice. This is completely worth the money. A comedy Classic.

This movie didn't make me Run Away! (or) Run away FASTER!!!
Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail is, by far, my favorite movie -and I'm sure it always will be! Being a truly hilariously-random film, this DVD does an awesome job of showcasing this fact to the highest extent. The killer white "rrrrabit" will live on in my heart forever, and I will always be knowledgeable that African swallows are non-migratory. What other movie has a group of knights requesting shrubberies -from King Arthur, no less- to create a 'two-level effect with a path through the middle'? Only Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
The movie might sound strange as I mention these things out of context, but I assure you it is much stranger when Monty Python says it!
So, to conclude this review, I definitely give "Monty Python and the Quest for the Holy Grail" DVD a 5 star rating, as I know it will entertain millions for years to come. Enjoy!

The Lego Camelot Number Alone is Worth the Price
Who would have thought that, after nearly 30 years, the world's goofiest movie could be made even moreso? Not only is this DVD a comedy triumph (it would be simply if it were the DVD version of the classic film, in which a crew too broke to afford horses for King Arthur and his Knights changed history and college kids' banter forever by introducing coconuts as migrating props). Oh, no, this DVD is one that may become a standard for other DVDs. Just look at this list of extras above! To be sure, some of them are fluff. The "load of rubbish" selection is simply some receipts and a few odd notes. But most of it is stupendous.

The first disc contains the movie itself, along with some choices of how to watch it.... subtitles, commentary by directors Terry Jones & Terry Gilliam or by John Cleese & Eric Idle & Michael Palin. Then "for people who don't like the film", there's subtitles from Shakespeare's "Henry IV, Part II". Now, these do not faithfully follow Henry IV verse by verse, but they do come from the play, and it's hilarious how the phrases Shakespeare wrote do actually match up with the action on the screen.

Disc Two contains several mementoes: a film of John Cleese, Terry Jones, and "Grail" production manager John Young (who also played the hapless "Historian" towards the end of the film, and the "I'm not dead!" guy) paying a return visit to Castle Doune , in 2000. At first it's fun to hear them reminisce at the filming site, but since it's a very small spot with nothing but a wall and a bit of ground, they appear uncomfortable and that quickly gets old. More interesting is the home movie made by the two Terries when they looked for prospective film locations in the seventies. Their excitement is palpable.

A somewhat painful scene (except for the chance it gives us to watch Terry Jones in action as a director) is the BBC documentary made during filming. The interviewer seems more interested in trying to be funny himself than in the Pythons. But there are several great comic extras, including words to some songs, a coconut skit, two scenes dubbed in Japanese, and best of all, an animated feature of the "Camelot" scene and song done entirely in Lego...must be seen to be believed.

Finally, someone has made good use of the storage space on a DVD. ... Read more

Reviews (142)

A sumptuous Renaissance feast!
Franco Zefirrelli's 1967 film was revolutionary in using teenaged actors to play the two most famous lovers of all literature. Olivia Hussey is heartbreakingly beautiful, a vulnerable and courageous Juliet, while Leonard Whiting's poetic good looks make him a sensitive and appealing Romeo. Zefirrelli's career as an opera director is put to spectacular use here--each scene is meticulously crafted to be an exact replica of the Renaissance. Stunningly beautiful clothing, jewels, furniture, food, glass, sculpture--it is an overwhelming feast for the eyes. The preserved medieval towns of Tuscany, and the lovely Borghese palace where the balcony scene is set, give the film the look of an animated Renaissance painting. Zefirrelli took some liberties with Shakespeare's original script for the sake of brevity, but unless you are a die-hard purist, this is a minor flaw. I saw this film a dozen times in the theater, and never without the sound of girls weeping by the end--I was often one of them. Leslie Howard was a better actor, and Leonardo DiCaprio/Clare Danes more modern, but if you love beauty, this is THE quintessential Romeo and Juliet on film. END

Zeffirelli's Quintessential Version! Every Aspect Excellent!
This is THE must see version of Romeo and Juliet. Zeffirelli's 1968 masterpiece stars 17-year-old Leonard Whiting and 15-year-old Olivia Hussey with great music by Nino Rota. Filmed "on location" in Italy this version also has the fingerprints of the 1960s all over it, from moddish long hair, the debut of Michael York as Tybalt, John McEnery as Mercutio, the lush balcony scenes, the nude scene, and an emotional intensity throughout. McEnery brings just the right comic touch to the comi-tragedy and screenwriters Franco Brusati, Maestro D'Amico, and Zeffirelli keep true to Shakespeare with a take on the story that's easily accessible to a wide audience, thereby making this one of the most popular films of the '60s.

Especially effective is the ambiguity of intent of the Tybalt-Mercutio duel, and the overall editing of dialogue just enough to keep it succinct and believable yet retain the poetic and philosophical virtuosity of the playwright's playwright. The music is used effectively and as it rises during the love scenes it's a manipulation that's an enhancement to rather than distraction from the emotion--a rare successful pull-off of this. And that balcony scene is extraordinary, the lush dark atmosphere, Romeo's giddiness, Juliet's beauty...I believed it.

Milo O'Shea (who later played the Judge in "The Verdict") does a believable Friar Laurence and Robert Stephens (I)(with a long list of Shakespearian roles to his name) an intensely serious Prince of Verona. It's hard not to fall in love with Olivia (watch for her new film role as Mother Theresa).

Some bits of trivia: Before 1968 Romeo and Juliet was not generally taught in US high schools and this film's popularity changed all that as most of you reading this had it in high school. Michael York turned down the role of Oliver in Love Story--one may read into this he felt it was a poor man's Romeo and Juliet...just a thought. Also Olivia Hussey briefly dated Prince Charles. And here's the clincher: Paul McCartney got the original offer to play Romeo. I'm glad he turned it down, as Whiting is perfect here. And for those who wonder, the story did not originate in historical fact, though one may wish it so. The story came from mythical legend starting in 5th century Greece, later evolving into "The Tragical History of Romeus and Juliet" translated into English in 1562 by Arthur Brooke and originally written about 1530 by Luigi da Porto., 'til Shakespeare got a hold of it (circa 1594) and breathed into it the life that will last as long as humanity does most probably.

This towers over the 1st film version with a 34-year-old Norma Shearer and a 43-year-old Leslie Howard, and as for the 1996 mess sorry guys; American accents, present day gang violence, over-the-top overacting, LA locales, and Leonard DiCaprio do not great Shakespearean tragedy make. This 1968 one is the one to see over and over.

Excellent movie...Great actors
Watching this as part of a highschool assignment, the teacher only allowed us to watch about 15 minutes of it. When I saw it playing on cable, I sat down to finish it. This, I must say, is the best version of Romeo and Juliet. In the '68 version The actors are young and even though it was made in '68, you can relate to them in this day. The acting is superb, no one better could have been picked for the parts. It was a real tearjerker. Not to mention the soundtrack...the songs were just amazing to hear. Just watch the movie once, you'll fall in love with it.

The Defintive R & J
I could watch this version of Romeo and Juliet over, and over, and over. The performances are dead on, especially John McEnry's turn as Mercutio (you understand the reason why he's killed off: people would have cared more about him than about the tragic heroes if he'd been around too much longer!). I would advise teachers, however, that this is not the first version they show students of the show. While most ninth graders read this play, the giggling that can abound in a classroom watching Romeo in tights often distracts from the meaning of the film.
So, for with the exception of ninth graders, this is the Romeo and Juliet to see.

Zeffirelli and Shakespeare: A Perfect Match
There is nothing worse than bad Shakespeare but not to worry here-- Franco Zeffirelli and Shakespeare come together here in a lavish, opulent production of ROMEO AND JULIET, just when we thought there was nothing fresh to say about them. Zeffirelli has broken new ground by casting Leonard Whiting, who is 17, and Olivia Hussey, who is all of 15 but looks even younger, in this timeless classic story about "star-crossed" lovers. With the possible exception of some parts of the musical score-- although much of it soars-- this film is as good today as it was when first released in 1968. (The musical theme was beautiful the first 50 times I heard it on the radio. Then it became trite.)

There are no bad actors here. In addition to the two lovers, Michael York as Tybalt and Pat Heywood as the nurse give outstanding performances, just to name two. My only negative comment about the acting is that Romeo always seems to run to and from an event or meeting; he never walks. Perhaps that is what a seventeen-year-old, testosterone-laden lad does, however. On the other hand, Romeo and Juliet's tragic story is completely believable and will put chills on your spine. Additionally, the dance scenes and duel scenes are quite wonderful. The wardrobe department got everything right as well.

A word about the language-- it goes without saying that Mr. Shakespeare is and ever shall be the greatest writer in English. Hearing his words again is a transcendent experience. ... Read more

Description

The is the year 2022. Overcrowding, pollution, and resource depletion have reduced society's leaders to finding food for the teeming masses. The answer is Soylent Green -- an artificial nourishment whose actual ingredients are not known by the public. Thorn is the tough homicide detective who stumbles onto the secret so terrifying no one would dare believe him. ... Read more

Reviews (97)

3 1/2 stars for sharply written and directed sf classic
THe 70's were a strange time for science fiction films. There were a number of minor classics (Westworld, the absurd and pretentious Zardoz, Logan's Run) and major space operas (Star Wars)that dominated the scene. While none of these films were perfect, Soylent Green was one of the outstanding efforts from the era. Although it's a flawed minor masterpiece, the strong performances from Heston, Robinson, Leigh Taylor-Young and Chuck Conners help the film continue to shine. All the actors benefit from the assured direction of veteran Richard Fleischer. The film was produced during one of MGM's bleakest periods and, in turn, has a rather bleak out look about the future.

Set nearly twenty years from now, humanity has used up most of our resources and spoiled the planet. There isn't enough to eat and there's even less space to live in; the cities are crowded with street people everywhere. The middle class is virtually extinct and only the wealthy have lives approaching the comfort to which we've become accustomed.

A executive with a major food corporation is murdered. The company produces a variety of pre-processed foods that are popular among the general population. Fresh fruit and foods are almost as extinct as many of the species that have disappeared from our overburdened, overdeveloped planet. Charleton Heston plays Detective Thorn who is investigating the murder. In the process, his life is threatened and he comes into major conflict with the police force about his methods. What Heston's character discovers about the food maker could unravel the fabric of the comfortable society that runs the world.

Soylent Green is based on Harry Harrison's fine novel Make Room, Make Room!. The adaption incorporates a lot of common themes from films during the 70's particularly the issue of the ecology. That isn't to say this film is obsessed with issues. While there are a number of importance observations, all of them are well integrated into this sharply written science fiction murder mystery. The direction by Richard Fleischer (Fantastic Voyage, 20,000 Leages Under the Sea, Treasure Island)isn't as stylized as one would expect but he does manage to get the most out of the material. The director's commentary is often wry and observant--a rarity now on most DVDs.

This was Edward G. Robinson's last film and his 101st. A talented, popular actor often misused by Hollywood, Robinson gives a startling fresh and powerful performance as Heston's roommate and assistant Sol. His final scene in the film is both powerful and gives Heston's character the faith to carry on his investigation. The dinner scene between Heston and Robinson (which was ad libbed) is terrific and much of the dialog and banter between the two actors is both funny and touching.

The DVD looks terrific particularly after all the poor prints that have circulated on television. Yes, there's analog artifacts but this is probably about as pristine a print as were likely to see. The transfer is vivid and well balanced. The sound is fairly strong given the fact that this was pre-THX and stereo. The DVD includes a couple of short featurettes about Heston and the making of the film. Robinson also gets due notice. A vintage theatrical trailer is also included.

Soylent Green's importance in science fiction cannot be underestimated. There were a number of bad films produced after 2001 and Planet of the Apes (including many of the sequels to the original Apes film)that had cheapened the luster these two fine films had temporarily given to science fiction. Soylent Green is a somber, powerful film. It's also an entertaining mystery. After this the genre would fall back into decline (although there were a few highlights) until the success of Star Wars in 1977. Thoughtful, impactful science fiction films were rare during the 70's. Although Soylent Green hasn't aged as well as one would expect, it's intent and the power of the performances, script and direction still make it a potent look into the future.

'Soylent Green' still nourishing after all this time!
If there was ever such a thing as 'sci-fi-noir', this is it. This wonderful, pessimistic, science fiction flick works as a cautionary tale, an action-mystery and a love story to boot. Charlton Heston fans will love it! It's 'Taylor-made' for the big guy (pardon the 'apes' pun). Heston excells at playing the cynical, tough yet decent sort; here a cop who's trying to unearth a cover-up reaching into the very top of government and industry. The movie is paced well and allows us to experience the gritty, sooty, reality of an exhausted, failing industrial society in the all too near future. The story line is supported by wonderful supporting performances by notable actors like Leigh Taylor-Young, Brock Peters, Chuck Connors, Joseph Cotten, and the great Edward G. Robinson, in what I believe is his last move. Unlike some 70's science fiction movies, the premise of 'Soylent Green' has not proved dated. It's as frightening and riviting today as it was when it was filmed nearly three decades ago. It's also poignant. The scene where Sol Roth (Edward G. Robinson) weeps out of sadness as the delighted Thorn (Heston) tasts the first real food he's ever eaten, is pristine, pure, gut-level story telling. Thorn's ultimate abandonment of his love interest, (Leigh-Taylor Young) to her unhappy fate is in keeping with the film's hard edge. Ultimately Thorn and Roth uncover a secret best left hidden. This movie never flinches. It's not as well known as Heston's other science fiction classic, 'Planet of the Apes' but 'Soylent Green' is great entertainment and perhaps the most underrated science fiction movie of the 1970's!

"Sorry We Went" Green
My wife and I saw this film in his initial theater release, expecting a good couple of hours entertainment, because of our faith in Charlton Heston. Bad move! Though it did depict rather well a bleak Malthusian future, its focus was entirely on efforts to obtain the wondrous Soylent Green as food, since it was so much superior to the other 2 colors. Alas, as soon as we had guessed the "shocking" source of the Green, there was nothing more to this one-trick-pony of a movie.

A nightmare every time closer
In 2022 the population's growth may reach eight billions people So the awful warning call given by Aldous Huxley ( A new visit for a brave new world) , George Orwell (Animal's farm or 1984) will suppose several restrictions about the free circulation vehicles and also an estimated amount of liters of water by each one of us.
This film is a very clever scifi story about a overcrowded world, where the reduced free spaces of the world we know actually , may be more narrow.
The story holds a deep reflection about the effects of a claustrophobic world, the lack of certain benefits you assumed almost naturally till now.
This movie shows us about a reality not so far. This work was the last appearance of Edward G. Robinson; thanks to Heston efforts for including him in that role. The last sequence in which you watch the ancient world like it was; it depicts a bucolic landscape; and the Pastoral Symphony works out perfectly with this goal. You may feel it something tearful, but the remarkable point is the hidden message. Still we are on time to avoid it. But who'll take this dangerous flag?
This film was released just one year after since Roma's club establihment, in 1972. In that age I had the opportunity of reading that fundamental work of Barry Commoner titled The circle that it closes.Watch for this one. Because with these raising reflections about the enviroment concern around the world made it possible, by instance, avoid to throw several hazardous weapons over Vietnam, whose direct and collateral effects had not studied enough. Chernobyl was just only fourteen years before and Long island twelve years.
Only with this long introduction you'll be capable of understand why this film,together with Farenheit 451, Capricorn one, The Omega man, Zardoz, The planet of the apes , 2001 and Solaris were made between 1967 and 1972. We are taking about movies of film makers so distant in style and view directorial as Kubrick , Tarkovski, Truffaut, Schafner ,Hyams and Boorman, but surrounded by that cloudy atmosphere who involved the world in those days.
A must for you to watch. It will let you thinking for a long, long time.

An Underrated SF Thriller
I just rediscovered this classic movie on DVD recently. It is an extraordinary and haunting film with a powerful message. The performance by Edward G. Robinson is moving, and it's almost obligatory to say that Charles Heston chews up the scenery (as usual).

Some of the reviewers here have bemoaned the fact that there are so many 70s-type vehicles in the world of Soylent Green, which detracts from its setting in the year 2022. Nothing could be further from the truth. I remember watching this film in 1973 and was very conscious of that fact that it was projecting what NYC might look like 49 years from then. Why so? Read on.

Not to state the obvious, but this is a film about a dystopian future. The planet is overpopulated and running out of resources. All of the major oil fields on earth have passed peak production (our experts tell us that the last major fields in Saudi Arabia and Iraq will reach peak production in just a few years from now). Most of the automobiles are old and broken down. Infrastructure is decaying. Even in 2004, here and now, you can see this process beginning. In many parts of the city where I live, people are driving vehicles manufactured from the 1960s, 1970s, and 1980s. Things are run down. People are working harder and making less money. Richard Fleischer's vision of the future is brilliant and spot on.

So what about the cheesy 70s background music, you say? All I can say is that by 2022 there might very well be a 70s renaissance, because by then people will have realized how good things were in the 1970s. Look at us in 2004, we're still playing Beatles music, and it is quite likely that the music industry will dramatically change or won't even exist by 2022.

And finally, to underscore the scope and brilliance of this film, just do some investigative research into today's Monsanto Corporation and see if you can't find an overwhelming parallel with the Soylent Corporation depicted in the film, whose aim was to control the world's food supply.

And who knows, by the year 2022, food processing and Chicken McNuggets will be so pervasive that NOBODY will know where their food really comes from. What a chilling thought.

I wish that every person on this planet owned this DVD. It's not just a great Heston film, or a brilliant science fiction thriller, it's an important film for all of mankind...because it's still not too late.

p.s. the amazing quality and sharpness of the images in this film are astounding. This is the film that I saw in 1973. All other versions have been muddy and dark. Another outstanding transfer!! ... Read more

Reviews (172)

Rice & Lloyd Webber's Operatic Passion Play on Film
After the bizarre Broadway staging of Tim Rice and Andrew Lloyd Webber's rock opera, the film version of "Jesus Christ Superstar" had to be a more traditional offering. Producer-Director Norman Jewison filmed on location in Israel, using natural settings and sparsely constructed sets for what is essentially a string of music videos (since it was written as a studio album first, the music presents problems for moving from one scene to the next). The framing device for the film is the cast arriving/departing by bus. Ted Neeley's voice is suited to the role, but certainly he is the shortest Jesus I can recall seeing in films. Yvonne Elliman and Barry Dennen remain from the original studio album and Broadway production as Mary Magdalen and Pilate, which is perfectly all right. However, it is clearly Carl Anderson as Judas who gives the best performance in the film. The film version suffers from the inadequate voices of several of the supporting cast members (most notably Josh Mostel as Herod) and the grossly reduced chorus of singers which never comes close to matching the number of bodies on screen, and there are a few unintentional laughs (as when Israeli tanks come over the dune and chase Judas). But the use of paintings depicting the crucifixion and the final shot of sheep being herded past the cross the cast leaves behind on the hill, are particularly effective. Of course as with most movies, if you want to watch it you want to get a hold of the widescreen edition, otherwise you cannot appreciate the Last Supper tableau or just enjoy the compositional elements of the shots. Every Easter weekend I watch this film, even if I do not have time to do all of "Jesus of Nazareth" or "The Greatest Story Every Told." The only thing radical here is the music, but I still have to think it qualifies as the requisite joyful noise.

Controversial Rock Opera
Jesus Christ Superstar was Andrew Lloyd Webber and Time Rice's first major success. The rock opera was first a concept album that exploded on the charts hitting number one and spending almost a year in the top ten and unleashed Murray Head on the world. It was then made into a successful Broadway play starring Ben Vereen. In 1973, respected director Norman Jewison (In The Heat Of the Night, Fiddler On the Roof) brought it to the big screen. The film was shot on location in Israel and that gives it an authentic feel. There is no dialogue in the film, everything is sung in true opera fashion. It kind is like a forerunner of the music video in that fact. Mr. Jewison mixes the biblical setting with modern nuances such as guards carrying machine guns, tanks and planes appear and at the beginning of the film, the cast arrives by bus and at the end it leaves on the same bus. The beginning of the film shows the cast setting up what appears to be a play. They get into costumes and set up for the play. The movie focuses on the last seven days of Jesus and Ted Neeley appears in the title role. The movie focuses on Jesus' relationship with Judas, who is played by Carl Anderson. The plot likens Jesus to a modern-day rock star, who rises above all the other prophets due to the hype-machine. Judas thinks that Jesus is believing the hype and moving away from his humble roots. He turns traitor in the belief he is helping the nation. At the end, we are left wondering if this was just a play or was it real as all the cast members get on the bus except Mr. Neeley. The movie fades out quite powerfully in the sunset on the cross. The movie moves along through the series of songs and is well choreographed. The album, play and film were highly controversial due to its take on the Passion of Jesus, but putting religious beliefs aside, it is an excellent film.

Most powerful movie ever produced!
Too many people miss the point. This movie was not made as a literal portrayal of Jesus' last days...it was (and remains) a figurative interpretation of the last days of one who would inspire a new branch of religion.

From the opening moments of the movie when Carl Anderson (Judas) sings ("...my mind is clearer now, at last, all too well, I can see, what we all, soon will be...") through Ted Neely (Christ) during "Gethsemane" ("Allright! I'll die, just watch me die!") the viewer is mesmerized by some of the most powerful music, lyrics, and staging ever written and performed. This particular sequence (when Jesus is climbing the mountain, fairly crying out for God's explanation of things to come ~ "Show me just a little of your omnipresent brain") still brings tears to my eyes and I've seen this movie at least 100 times!

The movie was shot on location in Israel a few years after the 6 day war, and during the Vietnam war. These realities are not lost on the writers, and evidence of their beliefs and opinions are sprinkled throughout the movie (the tanks coming over the horizon and the F-16's flying over Judas' head were a nice touch). Their religious convictions are displayed in such moments as when the priests are on the scaffolding ("He is dangerous") and the crowd extols Jesus below ("Haysanna, hosannah, sanna sanna ho, sanna hey sanna hosanna; hey JC, JC won't you die for me...") watch Jesus' face at that moment....

Yvonne Elliman (Mary Magdelene) does a fine job of balancing the angst of Judas with the over-arching compassion of Jesus, and Barry Dennen (Pilate) captures a high point when he washes his hands of Jesus' plight. Bob Bingham's (Caiphas) bass rattles your soul with his deep melodic tonality.

While the acting is certainly not on par with the great actors of our times, one has to take that with a grain of salt. I was 7 when I first saw it and I still watch this movie at least once per year (can you guess which day? :) By far this is Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice at their best.

Who the Hell did they get to play Jesus?!
The guy who plays Jesus is an awful singer. He ruined the entire movie sounding like the lead from some punk band. Also, it's clear they did not cast the actors based on their looks (or even their talent for that matter). I tried very hard to like this. I love musicals but this ranks down there with Cats, Hair, and Nine. If you want a great musical based on the scripture, check out the amazing Godspell.

awesome
OK, granted this musical was done in the early 70's and therefore has some 70's overtones, but the acting and singing are magnificent. The relationship between Judas and Jesus is powerful, and Ted Neeley stares right into your soul. I first saw this movie when I was about 7 years old and it left a lasting, positive influence on me regarding Christ. ... Read more

Reviews (62)

A Bad Life Decision
A Place in the Sun, 1951
Running time: 120 minutes in black & white
Director: George Stephens
Studio: Paramount Studio
Actors/Actresses: Montgomery Clift (George Eastman)
Elizabeth Taylor (Angela Vickers)
Shelly Winters (Alice Tripp--name is symbolic of her behavior)
Awards/Nominations: Oscar won in 1952 for best cinematography, black & white; best costume design, black & white; best director; best film editing; best music; and best writing.
Nominated for an Oscar in 1952 for best actor and actress in a leading role and best picture.
DGA Award won in 1952 for outstanding directorial achievement in motion pictures.
Golden Globe won in 1952 for best motion picture drama.
Silver Ribbon Award won in 1952 for best director of a foreign film.
NBR Award won in 1951 for best picture.
PGA Hall of Fame for Motion Pictures Award won in 1997.
WGA Screen Award won in 1952 for best written American drama and nominated for the Robert Meltzer Award.
Genre: Romantic Tragedy

In summary, the movie includes the trials and tribulations of a love triangle between a smart nice guy, a rich nice woman, and a manipulating possessive working-class woman. George Eastman hitchhikes from Kansas City to his uncle's swimsuit factory to work. Once there, he is given a position boxing merchandise by his not-too-friendly cousin. Prior to his employment, George is informed that he is not to have romantic relations with his fellow co-workers as a condition of employment. Unfortunately, George broke this rule by dating and ultimately getting one of his coworkers pregnant. While dating her (Alice), he falls in love with Angela Vickers, a high-class woman that is well-known throughout the comunity and by Charles Eastman (George's rich uncle). Instead of telling Angela about Alice and vice versa, George "drives himself crazy" and eventually commits the ultimate crime. What may astonish the viewer is that even after learning of George's hideous crime, Angela confesses that she still loves him.

Both George and Alice would have different lives at the end of the movie if George had stayed in Kansas City! He also should have been honest with both women in order to alleviate stress for both he and Alice. This movie was given four stars due to its relativeness to society and its great plot for the time period. It was interesting throughout the whole movie.

What Chemistry
The first time I viewed A Place In The Sun it did not have much of an impact on me. Perhaps I was too young, plus I did not understand Montgomery Clift's acting style. Subsequent viewings have made me realize the quality of this film. Clift stars as the poor relation of an important family who begins to work his way up. He first has a relationship with plain working girl Shelley Winters. Then he meets the real love of his life, beautiful, wealthy Elizabeth Taylor. From that point, things become very complicated for all concerned. Clift was an actor that played everything deeply, and his performances are always painfully real, just like this one, in which you can feel the conflicts that tear him apart. Winters is excellent in her tragic role, while Taylor, besides looking unbelievably beautiful, brings a lot of honesty to her character. The chemistry between the Clift and Taylor is palpable, and their on screen kiss is one of the most memorable you will ever see. Although there is a sense of doom that permeates the movie, the actors make every moment a great one. Some of elements of the story may seem dated, but it is played with such honesty and intensity that you will appreciate it for the very fine film it is.

Heartbreaking & Realistic
Ever wanted something you couldn't have? Ever wanted it so badly you'd kill to have it? In "A Place in the Sun" George Eastman (Montgomery Clift), a poor young man with big dreams, deals with these questions as he tries to make it to the top of the social ladder in spite of social prejudices from the richer Eastman clan.
As he pursues his dream of social grandeur, he falls in love with the beautiful and unatttainable Angela Vickers (Elizabeth Taylor), a rich socialite. But just as his dreams begin to come true, George is confronted by his ex girlfriend (Shelly Winters), a poor factory employee, who is pregnant with his baby and threatens to destroy his newly attained social lifestyle. Having made it to the top, however, George is determined to stay there at any cost - a decision that leads to tragic results.

Memorable performances
Excellent movie about the tragic consequences of pushing too hard to obtain the american dream. Montgomery Clift gives a realistic performance as the poor kid who makes it to the top at a high price. Liz Taylor is believable as the rich beauty who falls in love with Clift, and Shelly Winters is especially memorable as the poor factory worker who gets shoved aside by Clift after he meets Taylor. Beautifully made movie that makes you really get into the mind and heart of its protagonists. Highly Recommended.

Tragedy Turned to Melodrama
It was probably inevitable that "An American Tragedy," in its evolution to screen, would become more about the doomed love affair of Montgomery Clift and Elizabeth Taylor than the moral and ethical dilemmas that really form the foundation of Theodore Dreiser's novel. After all, doomed love is a bigger sell, especially when you have the romantic faces of Clift and Taylor swooning together in extreme close-up.

I'm not a fan of doing book to movie comparisons. I figure that film and literature are two different art forms, so I shouldn't compare their rendering of the story anymore than I would compare the same story as presented in a painting as opposed to a ballet. So I tried to take the film on its own merits (admittedly difficult to do, since I watched the movie on the same day I finished the book), but even at that, I think the movie falls short.

Clift plays George Eastman, poor nephew to a rich, socially elite family in a small New York state factory town. He's been invited by his uncle to come and work in the Eastman factory, giving him an entre into a world of luxury that has always been out of his grasp due to his family's humble position (they run a mission and preach on the streets). George strikes up a love affair with Alice Tripp (Shelley Winters), a girl who works with him in the factory, but his attentions for her quickly fade when he becomes interested in Angela Vickers, another member of the rich set, played by Liz Taylor. Complications ensue, and George finds himself and his situation spiralling drastically out of control, with an ending more tragic than he ever thought possible.

George Stevens directs the film with a sure hand, and there are some breathtaking displays of directorial skill. For example, one that stands out in my mind comes when the camera focuses on a radio reporting a possible murder, while the young, rich kids with whom George has struck up a friendship goof off in the water in the background. There are also some great uses of dissolve editing, though the technique is somewhat overused.

But there are many problems with the film, notably its pacing. Much time is spent on George's love triangle with Alice and Angela, while the script races through the trial and George's ultimate fate, as if the screenwriter realized he only had two hours to tell his story when he'd already wasted an hour and a half on front-end material. Rushing through the end blunts much of the story's original intent and power, as that is where the majority of moral questions arise.

Also, the character Shelley Winters plays is so drab and mousy, that one doesn't understand why George would entangle himself with her in the first place. But Clift does a great job with the lead role, delivering a performance of raw nerve.

It befuddles me somewhat as to why this movie is quite so acclaimed. I can only imagine that its reception has to do with cultural moods at the time it was released and that it just hasn't aged well. It came out in 1951, a big year for literary adaptations ("A Streetcar Named Desire" and "Death of a Salesman" were both given big-screen treatments that year), and you only need to compare "Sun" to "Streetcar" to see how short it falls at capturing the essence of a ture literary classic.

Grade: B- ... Read more

Description

Get set for more action, more vampires and more Wesley Snipes in this second monster-hit installment in the Blade franchise. ... Read more

Reviews (314)

Arguably the Best Action Movie of 2002
Wesley Snipes and Kris Kristofferson return to battle the undead in what will probably be the best action movie of 2002. With a whole slew of fight scenes, great costumes, great weapons, great scenes, and great soundtrack music, Blade II rocks.

Blade (Snipes) is enlisted by the Vampires to help destroy a genetic nightmare-being called the Reapers, which even have the Vampires themselves on the run. Assisting Blade is a re-juvinated Whistler (Kristofferson) and the Bloodpack, an elite group of Vampires trained to hunt Blade led by the lovely Leonor Varela and Ron Perlman. Blade is now the leader of the Bloodpack as they must try to defeat the Reapers.

Two hours later, you're going to have to catch your breath outside of the theater. Del Toro's direction is incredible, as you are right in the thick of the action. All the stops are pulled out for this sequel. However, the only drawback is the lack of a solid plot, but you pretty much forget about that after you get taken in my all the action sequences. The computer effects are equally dazzling, and adds to the gore of the film (which is definately a factor).

Everything is just right in "Blade II". The film is casted well, everything is shiny and glossy with a kick-butt attitude towards it. Camera shots and frame rate are queued with perfection, and the fight scenes during the film are what makes this production top-notch. A must see and a definate buy when released.

Claret has never looked better!!
If Guillermo del Toro set out to translate the language of comics to the silver screen, than he more than achieved his goal with the visually astounding Blade II. With the exception of the two returning characters of Whistler and Blade, this 'sequel' couldn't be more removed from the original if it tried. From atmosphere and colour coded lighting to whip crack pace and even more gore, Blade II is relentless in it's attempt to leave you gasping by the time the blood drenched credits roll. Foregoing any real semblance of plot (that would only slow things down after all), the film tends to feel like one long fight scene but it's all executed so impressively that the final impression left is one not unlike riding a rollercoaster. Not a bad thing and an even better thing if that's what the director set out to do. Guillermo himself is unapologetic in his honesty that he was simply intended to fashion a 'kick ...' movie that while different from Stephen Norrington's original, retains the similar style and wit that made the first so special. Acting wise, Blade is a role Wesley Snipes could probably play in his sleep so while he is predictably fantastic in bringing the character to believable life, all eyes settle on newcomer Luke Goss (he of Bros fame) and he doesn't dissapoint as the ruthless (and perhaps somewhat tragic) reaper Gerrad Nomak. From his appearance onscreen, Goss gives a captivating performance, somehow even investing a real humanity in a character that is more animalistic than human and that is testament to Goss' talents. Smartly avoiding overkill in the make up department, it's Goss' physical presence that is the most unsettling aspect of the villian. With two such formidable actors grounding the insanity that ensures in it's running run, the film is left to throw body parts up at the screen haphazardly. That it is crafted all so professionally allows you to simply be whisked away for the horrific ride. While not as acomplished as the first, Blade II remains startling good viewing. All action genres are pandered to, the horror fans get what they are after and when all is said and done, some might find themselves surprised how addictive the film continues to be, requesting if not demanding repeated viewings. A great horror and action film that deserves more of an accolade than simply 'sequel' and more a title in it's own right.

BEST MOVIE EVER
After the first installment in the Blade series, I was really looking forward to the sequel - and I wasn't dissapointed. This far surpasses Blade and just hightens the suspense for Blade: Trinity (out Dec 10). Wesley Snipes is his usual great self in a fast-paced, suspense action movie. Kris Kristofferson is brilliant as Whistler once again (as are the rest of the cast). If you liked the first then you will definetly like this - and hopefully like me you cant wait for Blade: Trinity !

Blade I Retains M. Wolfman Touch....
....Blade II does not.

What's the Marv Wolfman Touch you may ask. Wolfman and Gene Colan of course was the original Marvel comics team which created Blade from a subplot in their most popular horror comic Tomb of Dracula in the 1970s. Those dudes pretty much knew they were creating comic books stories and never, never took themselves 100% too seriously.

Blade II loses the light touch--as much as fables of vampirous goings on could indeed have a light touch--and goes for the jugular, pun intended. I found myself wishing for one of those campy, talky Vincent Price death scenes since most of the creatures here explode in a special effects blast into dust and immediately into oblivion type of thing when killed. The crew of offending vampires creepily open the flesh on their cheek, jaws and upper neck to--bite yer neck and suck yer blaad! Yeesh! And Snipes smiles sadistiaclly thru-out the entire thing. It was a chore to look at it 'cuz it is busy, so many of those vamp things disintergate and no one is having that much fun. I'll watch a video featuring Sesame Street's Count any day insteada this mess.

Pulse-Pounding!!!!
When the world is threatned by a new and deadlier breed of super vampire the legendary Blade and his mentor Whistler must join forces with the Bloodpack, an elite team of vampire warriors made up of his sworn enemies. In order to stop the carnage these ravenous fiends must be destroyed at all costs. In this high-voltage adventure, exploding with spectular effects and martial arts action. The electrifying Snipes reprises his role from the original cult classic Blade. I thought this was a hell of alot better than the original. I thought the sequel had a better plot, great acting, excellent fight scenes, and nonstop action. If you liked the original, you'll love the sequel. I loved the sequel, alot more than I liked the original. ENJOY!!!! ... Read more

Description

In his late color masterpiece Kagemusha (The Shadow Warrior) director Akira Kurosawa returned to the samurai film and to a primary theme of his celebrated career—the play between illusion and reality. Sumptuously reconstructing the splendor of feudal Japan and pageantry of war, Kurosawa creates a soaring historical epic that is also a somber meditation on the nature of power. The Criterion Collection is proud to present Kagemusha for the first time in its full-length version. ... Read more

Reviews (33)

Fine precursor to the classic "Ran"
Just before "Ran," Kurosawa got American funding for this movie about a "shadow warrior" who was assigned to impersonate Takeda Shingen should he die. This was to keep the Takeda clan's border secure and prevent enemies (of which Takeda had many) from invading. It is a wonderful film, and has two very strong points: the visuals, and the characters.

The strong visuals should be obvious - an Akira Kurosawa film with no strong visuals is like a Monet painting with poor use of color. The battle scenes are stunning and seem to come out of a nightmare, with rifleman shooting down on soldiers with a bright light flashing behind them. The colored armor of Takeda's men were also nicely picked and, as Kurosawa would later do with "Ran", give their presense a hauntingly beautiful yet horrifying tone. The final scene at the Battle of Nagashino (which was wrongfully nitpicked in Stephen Turnbull's Osprey book of the battle) chooses to show us only the aftermath of the battle, with shots of cavalry charging to the gunners and then cutting to the horrified expressions of those who watch the unfolding massacre of Japan's greatest army. The shot of the fields of dead is some thing that could only have come out of the nightmare of war.

I think the strongest part of the film, though, were the characters. The film has a slew of fascinating characters, from Takeda's generals (each with their own personality) right down to the rifleman who shot Takeda. Even the spies from Oda and Tokugawa interact and talk like real people, and I can't think of any one in this film I easily forget. I especially liked Oda Nobunaga, and I think this film has the best portrayal I've ever seen of him. He can be seen walking out with his army and stopping briefly to listen to a Christian priest give a prayer. There is another part where he rides around on an Arab horse, followed by a scene where he offers Tokugawa Ieyasu a glass of Western wine (poor Tokugawa chokes on it!).

The best character is, of course, the shadow warrior himself. The actor did a wonderful job of playing Takeda and the imposter, and even though being a common thief that nearly quits his job in the beginning, you find yourself growing to like him. The scene where he confesses to the concubines he is an imposter, knowing they'll take it as a joke, and then winks at a general was hilarious! Also, notice in the scene where a retainer describes to Takeda's nephew what the meaning of the clan flag is...the imposter is listening just as intently as the boy is! He also comes out strong in the second-to-last battle sequence, where he watches as men fight and die for a man they strongly admire. The final Kurosawa metaphor at the end (which I won't describe because its a serious spoiler) also gives the whole point of the story. The man tried to undertake a role that was perhaps too big for him, a role only one man could really play.

Overall, I was very impressed with this movie, and I would definately recommend it as viewing for those fans of the master of film himself. I hope soon a DVD will be released of it and I will be able to add it to my growing Akira Kurosawa DVD set. In the meantime, I happily own a video copy for viewing.

The shadow warrior
Kagemusha is another entry in Kurosawa's decades-long string of Samurai movies and is replet with rank-n-file anti-war themes: empires are fleeting, stubborn pride proves costly, and human life is cheap. Although not without its problems in pacing and stiffness, it is better than some of his more famous films, though no where near as good as Ran. The plot: The warlord Shingen is mortally wounded whilst besieging a fortress. His dying wish is that his dynasty continue. This is accomplished by using an impersonator, Kagemusha (Tatsuya Nakadai), who is a thief with humble ancestry. Kagemusha serves as Shingen's stand-in for three years, improving morale and even helping to win battles. The most impressive feature in Kagemush is the photography along with the splendid costumes. Indeed, outstanding cinematography and convincing sets are a familiar hallmark for Kurosawa. While one can hardly fault the films character development, for a war film, the pace is slow -- very slooow. Kagemusha was an expensive film by Japanese standards, and Kurosawa had alienated himself from Japanese studios with his cutting comments about their uncompromising attitude towards fimmaking. So unfortunatley (and ironically), he turned to the crass commerical master himself, George Lucas (as well as Francis Ford Coppola). Both are credited as executive producers for the "international" version of Kagemusha. Kagemusha was nominated for two Academy Awards, Best Foreign Language Film and Best Art Direction.

Better than Ran
Comparing Kagemusha with Ran is a thread that runs through many of the reviews. Both are dramas centered around warlords during Japan's feudal era, and were directed by Kurosawa late in his career. Both films are visually stunning, but there are differences in how the stories are presented. Ran seems affected by its self-conscious adaptation of King Lear, and has a more theatrical (and less cinematic) feel about it. The acting is very stylized, as if in adapting Shakespeare's play Kurosawa also wanted to reaffirm the Japanese qualities through similarities to traditional ritualistic Noh dramas.

The story of Kagemusha seems more of a natural portrayal in comparison. The loyalty of the thief to the warlord is perhaps a quintessentially Japanese story, and is beautifully evoked in many small scenes throughout the film. It is the battle scenes which are highly stylized in this film, as they serve to illustrate the changing fortunes of the clans, and are not centerpieces. They are a part of the amazing beauty of the film's images. One of my favorite images of all the films I have seen is that of the warlord's unhappy son plotting in a traditional room, while in the background we can see the blue of a lake being whipped up by a storm.

Some people will prefer Ran, and others will like best Kurosawa's earlier and more earthy films, such as Yojimbo. They are all wonderful, but for myself Kagemusha is his crowning achievement.

Great movie
I actually prefer Kagemusha to Ran. My Japanese language University teacher used to gripe that Kurosawa represented a "western" style of cinema, as opposed to Ozu, for instance. Ran is basically King Lear set in medieval Japan, whereas Kagemusha is more original in many ways, and less anachronistic. The themes of the Kagemusha's futile fight aganst destiny and his doppelganger-like identification with Shingen are also magnificently played. Finally, the very Japanese emphasis on passive control (Shingen's strategy is always to act as an umovable mountain on which to shatter his enemies) resonates in interesting ways.

I Want My DVD!!!!!!!
Why, oh why, is Kagemusha not available on DVD? I have seen probably a dozen of Kurosawa's movies, and Kagemusha is my favorite of them all. For the wonderful cinematography and score alone, it is deserving of a better format than VHS. ... Read more

Reviews (35)

The one Tracy-Heburn movie where she gets the upper hand
This 1957 film directed by Walter Lang was the eighth of the nine Tracy-Hepburn films and their first in color. Based on the play by William Marchant (which had starred Shirley Booth on Broadway), Katharine Hepburn plays Bunny Watson, a reference librarian who works for a television network. Bunny becomes quite concerned when she learns that the new computer being installed by Spencer Tracy's Richard Sumner is supposed to put her and the rest of her staff out of work. Gig Young has his standard role as the nice guy who ends up losing the girl in the end, while Joan Blondell, Dina Merrill and Sue Randall make up the rest of Bunny's brainy staff.

In terms of pairing Tracy and Hepburn "Desk Set" is certainly unique because it is the only film where she gets the upper hand at the end and he gets the comeuppance. Tracy is really nothing more than a misunderstood villain; his new toy is suppose to help the girls in the reference library not replace them. But none of this really matters because in the end it is clear than the women are a lot smarter than the machine (although they do get the baseball trivia answer wrong). The one priceless scene in the film is a roof top lunch between Tracy and Hepburn. He just has a few simple questions for her that turn out to be brainteasers, and Hepburn's character disposes of each and every challenge with an ease grace and guileless naiveté that is quite charming, while Tracy sinks lower and lower as she beats him at every turn. The rest of the film is fairly pedestrian as we wait for the expected happy endings for the computer and romantic plot lines.

After receiving Academy Award nominations for her work in "Summertime" and "The Rainmaker," Hepburn had made a film with Bob Hope that was totally butchered, the astonishingly unfunny film "The Iron Petticoat," and "Desk Set." It would be another two years before she made another film, although Spencer Tracy's failing health was as much if not more of a contributing factor as the sudden drop off in the quality of her films. Hepburn would turn to the stage and perform Shakespeare and then return to the screen with four consecutive Oscar nominated roles. Consequently, in retrospect, "Desk Set" clearly defines the end of a period in Hepburn's career. You can not help but look at the next two decades of her film career, where virtually every film is based on a play by a great dramatist (Tennessee Williams's "Suddenly Last Summer," Eugene O'Neill's "Long Day's Journey Into Night," Euripides's "Trojan Women," Edward Albee's "A Delicate Balance") and not think that this was very much a conscious effort by Hepburn in the wake of this particular fluff piece.

IT'S ABOUT TIME!!!!!
I've been waiting for this DVD forever because I love this movie but can't stand the pan-and-scan version. I just saw this mentioned on Turner Classic Movies, cried out "Yes! Yes!" and immediately came to Amazon to see if they have it. I am so glad they do! And in honor of this great movie finally being released in all of it's widescreen glory, I am cut and pasting my review for the video version here below:

"Like Floating Island...Delicious!"

The smart dialogue, the gorgeous fashion, the way you want to kick Gig Young in the teeth...I wish more modern comedy could be this clever. (My two favorite scenes are the rooftop lunch quiz and the rainy evening misunderstanding. As usual you never think Tracy is acting, he's so real. And Hepburn's Miss Watson (her name a inside-joke nod to the founder of IBM -Thomas J. Watson) is a character you root for to blow off egotistical beau Mike. Another bonus is the Sumners snooty EMIRAC assistant, Miss Warringer-whose come-uppance couldn't be better. I want a brown coat like Bunny's!

Thank goodness this is finally out on DVD and WIDESCREEN! It's completely enjoyable now without the distractions of pan and scan!

Tracy and Hepburn Forever!

The one Tracy & Hepburn match where she gets the upper hand
This 1957 film directed by Walter Lang was the eighth of the nine Tracy-Hepburn films and their first in color. Based on the play by William Marchant (which had starred Shirley Booth on Broadway), Katharine Hepburn plays Bunny Watson, a reference librarian who works for a television network. Bunny becomes quite concerned when she learns that the new computer being installed by Spencer Tracy's Richard Sumner is supposed to put her and the rest of her staff out of work. Gig Young has his standard role as the nice guy who ends up losing the girl in the end, while Joan Blondell, Dina Merrill and Sue Randall make up the rest of Bunny's brainy staff.

In terms of pairing Tracy and Hepburn "Desk Set" is certainly unique because it is the only film where she gets the upper hand at the end and he gets the comeuppance. Tracy is really nothing more than a misunderstood villain; his new toy is suppose to help the girls in the reference library not replace them. But none of this really matters because in the end it is clear than the women are a lot smarter than the machine (although they do get the baseball trivia answer wrong). The one priceless scene in the film is a roof top lunch between Tracy and Hepburn. He just has a few simple questions for her that turn out to be brainteasers, and Hepburn's character disposes of each and every challenge with an ease grace and guileless naiveté that is quite charming, while Tracy sinks lower and lower as she beats him at every turn. The rest of the film is fairly pedestrian as we wait for the expected happy endings for the computer and romantic plot lines.

After receiving Academy Award nominations for her work in "Summertime" and "The Rainmaker," Hepburn had made a film with Bob Hope that was totally butchered, the astonishingly unfunny film "The Iron Petticoat," and "Desk Set." It would be another two years before she made another film, although Spencer Tracy's failing health was as much if not more of a contributing factor as the sudden drop off in the quality of her films. Hepburn would turn to the stage and perform Shakespeare and then return to the screen with four consecutive Oscar nominated roles. Consequently, in retrospect, "Desk Set" clearly defines the end of a period in Hepburn's career. You can not help but look at the next two decades of her film career, where virtually every film is based on a play by a great dramatist (Tennessee Williams's "Suddenly Last Summer," Eugene O'Neill's "Long Day's Journey Into Night," Euripides's "Trojan Women," Edward Albee's "A Delicate Balance") and not think that this was very much a conscious effort by Hepburn in the wake of this particular fluff piece.

TRACY/HEPBURN MAGIC STRANGELY ABSENT!
This is one of Kate and Spencer's later efforts - post MGM, pre-"Guess Who's Coming To Dinner" and it generally lacks in the chemistry that most of thier work at MGM had in spades. Tracy's a method's engineer who's assigned to make the daily operation of a television station more efficient. Of course he's bound to butt heads with researcher, Bunny Watson (Hepburn). Unlike most Tracy/Hepburn movies, in which their love for one another is never in question, on this occasion,Gig Young is inexplicably and needlessly thrown into the mix as Bunny's boyfriend. But it's the old Hepburn/Tracy's stardust and magic that keeps this otherwise deadly boring film afloat.
TRANSFER: Desk Set is at last presented in its original Cinemascope 2:35:1 aspect ratio and it is anamorphically enhanced to take full advantage of 16:9 displays. Although colors can be rich, vibrant and bold, flesh tones have an uncanny pasty look in certain scenes and a reddish/pinkish overcast in others. There are instances where dirt, film grain and age related artifacts crop up throughout this print. Also, black levels tend to be weak in certain scenes. There's a hint of edge enhancement and some pixelization but the print is generally smooth looking. The audio, as with all Cinemascope films of the period, is vintage stereo and presented at a reasonable listening level.
Extras: Fox is genuinely inconsistent in the extra content they provide for their "Studio Series" titles. If you recall, "The Day The Earth Stood Still" contained a 70 min. documentary while "The Inn of The Sixth Happiness" contained only an audio commentary track. On this occasion we get an audio commentary and some truncated movietones junk that is short, boring and generally slapped together as an afterthought. Not what I would expect from any series dubbed, "Studio Series".
BOTTOM LINE: If you're a die hard Tracy/Hepburn fan than this is a must have. But it's not one of their best or even one of their mediocre. It's just big on...well, being big and short, unfortunately, on entertainment!

We get set up with Desk Set at last!
"A large market exists in the U.S. for classic movies on DVD. There can really be no excuse for withholding America's rightful cinematic history when Europe and Asia is already enjoying it!" That comes from another reviewer on these pages, and I second that emotion.

I'll go even further than that review and say that Desk Set is the BEST film with Spence and Kate. And don't forget the great Gig Young doing his perfect second banana routine, which has already delighted us in so many other films. They didn't hide behind so many physical gags or the safer facade of black and white. Instead they acted out the script in glorious full color widescreen and stereo, no less.

And did Fox drop the ball in giving us the proper widescreen version of this classic? No, they did not! The studio came through for us (which is more than we can usually say about studios) and put it out in widescreen! And they even added some actress commentary for good measure. Yes, it's been a long 9-year wait, since DVDs first came out in 1995, but it's here now, at least.

And what a great modern plot Desk Set has: an independent woman (instead of a cloying playtoy), a job for that woman as a research expert, (instead of the usual secretary trying to date her boss), a strong leading man but one with a sense of humor (instead of the usual he-man tough guy). And all smack in the middle of the early revolution of COMPUTERS!

The man vs. machine concepts in this film will reverberate down through the ages. Plus it has a great romantic plot, too. This film has everything! Many people say they love to see a well-restored 1957 Chevy, but I'll take this well-restored 1957 Desky instead! ... Read more

Reviews (41)

Love Sports? Then Watch This Ultra-Funny Action-Comedy
In the summer of 2001, this hilarious comedy-action film was released in Hong Kong, and it immediately became the biggest hit there, even beating the previous box-office record of Jackie Chan's "First Strike." The craze went on, and when it was released in Japan in May, 2002, it again became an instant smash hit even though Stephen Chow's name, before that release, had been known only among the small number of devoted Hong Kong film fans. How the movie is received in US and other regions, I don't know, but as those facts testify, "Kung-Fu Soccer" is an incredibly funny movie.

[STORY}] You need one? OK, it is about a young man Sing (Chow) who wants to promote the usefulness of kung-fu he learned at Shaolin Temple, and an ex-star soccer player "Golden Leg" Fung (good supporting actor Ng Man Tat), who is now down and out, living in misery. However, when Fung meets Sing on the street of Hong Kong, and sees how he kicks an empty can miles away (literally), Fung realises that here is a golden opportunity for him to regain the dignity and pride he lost long time ago. Combination of Kung-fu and soccer! Invincible!!

So, Sing recruits the old pupils he knew when he was training at the temple to make a soccer team. They are no longer what they were; one is a businessman busy with a cell ohone, another totally unemployed, and so on.... And they seem to have lost the skills they had once until, of course, one day, suddenly, they come back in good shape, ready for fight, game for more. Meanwhile, Sing meets a girl named Mui (Vicki Zhao), and a romance (but very unusual one) starts to bloom. My overall impression is, in short, Austin Powers with sports and martial arts.

[WHO IS STEPHEN CHOW?] Chow has been very popular in Hong Kong since the year 1990, about two years he made his film debut, and he is 40 years old at the time of writing this, but looks much younger and very agile. His comedies are always filled with incredibly stupid and ridiculous things, often under the very unique situations. Some of his movies include "With Love from Beijin" (1994) "The God of Cookery" (1996), and many others, and I hope those titles would tell you what you see in those funny films. Always stupid and powerful, often with extraordinary parodies, his films give you dynamic gags with improvised atomosphere. Though the film often lacks a coherent story, and his character is not always amiable, finally you come to like him.

[ABOUT THIS FILM] As I said, "Kung-Fu Soccer" is a funny comedy, and it also uses first-rate wire-actions and CG images to create its original world. The soccer players jump (to the height of more than 10 meters), kick a ball (to make a hole in a concrete wall, or sometimes catches fire, becoming a roaring puma-like shape!), and ... well, about the rest you should see for yourself. Some of the CGIs are intentionally (and aptly) cheesy (see how villains fly in a browl), but some are surprisingly effective, especailly in the final game scene. Not "Titanic" class, but its use is well-regulated and most importantly, makes lots of funny scenes.

[AND ... TRIVIA] 1) As Stephen Chow is a great fan of Bruce Lee, he makes a reference to this legendary hero in the character of the goal keeper whose orange-colored uniform is that of Lee in his last film "Game of Death." 2) Vicki Chao is a famous, very popular idol singer/actress in mainland China, but she never shows her real face. Three time she appears, but each time she is wearing some make-ups. This is an in-joke for those who know her, but to some audience Chow's joke may seem to have gone too far. 3) If you're a Hong-Kong film fan, check out the special appearances of Karen Mok with a strange make-up (regular of Chow's films like "The God of Cookery" and also seen in Jet Li's "Black Mask") and Vincent Kok (also seen in "With Love" and director of Jackie Chan's "Gorgeous").

[AND FINALLY...] The film has first made with the running time of 102 minutes, and then two additional sequences are made to make it 109 minutes (I saw the latter one in Japan). However, it has been reported that for the US release Miramax decided to cut extensively the Asian version, so you may keep that in mind. But, though I hate those changes done to the films, I think, as far as this case goes, the cuts would not affect the total effect of the film very much (I admit some parts of the original version was, to me, a little unnecessary or ineffective) because the film itself is way too funny. Well, anyway, that's for the record.

I love the film. Hope you enjoy it.

Wow, just wow
I very rarely (if ever) review movies. So why start now? Sometimes good things go unnoticed due to them being strange or not promoted right. Shaolin Soccer definitely falls into those categories. Movie is old by industry standards since it was made in 2001. It was recognized and wildly played in Asia and Europe but got none of the publicity in North America. Just like the title suggests Shaolin masters of Kung Fu are playing soccer. It's not another non stop Jackie Chan fighting movies. It has a decent plot; it has a fight between good and evil, greed and humbleness, lies and honesty. It teaches about friendship, being loyal, dedication and positive look on life regardless of the circumstances. And of course the special effects: amazing stunts and Matrix like action make it stand out from other Asian productions. Movie is well paced with no down time. Everything that happens, leads to more and more action. We have our share of baseball and football movies which all of them containing their dose of drama. Now it's time for a soccer movie. It's a bit of comedy mixed with action. Even if you've seen 1000 martial arts movies, even if you are sick and tired of sports genre flicks, see Shaolin Soccer. It is different and you will be glad you did.

grreaat
This movie is funnay!It employs some great martial arts techniques and kool computer effects. It begins with a group of former Shaolin monks that have chosen to embark on different ways of life. They reunite through one student that is down on his luck poor, but still positive. Another man was once a soccer legend and loses that prestige through an injury. He takes abuse from the coach. He then meets the former shaolin monk and they decide to form a soccer team.
It sums up the sense of honor and respect that the martial arts emanate. It does this lightly and humorously. The part in which stephen chow and his other monk brethren dress up and sing and dance...very funny. I nearly choaked on my popcorn and collapsed on the floor of my room laughing. It has the contrast of the basic yin and yang of evil, hence the "evil team"(a bad soccer team that the shaolin monks must compete against)It brings the martial arts timeless ideals of honor into the 21rst century, With style and substance.

My new fascination with Stephen Chow
While I like to think of myself as an internationalist when it comes to watching films, I had never heard of Stephen Chow before deciding to take a chance on 'Shaolin Soccer.'

Shame on me. Chow turns out to be a hilarious and creative star. Who could have dreamed of something as goofy, infectious and, at the same time, as technically brilliant (the special effects are eye-popping) as Shaolin Soccer? Now, I'm reading through the comments left here by Mr. Chow's longtime fans and I realize I'm going to have to check out some of his "better works" (as judged by these aficionados) like 'God of Cookery' and 'From Beijing with Love'.

Not knowing what to expect from Shaolin Soccer, I found myself delightfully convulsed with laughter at two early points in the film:

- An impromptu synchronized 'street' rendition of the Kool and the Gang hit 'Celebration.' This is almost impossible to explain. When it took shape in the movie, I literally mouthed the words "What the...?" Truly inspired.

- A second muscial number, in which two of the Shaolin 'brothers' take to the stage in an ill-fated cabaret act. While I'm sure this was even funnier in Cantonese, even the wonderfully descriptive subtitles demonstrated the amateur campiness of their performance (which was exactly Chow's point).

Plus, for any soccer/football fan the depictions of the in-game events are a joy. All in all, Shaolin Soccer was a unexpected treat.

Overated work of Chow
Dare no one criticize the "king of comedy" stephen Chow or, OK, most of you westerners may have a different taste.
From the point of view of a Hong Kong born native speaker of cantonese, I have no choice but to say that Shaolin Soccer was overrated. SC's hilarious jokes went stale and he was too obssesed with the use of special effect too. This movie makes me miss his past works like "from beijin with love", etc so much.
another point is that, SC are now more concern of the market of the rest of Asia and even Western, he eliminates all jokes which only locals find funny. So to me, as a Hong Kong people, I am disappointed. ... Read more

Reviews (108)

A visually stunning sci-fi spectacle
I have fond memories of seeing "Logan's Run" in the theaters many years ago, and am delighted to see this film getting a fine presentation on DVD. Directed by Michael Anderson, the film takes place in a post-apocalyptic future where humans live a hedonistic life in the shelter of a domed city. There's just one catch to this pleasure-oriented utopia: nobody is permitted to live past the age of 30. The title character, played by Michael York, is a Sandman: an elite policeman assigned to kill those who flee the birthday death sentence. But a surprising assignment takes Logan on a voyage that will change him profoundly.

"Logan's Run" is an adventure tale, a love story, a crime drama, a social satire, and a sumptuous visual spectacle all in one. The whole package is superbly enhanced by Jerry Goldsmith's inventive and varied score. This is one of the most visually stylish science fiction films ever made; it's full of scenes that are truly unforgettable.

The film is really grounded by the performances by the superb cast. Michael York and Jenny Agutter make an absolutely enchanting screen couple; the evolution of their characters' relationship is one of the key pleasures of the film. Richard Jordan brings complexity and intensity to his role as a fellow Sandman. And Peter Ustinov is delightfully warm, funny, and loveable in a critical supporting role.

The DVD includes a vintage "making of" featurette, as well as a full-length audio commentary by actor York, director Anderson, and costume designer Bill Thomas. The three discuss casting, stunts, special effects, Peter Ustinov's ad-libbing, and other aspects of making the film. They reveal some fascinating and delightful bits of trivia along the way. This is one of those great commentary tracks that makes you appreciate the film even more.

Solid sf adventure less than the sum of its parts
Logan's Run started off with a pretty amazing concept--(courtesy of science fiction writers William F. Nolan and George Clayton Johnson)what if our youth obsessed society put everyone over the age of 30 (21 in the novel)to death as a means of population control? This film version of a classic cautionary tale is intermittantly successful. David Zelag Goodman's screenplay condenses and changes around several key characters. Goodman's script essentially refocuses the novel into The Fugitive in the future. In the original novel Francis (played brilliantly by the late Richard Jordan)and the Old Man character (played as befuddled by Peter Ustinov) were one and the same. You'll need to read the novel to see why this was an important altered plot point.

Additionally, Sanctuary did exist in the novel while here it's clear that it's something of an urban myth. While these plot points might not seem essential, altering them radically reshaped the film. Still, it's clear that the film's director, producer and screenwriter (respectively, Michael Anderson the late Saul David and Goodman)wanted to streamline what could have been a confusing plot if not layed out correctly.

The basic plot--In the future our society is enclosed in domes. As a means to control the population, everyone has a life clock crystal on their hand. When you reach 30 you have the option to become "renewed" in a ceremony attended by the citizens. Logan (Michael York) and Francis (Richard Jordan) are Sandmen who hunt, capture/or kill runners (people who choose to not go through renewal and try to escape).

After one incident, Logan is debriefed by the computer that runs the city. The runner wore a symbol representing life. During this debriefing he is send undercover to become a "runner" and find out 1)Who is behind the network that tries to get people out of the city and 2) If sanctuary exists. Logan's life clock is prematurely aged to 30. He contacts a girl who he had met before on the circuit (a system where people can "dial up" others for casual sex)who he had seen wearing the same symbol. Despite her better judgement, she elects to help him escape.

Francis, alarmed that his friend is running, elects to chase him and either bring him back for renewal or kill him.

The film is quite good despite some gaping plot holes. Michael York gives a impassioned performance as Logan 5. Jenny Agutter is enchanting as Jessica. Richard Jordan shines as Logan's former partner Francis who feels betrayed and hunts Logan down. Roscoe Lee Brown is exceptional in his cameo as the demented cyborg Box. Michael Anderson, Jnr. gives a nice cameo performance as the surgeon hired to alter Logan's appearence. Made for $6 million, Logan's Run looked quite good when it was released in 1976. The symbolism of having Francis and Logan fight in the House of Representatives with an American flag was quite evident given the year of release (1976).
In many respects the themes in the film are more timely than ever. The obsession with youth, looking good and plastic surgery have come to define our culture in the 21st Century. The only thing missing from the film are botox injections.

Jerry Goldsmith's brilliant score is a highlight of the film. Like his score for Planet of the Apes, Goldsmith chose to go with a mix of sythesizers and orchestra to portray the city of the future. He eschews cliches in his music and the various themes and cues are at turns suspenseful and witty. The optical effects are pretty good given the time. The matte paintings by Albert Whitlock are outstanding and fairly convincing. The miniatures are a mixed bag. They didn't look completely convincing in 1976 nor do they today. Part of the problem has to do with the fact that waters don't fare well when placed in miniatures. You can't miniaturize the bubbles and water drops. Also, the use of the miniatures in combination with live action is quite grainy due to the film stock and amount of composites. Still, if you can suspend your disbelief, you'll enjoy the film despite its limitations.

Logan's Run attempted to tell an adult cautionary tale in a world of light weight escapist movies. It's a commendable film and the film makers frequently bite off more than they can chew. I'd rather have a film that's too ambitious than not at all.

Still, I appreciate the ambitions if not the execution. It's nice to finally have this fine if flawed movie on DVD. The transfer is quite good although the print has a number of flaws. There's also quite a bit of dirt evident on the print. These probably could have been cleared up with a direct digital transfer. Additionally, the 5.1 soundtrack occasionally sounds "tinny" and when played in the stereo format can be quite difficult to hear.

The extras are limited but nice. The commentary by director Michael Anderson and Michael York is quite good and informative. A pity the terrific actor Richard Jordan isn't around any longer to give us his perspective. I would have liked to see a fresh retrospective documentary on the making of the film. It's not likely to happen, though as no one is going to champion this film at the expensive of other newer projects (particulary since producer Saul David is gone). The featurette included is the original one made to promote the film. It's actually pretty decent given the age and purpose of it. The trailer is included as well. The disc is a dual sided single layer DVD with the widescreen and pan & scan versions on the same disc.

classic!
logan's run is a real gem. love the cast and the look of the film and it's a good dvd to have when you want to see something that's out of this world!

fantastic futuristic fun
Logan's Run was one of my faves as a kid. It was different from othe Sci Fi at the time. It created a weird world that was great to watch. I also watched the TV show version and loved it too (sure it was just a TV show and not quite as grand as the the more expensive flick but it was still weird enough to keep me watching). You've just got to love a show that creates it's own strange world and takes you away from reality. Logan has it's own style that provides just the right escape from the played out worlds of other Sci Fi flicks and shows. Give this a chance if you want something that's different and you've never seen it.

A bit excentric, but absolutely worth watching.
This is an awsome movie, even by today's standards. Granted the special effects can sometimes look corny or cheesy, but for the time when this movie was produced, the effects were top notch.

The story line goes like this. It is the year 2275. Disasters have forced what remains of civilization into a self contained, domed city. No one goes outside the city becuase they all beleive it to be a barren wasteland, incapable of supporting life. This is because it WAS that way when the city was founded, but that was over a hundred years ago. Since the city was founded, there was realised a great need to maintain the population to acceptable levels. So, it is determined that at age 30 you will "terminate". If you do not want to end your life at 30, you can participate on the "Carosel" on your "Last Day" (30 years to the day of your birth). The recorded message basically says that if you have a strong enough desire to renew, you will. Renewing gives you an unstated amount of extra time. If you are ready to end, you don't have to participate on Carosel. However, there exist a few people who don't want to follow the rules. They "run" from their fate. To prevent people from running (as well as for general law enforcement) there are a group of cop like folks. Each is refered to as a SandMan. It is their responsibility to enforce law in the domed city, and to track down anyone who decides to run, and terminate them.

Now meet Logan 5. He's a sand man, and he loves his job. But one day when he is doing his job and terminates a runner, he finds an Ankh on the runner. He doesn't think much of it. So he picks it up with the rest of the runner's belongings, and heads back to HQ to be "debriefed". But the central computer DOES recognise the Ankh. It is determined to be a symbol associated with a legenday place called Sanctuary, where runners can go and hide and live out their life normally (as you and I would consider normal). The computer determines that Sanctuary must be either right on the inside of the dome, or outside the city. Logan 5 is assigned to find sanctuary, and destroy it.

And so begins his Grand adventure, during the process of which he leaves the city, Falls in love with his "partner in crime, Jessica" (which is strictly forbidden in the city), Finds a man who has more cats than I could count, and returns to the city to try and stop the madness.

A very good movie on all counts. It should have been more popular. ... Read more

Reviews (60)

Don't monkey around with religion
This film is based on the play by Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee about the 1925, Scopes Monkey Trial. It is tricky to keep the differences between this play and the real trial apart in one's mind. Spencer Tracy (Henry Drummond) and Fredric March (Matthew Harrison Brady) spar over the legality of teaching of evolution in Tennessee. This combination is guaranteed to keep you glued to your seat. In this movie Scopes, while teaching evolution to a high-school biology class is arrested and placed in jail.

Some time the other characters get lost in the shuffle yet one other will show through. That is Gene Kelley who plays E. K. Hornbeck who reports the trial.

I will not give a blow by blow of the trail but to say it gets rather heated and is broken up with several adjournments with time to reflect on what was said and going to be said.

If you are interested in the real thing then read Scopes Autobiography "Center of the Storm."

Pr 11:29... "HE WHO TROUBLES HIS OWN HOUSE WILL INHERIT THE WIND."

"Sit down, Sampson, you're about to get a haircut"
Although Inherit the Wind was made in 1960 about a trial in 1920, it retains a surprising amount of bite.

In the film, based on the stage play of the same name, in turn based on the famous Scopes Monkey Trial, a biology teacher is jailed for teaching evolution. This sets up the film's centerpiece: a courtroom battle between famed attorneys, portrayed by acting heavyweights Spencer Tracy and Frederic March.

Gene Kelly is surprisingly good in a non-dancing role, and gets the best lines as the cynical journalist from Baltimore ("Sit down, Sampson, you're about to get a haircut," he says to the teacher when his girlfriend is called to testify).

Directed by the great Stanley Kramer, the film works well on a number of levels: comedy, courtroom drama, and commentary on religion's place in society.

A unforgettable tour de force and superb script!
This film is a triumph against the intolerance and the dark sides of the reason. The dreams of the reason produce monsters.
The generated legal battle between a Mathew Brady the hard fan religious and politician and Henry Drummond an opened mind lawyer about the Darwin ideas , keep full intensity all the film.
This historical process lets you thinking about the imaginary circunstance about what would the destiny of USA if Brady would have been President?
Spencer Tracy and Frederic March are like the alpha and the omega in this match . One timeless classic film in any age.
Don't even doubt it. This film is for you and for a wide target in the social spectre.
A must and a winner movie!

Incredibly Boring at Best
This movie is terrible. When people make a movie, you assume they would try to make it entertaining at the very Least. Don't waste your time viewing this film. It lasts way too long and you'll be happy when its over. Even if you do like the movie, it has a terrible ending. Hardly any of the conflicts are solved, and you're left with a feeling of disgust. That is only if you manage to make it through the entire movie. The songs in it as well are way too long and sound terrible. To sum it up, this movie is terrible.

A LITTLE BACKGROUND
As previous reviewers have noted, _INHERIT THE WIND_ is a work of fiction that is based on what came to be known as "The Scopes Monkey Trial." Also previously noted is the fact that Spencer Tracy, as Henry Drummond, the character adapted from the real life Clarence Darrow, and Frederic March, playing the role of Matthew Harrison Brady, whose character is based on William Jennings Bryan, engage in a carefully choreographed and outstandingly acted "pas de deux" that, to this day, has rarely been matched in any movie.

It should be understood that this is a work of fiction, and is not meant to duplicate the facts of the Scopes trial. That's why the names have been changed -- to allow literary license for dramatic purposes.

With this as background, one needs to understand the political climate that prevailed when the play from which the movie was adapted was written. The play was written in 1950, in the middle of what has come to be known as the "McCarthy Era." The anti-Communist hysteria of the time was seen by many as a threat to intellectual freedom. It was politically dangerous, at that time, to directly take on those threats to freedom of ideas, so the playwrites (Jerome Lawrence and Robert Lee) came up with the idea of using the Scopes Trial, which was safely in the past, as a vehicle to express the importance of the constitutional guarantees of such things as freedom of speech. That the play they wrote in 1950, and its 1960 movie version, were of such dramatic intensity was just icing on the cake.

I think that looking at _INHERIT THE WIND_ from the standpoint of historical perspective should do away with some reviewers beliefs that it is some sort of atheistic plot to challenge their belief systems. Also, repeating myself, I believe that it is important to realize that it is a work of fiction and need not accurately reflect the details of the real trial.

It's worth seeing from several perspectives. As a well acted movie; as one that creates an atmosphere that makes the viewer feel that he is in that hot, humid courtroom; and as one that expresses how important our freedoms really are. ... Read more