Amazon.com

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

Reviews (197)

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

Genre Grade: A-

Final Grade: B-

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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



... Read more

Reviews (28)

My favorite childhood movie - and it has a message!
I first saw this movie in theaters when it came out, which would make me nine or ten at the time. I loved the movie then. The environmental message made sense to me, and it really got its point across even to a young kid, though I didn't understand consciously that Batty had be a subject of animal experimentation (now I'm an 18 year old animal rights activist, so maybe it registered on some level though).

But a great message alone isn't enough to make a movie. It's got all the classic elements necessary for a kids movie. A great villian - Hexx is scary, unique, and voiced to perfection by Tim Curry, two strong protagonists for guys and girls in Zak and Crysta, a mythical past and setting, fun comic relief - Robin Willians is terrific as Batty, and plenty of great songs.

It's different enough from your typical Disney movie to be great, but similar enough that kids will love it. Plus, it will be something they've never seen before and it will send many important messages (about taking care of the environment, believing in yourself, and how you can make a difference) that every kid should hear. I definatly believe this is the best children's movie ever made.

Very beautiful, gentle nature story
Well, I'll just be brief with this one.
Synopsis:Zach, a 15-20 year old city boy comes to work for a deforestation company in the rainforest. A fairy, Chrysta, falls upon him by chance and to save his life, she attempts to give him fairy SIGHT, but ends up giving him fairy SIZE. Once Zack begins to explore the beautiful world of Fern Gully, he sees a side to nature that must be preserved. All of this is threatened though by Hexxus, an evil spirit that feeds on pollution.
Cons: A very overly pretty boy characters...but that's not always bad. An almost irritatingly naive female character, a shrinking violet a lot of times. Magic that unfortunately doesn't exist.
Pros: A good story to get across without being boring, dreary, or scary although a lot of people said that Hexxus terrified them. Batty Koda! Robin Williams plays the character of the brain scrambled bat very well and adds humor to the movie. Very sweet little movie to teach children about the destruction of the rainforest.
Overall: It's quite worth buying. A very charming movie for all ages, Fern Gully will help people to see another side to the rainforest while, not exactly realistic, is very lovable and lively. Enjoyable.

Spectacular beyond words!!
(...)Lovely animation, wonderful message, lovable characters....it has everything! It deals with the most important issue plaguing our planet to this day. It shows that living things deserve to be left alone, and that humans should stop interfearing (sp?). When I remembered this movie from years and years ago, I knew this had to be where my passion for animals and nature originated. This is a deeply moving and empathetic movie; the fairies can feel a tree's pain. It's seriously the best movie on the face of the earth to me. It's absolutely brilliant, spectacular, inspiring, powerful, uplifting, etc. I'm passing it on to my children and their children, without a doubt!

Message to everyone: Speak out for things that can't speak for themselves. Go vegetarian, adopt needy animals from shelters.....any little bit helps. We have alternatives to meat and paper and pencils.....why don't we use them and save a couple trees and animals? We need to have more sympathy and respect for the suffering of innocent lives who never did anything to deserve what they go through.

Long live tree-huggers!

(...)

Surprisingly Good
This is one of my favorite animated movies. Obviously this movie is one big enviornmental awarness message but so is about 90% of all movies. Although this movie features a very well told story, the best feature is the beautiful animation. Showcases early use of CGI effects that are used today. This movie does have musical numbers but they are good musical numbers. And of course, who could forget Robin Williams as the crazy bat. Recomended to anyone.

Important Lessons Sometimes Come in Small Packages
I absolutely adore this movie. It presents a delightful mix of humor and poignant symbolism. Perhaps if more children watched movies like this they would grow into enviromentally conscious adults. The characters are as loveable as they are educational. If I could, I'd buy a copy of this movie for all the children I know. ... Read more

Reviews (1707)

Titanic Triumphs Over Sinking Feeling
James Cameron's 1997 Titanic is, of course, the biggest box office hit of all time, edging out such blockbuster films as E.T., Star Wars, and Jurassic Park for that title. This film, with its tale of star-crossed lovers Rose and Jack intertwined with the real-life tragedy of the Royal Mail Steamer Titanic, won 11 Academy Awards and the loyalty of its millions of fans.
In 1997, though, no one involved in its making (except maybe the determined Cameron himself) believed this movie would float to box office glory. It was so ambitious and so expensive that not one but two studios (Paramount and 20th Century Fox) financed it, splitting the distribution rights and spending over $200,000,000 to recreate the fatal maiden voyage of the 1912 world's largest ocean liner. Yet Cameron, who had previously directed the first two Terminator movies, The Abyss, and True Lies, was proven correct when world-wide audiences embraced this touching and technically brilliant movie.
Yes, this first movie to reap $1 billion in box office gross did capture the hearts of millions of teenage girls who repeated screenings to see Leonardo DiCaprio's Jack Dawson woo Kate Winslet's feisty socialite (and soon-to-be-wed) Rose. And while many detractors scoff at this admittedly clichéd poor-boy-meets-rich-girl love story, it is exactly through this pairing that we get a feel for what it was like to travel at sea in those Gilded Era days before the First World War destroyed the old Europe forever.
This film has much going for it. It has, in addition to actual location shots of the real Titanic wreck (the minisub sequence is NOT special effects), a winsome couple, a classic mustache-twirling villain (Billy Zane) with the usual henchman (a menacing David Warner), a great supporting cast which includes Danny Nuccio, Bernard Fox (who used to guest star in TV series such as Hogan's Heroes and Bewitched), Kathy Bates, Bill Paxton (who has appeared in most of Cameron's movies) and Gloria Stuart (who plays the older Rose Dawson). Titanic also has a great musical score and incredible visuals: the sinking of the great liner is certainly realistic - even if the CGI effects are a bit artificial-looking. This picture certainly was difficult to make .... Thankfully, in spite of the media hype and negative publicity, Titanic proved to be a good and entertaining film. I recommend it to anyone who likes love stories or epic disaster films. This movie mixes both genres very well.

The Maiden Voyage
O.K. I'll admit it, while I'm usually not much for the sappy romantic films, James Cameron's Oscar winning epic Titanic is a very good movie. And I did see it more than once on the big screen.

An undersea expedition, led by explorer Brock Lovett (Bill Paxton), is searching for a valuable diamond aboard the wreckage of the Titanic. The team, instead finds a drawing of seventeen-year-old Rose DeWitt Bukater, (Kate Winslet) who is on the way to her wedding to wealthy tycoon, Cal Hockley (Billy Zane). Now an old woman (Gloria Stuart) Rose tells her story of the fateful voyage to the team. While the ship races to meet its fate with an iceberg, Rose falls in love with Jack Dawson (Leonardo DiCaprio) a free-spirited artist and third-class passenger who ignites a passion inside her.

The film itself is a technical marvel. Cameron and his crew recreated the ship and her history with such skill and percision that it's easy to go along for the ride. I liked the way the fictional story of Jack and Rose was interlaced with actual historical figures and facts. For example "The Unsinkable" Molly Brown (Kathy Bates), Captain Edward J. Smith (Bernard Hill), and shipbuilders J. Bruce Ismay (Jonathan Hyde) & Thomas Andrews (Victor Garber), all have a place within the love story. Speaking of which, for me, it's Stuart that sells the romance. Acting as "narrator", she makes it possible to care about these characters more than you would have otherwise. The chemistry between DiCaprio and Winslet is very apparent and Zane is pitch perfect as Cal. The sinking sequence is really something and no disaster film since has matched its scope.

As it stands right now, the DVD doesn't have any bonus material on it, save for the theatrical trailer. Enough time has passed that another edition is warranted. That said, the bare bones DVD is recomended. For some additiional perspective on the history of the disaster, I also suggest, James Cameron's documentary Ghosts Of The Abyss.

movie hits an expensive iceberg
this is my opinion should have its own category in the video store.by this i mean it should be under terrible movies that cost to much along with the day after tomorow.I think that this movie really did hit an iceberg and it was only popular because of its stars these stars i must add were not that great they were ok but nothing special.And i would rather shoot myself than hear another person singing my heart will go on.I really do not like this over expensive movie bu5 i suppose that thats just my opinion.

LOVE IT!
THIS IS ONE OF MY FAVORETE MOVIES OF ALL TIME!THE ONLY GROSS PART IS WHEN ROSE TAKES OF ALL HER CLOTHES!?YUCK!BUT ANYWAY,IT`S A GREAT AND ROMANTIC MOVIE!

build a bridge
titanic...The Movie....Is just that.
I enjoy the story, from that perspective.
I appreciate the effort to create a level of interest in such an event. Drama can attempt to capture, only you can respond!
In reading short 4-5star reviews, and Loooong 2-3star reviews, I believe the connection has been made, as planned! ... Read more

Amazon.com

Mel Brooks's 1987 parody of the Star Wars trilogy is a jumble of jokes rather than a comic feature, and, predictably, some of those jokes work better than others. The cast, including Brooks in two roles, more or less mimics the principal characters from George Lucas's famous story line, and the director certainly gets a boost from new allies (SCTV graduates Rick Moranis and John Candy) as well as old ones (Dick Van Patten, Dom DeLuise). Watch this and wait for the sporadic inspiration--but don't be surprised if you find yourself yearning for those years when Brooks was a more complete filmmaker (Young Frankenstein). --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (267)

HEY MEL BROOKS WE DON"T NEED A SECOND SPACEBALLS WE NEED
A FIRST ROBIN HOOD MEN IN TIGHTS. After viewing widescreen,fullscreen of the original dvd and the fullscreen vhs and then the TBS presentation not one of them gives you the complete picture.They all give you different corners WIDE;hides the floor and ceiling.FULL;covers elbows and noses TBS;gives you an extreme view to the far right so you can actually see the princess' OLD NOSE!! (which is barely noticible on either side of the original disc) But of course the left side suffers from lack of attention. I don't care what kind of bonus features you put in, bad picture presentation is BAD PICTURE PRESENTATION. All I had to do was read the picture dimensions on the so called "collectors edition" and I knew this was a waste of time and money. And that's a shame because the movie itself is very good and deserves better treatment than just a reissue of the widescreen side of the original disc and a second disc with a lot of fluff.

Collect what? A forced pre-menu trailer?! Not all bad tho!
This is an A++ movie, but the "special" DVD release is not as special as I had hoped.

Let's look at the bad parts first!

The pre-menu "don't pirate this disc" bit is a new live-action waste of time and seems to run much longer than the old-sk00l FBI warnings, despite the new version being in english only.How much money went into producing that claptrap anyway?The usual English/Spanish/French full-screen blurbs are more than adequate.Save the disc space for a better compression rate (not that this DVD release fails where it counts...).

Along with the new, patronizing, live-action piracy bit is an advert for the remake of the pink panther movie.One I was not able to cirumvent by pressing every menu button on my remote.This does not make for a happy viewer.And not just because it's yet another remake of yet another old movie that trashes the old and can't draw in the viewers at the theatres too, making execs wonder what went wrong as they then proceed to make a remake of another old film...but I digress.I also double-checked the price of the disc and all the blurbs on the box.I didn't pay for a pathetic trailer I can't get around.I paid for a movie.Not extra advertising in every place they can shove it.

Also, for "flubs" I had read "bloopers".Unless I missed a menu, there are no bloopers - which are usually far more interesting than pointing out flubs (production goofs such as pointing out the camera tracks in one scene and a poorly set up mirror in another), most people will find or just not care about.I want actors saying the effenheimer or the sclhizzlebler because they couldn't remember a line correctly!!

On the plus side, the opening menu (disc 1) is HIGHLY entertaining if you let it sit there and just run for a while.

DTS sound is AWESOME too.Alone it's worth the price!Specially in the F/X shots, you'll be blown away by the remix - it is INCREDIBLE and exceptionally well done.

Video quality is excellent for a restored 19 year old film too.

Nice to see the trailers and featurettes; especially when they hadn't been given the restoration treatment.(not being sarky here, it's incredible what they can do to restore and preserve film these days!)

The trivia game seems trivial; very obvious questions and the response sequences are too few to maintain interest.

But all in all, the restoration and enhancement of the video and audio is well worth the price.

As for the movie itself...easily one of Brooks' best works and is a great parody of the original Star Wars series, most of which were good in their own right but this parody of the original trilogy is stingingly funny.

I sincerely hope Brooks does a sequel (prequel) to Spaceballs because the "prequel" SW trilogy is so horrendously awful that any spoof of it would rake in far more money, of that I have no doubt!!

DinkDink,DinkDinkDinkDinkDinkDink !
Mel Brooks's "SPACEBALLS" is one of the funniest movies ever! From my childhood until forever this movie is a classic!

One of my favorite movies
I have watched this movie from begining to end so many times that I have lost count! As a clear spoof of all things sci-fi, Spaceballs goes all the way with the references to all the most popular science movies like Star Wars, Star Trek and even Alien.It's technical crew included many of the greats who worked on the original movies that it spoofs.The story is about Lone Starr and his friend Barf who is a half-man, half dog. (He's his "own best friend".) They are on a quest to rescue a runaway spoiled Druish princess who has come too close to the Spaceballs who are trying to steal the pure air from her home planet, Druidia.It is a great story that stands all on it's own without leaning too heavily on the movies that are beinging spoofed.

We needed more Schwartz in the Collector's Edition!
The movie itself is pure Mel Brooks. I really enjoy how Mel brings hilarious havoc to the sci-fi genre, spoofing movies from Flash Gordon and Buck Rogers to Star Trek and Star Wars.I am surprised that MPAA had originally given this movie a PG rating instead of a PG-13 rating since the movie is heavy on adult humor, language, and sexual innuendos - not exactly what I would call a flick for the whole family.Enough about the movie; this review is about the newly released Collector's Edition (CE), especially the bonus material.

The Dolby 5.1 sound quality has been enhanced compared to the original 2000 DVD release, but I will need to confirm this.I'm glad MGM offers a DTS track on disc 1.I have not yet compared Mel's commentary on the CE to the original release.I did make some limited comparisons of the picture quality: The colors are more vibrant (perhaps too much on the red?) and the picture is clearer to my eyes; the skin tones look correct to me. Since the video presentation is not THX quality, you will see some specks and film blemishes. The aspect ratio on the CE (1.85:1 for 16x9) is the same as the original 2000 release, but on my Sony monitor (4:3) the CE widescreen version is "slightly" zoomed in more than the 2000 widescreen released version.

I am disappointed in the Special Features. Why? For one reason, it does not include Rick Moranis.He is mentioned but is not interviewed at all - how can Mel not include Dark Helmet!In addition, you will not find any behind-the-scenes coverage (other than still photos) such as those found on the 2000 DVD release. Mel did not include any deleted scenes or bloopers (no, the film flubs don't count).However, there is a well-produced 29 minute documentary that includes the other main actors and crew members. You will learn that the actors and crew members had more laughs making this movie than the audience had watching it.If this is true, Mel should have included some of those comical moments in the Special Features.Also missing on this CE is a featurette about special-effects.The conversation between Mel and co-writer Thomas Meehan is rather boring, but the tribute to comical genius John Candy is commendable, touching, and about time.

The CE is a 2-disc DVD set.It is a shame that MGM and Mel could not/would not include more about this classic comedy.Overall I give the CE version a 3/5. The movie gets 4/5! ... Read more

Reviews (240)

A tribute to man's failings!
I approached this movie with a certain trepedation. As a great fan of the Nick Hornby novel, I was somewhat concerned about the Americanisation of the novel.

How could I ever have doubted John Cusack and co!! The point is made well by Stephen Frears in his interview; moving the movie to Chicargo highlights the fact that its themes are universal.

We are taken inside the mind of Rob(John Cusack), a thirtysomething record store owner, undergoing a mini mid-life crisis. His girlfriend has left him for the new-age hippie neighbour (Tim Robbins). In an effort to understand why this has happened he takes the advice of "The Boss" and contacts his "all-time top five break-ups" to try to determine why they broke up with him.

Rob is not the perfect hero and his flaws are clearly shown to us. It is this which allows the viewer to identify with Rob in a way which certainly I have done with very few movie characters. He's a good guy who does stupid things, hurts the people he loves, acts selfishly but is ultimately likeable.

Rob's journey of self discovery is always anchored by his obsession with music and this music gives us a further insight into the mind of the main character.

Special mention must be made of the deleted scenes on the DVD version. A couple of these are particularly fine and would have added to the narrative. I can only think that there was a particularly vicious editing process to cut ten minutes off the running time.

The cast is truely outstanding, a real ensemble piece with particularly fine performances from Jack Black and Todd Luiso as Rob's stereotypical record shop snob employees ("I can't fire them. I hired them three days a week but they starting coming every day. That was three years ago!) Some of the scenes in the music shop are painfully funny.

But ultimatly it's Cusacks movie. He truly is one of the most talented actors in mainstream cinema today.

Besides any movie that can namecheck Belle & Sebastian and The Beta Band and features a cameo from Bruce Springsteen deserves an extra star!

Watch it twice. At least.
It's hard to explain to someone who hasn't seen High Fidelity, or even someone who's just seen it once, how incredibly good it is. Take first the phenomenal John Cusack, who seems to make any film he appears in twice as watchable. Is there a more underrated leading man in this decade? I doubt it.

Then take into account the amazing support, knowns and unknowns - Cusack's sister Joan, Tim Robbins, Jack Black, etc. - even Zeta-Jones isn't half bad. Consider too the script, which is surprisingly faithful to Nick Hornby's (very good) book, and gives equal measure to comic and tragic relief.

Fianlly, the soundtrack. Can there be any greater song to sum up Rob Thomas (John Cusack's) final revelation after the film ends than Stevie Wonder's I Believe? No. High Fidelity is the complete package - funny, touching, well-acted, scripted, directed, scored for, and unbelievably true to life.

And for all those sad Englishmen writing in to complain that the movie should have been set in Britian - get real. I thank you.

Possessions and obsessions
This is a movie about men, their possessions and how they order them. For Rob, it's all about pop music and women. Nothing else, besides the odd film, matters to him. And it's pretty much the same for his two male colleagues at the record shop, who exist at opposite ends of the forcefulness spectrum. They form a self-selected elite who look down on the musical taste of nearly everyone they meet.

But actually their hyper-critical views are pretty close to the mark. It's great to hear someone else noticing and lamenting the 1980s decline of Stevie Wonder, for example. One might criticise author Hornby for selecting Rob's dream job as record producer in the punk era (1976-79) when he could have chosen, say, late 1960s Beach Boys / Beatles psychedelia. But you can never find someone with the identical taste as your own. Strangely, the music is not particularly central to this movie, in the sense that it probably generated fewer album sales for featured artists like Marvin Gaye than say 'The Big Chill'.

The structure of the movie takes a little getting used to. The first time you see it can be a disappointment -- there's no upbeat climactic ending, unless you count the improbable, rather obviously tacked-on, disco/concert by Sonic Death Metal, or whatever they happened to be called at the time. John Cusack's frequent chats to camera seem altogether natural (except when he's sauntering backwards and forwards on some wooden bridge-cum-platform in downtown Chicago).

What I like about this film is that, from a male viewpoint, it rings true so often. Men do behave treacherously, and the behaviour often looks worse at first sight. I like the fact that the actress who played Laura wasn't stunningly attractive. Even Lisa Bonet didn't seem particularly beautiful in the movie. (But yes, that really is Catherine Zeta-Jones discreetly stripping off in a role just before she became famous enough to warrant a major Hollywood film credit.)

This is not the perfect movie, but it contains a message about the male psyche that I hadn't extracted from any other movie, and that revelation in itself is sufficiently uplifting to distract from the artificial attempt by the film to uplift via the back-together-again concert/disco scenario.

Maudlin Navel Gazing to a Great Soundtrack
Ah yes. Another quirky offbeat romantic comedy from quirky offbeat romantic cynic John Cusack. Life sucks but he wouldn't miss it for the world. Give John Cusack credit. He was 34 when he made this. His character is a guy in his late 20's who has the emotional maturity of a teenager and Cusack pulls it off effortlessly. Cusack's character, Rob, isn't a jerk. He's a manchild. He doesn't mean to be a selfish obsessive boob; he just lacks the normal range of human adult emotions. Imagine the teenager Cusack played in Better Off Dead. Now imagine that teenager ten years later and working as the owner of a independent music store. He's a music snob and puts in long hours at the store but he still has time to ruin promising relationships with childish antics, talk to the screen and stalk former girlfriends while chasing after the next soon to be ex girlfriend. High Fidelty is the unofficial sequel to Better Off Dead. Instead of weird parents and goofy fantasy sequences, we get weird coworkers and morbid sexually and violently charged fantasy sequences involving Tim Robbins. I won't compliment the soundtrack except to say any movie about music had better have a damn good soundtrack and High Fidelity does its job.

There's a little Rob Gordon in all of us
After working on my college radio station as a DJ, entertainment news anchor, and Human Resource director, I was told by my friends that I should check this film out as I reminded them a lot of John Cusack's character in it. They were right. I too have had my share of bad relationships and can easily tell you the stories of how it went from "Hello" to "Goodbye" in less than 5 minutes. I have worked in music retail for 2 and a half years and I am also incredibly anal about my own collection of music and every song I can recognize played on the radio I can tell people what it is, who the artists is, what album it appeared on, and whether it is a radio edit, extended version, or remix.

That being said, when I first saw this movie I didn't quite understand many of the points. So I watched it again and realized "My god, I AM Rob Gordon!" Within a month, I purchased the DVD of High Fidelity and the book by Nick Hornby which was incredible. I highly recommend this film to all guys who have had their share of hard-not-to-forget relationships, radio DJs, music retail workers, and lovers of music of all types because the soundtrack, to quote Jack Black "kicks fu**ing a**".

The DVD is great to own. It presents the film in clear colorful matted Widescreen (1.85:1), offers 9 Deleted scenes that appeared in the original screenplay as well as the original novel, short mini conversations with actor John Cusack & director Stephen Frears, and the original theatrical trailer for the film.

Without a doubt, this is a MUST-HAVE for people who love music, have been in tough relationships, and enjoy writing Top 5 Lists.

"Good luck...goodbye...thanks, boss."-Rob Gordon (John Cusack) ... Read more

Reviews (238)

great satire from the late eighties
Mel Brooks definitely lives up to expectations with Spaceballs. This parody of the Star Wars movies will deliver laughs whether you are a sci fi fan or not. The cast of characters (including Bill Pullman, John Candy, and Rick Moranis...and of course Mel Brooks) closely parallels the familiar cast of Star Wars, but Rick Moranis takes the cake as Dark Helmet, the Darth Vader-like figure. ("And now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb.")

Personally, I found this movie amusing at 10, and now at 22 I still think it's wonderful. Most of the other reviews give you an idea of what the movie contains, so I won't get into a long explanation, but I have to recommend this one pretty highly as a great comedy.

Spaceballs
The Planet Spaceball has a problem; They're slowly running out of air. However, they have a plan; Capture Vespa(Daphne Zuniga), the Princess of their peace-loving neighbor planet Druidia, which would force their father, King Roland(Dick Van Patten), to give them the combination to the air shield, which underneath contains 10,000 years of fresh air. Instead, the Princess and her droid Dot Matrix(Voice of Joan Rivers), running away from her wedding to Prince Valium(JM J.Bullock), they find her. After being offered $1 million spacebucks, which they need to pay off gangster Pizza the Hutt(Dom DeLuise), space pirate Lonestarr(Bill Pullman)and his half dog/half man sidekick Barf(John Candy)go to stop the evil Lord Dark Helmet(Rick Moranis)and Spaceball President Skroob(Mel Brooks)and along the way, Lonestarr learns the ways of the Schwartz from the everlasting know-it-all Yogurt(Mel Brooks)

This movie, along with "DRACULA DEAD AND LOVING IT" is Mel Brooks at his best. It's fricking hilarious!! Bill Pullman is great as Lonestarr, a spoof combination of Han Solo and Luke Skywalker, Daphne Zuniga gives her all as Princess Vespa, John Candy is hilarious as Barf, Joan Rivers is decent as Dot Matrix, Rick Moranis is downright classic as Dark Helmet, a wimpy puny spoof of Darth Vader(He's the funniest guy on this movie!!!)and the rest of the cast is average.

Highly recommended as one of Mel Brook's best and with lines like "I am your father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate", "You are to refer to me as idiot, not you captain!", you won't stop laughing. So see this film.

AND MAY THE SCHWARTZ BE WITH YOU!!

because good is dumb
although not a mel brooks masterpiece this film does not suffer solely from lack of comedic inspiration. in fact i find it to be one of his best. its main problem, in my opinion, was the shift in audiences. for the most part films such as Blazing Saddles and Young Frankenstein catered to an audience that was, by 1987, much older and focusing on family life. plus, brooks' comedic venom was now aimed at a less familiar target in Star Wars. intially, even i had a hard time time convincing myself it was worth seeing. but after repeated viewings i realized that it was as funny as many of brooks' best. now dont get me wrong, you wont laugh as often as you did for High Anxiety but you'll laugh none the less. sadly, the core players of previous films are missing here (Harvey Corman & Madeline Kahn) and it suffers becasue of it but the times were changing and so were the films. only later on did brooks really get into a stupor with Robin Hood: Men In Tights and Dracula: Dead and Lving It, starring the one dimensional Leslie Nielsen.

The Funniest Movie Ever!!!
Spaceballs, a comic masterpiece directed by Mel Brooks, is one of the funniest movies that I have ever seen. I own the trilogy of Star Wars and I watched every movie in the trilogy before I viewed this movie. After I watched Spaceballs, I found myself in a state of pure laughter as I saw Mel Brooks and John Candy imitating the trilogy of Star Wars. Anyone that wants a good funny movie to view should buy Spaceballs today.

Holy Crap it was good!!
This movie was absolutely crazy and funny!! I couldn't help but laugh the whole way! My favorite moment was the spoofing scene of Alien. Sooo funny. Watch Spaceballs and get ready to laugh hard. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Star Trek fans were decidedly mixed in their reactions to this, the ninth big-screen feature in Paramount's lucrative Trek franchise, but die-hard loyalists will appreciate the way this Next Generation adventure rekindles the spirit of the original Trek TV series while combining a tolerable dose of New-Agey philosophy with a light-hearted plot for the NextGen cast. This time out, Picard (Patrick Stewart) and his executive crew must transport to a Shangri-la-like planet to see why their android crewmate Data (Brent Spiner) has run amuck in a village full of peaceful Ba'ku artisans who--thanks to their planet's "metaphasic radiation"--haven't aged in 309 years.

It turns out there's a conspiracy afoot, masterminded by the devious, gruesomely aged Ru'afo (F. Murray Abraham, hamming it up under makeup resembling a cosmetic surgeon's worst nightmare), who's in cahoots with a renegade Starfleet admiral (Anthony Zerbe, in one of his final screen roles). They covet the fountain-of-youth power of the Ba'ku planet, but because their takeover plan violates Starfleet's Prime Directive of noninterference, it's up to Picard & crew to stop the scheme. Along the way, they all benefit from the metaphasic effect, which manifests itself as Worf's puberty (visible as a conspicuous case of Klingon acne), Picard's youthful romance with a Ba'ku woman (the lovely Donna Murphy), the touching though temporary return of Geordi's natural eyesight, and a moment when Troi asks Dr. Crusher if she's noticed that her "boobs are firming up."

Some fans scoffed at these humorous asides, but they're what make this Trek film as entertaining as it is slightly disappointing. Without the laughs (including Data's rousing excerpt from Gilbert & Sullivan's HMS Pinafore), this is a pretty routine entry in the franchise, with no real surprises, a number of plot holes, and the overall appearance of a big-budget TV episode. As costar and director, Jonathan Frakes proves a capable carrier of the Star Trek flame--and it's nice to see women in their forties portrayed as smart and sexy--but while this is surely an adequate Trek adventure, it doesn't quite rank with the best in the series. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (410)

True DTS 5.1 Surround Sound Not Listed
Dear M. IMRAN "aka imranbecks,"

The last Star Trek Movie "First Contact" was not release in DTS 5.1 on the theaters.Just like every other DVD that claims to be in DTS does not have the true DTS sound to them because they were not film with DTS sound, with a few exceptions of course.

The listing on Amazon.com only states Dolby while the last two Star Trek Movies states DTS 5.1."Star Trek Insurrection" was film in true DTS Surround Sound and I am just hoping that it is release this way.That Amazon made a mistake but they probably didn't.

Please check this out and confirm if there is a DTS version of this movie.

When it comes to the movie I put it on the top with the few other movies that avoided the Star Wars style.Star Trek is a science fiction dealing with idea and subjects to think about not to have the old one on one battle routine.I know they fought back against the robots but that is not the same as killing other people and making it look as if this is the only answer to the problem.War is sick and I am sick of war movies.Please, they have now killed Star Trek because they turn "Enterprise" TV Series into a war story one episode after another and the last so called Star Trek Movie.

Star Trek has died because the people behind it could not see the beauty behind the previous Star Treks.So, in my opinion "Insurrection" was the last Star Trek of any kind and is the reminder of the original concept of Star Trek.

2.5 stars: Sort of enjoyable, but...
It's often been said that Star Trek producers and writers have the easiest and hardest jobs in the world simultaneously.Different people tune in, pop in a disc, buy a ticket, or otherwise view Star Trek for different reasons. There's some that show up for nostalgia of the old Shatner/Nimoy series, the optimism of Gene Roddenberry's vision, maybe because they've lost some optimism over the years. Others want to be challenged with new ideas, new philosophies and viewpoints. And some, probably more than any of us would like to admit, watch to see weird aliens and ships blowing up. So, although the first group will generally be happy no matter what, it is very difficult to make a Star Trek movie to appeal to the latter two at the same time. The ones that do, though (Wrath of Khan, First Contact), are the ones that are the most memorable.

Insurrection tries to split the difference. Although the ideas of imperialism and "might makes right" are examined, they are often maddeningly relegated to the background for another action sequence. The result is a film that never gains a steady intellectual footing, but also never really develops a compelling-enough story to be more than a light show, but it is a fairly good light show.

That being said, the movie opens perfectly. Data seemingly goes crazy, exposes a "duck-blind" to study a primitive people, then engages in a dangerous outer-atmosphere tango with Captain Picard, which is an excellent scene in nearly every way. It is funny, in an absurd way, but also invigorating, and after seeing its brilliance, you figure that the movie might just live up to its predecessor. Unfortunately, it turns out to be a bright spot in a movie filled with scenes that hit the wrong chord. The subplot about Data discovering his inner-child doesn't really distinguish itself from Data's myriad attempts to understand humanity in the series (does anyone else remember his beard?). The Son'a don't make great villains-they're cold, vengeful bastards, but they don't seem to realize it, like Khan did, so they can't have fun with it. Rather than being villains you love-to-hate, a. k. a. the best kind, they're just villains you hate. Picard gives a speech so self-righteous, he starts to sound like Janeway. Okay, using a pure moral system, the removal can't be justified, but moving 600 people to improve the quality of life for billions? Come on, at least think about it. Picard's much-older love interest subplot does have some juice, but the scenes about slowing down time are preposterous, just another unnecessary element in a sea of gratuitousness. And the ultimate nadir is when Riker pilots the U.S.S. Enterprise-E, an enormous and sophisticated 24th century starship, with what appeared to be a Thrustmaster joystick, circa 1997. (Speaking of beards that should be remembered...)

Much has been said of the humor in this movie, and some of it does hit its mark, but Worf's "aggressive tendencies" line and Counselor Troi's "boob" line are groaners, and in series that have generally gotten by on tense action and drama, going for laughs is a sign that you've run out of material. Check out Superman III for proof of this.

I suppose I shouldn't be too hard on these guys-the movie is a lot better than Nemesis, if only because it isn't obsessed with gloom. Jonathan Frakes once again sits behind the director's chair, and he tries to make this hodgepodge work, but unlike before, the performances are surprisingly unnuanced. Where before he was able to expertly juggle planet-side and ship action, keeping both storylines interesting, he now struggles to keep the action engaging on either front, all the while the movie begins to feel like a cookie-cutter action project-which is NOT a good thing. This movie came out only two years after First Contact, so I think that there wasn't enough time to develop it. I hope so, anyway, because in spite of a few scenes, this one ranks just above The Motion Picture and Star Trek V on my list of quality. If you want entertainment in a Trek movie, you might enjoy this one (emphasize might). If you are looking for something more, don't bother.

Painfully Inconsequential
With the Star Trek film series at an apparent stand-still, it seems a good time to re-examine the various entries;In particular, the "odd-numbered curse".Star Trek: The Motion Picture holds up far better in its director's edition, and Star Trek III serves as a vital and emotional bridge in the original crew's saga.Then things get complicated.Shatner's The Final Frontier is an undisputed failure, but one with noble ideas and containing a number of nice character moments (i.e. Dr. McCoy's flashback), and Generations, while squandering a grand opportunity, is still fun viewing.Which brings us to Star Trek: Insurrection, which is the only one beyond any redemption. And this is because it has no ambition whatsoever.While the creative staff expressed a desire to craft a more light-hearted adventure, why do it with a story that seeks to create parallels with the forced exile of Native Americans?The action pales in comparison to First Contact, and the laugh count is non-existent compared to The Voyage Home.And both of those films managed to have a good deal of heart.Heart has been a variable factor in Star Trek films, built largely upon the strength of a particular entry's guest stars.First Contact had three knock-outs in the form of James Cromwell, Alfre Woodard, and Alice Krige.Following up that, Insurrection boasts Donna Murphy, who is less engaged in the proceedings than Carrie Fisher in Return of the Jedi, F. Murray Abraham, who makes us yearn for Last Action Hero, and Anthony Zerbe, who would fare better if he donned sunglasses and a black robe.All fine actors, all incapable of infusing energy into a script where nothing compelling exists.I read a review that called this "Star Trek: Save The Hippie Commune".Not far off.So check this out for completeness sake, and try to find some moments to enjoy (Geordi watching the sunrise).The good thing to be said here is that Insurrection inflicts no irreparable damage on the series or crew.That would come with the following entry, that would violate the sanctity of even the even-numbered Treks.

Good movie... 5 stars for the extras!!!
Ok, sure, we all know this movie isn't as good as First Contact or Nemesis, but its a good movie with a good story to tell.. Its very light hearted and not as dark and scary as Nemesis and First Contact.. Overall, a good movie! A must have collection for all Star Trek fans!

Here are the extras that will be in this 2-disc DVD set:

Disc 1

The movie, presented in widescreen and enhanced for 16:9 TVs. Audio options include: Dolby Digital 5.1, DTS 5.1, and French Dolby Surround.
Text Commentary by Michael Okuda and Denise Okuda.

Disc 2

Production
It Takes a Village
Location, Location, Location
The Art of "Insurrection"
Anatomy of a Stunt
The Story of "Insurrection"
Making "Insurrection"
Director's Notebook
The Star Trek Universe
Westmore's Aliens
Star Trek's Beautiful Alien Women

Creating the Illusion
Behind-the-scenes footage of sequences filled with action and visual effects
Shuttle Chase
The Drones
The Duck Blind

Deleted Scenes
Ru'afo's Facelift
Working Lunch
Flirting
The Kiss
Status: Precarious
Disabling the Injector
Alternate Ending

Archives
Storyboards
Photo Gallery

Advertising
Teaser Trailer
Theatrical Trailer
Original Promotional Featurette
Borg Invasion 4-D Trailer

most like Roddneberry Trek
Fans like to bash this film as well as Trek 5, Shatner's directoral opus. However, it seems to me that both this one and 5 are much MUCH more like classic Trek story telling that Roddenberry liked so much.

Sure, this is no FIRST CONTACT, but we already have one of those. this is a more thoughtful and human trek story, and one well-directed, with some of the nicest looking effects we've seen. The cast is in top form and having fun. And like the original cast in 4, when they are having fun, so does the audience.

Check this out with an open mind. And an open disregard for the rabid so-called uber fans who casually bash this movie. ... Read more

Reviews (130)

Takes classic film noir detective story to new heights
This 1974 film takes the classic film noir detective movie to new heights. Yes, there is murder, scandal and lots of lies. But yet Jack Nicholson, cast as a private eye, is a sympathetic character. There's one scene in which the director, Roman Polanski, playing a bit part as a thug, rips open Nicholson's nose with a knife. This is the kind of wound that makes the audience grimace every time someone refers to it in the film. Faye Dunaway is cast as the femme fatale. She's beautiful, of course, and it's hard to take our eyes off of her. She's a woman of mystery, but little by little we glimpse her humanity. And by the time her secret is revealed, she's won everyone's heart.

Based on a real life scandal in Los Angeles in 1908, another underlying theme is about water and power in this desert city. The action takes place in the 1930s, and the details of that period of time are well portrayed, right down to Faye Dunaway's shaved and penciled eyebrows. The screenplay won an Academy Award and I can understand why. It was tightly written and revealed details that moved the plot forward at just the right pace. I sat there fascinated, not wanting to take my eyes off the screen, trying to figure out what would happen next and constantly surprised by the next twist and turn. John Huston is cast in the role of a wealthy landowner with a huge secret of his own. He's a fine actor and his presence on the screen added depth to the whole production.

The DVD has a special interview with the writer, Robert Towne, as well as Roman Polanski. This added to my enjoyment of the film and provided further insight about its production. Definitely recommended.

Transcendent Film Noir
I've seen very few "greatest film" lists that don't have Chinatown among the top 10, or even top 5. It's deserving. It's done in the style of a '50's film noir, but transcends the genre.

There are great performances here by Jack Nicholson and John Huston. Nicholson plays a jaded but heroically decent private investigator in the mold of Humphrey Bogart. He's much less the tough guy than Bogart, though, and you get the impression that he'd rather being doing something less seedy for a living. It's a very subtle portrayal. Huston, on the other hand, plays a tycoon whose mere presence on the screen can make your skin crawl.

The film stands out in just about every respect. The sets are wonderful and the cinematography beautiful to look at. Even the score is exceptional.

The DVD is a little short of extras, but they really aren't missed. The transfer is very high quality in all respects.

To the brainiac above who doesn't understand why the water is being dumped in the ocean: they're trying to create a drought to drive the farmers out of business. That's pretty much the key point of the plot. And, yes, a .38 snubnose is perfectly capable of hitting someone at 50 yards. Guns & Ammo tests them to that distance all the time. Get a clue!

A Master Screenplay, A Perfect Film
Many writers consider Robert Towne's screenplay for 'Chinatown' as the perfect screenplay. It is, and is also in fact the example of how important good writing is in the art of cinema. It is perfection and in the hands of Roman Polanski it became a film masterpiece. But it all goes back to the writing. Robert Towne has taken the true story of how Los Angeles stole water to grow and wound around it the fictional story of Jake Gittes, Evelyn Mulwray, and Noah Cross and made them major participants in an ugly little tale of lust and greed. Towne's screenplay is layered like a decaying Dahlia with twisting mysteries and taught suspense. There is not a loose end in sight and a few well placed red herrings are added to the mix to delight any fan of this type of story.
The attention to detail from vintage cars, sets, real L.A. streets and alleys to the excellent score by Jerry Goldsmith and the golden cinematography of John A. Alonzo contribute to all the aspects of this classic of the post 60's film noir.
Faye Dunaway as Evelyn Mulwray is at the top of her game creating a neurotic exotic hothouse flower that carries death within the heart of her dark and dirty secret. Lacquered and veiled in the most perfect black widow getup of the genre she is superbly brittle and vulnerable at the same time. She is fascinating to watch as she slowly unravels along with the mystery until she is naked in the horror of what her past and present prison is. This is a great performance by a great artist.
As Evelyn's father Noah Cross, John Huston is the debauched cancerous center of evil and greed captured within the crumbling casing of a seemingly charming old man. He too gives the performance of a lifetime and his soliloquy on what a man is capable of is chilling.
The center of this masterwork is Jack Nicholson who became a star with this, the best of his early work. His J. J. Gittes is hardboiled and ruthless in getting to the bottom of why he is being used to take the fall for a murder. He embodies the soul of Bogart and the heart of a romantic fighting to stay tuff in a rotten world. He is drawn with such skill that he seems not to be acting but simply existing the real world of L.A. in the late 1930's.
"Chinatown" is seminal in its place in film history. It bridged and old and forgotten genre with a new Hollywood in its post studio infancy and laid the groundwork for later films of equal ambition such as "Mullholland Falls" and "L.A. Confidential".
This is one of the best film ever made and a must have for any serious film collector.

I cut my nose shaving
Not since Otto Preminger's LAURA had filmgoers the pleasure of watching a classic film noir, until Polanski's CHINATOWN. The plot and characters are complex but chillingly believeable. I can't find anything wrong with this film. It is well-paced for a fairly long movie. The lighting, cinematography, setting, costumes... everything is as should be. The performances by John Huston and Faye Dunaway are eerie and tragic, respectively. Then of course there's Nicholson. Mad Jack was already firmly established on the Hollywood map having already won acclaim for EASY RIDER, THE LAST DETAIL, and FIVE EASY PIECES. This film however fixed him permanently in the constellation of Hollywood stars. ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST would soon follow. In any event, his portrayal of an aloof, world-weary gumshoe who stumbles in over his head into an intrigue involving crooked politicians and the money-slobbering wealthy still holds up 30 years later. This is an incredible film.

THIS IS WHAT FILM IS SUPPOSED TO BE
The mid-1970s saw a spate of "government conspiracy" films, all with liberal themes that emanated from Watergate. None of them were about Kennedy stealing the 1960 election. Hmm.
"Chinatown" (1974) may be the best screenplay ever written. A historical look at 1930s Los Angeles, it actually condensed events from the 1900s with events that, uh, never happened but made for good drama. Written by L.A. native Robert Towne, directed by Roman Polanski, produced by Evans and starring Jack Nicholson, Faye Dunnaway and famed director John Huston, it told the story of how Los Angeles became a metropolis. In Towne's version, Huston "owns" the L.A. Department of Water & Power with a character based on actual L.A. City engineer William Mulholland. Mulholland had orchestrated the political deal which built the aqueduct that brought water from the Owens Valley into the L.A. Basin, allowing millions of Southern Californians to keep their lawns green to this day.
The Mulholland character is "sacrificed" at the altar of greed, embodied by Huston, who secretly buys the San Fernando Valley, knowing that once the water deal is set, it will be incorporated into the city, making him a gazillionaire. It is rather cynical, although nobody suggests the L.A. "city fathers" were boy scouts. The same old theme is that capitalism and American political power are corrupt. To make sure the audience is convinced the corruption is beyond redemption, Huston is in the end found out be an insatiable, incestual monster. He plays the role so well it brings up minds-eye imagery of his real daughter, Angelica. The film is utterly beyond any criticism, regardless of political colorization. For decades, film students and screenwriters have studied it. It spawned an artistic quest to lace the screen with symbols, metaphors, backstory, and twists.
"Chinatown" seems to be the apex of the American film period, the mid-1970s. The period from 1960 to 1979 is unparalleled, but the backstory of the people who created these classics is a telling tale of why the genre leans to the Left. In the 1960s, film schools became popular. Four schools emerged, and have held their place as the place to learn the craft. In Los Angeles there was the USC School of Cinema-Television. Their first big alumnus was "Star Wars" director George Lucas. UCLA combined their film school with their drama program, so as to bring actors, writers, directors and producers together. Coppola went to UCLA along with a future rock star named Jim Morrison, who would form The Doors with another UCLA film alumnus, keyboardist Ray Manzarek.

STEVEN TRAVERS
AUTHOR OF "BARRY BONDS: BASEBALL'S SUPERMAN"
STWRITES@AOL.COM ... Read more

Description

A retiring cop and his replacement track a psychotic killer who's using the seven deadly sins as a guide. Starring Brad Pitt, Morgan Freeman and Gwyneth Paltrow. ... Read more

Reviews (453)

A worthy addition to DVD Format
I love DVD's! Not only is the format superior to VHS, but it allows me to enjoy movies on multiple levels. Now, in the spirit of the Criterion Collection, we have 'SE7EN - New Line Platinum Series Edition' added to the ever expanding library of DVD's to choose from. (If you have not heard of the Criterion Collection, please search for titles that include this designation - you will not be disapointed!) Seven is a great film with superb writing, acting, direction, the whole shebang and I am not going to bore you with those details. This review centers entirely on the Platinum DVD Release - and I can honestly say that it is VERY worth the money you spend on it. The commentary by David Fincher is awesome, and the commentaries by Morgan Freeman and Brad Pitt expand the understanding of their characters. Beyond this, the professionals who work behind the scenes have their two cents to share with you as well, and they are quite informative. Exlporing the Title Sequence is invigorating, as are the animated story boards. But the true value of this DVD is in the animated Notebook of John Doe's writings. Talk about a glimpse into the mouth of madness! It illustrates the mind of the killer, played marvelously by Kevin Spacey, and blows your mind. Talk about over the top DVD extras! This two disk set will keep you busy for quite a while, and I highly recommend it.

Brilliant...and Disturbing.
I wish more movies like Se7en were made, and not because I'm into only creepy, unsettling films. Se7en simply doesn't pull any punches. The excellent characters, script, music, and atmosphere all work together to create the perfect canvas to paint this brutal tale of a serial killer that tortures and kills specific people in accordance with the seven deadly sins. Everything in Se7en has been tweaked to perfection. The movie captures your attention so completely that you can't look away, even at some of the truly morbid scenes. And let's not forget the acting! Brad Pitt, Morgan Freeman, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Kevin Spacey are all simply outstanding. Every word they utter seems real, unlike most Hollywood films where the characters are contrived and simply not believeable. The ending is shocking and depressing, more than equaling the rest of the film.

As if Se7en wasn't awesome enough, the DVD is simply loaded!! This is one of those rare cases when a movie DESERVES to be stocked full of extras! Obviously, this movie is not for the squeamish or weak of heart, but anyone who can handle this kind of a movie will discover one of the best films of the 90's.

Morgan Freeman Is A Genius....
Robin Williams...Russell Crowe...Marisa Tomei...Angelina Jolie...Cher...How come these "actors"(& I use the term lightly)have an Oscar & Freeman doesn't? Between SE7EN & NURSE BETTY, 2 of the best performances of all time, there is something seriously wrong.. Watch this powerful film with a lead performance to match to cure any doubts...........

The Best of it's Kind
A series of freak murders. A detective ready to retire and a new detective make this film one of the best in the drama genre. Will keep you on your feet till the very end. A very similar idea as other inteligent murder mystery thrillers like "Kiss the Girls" and "The Bone Collector" but this is the best of the lot.

Terrible movie
I'm obviously in a minority here. But IMO the movie just sucked. The thing that irritated me throughout the movie was the darkness and by that I mean the absense of light. The lighting is artificially dimmed for effect and it just doesn't work. Nobody works and lives in such poor light. The black and white film noirs work beautifully, but this movie seems stage-managed. Amongst contemporary movies, the lighting in "Dark City" was very natural and fit in well with the theme of the movie. This is a one gimmick movie and it got old within the first 5 minutes. I count this, along with "Absolute Power" and "Behind Enemy Lines" as amongst the worst 10 movies I have seen. ... Read more

Reviews (125)

Finally on DVD!!!
You're not likely to find a more sweet, affectionately drawn portrait of a time and era than this film. The last great one before this was "American Graffiti." Tom Hanks takes a very easy-going hand with the direction of this excellent movie, which is one of the film's strong points. It moves at a fast, yet leisurely pace and has a good story to tell about one of the millions of one hit wonder band that crop up, have a hit or two, and then just when they are about to become the hugest group in the world, disappear into oblivion. The group in this movie, therefore is, aptly called the "Wonders." (The original spelling of their name, the "One-ders" has to be changed because people kept pronouncing it "Oh needers".) This movie is a very light, fun musical comedy/drama with a bouncy, authentic-sounding score, highlighted by the excellent title number and some other faux-60s pop hits, and delightful performances from an exuberant cast. Hanks even has a small part as their manager, in a very downplayed, tasteful performance. This movie is wise to never take itself or its plot too seriously, acknowledging throughout, even during the breakup, that the "Wonders" was really a whim more than anything else throughout their shortlived history. Many clever set pieces compare the "Wonders" to parts of Beatle history, the difference being that the Beatles had more than one or two hit singles. All in all, this movie is a fun, vibrantly colorful look at the 60s music industry, that gently and subtly parodies the era while celebrating it simulaneously. P.S. Look for a fabulous cameo by Rita Wilson, Hanks' real-life wife as a cocktail waitress.

"...like I wonder what happen to the O-NE-DERS?" Lenny
Those words spoken by Lenny just kill me...Zahn plays the part of Lenny, the smart-talking and wild member of the group. This movie takes place in 1964, just as Vietnam was beginning to re-focus a carefree America. Along comes a "one-time wonder" with a hit song which climbs the Billboard Chart in record time...The chemistry that Zahn, Schaech, Scott, and Embry have, combine to form an exciting and comical band who go from obscurity to nationwide fame in a few weeks' time. Each member of the group handles the group's rising success in a different way. That aspect alone is unique! Tom Hanks plays the manager-part very realistically, but adds a twist of humanity when it comes to dealing with Scott's character. Liv Tyler, who plays Jimmy's girlfriend Faye, does a wonderful job of playing the part of the loyal girlfriend (though Jimmy burns her in the end). Tom Everett Scott does a fantastic job as the main character whose drums bring the Wonders to life through his playing. The plot is simple but could've been more developed. The soundtrack is a must if you purchase the movie. The album notes are fictional but add insights to other characters in the movie. Hanks did a wonderful job directing this movie and writing many of the songs involved in the movie. Overall, this ranks as one of my family's favorite movies...

"We can use the 'Wonders' with an 'O' 'N' 'E'"
This is one of Tom Hanks' best!
Written, directed, and starring Tom Hanks, 'That Thing You Do!' tells the charming story of a small town band hitting the big times. It starts with the find of a perfect drum player and ends in a wonder.
Guy Patterson is helping run the family appliance store, something he could live without doing, Jimmy is the lead singer to a newly started rock band with one problem: his band has its first gig and no drum player!
That's when Guy comes in, with his amazing fast drum playing skills, which turns the band's best song, "That Thing You Do", from good to great!!! They recieve a standing ovation and are asked to perform another gig! After making a single recording of "That Thing You Do!" on a record, they get a manager, who leads them to their new manager, Mr. White (Hanks).
After making the radio and hitting a state fair tour, the band fly to California where they are given a chance to perform live on TV!
As the worst would happen, something dramatic with Jimmy and his girlfriend, who is also their costume mistress, and the band break up. Giving the song "That Thing You Do!" a lable as a One-Hit Wonder.
_________________________________________________________________
The movie is awesome, all in all. It delivers fast, fun comedic jokes and has very snappy and catchy music. The ending is very sweet, giving a brief on all the main characters and where they are today. This movie will touch your heart, if not through the story, then the music.

Not deep, but highly etertaining slice of 1960's pop music
This is a movie about a 1964 garage rock band called "The Wonders" that catapults to the big time in one summer then disbands, having made only one hit -- get it? The one-hit-Wonders!

Some reviewers have complained that this movie isn't deep or "real" enough. I'm assuming that it doesn't show enough explicit sex and drug use to satisfy their urge for reality (the movies they recommend as alternatives are rated R). This movie isn't trying to go that deep, but it's a very entertaining, very clean slice of mid-60's Amnerican pop music.

My husband came of age in the 60's and he finds it immensely entertaining. He always laughs at the all-girl band Tom Hanks cleverly creates to showcase local 60's mediocrity -- and he's laughing at himself, remembering some of his own mediocre music ensembles from the same decade. But he only laughs during that one song; the rest of the music in this movie is excellent. Every time he hears the alterative version of the main song (during the end credits) he wishes that his own garage band would have had access to music like that.

1964 was an interesting time for pop music; it included 50's type genres as well as rock and roll (which is usually associated with the 60's, although it began earlier), and this movie (and soundtrack) capture it beautifully. The "Playtone Galaxy of Stars" (Playtone being the fictitious recording lable featured in the movie) includes a black girl's group, a glamourous blond pop singer and a tall, dark, handsome guy, reminiscent of a certain "look" from the late 50's/early 60's who sings a song hummorously reminiscent of "Secret Agent Man." Even jazz is featured: when the group falls apart, the drummer gets to jam with a black Jazz pianist that he's admired for years.

Not only do the Wonders sing the phenominally catchy and immensely listenable title tune (and the actors are really playing and singing, which is quite an achievement) but several others: my personal favorite is the jazzy "Dance With Me." But the wonderful (there I go again) title song is what seems to magically captures a whole decade of rock and roll; it would have been a major hit if it had existed in 1964.

My husband and I obviously love this film and what's really great about it is that our kids love to watch with us; they especially love anything Steve Zahn says or does -- he's hysterical. All the other performances are great as well; it's a very good piece of ensemble work and everyone gives a very natural performance. The plot clips right along, the screenplay is witty and the cinemetography is very cleverly done.

All right, so it doesn't have a deep meaning, but it's not trying to. If you enjoy music from the 60's, you can't find a more entertaining film than this one.

Just OK, nothing special
I expected an entertaining movie judging by these reviews,
but I was disappointed. This is a trite, ordinary movie with a catchy song. ... Read more

Reviews (51)

A funny, warm comedy all audiences will enjoy!
I recommend you all go see this movie! Tom Hanks plays an immigrant named Viktor Navorski from the Eastern European country of Krekozhia who travels to New York City on a personal mission. Upon arriving to the U.S., Navorski finds out that his country has had a civil war. As a result, he can neither return to his country nor enter the U.S. until the civil war ends and if the U.S. recognizes Krekozhia's new government.
He is left stranded at J.F.K. airport and is then ordered by Homeland Security officials to remain in the airport's international transit lounge until peace returns to his country. During the time he is there, Navorski finds out that the terminal is a world in itself where he experiences things like ambition, generosity, amusement status as well as romance with a beautiful flight attendant he meets played by Catherine Zeta-Jones.
Meanwhile, the Homeland Security supervisor who originally ordered Viktor to remain in the terminal considers him a problem he has a hard time controling in the system he oversees and a glitch he wants to quickly erase.
This film also touches on the bureaucratic non-sense immigrants have to endure when they come here. Aside from its (what I percieve to be) indirect political statement, overall, The Terminal is a funny and warm comedy audiences of all kinds can enjoy.

"Do you have an appointment?"
If you're looking for a sweet, poignant comedy, The Terminal is the movie for you. Tom Hanks stars as Victor, fresh off the plane from a small Eastern European country whose government was overthrown while he was inflight. Until the U.S. recognizes the new regime, his passport is invalid and he cannot leave the airport, according to the security chief (Stanley Tucci). Victor proceeds to make himself at home in the terminal, befriending some airport workers and even starting a romance with a lovely but flawed flight attendant (Catherine Zeta-Jones).

This movie is simply a joy. Hanks' innocent-but-wise character is so likable that you are cheering for him all the way as he becomes involved in the lives of his quirky airport friends (lead by the scene-stealing Kumar Pallana), gets a good-paying airport job, and shows what a decent and caring man he is. Tucci is perfect as the humorless security man who watches as Victor's stay in the terminal stretches to nine months. Zeta-Jones is interesting as a troubled woman who collects men, and her character adds some reality and even saddness to the otherwise fantasy-world of Victor's airport.

The Terminal is a feel-good comedy with an excellent script and an amazing set that will make you think it was really filmed in an airport. Fans of Tom Hanks will add Victor to his long list of loveable characters. Highly recommended.

Great movie... just too long!
Wow. This is an amazing movie. One of Tom Hank's best, and one of Catherine Zeta-Jones's worst. She is the only disappointment in this movie. She is normally I very good actress but in this movie she is just... I don't know...her and Tom Hanks don't really click. Her portrayal of a somewhat ditzy, emotionally distraught flight attendant is wimpy and a little boring. The three people who befriend Tom Hanks in this movie, the janitor and the other two people... who he plays poker with... have great supporting roles and their careers should sky-rocket now. So...if it is such a great movie why do I only give a a four star rating? BECAUSE IT IS SOOOOOOOO LONG! It is about two hours and eight minutes long which doesn't seem terribly long (especially after seeing Return of the King twice in one day), but it is almost like there could be twelve endings...and it seems like its almost over then BAM! a pan to another scene. That is the only reason it gets four stars. But go see it anyways. Its one of those movies that, even though you might now watch it all the time... it is one that you will love watching a couple times a semester ( I'm a Jr.High student and movies are like... one of my favorite things in the world). Anyway great flick, go see it, and when it comes out buy it.

Terminal, indeed.
For all Steven Spielberg's directorial gifts, brevity is not one of them. The worst film he has made since "1941" 25 years ago, "The Terminal" is aptly named - a 90-minute concept stretched a full hour beyond its expiration date, with only a accent-bearing, shambling Tom Hanks to accompany us.

Spielberg's film fails on more than one level, but mostly because he saddles the central plot - a man forced to live in the international terminal of New York's JFK Airport - with a collection of either forgotten or underdeveloped side stories that pay lip service to diversity - a Latino, a black guy, a black girl, an Indian janior, a beautiful stewardess - without making much of use of them until the last half-hour, when these cardboard cutouts suddenly claim a stake in the game.

You think "Return of the King" had too many endings? Just wait. And wait.

Hanks is Viktor Navorski, a native of the fictional Krakovia, where rebels have overthrown the government. Viktor is in New York on a trip whose motiviation remains unspecified until very late in the film. With his country in the throes of a coup, his passport and visa are no longer valid. Homeland Security agent Frank Dixon (Stanley Tucci) tells Viktor bluntly with a bag of chips smashed by an apple: Viktor can't go home, and he can't go to New York. He's shown the terminal, and the doors to New York through which he cannot pass.

What follows is a mix of Frank Capra fable and a human jungle version of Hanks' "Cast Away." Viktor builds a makeshift bed out of torn seats at an abandoned gate; he finds quarters to buy Burger King cheeseburgers (at a cheaper cost than you'd ever find in an airport); he makes friends with a baggage handler (Chi McBride), the janitor (Kumar Pallanatucci) and a food service worker (Diego Luna) smitten with an INS agent (Zoe Saldana); and he flirts with the Midwestern stewardness (a perky Catherine Zeta-Jones), a psuedo-intellectual who is the mistress of a wealthy, married man.

Viktor also turns down Dixon's offers to help him into New York, where he can become, Dixon thinks, "someone else's problem." Viktor won't leave on his own. He refuses asylum. Dixon won't detain Viktor until he's broken some law, although, I would think, taking payments under the table to do construction work in the airport is reasonably illegal.

The movie's turning point occurs when a Russian man threatens to kill himself unless he's allowed to deliver Canadian medicine to his dying father; Dixon calls in Viktor to translate, and Viktor's solution, clever as it may be, is so prepostorous that it takes "The Terminal" off whatever rail its was still hugging and straight into foolishness: A marriage proposal, an elaborate, mosaic fountain built out of ceramic scraps, a cruel blackmail by Dixon and, yes, a jumbo jet brought to a halt by a wet mop.

Despite his two Oscars, Hanks is more gifted than critics give him credit for, and his subtle comic work as Viktor works much better than his recent turn in "The Ladykillers." Tucci, until his character is forced to become vengeful, embodies a decent-yet-prideful Dixon. If there is a couple in this film, it's these two. Hanks and Zeta-Jones have zero chemistry - their kiss is in long shot, with the camera pulling away - and the downbeat end note on their relationship provides the lone beacon of reality in "The Terminal." The set design by Alex McDowell is quite flawless - this might as well be a working airport - and yet Spielberg never does much with it. He so immerses himself in these subplots that the airport becomes a stale gimmick.

But, more frustrating, is a screenplay, by Jeff Nathanson and Sacha Gervasi, that actually conspires to keep Viktor - and us - waiting longer than he needs to be. "Everybody has a story," Dixon says at one point, and if Viktor were allowed to explain his reason for being in New York to anyone but a stewardess who doesn't even know Viktor lives in the airport, it's quite likely that something could have been "arranged."

Would "The Terminal" have the been the same movie? No. It would have been a better one.

It's okay...but it's not great
Like virtually all other moviegoers, I was very excited about a new movie starring Tom Hanks and directed by Steven Spielberg. I never would have guessed that something would go seriously awry with this film. I certainly never would have guessed what that something would be either.

Well, let me go over the good things first. The storyline is fascinating. The idea of a foreigner indefinitely trapped in an airport terminal because of a violent military coup in his own country and the current U.S. immigration laws here -- a story with such a premise is guarranteed to contain a good deal of drama and comedy. The acting was superb. Yes, it's true that Tom Hanks's accent was awkward and felt out of place at first, but after awhile it starts to grow on you if you're patient. And Stanley Tucci (A MIDSUMMER NIGHT'S DREAM, ROAD TO PERDITION) is one of the very best supporting actors in movies today. All of the character development is top-notch.

So with all these great things to say, what could possibly be wrong with this movie? Well, for one there was the incredibly cheesy (and almost unnecessary) subplot involving Catherine Zeta-Jones's interaction with Tom Hanks. As a mere character in the film, she was fine. But when they started to talk to each other, it made me wish the screenplay writer had been fired early on. (My complaint revolves mainly around the "I'm like Napoleon" conversation. It was very lame, and very contrived.) Another complaint I have was John Williams's score. It could have been so much better if he had just picked it up a little. Criticizing the greatest composer of the last 100 years is not something I do lightly. Unlike most other filmscore composers, after you watch a film whose music was composed by John Williams, you'll usually be humming the main theme for the rest of the day. But I don't even remember what the main theme was for THE TERMINAL.

However, none of those gripes constitute my primary problem with THE TERMINAL. My biggest problem with this movie is that it wasn't great. It was simply okay, or adequate. Do all movies have to be great? Only if they're made by great filmmakers. Steven Spielberg is easily the greatest filmmaker of the last 25 years. Therefore, I don't think I'm being unreasonable when I hold his films to a higher standard (the standard which he himself has set) than the rest. I expect greatness from Spielberg. This wasn't great. It was just okay.

Therefore, 2.5 stars (but I'll round up to 3). ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

By now, Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan have amassed such a fund of goodwill with moviegoers that any new onscreen pairing brings nearly reflexive smiles.In You've Got Mail, the quintessential boy and girl next door repeat the tentative romantic crescendo that made Sleepless in Seattle, writer-director Nora Ephron's previous excursion with the duo, a massive hit. The prospective couple do actually meet face to face early on, but Mail otherwise repeats the earlier feature's gentle, extended tease of saving its romantic resolution until the final, gauzy shot.

The underlying narrative is an even more old-fashioned romantic pas de deux that is casually hooked to a newfangled device.The script, cowritten by the director and her sister, Delia Ephron, updates and relocates the Ernst Lubitsch classic, The Shop Around the Corner, to contemporary Manhattan, where Joe Fox (Hanks) is a cheerfully rapacious merchant whose chain of book superstores is gobbling up smaller, more specialized shops such as the children's bookstore owned by Kathleen Kelly (Ryan).Their lives run in close parallel in the same idealized neighborhood, yet they first meet anonymously, online, where they gradually nurture a warm, even intimate correspondence. As they begin to wonder whether this e-mail flirtation might lead them to be soul mates, however, they meet and clash over their colliding business fortunes.

It's no small testament to the two stars that we wind up liking and caring about them despite the inevitable (and highly manipulative) arc of the plot. Although their chemistry transcended the consciously improbable romantic premise of Sleepless, enabling director Ephron to attain a kind of amorous soufflé, this time around there's a slow leak that considerably deflates the affair. Less credulous viewers will challenge Joe's logic in prolonging the concealment of his online identity from Kathleen, and may shake their heads at Ephron's reinvention of Manhattan as a spotless, sun-dappled wonderland where everybody lives in million-dollar apartments and color coordinates their wardrobes for cocktail parties. --Sam Sutherland ... Read more

Reviews (480)

Caviar Garnish
This is the second remake of "The Shop Around the Corner". The first was Technicolor musical called "In the Good Old Summertime" which starred Judy Garland. References to Miss Garland's most famous film "The Wizard of Oz" abound in "You've Got Mail" (Meg Ryan hanging ruby slippers on a Christmas tree and reading the book "The Scarecrow of Oz" while ill, the song "Over the Rainbow" being sampled throughout and sung in its entirety at the end, etc.) In addition to reminding me of the two previous versions, I was also reminded of "Pillow Talk". In "Pillow Talk", Doris Day and Rock Hudson, who hate each other, fall in love over a party line without either realizing who the other is. Here, it's Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks falling in love over the Internet. The plot is lightweight and predictable, but the performances more than make up for that. Dabney Coleman, Jean Stapleton, Greg Kinnear, and indie-queen Parker Posey are all brilliant, and although neither of the leading rolls are much of a stretch for Hanks or Ryan, they are at least likeable and have more than enough star power to make this picture work. The script is light and funny, and this film is sure to please if you don't ask it to be more than it is.

The best romantic flick I've ever experienced.
There are a couple of things this film has going for it. First is the chemistry between the on-screen characters. There's a reason Hanks and Ryan were casted for this flick- it's because audiences (including myself) like to see the sparks between these two people. They were a great team in Sleepless in Seattle, and it's pretty obvious the 'magic' is still there.

The soundtrack to this movie is absolutely incredible. Harry Nilsson is perfect (the puppy song, over the rainbow), and the rest of the songs fit so well with the mood of the movie at all times. Sinead O'Conner's addition (I think it's called the lord must live in NY city) adds to the mood I talk about later, and Carol King's Anyone At All is one of the best romantic songs I've ever heard/played.

The mood to the movie is always incredibly upbeat- which is strange- most movies have their lulls or depressing moments. This movie, however, never gets itself in that rut. It's always very very cheery and bright. Although some may hate that, I can do nothing but appreciate the change of style. Everytime I watch You've Got Mail, I just think, "I WANT TO GO TO NEW YORK!!!"

Overall, the movie just makes you feel good. It's one of my favorite movies, and is certainly my most favorite romantic film. Even techies won't get annoyed, because thank goodness the focus isn't aol or anything of that matter.

Bouquets of sharpened pencils, indeed
Here's the main and completely irrelevant reason to love this movie: New York City in the fall. Honestly, it should have no bearing whatsoever on the plot, but it does -- and it's impossible not to fall in love with the bright, sunshiny, orange-leaved sheer beauty of the city encapsulated in this movie. Without even resorting to shots of Central Park in all its glory (and really, who can resist that?), "You've Got Mail" takes you on a lovely scenic tour of the Upper West Side, Starbucks and all. Who can resist the street fairs, the parks, the stores, the dock? It's picture-perfect, and if it's a bit surreal, I won't admit it: New York really is rather lovely in the fall.

Aside from making me want to run away to the Big Apple and work in the children's section at Fox Books, "You've Got Mail" also features Meg Ryan at her most adorable ("Aren't daisies just the friendliest flower?"), Tom Hanks at his most charming, and a terrific supporting cast (Greg Kinnear and those typewriters!). The story, a modernized little "remake" of "The Shop Around The Corner", is more fairy tale than realism -- two people fall in love over email, in war in real life, and however can such a thing be solved -- but it's an enchanting story nonetheless. In a time when romance on the web seems all-too-seedy and in reality, sometimes frankly dangerous, this little tale of two people sharing their most intimate thoughts long before they share a single glance is like a breath of fresh air. Sure, the technology's a little faded, but the magic's still there.

I know, I know...
I know what you're thinking. Tom Hanks, Meg Ryan, Greg Kinnear. You think you're too good for this movie, don't you? It's the sappiest, dumpiest little half-a-flick ever reared by Nora Ephron. Romantic comedies suck. Do I paint a correct picture, or do I exagerate? Well I think you're just cinematically jaded.

Yeah, that's right! I said it!

A lifetime of Vietnam movies and tragic love stories has left you too cynical to enjoy a simple romance between two adults. Teenagers getting into car crashes, mothers being diagnosed with breast cancer, murderers who you like despite the fact that they're pure evil. These are the cinematic icons that appeal to you, yes? Well what about hard-edged bookstore manager and idealistic bookshop owner? What about oddly-principled boyfriend who owns two identical typewriters? What about...uh...Jean Stapleton? She was funny, right?

Look, the point is it doesn't suck and don't judge it just because it's a Hanks/Ryan romantic comedy on par with "Sleepless In Seattle" (Which was a good one too, by the way).

Although, I still prefer the original "Shop Around the Corner" with Jimmy "Not Bow-Legged" Stewart.

Clever!
This is an excellent updated version of "The Little Shop Around The Corner" with anonymous penpals using email instead of the letters used in the original with Jimmy Stewart and Margaret Sullivan. Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks,as always,make a great team. ... Read more

Amazon.com

It's not the scary hit that The Ring was in 2002, but The Grudge makes a similarly convincing case for American remakes of popular Japanese horror films. Barely a year passed between the release of Takashi Shimizu's creepy ghost story Ju-On: The Grudge and the production of this American remake, set in Tokyo and starring Sarah Michelle Gellar in her first post-Buffy horror film. About the only significant difference between the two films is the importing of a mostly-American cast (including Bill Pullman, Clea DuVall and Grace Zabriskie), but The Grudge was reconfigured (by screenwriter Stephen Susco) to allow Shimizu to refine and improve the spookiest highlights of his earlier version, which enjoyed previous incarnations as a short film and two made-for-Japanese-video features. Surprising box-office analysts with a $40 million opening weekend, The Grudge may disappoint hard-core horror fans because it lacks gore and graphic violence, but as a creepy tale about a very haunted house, it's guaranteed to send a few chills up your spine. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (344)

I gotta hold a "Grudge" here...
Let me just get this off my chest...for the love of God, just because the Ring was a surprise horror hit, could you please stop trying to copy it in every horror film! This film has the same cheesy lighting and imagery that 'the Ring' did. The main terror in this film is bottom line, a naked asian boy who meows. That scares me, but not in a horror way. Sarah Michelle Gellar is not bad nor any of the actors cast in here, they just weren't given much and unfortunately neither were we. Catch it on cable or satelite tv late one night, then forget it. Not one you want to waste adding to the collection.

Buffy - The Horror Genre Slayer
I couldn't wait to watch this movie. I thought the plot was superb. The acting was terrific. And the CGI and FX where the best I've ever seen. The main ghost women looked so realistic. And Buffy looked great. I haven't seen Sarah Michelle Geller play such a terrific role since Scooby-Doo. The ghosts in this film are so scary to look at.

Now I'll stop being sarcastic and give you the words to decode my review.

I couldn't wait to = I unwittingly suffered through this...
superb = crap
terrific = pathetic
best = worst.
realistic = s##t house
looked great = made me wanna puke as usual.
Scooby Doo = Debbie Does Dallas
are so scary = Are constipated looking dummies that should have been designed to look more like Michael Jackson if they wanted motionless, falling mannequins to look scary.

Wow, what a bad movie
I went to see the grudge in the theatres and I wasn't expecting a good movie because of the recent surge of poorly made PG-13 movies released. Unfortunately it was worse than I was expecting. I watched it and I kept thinking "what the hell is going on?" My biggest gripe of the movie was that things would happen that wouldn't be explained. Half way through the movie I kept debating whether or not to walk out. Three-fourths of the way in I wanted to gouge my eyes out. I gave it a 2 because it was, somehow and somewhat, better that other movies of it's kin (ie; Abandon, The Ring 2, etc.)

And Sam Raimi used to be such a good director too.

Scarier and Better than Original
I am, of course, a huge Sarah Michelle Gellar fan.I thought the initial, theatrical version of "The Grudge" was a very well done and original movie.It was scarier than "The Ring," it had better acting, better directing, and a more intriguing plot.My problem with the film was due to the fact that the filmmakers never really showed WHAT exactly happened in that house.The audience easily inferred what took place, but the audience was never explicitly told, "this is what happened, and why all this crazy, evil stuff is now happening."This version changes that.

I prefer this unrated, extended, director's cut, or whatever they are calling it becausethe include what actually happened in that house, and it is truly horrifying.The majority if the added scenes depict some pretty scary stuff that I think was important to the plot of the movie and should not have been cut.Thanks to this version, it has been added back in to the film.Now, we the audience, can truly understand how terrifying this movie is.

p.s.The terrifying aspect works best at home in the dark by yourself when you start the movie at around midnight or so.

Lost In Translation??
This movie was a remake of the Japanese Horror film Ju-On: The Grudge.In fact, it even has the same director.However, I think there are a lot of things taken for granted in Japan that Americans don't really understand.

So at the end of the movie I was left scratching my head thinking, "What did I just watch?"I understand how the killings started, so maybe a better question was, "What was the point of this?"The ending is not an ending at all, but more an opening for a possible sequel.

The strongest aspect of this movie was that the bulk of the gore was left to the imagination of the viewer.You don't see people getting killed, you see it coming and then the rest is up to you.I think this actually makes it more scary than seeing what actually does happen.

The best part is that it lowers the rating from an 'R' rating to a 'PG-13' so more people can see it.With an 'R' rating, this movie would not have made as much as it actually did.

However, if you like a scary movie then go ahead and watch this.If you don't like them as they keep you up for weeks with nightmares (and you don't want this) then stick with Mary Poppins.This movie will have you jumping a couple of times. ... Read more

Description

From the great Muppet creator Jim Henson comes this classic bursting with enchantment and adventure. Academy Award winner Anjelica Huston stars as the Grand High Witch in this exhilarating tale.Year: 1990 ... Read more

Reviews (42)

Beware of Witches
Firstly it is true that this movie can be extremely frightening to young children, and should not be shown not be seen by them.
Otherwise everyone else should really enjoy this fantastic movie, that takes place in Sweden and modern day England.

A little boy Luke ((Jasen Fisher) is told by his grandmother (Mai Zetterling) all about witches, and of her own childhood experience with these evil creatures, including the mysterious loss of her best friend to their wicked wiles.

When a few months later he goes with his grandmother to a grand old hotel by the seaside in England, he discovers to his dismay that there is witches conference at the hotel, and before he can foil there evil plans to destroy the children of England, he and another boy, Bruno (Charles Potter) are turned into mice at the orders of the Grand High Witch (Angelica Huston)

He and Bruno must now survive while at the same time exposing defeating the witches' evil plans.

A great movie based on the book by Roald Dahl.

Delightful Kids Flick
I discovered thsi movie at the age of eight and became obsessed with it renting it several times then buying it for myself a few years later. Kids flicks don't get any better than this.

This movie is based on the book by Rolald Dahl which is about a boy who comes across a flock of witches while vacationing with his grandma on the English seashore. The witches *led by Angelica Huston* are meeting under the disguise of a "children's charity organization* but really are discussing plans to get rid of all of the children in England by turning them into mice! Unfortunately, the boy whose name is Luke becomes one of their first victims. The story is great fun as are the actors. The end is the best part which takes place at a fancy dinner for the witches, but I won't give it away. Fantastic movie for the young and the young at heart.

5 starz!!!
This movie is just an automatic classic.It is aliitle funny but most of all kind of creepy.The movie starts out kinda slow but then it starts to pick up it's pace, this movie is just a must have.

Campy, but cute, children's story
This is definately for kids, perhaps 8 to 12 years old, where they can separate out fantasy from reality. The slow starting pace and the campy effects might bore adult viewers, but it's a great flick for kids. The cameo appearance of Rowan Atkinson adds a couple of laughs, but filmmaker really underutilized the comedian's talents.

THE WITCHES (ANJELICA HOUSTEN)
i used to watch this film when i was a lil kid and i used to well like it! it was funny cos ma cousin got scared of the grand high witch! and anjelica housten does look quite fit in this- even though she is a witch!!! anyways it is a brilliant film for lil kids and i would even watch it now!! GO 4 IT! 10/10... ... Read more

Reviews (853)

One of the best movies EVER!
As a musical theater purist, I was concerned that a movie musical with 3 of Hollywoods A list stars would be a hinderance rather than a help in the "revival" of the genre. I must say that I was blown away by the sheer genius and excellence of the film.
Catherine Zeta-Jones' Velma was equal to, if not better than Bebe Neuwerth's ( Brodway revival). Her beautiful voice and masterful dance skill is worthy of the great white way. A Tony may have been a more appropriate award as opposed to her much deserved Oscar. Although Rene Zellwegers voice was a little shaky in the begining she brought out a tough side in Roxy that was not there in neither the original nor the revival stage versions. Then my biggest fear, Richard Gere as Billy Flinn, was in a word perfect. You can't ask for a better fit, and what a shocker to see that wonderful tapdance!
With great costumes,Fosse-like choreography, expert lighting and singing (by many broadway veterans in the chours as extras) this dark comedy shines. Also with great cameos and supporting performances by the great Chita Rivera ( original broadway cast),John C. Reily (oscar nominated),Lucy Liu, and Christine Baranski this film shines as one of the greatest ever made, not just as a musical, but as a film. Rob Marshall's directorial debut deserves all of it's accolades...and all that jazz.

Sizzling and sexy musical entertainment.
I have just seen one of the best movie musicals in years. "Chicago," directed by Rob Marshall and starring Catherine Zeta-Jones, Renee Zellweger and Richard Gere, will knock you out of your seats. This stylish adaptation is smart, sassy and gorgeously put together.

Catherine Zeta-Jones is red hot as the murderous Velma Kelly. Velma washes the blood of her victims off her hands, and then sings and dances on stage as if killing people is all in a day's work. Zeta-Jones struts across the screen as if she owns it. She is sultry, sexy and a very talented singer and dancer. Renee Zellweger does fine work as the low class Roxie Hart, a selfish and conniving young woman who longs to be a musical star. Like Velma, Roxie lands in jail after committing murder. Richard Gere effectively plays their shyster lawyer, Billy Flynn, with roguish charm and a twinkle in his eye. Also outstanding are Queen Latifah, as an avaricious warden, and John C. Reilly, as Roxie's hapless husband.

The movie takes place in the 1920's during the Jazz Age. It is the era of Prohibition, fast women, and an "anything goes" attitude. Rob Marshall has an assured touch, and he directs this material with panache. The swinging score by Kander and Ebb goes perfectly with the wonderful costumes, sets and choreography. I have not enjoyed a movie musical this much in years, and I recommend "Chicago" highly.

Manipulating the System
The 2002 Oscar winner for Best Picture,"Chicago" is a musical which has the late Bob Fosse's choreography stamped all over it, although it's really anybody's guess as to whether or not he would have been pleased with this film version of his 1975 stage hit. Happily, the acting was great and the leads did their own singing and dancing.
The story is based on the real-life cases of Beulah Annan and Belva Gaertner, renamed respectively as Roxie Hart and Velma Kelly (There was a real Roxie Hart as well, who committed murder in Indiana in the 1910s), who were exhonerated of murder charges by a flashy lawyer in the 1920s.
The story begins on a snowy night at the Onyx Club in the Chicago of Al Capone, where the booze flows heavily despite Prohibition laws, and a brassy Velma (Catherine Zeta-Jones) arrives at work late, stopping to hide the gun she has just used to kill her husband and sister after catching them in bed together. She performs the rousing number, "All That Jazz" shortly thereafter as if nothing has happened.
Watching her is ex-chorine Roxie, played by a slender, shiny-complexioned and pixie-faced Renee Zellweger, whose unquenchable desire for fame has led her to cheat on her mechanic husband with a slickster furniture salesman (Dominic West)who falsely claims he has connections that can revamp Roxie's career.
Soon, Roxie and Fred Casley scurry over to the Hart's apartment to continue their affair. When Roxie asks Fred, as she has before, when he will introduce her to the club manager, and help her return to showbusiness, Fred admits that he lied. The following confrontation becomes violent and Roxie fatally shoots Fred as he tries to leave.
Amos Hart, Roxie's dim-witted but devoted husband(John C. Reilly) tries to cover for her at first as Taye Diggs' Bandleader/Announcer leads us further into the action by introducing Roxie's first number, "That Funny Honey", which changes tones as the investigator mentions the victim's name and Amos becomes aware of his wife's infidelity.
Roxie is arrested and taken to the Cook County Jail, where Chita Rivera, who originated the role of Velma Kelly on Broadway,has a cameo appearance as inmate Nickie.
We are then introduced to Matron Mama Morton(a pretty, regal, and matronly Queen Latifah), and the vaudville numbers continue as she sings the racy and more-than-highly suggestive "When You're Good to Mama".
As she begins her time in prison, we get to know Roxie's inmates during "The Cell Block Tango". Judging from the visuals, where most of the inmates' handkerchiefs came out red as they finished giving details of their crimes and the Hungarian immigrant's was white, we are to believe that Katalin Helinszki (Ekaterina Chtchelkanova), who was accused of the most heinous of the murders, is innocent.
Soon after, Mama Morton pulls a few strings, Defense Attorney Billy Flynn (Richard Gere, whose early training in stage musicals, like that of Catherine Zeta-Jones' serves him well here) arrives to represent Roxie, who also has push-over journalist/sob-sister, Mary Sunshine(Christine Baranski)in her corner.
The song "We Both Reached for the Gun" is based on headlines from the actual case, and has the feel of a hymn sung at a revival meeting. It is reflective of Roxie's false repentance for her misdeeds.
As the publicity surrounding Roxie grows, and the opportunistic Flynn begins to devote more time to her than to his previous client, Velma, another potentially lucrative case appears for Billy when Lucy Liu's pineapple heiress, Kitty Baxter committs a triple homicide(Note that his discussion of this case with dinner guests would not have taken place today), forcing Roxie and Velma to use a few tricks to win back Billy's attention, including a fake pregnancy.
Onstage, as the murder-as-entertainment scenario continues, we are treated to the long-suffering but loyal Amos' "Mr. Cellophane", and his devotion to his unfaithful and ungrateful wife is heart-rending. But at least he gets more attention than the offscreen family of Fred Casley, who might have given the story an interesting perspective if included.
Roxie's falling-out with Billy over his selected courtroom attire for her ends abruptly upon her observation of the tragic results of a poor woman's inability to get proper representation. Noteworthy is the strong anti-immigrant sentiment of the time.
Ultimately, Flynn, Velma, and Roxie, razzle-dazzle 'em in court. Lies win out over truth, and style, in the form of Flynn, Velma and Roxie, wins over substance in the form of Colm Feore's prosecutor, Martin Harrison, Katalin Helinszki, and Amos, and the Hart's neighbor, Mrs. Borusewiz (Jayne Eastwood), who also took the witness stand, as often happens in life.
Although acquitted, things didn't end so happily for the real Beulah Annan, whose life ended in a sanitarium in 1928.Belva Gaertner lived to see her story told onstage the year before.
But the man-manipulating Roxie Hart and Velma Kelly live to dazzle the world again, and our rollicking tale of cynical truth ends on a positive note for our main players.
All one could do in the end is heave a sigh, enjoy the show, and "All That Jazz"!

Too Much Music
I saw nothing on the cover to indicate this was mainly a musical. The minimal story line was squeezed in between 110 minutes of singing and dancing..... I would describe as "interpretive modern jazz". We finally used "fast forward" to speed through this dancing and at the end threw the VHS tape in the rubbish. What a disappointment.

The DVD release is shameful
Don't get me wrong. I love this movie more than just about any other movie in existence. The problem is that whenever you get a big-budget, Oscar-winning movie, the initial release on DVD is always going to have at least 2 discs and 2-3 hours of special features. So naturally, I eagerly awaited the release, so I could bask in the sheer excessiveness of the entire product, but instead, I watched as the curtain rose to reveal a DVD that, from my perspective, can only boast of having a 3-minute-long musical number deleted from the theatrical cut of the film. I was crestfallen, and proceeded to wait until they unveiled the real prize, the multi-disc extravaganza that I had expected from the start. But still I wait, so I am forced to say that the DVD is only worth renting, but not worth the $20.00 that the distributors continue to ask for. The movie is incredible from start to finish, but it's just not worth spending $20.00 on this, only to see Miramax release a 4-disc set the moment you take the plastic off the case. I personally will wait until they release it in a DVD set that truly does this masterpiece justice. ... Read more

Reviews (24)

TERRIFICALLY ENTERTAINING
Combining soapy suds and exhilarating dance sequences with the formidable acting skills of lead players Shirley MacLaine and Anne Bancroft, Herbert Ross creates a winner in The Turning Point. Baryshnikov is every bit as magnetic onscreen, in a well-chosen role as a dance lothario, as he is every second he is dancing; he defies gravity and sends your spirit soaring. Leslie Browne, a novice (to put it kindly), in the acting department, is no less spectacular on the dance floor. Rarely has a big, old-fashioned, commercial film been so successful at making classical ballet so tangible and electric. The score, punctuacted throughout with the obvious classical scores of the many pieces we get glimpses of, adds a resonance to the story. MacLaine and Bancroft, as rivals in romance and once, in their careers, have a grand old time with our emotions, as they traverse the entire wide range of jealousy, humiliation, aging, love, friendship -- and eventually combust onscreen, which provides the movie with its most dazzlingly entertaining moments of drama. Tom Skerrit is terrific as Shirley's dancer-gone-husband, and the portrait of MacLaine's character has surprising moments of reality sprinkled throughout the screenplay. A wonderful big, overlong, old-fashioned movie, and a great way to introduce your family to classic dance, not only painlessly, but engagingly.

Why isn't this movie on DVD????
'The Turning Point' was one of the best movies of the late 70's, I can't believe it hasn't been issued in DVD! It had 11 Oscar nominations, including Best Picture, and, in a rare instance, two leading actresses (Shirley MacLaine and Anne Bancroft) were both nominated for Best Actress from the same film. It's about two women closing in on middle age, once good friends, both having been promising, competitive ballet dancers with the same company in their youth. Anne Bancroft's character proceeded on to become a successful, internationally celebrated prima ballerina, while Shirley MacLaine's abandoned the ballet scene on the verge of her career breakthrough to marry and raise a family. After twenty-one years, the Ballet company finally comes to MacLaine's Oklahoma City home on tour, and the women are reunited. MacLaine, now the mother of three young teens, begins regretting what she might have been and what she gave up. In addition to envying Bancroft's success, she envies her own eldest daughter's (Leslie Browne's) promising dance talent, and the chummy relationship her daughter and Bancroft begin cultivating as a result of the girl's acceptance into the company.

Bancroft, on the other hand, is an aging prima ballerina whose star has all but faded, and whom the company is slowly but surely putting out to pasture in favor of younger, fresher dancers. She begins regretting the things she's forsaken for her career, such as marriage, motherhood, and a meaningful romance with a special man. In turn, she starts stewing a jealousy of MacLaine's having these things that is as strong as MacLaine's resentment of her career success. To fill in the void, she seeks to endear MacLaine's young dancer daughter to her in a mentor/friend/mothering relationship that she hopes will overshadow and upstage the girl's devotion to her own mother. All these emotions build and build and build till they end up climaxing in a screamfest of accusations and insults between the two leads, that progresses to a classic physical cat fight in the parking lot of Lincoln Center.

Meanwhile, MacLaine's daughter is having problems of her own. She falls for the company's primary male dancer (a handsome young Mikhael Baryshnikov) who turns out to be a ladies man and stomps on her heart. The music, the moods, the gauzy views of MacLaine's drowsy family life in Oklahoma City and the disciplined New York Ballet world in summer, all have the quality of a golden fairy tale, and the dancing sequences performed by some of the best professional dancers in the world at the time are breathtaking. MacLaine and Bancroft are unmatched as the competitive friends, Leslie Browne is flawless as the somewhat airheaded but magnificently gifted daughter, Barishnikov is perfectly believable as the devil-may-care loverboy, Tom Skeritt does a fine job as MacLaine's patient husband, and even the boy and girl who play MacLaine's two younger children are captivating as typical opinionated adolescents.

I hope a DVD for this beautiful film is issued SOON and it is not a case of having to wait till 2007 for the 30th anniversary!

DOUBLY RICH: CAPTIVATING THEME, BREATHTAKING CHOREOGRAPHY
A very fitting title for this "Terms of Endearment" meets "Footloose" offering...a delicate, if somewhat idealistic, treat for people who like subtle emotional vectors.

The theme is sensitive: daughter becomes successful ballerina, makes mother hark back to her own difficult decision to give up her dancing passion to raise a family.

Envious angst and catty remarks ensue, but of course all is patched up towards the end. The performances are sterling all round but the dialogue could have been a little more taut, it is hit-on-the-head-obvious when things get sappy.

But that doesn't matter because it's the choreography that the movie will be remembered for, the ballet sequences are simply stunning. Minor gripe: a couple of ballet scenes have overbearing voiceovers which recap all that the dancer has gone through in life, which interrupts the lyric of the moment a bit. Again, editing may have been in order.

Nonetheless, it makes for an engaging, luminous portrait of dance and its various twists and turns as apt metaphors for the quirky vagaries of life, loves, ambition.

Very decent rental, but a great must-own if you dig chickflicks.

TOADS AND FROGS
how many times I have used that line when things have popped out of my mouth without thinking them through. This is a GREAT movie. The dancing will "wow" you and the acting by MacLaine and Bancroft is wonderful. This should be released in DVD with lots and lots of extra dance footage. My husband even stayed awake throught it. PLEASE release it!

Please, please, please issue in DVD!!!
I will purchase this film in a heartbeat as soon as it is available in DVD. The story is moving, but the dance sequences that are captured here - especially of Baryshikov in his prime - make it a ballet lover's dream. ... Read more

Amazon.com

An atmospheric and sexy crime caper, this stars Dennis Quaid as a New Orleans police detective. He's a smooth talker who butts heads with the new assistant district attorney, Ellen Barkin. She's rigid and plays by the rules; he is mildly corrupt. They soon find themselves romantically entwined, and a bit chagrined.

Director Jim McBride (Great Balls of Fire) was in top form with this 1987 sizzler. You may not remember the particulars of the plot, which concerns supposed gang killings and police corruption, because it is the romance that has staying power. Blame this on Quaid and Barkin, who send off enough sparks to light up Bourbon Street. They are not only sexy together, but endearing, which makes you want to like them as much as they like each other. --Rochelle O'Gorman ... Read more

Reviews (27)

party on down, Cher!!!
This is what I call a personality movie. The plot is fine, maybe a few holes and you sort of can see it coming down the turnpike, but that is not what you will watch this movie for time and again. It's the actors. They are the whole show and they give you a great one at that. Dennis Quaid jumped into leading man spotlight with this film, and Ellen Barkin is a delight as his adversary and can't-help-falling-for-you-lover...she is cute, engaging and not your typically blonde!! Quaid and Barkin are friends in real life, and that chemistry carries over into their roles. They have fun with the characters and so will you.

I have viewed this movie and will continue to do so, it's just that sort of a good time. I absolutely adore New Orleans, and you get some good scenery and even better cajun music (though where is Doug Kershaw??? I ask!), with excellent supporting performances from John Goodman and Ned Beatty.

Dennis plays Remy McSwain, a police Lieutenant that loves the Big Easy and takes everything in laid back stride, until problems arise. There is a supposed drug war going on, he thinks he has all the answers until Burkin's ADA Anne Osbourne starts asking questions of her own. Their attraction is instantaneous, sexy and fun, as she knows she cannot fall for the man she is investigating, but she cannot seem to stop herself.

Uncle Souse tells Barkin's character at once point "put your purdy face in the car, cher."....well, put your purdy face in front of the telly and enjoy a trip down to Dr. John's way.

Please note that is Jim Garrison playing Jim Garrison!! For those who do not recall the name, see Oliver Stone's JFK.

Mature audiences as there is one sexy, steaming love scene between the leads (which they said they had trouble doing since they were friends in real life - well, it sure does not show!!!)

Look out for the gator, baby!!!

Sexy and Colorful
This colorful and fast moving film from director Jim McBride about an only slightly corrupt cop in 'The Big Easy' and the pretty Assistant District Attorney sent to investigate the department is filled with cajun spice and atmosphere. The lines between right and wrong are blurred like a rainy windshield in this lightning paced and very sexy cop film.

Dennis Quaid gives a terrific performance as Remy McSwain, a second generation cop who sold out early on in his career, accepting it as the norm but not letting it hinder him from doing his job. When the prim and sexy Ellen Barkin arrives on the scene in the form of D.A. Anne Osborne he attempts to wine and dine his way out of trouble as bodies start piling up in an apparent drug war.

The sexy encounters between Remy and the shy Anne blend seamlessly with some very brutal crime scenes and a lot of New Orlean's music to propel this film at a breezy and very enjoyable pace. When Remy's own corruption is exposed their relationship becomes more complicated as he tampers with evidence and gets off. But her comments to him that he is no longer one of the 'good guys' causes him to take a serious look at himself. When cops are discovered to be behind all the recent drug trouble, the answers will hit far too close to home.

A very unique cop thriller that manages to maintain a light and breezy ambiance throughout, this is one of the most memorable films of it's kind. It's spicy flavor goes down easy and makes you crave more. The supporting cast that includes Ned Beatty, John Goodman, and Lisa Jane Persky offer fine support in this very seductive and one of a kind film you must see. Pick this one up today!

Glad I finally watched it.
A friend of mine has chased me around with this DVD for weeks, telling me it is a must see. She was right! The only problem is, it's her copy and now I'm going to HAVE to buy my own. I live about an hour away from New Orleans and let me tell you, they have the Cajun flavor down pat. I just wish Dennis Quaid were there all the time. This movie is sexy, steamy and very entertaining. It's amazing that it is from 1987 and yet is not outdated at all. If you haven't seen it yet, then buy it now!

Hard to Follow
I was very disappointed with this film. I had watched it immediately after coming back from a wonderful trip to New Orleans and was desiring something that would remind me of New Orleans. The acting in this movie was mediocre. What really made this movie not very enjoyable was the fact that the storyline was very hard to follow. Most murder mysteries are supposed to have their share of twists and turns, however this movie went way beyond that to the point of complete confusion. I gave this movie a 2 star rating because at least the New Orleans backdrop and the Cajun Zydeco music was nice.

Not Quite So Big As I Remember
I used to have this on VHS and adored it- it's a terrific film, with an unbeatable combination of twisty plot, stars that have incredible chemistry, and spicy music.... and yet when I watch it on DVD I find five minutes of the ending has just disappeared into the great old void at the editing room.

Does anyone know why this part has been cut? It doesn't seem to make much sense, as without it, the conclusion of the film is very abrupt and disjointed... it's amazing the difference that one tiny little scene makes!

Don't give up your VHS copy just yet- not until those editors find that damn five minutes and put 'em back in where they belong! ... Read more

Reviews (114)

I can dig it!
I am 21 years old. My mother raised me with the monkees music and tv shows. I did not see this movie until 2 years ago. I was impressed. And so should everyone else be that called them a "fake" band and so on. The talent is remarkable, as well as the direction and the writing. This film involves all of the angst and emotion of their personal lives as well as the sign of the times. They were trying to find love and peace in a world ridden with war. At the time they were so passionate about their beliefs, as well as with trying to strip off the stereotypes that people put on them by thinking that they weren't original or by comparing them to the Beatles (with whom they were friends with and hung out with on a regular basis). Everyone will have a different opinion after watching this movie. My opinion is that it is thoroughly enjoyable and an absolute shame to never see. There are so many different scenes and wonderful actors and great music! I think I am going to watch it again right now. Oh, and remember:Nobody ever lends money to a man with a sense of humor.

The Ultimate Acid Trip
Bob Rafaelson and Jack Nicholson were at a party with the monkees while all of them were stoned and asked them questions about their fame, their desires, and their fantasies and the result was Head, a psychodelic, plotless mindtrip which flows like a good Monty Python Episode.

Those tuning in to see the rapid-fire improv-filled laughtrack which was the TV series are in for a shock as this has none of their ultrasticom comedy, but hey! Hey! it's still the monkees....everything is just a bit more abstract and surreal :) And let's not forget the music! Wow! The monkees have never sounded so good, writing nearly all of their material. Mickey shines on Psychodelic "Porpoise Song" (while we see him jump off a bridge into a mermaid-filled sea) and the sweet ballad "aas We go Along. Mike Nesmith really rocks on "Circle Sky" and Peter Tork gives us more songwriting weirdness with his rapid fire "Long Title: Do I Have To Do This All Over Again?"

This is a good movie to sit back with your friends and watch entranced at its path. Lots of fun cameos by the likes of Teri Garr, Frank Zappa, and of course Victor Mature and his hair!

Groovy!

cult classic
All I have to say is if your a true monkees fan your wasting your time I'ts terrible. How ever if your a huge fan of Rocky Horror Picture Show, Shock Treatment,J-Men Forever and any movie that director
Ed Wood did "except" Orgy Of The Dead (thats just asking for punishment.)than this movie is awsome.
I don't under stand why Peter Tork is the star of the movie ,he's on the least compared to the other guyes.

Head is a trip!
What is so unique about HEAD is that it's dreamlike in a way that few movies are. A uniquely crafted film inspired by the underground films of the 50s & 60s. Few movies manage to be entertaining solely on the strength of editing, but here a series of dreamsequences are seemlessly strung together in a fun and innovative way. The most revolutionary part has to be the way the beginning and end sequences were connected by the events between them yet are the same scene with only slight variations. Huh? As the Monkees put it, "when you see the end in sight the beginning may arrive". How they do it is masterful. If you try to make sense of this movie, you'll be missing the point. The best thing to do is just mellow out before you watch it and allow HEAD to mess with your head a little. It will if you give it a chance and that makes for a truly rewarding viewing experience. Outside of the Monkees trying to escape their manufactured image, nothing really makes sense in this strange little movie. However, criticising HEAD for it makes about as much sense as critising your dreams for being equally strange and nonsensical. Where comedy is concerned, HEAD is not funny in a humorous way but rather in a peculiar way, similar to the way dreams have you saying, "what was that all about?" later on. If this had been a hit, it could have taken popular filmmaking in a whole new direction.

The Definitive Anti-Masterpiece
When this film was made the career of the Monkees was already in decline as their show had been cancelled and their music was no longer charting ('Porpoise Song' from the "Head" soundtrack got up to number 62 on Billboard). The group was tired of their squeaky clean image as the 'Pre-Fab Four', and they just wanted out. This film was conceived in an effort to reach out to more adult audiences, and to hasten their departure from the scenes as the prototype MTV 'boy band'.

The film itself is a quirky, stream of consciousness movie that treads the line between anti-war statement film to over the top comedy in scenes where, for instance, they have to frolic on the scalp of Victor Mature (in a sequence known as 'dandruff') and are subsequently sucked into a giant vacuum cleaner by Victor Mature's hairdresser. There is no plot as such, but there is some redeeming social commentary such as when Frank Zappa tells Davy that he needs to work on his music more (but compliments his dancing, done with Toni Basil). At the end of the scene Frank Zappa's cow offers her opinion of the Monkees, in a scene that must be my favorite of the movie.

Some of the music is great, with the Nesmith tune 'Circle Sky' getting top mention. It's a great song, filmed live in a scene designed to show how the boys had been devoured by their public image. Other musical numbers are a bit lacking, particularly 'Daddy's Song' and 'As We Go Along.'

Highlights in the film are in the cameos. Not only do Toni Basil and Frank Zappa put in appearances, so do boxer Sonny Liston (who fights Davy), Terry Garr (who pleads to have poison sucked from her finger), Annette Funicello (who pleads tearfully with Davy in a love interest scene), and Jack Nicholson and Dennis Hopper in a cantina scene. Most peculiar of all credits are for writers and producers, namely longtime Monkees collaborator Bob Rafelson, and Jack Nicholson, who later collaborated on "Five Easy Pieces" and "The Postman Always Rings Twice", among other projects.

There are also extras consisting of theatrical trailers, including one in Portuguese, and television ads for the film. The film was essentially not promoted, certainly didn't connect with the typical Monkee demographic, and was a disaster at the box office. This didn't trouble the band, as it gave them a clear path out, with Peter quitting very shortly after the movie was released. This is as unlike the Monkees TV show as can be imagined, and I recommend it for anyone looking for a trippy sixties flashback stranger than most any other. I was fortunate enough to see this in a theater, and have loved it ever since. I recommend the film to people who know about the Monkees or just think they do. I guarantee that it will shatter your preconceived notions of the band. ... Read more

Reviews (362)

Rousing swashbuckling tale
This is not your Father's Zorro, and Antonio Banderas does a fine job as the masked avenger (and according to the Amazon.com trivia section, the first Hispanic to play this role). Banderas plays the second generation people's hero in Southern California, just prior to Spain's ceding of the land to Mexico.

Anthony Hopkins is a great second (who is actually the first) Zorro, a/k/a Don Diego de la Vega, a Mexican land baron and freedom fighter. After escaping decades later from prison, Hopkins escapes from prison to seek revenge on the no-good governor (well played by a smarmy Stuart Wilson) the man who killed his wife and stole his daughter.

Bandaras, a low-life bandito becomes urbane and a proficient warrior at the teaching of Hopkins, and then becomes transformed by a positively bewitching Catherine Zeta-Jones. Their interplay gives the film its romantic, and often sensual edge.

Lots of swordplay and general excitement, as we recall from Douglas Fairbanks and Disney's Guy Williams. The movie moves quickly (but bogs down for awhile 2/3 of the way through. Happily, it picks up the pace through the end.

Nice scenery. When we see the sign of the return of Zorro, via a blazing Z cut into a hillside , it is positively thrilling. A stirring script which fits the film well. More than enough humor (such as the scene in the confessional, or one of several chased of Zorro by the troops) for the purpose of lessening the tension which is well added by a malevolent Matt Letscher.

As one says, it is a grand throwback. As another said: That's entertainment!

...They make the sign of the Z...
This film is the most recent Zorro film. It stars the young Hispanic Antonio Banderas and the intelligent actor Anthony Hopkins. THis may be the first time that a true Hispanic has played Zorro in an American film.
In 1820, Spain has lost California to Mexico. But Rafael Montero (Stuart Wilson) the Spanish govenor, is determined to kill his nemisis Zorro. The fox again foils Montero's plans with the help of two young orphans, one of whom he gives a medallion. Somehow, Montero learns that Diego de la Vega (Anthony Hopkins) is Zorro. Diego's wife is murdered by Montero's men, his hacienda burned, Montero robs him of his child, and Diego is sent to prison. Defeated but determined never to surrender, the enraged fox promises the govenor that he will never be rid of him.
Twenty years later, Santa Anna has become worse than Montero, and people vanish without a trace. The orphan who helped Zorro, Alejandro Mureita (Banderas) and his brother are caught by Montero's man Capitan Love (Matthew Letcher) who beheads Alejandro's brother. Meanwhile, Deigo escapes and sees that Montero has raised his stolen child Elena (Catherine Zeta Jones). Diego sees Alejandro. The two men form an alliance. Diego trains Alejandro in the art of the sword, the whip, riding a horse, and athletic ability. Alejandro tries an exlpoit as Zorro but is rejected by Diego. In the end, however, the new fox earns his mask. Diego now seeks revenge on his nemisis, Montero, while the new Zorro tries to free the people.
This film extends Zorro's legacy. However, in the future I am sure we will see more films with Zorro being Diego. One line with this film seems to hold more emotion than the rest.
DIEGO: "Rafael! You'll never be rid of me! Never!"

New Zorro, New Age
I have never been a huge fan of Antonio or Jones until I saw this film. With its breathtaking scenery, action and atmosphere it makes you love zorro again! A new zorro for a new age! Very well done film with superb acting. The dvd is full on with excellent picture quality and sound.

Zorro No Longer a Hero
Zorro, the hero of Pulps, movies, books, comics and television, has a new movie out. Antonio Banderas, on Larry King Live, mentioned that he hoped this movie would help to keep alive the spirit of the only Spanish super-hero (he in not the only one nor was he at the time of the interview). Well, I think it will do much to keep the name alive but not the spirit.

Anthony Hopkins is Zorro, the Fox. After years of struggle, Spain is pulling out of California and leaving it to the Mexicans. But Zorro slips up and the evil Governor tracks him down, kills his wife, steals his daughter and throws him in prison. Twenty years later Don Diego (Zorro) hears that the Governor is back. Minutes later he has escaped from prison (what was he waiting for?) and is destined to run into Antonio Banderas. After their meeting, Don Diego trains Antonio to be the new Zorro. The rest of the movie involves the plan to create the Independent Republic of California by buying it from Santa Ana with gold dug out of its soil and stamped to look Spanish. Mexico is willing to make the sale because of their war with the United States (it is now 1841).

If you are looking for a fun swashbuckling adventure, then this is definitely the movie to see. If, however, you want to see Zorro, you might find yourself a little disappointed. Gone is Zorro, the defender of the common people and the innocent. In his place is, not one, but two, Zorro's who are bent on personal vendetta's and enlightened self-interest. It is actually Don Diego's daughter who helps some enslaved Mexicans near the end of the movie.

The transition from one Zorro to another takes the Fox out of the wealthy and privileged and makes him a commoner. The new Zorro is also a thief (in a wonderfully fun scene the young Zorro steals his horse, a very serious crime at the time). Having Zorro break so common a law seemed wrong to me. To have Zorro flaunt the breaking of laws meant to worsen the lives of the commoners is another thing entirely. But in this movie Zorro does not taunt authority. He plots against it, to be sure, but for his own reasons and not for the good of the people.

As this movie has two Zorros, there are now also two villains to be defeated (one each). The elder Zorro still has his old nemesis to contend with while the younger Zorro has made a personal enemy of Captain Love, a young Cavalry officer who seems to be in the wrong country. Both villains are vile and easy to hate. This make the personal vendettas a little more palatable as well as making the ending a lot more fun.

The other main problem with this film is that Zorro loses. Zorro never loses. but in this film Zorro loses big time. He loses his wife, his home, his daughter, his name and twenty years of his life. Granted, he briefly regains his daughter but gone is the hero who can laugh in the face of danger and triumph brilliantly.

The last thing I wanted to mention is that, probably due to the controversy over the new Jeffrey Irons film, Zorro is no longer married to his wife Lolita. Her name has been changed (how dare they) to the more common Esperanza. I can understand the concern of some but Don Diego won the heart of Lolita before the Roaring Twenties. As in the Nabakov novel, Lolita is a valid name before it was turned into an adjective. Next thing you know people are going to try and get Disney to change the name of Bambi because they think it is a girl's name (Bambi was the prince of the forest).

So, if you want to see The Mask of Zorro because, to you, it means an exciting swashbuckling movie, you will really enjoy this one. But if you want to see the movie to watch the continuing adventures of a hero that has entertained all generations since his debut almost eighty years ago, part of you will be disappointed in what has happened to the character.

ZORRO MEETS ZETA JONES
THE MASK OF ZORRO is a rousiing, energetic, exciting romantic swashbuckler movie, reminiscent of all those great Fairbanks and Flynn movies.
Antonio Banderas is a perfect Zorro, starting off rude and crude, ending up flamboyant and gallant. His injection of humor and the way he rolls his eyes is a definite good addition to his role.
The ever amazing Anthony Hopkins shines in his role as the first Zorro, whose life is ruined when his wife is killed and his daughter taken away from him by his cruel enemy. It's rare to see an action hero over the 50 year mark!
Catherine Zeta-Jones is breathtakingly beautiful and is wonderful in her role as Hopkins daughter, feisty, yet adolescent in her yearnings for the masked man.
Stuart Wilson is vile and irreprehensible as Don Metero, the head villain, and he plays it to the hilt.
Matt Leschler as the Captain is even worse, his dashing good looks hiding a psychotic imbalance.
The whole movie is superb; James Horner's overlooked Oscar score is beautiful, including the closing credits duet by Tina Arena and Marc Antony of "I Want to Spend My Lifetime Loving You."
This is a fun, enjoyable and uplifting kind of movie. ENJOY! ... Read more

Reviews (46)

Great if you love disney sequels
Why does Disney love to come out with sequels. Last year we had The Return to Neverland. And to mention these sequels to. The Return of Jafar, Aladdin and the King of Theives, Cindrella 2: Dreams come True, 101 2: Patch's London Adventure (out today). What is next? Lilo & Stitch 2, The Ememror's Neve Groove 2? As the movie opens, the King of London believes Radcliff's lies, so he orders that John Smith (Mel Gibson) to arrested. But when John Smith learns that he is being arrested, he falls into water. While in America, Pocahontas (Irene Bedard) had learned of his death, and is confused on where she should go from there. But when when John Rolfe (Billy Zane) shows up on orders from the king to bring back the chief, an indian decides that Pocahontas should go to London instead of Chief Powhatan (Rusell Means). Powhatan has another indian who never talks to make the journey to london.

WORST EVER
This movie was soooo BORING!!!!! Well okay it was ok at the beginning but near the end I was thinking to myself "I'll only like this movie if she chooses John Smith!" And guess what? SHE DIDNT!!!!! GRRRR it makes me heartbroken! I looved the Lion King 2, Peter Pan 2, and Aladdin 3 (Aladdin 2 was reeeally bad heheh) and I havnt seen any other sequals unless you count Fantasia 2000 which I think doesnt seem like a sequal at all, more like a whole new movie! But back to Pocahontas... I LOOOOOVED JOHN SMITH!!! I know that the person I borrowed this movie from is only keeping it to expand her disney collection... (she has probably almost all of them) and if Ariel can see Eric once, fall in love, take some time off and finally come up with a plan to see him again (which, when you think about it, must take some time for the movie to progress and such) She still loves him and marries him BUT WHAT ABOUT JOHN SMITH????? IT'S ALMOST THE SAME!!!!!! DONT RENT THIS MOVIE!!!!!! SAVE YOUR MONEY!!!!!!!!!!

RUBBISH ENDING!!!!!!!!!!!!
this movie was rubbish from the start and had a spactacularly rubbish ending. the animation wasnt up to much. it loored like they had taken the original charaters from the first movie and melted them! all the walt disney "classics" have all had their own style. ie. the lion king had very pricisely drawn figures and was done in bright colours. pocahontas was made of more subtle colours and had a slightly abstract feel about the charcters. in this movie, the drawings just melted into the style of all teh other recent, rubbish disney sequals, nothing special or significant, the sort of animation taht can make you feel sick after watching it to long. this movie didnt quite reach the stage of making me naucious but it very easily could have if it was drawn with a few more of the really rubbish "pictures". the voices were all different, allthough that might not have been disneys fault.it only had about 3 songs in it and all them sounded like the writen had written them in his/her sleep!
allthough im not sure if the hole ball thing was actually a reference to hitory (i suspect not)i think that was completely FAKE and unrealistic. and since when has pocahontas been able to speak english?!? i know that in the first movie she and john smith could speak in the same languge but 1) you dont know what language that is 2)that was only because the tree did something weird.
was it js me or did pocahontas look completely hidious for a cartoon in this movie?
everyone was SO(...) mean to the little dog (what was his name?!?). pocahontas was hugin meeko all the time but she ignored the dog untill the end. meeko was just evil to the dog, apart from in the rare occasions that he was being sweet to the dog. bt i will admit that meeko (and the dog, and, yes, evan flit) was sooooooooooooo CUTE!
finally, the RUBBISH ending. firstly, pocahontas rejects john smith, who is like, the love of her life(in the first movie anyway)!!!!!! he was completely cool with it as well. she was like "we walked the same path once, but no i know my place." and he was like "i hope you find happiness." ok. im 13 and i definately know that my boyfriend isnt long term but evan if HE rejected me like that i would proabl slap him. and john smith was like THE LOVE OF HER LIFE. and then, to make it worse, she went with that pathetic excuse for an animated character JOHN ROLFE who had an unaturally posh accent anf "falls in love with him". THAT WAS W(...)-R(...)-O(...)-N(...)-G(...).!(...)
and john smith was SO(...) SWEET to her throughout the entire movie. one of the fisrt things he said to her were "ive though about you every day!" that was soo sweet. and pocahontas still loved him at the begining.SHE SHOULD HAVE GONE WITH JOHN SMITH!!!!!!! like ive already said THE ENDING WAS WRONG!!!! walt disney movies always have the same two messages
"friendship"
and
"TRUE LOVE"
theyre not supposed to be making films about players.
this movie is RUBBISH!!!!!!!! save yourself the agony and DONT WATCH IT!!!!

The Worst Movie in the World!!!
There's only one word to describe how I feel about this movie: HATE!!!

This was probably one of the first Disney sequels I ever saw, and also the worst. Even "The Return of Jafar" was better than this one, and that's saying alot!! I can't believe she ditched John Smith. It just dosn't make any sense. Mr. Rolphe isn't very outstanding either. Though they never show it in this movie (I don't think), there is a little bit of a historical record in it. Pocahontas DID marry John Rolfe. She went back to London with him and became a Christian. About 2 years later she died of a disease.

I have this sense of knowing when a movie is bad from the very beginning. After Flit smashes into that flower painting I knew this would be a bad movie; and it is!! I finally had to sell this movie to forget about it forever. Thankfully, I can now watch the first Pocahontas in peace, without worry. :)

So please, don't waste your money on this garbage. Buy a good, decent film instead. Like Finding Nemo....

Why I hate this movie (Part III)
I'm sorry and I know that I can't shut up about this movie, but I can't. It is probably the worst movie I've ever seen and that's saying a LOT! A few more things:

If you haven't read my other reviews on this movie, please do, because they say a lot!

Rolfe is hella ugly whereas Smith is the dashing explorer!

I was embarrased for Pocahontas because she acted like a moron with her love life!

Since when do people care about animated movies being historically correct. As if Poca1 was perfect. I say if you're gonna make it, ya might as well go all the way! This movie not only shames itself, Pocahontas, and Disney, but also makes it slightly painful to watch the wonderful first movie. This movie was directed towards kids and since when do they care if it's historically correct?!!? My younger cousins hated this movie, because they liked Smith. I think that kids are more satisfied and concerned with Pocahontas and Smith being in love than the educational value of this movie. If people always watched movies for information, then there'd be a major problem. since when does Disney care about being informative?!!? I hate that jerk Rolfe!!!!!

I own the movie and soundtrack for the first movie and they're both amazing. I hate the second movie and soundtrack!

Don't watch this movie. Pocahontas and John Smith were two of my favorite disney characters ever and this makes me sad. I wish I had never seen the second one. IT IS PROBABLY MY LEAST FAVORITE MOVIE OF ALL TIME! Don't watch this!!!!!!!! ... Read more