Amazon.com

Critics were ruthless when Give My Regards to Broad Street was released in 1984, but the passing years have turned it into an offbeat curio from Paul McCartney's post-Wings era. The ex-Beatle was roundly panned for scripting this empty-headed vanity project, and it still qualifies as a mistake of sorts, dubiously combining new performances of Beatles classics with a few Wings hits and tracks from McCartney's popular 1982 solo album Tug of War. Most of these songs are performed as semi-lavish, blandly filmed production numbers ("Silly Love Songs" comes off like an embarrassing mix of Michael Jackson's Thriller and a Flock of Seagulls reunion), and the whole movie reeks of cheesy early-'80s New Wave/MTV influence, even in the casting of Tracey Ullman as a leather-clad Londoner with streaks of red hair dye.

The "plot" is entirely dispensable, consisting of "24 hours in the life of a rock star," in which Paul has until midnight to find the missing master tapes of his latest album, or lose his entire music empire to a slimy corporate takeover. (Parallels to Macca's loss of Beatle music rights to Michael Jackson are fascinating to consider.) It's all an excuse for a rambling, amiable mess of a movie, with slim supporting roles for Ringo Starr (who admirably refused to participate in re-recording the Beatles hits), his wife Barbara Bach, Linda McCartney, and, most inexplicably, Sir Ralph Richardson in one of many throwaway fantasy sequences. Critic Roger Ebert rightly called Broad Street "about as close as you can get to a non-movie" (which might explain why director Peter Webb never made another film), but the music's still good (look closely for Dave Edmunds and former Led Zeppelin bassist John Paul Jones), and we'd sure like a spin in Sir Paul's groovy vintage hot-rod. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (43)

It's all perspective....
What you want out of the film might affect what you expect. This is a fun film. It's like a long music video. No More Lonely Nights,Not Such A Bad Boy, and No Values are 3 good new songs put on here. Some people feel it is a sacrilige for Paul to have re-worked Beatles tunes, but it at least offers an interesting twist. And oh, yeah, Paul was tyring to have some fun with the film. It seems some reviewers (see review below) are being way too serious and biased against Paul. To some "music fans" he can do no right. Not every project is genius, but Beatles fans can find fault with all solo Beatles material. None of them is a "saint", and all have their flaws.

This film would do nice with a DVD release with some extras. After all Shanghai Surprise (George's 1986 film) and Caveman (Ringo's 1981 film) are both on DVD and did not fare well commercially, either.

Enjoy this film as a music video with a thin plot. To me, it is a nice small film that deserves to be re-released. And if Paul would only do a video collection spanning 1970-Present onto DVD....

The film is very interesting!!!
Paul is a genius and the man that composed the essential and style of Beatles's music. The Sargent Pepper album was an idea of Paul and it's more important songs belongs Paul. Macca was the best of the Beatles. This film is not a masterpiece BUT is an interesting film that show us the concept, the idea to make movie in a basic format with sweets songs. The songs are very beautiful and the performer of YESTERDAY is the best version solo than I heard it. "Bad boy" is a deliciuos song and "No more lonely nights" is a imponent song. I think that when the most important composer and singer of the Rock/Pop's History like Paul McCartney gives his ilusion and work like this film WE must to be happy and glad. THANKS SIR PAUL!!!!

Fantastic Movie for Any True Beatles Fan!
While nobody should be fooled into believing that this is a real movie with a real storyline to begin with, viewers should realize from the get-go that this is nothing more than a MUSICAL...meaning that it was made to feature Paul Mac's absolutely great & awesome music, and nothing more!!! SO, that being said...the self-appointed experts and movie "critiques" should realize this before they go bashing such a flik!!! Obviously, to the non-Beatles or McCartney fans searching for a "real" movie, this would be a "HORRIBLE" film! But to those who truly love and appreciate Beatles' and McCartney's music, (hey! nobody can say that their previous movies had fine plots either!), this film is just one more "gift" to all us hard-core Beatlemaniacs out there, to chrish and remember for the rest of our lives, just like the other half-dozen or so musicals that the Fab Four left us....

Absolutly out of this world!
I loved this movie in fact I had to buy two VHS movies of this great film because I didn't want to wear the other out and find that the movie wouldn't be available! I just can't stop watching it. This movie is my number one choice among my Beatles collection, next to A Hard Days Night, Help, and The Magical Mystery Tour. I recommend this show to all that like Paul McCartney or The Beatles. I also think that this movie has gotten a really bad rap for being a bad show, for there wasn't enough of Paul's old songs on it, I think that there is just the right amount of music. The criticts are wrong about this movie, dead wrong. I am sorry that because of the rap this show got Paul McCartney doesn't do more movie scripts and act a little more, he is so good at it. This is the best movie I have seen since The Magical Mystery Tour!

Glad to have it on DVD
It ain't the best movie ever made, but it ain't the worst.

Two big mistakes McCartney made with this project: 1) re-recording old songs (including a half-dozen Beatle tunes), instead of writing all new material (only three new songs were used) 2) writing the screenplay himself, instead of hiring an experienced screenwriter to flesh out his idea.

I can't think of a reason why a non-McCartney fan would want to watch this. If you are a fan, then there's worse ways to spend a couple hours. But really, it's hard to say anything specifically good about this movie. It's hard for me to believe that Macca never realized that the story was so under-developed and unimaginative. For such a creative person, he seems to have set out write the most boring story he could. That's why I consider it a mistake to use old songs-- he could've at least let the movie coast along on the strength of all new material.

I didn't see this in theaters 20 years ago. I can understand why people were so dissapointed. While there's nothing special about the film, it is far from the biggest disaster ever committed to celluloid. ... Read more

Reviews (41)

Underrated?
I admit I have had a soft spot for this movie ever since I saw it during its theatrical run when I was 8 which is why I give it four stars instead of three. But I've always felt it is a fun action-adventure film with a great cast and fantastic vistas of the Yugoslavian countryside. Critics have lambasted it as being a highly inferior sequel to one of the classic war movies of the 60's, and maybe some of that criticism has some merit. Yet "Force 10 from Navarone" as viewed on its own merits without the comparisons to "Guns" is not too shabby. A straight-foward action story of an Allied force consisting of two British commandoes (Robert Shaw and Edward Fox), an American Ranger (Harrison Ford), and an escaped American prisoner (Carl Weathers) trying help Yugoslavian partisans blow-up a bridge to foil a German offensive. It's not Oscar material, but it is fun and definetly not as bad as the critics claimed.

Great WWII action movie!
First off, I enjoy anything having to do with World War II. I remember seeing this movie as a kid before I saw the original "Guns of Navarone." I was flipping channels last night and saw that "Force 10" was on. I watched it and remembered how much I enjoyed it the first time.

Not only does this film focus on a remote battlefield (remote in the sense that it's not a Normandy or anything you might have seen in "Patton"), but it provides an exciting story that the viewer just can't forget. After so many years, I fondly remembered Carl Weathers' knife fight with that big guy (the name escapes me, but he played the character Jaws in two Bond films), the amusing explosives expert Miller, and all the crazy twists and turns that took the commandos to their final objective - destroy a dam to destroy a bridge. (What I never understood, though, was why didn't the Germans just have their armored and infantry divisions cross the dam rather than face hostile fire on the bridge from the Partisans!).

Anyhow, the film is great. They just don't make movies like this anymore. Harrison Ford and Robert Shaw (and the rest) make a great team, best shown when they walk cavalierly away from that ticking bomb that's about to explode in the dam! Yes, a great war flick that I highly recommend and rank right up there with the best.

"We're Talking About the Wrong Target!"
I first saw this movie as an in-flight movie while flying from Copenhagen to Seattle in September 1979. A sequel to "The Guns of Navarone" (1961) that starred Gregory Peck who played Keith Mallory and David Niven as Dusty Miller, Mallory and Miller return to action with Robert Shaw as Mallory and Edward Fox as Miller who have been assigned to a new mission in Yugoslavia to kill a Nazi agent posing as a Yugoslav partisan. Here they tag on with Force 10 led by American Army Ranger Lt. Col. Mike Barnsby (Harrison Ford) whose mission was to blow up a bridge to prevent the Nazis from crossing into the region defended by the partisans. The sequel was planned for filming back in 1967 with Peck and Niven playing their respective roles. The novel by Alistair MacLean was released in 1968, becoming his 17th million-copy best seller, but due to creative and economic concerns, the movie version was stalled. By 1977, the plans for filming commenced. Because of their ages, Peck and Niven would not star in the sequel. The following year the movie was released with Shaw, Ford and Fox. Sadly, Shaw did not live to see the film's release when he died of a heart attack August 28, 1978 in Tourmakeady, Ireland at the age of 51. Former Oakland Raider Carl Weathers plays his role well as the fiery Sgt. Weaver who merely "invited" himself on the mission, not knowing what was going on at first. Franco Nero plays Capt. Nikolai Leskovar, the Nazi agent Mallory was assigned to kill. Alan Badel plays the partisan leader Maj. Petrovich who assigned his daughter Maritza (Barbara Bach, also known as Mrs. Ringo Starr) as a partisan agent to spy on the Nazis and their Chetnick allies at a camp where they were operating. Richard Kiel plays the Chetnick leader Capt. Drazak who dupes Force 10, leading them to the camp where they would fall into the hands of the Germans commanded by Maj. Schroeder (Michael Byrne).

Like "The Guns of Navarone" the sequel is action-packed from start to finish from the stealing of an R.A.F. Lancaster at Termoli Air Base in Italy to the destruction of a dam that washes away the targeted bridge with several million tons of water. This is a great movie for those who love action dating back to World War II.

force 10 uncut is not for my kids
I love this movie. I have seen it many times on television but when I rented it I was suprised to see that this rated PG movie had full frontal female nudity. I was lucky that I wasn't watching it with my kids. I really don't understand how a pg movie can have this but its there. Just a warning in case any parents are considering it for a family war movie like I was. After all war is a good family history lesson.

very mediocre
Passes the time, that's all. Notable that the Partisans (Communist anti-nazis) are portrayed as purely heroic, while the Chetniks (anti-communist anti-nazis) are shown as purely evil. In fact the film portrays the Chetniks as in essence a German auxiliary force--very very few historians would agree with that idea. But then, if you're filming on location in a Yugoslavia under Marshall Tito's communist dictatorship I guess you have to toe the local ideological line. Hey, it's only a movie, right? ... Read more

Reviews (139)

"Remember - The Spy Who Loved Me"
On July 7,1977 (7-7-77), The Spy Who Loved Me roared into theaters across the country to become one of the most financially successful Bond films of all time. The tenth in the series, TSWLM marks the begining of the big Bond films, a trend that would continue (with the exception of For Your Eyes Only) throughout the rest of the series. In this film, James Bond (Roger Moore) must join forces with Soviet secret agent XXX (Barbara Bach) as they track down two missing nuclear submarines. Their search takes them to Egypt, Sardinia, and Atlantis, a giant underwater city owned by the shipping mogal Stromberg. Stromberg wishes to use the two submarine to start World War III by launching nuclear missles at New York City and Moscow. If successful, he wishes to start a new civilization under the sea. This is a grand movie. The action, gadgetry and the sets themslves are absolutly wonderful. Two more reasons to see TSWLM: the villanous Jaws (7-foot 2-inch actor Richard Keil) and "Nobdy Does It Better" the title song is arguably one of the best Bond songs of all - it's my personal favorite. So anyway, see this movie. It's the biggest. It's the Best. It's Bond. And B-E-Y-O-N-D.

Moore's best
The Spy who Loved Me was awesome.This film had the best settings,Roger Moore performance,and musical score.Atlantis was SWEET.Stromberg gets 3 out of five stars as a villain,while Jaws gets 4 and a half.Barbara Bach was great as agent Triple X.I love the car chase on land and the part were the Lotus Espirit turns into a submarine is awesome. The trapdoor in the elevator that led into the shark room was really cool.A good pre-title sequence with the ski chase.This movie takes place in Egypt and the Mediterranean Sea.I liked the part when Jaws and Bond fought in the shark room. Kind of gruesome when he kills the shark though.

Great Bond Adventure
This is the 10th film in the long-running "James Bond" series and the third to star Roger Moore as Bond. This entry is also my favorite in the series (well, so far it is as I have only seen five Bond films).

007 is on another mission to the save the world (what else?) in "The Spy Who Loved Me." A pair of nuclear submarines from England and Russia have strangely disappeared and Bond...James Bond, is assigned to retrieve a microfilm that has recorded the movements of the British sub. The Russians send their own spy, the beautiful Anya Amasova, to find the film as well. At first, Amasova and Bond attempt to outwit each other to get the film but eventually the pair are ordered to team up to get to the heart of the problem. The trail they follow leads them to billionaire Karl Stromberg who has a dastardly plan to destroy the Earth...

This Bond episode works well thanks primarily to some good direction from Lewis Gilbert. Though the film is not well paced, Gilbert makes up for that with some excellent set pieces. I thought the fighting sequences on Stromberg's boat were particularly well done. There are some other good moments too, including the chase in the Lotus Espirit (which can transform into a submersible), the opening ski-chase, and Bond's dueling with steel-toothed bad guy Jaws. The acting here was serviceable, though I felt it left something to be desired. This happens to be the first Bond film I've seen in which Roger Moore is carrying the 007 moniker. Moore gets the job done but he seems to lack the edge of the two other Bond's I've seen: Sean Connery and Pierce Brosnan. Meanwhile, Barbara Bach has the looks for a typical Bond-girl but is a bit stiff in her role. Still, she gives an effective performance. One more thing worth noting is the theme song by Carly Simon, "Nobody Does It Better." I really liked it and it seems to complement the James Bond character well.

This is a great entry in the 007 series. If you're a Bond fan (or even a non-fan) and haven't yet seen this episode, then be sure you do so. This movie will be a fresh reminder that indeed "Nobody Does It Better" than James Bond.

moores franchised bond
roger moore gets knocked around a lot for the way he played bond.
now, come on, lets be frank, bond is the stuff of pulp fiction and moore knew this.
by the time live and let die was being filmed the bond movies had become a franchise (only the first three stand out as non franchise movies). connery could not co-exist in a franchise.
he was too stubborn an actor to merely be 'one of the special affects'.
when roger moore came around he decided not to take any of it seriously and he was right to do so.
it is moores little boy sense of humour that makes these movies work.
spy who loved me and for your eyes only are the best of the moores, with this one having the slight edge.it has the necessary balance to make it a mmeorable entry. classic scene:
when moore is in a van being attacked by jaws he smiles, and charms his way through a series of puns that only he, in his all too cool superficiality, could pull off.
makes for a fun night.

the underrated moore in the best of his bonds
roger moore gets picked on a bit too much as of late for making bond too cartoonish.
puleazee!
we are talking about a pulp character here.
there is no doubt that he did not have connery's edge, but. hell, connery no longer even had his edge.
the lame, bored connery of diamonds are forever is not the gritty connery of dr.no or from russia with love.
we wouldn't see that type of grit again until dalton's brief stint, which DID work, but was flawed by two films with a miami vice feel.
moore refused to take any of it seriousely and by doing so, at least for a while, he gave a new vigor to the franchise.
unfortunately, moonraker followed this, but then moore did one have one last hurrah with a more subtle performance in 'for your eyes only '(and he did prove to the producers in that film that he could take it seriousely).
but here, is moore at his best. this is His interpetation and all the elements come together to support moore in his styling of the character.
a potent remionder that moore kept this franchise alive and going and did it well for some time. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Pretty good crime drama -- but avoid the DVD
This video may have been released in 1994, but the film itself was released in 1975. An Italian-Canadian co-production, shot on snowy Canadian locations and inside a Rome studio.

Story concerns a criminal just released from prison; actor Fabio Testi, I think (although the star, Testi gets no billing on many of the video and DVD boxes, the billing reserved for bigger international stars such as Ursula Andress, Eli Wallach and Barbara Bach.)

Right out of prison, Testi robs a jewelry store with partner Eli Wallach. They split up, the plan being for Testi to take the jewels across the border while Wallach awaits him in Vermont. But Testi's car breaks down, and he winds up in the Stateline Motel, populated by sleazy people who've guessed that he's the jewel thief, and plot to steal the jewels themselves. Ursula Andress is the love-starved, and possibly crazy, wife of the motel owner, who seduces Testi. Bach is the main squeeze of a police officer.

The story sounds like classic film noir, but the style is not. It's very much a 1970s Italian crime drama, filled with 1970s clothing, lots of zoom-ins and zoom-outs, and hyperkinetic music.

It's a decently entertaining film, but AVOID the DVD. The DVD didn't sync up the sound properly, so the entire soundtrack is off-sync, the dialogue, gunshots, everything, occuring after the picture. In some scenes, one character's voice comes from another character's mouth. Dreadful.

I checked my VHS copy, and it's all properly synced. Although this is an Italian film, the lips are perfectly synced to the English dialgue. It appears the actors spoke English. So there's no excuse for the poorly synced DVD. ... Read more