Description

The Academy Award winner for Best Original Screenplay, Gosford Park is a whodunit as only director Robert Altman could do it.As a hunting party gathers at the country estate, no one is aware that before the weekend is over, someone will be murdered - twice!The police are baffled but the all-seeing, all-hearing servants know that almost everyone had a motive.
This critically-acclaimed murder mystery features a who's who of celebrated actors.With a diverse cast of characters - all with something to hide - it'll keep you guessing right to the surprising end.Gosford Park proves that murder can be such an inconvenience. ... Read more

Reviews (343)

Not for 14 year old boys?
While taking all those guided tours through cavernous estate houses in England and Ireland (and even a few on the north shore of Long Island), I always wondered what it was like to live that lifestyle. But of course, walking around those still houses doesn't really tell you about the people who lived there anymore than a stage tells you about its actors. However, Gosford Park was a great way to fill in those blanks. The way it pulls you into the world of 1930's English high society and all its pretense and hypocrisy is great. This movie definitely enlivened my understanding of class in old European societies.

The reason Gosford Park has such great insight is the film's screenwriter, Julian Fellows who himself grew up as part of the English aristocracy. Much of what makes this film fun is the idiosyncrasies of its characters and their world that Fellows has personal experience with. A maid and driver stand in the pouring rain until their mistress gets in the car. Servants only refer to each other by their master's name, and they maintain the same hierarchy as their masters so that a duke's servant is treated better by other servants than a baron's. Only married women are allowed to have breakfast in bed; unmarried women must go to the dining room. What a strange world they lived in, especially to someone like me who grew up in a middle class New York neighborhood.

The spine of Gosford Park is, without question, NOT the murder mystery. In fact, the murder mystery plot is about 5% of the movie-if that. It's what's known in film lingo as a McGuffin, a device that helps propel the plot in a story but is of little importance in itself. If a viewer turns to the murder mystery plot for what this movie is all about, they will most likely be sorely disappointed, seemingly like many of the negative reviewers here were.

The key to enjoying this movie is to think about what it's like to live in a society that is extremely oriented by class. What must it take to keep it going? As I alluded earlier, pretense and hypocrisy grease the gears of high society. From scene to scene, we peep around corners and into bedrooms to see characters trying to hide one secret or another. And in the end, we see the unpleasant consequences of this duplicity.

This is definitely not a film that lays out its purpose before the audience. Since the almost 60 characters (for a chuckle, look under product details above for the colossal cast list) each add something unique to the larger picture, and since the audience is usually only told something once, you definitely have to be your own detective. However, Julian Fellows does a brilliant job interweaving these characters into a solid whole, and he definitely deserves the Oscar he received for the screenplay.

Since this is a complex and subtle film, multiple viewings are helpful, but unlike some other reviewers, this is something I really enjoyed. Like a good album, each time with it reveals another layer and increases your appreciation. Robert Altman, the director, says in his DVD commentary (which was boring except for a few insights, but Julian Fellow's commentary was excellent) that the film is "like looking in through the windows of a house, you only get part of the picture at a time." I think this analogy fits nicely, especially since the film is set in a house. Altman also acknowledges what some of the negative reviewers complain about, saying he meant the audience to be left wondering after the first viewing. He didn't intend this movie for the "wham, bam, thank you ma'am" set. In fact, Altman went out of his way to insert curse words, guaranteeing an R rating so that "14 year old boys couldn't walk off the street and watch it."

And of course, last but not least, the acting was great. Gosford Park has an excellent ensemble cast with not a single weak link. Maggie Smith as the snobbish Aunt makes you smile; Kelly MacDonald as the Aunt's young, innocent maid makes you want to give her a big wet kiss (maybe that's just me); and Clive Owen's cool restraint as a mysterious footman keeps you following him around the screen.

All through, Gosford Park is a movie very well done.

Buy this DVD and watch it again and again....
because you miss most of the film the first time around!

On the surface this appears to be a very formulistic murder mystery. It has the classic setting, 1930's period, an isolated English manor house filled with guests for a weekend shooting party, and all of the servants both resident and visiting. Everybody has secrets, the tension is so thick it could be cut with a knife and there is conveniently one missing from the kitchen. For more than half the film we see motives offered and wait for the murder and yet after it occurs it becomes evident that this is NOT a murder mystery at all!

The film has been compared to Upstairs Downstairs and it does involve the lives of those both above and below stairs, but it is much more than that. The various stories are added layer by layer some, such as the imposter in the servants' hall are obvious while others like the secret abortion are only alluded in a couple of lines. The various stories are, while interesting, not really the point of the film either. This is a beautifully drawn portrait of a way of life that is long gone and will probably never return. Almost everyone has read about or seen depictions of English Country Life in the '20's and '30's. It is a setting that has been used in drama, comedy, romance and of course mystery genres for years but Gosford Park makes it clear that we have only the faintest ideas of what that life was really like. The genius of this film is that it takes all the information that could have been spread out in a PBS documentary series and used fiction to illustrate the same points in a much more effective and enjoyable way.

The cast is huge and filled with actors, both well known and soon to be well known. No one is given such a large role that it becomes their film and yet each performer manages to turn their scenes into a polished little gem.

The extras included in the DVD are wonderful. They include deleted scenes (with commentary), features on the making of, and authenticity of the movies as well as Q & A with cast and filmakers. The best of the extras by far are the commentaries with the director, Robert Altman and screenwriter, Julian Oscar.

I highly recommend the purchase (as opposed to the renting) of this film. It is so packed with detail that it would be impossible to absorb it all in just one or two viewings.

"Nothing's more exhausting than breaking in a lady's maid."
The upperclass friends and relations of Sir William McCordle (Michael Gambon) arrive at his country house for a weekend of shooting, accompanied by maids, footmen, and valets, all of whom will be staying under one roof. Sir William is a mean-spirited and self-centered old man, married to a much younger, emotionally distant wife (Kristin Scott Thomas), with many family members dependent upon his continuing largesse. The hilariously waspish Countess of Trentham (Maggie Smith), who believes she has a lifetime stipend, arrives with young Mary Maceachran (Kelly MacDonald), who is trying valiantly to become a good lady's maid. Ivor Novello (Jeremy Northam), a Hollywood star, and Morris Weissman (Bob Balaban), a producer of Charlie Chan movies, are the only guests without aristocratic backgrounds and inherited privilege. The atmosphere of the house, filled with venomous "friends" and relations, soon becomes even more poisonous.

The "below stairs" lives of the servants are also fully revealed, as they share living quarters, eat meals together, tend to the laundry and cooking, and gossip about their employers. The butler Jennings (Alan Bates) and the head housekeeper (Helen Mirren) run the household and try to guarantee that no real-world cares will intrude upon the lives of their employers. Since "upstairs" and "downstairs" occasionally meet very privately at night, secrets abound, many of them secrets of long standing. When Sir William is poisoned and stabbed ("Trust Sir William to be murdered twice"), nearly everyone has a motive for wanting him dead.

For director Robert Altman, the primary focus of the film is on the characters, their way of life, and their values, with the murder mystery secondary. Set in late November, the end of the year 1932, the action takes place when this secure aristocratic lifestyle is also nearing its end, something that the arrival of the newly rich Hollywood characters, Novello and Weissman, illustrates. Dramatic cinematography (by Andrew Dunn) emphasizes the cold and rainy dreariness of the weekend, and suggests parallels with the coldness of the dying aristocracy.

Interior shots reveal the contrasts between the elegant and mannered lives of the "upstairs" characters and the hardworking daily lives of the "downstairs" characters, who adhere to their own rigid social codes. Every detail rings true, and as the characters' lives and interrelationships are revealed obliquely in brief snippets of seemingly unrelated conversations, a broad picture of the upstairs and downstairs lifestyles gradually emerges. Fully developed, many-leveled, wonderfully acted, often funny, and impeccably directed and filmed, this is a film one can watch again and again with delight. Mary Whipple

The Triumph of the Tried and True... a la Robert Altman!
GOSFORD PARK is an enchanting movie on every level and should please even the most discerning audience. Quite unexpectedly, Robert Altman has thoroughly researched the Agatha Christie murder mystery-type stories, the archetypical British mystery/drawing room genre, and (more important) the stuffy and unbelievable class disparities of olde England and has produced a stylish, smart, lushly beautiful recreation of England in the 1930s. The settings are elegant - a mansion/castle where the 'haves' and their lowly servants carry on their lives as though 'to the manner born'. Blessed with a dream cast that includes nearly all of the greats of the British acting school, Altman has given plumb roles to Maggie Smith, Helen Mirren, Eileen Atkins, Emily Watson, Kristin Scott Thomas, Stephen Fry, Michael Gambon, Jeremy Northam, James Wilby, Alan Bates, and Derek Jacobi. The story is an interesting murder mystery but it merely serves as the matrix upon which these fine actors, writer, cinematographer and director capably flaunt their skills. This movie is Delicious! It is so fine that it bears repeated viewings just to make sure you catch all the innuendoes and rapid, superb double entendres encased in this bit of magic. Altman devotees will not be disappointed and those who are not fond of the eccentric director's previous films are bound to be won over to the genius of Robert Altman.

Upstairs, downstairs, cold stares
No matter how many actors, including bankable stars, appear in a Robert Altman movie, it seems to be about Altman. He has an individual, if by now familiar, style of filmmaking that is always calling attention to itself. That style includes very fluid camera movement, quick-cut editing, and a good deal of dialogue that is covered by other dialogue or sounds distant. We are meant to be awed by the spontaneity and naturalism of it all.

Apparently many people are impressed by this mannerism and consider it a sign of artistry. On the whole, I find it pretentious and irritating. In one of the supplementary features on the DVD, Altman, his screenwriter and a handful of the actors from Gosford Park are interviewed in front of a studio audience. Altman and the writer rattle on about how every scene is shot by two cameras that are always in motion, so that the actors are never sure whether they are going to be foreground or atmosphere, or what angle they'll be seen from. Does Altman really think he invented the idea of shooting a scene from multiple angles, and choosing one during editing? And why is a camera that's gliding and panning constantly somehow more "truthful" than one that's framing the character or group that the director believes is most essential to telling the story at that moment?

It can be said in Altman's favor, though, that he never makes a merely conventional or routine film; they are all a bit eccentric (a compliment in my book) and, despite my reservations about the camera and sound-recording style, usually offer a fresh view of the theme or its environment. Gosford Park is your standard Agatha Christie-style murder mystery set among a dinner-jacketed, evening-gowned crowd in an English manor house in 1932 -- except, in this case, the doings of the upper crust are set against the army of servants below stairs who work their tails off to make everything straight, gleaming and smooth for their social betters.

Altman and his screenwriter Julian Fellows do a very creditable and humane job of conveying the personalities and individuality of the servants; they aren't just symbols of The Oppressed. The characters of the gentry, though, while ably portrayed (the acting talent makes sure of that), are almost universally so sour, rude and calculating that it's hard not to feel that there's a touch of old-fashioned, left-wing agit-prop involved. (The one exception is Jeremy Northam, who plays Ivor Novello -- a real singer and film star of the period -- with considerable charm.) I can believe that an assembly of English bluebloods in that era might have carried within themselves much wickedness, but they would have been far too polished to display it as openly and crudely as they do in Gosford Park.

Altman recruited a clutch of A-list British stage and film actors, and they don't fail him. Altman's casual attitude toward the basics of craftsmanship (as opposed to displaying his self-assumed creative genius) ensures that you will be lucky to figure out who half the characters are and their relationships with one another by the time of the denouement, but their cultivated swinishness holds the attention anyway. I think actors love playing obnoxious and unlikeable characters; these seem to be enjoying their roles, and you will, too.

The English have a term, "curate's egg." The meaning is, "parts of it are very good." ... Read more

Reviews (160)

Very weird but has its moments
Very odd but often entertaining comedy that features humorous performances from its stars, Julia Roberts and Brad Pitt. A disappointing factor for those hoping to watch these two lovelies together is the fact that they hardly share any screen time together. After a very shaky start of watching this odd couple fight over a trip to Las Vegas (which are terribly acted, revealing either too little rehearsing or actors not actually performing scenes on the set together), the film gets going when Pitt is forced by a group of gangsters to whom he owes a favour to retrieve a supposedly cursed handcrafted gun from Mexico. While he is gone Roberts is kidnapped by a hitman (James Gandolfini) who is possibly one of her boyfriend's enemies. Most of the film is funny, but some twists and turns will feel so odd as to not actually be quirky but actually be very uncomfortable. Considering the mean tone the film has, it seems like a real let-down when the ending turns out to be much sappier then expected, and director Gore Verbinski can't seem to decide if he wants to actually make a grungy movie or show his actors up as gorgeous icons. A worthwhile, if halfhearted, effort.

The Mexican a very flawed film with Pitt and Roberts
Brad Pitt and Julia Roberts star in this dark comedy/low budget action movie. ''The Mexican'' is about a guy named Jerry (Pitt) who works for a crime boss. One day the crime boss, asks Jerry for one last ''job'' before Jerry decides to quit working for him and pay of his debts. The ''job'' though isn't as easy as Jerry thinks it is. He is asked to find a rare gun that is worth alot of money in Mexico.

Jerry's girlfriend , a nieve and spoiled brat named Samantha (Roberts fits the role perfectly ) reacts to Jerry last job like a bat out of hell. She immediately tells Jerry that if he goes to this job that she will never take him back, and to not both coming to her. The character of Samantha is as shallow and mean as a woman can get, I almost get shivers down my spine when I think that women like Samantha exist, because they aren't worth fighting for.

What Samantha doesn't realize is that Jerry is doing this job for her out of love. Jerry wants to pay his debts , and to pay of this debts requires doing this job in Mexico.
Pitt while not being the charasmatic actor, does at least add some depth and character to Jerry.

Anyhow once Jerry arrives in Mexico (a pretty dangerous place in some areas, but enjoyable in others) meets his contact who is going to give the rare gun to him.

However, things go horribly wrong when the contact Jerry is with literally dies
in front of him during a midnight celebration in Mexico. Jerry at first does not know the guy is dead, until he notices the bloody headshot on the car seat where he places the body in!!! Uggh.

This is only the start of a bad situation for Jerry. Once Jerry's crime boss finds out that he has fowled things up (although it's not his fault this guy is dead) sends in a psychopath killer named Leroy (James Gandolfini ) to hold his girlfriend Sam as hostage, while Jerry tries to come back to his boss with the antique gun.

One of the big problems the Mexican is the load of unlikeable characters in the
film. Brad Pitt's character of Jerry is probably the only somewhat likeable character in the film. Julia Roberts (again in her usual uncharasmatic self) as Sam, doesn't really
show any love or compassion only up to the point where she herself becomes involved in Jerry's situation. She only really cares about herself.

Then there's Gandolifini's character who can be best characterized as self hypocriting homosexual, hitman. which in fact he is if you watch the whole film. Gandolfini is best known for playing the paranoid , lovable, and evil Tony Soprano in the Sopranos but his role in that overrated, and his role in this film is forgettable.

The Mexican is not a total waste of a film, although much of it is.

I loved the twists in the film that the Mexican's in the film, from the villages to the cops were smarter than the dumb gringo (Jerry) who comes to look for the ancient gun for his boss. In fact, the Mexican's gave me such a good laugh, that I thought they were probably the best actors in the film. Every stereotype that Jerry and his white crime buddies put on them is eventually thrown back in their face with big laughs.

That's all I can say, I won't spoil it though by going into the exact dialogue. The film also has a couple of good twists in the middle, and near the end. However, the Mexican though has so many problems with it, that keep it from leaving a lasting impression and making it a likeable film that I can't recommend buying.

Renting it though is a different matter, you'll probably get some good laughs from it like I did, but that's it.

As Roger Ebert would say ''Two Thumbs Down'' but give it a viewing however don't expect to be blown away by this low budget film because you wont.

Good, Convuluted Story
I liked it. Lot's of people didn't, but for a Brad Pitt movie with my least favorite actress Julia Roberts, I found it highly entertaining. Some violence, some edge of the seat moments and some dark humor. Quite a tale.

Once Upon a Time in Mexico
This movie got some attention since it has two big Hollywood stars in it, Brad Pitt and Julia Roberts. However, it`s not too enticing or convincing, just a merely entertaining mix with bits of romantic comedy, thriller, road movie, action and an offbeat feel that tries to reach cult status. It`s a decent effort, but the characters aren`t very intriguing (Pitt plays a dumb pretty boy, Roberts is in another bland role and only James Gandolfini, the best element here, truly convinces as an interesting gay hitman), the plot is full of ups and downs and it runs for way too long. At parts it even comes close to Tarantino/ Robert Rodriguez territory, yet as a whole it`s too muddled and uneven to suceed. Director Gore Verbinski offers a couple of nice shots of Mexico with good atmosphere and an appropriatte soundtrack, making for a mildly enjoyable cinematic experience. Still, this is just fast-food cinema overall. Not memmorable, but worth watching once.
A decent rental.

Can't believe what everyone tells you
I heard from so many people that this movie was horrible. Well I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. I really liked the flashbacks to the legend of the gun and it was just a very fun movie to watch. I highly recommend it! ... Read more

Reviews (134)

One of the Best Science Fiction Movies of the 80s!
One of the Best Science Fiction Movies of the 80s! This elaborately conceived science-fiction film is generally overshadowed by it's predecessor 2001. But unlike that film, you did not have to read the novel beforehand to understand its story line. Written, Produced, Cinematographed, and Directed (total creative control) by Peter Hyams, this superb science fiction classic was easily 20 years ahead of its time, and therefore unappreciated by many except the cinema and science fiction purists. Including a mesmerizing original sound score by David Shire, and academy award winning visual effects by futurist Syd Mead, this movie is so rich in theme and detail, you will be compelled to watch it over and over again! Billed, of course, as the sequel to 2001, this film managed to accomplish what that one did not. It created an absorbing, COHERENT, and spell binding FEAST for the senses. Watching this movie in 5 channel Dolby Surround is practically a religious experience, a theme touched on in the movie. If you are one of the many who missed this cinematic experience, treat yourself to a movie that is sure to become part of your private library. You'll be amazed while you're watching it, that you are watching a film made in the 80s! One of the best science fiction films ever made! Excellent!

One of the Very Best Science-Fiction Movies!
This elaborately conceived science-fiction film is generally overshadowed by it's predecessor 2001. But unlike that film, you did not have to read the novel beforehand to understand its story line. Written, Cinematographed, Produced, and Directed (total creative control) by Peter Hyams, this superb science fiction classic was easily 20 years ahead of its time, and therefore, unappreciated by many except the cinema and science fiction purists. Including a mesmerizing original music score by David Shire, and academy award winning visual effects by futurist Syd Mead, this movie is so rich in theme and detail, you will be compelled to watch it over and over again! Billed, of course, as the sequel to 2001, this film managed to accomplish what that one did not. It created an absorbing, COHERENT, and spell binding FEAST for the senses. Watching this movie in 5 channel Dolby Surround is practically a religious experience, a theme touched on in the movie. If you are one of the many who missed this cinematic experience, treat yourself to a movie that is sure to become part of your private library. You'll be amazed while you're watching it that you are watching a film made in the 80s! One of the best science fiction films ever made! ... Excellent!

2010
this is the first and only stanley kubrik film sequel.some other dude did it .basicly,another space crew is sent up to space to find out what went wrong with the space mission from 2001:a space odyssey.its a bit intellectual for children.it is very slowly paced also.the director,again,is NOT stanley kubrik,but this IS a sequel to his movie.it is essentialy the empire strikes back to 2001s star wars type start.i mean the original was the first sci-fi movie to set the standard in movie films.those who enjoy a journey into your mind will like this.a lot of the same problems from the first one are rediscovered so it is inevitable that a lot of the same things end up happening.this movie is a lot better than it gets credit for.

More comprehensible than the first...
While the first movie was o.k., it is not a good movie to watch on Saturday night with a few friends. It was meant to be watched, pondered, and repeated until you realize that the ending is impossible to understand.

While this movie may not be as scientific, it's still not totally unbelievable. You can enjoy it fairly easily, and it's overall just a fun movie, with good acting and plot.

An excellent film...
In the outset of 2010: The Year We Make Contact, the Soviet Union is preparing to send its spaceship, the Alexei Leonov, to Jupiter in order to investigate the phenomenon responsible for the dereliction of the American spaceship, the Discovery. Because the Soviets are not familiar with the HAL9000 computer that runs the Discovery, they approach American scientist Dr. Floyd (who oversaw plans for sending the Discovery in 2001: A Space Odyssey) and ask if he would like to tag along. Dr. Floyd and two other Americans, an engineer and a computer scientist, are permitted to board the Leonov. Their purpose: To learn what happened to the crew of the Discovery and why its computer system, Hal, malfunctioned.

The backdrop of 2010 features increasing confrontation between the United States and the Soviet Union and, unlike the book, becomes, in part, the basis for the climactic ending. As so many commentators of the film have noted, the backdrop belongs to a faded Cold War era, but we can hardly blame producer Stanley Kubrick for not knowing, in 1984, that in eight years there would be neither Soviet Union nor Cold War. Had Kubrick, like the book 2010: Odyessy Two, not higlighted a U.S.-Soviet confrontation, the movie might not have been the interesting and enjoyable expidition into alternative Cold War futurology that it is. A great cast and excellent special effects make for a wonderful viewing experience.

That said, the movie's political message that "we have to get along" remains, and the imperative to explore and utilize all worlds "together" and "in peace" remains as powerful today as it was in 1984, even though we have yet to acheive the magnificent accomplishments in space exploration in this film. ... Read more

Reviews (239)

I Give This Four Barks Out of Five
Best in Show is a clever 'mocumentary', a delightful satire of the dog show world. Director Christopher Guest and co-writer Eugene Levy also star in the movie, along with a slew of other comic actors. As writers, Guest and Levy are throwbacks to kinder, gentler times. Their brand of satire is funny and sometimes biting, but it is never brutal. They allow the performers to improvise a lot. This doesn't always work out, but when it does, the results are hysterical. The movie succeeds because the dogs' owners, not the dogs themselves, are the real characters. It shows that in the bond between man and dog, man may be the strangest and funniest half.

At the start, we meet several couples and individuals who will be showing their dogs in the Mayflower competition in Philadelphia. Some are shown in real scenes, other in fake interviews. Christopher Guest is Harlan Pepper, a down home North Carolina boy who runs a fishing supply store. He also raises champion blood hounds and dreams of being a ventriloquist. Eugene Levy and Catherine O'Hara play the Flecks. He literally has two left feet, and she is an aging hot babe, who is constantly running into men from her past, much to Mr. Fleck's annoyance. Parker Posey and Michael Hitchcock are the Swans, a couple of yuppie lawyers who have channeled way too much emotion into their dog. Sherri Ann [Jennifer Coolidge] is a very buxom and very wealthy matron who, along with her trainer, Christie [Jane Lynch], has entered her pom-pommed poodle. Finally, we met Scott and Stephan [John Michael Higgins and Michael McKeen], a gay couple who has entered one of their beloved toy dogs. In their spare time, Scott and Stephan produce calendars, using photos of their dogs dressed up like characters in famous movies.

The movie follows the characters before, during and after the competition. The show itself is quite authentic looking. It even spoofs sports announcing. One of the announcers is a proper Englishman, full of knowledge about dog shows. The other is an American who is completely clueless. Their scenes are among the film's funniest.

The humor is Best in Show is too dry for some viewers. It's often subtle comedy. I enjoyed it, but I like my humor from broad to dry and everything in-between. I also think I share Guest and Levy's point of view. They seem to be dog lovers who think that what goes on in the world of championship dog lovers is somewhat over the top. What the characters in the movie express towards dogs isn't exactly love. It's more obsession and a need to be noticed. In fact, these people require more attention than their mutts do.

Funny Mock-u-mentary
There's a shallow gold-digger married to a wealthy but mute 90 year old. There's a flamboyantly perky hairdresser (a most amusing character!) who is coupled with a hairdresser. There is also the two lawyers, married, dysfunctional, and highly high-strung. Then there's the former "popular" and experienced prom queen married to the nerdy and self-conscious salesman with two left feet (literally). And finally, there's "Harlan", the ventriloquist wannabe. What do they all have in common? Besides being hysterically human and flawed, each enter their prize dogs in a "Best in Show" contest. With excellent dry humor and in the mode of a documentary, "Best in Show" displays very aptly the human condition, relationships, ambition, and quirky but spunky dog owners and how they react to life, to thier self-worth and to winning (or not winning). I loved this movie for many reasons. The acting was superb; the storyline was choppy but worked very well; and the humor was intelligent and some of the one-liners hit you 5 seconds after they're said--the most powerful form of comedy. This is not for those who like fast moving movies; it's for those who like intelligently quiet humor and can read in between the lines by taking a simple process of entering a dog show and making it into a social, psychological, and fun story. You'll enjoy it!

Not quite "Best"
Christopher Guest has a rare misstep in "Best in Show," the follow-up to comedy classic "Waiting for Guffman." While "Best" is still a fun and frenetic mockumentary, it isn't up to the standards of its sibling mockumentaries -- it's a little too repetitive and over-the-top.

Welcome to Philadelphia, the home of the Mayflower Kennel Club Dog Show. Among the crazy dog owners are Starbucks yuppies Hamilton and Meg Swan (Michael Hitchcock and Parker Posey), gay couple Scott and Stefan (John Michael Higgins and Michael McKean), ventrilogist hick Harlan Pepper (Christopher Guest), and buxom airhead Sherri Ann (Jennifer Coolidge) and her lover/trainer Christy Cummings (Jane Lynch). Front and center is two-left-footed Gerry Fleck (Eugene Levy) and his wife Cookie (Catherine O'Hara), whose sexy past keeps coming back to haunt her.

All these people converge at the dog show, and face difficulties ranging from wrenched knees to televised lesbian smooches to lost squeaky toys -- and some of the dogs are getting a bit crazy as well. With an obnoxious commentator watching over it all, they all strive for the ultimate prize. Poodle, Norwich terrier, bloodhound, Shih Tzu or emotionally scarred Weimaraner -- who will be best in show?

"Best in Show" does for dog shows what "This is Spinal Tap" did for old metal -- it makes affectionate fun of them. Christopher Guest returns to mockumentary turf in the moderately funny "Best in Show" -- it's flawed, but still far above the average comedy.

The biggest problem with "Best in Show" is that Guest tries too hard. The jokes and goofiness are over-the-top, belying the mockumentary format. And the jokes get a bit repetitive. How many times can Cookie run into old boyfriends? Isn't the gay humor both cliched and overdone? But, the humor itself is quite funny, with plenty of strange lines like "We have so much in common! We both love soup... and the outdoors... snow peas... talking and not talking. We could not talk or talk forever and still find things to not talk about."

No flaws can be found in the veteran mockumentary cast -- these people look like they're having a good time. Hitchcock and Posey are chillingly good as the couple who met over J. Crew catalogues in a Starbucks, while Coolidge is deliciously dumb as a bisexual Anna Nicole Smith clone. McKean and Higgins, despite being cliched, play their roles with unadulterated delight. Fred Willard's vulgar commentator is over-the-top stupid, but still amusing.

Despite repetitive humor and the occasional dud joke, Christopher Guest's follow-up to "Waiting for Guffman" is an amusing look behind the scenes of dog shows. It's not "Best in Show," but it's one of the best of breed.

Definitely the funniest of the mockumentaries
This is a fast moving and funny movie that's a truly great comedy, worthy enough to stand alongside This is Spinal Tap.
This one has everything. Conflict-who will win the dog show? Humor, and lots of it. Fred Willard again proves he needs his own TV show (nay, his own channel) as a dog-show commentator so obliviously stupid he's lovable. Eugene Levy and Catherine O'Hara are perfect as your typical, middle-class east-coast family; Eugene's plays somewhat of a "loser", Catherine's great as the promiscuous wife. Jennifer Coolidge is pretty funny as the "glamorous" lesbian who can be aggressive in subtly funny ways.
The best thing about this movie is that it's truly humorous with truly funny actors. These people aren't puppets for lame sex jokes (well, not counting both gay couples) they're funny because they (as in the talented actors, the whole lot of 'em) inherit their characters and give them a life of their own. I mean, I bet that Eugene Levy came up with his character's two left feet on the spot because he knew he had to make a somewhat pathetic character even more pathetic. There's an absolutely pointless scene where Guest's character, a southerner/hunter/ventriloquist, talks to the camera about how he used to stay up all night naming nuts. It's funny though, because it makes no sense but somehow falls in line with the character.
This is a great comedy that makes few cheap shots but is consistently funny through and through.
The DVD has a pretty entertaining commentary with Guest and Levy, and some funny deleted scenes (look for the one where Hamilton tells Posey about "a saying my father used to say"). Those extras are enough for this disc though, and the price is great. Buy this inspired and funny comedy.

Best in Show
BEST OF SHOW was a little disappointing. I couldn't connect with Christopher Guest's hillbilly character, Eugene Levy's character lost me behind his buck teeth and two left feet (No, they really are two left feet!), and I thought Fred Willard's ringside color-man bit was more irritating than slashingly satiric. Bummer. It was because they were in it that I got this one.
On the other hand the movie is filled with strong characterizations and funny bits. Larry Miller has a hilarious scene as one of Catherine O'Hara's ex-lovers who, to husband Levy's obvious discomfort, describes things in graphic detail. Ed Begley Jr. hits the right note as the quietly helpful hotel manager. The bickering yuppie couple and the gay couple were fun, too. ... Read more

Reviews (333)

JUST THE BOX ART WILL MAKE YOU LAUGH!
Christopher Guest is Corky St. Clair, small town Blaine ("The Stool capitol of the world"), Missouri's resident community theater director. With plans of getting back to Broadway, he has created a musical extravaganza "Red, White and Blaine" to celebrate the town's 150th anniversary.

This sly, often hilarious, mock documentary features Guest's resident troupe of improvisational actors -- Eugene Levy (co-writer), Catherine O'Hara, Parker Posey, Fred Willard and Bob Balaban as the stage-struck locals who pin their amateur hopes on being discovered when Corky hints that legendary talent scout Mort Guffman will be in the audience.

If you appreciated "Best In Show," than check out its predecessor. Over 80 hours of film were shot in Super 16mm and edited down to a brisk 84 minutes. The widescreen print is especially sharp and the sound is clear. Co-writers and stars Guest and Levy share a loose and funny commentary and there's at least 30 minutes of whimsical and surprisingly poignant deleted scenes with optional commentary. Recommended.

"Is it karma? - Maybe."
This is what director 'Corky St Claire' has the NERVE to say, congratulating himself on the progress of his self-penned show, 'Red, White and Blaine'. This 'mockumentary' is THE FUNNIEST MOVIE I'VE EVER SEEN! It has it's own 'groove', and once you get onto the Guffman wave-length, you soon become an addict! Christopher Guest delivers his finest performance ever as small town Blaine's resident 'creative type', a tubby, autocratic drama teacher with 'off-off Broadway' experience. The fictional town of Blaine is so 'small town' that the fact that Corky is obviously gay never enters their thoughts; he's 'creative' (and 'from New York'!) The supporting cast, however, are in danger of stealing the movie from under his feet! Parker Posey is pathetically delightful as 'Libby Mae', a Dairy Queen employee who dreams of hitting Broadway so she can "meet Italian guys". Also praisworthy are the characters of "Ron" and "Sheila", a married couple of zero-talents who "Corky" dubbs 'The Lunts of Blaine'. Yet the real prize has to go to Eugene Levy as "Dr Pearl", the local dentist who lands a starring role in 'Red, White and Blaine'. "Dr Pearl" fancies himself as a comedian ("At family functions, I love breaking people up.") and Levy SOMEHOW manages to be hilariously funny playing a character who TRIES to be funny - and ISN'T! Anyone who has ever been involved with local theatre on any level whatsoever will ADORE this movie! Not only does it take a playful stab at Middle America, it ALSO pokes fun at the documentary genre itself (those tense close-ups, those hand-held cameras!) The cleverest, most intelligent comedy in years - 'Waiting for Guffman' has become a cult movie, and quite rightly!

After years, and years of clinical research.
I have determined that this is funniest movie of all time. If you don't agree with me, or even worse, if you don't
"get it", you are part of the problem, and deserve everything
you have coming to you.

"I find I have no feeling in my buttocks."
Hey Amazon censor - "buttocks" is not a bad word. Lighten up :-)

"Waiting For Guffman" is another Christopher Guest-and-ensemble-cast mockumentary, this time involving community theater in Blaine, Missouri, "the stool capital of the world."

There was no real script, but the actors did have certain plot-points to work around, and they pull off a very funny movie.

The musical in the movie, entitled "Red, White, and Blaine" is to be performed on the 150th anniversary of the founding of the town of Blaine, which involved cross-country wagoneers who at night believed they had reached the Pacific ocean, but when the sun rose they discovered they did not quite make it, subsequent quality stool manufacturing, and alien abduction.

There is the crop-circle scientist who explains that although the diameter and circumference change slightly, the radius is always the same, as is the weather - "when you step into that circle it is always 67 degrees with a 40 percent chance of rain - always".

There is the alien abductee (perhaps my favorite part) played by Paul Dooley. He had the misfortune to be probed by many aliens (though not all at once) which leads to his buttocks being numb on Sundays.

Cast regular Eugene Levy plays a Jewish dentist, and Fred Willard and Catherine O'Hara are husband and wife travel agents who have never been outside Blaine. Bob Balaban plays the straight-laced local music teacher who is somewhat put upon trying to get Christopher Guest (Corky, the show's director) to hold proper rehearsals. Parker Posey is the local Dairy Queen employee with dreams of stardom and a father in prison.

The group goes through the audition process for their role in the musical, then rehearsals, and finally the performance, during which they anticipate the arrival of an influential NY drama critic, Mort Guffman - hence the title.

There are a lot of funny little moments, such as Corky wearing those big pants and doing his little dance, or Levy singing "I Dream of Jeanie With the Light Brown Hair", or rehearsing his "how high a ridge I could not tell" line, or Willard talking about his reduction surgery and trying to show it to Eugene Levy who retorts in a Johnny Carson voice..."Medicin man not go near...'Dances With Stumpy'.

Much of the show music was written by Guest, Michael McKean, and Harry Shearer from "Spinal Tap" fame.

The DVD had deleted scenes with optional commentary, a text-based behind the scenes, a commentary by Guest and Levy, subtitles and a trailer.

"I'll tell you why I can't put up with you people. Because you're (...) people. That's what you are. You're just (...) people, and I'm goin' home and I gonna - I'm gonna bite my pillow, is what I'm gonna do!"

What time is it?
Haven't you been paying attention? It's Midnight at the Oasis!
I originally wrote that this film is too deadpan and straight for my liking, especially coupled with a commentary that I still find rather boring. However, I think this is the best thing about these movies and Guest's personality in general. Most movies like this play down to their audience, continually winking at them and patting them on the back for getting all the jokes. Waiting for Guffman is so off the wall that it can play to any audience but a certain kind of people will get all the jokes and non-jokes (a term that I use for dialogue and scenes that don't have explicit jokes in them but have a humorous bent: take the scene with David Cross, for example).
Anything with Fred Willard is classic. Eugene Levy saying he was not the class clown, but sat near the class clown and studied him. And of course, "what do your keen and perceptive eyes see?"
Bestin Show is probably the funniest (not counting This is Spinal Tap), while A Mighty Wind is probably the most touching, feels the most complete and polished. Waiting for Guffman is so subdued though, which is why it's great. There's still a lot of laugh-out-loud (especially if you're a first time viewer, or the first time in a while) moments, and the ending is one of the best comedy endings of all time.
I love the little moments here, (Catherine O'Hara's little speech about "less is more" acting, Fred Willard telling Dr. Pearl "this is my wife Sheila, you may remember her from previous bills") there's just something so pure about these movies that makes them rewatchable. It's a pretty good movie, but keep in mind it's pretty rough and in my opinion the "worst" of the mockumentaries.
On the DVD side of things, I couldn't help but think the commentary was, well, boring. There was a lot of dead time. Guest seemed so bored during the recording, then again he could've just been kidding. We learn of the movie's incredibly small budget and cramped shooting schedule, however. And the deleted scenes are a treat, my favorite probably being the "Nothing Ever Happens in Blaine" song. Aside from that, there's little else, though. But the disc is pretty good (and cheap), so it's a no-brainer purchase. Get it. ... Read more

Description

Documentary-style Comedy. Christopher Guest follows up his acclaimed ensemble comedies Best in Show and Waiting for Guffman with a docu-comedy about three folk groups from the 60s who reunite for a memorial concert in New York City following the death of a legendary folk manager. ... Read more

Reviews (147)

Guest just keeps on going, and going, and going....
Christopher Guest first came to prominence in 1984, as an assistant and star in Rob Reiner's hilarious "This is Spinal Tap".

Guest learned at the hands of the master, and the last 20 years of his career have been spent on mockumentary efforts ("Waiting for Guffman", "Best in Show", and, in 2002, "A Mighty Wind", where he decided to satirize the 60's folk music movement, something he and his fellow Spinal-Tappers had once done as a skit on Saturday Night Live). There are hallmarks in Guest's work. He utilizes a co-writer, the newly popular Eugene Levy (the best part of Steve Martin's recent "Bringing Down the House"), he has a regular cast of character actors that ad-lib their way through zany and satirical situations in all three films, and he conquers the art form of teasing fans and popular culture icons with gentle spoofing, double entendres, hidden meanings, and really great filmmaking.

Although I enjoyed the film in the theater, it really came into its own when I was able to watch the DVD where I could marvel at the details and depths of Guest and Levy's imagination, and the brilliance of their comedy. It's strewn throughout the film, but a lot is captured and hightlighed in the DVD's special features.

The premise of the film is simple:

Irving Steinbloom, aged icon of the 50's and 60's folk music scene, has died in New York. His son, who followed him in managing folk music acts, Jonathon (Bob Balaban)endeavors to create a "PBN" concert in his dad's memory, bringing together three of dad's oldest and most famous acts. We get to see the faded stars in their lives today, deciding to do the show, then practicing, traveling to the Big Apple and enduring some mild hoopla and memories. Finally, we see the big event.

It was easy to pick out the most outstanding performance of the film, it belonged to co-writer Levy (as Mitch), who completely convinces you, iron gray wig and all, that he is an unhinged, deer-in-the-headlights folk icon, with much of his early musical promise deadened by the cornucopia of meds he's taken over the last three decades, to try to capture some mental stability. To fully appreciate his performance, and the droll wit that drives Levy, see his ad-lib in the Special Features press conference, where Mitch does a completely credible and incredible speech, comparing Rap music to folk music. You gotta see it to believe it!

Strolling through the DVD also brought out the idiosyncrasies in the film and let me marvel at the comedic turns of the delightful Jennifer Coolidge (as Amber Cole, eastern European escapee and PR agent) and John Michael Higgins (as Terry Bohner. Leader of the "New Main Street Singers"). Both were completely over the top in "Best of Show", and even more laughable here. Both are amazing scene stealers, but you have to think back over the scene to realize it.

In the Special Features, you're really crushed to find deleted scenes that should have survived the film's editing (particularly Coolidge in a deadpan "piccolo" joke), memorable songs ("The Good Book", by the New Main Street Singers, is hilarious) and the unmatched wry and acerbic humor of commentators Guest and Levy. Guest, with amazing attention to detail, even filmed the concert portion of "A Mighty Wind" with TV cameras to be able to recreate the concert as it might have appeared on PBS or public access.

"AMW" is not for everyone. Those who won't want to probe for the humor or the double entendre or can't reminisce about the golden age and the innocence of folk music will probably think it dull, dull, dull. I've rated it four stars, because it pales in comparison to Guffman and Best in Show, but I must say, I really enjoyed the film.

Guest is a genius at understated, satirical comedy and at making gentle, loving jibes at pop culture stereotypes. Although "AMW" may be the lesser of his three films, it still proves that he is truly the king of film comedy. Can't wait for his next one!

A Mighty Wind.... A Mightier DVD!
Christopher Guest, Harry Shearer and Michael McKean came down to Sydney, Australia for a special screening of 'A Mighty Wind' with a Q&A session afterwards. I was lucky enough to attend and was even luckier to hear the plans they had for the DVD.

First off, if you're not familiar with Christopher Guest's movies you simply have to know one thing, they are all Improvised. No script just acting on the spot. All Guest's movies (Best In Show, Waiting for Guffman) are in the style of a documentary (Mockumentary) where the storyline is plotted out before hand and the scene is just given an outcome which the actors then have to Impro. This makes the movie fresh and funny plus its what differentiates itself from other films, giving it a unique element.

The movie itself centres around when folk icon Irving Steinbloom passed away, he left behind a legacy of music and a family of performers he had shepherded to folk stardom. To celebrate a life spent submerged in folk, Irving's loving son Jonathan (BOB BALABAN) has decided to put together a memorial concert featuring some of Steinbloom's best-loved musicians.

There's Mitch & Mickey (EUGENE LEVY and CATHERINE O'HARA), who were the epitome of young love until their partnership was torn apart by heartbreak; classic troubadours The Folksmen (CHRISTOPHER GUEST, MICHAEL McKEAN and HARRY SHEARER), whose records were endlessly entertaining for anyone able to punch a hole in their center to play them; and The New Main Street Singers (featuring JOHN MICHAEL HIGGINS, JANE LYNCH and PARKER POSEY), the most meticulously color-coordinated "neuftet" ever to hit an amusement park near you.

Now, for one night only in New York City's Town Hall, these three groups will reunite and gather together to celebrate the music that almost made them famous.

Christopher Guest stated that the DVD was set to release in 6 months, making it around Christmas time or early January (Depending if Warner Bros decides to push it forward or hold it back).

The DVD is set to have feature commentary by both Christopher Guest and Eugene Levy (Writers). Also the whole 'Ode to Irving' show at New York City's Town Hall will be played in its entirety for all those fans of Folk Music out there. There will also be around an hour of Deleted Scenes (Additional Commentary), Trailer and Production Notes.

This DVD is definitely worth the buy. It may not be packed with Special features but the film itself is whats worth the money. If you loved Reiner's spin on Rock music with Spinal Tap wait till you see (if you haven't) Guest's take on Folk Music. With over 80 hours of footage shot and around 8 months to edit it, it really shows how passionate Guest is about his films and what he feels is the Creme da la Crème to make into a 5 star movie.

A must see movie. A must buy DVD.

Funny + folk-music + Eugene Levy
Why only 4 stars and not 5? I cannot believe that in 2004 there are still companies that package DVDs in flimsy cardboard cases rather than plastic clamshell keepsakes. And this is a film you'll want to keep.

If you only know Eugene Levy from the American Pie films, you will be pleasantly surprised with A Mighty Wind. I had no idea Eugene Levy could sing so well, or was capable of a serio-comic performance. I usually love his bit roles in films, and this one was way better than I expected. Aside from Levy, this is another of director Christopher Guest's mockumentaries, albeit an extremely good-natured and lighthearted one centered around a PBS folk-music concert. Guest is one of the few filmmakers who can make the mockumentary format work (aside from Woody Allen), and he leads a brilliant cast into a largely improvised framework that contains laughter and sentimentality.

I'm not a folk-music fan at all, but I enjoyed the music in the film a lot. It's pleasant rather than annoying and preachy.

"You can't get to heaven on the wings of a gun"
I got a lot of enjoyment out of this movie, and basically agree with most of the other positive reviews on this site, but my main reason for posting this review is to highlight the hilarious "Children of the Sun" video which is one of the special features. This is a Folksmen tune that they released in 1968, from their "Saying Something" LP (where they broke their covenant with the fans by not hyphenating the album title.) This was when the true folk era was dying out and bands needed to make the transition to something just a little more psychedelic sounding. (Of course, this is all fictional...) But the video just had my whole family (teenage sons included) doubling over with laughter, with the primitive but "far out" video FX, the trippy-cheesy lyrics and the earnest delivery of the songs Transcendent Message. As a 7-year old kid in 1968, my consciousness was saturated with that stuff, as my parents were into Donovan, the Fifth Dimension, the soundtrack to "Hair" and all the other earnest performers out there singing similar Anthems of a New Generation. The whole disc is full of great amusing material, but "Children of the Sun" really did top it all off quite brilliantly.

Very subtle and very funny!
Compared to WAITING FOR GUFFMAN and BEST IN SHOW, the humor in this mockumentary is a bit subtler. It is funnier every time I watch it, as I catch more of the wry, understated humor with each viewing. The songs are catchy, too. You really care about what develops with the central characters played by Eugene Levy and Catherine O'Hara. This is a great comedy in keeping with Christopher Guest's other masterpieces! BUY IT! ... Read more

Reviews (35)

For a movie: BEST MOVIE Compared to book: NO CONTEST
I read 'Catch-22' first, and it instantly became my favorite book (as soon as I finally got through it). When I heard of the movied version, I was estatic, but in wonderment. How can such a complex book with no linear structure ever be adapted to movie form? My expectations were high, but weary...

First of all, casting was excellent. Alan Arkin played a perfect Yossarian, as well as Jon Voigt as Milo, and so on. The settings were great, really convincing from what I read from the book.

As far as the comparison to the book. If it stands true for one instance, the book is worlds better than the movie. As a reader, you get so much more out of Joe Heller's sardonic universe. The complex plot, the meticulous descriptions (in which he used words I never knew existed...either have a dictionary with you when you read 'Catch-22', or have a vast vocabulary!), and all the rest...

The movie does attempt to follow Heller's complex plot structure, hopping back and forth to unravel plot points with each pass. The movie does this well with Yossarian's epidemic with Snowden. Most of the ingeniously clever dialogue is brought to the screen, but that's what makes the book/movie so great.

At any rate, I highly recommend this movie, as well as anything from Joe Heller...the best writer of the 20th century.

an excellent dvd
"Catch-22" is a beautifully designed, shot and executed movie that, in the end, doesn't really work. However, it's too elaborately staged and too ambitious to be considered a "bad" movie. And the extra features that accompany the DVD help the film transcend a "thumbs up/thumbs down" rating.

First and foremost, it looks amazing. I loved this film when I initially saw it on tape in 1990, but it was only recently that I was able to see it in a widescreen format -- letterboxing reveals what a brutal disservice pan-and-scan does to the compositions of "Catch's" 2.35:1 aspect ratio. If you've only seen this movie in fullscreen, you haven't really seen this movie.

The transfer is also incredible. I'm so used to seeing the grainy print of my VHS copy that I hadn't realized how great a lot of the cinematography is. The use of front-projection during the air-combat scenes is astonishing and the detail and color really surprised me.

But the main reason to get this DVD is the commentary. Director Mike Nichols is joined by Steven Soderbergh to talk about "Catch-22" and through their discussion, one really gets a sense of how Nichols (who had just directed back-to-back hits with "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf" and "The Graduate") took on this project with the best intentions and inspiration... and quickly got swallowed up by the massive project and even bigger budget. Soderbergh is, in my opinion, one of the best directors doing commentary these days (he gives a perfect mix of technical details and storytelling) and he really knows his "Catch-22" ---though I find it a little incredible that he never noticed the changing portraits in Major Major's office, as he claims while watching the scene.

This movie is a great mix of Fellini, Laugh-In, Welles and Salvador Dali. Some may feel there's not enough Joseph Heller here but it would take a mini-series to cover all the bases of such a deep, rich novel. At times, this movie can try your patience (like most Catch-22's often do) but it's definitely worth seeing and hearing in this new format.

A change
I take back most of the things I said. This is a great movie, and Milo is good.

A good film that should have been better
First, I was upset to see that the Hungry Joe's character from the book was all but not used, and that he didn't even die because of the cat, but instead suffered Kid Sampson's death from the book. Now...

I do admit, this movie is better than I thought it would be. I'm especially happy with Bob Newhart's Major Major, the Chaplain, and Major Danby. My only problem is that many of the characters aren't portrayed to the best of their abilities, considering how well the book fleshed them all out. The best example is Balsom's take on Colonel Cathcart. In the book, Colonel Cathcart is prim, proper, and insane. In the movie, he is simply a crude, crusty old soldier, reminicent of Ernest Borgnine in "All Quiet on the Western Front." Though he is good when interacting with Dreedle. Orr is good in this, but maybe just a touch creepier than he should be. Milo is just wasted, and a little bland. Orson Welles is surprisingly good, but that is in direct effect of the good writing of his scenes.
Alan Arkin gets off to a slow start, but becomes very good as the film picks up speed. The Snowden films are great.

My main problem with the film, however, is that two very important characters from the book are completely and utterly not in the movie: Clevinger and Dunbar. Clevinger, while only in the first few chapters of the book, had a lot of very interesting things to say about Yossarian's behavior, and would have just been a good character to have. Dunbar, on the other hand, actually had a very large part in the book, serving as Yossarian's side-kick. He also delivered the classic monologue about boredom being the key to a seemingly-longer life. A great piece of writing that would have worked well with the rest of the film.
All in all, I suppose the main thing that would have made this movie better is an extra half-hour, so that more of the classic scenes could have been used. But still, surprisingly good.

It's not the book - what movie is?
I read Catch-22 many years ago. Loved it. I've seen Catch-22 the movie several times. Loved it. But they are different. You are not going to get every nuance of the complex, convoluted book into the movie, but it is a good approximation. The movie works on its own, mostly due to the collection of oddball characters and circumstances. The long list of big named actors did a good job. However, the cinematography may be the star, here. As an "anti-war" comedy, this ranks near the top.

The reasonably-priced DVD has a so-so commentary by director Mike Nichols with Steven Soderbergh. ... Read more

Reviews (180)

We Are Not Alone
Nearly a quarter century since it was unleashed, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND ranks as one of the supreme cinematic achievements of the modern era. Steven Spielberg wrote and directed this tremendous science fiction film with his own distinctive middle-class view on things.

Richard Dreyfuss is at his usual terrific best in the role of Ron Neary, another of Spielberg's "Everyman" characters. He is an Indiana power lineman who is called out on a night where the entire city of Muncie goes dark. Then, at a railroad crossing, he is suddenly shocked by the appearance of a UFO, flooding him with brilliant white light. This encounter soon turns both him and his life upside down; his wife (Teri Garr) and kids can't understand his obsession with turning the shape of mashed potatoes or mounds of dirt from his backyard into a mysterious mountain he's been seeing in his mind. Meanwhile, a lonely mother (Melinda Dillon) has her own close encounters with the UFOs, resulting in the still-unseen aliens abducting her son (Cary Guffey). She too has visions of a mysterious mountain, visions which find their way into paintings and colorings.

When the news comes on TV with word that a train supposedly loaded with deadly nerve gases has overturned in northeastern Wyoming, however, both Dreyfuss and Dillon know the locale--Devils Tower. In spite of government officials closing the park off to outsiders (the nerve gas leak is an elaborate cover story), Dreyfuss and Dillon witness, along with a noted UFO expert (Francois Truffaut, director of the 1969 classic THE WILD CHILD) and hundreds of others, the first actual close encounter of the third kind--direct physical contact between Earthlings and extra-terrestrials.

Spielberg's film was obviously a radical shift from most previous Hollywood depictions about outer space visitations to Earth. He evokes the famous line "Watch The Skies" from Howard Hawks' 1951 classic THE THING, but does so without the paranoia and hysteria of the space invasion films of the 1950s. There are no lasers or bug-eyed monsters.

Because CLOSE ENCOUNTERS was made after America's twin debacles with Vietnam and Watergate, it takes a low-key but rather apparent questionable view of the military and the government--as Stephen King put in his book "Danse Macabre", a "don't-let-the-military handle this" approach. In its scope and approach, this movie is closer, in a middle-class way, to Kubrick's 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, which Spielberg has always numbered among his favorites, than to any sci-fi film of the past. Dreyfuss and Dillon are excellent in their roles, as is Truffaut; and as for John Williams' score...what more needs to be said; it's brilliant. CLOSE ENCOUNTERS (also known as CE3K) won an Oscar for Vilmos Zsigmond's cinematography, though four other men (William Fraker, Douglas Slocombe, John Alonzo, Laszlo Kovas) are also credited.

Well conceived, suspenseful, occasionally terrifying, and finally uplifting, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS is yet one more staggering masterpiece for a director with a whole lot of masterpieces still to come.

This Movie Changed a Genre
Steven Spielberg is at his best here. The film plays almost like a documentary, and leaves you half-expecting to see alien ships whipping past you on the highway.

Richard Dreyfuss, in a stellar performance, is an ordinary man who is suddenly possessed by something, but is not sure what. We, and he, gradually discover that he is not alone in this obsession; a small group of people across the country have been summoned to Devil's Tower in Wyoming. There is also a sudden increase in UFO sightings across the country. The summonees gradually converge on Devil's Tower, while the scientific community tries to keep everyone away, out of legitimate and sincere safety concerns. The scientists have figured out that a spaceship is on its way and plans to land. The entire movie runs like Ravel's "Bolero": a slow crescendo culminating in a roaring climax ...

The special effects are not only extremely good but are also beautiful. The alien scout ships look like luminescently surreal Christmas tree ornaments and the mother-ship looks like the surreal tree they came from. Everything glows in outlandish colors. The musical score fits the movie perfectly (well, it was done by John Williams) and can stand alone as an orchestral masterpiece. The acting is also very good, and especially so for Richard Dreyfuss.

This film redefined the whole genre of aliens-visit-Earth. Before "Close Encounters", such movies had the aliens attacking us, the aliens appearing friendly but actually here for nefarious reasons, or the aliens being here for genuinely friendly reasons but we don't get it and end up attacking them. "Close Encounters" showed benign, intelligent aliens being met by benign, intelligent humans for information exchange and mutual gain. Of all the garbage and violence we've broadcast out into space (for everything seen on broadcast television is also transmitted Out There), I hope that any would-be visitors, if they exist, see this film before arriving. Even without understanding a word, they'll get the message: if you come in peace, you'll be received in kind. I'm not some fanatic who's convinced there is someone on the way, but, just in case there is, I hope we can respond as maturely and intelligently as this film portrays.

The Neary Family is as impressive as the light show
For me the portrayal of the Neary family is equally as stunning as the portrayal of the spacecraft throughout the movie. The acting in any scene involving the Nearys is astounding. Even though that family doesn't end up the way we might hope, they behave exactly like a real family might when faced with their situation. Pay special attention to the children. Their reactions are dead on.

The special effects are breathtaking and continue to prove, as have so many other great films, that the old way of doing effects is far more spectacular and convincing than today's cartoonish CGI effects.

Incoherent plot; bad science
This film has such distractingly glaring holes that enjoying it is impossible.
Aside from questions of what do aliens need with airplane fighter squadrons and steamships, it presumes that aliens use the same numbering systems and geographic and temporal degradations that we do (why would an alien know how long a second is?)

Add a whole lot of Spielbergian paranoia about the government, and there you have it.

"Toys!"
4.5 stars. This is easily one of my favorite early films from living, legendary filmmaker Steven Spielberg. This film and "Jaws" are two incredible, remarkable achievements from the 1970s. In 1977 all I really remember was the release of another science fiction film by the name of "Star Wars," and it wasn't until the early eighties on cable television that I began to appreciate "Close Encounters of the Third Kind." One of the aspects that sets his early films apart from most was his subtle, yet effective sense of humor. There are many scenes in this film that are just plain hilarious. This is a great story with some excellent acting, most notably from Richard Dreyfuss who won the Oscar for Best Actor in the same year for "The Goodbye Girl." I can't help feeling that his work in this film added to the Oscar voting. Apart from the magical Spielberg touches, which are everywhere, there is another force in this film in the score by composer John Williams. John Williams also won the Oscar for Best Score that same year for "Star Wars." As for the Special Features section on the DVD they finally have the deleted scene showing the inside of the Mother Ship. Steven Spielberg mentions in the documentary that he wishes he had never filmed the sequence, leaving the inside of the ship a mystery. But I love the scene, and I think it adds even more majesty to the ship seeing how huge it is from the inside. This is a Sci-fi gem from the 1970s. I highly recommend buying this DVD. Thank you. ... Read more

Reviews (180)

We Are Not Alone
Nearly a quarter century since it was unleashed, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND ranks as one of the supreme cinematic achievements of the modern era. Steven Spielberg wrote and directed this tremendous science fiction film with his own distinctive middle-class view on things.

Richard Dreyfuss is at his usual terrific best in the role of Ron Neary, another of Spielberg's "Everyman" characters. He is an Indiana power lineman who is called out on a night where the entire city of Muncie goes dark. Then, at a railroad crossing, he is suddenly shocked by the appearance of a UFO, flooding him with brilliant white light. This encounter soon turns both him and his life upside down; his wife (Teri Garr) and kids can't understand his obsession with turning the shape of mashed potatoes or mounds of dirt from his backyard into a mysterious mountain he's been seeing in his mind. Meanwhile, a lonely mother (Melinda Dillon) has her own close encounters with the UFOs, resulting in the still-unseen aliens abducting her son (Cary Guffey). She too has visions of a mysterious mountain, visions which find their way into paintings and colorings.

When the news comes on TV with word that a train supposedly loaded with deadly nerve gases has overturned in northeastern Wyoming, however, both Dreyfuss and Dillon know the locale--Devils Tower. In spite of government officials closing the park off to outsiders (the nerve gas leak is an elaborate cover story), Dreyfuss and Dillon witness, along with a noted UFO expert (Francois Truffaut, director of the 1969 classic THE WILD CHILD) and hundreds of others, the first actual close encounter of the third kind--direct physical contact between Earthlings and extra-terrestrials.

Spielberg's film was obviously a radical shift from most previous Hollywood depictions about outer space visitations to Earth. He evokes the famous line "Watch The Skies" from Howard Hawks' 1951 classic THE THING, but does so without the paranoia and hysteria of the space invasion films of the 1950s. There are no lasers or bug-eyed monsters.

Because CLOSE ENCOUNTERS was made after America's twin debacles with Vietnam and Watergate, it takes a low-key but rather apparent questionable view of the military and the government--as Stephen King put in his book "Danse Macabre", a "don't-let-the-military handle this" approach. In its scope and approach, this movie is closer, in a middle-class way, to Kubrick's 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY, which Spielberg has always numbered among his favorites, than to any sci-fi film of the past. Dreyfuss and Dillon are excellent in their roles, as is Truffaut; and as for John Williams' score...what more needs to be said; it's brilliant. CLOSE ENCOUNTERS (also known as CE3K) won an Oscar for Vilmos Zsigmond's cinematography, though four other men (William Fraker, Douglas Slocombe, John Alonzo, Laszlo Kovas) are also credited.

Well conceived, suspenseful, occasionally terrifying, and finally uplifting, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS is yet one more staggering masterpiece for a director with a whole lot of masterpieces still to come.

This Movie Changed a Genre
Steven Spielberg is at his best here. The film plays almost like a documentary, and leaves you half-expecting to see alien ships whipping past you on the highway.

Richard Dreyfuss, in a stellar performance, is an ordinary man who is suddenly possessed by something, but is not sure what. We, and he, gradually discover that he is not alone in this obsession; a small group of people across the country have been summoned to Devil's Tower in Wyoming. There is also a sudden increase in UFO sightings across the country. The summonees gradually converge on Devil's Tower, while the scientific community tries to keep everyone away, out of legitimate and sincere safety concerns. The scientists have figured out that a spaceship is on its way and plans to land. The entire movie runs like Ravel's "Bolero": a slow crescendo culminating in a roaring climax ...

The special effects are not only extremely good but are also beautiful. The alien scout ships look like luminescently surreal Christmas tree ornaments and the mother-ship looks like the surreal tree they came from. Everything glows in outlandish colors. The musical score fits the movie perfectly (well, it was done by John Williams) and can stand alone as an orchestral masterpiece. The acting is also very good, and especially so for Richard Dreyfuss.

This film redefined the whole genre of aliens-visit-Earth. Before "Close Encounters", such movies had the aliens attacking us, the aliens appearing friendly but actually here for nefarious reasons, or the aliens being here for genuinely friendly reasons but we don't get it and end up attacking them. "Close Encounters" showed benign, intelligent aliens being met by benign, intelligent humans for information exchange and mutual gain. Of all the garbage and violence we've broadcast out into space (for everything seen on broadcast television is also transmitted Out There), I hope that any would-be visitors, if they exist, see this film before arriving. Even without understanding a word, they'll get the message: if you come in peace, you'll be received in kind. I'm not some fanatic who's convinced there is someone on the way, but, just in case there is, I hope we can respond as maturely and intelligently as this film portrays.

The Neary Family is as impressive as the light show
For me the portrayal of the Neary family is equally as stunning as the portrayal of the spacecraft throughout the movie. The acting in any scene involving the Nearys is astounding. Even though that family doesn't end up the way we might hope, they behave exactly like a real family might when faced with their situation. Pay special attention to the children. Their reactions are dead on.

The special effects are breathtaking and continue to prove, as have so many other great films, that the old way of doing effects is far more spectacular and convincing than today's cartoonish CGI effects.

Incoherent plot; bad science
This film has such distractingly glaring holes that enjoying it is impossible.
Aside from questions of what do aliens need with airplane fighter squadrons and steamships, it presumes that aliens use the same numbering systems and geographic and temporal degradations that we do (why would an alien know how long a second is?)

Add a whole lot of Spielbergian paranoia about the government, and there you have it.

"Toys!"
4.5 stars. This is easily one of my favorite early films from living, legendary filmmaker Steven Spielberg. This film and "Jaws" are two incredible, remarkable achievements from the 1970s. In 1977 all I really remember was the release of another science fiction film by the name of "Star Wars," and it wasn't until the early eighties on cable television that I began to appreciate "Close Encounters of the Third Kind." One of the aspects that sets his early films apart from most was his subtle, yet effective sense of humor. There are many scenes in this film that are just plain hilarious. This is a great story with some excellent acting, most notably from Richard Dreyfuss who won the Oscar for Best Actor in the same year for "The Goodbye Girl." I can't help feeling that his work in this film added to the Oscar voting. Apart from the magical Spielberg touches, which are everywhere, there is another force in this film in the score by composer John Williams. John Williams also won the Oscar for Best Score that same year for "Star Wars." As for the Special Features section on the DVD they finally have the deleted scene showing the inside of the Mother Ship. Steven Spielberg mentions in the documentary that he wishes he had never filmed the sequence, leaving the inside of the ship a mystery. But I love the scene, and I think it adds even more majesty to the ship seeing how huge it is from the inside. This is a Sci-fi gem from the 1970s. I highly recommend buying this DVD. Thank you. ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Terrific acting and issues which remain relevant today
Sally Field is an earnest but ambitious newspaper reporter who skirts the boundaries of journalism ethics - a term not yet regarded as an oxymoron when this movie came out in the early 80s - and Paul Newman is the unfairly indicted son of a south Florida mobster. Field chases her story with unintended tragic consequences and sparks fly between her and Newman, in more ways than one.

The real strength of the movie is in the fine acting. Newman and Field are in top form but it is the supporting roles which catch your attention. The then little known character actor Wilford Brimley shows up in the third reel as a down-home U.S. prosecutor and walks off with the movie. "At the end of today two things are gonna be true that ain't true now. One is we're going to know what in the good Christ has been going on down here, and two is I'm going to have somebody's ass in my briefcase." "Wonderful thing, subpeenees." Bob Balaban is also vivid as an overzealous prosecutor whose ruse sets the plot in motion.

If you like this one, you may also like "Independence Day." Not the recent studio blockbuster starring Will Smith but a "small" movie from the early 80s featuring tight writing and a terrific ensemble cast, with Kathleen Quinlan and David Keith in the leading parts and Dianne Wiest in an unforgettable supporting role.

Good performances...ethics be damned
The issue of leaking information to the press has been around for years, and this film does its best to illustrate how badly it can backfire when the sources aren't properly checked and re-checked.

Having said that, and being a journalist myself, I just want to shoot Sally Field for her gross violations of journalist ethics. Getting involved with the subject? No how, no way. It just isn't done. If you can accept this HUGE leap of journalistic and editorial faith, then the rest of the movie is a breeze.

Aside from Newman, I think the best performance in the movie is one of the briefest...Wilford Brimley as the U.S. Attorney who gets to the bottom of the mess. It's just a pleasure to watch him go through the paces of tearing Bob Balaban's little vendetta all to pieces, and to experience his grudging approval to let Newman walk.

"You got your selves."
Elliott Rosen is an obsessive prosecutor who is desperate to get some inside info on the "mob." He steps in to a moral grey area in his pursuit. Knowing that Michael Colin Gallagher (Paul Newman) is innocent of any crime he plans to push him into finding out who did it. The plan is simple he will leak the false fact out, through reporter Megan Carter (Sally Field), that Gallagher is being investigated. This information has a negative impact on Gallagher's business. Further pursuit leads to a death of the innocent. Naturally the paper that prints this has no intention of retracting. Gallagher finds a unique solution. See if you can spot it.

This movie does not make an immediate impact on you with the exception of Brimley's final confrontation speech. However repeated viewing brings out the subtleties that will make this one of your favorite movies for years to come.

The dangers of the public spotlight
Not quite a star-studded flick, but chock full of subtly forceful personalities. Paul Newman plays Gallagher, a crusty but otherwise legit Florida-based liquor wholesaler whose life is turned upside-down when the Miami Standard fingers him as a possible material witness. Under current laws regarding libel, Newman can always sue the paper for libel. However, the law sets a higher standard of wrongdoing to be proven when the victim is a public-figure. (The distinction was meant to prevent public officials from using libel laws to block any criticism of their actions - most notably in the case of southern police officials during the early civil-rights years; unfortunately for Gallagher, the laws have been expanded to cover any figure in the public eye, whether he's there by choice or despite it.) Because the Standard acts without malice, and only reports what's been leaked to it by a shifty DoJ official (Bob Balaban), the fact that the story itself is actually incorrect is irrelevant. While DoJ hopes to pressure Gallagher to turn state's evidence, or somehow lead them to somebody who can, the newspaper hopes Gallagher will come forward and give his own spin. (Exaggeration is an often-used media tactic - one hoped to pressure a story's subject to reflexively come forward and give a story that, while less spectacular, is nonetheless worse off now that it's been confirmed.) While Gallagher comes forward, and hooks up with Sally Field as the Standard's ace reporter, he soon finds another way to wreak havoc - by turning his enemies against each other.

There's something satisfying about the deceptive ease with which Gallagher turns the media against itself, but the resolution is unsatisfying. Wilford Brimley plays the Assistant Attorney General who gets everybody honest by threatening to make people talk under oath. (We get the point, people have no problem saying anything as long as they don't have to stand by it.) The last scene is essentially Brimley's one-man show, one that upstages Sally Fields's character's turn-about: rather than disclose Gallagher as the source of her latest story, she's willing to take the fall for him. Her logic is impeccable - somebody is going to take the blame and the fall no matter what. Why not her? If anything, the film disappoints in underplaying the attraction between the two, which only makes you wonder whether her denouement is one of journalistic integrity or love. Instead, we cheer that Brimley will get to tell the media what he thinks (and nobody in this room is going to like what I have to say, he warns) and the way he exacts retribution (you're no White House appointee, he tells Balaban's character. "The one who hired you, is me." Start packing).

REVENGE WITHOUT BULLETS
When you watch the theatrical trailer of ABSENCE OF MALICE, you are lead to think that this movie describes Paul Newman's revenge and will contain a lot of violent scenes. This is not true. In fact, has a trailer ever described accurately a movie ?

ABSENCE OF MALICE is, in the first place, an "actor" movie, with two stars of 1981 : Paul Newman and Sally Field. The secondary roles are also well written and interesting. The movie belongs to the category of moral movies and tries to defend these two ideas :

- Things and people are not always what or who they seem to be.

- The newspapers should have the duty to verify their sources before printing anything.

The treatment of the subject i