Reviews (74)

Just Because You Are Paranoid...
...Doesn't Mean You're Not Being Followed. Filmed and released between Coppola's masterpiece's THE GODFATHER and THE GODFATHER 2, The Conversation is a tremendous character study with teh flavors of a thriller. Gene Hackman, brings an incredible complexity and subtlety to his portrayal of Harry Caul. That performance and Francis Ford Coppola's direction and original script make this a film that is possibly more poignant today than during its original release, since the story deals with privacy and responsibility. Today, many of the feats performed by Caul as a surveillance operator, are available with most personal computers. Adorned with great characters, like John Cazale and Robert Duvall(both of THE GODFATHER), Cindy Williams and Harrison Ford in an early role as a Christmas Cookie baking weasel (both of AMERICAN GRAFITTI). But, its Hackman's story and his paranoia is evident from the get go. I believe it was the filmmakers intent for you to be left thinking when the film is over... they succeeded. The DVD is nicely restored with great sound design properly presented as well as a non-promotional mini-documentary and commentaries by Francis Ford and an editor.

"The Conversation" on DVD
"The Conversation" is one of those great little masterpieces of the 1970s that just so happens to be directed by Francis Ford Coppola. "The Conversation" tells the tale of Harry Caul, (geniously played by Gene Hackman) a surveillance expert who makes the mistake of getting personally involved in a disturbing assignment. Gene Hackman's performance is so subtle, underplayed, and finely-tuned that it alone makes the film worthwhile. The script is fabulous, with a twist that makes "The Sixth Sense" look like kid's stuff.

The DVD of "The Conversation" is great. To start off, it has good, animated menus. The theatrical trailer is nice, just for nostalgic purposes. There is also a featurette, "Close-Up on The Conversation". It makes for a nice, brief look at the making of the film, and it's fun to see Coppola so young. What really makes this DVD great though, are the two commentary tracks. The first is by the director himself, Francis Ford Coppola. Coppola's commentary is one of the most comprehensive I've ever heard. If you don't appreciate this movie now, you will after you've heard his commentary. The second commentary is by editor Walter Murch, which is also very good, especially if you are specifically interested in the editing process.

If you like Coppola, Hackman, or are just a sucker for a clever script, this DVD is for your collection.

The Commentaries Embellish This DVD
This is an excellent piece of filmaking. Very, very underated to date although many of the Amazon posts catch this piece of story telling. Like the parallel editing sequence that MADE the end of Godfather 1, really kill (pardon the pun) at least according to Robert Evans (The Kid Stays in the Picture)-it is interesting to note that this particular new editor of "The Conversation"-contributed alot of great ideas to the story as well as working on the sound mixing. FFC was off working on Godfather II, so perhaps the Editor has a little more freedom and time to work his magic. Funny-most of the workers of the young studio were non-union so he could not even be credited as a picture or sound Editor. Famous Director of Photography Haskell Wexler was "let go" by Francis very early on and replaced. This action gave the film a superior look, for the theme of the film. You have to love the retro vibe of all that electronic tape gear in the digital age we now live. The visual look is crisp and stunning. If you view this DVD-watch BOTH commentaries. The haunting piano melody over the DVD Menu and that appears throughout the story-is worth appreciation alone. I actually sat down and counted out both sets of machine gun triplets in what is a rather dreamy piece of solo piano. As many have said already-this belongs in your DVD library. And let's not forget the early work here of Harrison Ford-complete with scar on his chin; Cindy Williams; Robert Duvall and Teri Garr. Enjoy and relish. People ARE watching and listening. Even Gene Hackman's sax has "ears."

One gem: one lady between two giants
A Cannes' winner among other virtues, this film is like the fourth symphony of Beethoven: a princess between two power muscle men.
In fact the godfather I and II literally absorbed and in a certain way detoured, (together with Appocalyse now) the attention about this movie.
A genuine masterpiece that confirms the status of Mr. Coppola to the highest rank in the cinema's story.
Hcakman has never been best.

Outstanding work!
In between Godfather films, Francis Ford Coppola made this masterpiece. There are many actors that would go on to bigger and better things. Harrison Ford, Cindy Williams, John Cazale to name a few. But it's Gene Hackman's show, who gives his best performance since the French Connection. A classic!! ... Read more

Amazon.com

The husband (Michael Douglas) is a currency trader whose portfolio value is going right down the drain. The wife (Gwyneth Paltrow) is the heiress to a $100 million fortune. The marriage is not a happy one, but the promise of long-term affluence keeps them together. The wife pursues an affair with an artist (Viggo Mortenson) who gives her all the passion she doesn't get at home, and when the husband finds out, well ... someone's going to pay with their life. Who will the unlucky one be? We wouldn't dare spoil the elegant plot twists of this devious thriller, but it's well known that Douglas excels at portraying greedy characters with ice in their veins. Here, it's easy to assume that Douglas has pulled off, as the title implies, a killing that nobody will ever pin on him. But this is the kind of glossy thriller (loosely inspired by Alfred Hitchcock'sDial M for Murder) that delights in disrupting your expectations, so it grabs your attention right up to the final scene. It's a bit too cold to really draw you in (hey, these are not very nice people we're dealing with here!), but with its able cast and stylish direction by Andrew Davis, this less-than-perfect murder thriller is still definitely worth a look. The widescreen Special Edition DVD includes audio commentary by Michael Douglas, Andrew Davis, and producer Peter McGregor Scott, an alternate ending deleted from the finished film, and sketches by the film's costume designer. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (39)

In case you missed this movie...
This isn't one of Harrison Ford's bigger hits, but it should be, at least within the dramatic genre. Sure, he's Indiana Jones, and he's Han Solo, but outside of those series, Ford's movie choices have occasionally left this fan, at least, scratching her head (Sabrina? What were you thinking!?).

"Regarding Henry" is a rare little gem of a story, a simple film about a man whose life changes, believe it or not, for the better when he's shot and nearly killed by dint of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Ford's Henry Turner takes us through a life he doesn't remember, including a daughter and a wife played by an impossibly young and fresh-faced Annette Bening.

Sure, it's a little sentimental. But it's a pretty simple story with a positive feel. Filmed on location in New York City, the Manhattan scenery is rather delightful as well.

It's not film noir, it's not a tour de force of characterization, and no, it's not Academy Award winning screenwriting. But it is a thoroughly enjoyable movie, one Ford doesn't have any reason to be ashamed of.

Sometimes the worst curse is your truest blessing
Despite being less well known, "Regarding Henry" is one of Harrison Ford's best works. The film demands a wide spectrum from this great actor and he delivers convincingly. For the most part, the other performers take their cue from Ford's "Henry" and render a near perfect glimpse of a life that could have been.

The tile character, Henry Turner, is introduced to us as a top-flight litigator for a large New York legal firm. He is well groomed, dressed in a designer suit and he is seen speaking sincerely to a jury about human desires and justice. Our opinion of him changes as soon as Henry leaves the court. He quickly makes a call to his interior designer to berate her for having the wrong table delivered to his palatial home. He is just another lawyer, after all.

It is hard to watch this movie at the start. Henry is one of those men we all love to hate. He is selfish, self centered, successful and confident. His daughter is frightened of him and his wife is a pale reflection of him. Luckily we are not forced to watch this Henry for very long. He makes the classic movie exit and "goes out for some cigarettes."

What follows is a scene that is perfectly directed. Henry walks into a corner store demanding his brand of cigarettes, unaware that the other patron is robbing the owner. Henry does not become scared but before he can even attempt to control the situation, he is lying on the sidewalk with two bullets inside his body and the wail of approaching sirens in the background. This event is the cusp of Henry's life.

Annette Bening plays Henry's Wife, Sarah. She may not be in love with her husband anymore but she needs him. As her financial position becomes clear, she realizes she needs him very much. But she is not unaffected by it all. This is the man in her life, the father of her child, a good provider and protector. Seeing him lying motionless in a hospital bed, drooling and staring vacantly, is probably the most painful thing she has ever experienced. But there is some hope of recovery.

Henry's long rejuvenation at a specialty medical center is like a rebirth. He remembers nothing, coming into his new world without the power of speech or the ability to walk. His midwife/physiotherapist, Bradley, is wonderful. He is full of life, energy and enthusiasm. As Henry is taught to walk and speak and function, Bradely becomes the mainstay of his life. Sarah keeps her distance and Henry doesn't get to see his daughter, (Rachel), at all until the day he is deemed fit to go home, a scary separation from the only people he trusts.

But the Henry that returns to a home he barely remembers, is not the same man that left for cigarettes. He is a little shy, very calm, forgiving, gentle and above all, nice. His transformation is interpreted in different ways by different groups. The movie serves as an interesting depiction of how society views disabilities. His boss is patronizing, his daughter delighted, his mistress is distraught and for the longest time, Sarah doesn't know what to feel.

The ending may be predictable but in this case, it is the journey that we love. Most of us feel we have lost our innocence and that our honor has been a little tarnished by life's decisions. Henry takes us on a trip to see what might happen if we surrendered all the hard won prizes in our life and instead, chose to embrace life itself. This is a film that will make you feel. Some days, that's just what we need.

RITZ!
a great movie. even if you dont like drama i think you will like this one. its about harrison ford gets shot in the head and has to go to rehad to learn how to speak and work again so he can go home to his wife and kid. its not is most knowen movie but still a great one

Worth Seeing
I know this movie was not a big hit when it came out but it is really a good film. Harrison Ford is great as one of his most likeable characters that I have seen him portray. Henry, a corrupt lawyer who withholds evidence when his client is obviously guilty and a womanizer is seriously injured in a robbery. When he comes to, he has lost his memory and has to be re-taught just about everything. His teacher is a very virtuous man, who teaches Henry to enjoy the good things in life (Henry loves most of all Ritz crackers). Thus the mean, cheating Henry who forced his daughter to remain at a boarding school that she hates, is suddenly transformed into a kind man who cares about everybody's feelings.

Eventually, he figures out that the Henry he once was was a horrible person and he hopes never to go back to that life.

Annette Benning is great and beautiful as the wife that had an uncaring husband who all of a sudden loves her more than anything. She has to decide if she is ready to leave the life they led with other uncaring and obnoxious friends.

Priceless scenes, especially those involving Henry and his secretary!

AT LEAST THE FILM'S HEART IS IN THE RIGHT PLACE..
A hotshot, hyper-workaholic lawyer finds himself in the middle of an accidental shootout, loses his memory, and lo and behold, his world goes topsy turvy. Quite predictably, as is the case with pretty much every scene in this feel-good Oscar bait, the man turns over a new leaf, becomes a good father, a conscientious husband and a decent human being. Yawn.

The movie's slowly unfurling narrative and its high predictability levels could have made it a skippable fare, but Ford's rendition of amnesia is moving, and Annette Bening's performance is very impressive. An occasional saving grace is also the music, if you have an ear for that kind of stuff.

Recommended rental. ... Read more

Reviews (559)

Violent as an art form
I was hooked to John Woo's productions since I was a teenager in Asia. His productions were always stylish despite limited budget compared with what he's doing now in Hollywood. Storylines are always kept super simple so that viewers are enticed to enjoy the rest of the movie. Then, I wondered if there were a day when John Woo would leave his trademark in Hollywood & boy, didn't he start with a big bang? MI2 is every bit a John Woo's movie. Having said that, he's more restrained in using those slow motion scenes which he tended to overkill in his previous productions such as Face Off & Hard Target. The perfectly choreographed fighting scenes reminiscened of Asian gangster movies with plenty of somesaults, kicking, fists in the air, gun fights which never seemed to be running out of ammunitions were first rate. If you have seen Replacement Killers by Chow Yuen Fatt, the viewers would know what I mean. The chemistry between Thandie Newton & Tom Cruise was accentuated with the ingenious cinematography of their first encounter in a function amid the commotion of Flamenco dancers with their rhythmic tap dancing, & clapping. Talking about passion! Then, there's the memorable car chases between them in a Porsche 996 Carbriolet & Audi TT. Wow!! Anyway, what made John Woo's movies memorable must be the plot which the hero has to sacrifice himself to save another, or vice versa. In that sense, we really feel for the characters. Moreover, there's always the final confrontation between the ultimate good guy, & the ultimate bad guy. No interruption but fight to the death between two worthy contenders. Smooth!! Remind you of Nicholas Cage & John Trovolta in Face Off in the final slug after the boat crush? Watch out for the bike chase sequence which bettered or matched the car chase sequence in Gone in 60 Seconds. What shouldn't be overlooked is the bolsterous soundtrack composed by Hans Zimmer which seemed to bring the movie to a higher level. Hans' contributions in previous blockbusters such as Backdraft and The Rock have proven my point. In addition, there's cameo appearance by Sir Anthony Hopkins (short but memorable) & commendable peformances by Tom's funny but competent side kicks such as Ving Rhames (who only got mad at the baddies after they put a hole through his Versace jacket!) & John Polson (Aussie block to the bone with much usage of "mate" in his vocabulary). This production is definitely first class & slick. Critics can say whatever they want about MI2 being a no brainer but hey, for its entertainment value, it's definitely one of the best action movie for Year 2000. I can't wait for the sequel. Can this mean that this is a threat to 007 franchise? Highly recommended for first timer or repeat viewing. Sydney is definitely coming of age as the Hollywood of the Southern Hemisphere as it has proven in the Matrix, this movie, & the up & coming Star Wars prequel. Good on you, mate!! For viewers who are interested in John Woo's previous works, A Better Tomorrow (with 3 sequels) starring Chow Yuen Fatt is regarded as a classics in Asia. Don't miss them.

Mission:Very Possible
M:I2 is to say the least a vast improvement over the original 1996 movie. Tom Cruise returns as secret agent Ethan Hunt, a spy that even James Bond would like to have as his partner. The films' opening sequence is to say the least, breathtaking, as Hunt climbs on top of a mountain to receive his new assignment. From this point the action begins.John Woo, as usual, employs his slow motion action sequences, those which are similar to his 1997 classic "Face Off", starring John Travolta and Nick Cage. The Dolby Digital soundtrack will knock your ear drums, to say the least your stereo system will receive a good workout. Although there are some scenes which could have been left on the editing room floor, such as the sappy love scenes, which really des not belong in this kind of movie. Watch for an exciting chase sequence near the film's conclusion involving motorcycles, which takes the film to a new level.In conclusion the film earns four stars for its' clever action sequences and a plot which is easy to swallow, considering the near IMPOSSIBLE to follow plot of the original. Remember, this was the #1 money maker of 2000. Needless to say a dissapointing year at the movies. Where is Star Wars when you need it

Mission Failure
Despite a few problems, I still liked the first Mission Impossible movie very much. It's too bad the sequel didn't hold my interest as much as the first film did.

IMF operative Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise--sporting longer hair) is called away from his vacation by his new boss Commander Swanbeck (Anthony Hopkins in essentially a glorified cameo) to find a renegade agent. Once the mission begins, Hunt finds himself attracted to former agent Sean Ambrose's (Dougray Scott) girlfriend, Nyah Hall (Thandie Newton). These feelings complicate things as Ambrose holds the world hostage, threatening to release a deadly chemical weapon, if demands are not met. Hunt can also count on help from his pal Luther Stickell (Ving Rhames) when things get tough.

Director John Woo takes over for Brian De Palma, and with MI2, moves even further away from the concept of the television series. Hunt acts more like James Bond here than he did in first film. The only real difference is Hunt's long hair. Cruise may have the screen clout, but quite frankly is out of his element thanks to a weaker script. If you throw in Woo's trademark and tiresome overuse of doves and slow motion--it's practically a lost cause. As if that were not enough, Scott makes a very poor villian, ala` Aaron Eckheart in another Woo film, the equally poor Paycheck. The only bright spot for me was Newton...wow!

The extras on the DVD, may be more plentifull here, as opposed to those found on the Mission Impossible disc, but that doesn't mean that they are all worth your time. The audio commentary with Woo is OK but can get a bit tedious. The 15-minute "Behind The Mission" features "canned" cast and crew interviews. I did enjoy the Five-minute "Mission Incredible" stunts featurette. You also get to see the group Metallica's music video for the soundtrack song "I Disappear", a rather cool alternate title sequence that would have worked out better and the disc highligt, a very funny MTV Movie Awards show parody, "Mission Improbable" with Cruise, actor Ben Stiller and Woo. There's also a generous amount of DVD ROM material

What a disappointment...

Roxburgh too good for this film - he deserves better!
I would have given this movie more stars if Tom Cruise wasn't present in it, and Richard Roxburgh would have done a one man show. The scenes with Roxburgh, and only the scenes with Roxburgh was what kept me alive during the film. Although when that stupid Tom Cruise killed Roxburgh's character the movie ended right there. The scene was when he switched their faces, and I thought Roxburgh's character had beaten the crap out of Cruise's character and they killed him and I was feeling quite happy for the moment, until, they pulled the face off of Cruise and it was Roxburgh instead. I was DREADFULLY upset. And then it showed Roxburgh running, but it was really Cruise since he hadn't pulled off his face yet. He should've left Roxburghs face on (at least he would've looked better), and then he ripped his face off and it was Tom Cruise, thus the movie ends.

An action movie that will keep you entertained!
This movie is what action movies are all about. It keeps you entertained from start to finish, and it does pretty well in other ways. The story is still pretty good, nowhere near as good as the first one, but it's still good. Some people may say that the save-the-world theme is old, but that's what action movies are about. Give me one James Bond film where 007 didn't do that. Give me any other action movie without that theme. Lord of the Rings had it. Star Wars had it. So does the fact that M:I-2's story revolves around someone saving the world make the movie bad? No way! It's the kind of plot that makes an action movie an action movie. Moving on. Like others have stated, the purpose of action in these movies is not to seem totally realistic, but to be really entertaining and fun to watch. Actually, it still is pretty realistic. What's all this junk about Ethan hitting all his shots (Which is pretty unrealistic, I'll admit)? Didn't any of you watch the Biocyte shootout? How many of his shots hit one of Ambrose's men? Maybe a quarter of them! He's still human and has down-to-earth abilities, not completely unrealistic superhuman stuff that a lot of people criticize. And besides, until the road chase, it is perfectly reasonable that Ethan didn't get shot! Half the time he was behind a wall or lurking in the shadows, waiting for the moment to go Splinter Cell on a patrolling guard. Anyway, sorry I lingered. The acting in this movie is great. Tom Cruise gives Ethan Hunt a very human qualities. Thandie Newton, who plays Nyah Hall, also does the same for her character. Ving Rhames returns to the comic-relief character Luther (the brilliant computer programmer from M:I), and continues to give Luther the comical humor from the first movie. John Polson is introduced as the Australian helicopter pilot Billy Baird, and also gives a lot of humor to the movie. And by the way, both Rhames and Polson do a great job of acting besides the humor, and bring the characters to life very well. Dougray Scott is the villain in this movie, and does it very nicely. He gives Sean Ambrose the kind of madman look and nicely combines it with cold-blooded intelligence to make the character a very good villain. And finally, Anthony Hopkins is Ethan's new leader, and does a very good support role. What about the music? Well, if you've seen the first movie, the music is just the same with a little metallic feel to it. And if you haven't, then don't worry, you won't be dissapointed. This is a great action movie that will keep you entertained throughout the two hours of the film, and does well in areas that some action films don't quite succeed in, despite what others say. ... Read more

Reviews (70)

impressive
Following the success of his thesis project "Who's that knocking at my door", Scorcese returned in 1973 with Mean Streets. Like a lot of other of Scorcese's films, Mean Streets explores the catholic guilt of the main character(Keitel) while drawing a contrast to another(DeNiro).
Keitel is near perfect in his role. In most other films, the audience would hardly consider Keitel a protagonist. He runs numbers, wacthes strippers, and does not "love" his girlfriend. However, when compared to Deniro's Johnny boy or some of the other characters in the film, one can't help but admire his altruism. In Mean Streets, Keitel plays the only role he is capable of playing well: A man stuck in two different worlds; In this case the world of clubs, dark alleys and violent street corners and the other more peaceful and disciplined world he strives for.
I don't care much for DeNiro's character, so I will not comment much on him, however it is only fitting that I reccomend some other films for Kietel fans on fans of this genre. Bad Lieutenant is the best place for any Keitel fan to start, but it is certainly not for the faint hearted. Taxi Driver also stars Keitel, but DeNiro is the main character. These films both tell the story of a man who is so fed up with the turmoil he observes every day on the streets, that he takes a road which eventually results in his own destruction.

the most influential independent film
"Mean Streets," simply put, is the greatest independent film ever made. At the very least, it pioneered what modern audiences have come to associate with the best of indie cinema, and what, by the late '90s, has become so essential to our perception of so-called "hip" movies that the once daring and exhilarating techniques are now mostly used as frustrating cliches. The picture itself, made in 1973, is most famous for kick-starting three major careers. Martin Scorsese and Robert DeNiro later collaborated as a director/actor team on four more masterpieces: "Taxi Driver," "Raging Bull" "The King of Comedy" and "Goodfellas." Harvey Keitel, in the leading role, went on to play other memorable characters, like "Pulp Fiction"'s Mr. Wolf. Cast as Charlie , a small-time, young gangster in New York's Little Italy, Keitel struggles to make sense of his Catholic background and help his troubled friend (DeNiro) stay out of the powerful Mafia players' way. What seems to be a familiar scenario, used as far back as the classic Bogart/Cagney vehicles, gets an unusually complex treatment from Scorsese. A conventional, linear plot structure with big speeches and witty one-liners from main characters is abandoned for a grittier, naturalistic approach. The film consists of a series of telling episodes, related only through their participants. "Mean Streets" has much more in common with the works of Italian Neo-realism or French New Wave, rather than a typical gangster drama. Its unorthodox, original, yet unpretentious camera work gives the film an unprecedented vitality that young filmmakers have attempted to recreate for decades. Now commonplace shots, such as a subtitled introduction of a particular character, a fight sequence tracked through the four corners of a room in a single take, a swaying hand-held camera to create the sense of an alcohol-induced stupor, have all been popularized through this movie, a veritable Bible of dynamic cinematography. Another revolutionary aspect of "Mean Streets" is the virtual lack of a script. Most of the key scenes were almost fully improvised, thus sounding far more authentic than the old-style, theatrical delivery used in most American films up to that time. The actors' speech is so profanity-ridden that no screenwriter of the time could have possibly doctored anything even close. De Niro's flamboyant turn as a youth on the edge of sanity is unlike anything before. In fact,the swear-fests of later crime movies (and indie classics like "Clerks") owe a direct debt to his extraordinary performance as Johnny Boy. One of Scorcese's most groundbraking achievements was his incorporation of popular songs into the soundtrack. All of the icluded music originates elsewhere- Italian traditional recordings (Opera arias, Folk tunes) and for the most part, glorious, irresistable Rock'n'Roll of the early 60's (Motown, the Stones, Girl Groups, DooWop).The easily identifiable hits serve as atmospheric settings, adding an extra, personal dimension to any given scene. George Lucas' "American Graffiti", released in the same year, operated by the same principle, establishing a tradition that seems to expand with every coming year. As it is often the case with true independent cinema, "Mean Streets" was ignored at the box office, despite an underground acclaim which helped launch not only the great talents behind it, but an entire school of filmmaking.

Overlooked and underappreciated
This is a fantastic film, and I'm going to tell you why I think so, and by the time you finish reading this, you just might change your mind about it, or run out and have to see it.

The music is great. Perfectly fits the time period and setting, I dunno how much they had to pay in royalties for the songs in this film, but I love em'.

The camera work is fantastic. There's a scene where the camera gives you charlie's viewpoint, stumbling, wobbling across the bar, lights flashing, people dancing, music blaring, then zooms out to his smiling happy face. Then there's the filming of the street festival and the overall way which New York is captured so perfectly. It feels like you are really in the city, the movie has that gritty feeling to it.

The dialogue is great, many of it is ad libed by Deniro and Keitel. This is the beginning of ad libbed dialogue for deniro, the culmination being his speech in front of the mirror in taxi driver; "You talkin' to me"? There's a scene where Keitel confronts Deniro outside the bar to ask him about his debt, the exchange is perfect, it could never have been written and its executed beautifully.

The acting is also fantastic throughout.

So, great acting, great filmwork and great dialogue all come together to create a wonderfully realistic film.

Now, the end of the movie, maybe you didn't understand it, so I'll explain the film. I'll try not to spoil the ending.

Ok, so Charlie does some bad things, he works for the mob after all, and he wants to repent for his sins, so, after going to church and then later seeing jonny boy in a bar he thinks that God has asked him to repent for his sins on the streets, by helping out Jonny Boy. He doesn't believe that saying a few hail mary's or confessing washes away one's sins. So enter the walking train wreck that is Jonny Boy.

Now, what type of person is Jonny Boy? He has no sense of responsibility, he does not answer to anyone, he does not obey any rules, never does what is expected of him.

Hmm, so what type of person is Charlie? There are several scenes in the film that let you know what type of person charlie is. The statement Charlie loves everybody and everybody loves Charlie almost sums it up. Charlie wants to please everyone. But his life is full of conflict. You can't be in the mob and be religious, it just doesn't work that way. You can't hang out with guys who are racist and date an African American. These are just a few examples, but suffice to stay that Charlie wants everyone to like him, the local mob boss, his friends, his God, but he also wants to be happy and do the things he wants to do. There is conflict in all of this. Some of the other people that charlie wants to please, eg., God and the mob boss, have conflicting agendas. Some of the people that charlie wants to please conflict with what he personally wants to do with his life, eg. he is embarassed to be dating the epileptic because he thinks it shows weakness to his friends, but he loves her and she makes him happy.

You cannot please everyone. The irony of this film, and this is a little spoiler, is that while charlie is trying to save jonny boy, he should take a few lessons from him. Jonny Boy does whatever he wants without thinking about who he might upset, or disappoint. Charlie is the complete opposite. Yeah, Jonny Boy is destructive and his life is falling apart, but the point is that the two of them represent two opposite extremes. This is why the end of the film is tragic, its the lesson that you can't make everyone happy, that life is full of conflict, the conflict may be between different people in your life which you try to please, or between yourself and other people in your life. These basic conflicts and how we deal with them sum up who we are as human beings.

So there are many reasons why this film is great, I highly recommend giving it a second chance. I watch it every once in awhile and it really is one of my favorite films.

"Mean Streets" my @5$
Good god what a f*cking waste of time and money. When I was at work I was talkin' to my buddy Travis about the worst movies we'd ever seen and he mentioned a movie with DeNiro & Keitel but he couldn't remember the name. He said "Johnny Boy" and I was like, "Oh yeah, that's Mean Streets!" We agreed this is one of the top worst f*cking movies EVAR MADE!! That's right dude, do NOT watch this! You will be saying things like, "What's the point?" "What was the plot of that movie?" "It just ended, like THAT?" Seriously, you'd be better off just watching Goodfellas or Casino or Taxi Driver one more time.

Great movie about life on the street
This movie is great mainly because of the acting of Robert Deniro. He is explosive in his role as Johnny Boy a degenerate who owes bookies and shylocks. His friend Charlie, played by Harvey Keitel tries to save him. Movie shows little Italy in the seventies and has an authentic NY feel. ... Read more

Reviews (220)

A Beautiful and Haunting Debut
Julie Taymor, of Broadway's "Lion King" fame, creates a dazzling surreal anachronistic fantasy world with her feature film directorial debut. "Titus" (lately, "Titus Andronicus,") though thought to be Shakespeare's worst play, is a beautiful symphony of distruction, murder, deception, seduction, rape, and cannibalism...at least it becomes so under Taymor's careful direction. The choreographed opening scene of marching soldiers weary from battle in the middle of the collesium sets the tone for a very unlikely brilliant piece of film. Alongside armored soldiers on horseback, people ride down the street in automobiles of various periods. A jazz band accompanies the new young emperor's wedding night orgy. And two young Gothic barbarians in furs trade in their furs for leather and video games. This movie is beautiful, intelligent, and above all unexpected. You can't help but like Aaron the Moor, who prides himself on his villany. Even the queens young sons you can't help but find fascinating, despite their rape of Titus' young daughter Lavinia.

Anthony Hopkins, as always, is brilliant in the title role of Titus. A man dedicated to his country and his emperor and upholds duty above all else...even willing to risk his daughter's unhappiness by consenting to her marriage to the young corrupt emperor Saturninus. Saturninus however eventually marries Titus' captive Gothic queen, played with true sinister brutality by the unrepentantly sexy Jessica Lange. One of her sons you might even recognize from the movie "Velvet Goldmine." Saturninus is played by the always talented and sexually enigmatic Alan Cumming who seems to take great pleasure in imitating more politicians than you could shake a stick at. But hands down the show is stolen by Henry Lennix, playing the evil Aaron, the queens trusted friend and consort. Aaron never apologized for all the pain he has inflicted or his evil ways...he revels in them.

The ending is not unexpected considering most Shakespearian tragedies...but I won't ruin the finer points. Suffice it to say, my personal favorite scene involves the queens two sons, Lavinia, and some twigs put to some very interesting use...this scene sticks with you long after the movie has ended...as beautiful and haunting as it is horrifying.

Titus (2000) d: Taymor, Julie
Titus Andronicus is arguably the most complicated play ever penned by the great William Shakespeare. It is also one of the darkest and most violent plays, filled with shocking scenes, and obscene human behavior. Using the original old English, this movie mixes things up a little using outrageous situations, and brilliant visual touches of ancient Rome, fascist Italy, and a coke-a-cola post everything media assault. The new emperor played by Alan Eyes Wide Shut (1999) Cumming marries a vengeful queen (played by a sometimes topless Jessica Lange) who has two vicious punk rock sons who torment Roman warrior Titus (played by Anthony Hopkins). In scenes comparable to Silence of the Lambs (1991), Titus seems to lose his mind after his two sons are decapitated and his daughter is raped, she has her tongue cut out and her hands chopped off. Revenge soon follows in a cannibalistic dinner served to the guilty, 'a la Theatre of Blood (1973) with Vincent Price. The DVD contains many extras. A excellent film with something to offer both young and old alike. Not only is it hard to believe the depths the movie delves into, but even more incredible is that this epic picture by Julie (Lion King) Taymor is a directorial debut. Impressive first try..., we can't wait to see another.

I Gave it 4 Viewings
Ms Taymor, let me say at the outset, is a highly creative director. Loved the Broadway show (The Lion King). She's innovative, imaginative, extremely adept at visual imagery, etc. What she isn't is adept at interpreting The Bard. The DVD version had her meeting with a group of NYU students discussing the production and the play, in which she showed exactly how shallow her understanding of Shakespeare actually is. Her focus was entirely on her vision, rather than his text. That shows up, rampantly in the movie. It's all about her and her imagination, never centering on the text or the innner beauty of Shakespeare's most brutal play.

I'm not saying that all the bard's plays have to focus on the grand design of the poetry, the meter, the frangrant, redolent language, but at least lip service should be paid there. In this version, we get stuffed with so many Taymor pipe dream (and I do mean a loaded hookah!) visuals, that the language is submarined into oblivion. Even so consummate an actor as Anthony Hopkins (why isn't he Sir Anthony, by now? ..get off your keister, Queenie!) can't compete with the hyperactive Ms Taymor and her busycam. She's obviously aiming for the Art House crowd (of which I am a sometime member, but not in good standing here, obviously), but she misses even that mark. Most of the "innovative" interpolations, such as the young kid who provides the framing device, are entirely superfluous, thereby losing any actually artistic force they might have achieved. It's nothing but empty window dressing.

The performances are largely execrable, including Sir Tony, I hate to report. His version of the Brando mumble is ill suited to the title role. Jessica Lange gives a nadir plumbing performance in a career that features a few of them. She was a lot more convincing in King Kong, trust me. The rest of the Mad Max rejects were even worse.

The reason I gave this film four viewings before sending the DVD on to a friend, was I thought perhaps it was just me, and I was being too reactionary or cynical about this brave new look at what is actually, in a way, one of my favorite Shakespeare plays. Then, midway through viewing #5, I thought, "nah....this thing really is as bad as originally perceived."

Last I heard, "The Lion King" was still playing on Broadway. My suggestion is, buy tickets to that, next time you are in NYC. As for this Turkey, my advice is to rent it if you must. Otherwise, don't put yourself through the torture I did.

BEK

Brilliantly stylized; unique
Every once in a while, a movie comes along which you feel was made just for you. I can understand why a lot of people might not like this film, but for certain people I think it might be just what they were looking for.

Taymor's production, instead of trying to somehow mitigate the remorseless violence and moral vacuum which characterized the much-maligned play, intentionally plays it up. The garishness of the plot is complimented by the garishness of the anachronistic costumes, the elaborate staging and the delerious, overdramatic acting. It gets right to the heart of what a revenge drama is, and what value can be found in Andronicus just as a pure visceral experience. A lot of great performances, and the images are brilliant. My only complaint is, given the pacing of a modern film, it's difficult to hear and understand all of the dialogue sometimes, since none of it was 'updated' from the original Shakespearean. Given the stylized nature of everything else, maybe some of the dialogue should have been simplified.

Writing this now, comparisons to Kill Bill are inevitable, and, while it can't quite claim to reach that pedestal, and lacks the ultimatley morally redeeming value of the complete KB, I recommend it to fans of the KB pt. 1 as a similiar experience.

Taymor adapts vengeance and its consequences...
Titus is based on Shakespeare's Titus Andronicus, which is an extremely bloody and terrifying tale of vengeance and its consequences. The cinematic adaptation that Julie Taymor wrote is set in a Roman Empire-like environment with crossings of ancient and modern as the mise-en-scene displays cars as well as tanks with soldiers in ancient armor. This creates a link between then and now, which could suggest that the displayed horror is timeless and possible even today. Taymor creates exaggerations in this cinematic environment with brilliant cinematography, grand directing, and mise-en-scene that amplify the abstract atmosphere as it elevates the unnatural doings of Titus Andronicus (Anthony Hopkins), Tamora (Jessica Lange), and Saturninus (Alan Cumming) among others. The Shakespearian violence that Taymor presents serves as the means to an end as the story plunges into a dark realm that most do not wish to visit, but must contemplate as it could have devastating effects on all.

The film opens with a scene where a young Lucius is sitting at the kitchen table, with a brown paper bag over his head, eating dinner while sadistically tearing the heads of his warrior dolls while violently smashing the items on the table and pouring ketchup over the "killed" dolls. This is followed by an explosion where Lucius dives bawling to the floor for protection. Lucius is a clear resemblance of his father Titus in the opening shot. The rest of the film is a carnival of hideous acts and morbid behavior that alll falls around Titus with a domino effect trigged by one wrong decision. Despite the distressing elements of Titus, the film offers a brilliant cinematic experience that devours the audience as it supplies several subplots and themes, which the audience should ponder under the light of human compassion and the word "consequences". ... Read more

Description

In CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER, Harrison Ford returns as intrepid CIA agent Jack Ryan.When his mentor, Admiral Greer (Jones), becomes gravely ill, Ryan is appointed acting CIA Deputy Director of Intelligence.His first assignment: investigate the murder of one of the President's friends, a prominent U.S. businessman with secret ties to Colombian drug cartels.Unbeknownst to Ryan, the CIA has already dispatched a deadly field operative (Dafoe) to lead a paramilitary force against the Colombian drug lords.Caught in the crossfire, Ryan takes matters into his own hands, risking his career and life for the only cause he still believes in -- the truth. ... Read more

Reviews (65)

Wars Abroad, Wars At Home
Clear And Present Danger is the third Tom Clancy novel, featuring hero Jack Ryan, to be made into a movie. The story deals with the war on drugs and corruption in the government. The end result is a better film than Patriot Games, taking its cues more from the original novel, than that film did.

Former CIA analyst Jack Ryan, (Harrison Ford) is asked by his mentor and friend, Admiral Greer (James Earl Jones) to take over for him, while he battles cancer. Ryan reluctantly accepts. When a friend of the President's (Donald Moffatt) is killed, Ryan learns that a drug kingpin (Miguel Sandoval) may be responsible, for the crime. As he briefs the President, forces inside the administration, are working to take the cartel out, even without any proof. Ryan must discover the truth, about who is working against him before it's too late

The cast also includes the great Henry Czerny as Ritter, a smarmy guy at the CIA who butts heads with Ryan, Harris Yullin as the National Security Advisor, and Anne Archer returns as Cathy, Jack's wife. Directed by Philip Noyce, who also directed Patriot Games, the film stays within the framework of the book. The movie also is detailed enough to keep fans of the book happy, while at the same time it is nicely paced Ford proves once again why he's so right for roles like this. He wears his hero hat so well. It is Czerny though, that makes things really interesting for Ryan and, he gives the film an extra spark or two.

As part of the reissued "Jack Ryan" series on DVD, Clear And Present Danger, contains a retrospective featurette on how the film was made. It's pretty good and does a decent job taking you back, to what it was like on the set. The standard theatrical trailer tops off the extras. I wish there was a commentary track to go along with the other stuff--or maybe some deleted footage-that would have helped.

Still the DVD is recommended over the "movie only" edition from a few years ago

Ryan, The Drug Cartels, And CIA Abuse
The third installment in the cinematic series based on Tom Clancy's CIA analyst Jack Ryan, CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER is a long but engrossing political action thriller that once again puts Harrison Ford, the thinking man's action film actor, in the role of Ryan.

This time around, Ford investigates the murder of a close friend of the President (Donald Moffatt) by Colombian drug cartel hitmen. When his mentor (James Earl Jones) falls ill due to pancreatic cancer, Ford is suddenly put in charge as deputy director of the CIA. He continues his investigation of the murders and ties them in with one particular drug cartel leader (Miguel Sandoval) with whom the murdered man had a little issue with ill-gotten money,....

But what Ford doesn't know is that, on orders from the revenge-minded Moffatt, his second deputy (Henry Czerny) and the president's national security advisor (Harris Yulin) have ordered a rogue officer named Clark (Willem Dafoe) in with a covert military team to put a huge dent in the cartel's activities. Dafoe and his team are successful at what they do, but the cartels retaliate with deadly results on Ford's friends in the FBI during a visit to Bogota. And when Ford finds out about the operation, he finds himself going down to Colombia a second time to help spirit Dafoe and the covert team out of harm's way.

Ably directed, once more, by Phillip Noyce (DEAD CALM; PATRIOT GAMES), CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER gives Ford another chance to prove his mettle in the action genre. The suspense and CIA intrigue are all laid out exceptionally well by Noyce and his first-rate cadre of screenwriters, Donald Stewart, Steven Zaillian, and John Milius. Jones is at his usual best as the now-dying Admiral Greer, and Anne Archer returns as Ford's wife.

But a performance really worth noting here is Czerny's as the unconsciously corrupt CIA deputy director Robert Ritter. About as uncouth and conniving a heavy as there has ever been in the movies, his performance is absolutely chilling and believable. It makes the whole notion of our government going beyong reasonable bounds even more credible than it already is.

Some will object to the film not pandering to Clancy's right-wing political points of view or his gung-ho pro-military stance, but that isn't necessarily what this movie is about. It does not condemn covert military action, but it does question the wisdom of sending men into a war zone where the risks are extreme, the reasons for such actions are vague at best, and there is no clear exit strategy. Such points are made extremely well in this film's action format; and for those reasons, it gets the highest marks.

Best Clancy Movie
Out of the four Tom Clancy/Jack Ryan movies, I think Clear and Present Danger is easily the best. Harrison Ford is one of my favorite actors, and even though he's made some dreck in recent years, his string of successes post-Star Wars and Indiana Jones reached their peak around this time.
The story of the film revolves around the U.S. war on drugs, attempting to stop the flow at the source of production in Colombia. To this end, Harrison Ford as Jack Ryan becomes caught up in the action along with the always-great Willem DaFoe as CIA agent Clark. Just about all of the actors in this movie are great, including Joaquim de Almeida, Donald Moffat, Henry Czerny (the slime dripping off his character might damage your TV), and Raymond Cruz.
Not only is this one of my favorite spy/government intrigue movies, but it's just flat-out one of my favorite movies. Great story, great actors, great movie. Highly recommended.

Not even close
Once there was a man named Jack Ryan. That's about where the similarities to the book end.

For what it's worth, I'm not a picky movie viewer. I'll watch nearly anything. So for me to complain about this movie means that something was really off-base.

As far as an action movie goes, it was passable. As far as the technological thriller that the book was, it doesn't even come close. There is no character development (never felt anything towards Ding), random changes in a character's persona (Clark goes from wanting to kill Ryan to making the chopper go back), thing missing that are important to the plot (downing of drug running planes), and things that were never in the book (yacht owner tied to the President).

To make what could be an extremely long review somewhat shorter, if you've read the book and are a fan of Tom Clancy, don't bother. If you're just looking for a film with " 'splosions," this might work.

The Best Jack Ryan on the Screen, and with Good Reason!
Harrison Ford isn't the person who wrote this story, Tom Clancy is. But, Harrison Ford is the perfect Jack Ryan, a spy with a conscience and a man who does the right thing not the expeditious thing. While this is not close to his biggest role or hit, he plays the character, Jack Ryan, as perfectly as he can be portrayed in a movie. He gives the right feeling to his character, the right indignation to wrongs done in the name of Patriotism and Justice, and portrays the right kind of patriotism to the fullest. But, the rest of the cast is also well played, including the good guys, Clark, Chavez, and James Earl Jones' character, and the bad guys, the President and his sleazy administration, as well as the drug dealers. Tom Clancy wrote a great book with this one and the book is well served by the overall excellence of the movie. I strongly recommend the movie to fans of Harrison Ford, Tom Clancy, and William Dafoe. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Filmed in the widescreen splendor of "Panavision Super 70" and blessed with the finest production values that Hollywood clout can buy, this tale of spunky Irish immigrants forgot one crucial ingredient: a decent screenplay. The film is entertaining enough, and director Ron Howard brings his technical proficiency to the simple plot, culminating in a dynamic, breathtaking depiction of the Oklahoma land rush of 1893. But the movie is really just a vacuous vehicle for married stars Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman as (respectively) the poor tenant farmer and rich landlord's daughter who flee Ireland to be American pioneers. The scenery and the stars are never less than stunning, but Howard falls short of the mark in his attempt to match the epic sweep of films by David Lean. On the other hand, this movie is certainly never boring even if it rarely makes sense, and Lean's own Irish epic, Ryan's Daughter, is a snoozer by comparison. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (60)

Book of Days
Far and Away is such an incredible looking movie that your heart might end up hating your eyes for distracting yourself from the true beauty of the film.

This film is the story of Joesph and his hopes and dreams. His father is killed and he seeks to kill the man that took his land. Joseph meets up with Shannon, the wealthy daughter of the man responsible for taking Joseph's land, and she pays him to take her to America. Unfortunately they're robbed and we see the cold, harsh realities of foreigners trying to survive in America. Through prize fighting, Joseph begins to make a nice life for himself, while the spoiled Shannon ends up plucking chickens to make end's meat. Their trials and tribulations bring them together in one of the best love stories told, and the ending...well, lets just say that it's one of the most wonderful endings you'll find in a film.

Ron Howard has done an incredible job of bringing this film to life, and the performance of Tom Cruise is one of his best ever. Far and Away is a film that you have to see. You'll feel better about life after you have.

A real feel-good love story for the dreamer in us all.
What can I say about this film to begin my review? Three words. I LOVE it. I may be a little biased, but I love things set in Ireland, Scotland, and that area. I was hooked immediately on the beautiful scenery of Ireland's west coast, and my heart was immediately stirred by the rich and dramatic, yet at times very soft and tender music. Even more so when I read "Music By John Williams" in the opening credits. But I digress.

Music and scenery aside this movie still has much going for it, and it really shines. It's a love story yes, but it's beautiful. Others have mentioned the great chemistry between Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman here, and they are right. I am not a big fan of Tom Cruise (Rain Man was excellent though) or Nicole Kidman, but they played very well off each other. This film follows, again as many have mentioned, the two lead characters as they make a harrowing journey from Ireland to Boston to Oklahoma in pursuit of their dreams. His is "I'll work my own land someday" hers is "I'm modern, and I'm going to a modern place" She wants to get away from her parents old-fashioned and "stuffy" way of living.

I hate to diss other films so I'll try not to do that here. I WILL say that I loved the love story in Far And Away because it works. And it works because it is given time to develop. Joseph and Shannon hate each others guts at first and make no secret of it, but they are drawn slowly together by the perils of their journey. It is touching to see their hatred for each other change from hatred to grudging respect, to affection, and finally grow all the way to genuine love. This works MUCH better than spending a day on a ship, and saying to yourself "Oh look, there's a pretty girl up on the next deck. Let's take her dancing, partying, teach her how to spit, how to stand on the back of a ship with her eyes shut and her arms outstretched. Then I'll draw a nude portrait of her, and then we'll go and have sex in the back of a car. All witihin a period of about three or four days." (Just for the record I loved Titanic too, but the "quickie" love story took away from the power of the film JUST a TAD because the love between Rose and Jack was not allowed to GROW and DEVELOP into itself as it is here in FAR AND AWAY. In TITANIC the love between Jack and Rose was just THERE. It was just: Boy meets girl. Girl meets boy. Boy loves girl. Girl loves boy. Badda-BING, Bada-BANG, Badda-BOOM)

I'm sorry, I'm digressing again, so I'll try to keep to the point and keep the rest of this short. In summary , to me this film is a great one, well done in every part of the package. LOVELY scenery is wedded to absolutely beautiful music as two great actors are supported by an assortment of loveable aqquaintances and a couple of dastardly villians (I'm counting Mike Kelly here too, see the film to know who he is and why I call him a villian). All this comes together in a beautiful love story that has the power to touch the heart, and the tear ducts, and make you realize the importance of holding onto and going after your dreams. I loved it, and so can you, if you have the courage to let this film touch your heart. If you do allow that, it will carress it. Peace, and God bless you. Always.

Do you have a craving for strawberry tart?
Watch this movie to find out where that line comes from.

In 1892-93, Tom Cruise is poor Joseph in Ireland and Nicole Kidman is rich Shannon from the same country. Their fake accents are collectively awful. Cruise sounds like a wannabe leprechaun.

Together they run off to America where they tell the landlord they are brother and sister so they can share the rent. Joseph becomes a boxer and wins big in the ring. Shannon decides to be a dancehall girl.

Although they profess to hate each other, you know where that storyline is going to end. It is, after all, Cruise and Kidman in their heyday.

I did like the homesteading scene at the end -- where people raced across the plains and made their claims to land. I hadn't known about that piece of history before. Nicely done, Ron Howard!

Too much edited from TV version
I was very disappointed to find so much missing from this movie on DVD. I have the TV version recorded and I know they left out quite a bit. This seems strange since DVDs are suppose to hold so much more information. I also saw the movie at the theater a couple of times,there are parts missing on the DVD that were in the theater version also. Don't buy the DVD if you enjoyed the TV version"with never before seen footage". I had expected the DVD to cover it all,but at least everything I saw at the theater.

Only because I can't give it zero
This well may have been the worst movie I've ever seen. I only watched it to the end to see if it could continue to deteriorate. Shockingly, it did. The storyline was terrible, the dialogue was worse. The best part (or worst, depending on how you look at these things) was the very end. Just when you think the film couldn't get more insipid, a horse rolls over Tom Cruise and, much to Nicole Kidman's chagrin, he dies. She starts crying and screaming over his dead body and, shades of Beauty and the Beast, his eyes suddenly pop open. Yes, he's been brought back to life by the strength of her love. What were these people thinking? If you are trying to find a movie to fill out your list of the ten most worthless films of all time, check this one out. If not, don't bother. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Part of the late-'70s wave of films about strong women (as if none had existed before that), Julia starred Jane Fonda as writer Lillian Hellman in a story based on some of Hellman's own writings. The stronger woman here is the title character (Vanessa Redgrave), a socially active young woman who teaches Hellman the importance of sticking to her beliefs--even in the face of Nazi terror. The subplot focuses on Hellman's growth as a writer, under the supportive wing of lover Dashiell Hammett (Jason Robards). Lushly photographed by Fred Zinnemann, it's one of the few films that projects a sense of how a writer writes; it also was unafraid to explore the dark consequences of conscience, when Resistance-fighter Julia is captured by the Germans. Robards and Redgrave both won Oscars (leading to Redgrave's Zionist hoodlums acceptance speech). Watch for Meryl Streep in a tiny role in her film debut. --Marshall Fine ... Read more

Reviews (17)

JANE & VANESSA AT THEIR BEST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I have seen this film many times and each time it's new. Jane is so real playing nervous when being searched on the train! Even though I know the outcome I
still squirm in my seat--thats a great proformance--

Julia
Based on a section of Lilian Hellman's PENTIMENTO, it tells about Hellman's gradual involvement in the resistance movement during WW II. Jane Fonda plays Hellman, Jason Robards is Dashiel Hammett in a bit role, and Vanessa Redgrave is Julia, a rich friend of Hellman's since childhood who is deeply involved in the German resistance. Hellman is asked to smuggle $50,000 into Germany on her way to Moscow; she does so under great risk, and then Julia is arrested and murdered. Julia is supposed to represent great courage, and Redgrave plays her with an angelic quality; Hellman is the initiate into all that Julia is. Done very artfully, though it's lacking in drama.

The Truth behind..."Julia"
Hellman had a childhood friend (Alice) that grew up and died in the Vienna riots, 1934. (An Unfinished Woman, chapter four). Obviously, this is what inspired the Chapter....Julia... in her later book. So the story is probably true to the point where they charged the students...and the newspaper headline that follows. Scenes at the hospital were probably made up as her friend, Alice, died in the riots. The train trip was probably made up , but she did go to Moscow.

The story of her life with Hammett is completely believable even though locations may have been changed. Her relationship with Dorothy Parker, and the trip to Paris....look to be true. The later part of the movie as to how she dealt with Julia's body could have well been true...but happened immediately after the Vienna riot.

The part where Hammett says...."You'd better tear that up.." happened later in her life in regards to the play..."The Autumn Garden" and not in relation to her first play.."The Children's Hour".

The movie, the story...very well done. Fonda, Redgrave, and Robarts...all excellent.

If you really want to enjoy this movie. I suggest you do the following reading. Hellman's three books....plus her play ..."The Children's Hour". Read about Dorothy Parker, I believe there is a book "The Life and Times of Dorothy Parker." I can not recall the title exactly. It's the times of the 30's that is really interesting to me and frames this story superbly.

Best Movie in the History of the World
Everything works in this beautiful period piece, especially the acting. The design and costuming are also spectacular, as is the powerful, poignant script. It's a hero's journey/road picture to outdo any other, as far as I'm concerned, with bravery against Nazis thrown in for good measure -- lovely work that happens to feature Meryl Streep's film debut.

Truth? Fiction?Or Just A Darned Good Story
Occasionally, when I'm dashing off a review for amazon.com, I will try to adopt a less subjective, somewhat more professional style.Sometimes this is little more than a kind of writing exercise: sometimes it may be just because I've looked at some of my other reviews and seen (much to my own embarrassment) how often the pronoun "I" comes up.Who needs that?

But then *I* think there really are some advantages to talking about film in a subjective mode.Perhaps more than any other art form (except maybe, popular music and--if you view it as an artform--television), the movies just about beg for a subjective analysis.It's what made reading Pauline Kael so much fun after all.Ultimately, movie criticism is about what you like, what moved you, whether or not you could relate to the action on the screen, whether or not you even WANTED to relate to the action on the screen.The whole schmier.

And another advantage to the subjective approach--so often, when I re-watch a movie, I respond to it completely differently from the last time.A film you loved twenty years ago has you scratching your head and saying, "WHAT was I thinking."And a film you detested can take on a positive new light for reasons that you can't even begin to put your finger on.You may even find that you go back and forth with a given film to the extent that you begin to realize that subjective commentary may be the ONLY truly honest commentary.

Case in point, Fred Zinneman's 1977 film JULIA.There was a time when I was very ambivalent (and really mostly negative) about this movie.It seemed to be an exercise in earnestness, kind of "special project" movie that the relatively recently politicized Jane Fonda undertook so frequently in the 1970s.Actually, though, I found that the political story worked pretty well.The subplot about Lillian's struggles to establish herself as a playwright nearly drove me up the wall, precisely for the reasons that others have detailed here.The scenes of her chainsmoking, tearing her hair--and actually throwing the typewriter out the window (try doing that with your computer these days) virtually SCREAMED "serious writer at work."When I watched this film in my 20s, I wasn't very patient with what I felt were cinematic cliches.

When I watched the film again recently, I found that these scenes didn't bother me half as much as they had back then.It may well be it's because I've seen hundreds of films in the interim and have come to realize that there is a kind of "cinematic shorthand" (a much friendlier term than "cinematic cliche, wouldn't you say?) that has always been employed (whether you're talking about images of the hands of clock speeding by--or calendar pages being torn off--or something as basic as a voiceover, a device central to the film JULIA).I seem to have grown a lot more patient with such cinematic conventions over the years.And in the case of JULIA, I have actually started to see the typewriter throwing as further possible evidence of a self-mythologizing tendency on the part of Lillian Hellman, the author of the film's source material, the "memoir" PENTIMENTO.

Mary McCarthy has been widely quoted as having said that every word that Lillian Hellman ever wrote was "a lie, including 'the' and 'and.' I don't know enough about Hellman or McCarthy to comment extensively. But the film, perhaps inadvertantly, raises a lot of interesting questions about the very nature of what a memoir is, or a film biography.If Lillian Hellman sought self-aggrandizement, which seems likely, does she also not touch on some very real truths about the nature of courage and heroism.And in the end, doesn't she (or maybe don't the filmmakers) tell a pretty good story?

Take it with a grain--or a shaker--of salt.Put some of it on your popcorn.And enjoy a remarkable story about two remarkable women.In this po-mo world, we're becoming used to taking every tale as a fiction.When it's told with good acting, good direction, good cinematography, and, yes, mostly good writing, it's pretty easy to take a few "lies" with the truth, the chaff with the wheat, and to still take a few lessons from the process.






... Read more

Description

This rock'n'roll adventure story tells of two unlikely lovers who accidentally double-cross the Detroit mob by stealing valuable contraband. Christian Slater and Patricia Arquette, flee to Los Angeles where they are sought by both gangsters and cops. ... Read more

Reviews (173)

A great movie.
A young man by the name of Clerence (Christian Slater) gets to meet a bright wide-eyed Prostitute named Alabama (Patricia Arquette) falls in love at first sight and then they get married. But the Couple takes a wrong turn, when Clerence told the wrong suitcase from a Pimp (Gary Oldman), which Clerence did kill him. Then Clerence & Alabama finds out that the suitcase is full of cocaine and than they decide go to L.A. to sell it and cash it in, while the Mafioso (Lead by Oscar-Winner:Christopher Walken) are searching for the Drugs and the Couple.

Directed by Tony Scott (The Hunger, Top Gun, Enemy of the Gates) made an excellent, clever thriller with romance. Excellent Performances from the Cast, including:Dennis Hopper, Val Kilmer, Micheal Rapaport, Bronson Pinchot, Brad Pitt, Saul Rubinek, Chris Penn, Tom Sizemore, Samuel L. Jackson, James Gandolfini & Conchata Ferrell. This wasn't a huge success at the Box Office but it did recieve great reviews by Critics and it become a Cult Classic. DVD's has an terrific anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an digitally remastered-Dolby Digital 5.1 Surround Sound (Also on DTS). DVD's has three separate feature-length Audio Commentaries by Stars:Slater & Arquette, Director:Scott & Writer:Quentin Tarantino. DVD has nearly 30 mintues of Deleted Scenes (also an Alternate Ending) with/without commentary by the director & writer. This DVD has great extras. Tarantino wrote a terrific written script, which he's best known for Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction & Jackie Brown. This DVD is a great 2-Disc Set. Do not miss this great film. Panavision. Grade:A.

Stay True To Yourself
Directed with a slick style by Tony Scott (Top Gun, Spy Game), True Romance, boasts an all star cast, a cool soudtrack, and a great script from Quentin Tarantino. He would of course, go on to write and direct Resevior Dogs, and Pulp Fiction. I happen to think though, however, that the script for this film is Tarantino's best work in anything he's ever done. Period I know I'm probably in the minority with that opinion, but most of the the other films he's written/directed himself, have a samenees to them.

Clarence Worley (Christian Slater) likes comic books, Kung Fu Films, and Elvis. He leads a fairly normal life, that is, until he meets call girl Alabama (Patricia Arquette). After a spending a passionate night together, they declare their love for each other, and they decide to get hitched. Clarence is visited by the ghost of Elvis (Val Kilmer) who tells him that he should kill Alabama's pimp Drexel (Gary Oldman)... Dennis Hopper Michael Rappaport Christopher Walken and Brad Pitt also star in this quirky, sometimes dark, love story.

The 2 disc DVD director's cut is a must for fans of the film, over the movie only disc version, that still available.

Disc One has the unrated director's cut of the film. There are 3 audio commentary tracks. Each one offers a unique perspective on the same film and it's kind of fun to have these different takes on the same film. All of the tracks are decent and never lag (especialy Tarantino's who barely misses a beat) The director's storyboard track allows for a side by side comparison between the final film and how Scott laid everything out beforehand. DVD-ROM stuff includes the original script, production notes, and a web site archive with a few links

Disc Two has interviews with both cast and crew, some interesting on the set footage. Cast members offer audio reactions to specific scenes that they appear in as they watch them--this is really cool. Comments are from Hopper Kilmer Pitt and others There are a number of deleted scenes that can be viewed optional commentary from Scott. The best extra is the alternate ending. Rounding out the extras are the ususal trailers and photo galleries and such.

This 2 disc set comes highly recommended

excellent
I loved this movie. Christopher Walken and Dennis Hopper we're absolutely fantastic. I was really dissapointed that we didn't see more of Walken throughout the film. The thing that impressed me the most about it though was how each role no matter how small was executed to perfection. Bradd Pitt, Chris Penn, James Gandolfini, Vincent Donofrio? There are two many roles to mention. Scott did an excellent job with the script although it may have a sunnier disposition than Tarantino's other films.

Tarentino's Frist - Possibly His Best...
I recently read Tarantino's original screenplay to "True Romance". Apart from the change in narrative structure (non-chronological), it hints to a bleaker, grittier urban drama, with a tragic ending. It would have been very interesting to see the final film in Tarantino's vision.

Tony Scott's sugar-coated adaptation works wonders though. It was made very clear in the script that the relationship between the two leads was very strong. Scott took this unison and gave the film a fairy-tale tone. The villains in the film are very colourful, contributing to the feel that Scott has established. Hans Zimmer's score does nothing better, than to enforce this vision.

The cast is one of the most impressive line-ups I've ever seen. Much of the film rests on the shoulders of Christian Slater and Patricia Arquette, both characters come off very likable with clear, clean, simple motives. These are career performances. Dennis Hopper gives good in his limited screen-time as Christian's ex-cop, ex-alcoholic father. It is in his time shared with Christopher Walken (being a one-scene wonder, like in "Pulp Fiction"), that he comes off at his best. The Sicilian scene is Walken's most intense since "Deer Hunter". Gary Oldman also gives another deliciously evil and memorable performance, the man is a chameleon, he is yet to unimpress me.

But one of my favourite things about the cast is seeing then-relative-unknowns Samuel L. Jackson, Brad Pitt and James Gandolfini in small, but memorable roles. A real shame that Jackson's performance was cut down heavily from the script, some of the dialogue in his one scene was very amusing, if maybe a little offensive to some.

"True Romance" is a brilliant crime drama, and a perfect (if phased) introduction to Tarantino's work, it is probably the most accessible film he's penned. People will always ponder over whether or not Tarantino's directorial version would have been better, but they can always rest-assure that Scott has given a wonderful adaptation, supported by a very strong cast. It could have been much, much worse.

great scott
what the hell is tony scott doing??? quentin tarantino really knows how to ruin something potentially good. ... Read more

Reviews (746)

THE FUTURE IS DISMAL - SO IS THE TRANSFER!
Ridley Scott's "Blade Runner" is an apocalyptic postmodernist vision of the future. The story involves a bounty hunter, Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) who is assigned to kill three replicants - android style robots that look identical to humans, but who have come to earth to seek revenge on their creator - Eldon Tyrell (Joe Turkel). Sean Young costars as Rachel, the latest model of replicant who is so incredibly life like that not even she knows that she's not human. Also in the cast are Rutgar Hauer as Roy Batty - the ultimate killing machine, Edward Olmos as a drugged out police detective, Gaff, and Darryl Hannah, as the psychotic replicant, Pris. Flawed in its narrative, but visually stunning, "Blade Runner" has developed a cult following - and it is easy to see why. The production is layered with multi-references to the steady moral and social demise of our own society that stir the mind into rethinking this movie as much more than a sci-fi adventure. This version of the film is the re-edited director's cut that audiences were never shown in 1982. The subtle tweaking of story and plot elements really doesn't enhance one's viewing experience so much as it just alters the story in a different direction.
But what a shame about the transfer! Though the general color balancing and attention to fine details, even in the darkest scenes, is adequate, there is simply NO EXCUSE for leaving the chips, scratches and in some cases, tears in this DVD transfer. Pixelization crops up now and them, but the most disturbing part of the transfer is that it fails to pay attention to the dirt and (in some cases) hair, stuck to the film negative. The result is a dirty looking picture that, while perhaps in keeping with Ridley Scott's vision of a dank, hard universe of the future, is most definitely not what the director had in mind. Saving grace: the transfer is anamorphically enhanced for widescreen televisions. The sonic characteristic of the 5.1 audio is rich, though dated. Strong bass and reasonably well balanced dialogue and effects, though there are a few perceived occasions where dubbing in of dialogue sounds possible. And one final insult from Warner Brothers, this disc has NO extras - not even a theatrical trailer!

Stunning - The Best Sci-Fi Film Ever Made
Directed by Ridley Scott, possibly the best director in Hollywood, Blade Runner: The Director's cut is an outstanding medley of action, noir, sci-fi, and suspense. Robots have been taken to a new level - Nexus 6 Generation Robots called "replicants", which outmatch humans in strength and ability and equal in intelligence, but lack one human quality - emotions. They were used for "slave labor" to work in places too hazardous for humans. However, replicants after a few years begin to develop their own emotions, which causes them to rebel against their masters. Special cops, called blade runners, were assigned to exterminate criminal replicants. Eventually replicants were declared illegal on earth, and were banished to a shuttle in space. LA, 2017. Rick Deckard, (Harrison Ford) a retired blade runner, is forced to "retire" five replicants that have escaped from the shuttle, but winds up falling for one, Rachael. (Sean Young) Roy Batty (Rutger Hauer) leads the other three replicants to find their creator, Eldon Tyrell, to expand their short four-year life span. Incredible action scenes, dark, brooding noir, creeping suspense, and excellent sci-fi, Blade Runner: The Director's Cut will please fans of any of these genres. The Director's Cut offers production notes, subtitles, added character developement, the original ending, a unicorn dream sequence, and the deletion of unnecessary scenes and the annoying voice-overs. Plus, it is digitally restored to excellent picture and sound quality. Some "sensitive" viewers might find the plot and noir atmosphere cold, but action, noir, sci-fi, and suspense fans will enjoy it very much. With stunning special effects, incredible cinematography, compelling plot, and rich, incredible characterizations (esp. Rutger Hauer), I strongly recommend Blade Runner: The Director's Cut to action/sci-fi fans.

Not quite the Blade Runner I remember
After purchasing and viewing the DVD director's cut release, all I can think is "where can I find the original theater release version". I sat my family down to watch it two nights ago and they lost interest very quickly. While it is still visually stunning to watch, it is not enough overcome the seeming lack of narrative/plot. In fact, one of the key things removed from the director's cut version is the voiceover narrative by Harrison Ford's character Deckard. For those that know the original version, it can even be a challenge to remember the significance of each scene. For new viewers of BR, they're left wondering, scene after scene, "OK what just happened and what relevance does it have to anything?". Bring back the voiceover!

The Director's Cut is AWFUL.
Compared to the original version the Director's Cut is awful. Background narration has been removed; the ending has been changed. Don't waste your money.

this is still a good DVD
but not as good as the original release. I preferred the narration and for that reason, I probably don't watch this movie as much as i did when I had it on VHS. I really don't understand why they don't make both versions available. ... Read more