Amazon.com

Kip Raines (Giovanni Ribisi) is a cocky young car thief working with a crew to steal 50 cars for a very bad man whose nickname is "The Carpenter." Being young and cocky, Kip messes up, so it's up to his big brother, Randall "Memphis" Raines (Nicolas Cage), to come out of car thief retirement and save him. With a cast that includes Robert Duvall, Angelina Jolie, Delroy Lindo, Cage, and Ribisi, it would be easy to say this story wastes all their talents--which it does, but that's not the point. This is a Jerry Bruckheimer film. A good story and complex characters would only get in the way of the action scenes and slow the movie down. No, Gone in 60 Seconds (based on the cult 1974 film of the same name) is not about the stars as much as it's about cars. Fast cars. Rare cars. Wrecked cars. All cars. Too bad director Dominic Sena (Kalifornia) doesn't come across as more of a gearhead; he seems less interested in fast cars than fast cuts. But is this movie fun? Absolutely, and it's fun because it's so stupid. With pointless car chases and hackneyed dialogue in one of the most predictable plots of the year, Gone in 60 Seconds is a comic film that's not quite a parody of itself, but darn close. --Andy Spletzer ... Read more

Reviews (328)

Good Movie...Cage Needs More Sleep
When I first went to see "Gone In 60 Seconds", I had never heard a word of it in previews or word-of-mouth. I never liked or could sit through any Nicholas Cage movies until this one though. Cage plays a rather lathargic Randall Raines, a reformed car theif who is unwillinglly drawn back into his old profession to save his younger brother Kip (The Wonder Years' Giovanni Ribisi) from death. Kip takes a car boosting job for the meanest car-theft ringleader in town (A part which even I could've played better than this guy), and faces the ultimate price for mistakes. To keep the big boss from killing his brother, Cage must round up old collegues to pull off the biggest boost of their lives. Some of his partners in crime include Angelina Jolie, Robert Duvall and my favorite...Vinnie Jones as The Sphinx. Each with his/her own special tallent, they work at moving 50 cars in 2 days to save little Raines. The one thing that kept the movie from running out of gas at the box-office I think, was the fact that they went in-depth as far as methods of boosting the cars...instead of knocking on someone's door and stealing the keys from the kitchen table. And there's a lot of laughs along the way that keep it from seeming like a re-run of CHIPS. Up-beat comedy makes the movie a lot better than it could've been, my favorite part was Nicholas Cage taunting a seriously ghettoed-out rival theif from inside a diner who was out kill him. The movie does have a few corney scenes that were obviously forced by a nerdy director...but the action, the laughs, and all the new stuff you learn about stealing cars these days is what makes it a good pick for me. I think this movies' like alcohol though, if you get in a car after it youre gonna feel like driving like a maniac. Nicholas Cage deffinately hits a mark with this one.

An escapist guilty-pleasure movie
If you're the kind of moviegoer who likes to watch some films without having to do a lot of thinking, loves action and hot cars, and likes to watch a goofy movie without having to think about character depth or surprises in the story, you'll like this movie. I recommend it only to people who like such movies. I don't mind watching such a movie now and then, and there are some things that I thought were pretty cool.

The 1967 Shelby GT-500 Mustang is the best thing about the movie. I've always liked cars and this is a rare classic. The climactic chase is cool and well done. Nicholas Cage actually did 98% of his own stunt driving. Another thing I liked was Robert Duvall. I guess he's the kind of actor who can survive anything. And the opening boost of a brand new Porsche 911 right out of a factory showroom was kind of neat, and funny as well.

But the story is predictable, awfully predictable. You know the hero will save his brother's life. The only surprise is in the final delivery of that Shelby. If you actually saw the original 1974 film you'll recognize a scene in a garage that pays homage to a similar one in the old film. It involves a car, a cop, and heroin. I was also disappointed that the final chase doesn't last longer.

GREAT CAR FILM!
"Gone in 60 Seconds" exists for one purpose: to show off some of the hottest cars in existence. The storyline is kind of hokey, but the cars more than make up for it, especially the GT 500. The car chase at the end is one of the best ever filmed! All the actors (Especially Robert Duvall, who can never give a bad performance) do fine in their roles. All in all, "Gone in 60 Seconds" is a one @#*& of a ride!

Also, don't miss Christopher Eccleston (plays the villain, Raymond Vincent Calitri, in this film) this January, when he resurrects one of the greatest characters of all time, the Doctor, in BBC's new "Doctor Who" series. BBC plans to send it to American TV stations as well.

Movie Grade: B+

Maybe a three star movie, but still...
A waste of great talent is probably the most honest thing I can say about this flick.
Jolie is Academy Award material and she hardly does anything in this movie. Gage is a master, this movie was a waste of what he's capable of doing, but I guess he's a good draw. I actually saw this at the theater when it came out and a second time recently. There are cool cars and some cool chase scenes, so it's not that it isn't entertaining, it's just that I was expecting a lot more.

Great chase scenes- cheesy otherwise
Nick Cage is pretty good in this film- the car chase scenes are wild and fun- the rest of the storyline gets kind of schmaltzy and is really predictable.Good action flick when you need to zone out- if you want something with more substance- go back some years and watch Dirty Harry! ... Read more

Reviews (351)

Hail to the Queen!
During its theatrical run, critical praise of ELIZABETH was subdued somewhat due to the film's historical inaccuracy and emphasis on melodrama. While both of these observations are admittedly correct, ELIZABETH is none-the-less a spectacular production. From the riveting opening credits to the chilling finale, this movie is full of provocative dramatic elements: sex, betrayal, politics, religion, violence, and revenge. The cinematography, set design, and costumes are outstanding. The settings alternate between dank medieval gloom and brilliant regal spendor. Cate Blanchett gives a dynamic performance of Meryl Streep calibre. (She should have won the Oscar, but ELIZABETH wasn't nearly as popular as SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE.) In plot and theme, ELIZABETH is like a hybrid of THE LION IN WINTER and THE GODFATHER. It begins as the reign of Elizabeth's sister, Queen Mary ("Bloody Mary")is coming to an end. The film then details the controversial ascension of Protestant young Elizabeth to the throne. The movie focuses on the early years of her reign, as Elizabeth struggles to solidify her power and overcome conflicts of religion and political intrigue; questions of marriage; and numerous plots to depose or assassinate her. As previously mentioned, the movie takes a good deal of license with history, taking events and relationships that occurred throughout Elizabeth's reign and condensing them into the first few years of her reign. Overall, ELIZABETH is an excellent production-- as chilling and dramatic as SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE is romantic and funny. The two films are wonderful counterparts.

Not Your Average Costume Drama
Shekar Kapur's account of the early years of Elizabeth I's reign in not your average costume drama, it is a visceral and entrancing film that despite all the historical inaccuracies that other reviewers have noted (and they are many), perfectly captures the climate of religious conflict, struggle for power and constant danger that characterised the beginning of Elizabeth's reign. Michael Hirst's script portrays the young queen as an innocent caught in the throes of international politics, who by the end of the film has become a calculating monarch willing to sacrifice almost anything to ensure her survival and the welfare and prosperity of her kingdom. Kapur's brilliant direction gives the film a vertiginous rhythm, while Remi Adefarasin's ominous cinematography adds a menacing and sinister atmosphere that sometimes gives Elizabeth the feel of a horror movie. Also worthy of praise are the magnificent production design, the gorgeous costumes and a surprisingly eclectic soundtrack that includes Byrd, Mozart, Holst and Elgar as well as some great original music.

The acting is also excellent. Especially Geoffrey Rush as the unscrupulous yet reliable Walsingham; Christopher Eccleston as the devious Duke of Norfolk; Richard Attenborough as Cecil, Elizabeth's most loyal and trusted aide; and Kathy Burke as the frustrated and paranoid "Bloody Mary". However, the real jewel is Cate Blanchett's amazing, star-making turn as the title character. She gives a complex, mesmerising and moving performance as she makes the transition from scared and vulnerable young woman to quasi-preternatural icon.

If you are interested in the "true historical facts" of Elizabeth's reign you should choose a documentary of one of the many great books that have been written about her (my favourite is Alison Weir's biography), but if you are looking for a great cinematic experience that explores the young queen's personality and motivations in remarkable depth this is definitely the one to choose. In my opinion Shekar Kapur's masterpiece is the best film of its kind.

Entertaining, but wildly inaccurate
If you're not bothered by historical inaccuracies, then go ahead and check out this movie. It's extremely well-acted for the most part, although Fiennes's Dudley turns milksop in an entirely fictitious turn of events that aligns him with a Catholic plot to replace Elizabeth with Mary, Queen of Scots (whose death in the movie is all wrong, too). Events from decades later are all condensed into what is clearly supposed to be the first year or two of Elizabeth's reign (which begain in 1558): Norfolk didn't rebel until the Northern Rebellion in 1569; Elizabeth wasn't excommunicated until 1570; she didn't even enter the Anjou courtship until 1578; and Mary, Queen of Scots was beheaded in public, not murdered in her bed, and that not until almost thirty years later, in 1587! Furthermore, in 1558 Lord Robert Dudley was not yet Earl of Leicester (he wouldn't be until Elizabeth gave him that title in 1564, and he was NEVER a duke!), and as another reviewer has pointed out, there's certainly more drama and intrigue in his REAL story than the movie allows -- he was rumored to have murdered his wife, Amy Robsart, after all.

I won't go on, but my point is that there is a hell of a lot wrong with the storyline that didn't even need to be wrong. It's still an entertaining movie, as I mentioned before, and Cate Blanchett really does deliver an exceptional performance. But at least some sort of gesture towards a measure of historical accuracy would have been appreciated.

Well acted, but distorts the actual events
Elizabeth is a well acted and entertaining movie, with some very well done performances and is visually stunning. The problem is that the writers decided to change so many events, that it ends up unnecessarily distorting the actual history.

To see a factual, well-acted, and still superb movie of the same era, get the 1971 film "Mary Queen of Scots" with Vanessa Redgrave. Not only does this follow the actual events, but the drama of 2 queens battling for power is so forcibly played that you can watch it over and over

What's wrong with the real story?
Lovely, beautifully acted, blah blah...

But why would the producers/writers take such an EXCITING true story, and change all the facts, and make is so much boring than it actually was? The real story has everything: romance, murder, betrayal, a wife pushed down the stairs, politics... so why turn it into such a dull, ordinary, mushy romance?

If you want to watch a strong woman influencing world events, watch "The Lion in Winter." If you want to read about the TRUE story of Elizabeth's ascent to the throne, read Alison Weir's books. If you want to watch a goopy romance movie, there are plenty of much better ones to choose from. But don't waste your time with this movie. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Director David Cronenberg's eXistenZ is a stew of corporate espionage, virtual reality gaming, and thriller elements, marinated in Cronenberg's favorite Crock-Pot juices of technology, physiology, and sexual metaphor. Jennifer Jason Leigh is game designer Allegra Geller, responsible for the new state-of-the-art eXistenZ game system; along with PR newbie Ted Pikul (Jude Law), they take the beta version of the game for a test drive and are immersed in a dangerous alternate reality. The game isn't quite like PlayStation, though; it's a latexy pod made from the guts of mutant amphibians and plugs via an umbilical cord directly into the user's spinal column (through a BioPort). It powers up through the player's own nervous system and taps into the subconscious; with several players it networks their brains together. Geller and Pikul's adventures in the game reality uncover more espionage and an antigaming, proreality insurrection. The game world makes it increasingly difficult to discern between reality and the game, either through the game's perspective or the human's. More accessible than Crash, eXistenZ is a complicated sci-fi opus, often confusing, and with an ending that leaves itself wide open for a sequel. Fans of Cronenberg's work will recognize his recurring themes and will eat this up. Others will find its shallow characterizations and near-incomprehensible plot twists a little tedious. --Jerry Renshaw ... Read more

Reviews (196)

"Matrix" haters will find solace in "eXistenZ"
David Cronenberg has always been an unpredictable filmmaker, and even after 25 years in the business, his unique visions show no signs of decay. The possibilities of the human body used for malevolent purposes fueled his "Shivers" and "Rabid"; the eerie drama of the human subconscious punctuated "Dead Ringers," "Naked Lunch," and "Crash." With "eXistenZ," Cronenberg takes eager aim at the future and questions our reality in a film that's devoid of flashy, computer-generated EFX and mindnumbing violence (*ahem*, "Matrix"), but is exciting and intelligent all the same.

The plot concerns a Virtual Reality game designer (Jennifer Jason Leigh) previewing a new system--'eXistenZ'--to the public, but things go horribly wrong when a would-be assassin puts her on the lam with a P.R. nerd (played by Jude Law). For the rest of the film, this odd couple wanders about the VR world, occasionally coming out of the game, to the point where the line between fantasy and reality is blurred (the last shot in the movie only reinforces it).

Cronenberg has gathered possibly his best cast here, getting a lot of mileage out of familiar faces (including Willem Dafoe, Christopher Eccleston, Don McKellar, and Ian Holm, among others). And even though the acting is occasionally overwrought and laughable, the director doubles back in the final sequence, critiquing his work with tongue planted firmly in cheek.

Perhaps most importantly, "eXistenZ" proves that FX don't necessarily insure a more 'futuristic' film. Through subtle camera techniques, Cronenberg successfully merges from one level of reality to another with an expert hand. Unlike "The Matrix," which impressed me only on a technical level and left my brain hollow afterward, "eXistenZ" is for cerebral moviegoers, people who demand a little more than chic black leather and slow-motion bullets to propigate a satisfying experience.

Could have been better
It's hard to rate this movie, especially without giving away any plot spoilers (which has to do with periods of bad acting). However it's a fun ride, yet it feels as though the whole "game world" wasn't as fully explored as it could have been. A few scenes, namely the "Chinese Waiter" one, are fantastic, while some are boring...like the car ride in the beginning. The plot itself is pretty easy to understand once you watch the movie twice, or just pay attention the first time. This is no Matrix, and it should hardly be compared to it (I'm not saying The Matrix is good or bad: the only thing these movies have in common is the ability to link up into a fictional world). I bought this as a blind buy and was slightly dissapointed...especially after watching Crash. Check out Equilibrium as well.

Superb psychotic suicide
Cronenberg is a genius in a way. He leads us into the world of a new generation of console games and 3D virtual reality. Everything happens the way the characters you are projected into decide, and yet your deeper psyche can influence the characters. You liberate in such a game your most sombre death instinct and psychotic tendencies. You become the character and the character becomes you. You are entirely dominated by a logic that comes from the character and from the deepest layers of your impulses and passions. You burn up yourself in such a game and you do not know any more where reality is and where you stand in it. Everything becomes both virtual and real. You are lost and unable to make a decision and get out of this virtual world which is just as real as reality. Reality disappears by being blended with virtuality. The game becomes a nightmarish experience and a psychotic trip. You use any weapon at your disposal, in the game or in reality, to kill and destroy yourself and other characters or individuals. Death is at the end of the line, death of your mind, death of your psyche, death of your individuality, death of your freedom and free choosing mind. This film is dangerous because it reveals a real danger we are confronted to : playing any game builds in you a second nature that is rooted in your most morbid passions.

Dr jacques COULARDEAU

eXistenZ
What a wonderful movie. All of the mind twisting about just what is reality anyway? and a feeling for what it's like if you are a videogame character living in a videogame world, where you may have to chop off a person's head to proceed with the game. I love the homage to Philip K. Dick, who beat the reality problem nearly to death in his works (movies made from his stories include Blade Runner, Total Recall, Minority Report, Screamers, Imposter (which I haven't seen), and the embarrassing Paycheck). When the main characters in eXistenZ get hamburgers to take to the motel, the burgers come from Perky Pat's, and Perky Pat comes from Philip K. Dick. Residents of Mars, to spice up their boring lives in The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch, take a drug and play with their Perky Pat dolls, becoming the dolls and trying to live a Barbie and Ken existence. They know it's not real, but it becomes more real than real. You know that you are viewing a great simulation of reality in this movie when the burgers come from Perky Pat's. This movie would not have been made if Philip K. Dick had not lived, and we are better for both of those events.
It also seems to me that people who love The Matrix as much as I do - and there are millions of us - can't help but love this film. I can only attribute this movie's small potatoes performance vis a vis The Matrix to not enough people having seen it. So if one one-hundredth of you Matrix fans out there and all of the Matrix haters one reviewer referred to would rush out and buy this DVD you would make David Cronenberg really rich, as well as one of our finest creators of off-kilter movies.

Original and Strange - Still Cronenberg Has Done Better
A typical Cronenberg - blurred line between reality and fantasy, strange interaction between biology and technology, themes of addiciton and a psychological thriller plot. Leigh is average at best as a star game designer who is releasing a VR game so potent that people are out to kill her. Jude Law is good as the sidekick dragged into Leigh's alter world. However, as in all Cronenberg movies, he is the star and the actors are basically meaningless. Like "Naked Lunch" and "Dead Ringers" the sets and effects are striking and often gross. And also like those movies, Cronenberg injects biology where you would never expect it. In "eXistenz" the game console is a biological creature which must interact with the player via a connection to the spinal cord - weird stuff indeed. Gamers eventually develop a strong addicition to their bio-console in a drug-like way - another common Cronenberg motif. The story is intelligent and the artistic direction is quite interesting, but this film is not for everyone. ... Read more

Reviews (656)

Fear Comes From Inside: Really Scary Film with Stylish Touch
Yesterday, on April 28, we have finally seen the theatrical release of this masterpiece in Japan, and the waiting time was very, very long. But it was worth of our patience. "The Others" is not only a chilling and scary movie; it is crafted with style and intelligence, and it is fantastic to watch the director (who is still below the age of 30!!) create this piece of art.

As you probably have known by now, beautiful Nicole Kidman plays Grace, whose children are allergic to light (and this disaease really exists, you should know). With ritual-like meticulous rules, she manages her household works, employing new servants in a huge, dreary countryhouse, which ever-hanging fogs mystriously surround. But there is (or are), she comes to know, some intruder(s) here, of which existence her children are convinced. And sooner or later, Grace comes to feel that, too.

It is a natural but unfair comparison if you point out that "The Others" resembles at some places a certain Oscar-nominated film, because the director Amenabar does it with completely different touch. I cannot tell you much, but let me say, like Hitchcock's classic "Rebecca," the heroine (and the audience) is lured inexplicably into the mystery of the old house and its past. Also using the classic frameworks of ghost stories used in the original "Haunting" (Robert Wise version, NOT THAT remake), the film makes us jumping in the seats, sending lots of chill in spine, and, moreover, it treats a universal subject of love between mother and children in a subtle fashion. On top of that, the film goes further, to make the mother Grace not exactly an ideal one for kids, and it succeeds eventually in depicting the fraility of humans -- in short, you really don't know what you think you know.

Anchored by strong and believable acting given from underrated Nicole Kidman (why did Oscar ignore her work here, preferring that musical ... well, but all right, I understand), and aided effectively by other well-cast players whose uncanny presence unnerve us greatly, "The Others" will rivet your eyes on the screen, especially when you are a connoisseur of old-fashioned horror film. Keep your eyes open when you see the details of the film: furniture, photoes, everything. Something is wrong with this house, but how and what is not clear. This bizzare sensation is another asset of the film, and you will find what you missed with repeated viewing.

For those who have enjoyed this (and I bet you did), the story is perhaps inspired by Henry James's novella "Turn of the Screw," which deals with the similar situation. You may as well read that equally well-crafted, creepy story.

Trivia: look closely at one of the old photoes of the dead: one of the three men on the bed is director Amenabar himself (and one of the others is Mateo Gil, director of Spanish film "Nadie conoce a nadie" of which music Amenabar composed, and of which star Eduardo Noriega was featured in the two previous Amenabar film in Spain, "Thesis" and "Open Your Eyes." The former one is a must-see for anyone loving blood-curdling thriller. But hey, appearing in a photo? This is exactly what Hitchcock did in one of his earlier films about a life-boat, another masterpiece about the people in a confined place !! Surely Amenabar loves his master.

"Others" Among Us
THE OTHERS is one heck of a ghost story. In the tradition of intellegent films of the genre, such as THE SIXTH SENSE and POLTERGIEST, this movie keeps you on your toes from start to finish. Grace (Nicole Kidman) awaits her husband's return from war. She and her children, who suffer from a rare medical condition, called Xeroderma Pigmentosum, (extreme sensitivity to light) live isolated from the outside world. Then, one day 3 mysterious servants, led by Bertha Mills ( Fionnula Flanagan) arrive at the door...Soon after Grace finds herself struggling to keep her children safe from strange forces as her sanity slowly slips away. This film has all the classic touches that make a good ghost story. Creaking doors, a big house isolated and poorly lit, strange noises and happenings, all helped along by a great performance from Kidman. Written and Directed by
Alejandro Amenábar, the movie is tops, where so many other recent ghost stories have failed, relying to much on dopey effects to push the story ahead (the remake of The Haunting for example).

The 2 disc DVD set is pretty good even though it all could have probably fit on one disc. The features are made up of documentaries and featurettes. The most intriguing of which, is on the aforementioned disorder, seen in the film. The still gallery includes rather typical looking photos from the film. I would have liked for a commentary track, but I know that not every DVD has to have one to be solid. Nicole Kidman makes this film more than just a story about "things that go bunp in the night" Recommended

Very Inteligent Horror Film
Another fantastic example of a new genre of smart, very well written and very well made horror movies. Had this come before Sixth Sense it would deserve a full 5 stars.

"I just feel more and more cut off from the world."
Alejandro Amenabar's "The Others" is a reminder that very good films need not be glitzy or gimmicky. Neither is an excess of special effects or action sequences required. Film is an exercise in storytelling and good films succeed in telling their story well no matter how small and quaint the film may appear to be.

Grace Stewart (Nicole Kidman) and her two children, Nicholas (James Bentley) and Anne (Alakina Mann), live in a manor off the British coast. Three strangers arrive one day in answer to a placed advertisement for domestic help. For some strange reason, the three strangers prove to be familiar with Grace's house. Mrs. Mills (Fionnula Flanagan), Lydia (Elaine Cassidy), and the gardener Mr. Tuttle (Eric Sykes) soon immerse themselves in the daily routine of the manor, but the mood of the house suddenly seems changed with them around. Is there something to the strangers or is Grace's imagination just getting the better of her?

"The Others" revels in its simplicity. This is a film reminiscent of an earlier era in terms of filmmaking craft but it does not at all feel like a time-displaced relic when viewed through the filter of modern sensibilities. A legitimately unsettling atmosphere is created under the deft direction of Amenabar and Kidman is granted a wonderful opportunity to put her acting talents on display. She takes full advantage of her chance to carry a film on her own and succeeds admirably. Kidman is the emotional and dramatic catalyst of the story and the film as a whole would have been far less effective had she faltered. Flanagan, Cassidy, and Sykes are also great as the sweet but creepy strangers. From the outset, we know that there is something amiss by their arrival on the scene but we cannot put our finger on it. A tip of the hat to Amenabar for keeping us in suspense until the very end. Good work all around.

A Wonderful Classy Thrill Ride
Definately one of Nicole's Best Performances this film is gripping anc chilling. The acting is great and the plot takes you for many twists and turns. This reminds me of an Alfred Hitchcock movie and it will definately be remembered. ... Read more

Reviews (51)

You have to cover the trail!
This little Scottish gem is worth watching more than once! I'll not bother recanting what it's about, you can read that above. This is a delightful example of how greed and peer pressure can twist and stain the human soul with ugliness. Most of the movie takes place in the three roommates' flat in Scotland so it has a real claustrophobic feel to it. The plot is simple, watch the three characters crumble as they're affected by their decision to keep the money and dispose of the body. Strongest scene: when David comments about the dinner after having to hack up the dead body "It tastes different." Possibly meaning both the dinner and everything else about his life. This film has a nice ending, not a phoney one just to keep everyone happy. Technically, the digital transfer is mediocre. The sound is quite low. I have to turn my TV up pretty high to hear it, but this could be due to poor production on the set. There are no extras included on this DVD.

Ewan McGregor's first major role is a definite winner!
I'm a major Ewan McGregor fan, and that's how I first came to see this movie. It's the first of three movie he would make with the now-famous Scottish film makers Danny Boyle, John Hodge, and Andrew MacDonald. This is the best out of the three in my point of view. It's about three flatmates who finally find a fourth. But when he ends up dead, and the three break into his room only to find a bag of money. First they must dispose of the body, second they must decide how to use the money. But the effects of money on three good friends comes to suspenseful and tragic ends. This is a phenomenal movie even if you don't like suspense (I don't). It's also great for anyone who wants to see Ewan McGregor with long hair that is dripping with sweat. This is a wonderful psychological thriller for even the very squeamish.

Don't Cross That Threshold
What will happen when three affluent and professional friends and flatmates,a journalist,a doctor and a chartered accountant,find a corpse and a suitcase full of money? What choices will confront these educated and intelligent people and what are the consequences of their choice?
This is the story of Shallow Grave, the debut long feature of Brit Danny Boyle, and the first of his many collaborations with writer Dr John Hodge (MD not PHD).
More specifically,it is the story of two men,Ewan McGregor and Chris Eccleston and a woman, Kerry Fox who share a flat and a friendship that is obviously harmonious.Deciding to let a fourth room in their large flat,they begin to interview likely candidates with an air of haughty antagonism and playful sarcasm,until Mr Keith Allen himself drops by, mysterious but with ready cash and moves in.
Yet their new roommate's life is quite short, and he is discovered dead, but with a lot of cash. The money of a man who came out of nowhere, had no visitors and apparently will not be missed too soon, is quite tempting to keep. This is the dilemma the three friends faced in a very tense moment that pierced right through their conscience.
In John Boorman's Excalibur, Merlin the magician, granting the wish of a knight to change his appearance into another for carnal reasons,says in a memorable quote ' The future has taken root in the present'.
This is exactly what happened in Shallow Grave the very second our heroes decided to keep the money, depose of the body (in parts, a task that traumatized them), and live happily ever after.So they thought!
How wrong they were, for crossing the threshold of their moral and ethical obligations towards their dead roommate,will forever change their lives and they will pay dearly for it.
Greed will inevitably be the driving force that will govern their lives and relationship from then on,pull them apart,reduce them from highly respectable members of the society to frightened and paranoid ,even pathetic creatures, that live mainly by their instincts.
Of course no one is truly mysterious and although we really do not know who really was the character of Keith Allen and where is the source of that money, we do get an idea that his line of work did not involve paying taxes, and two of his not so nice chums soon enough,looking desperately for him, find their way to the flat, obviously not thinking of tea and scones.But they are murdered and deposed of.
These bodies soon resurface (no crime is perfect as the cliche goes)and this will wet the appetite of the subtley clever police, with the chief inspector and his detective (played by John Hodge himself) who rightly suspect foul play.
All this lead to a tragic end, that was in a way inevitable the moment the lure of cash (even for people who really do not need it) turned into a possessive demon. It is a frightening thought of course, because no matter how much we claim superior moral ground and are indignant, we can never anticipate the choice we will make, facing a similar situation.
This makes Shallow Grave a little gem of a movie, a product of talented group of friends (and not of the studio machine)who contributed their effort to give us a film that is quite original and with a message that is as old but poignant as life itself. It is about the consequence of our choices, and the path it will take us once we cross that threshold.

do the wrong thing
Three obnoxious flatmates put scores of potential tenants through their paces before selecting a fourth resident for their humble hipster abode. Soon he is dead from a (self-inflicted) drug overdose but he left behind wads of cash that they want. Now to dispose of him and carry on!!!

They draw straws of who will actually dismember and bury him. It is gross!!! This division plus the knowledge of their horrifying secret slowly tears the flatmates apart. It is an interesting process to watch -- particularly when one moves into the attic and drills holes into the ceiling to spy on the two he left downstairs (shudder!!!!)

what can I say, just a great movie
its British and its awesome. Ewen McGregor is the best in this and he offers a character that is fun to watch. Christopher Eccelston's nose is the gem also, and he has a slight resemblense to my friend Marcus, sorry MArcus but its true and Kerry Fox is hot, hot, hot.a great paranoia film with a lot of body cutting up and Danny Boyle( A Life Less Ordinary, 28 Days Later, The Beach adn Trainspotting) is a great director. the end where Eccelston gets the nife in the neck and McGRegor tricks Fox into thinking she has the money, just great ... Read more

Description

"He Who Seeks Revenge Should Dig Two Graves"

Alex Cox's new film is a scathing black comedy about love, sex, family,murder, incest and revenge, set in a post-apocalyptic Liverpool. Afterten years in hiding, Vindici (Christopher Eccleston-28 Days Later, TheOthers) returns to destroy the Duke (Derek Jacobi-Gosford Park,Gladiator) who murdered Vindici's wife on their wedding day. During hisabsence Vindici's family fell into poverty, while the Duke, Duchess andtheir decadent sons acquired wealth and power, ruling over their courtobsessed with transient beauty, money, inherited privilege and power.Determined to exact his revenge, Vindici sets out to gain the confidenceof the Duke and his villainous heir, Lussurioso (Eddie Izzard-Dressed ToKill, Circle).

Featuring brilliant performances by Eccleston, Izzard, and Jacobi,Revengers Tragedy proves once again that Alex Cox (Repo Man, Sid &Nancy) is one of the few truly subversive filmmakers at work today.Somewhere between A Clockwork Orange and Baz Luhrmann's Romeo & Juliet,this updated telling of Thomas Middleton's notorious 17th century playis an energetic and stylish masterwork. ... Read more

Amazon.com

An affecting movie about ghosts and illusions, The Invisible Circusfollows Phoebe (Jordana Brewster), an American girl who's retracing thepath of her sister Faith (Cameron Diaz), hoping to discover what led toFaith's mysterious death. Using the postcards that Faith sent her fromEurope as a map, Phoebe travels from Amsterdam to Paris to Portugal,learning from Faith's ex-boyfriend Wolf (Christopher Eccleston) about aside of Faith that Phoebe knew nothing about--a side that overturns all ofPhoebe's cherished beliefs about her sister and herself. The performancesin The Invisible Circus are uneven, and yet the culmination of themovie captures something piercingly sad, something acute and evocativeabout how survivors create myths about the lost, myths that can both helpand hinder their lives. Blythe Danner plays the mother of the two girls ina brief but subtly powerful performance. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (16)

Doomed to disappoint...
The Invisible Circus must have looked great on paper. It's Jennifer Egan's successful and much-loved first novel adapted by proven screenwriter Adam Brooks (Practical Magic, Beloved, French Kiss). It had a promising variety of star wattage attached, including blockbuster darling Cameron Diaz, rising star Jordana Brewster, art house favorite Christopher Eccleston and the perenially excellent Blythe Danner. The drama moves from the coast of California to the streets of Paris to the cliffs of Portugal -- a potential visual feast of landscapes. And from a marketing standpoint, the story features a bit of everything -- family, rebellion, love, loss, guns, drugs, sex, world-travel, a 70s soundtrack, politcal intruige... even an old Volkswagen. A guaranteed hit, right?

Wrong. The Invisible Circus fails, and fails miserably.

The failure of this film can be blamed largely on Brewster. Her Phoebe is by turns annoying, cruel, selfish, ridiculous... you name it -- Brewster is almost unwatchable in her portrayal of a difficult character. I imagine an actress with more emotional sensitivity could have pulled it off and made the character a bit sympathetic, but Brewster fails entirely. From what I understand, she is studying at Yale... let's hope she's majoring in something other than drama.

Cameron Diaz fares better -- unlike Brewster, she's actually acting. But her character Faith is cursed by writer/director Brooks, who robs us visually and verbally of Faith's real struggle. He has the other characters inform us that Faith is upset, rather than give Diaz the chance to really portray the conflict onscreen. And so when we finally reach the point where we learn what really happened to her character, it feels like an anticlimax. Diaz tries her best, but she can't save Faith.

I'm a fan of both Christopher Eccleston and Blythe Danner, and why either of them chose to appear in this movie is a mystery to me. Eccleston, like Diaz, is given little to work with -- he's reduced to a series of broody stares at Brewster and a very bad hippie wig that makes him look older, not younger. Danner, as Phoebe and Faith's mother, is limited largely by poorly written dialogue and by the fact that all of her scenes are with Brewster.

Given the dramatic potential of the story, I think it could have been a better film in the hands of another writer/director. Though Brooks is a proven screenwriter and has even directed before (back in the 80s), whatever experience he gained in the past fails him here. He has given us the dismal Brewster in an uneven, poorly-written and emotionally lacking display of moviemaking. The Invisible Circus is a waste of time.

A thought provoking film
I rented The Invisible Circus, thinking that I would be renting a sob-fest type of movie. Instead, I discovered a wonderful drama, during which I never cried. The movie revolves around Phoebe (Jordana Brewster) who's older sister, Faith (Cameron Diaz)commited suicide on the cliffs of a small town in Poturgal. Intent on discovering why she did this, Phoebe retraces Faith's journey through Europe, and on the way meets Faith's old boyfrend Wolf. One could say that this is a self-discovery movie. Haunted by her sister's death, Phoebe constantly thinks that she will return, but in the end learns to let go. It was nice to see Cameron do something else than the cute, ditzy blonde girl routine and I was pleasently surprised by Jordana Brewster. With breathtaking views of Paris, Berlin, and Potugal, I encourage you to rent this film.

The Invisible Circus
I think "The Invisible Circus" was a good movie, but it could've been better. Here are the facts:

Phoebe(Jordana Brewster) is an eighteen year old living in San Francisco in 1976 with her mother(Blythe Danner). Her father(Patrick Bergin) died of leukemia nine years before, and her sister Faith(Cameron Diaz) killed herself six years before in Portugal.

Phoebe never got over Faith's death, so she decides to go to Europe to find out what happened to Faith during her year in Europe. Phoebe uses the postcards Faith sent as a map, going everywhere Faith went(Amsterdam, Berlin, Paris and Portugal).
In Paris, she finds Wolf(Christopher Eccleston), Faith's ex-boyfriend. Wolf hasn't gotten over Faith's death either, despite the fact he's about to marry another woman(Isabella Pasco).

With Wolf's help, Phoebe learns what happened to Faith and why she killed herself, and Phoebe finally moves on.

The performances were good enough, and the movie was somewhat interesting.

Overall- 5.5/10

Moving
This video is very moving and intense. It is the story of a girl who committed suicide in the 1960s, and her now-grown-up sister's attempt to understand what happened. It seamlessly traces and intertwines both sisters' trips through Europe, and shows how the older sister went further and further into rebellion until she reached a point she could not turn back or go on. It shows the older sister's integrity - even though she did not get caught in her crime, and faced only her own guilt, she was unable to live with herself, and saw suicide as the only way out. It shows the boyfriend's love of her, even as he tried to get her to pull back, and his attempt to understand, years later, what had happened. And it shows the sister's and mother's attempts to live with what had happened. It is a very powerful movie. Diaz shines in her role, and Ecclestein, Danner and the other minor characters are also very powerful. Brewster is a little weak - a more experienced actor could have brought a little more depth to her character, and Ecclestein's wig was horrendous.
Those two minor flaws, however, could not dim the beauty or power of this movie.

A Generation Gap Examined...
I find this film fascinating for its subtext. It begins with a San Francisco family torn apart: A father's untimely death and his eldest daughter's demise in some far off part of Europe during the politically charged 1960s.

Left behind are the mother and youngest daughter. When the daughter wants to answer the lingering questions she has about her big sib, she sets out to trace the path that her sister took, and to find out what she could about the events.

Of course, she is cautioned every step of the way, first by her mom, then by her sister's long time beau, who very reluctantly and uncomfortably begins to recount the story of their excursion across the continent and their involvement with the "peace movement," and what he knew about his lover's death.

The "Generation Gap" I refer here is the elder "Baby Boom" daughter, played by Cameron Diaz, and her "do anything" free spirited ways, and her kid sis, portrayed in a very reserved performance by Jordana Brewster, who demonstrates how a few years can make a big difference in how you get treated. Here, seemingly trapped in her existence, she plays the part of a bird trying to find her way out of the cage she has been locked in for her life, and trying to get some answers from a world that seems intent on "protecting" her.

This isn't an action picture. I wouldn't even consider it a road picture, even though it takes place in Amsterdam, Paris and Portugal, beautiful locations all. But it is a psychological drama, about putting people's actions into a context, be it historical or just understandable. If you're born between the late 50s to the mid 70s, this film just might strike an important chord with you.

Wonderful performances from Diaz, Brewster, and Christopher Eccleston as the former boyfiend who plays tour guide to both Europe and his ex's final days.

Recommended. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Actor Christopher Eccleston (28 Days Later) is superb as a modern-day messiah in this captivating drama written by Russell T. Davies, author of the original British Queer as Folk series and the lovely Bob and Rose. Eccleston plays Steve Baxter, a mild-mannered, Manchester pub-crawler called one night to his true destiny as the second Son of God. After a couple of convincing miracles, the world looks to Steve for guidance, but he gives mixed signals: on one hand, he calls for a Third Testament to establish a foundation for living in the modern age; on the other, he predicts an imminent Judgment Day. The confusion causes mass mayhem, and Steve's disciples, especially an almost-but-not-quite love of his life (Lesley Sharp), try to make sense of the conflict while preventing devils, in human form, from undermining his mission. Ultimately, Davies's story concerns profound questions about human freedom and choice. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Amazon.com

Kip Raines (Giovanni Ribisi) is a cocky young car thief working with a crew to steal 50 cars for a very bad man whose nickname is "The Carpenter." Being young and cocky, Kip messes up, so it's up to his big brother, Randall "Memphis" Raines (Nicolas Cage), to come out of car thief retirement and save him. With a cast that includes Robert Duvall, Angelina Jolie, Delroy Lindo, Cage, and Ribisi, it would be easy to say this story wastes all their talents--which it does, but that's not the point. This is a Jerry Bruckheimer film. A good story and complex characters would only get in the way of the action scenes and slow the movie down. No, Gone in 60 Seconds (based on the cult 1974 film of the same name) is not about the stars as much as it's about cars. Fast cars. Rare cars. Wrecked cars. All cars. Too bad director Dominic Sena (Kalifornia) doesn't come across as more of a gearhead; he seems less interested in fast cars than fast cuts. But is this movie fun? Absolutely, and it's fun because it's so stupid. With pointless car chases and hackneyed dialogue in one of the most predictable plots of the year, Gone in 60 Seconds is a comic film that's not quite a parody of itself, but darn close. --Andy Spletzer ... Read more

Reviews (341)

Entertaining
This movie is not supposed to an oscar winning performance, it is an entertaining movie to watch and there is nothing else like it (except for the original), so I think it has some redeeming qualities just for that alone.I thought I would hate it, but I was pleasantly entertained.The only thing that got old for me was the car chase.

Look away from screen to avoid seizures(in a bad way)
Im not sure who started this trend of directing movies so that they have the camera cut every 2-4 seconds.The movie SWAT and also watching Dr. Phil would be very good examples of this quick cut trend of editing.I dare anyone to watch any of the previous mentioned and be able to count to six before the camera cuts.It's impossible.Once you realize 4.9 seconds is the limit of a hold in a shot, (For me anyway) it becomes almost impossible to watch.Similar to watching a strobe light.Is it possible that it is cheaper to make productions this way or could it be a sinister plot to shorten viewer attention spans?In either case this movie is worse than watching a blank screen.It's so bad that I no longer like Nick Cage. After I started watching, I was "Gone in about 18 minutes."

Turn your mind off and your radar detector on!
It's okay, as I say in a lot of my other reviews..."it is what it is".Simple story, lots of action, tons of fun cinematic scenes!

In this action thriller, a master car thief has his skills pushed to the limit. Randall "Memphis" Raines (Nicolas Cage) can steal practically any car that crosses his path. While he has done well in his life of crime, he knows that there's a short future in theft, and he wants to get out of the business.

But his retirement plans are interrupted when his younger brother Kip (Giovanni Ribisi) gets in trouble with a dangerous crime boss. To get his brother out of harm's way, Randall agrees to a profitable but risky scheme to steal 50 luxury cars in one night, with the help of several other car thieves, including Sara "Sway" Wayland (Angelina Jolie). A rival group of thieves is trying to pull the same stunt at the same time, and detectives Castlebeck (Delroy Lindo) and Drycoff (Timothy Olyphant) are trying to shut down both operations. Also starring Robert Duvall as Otto Halliwell, and Scott Caan as Tumbler, Gone in Sixty Seconds is a remake of the 1974 low-budget action hit of the same name, best remembered for a 40-minute chase scene in which 90 cars were destroyed.

Do not waste your time
If you're looking to buy this because it's "unrated" and you're expecting something edgier, sexier, or more violent than the original 2000 cut, don't bother -- the only reason it's "unrated" is that the studio didn't bother to submit it to the MPAA.

In other words, it's a marketing ploy.Yes, this version is slightly different from the one previously released -- this one has all the deleted scenes re-inserted, so the film runs a few minutes longer.But there's nothing in it that wouldn't get another PG-13 if they re-submitted it.

Don't waste your time, don't waste your money, and don't fall into this marketing ploy.

Forgotten In 60 Seconds
Yes, I know. Its sad that I would devote so much thought to a thoroughly forgettable film.

Jerry Bruckheimer makes a certain kind of film. He makes films that are widely seen because they are the equivalent of an 'easy read'. People go to his films because they want to see a bunch of people break into Alcatraz or because they want to see a bunch of convicts save a plane or destroy an asteroid before it hits Earth. They are loud, slickly produced films full of explosions and action. They ARE the Summer Film. Most of these films are enjoyable in a rudimentary sort of way. It is the truly memorable films of summer that go beyond these formulas. Unfortunately, "Gone In 60 Seconds" doesn't even live up to the Bruckheimer standards.

I have some questions about the film, well, 60 questions, and some thoughts about each of the questions.

1. Why was the movie made?

When a production company becomes as big, as well-known, and as important to the studio footing the bill, as Bruckheimer's company is to Disney, they have to produce films on a regular basis just to keep the cash coming in. I am sure that everyone involved anticipated that this film would be a huge hit, causing buckets of cash to fall from the sky.

2. Why did Academy Award winner Nicholas Cage make this movie?
3. Why did Academy Award winner Anjelina Jolie make this movie?
4. Why did Academy Award winner Robert Duval make this movie?

It's the cash, stupid. Cage makes about $20 million per picture. Jolie and Duval probably made a mint as well. They've got mortgages just like everyone else.

5. Why is Cage's character called 'Memphis' when he is from Long Beach, CA?
6. Why is Jolie's character called 'Sway'?
7. Why is Vinnie Jone's character called 'Sphinx'?

Only the screenwriter, Scott Rosenberg, can answer these questions. The answers certainly aren't in the story. In Rosenberg's last film, 'Con Air', many of the characters had nicknames, but we learned why they had those nicknames. At least Duval's nickname is 'Otto'. That makes sense.

8. After his brother, played by Giovanni Ribisi, fumbles a car theft, causing Cage to come out of retirement to save him, why does Cage agree to let Ribisi and his friends join the crew?

Their great track record?

9. Why is their Cajun music playing over the credits?

The main characters are from Long Beach. It makes perfect sense. Of course. Cajun music.

10. Why is so much of the daylight action shot with brown filters?

It makes the entire film look muddy. Great idea, guys.

11. Why is Christopher Eccleston's villain British?

Yes, I know the actor is British, but there is no reason for the character to be. Watch the very good, but very depressing 'Jude' or the simply great 'Shallow Grave' to see how good this actor can be. And then, wonder aloud why he decided to appear in this film.

12. Why is it so easy for Cage and his crew to steal cars?

Most of these scenes are interesting, but not suspenseful. Because they only have difficulty grabbing a small number of the 50 cars, everything appears easy. The suspense is gone.

13. Because of #12, the climatic car chase is predictable. Why?

Because everything else is so easy, naturally something will go wrong with the last car. There is no suspense anywhere. In the entire film.

14. Why is the actual climax so boring?

Because it has been done hundreds of times before.

15. Why is the only sex scene between Cage and Jolie less erotic than the two lovers that they are watching at the time?

It's the chemistry, stupid. There isn't any.

16. Why is Delroy Lindo's character driving a Cadillac and then a BMW while undercover?

Not exactly standard police issue.

17. Why are we introduced to Frances Fisher's character at all?

She has literally one line. She also pops up in the background twice.

18. Grace Zabriskie played Cage's mother?

Yes. At least her one scene had some point in the story.

Okay, so I'm not actually going to ask 60 questions about the movie. The movie attempted to live up to about a third of its promise, so I think it is acceptable for me to live up to a third of mine. It promised a lot of car chases, it has two. It promised interesting characters, it has none.

If I really went to the trouble of listing 60 questions, and you read them, we are each devoting far too much time to a film that will live up to its title in more ways than one.
... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

One of the big Elizabethan-era films of 1998, Shekhar Kapur's Elizabeth serves up a brimming goblet of religious tension, political conspiracy, sex, violence, and war. England in 1554 is in financial and religious turmoil as the ailing Queen "Bloody" Mary attempts to restore Catholicism as the national faith. She has no heir, and her greatest fear--that her Protestant half-sister Elizabeth will assume the throne after her death--is realized. Still, the late Queen Mary has her loyalists. The newly crowned Elizabeth finds herself knee-deep in dethroning schemes while also dodging assassination attempts. Her advisers (including Sir William Cecil, superbly played by Richard Attenborough) beg her to marry any one of her would-be suitors to stabilize England's empire. No matter that she already has a lover. The passionate Robert Dudley (Joseph Fiennes) is married, however, and shows he cannot stand up to the growing strength of the Queen. With the help of her aide Walsingham (Geoffrey Rush), Elizabeth strikes against her enemies before they get to her first. But her rise ultimately entails rejecting love and marriage to redefine herself as the indisputable Virgin Queen.

Cate Blanchett's Oscar-nominated performance as the naive and vibrant princess who becomes the stubborn and knowing queen is both severe and sympathetic. Her ethereal, pale beauty is equal parts fire and ice, her delivery of such lines as "There will be only one mistress here and no master!" expressed with command rather than hysterics. As striking as Blanchett's performance is the film's lavish and dramatic production design. The cold, dark sets paired with the lush costuming show the golden age of England's monarchy emerging from the Middle Ages. Rich velvet brushes over the dank stones while power is achieved at any price, and with such attention to physical detail, Elizabeth fully immerses you into its compelling chronicle of pioneering feminism and revisionist history. --Shannon Gee ... Read more

Reviews (351)

Hail to the Queen!
During its theatrical run, critical praise of ELIZABETH was subdued somewhat due to the film's historical inaccuracy and emphasis on melodrama. While both of these observations are admittedly correct, ELIZABETH is none-the-less a spectacular production. From the riveting opening credits to the chilling finale, this movie is full of provocative dramatic elements: sex, betrayal, politics, religion, violence, and revenge. The cinematography, set design, and costumes are outstanding. The settings alternate between dank medieval gloom and brilliant regal spendor. Cate Blanchett gives a dynamic performance of Meryl Streep calibre. (She should have won the Oscar, but ELIZABETH wasn't nearly as popular as SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE.) In plot and theme, ELIZABETH is like a hybrid of THE LION IN WINTER and THE GODFATHER. It begins as the reign of Elizabeth's sister, Queen Mary ("Bloody Mary")is coming to an end. The film then details the controversial ascension of Protestant young Elizabeth to the throne. The movie focuses on the early years of her reign, as Elizabeth struggles to solidify her power and overcome conflicts of religion and political intrigue; questions of marriage; and numerous plots to depose or assassinate her. As previously mentioned, the movie takes a good deal of license with history, taking events and relationships that occurred throughout Elizabeth's reign and condensing them into the first few years of her reign. Overall, ELIZABETH is an excellent production-- as chilling and dramatic as SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE is romantic and funny. The two films are wonderful counterparts.

Not Your Average Costume Drama
Shekar Kapur's account of the early years of Elizabeth I's reign in not your average costume drama, it is a visceral and entrancing film that despite all the historical inaccuracies that other reviewers have noted (and they are many), perfectly captures the climate of religious conflict, struggle for power and constant danger that characterised the beginning of Elizabeth's reign. Michael Hirst's script portrays the young queen as an innocent caught in the throes of international politics, who by the end of the film has become a calculating monarch willing to sacrifice almost anything to ensure her survival and the welfare and prosperity of her kingdom. Kapur's brilliant direction gives the film a vertiginous rhythm, while Remi Adefarasin's ominous cinematography adds a menacing and sinister atmosphere that sometimes gives Elizabeth the feel of a horror movie. Also worthy of praise are the magnificent production design, the gorgeous costumes and a surprisingly eclectic soundtrack that includes Byrd, Mozart, Holst and Elgar as well as some great original music.

The acting is also excellent. Especially Geoffrey Rush as the unscrupulous yet reliable Walsingham; Christopher Eccleston as the devious Duke of Norfolk; Richard Attenborough as Cecil, Elizabeth's most loyal and trusted aide; and Kathy Burke as the frustrated and paranoid "Bloody Mary". However, the real jewel is Cate Blanchett's amazing, star-making turn as the title character. She gives a complex, mesmerising and moving performance as she makes the transition from scared and vulnerable young woman to quasi-preternatural icon.

If you are interested in the "true historical facts" of Elizabeth's reign you should choose a documentary of one of the many great books that have been written about her (my favourite is Alison Weir's biography), but if you are looking for a great cinematic experience that explores the young queen's personality and motivations in remarkable depth this is definitely the one to choose. In my opinion Shekar Kapur's masterpiece is the best film of its kind.

Entertaining, but wildly inaccurate
If you're not bothered by historical inaccuracies, then go ahead and check out this movie. It's extremely well-acted for the most part, although Fiennes's Dudley turns milksop in an entirely fictitious turn of events that aligns him with a Catholic plot to replace Elizabeth with Mary, Queen of Scots (whose death in the movie is all wrong, too). Events from decades later are all condensed into what is clearly supposed to be the first year or two of Elizabeth's reign (which begain in 1558): Norfolk didn't rebel until the Northern Rebellion in 1569; Elizabeth wasn't excommunicated until 1570; she didn't even enter the Anjou courtship until 1578; and Mary, Queen of Scots was beheaded in public, not murdered in her bed, and that not until almost thirty years later, in 1587! Furthermore, in 1558 Lord Robert Dudley was not yet Earl of Leicester (he wouldn't be until Elizabeth gave him that title in 1564, and he was NEVER a duke!), and as another reviewer has pointed out, there's certainly more drama and intrigue in his REAL story than the movie allows -- he was rumored to have murdered his wife, Amy Robsart, after all.

I won't go on, but my point is that there is a hell of a lot wrong with the storyline that didn't even need to be wrong. It's still an entertaining movie, as I mentioned before, and Cate Blanchett really does deliver an exceptional performance. But at least some sort of gesture towards a measure of historical accuracy would have been appreciated.

Well acted, but distorts the actual events
Elizabeth is a well acted and entertaining movie, with some very well done performances and is visually stunning. The problem is that the writers decided to change so many events, that it ends up unnecessarily distorting the actual history.

To see a factual, well-acted, and still superb movie of the same era, get the 1971 film "Mary Queen of Scots" with Vanessa Redgrave. Not only does this follow the actual events, but the drama of 2 queens battling for power is so forcibly played that you can watch it over and over

What's wrong with the real story?
Lovely, beautifully acted, blah blah...

But why would the producers/writers take such an EXCITING true story, and change all the facts, and make is so much boring than it actually was? The real story has everything: romance, murder, betrayal, a wife pushed down the stairs, politics... so why turn it into such a dull, ordinary, mushy romance?

If you want to watch a strong woman influencing world events, watch "The Lion in Winter." If you want to read about the TRUE story of Elizabeth's ascent to the throne, read Alison Weir's books. If you want to watch a goopy romance movie, there are plenty of much better ones to choose from. But don't waste your time with this movie. ... Read more

Description

This widely acclaimed motion picture features outstanding performances from Renee Zellweger (JERRY MAGUIRE, BRIDGET JONES'S DIARY) and Julianna Margulies (TV's ER, THE NEWTON BOYS). Sonia (Zellweger) is a young woman who always did just what was expected: she married the right man, moved to the right neighborhood, and had a beautiful baby. And yet, when she discovers an exciting world beyond her tightly knit community, it sparks a growing desire for independence that threatens the security of the perfect life she knows. See A PRICE ABOVE RUBIES for yourself, and learn why critics and audiences nationwide have praised this passionate movie gem! ... Read more

Reviews (42)

Zellweger Shines in Ethnic Drama; Divergent Viewpoints
...

A carefully and compellingly rendered drama of a contemporary woman's stirring discovery of self, "A Price Above Rubies" is set in the context of a Hasidic Jewish/American community. Beautifully photographed, this film's acting sparkles -- and renders a reasonably accurate portrait of an easily caricatured community.

Renee Zellweger establishes herself as a talent of unlimited possibilities. ...

The film's feminist perspective is gracefully realized without belittling all guys -- which greatly enhances the film's power! (And lowers my blood pressure!)

Production design is exceptional!

Those Orthodox Jewish critics who are angered by this film's portrayal of Jewish Orthodoxy might have us believe that the world of Orthodoxy is monolithically benign. It is not. ...

Traditional thought and practice -- orthodoxy in many settings -- has its beauties and strengths and -- like most things human-- it has its dark, shadow side as well. "A Price Above Rubies" depicts the delicate balance gone awry.

For a very different, also wonderful film which depcts both light and shadow sides of Ameriocan Jewish traditionalism, but less critically of Orthodoxy, try "The Chosen" (1982) (adapted from Chaim Potok's book), with Robby Benson (quite good in this film, to my surprise), Rod Steiger and Maximillian Schell -- available on VHS, not yet on DVD. For me "The Chosen" is a five star, among my all-time top 10 films!

Zellweger Shines in Ethnic Drama; Points of Comparison
REVISED from my earlier review:

A beautifully rendered drama of a contemprary woman's stirring discovery of self, "A Price Above Rubies" is set in the context of a Hasidic Jewish/American community. Beautifully photographed, this film's acting sparkles -- and renders a reasonably accurate portrait of an easily caricatured community. Renee Zellweger establishes herself as a talent of unlimited possibilities. (I wrote these words of promise when the film was 1st released, long before Renee's fame via the fluffy "The Diary of Bridget Jones" and the incredibly wonderful "Chicago"! Now I saw hor on the cover of Cosmo!) The film's feminist perspective is gracefully realized without belittling all guys -- which greatly enhances the film's power! Production design is exceptional!

Those Orthodox Jewish critics who are angered by this film might have us believe that the world of Orthodoxy is monolithic. It is not. In my own family and beyond, many people experience forms of Jewish Orthodoxy which are fulfilling and wonderfully peaceful. On the other hand, abusive conduct does creep in to parts of this world, as exemplified most vividly by the 1999 Amos Gitai film, Kadosh -- a terrifying portrait of the worst side of Orthodox Jewish patriarchy, which makes "A Price Above Rubies" seem like a fairy tale. In my own community, we have learned of an attempted horrific Orthodox shunning and boycotting of a wife and doctor after she reportedly sought a divorce alleging substantial physical abuse. (Who can say whether the woman's charges were true! The vengeful letter writing and attempted boycott are fact, however.)

Traditional thought and practice has its beauties and strengths and -- like most things human-- it has its dark, shadow side as well.

AN INTENSE TALE OF EMANCIPATION. NOT ABOUT RELIGION.
Beyond a touch of sensationalistic Hollywoodisation (over-simplifying the perceived orthodoxy of Jews) the movie is about a woman who is stifled in her relationship with a fanatically devout husband, and in that it etches an intermittently sharp portrait of a subculture caught between a rich historical legacy and a changing contemporary world.

To me, the movie was NOT about the Hasidic way of life. I could see this film holding just about as relevant even if I replaced the community potrayed in it with any other. It is about the marital suffering of two people who are very different in their moorings.

Renee Zellweger, the pivot, does a very convincing job of showing the desperation in a young woman's personal search, Sonia, who embarks on a search for not only herself but also her place in the world -- for the duration of the film Renee gave Sonia the precise dignity and emotion that the role deserved.

The supporting cast were strong, Juliana Margulies certainly showing that she's doesn't always play the 'nice girl'. Christopher Eccleston was convincingly wicked and Glenn Fitzgerald puts in a credible performance as Mendel, the husband, capturing the essence of the role commendably.

Bordering sometimes on being a chick-flick, the movie generally deals with feminine issues, and I would think that the emotional dominion would have it seldom appeal to a male audience. Which is quite evident in the other belittling reviews here.

I recommend this film highly, although it is an intense one and perhaps not for every Joe Blogg. Make sure you're in the mood.

Very high price of individual freedom
What a movie! At the end I had goosebumps and was trying hard to hold back the tears. What a fantastic performance by RZ!

The movie starts off as a slow-as-molasses slice-of-life story about an orthodox Jewish family in NYC. But it ends as the heroic struggle of a Jewish woman yearning to be free -- free of paternalistic controls, free to decide on her own fate, free to pursue beauty in life, a rebellious street-smart and hard-headed woman who wants to be free enough even to judge the wisdom of God, an ultimate heresy for the social milieu she was raised up in. She goes through hell, but at the end she hangs on to her dear freedom. And that has a "price well above rubies" and diamonds.

RZ is a star! She is burning with talent and heart.

Dark Side
Despite the Orthodox Jewish background this movie is really about a womens life and her ways of reaching what she has always wanted. See the movie with an open mind and all will be well. ... Read more

Reviews (51)

You have to cover the trail!
This little Scottish gem is worth watching more than once! I'll not bother recanting what it's about, you can read that above. This is a delightful example of how greed and peer pressure can twist and stain the human soul with ugliness. Most of the movie takes place in the three roommates' flat in Scotland so it has a real claustrophobic feel to it. The plot is simple, watch the three characters crumble as they're affected by their decision to keep the money and dispose of the body. Strongest scene: when David comments about the dinner after having to hack up the dead body "It tastes different." Possibly meaning both the dinner and everything else about his life. This film has a nice ending, not a phoney one just to keep everyone happy. Technically, the digital transfer is mediocre. The sound is quite low. I have to turn my TV up pretty high to hear it, but this could be due to poor production on the set. There are no extras included on this DVD.

Ewan McGregor's first major role is a definite winner!
I'm a major Ewan McGregor fan, and that's how I first came to see this movie. It's the first of three movie he would make with the now-famous Scottish film makers Danny Boyle, John Hodge, and Andrew MacDonald. This is the best out of the three in my point of view. It's about three flatmates who finally find a fourth. But when he ends up dead, and the three break into his room only to find a bag of money. First they must dispose of the body, second they must decide how to use the money. But the effects of money on three good friends comes to suspenseful and tragic ends. This is a phenomenal movie even if you don't like suspense (I don't). It's also great for anyone who wants to see Ewan McGregor with long hair that is dripping with sweat. This is a wonderful psychological thriller for even the very squeamish.

Don't Cross That Threshold
What will happen when three affluent and professional friends and flatmates,a journalist,a doctor and a chartered accountant,find a corpse and a suitcase full of money? What choices will confront these educated and intelligent people and what are the consequences of their choice?
This is the story of Shallow Grave, the debut long feature of Brit Danny Boyle, and the first of his many collaborations with writer Dr John Hodge (MD not PHD).
More specifically,it is the story of two men,Ewan McGregor and Chris Eccleston and a woman, Kerry Fox who share a flat and a friendship that is obviously harmonious.Deciding to let a fourth room in their large flat,they begin to interview likely candidates with an air of haughty antagonism and playful sarcasm,until Mr Keith Allen himself drops by, mysterious but with ready cash and moves in.
Yet their new roommate's life is quite short, and he is discovered dead, but with a lot of cash. The money of a man who came out of nowhere, had no visitors and apparently will not be missed too soon, is quite tempting to keep. This is the dilemma the three friends faced in a very tense moment that pierced right through their conscience.
In John Boorman's Excalibur, Merlin the magician, granting the wish of a knight to change his appearance into another for carnal reasons,says in a memorable quote ' The future has taken root in the present'.
This is exactly what happened in Shallow Grave the very second our heroes decided to keep the money, depose of the body (in parts, a task that traumatized them), and live happily ever after.So they thought!
How wrong they were, for crossing the threshold of their moral and ethical obligations towards their dead roommate,will forever change their lives and they will pay dearly for it.
Greed will inevitably be the driving force that will govern their lives and relationship from then on,pull them apart,reduce them from highly respectable members of the society to frightened and paranoid ,even pathetic creatures, that live mainly by their instincts.
Of course no one is truly mysterious and although we really do not know who really was the character of Keith Allen and where is the source of that money, we do get an idea that his line of work did not involve paying taxes, and two of his not so nice chums soon enough,looking desperately for him, find their way to the flat, obviously not thinking of tea and scones.But they are murdered and deposed of.
These bodies soon resurface (no crime is perfect as the cliche goes)and this will wet the appetite of the subtley clever police, with the chief inspector and his detective (played by John Hodge himself) who rightly suspect foul play.
All this lead to a tragic end, that was in a way inevitable the moment the lure of cash (even for people who really do not need it) turned into a possessive demon. It is a frightening thought of course, because no matter how much we claim superior moral ground and are indignant, we can never anticipate the choice we will make, facing a similar situation.
This makes Shallow Grave a little gem of a movie, a product of talented group of friends (and not of the studio machine)who contributed their effort to give us a film that is quite original and with a message that is as old but poignant as life itself. It is about the consequence of our choices, and the path it will take us once we cross that threshold.

do the wrong thing
Three obnoxious flatmates put scores of potential tenants through their paces before selecting a fourth resident for their humble hipster abode. Soon he is dead from a (self-inflicted) drug overdose but he left behind wads of cash that they want. Now to dispose of him and carry on!!!

They draw straws of who will actually dismember and bury him. It is gross!!! This division plus the knowledge of their horrifying secret slowly tears the flatmates apart. It is an interesting process to watch -- particularly when one moves into the attic and drills holes into the ceiling to spy on the two he left downstairs (shudder!!!!)

what can I say, just a great movie
its British and its awesome. Ewen McGregor is the best in this and he offers a character that is fun to watch. Christopher Eccelston's nose is the gem also, and he has a slight resemblense to my friend Marcus, sorry MArcus but its true and Kerry Fox is hot, hot, hot.a great paranoia film with a lot of body cutting up and Danny Boyle( A Life Less Ordinary, 28 Days Later, The Beach adn Trainspotting) is a great director. the end where Eccelston gets the nife in the neck and McGRegor tricks Fox into thinking she has the money, just great ... Read more

Reviews (6)

A visual feast for the senses and soul
I was so enthralled by the beauty of this film that I had to go back and see it again the next night. I might add that I almost never see movies twice. Visually stunning black and white cinematography toned a deep blue-tone, lent a rich sense of dreamlike antiquity to the film. Shot on location in northern France, full of medieval icons and stone buildings, surrounded by peasant farms and fields the film touched on many local customs and lore : gypsies with houses in trees, a dark-tressed virgin mary-possibly an older connection to Ceres or an earth-mother goddess, early midwivery, and, perhaps most importantly the desire for a direct connection to God, which conflicts with the Church-as-middle-man role. The story was a deeply moving and inspiring tale of a pure desire to touch divinity.

A Profound depiction of medieval life
There are not enough words to describe the utter beauty of Anchoress. The imagery and symbolism is intellectually and visually satsifying; one could watch this