Reviews (177)

The Depths Of Depp
Johnny Depp plays George Jung, your every day man turned multi-millionaire drug dealer. The amazing journey starts with just a bit of weed going to people on the beach, soon he and his friends are working their way to Mexico in major exports. After a brief stop in jail Depp changes from marijuana to cocaine. Soon Depp has so much money he can't fit anymore in his house. It is in this time he meets his wife-to-be decently played by Penelope Cruz. A mishap with his wife later and he is in jail again. The part about this film that sets it apart from most drug movies is that it shows the highlights of the illegal exchange business but it also shows the bottoming out. The other thing it has is a connection with the characters. You actually begin to feel for Depp as he is separated from the one thing that he loves in his life, his daughter. Franka Potente (Run Lola Run) and Paul Rubin (Pee Wee Herman) also have roles in this film that has heart and substance(s).

Strong Powder
BLOW is based on the true story of George Jung (Johnny Depp). In the 70s and 80s, Jung was the single largest importer of Columbian cocaine, to the United States. Therefore, he alone, changed America, and helped to create the "drug culture" in this nation. At the film's center is the partnership between Jung and Pablo Escobar, (Cliff Curtis) and how they operated, with and against each other. It really is true what others have said about Depp's performance in the film. He doesn't let this highly complex role intimidate him. He pulls it off brilliantly. He scenes with Penelope Cruz are pure magic. Directed by the late Ted Demme, BLOW offers viewers an inside look into how some people got very rich off of other people's addiction to drugs. Even though some have blasted the film because, in their opinion, it glorifies drug use, I see it more as an anti drug film. Having said that, dont expect an overt anti-drug message in the movie either. My take on it is that the "message" hides as a subtext as an implied theme. If the film does have any connection to any indictment against drugs, that comes from the fact that Demme died last year from apparently using the stuff himself.

The DVD is part of New Line Cinema's Infinifilm series. Like all other discs in the series, it is packed with extras, allowing viewers to have more of an interactive experience, while watching the film. Hearing Demme talk about drugs on the commentary track with Jung, may unsettle some, given what happened to him, but there really isn't much of that on the track. The deleted scenes don't really add much to the film and were properly edited out of the picture. The Ted Demme Production Diary is cool because it takes us through how movies are made (I always enjoy that stuff). Rounding out the standard features are trailers, filmographies, and a Nikka Costa Music Video. The disc also has a few DVD-ROM extras. The Infinifilm extras include interviews with Jung conducted by Demme, a trivia track, among others. Use of the Infinifilm mode gives you access to these features for a unique look at BLOW.

Thanks to powerful performances and solid, well produced extras, BLOW is a Highly Recommended film/DVD **** and a half stars.

Blow is about the life of Mr. George Jung from childhood to
his final drug bust for which he is still serving time. Johnny Depp carries this movie very well, like all movies about gangs or drugs or anything crime related, this movie starts off with everything going well and then everything starting to go downhill again, it is a true story, obviously with quite a bit of Hollywood fabrication but none the less, it inspires sympathy for the characters, I for one am someone who isn't really a very emotional person when it comes to movies, at least I don't think so, but this movie brought a tear or two to my eye, especially the ending, where Depp recited a poem written by Jung and it is the saddest thing, the special features are quite amazing, I would recommend this movie to people over 14 because it does have an R rating which is due to a lot of language, drug content, extremely brief nudity and some violence here and there. Enjoy.

extras no good
I rated this movie 5 stars, until I got a load of the DVD extras. These extras actually serve to drag down the enjoyment of the movie. First, there are the "character outtakes" whatever that term is supposed to mean. These consist of various characters being interviewed about George Jung - the character, not the real person. They say poorly thought out and inarticulate things like, "This guy... he's like... this guy don't care what anybody thinks, you know?" My impression was that the actors just got in front of a camera "in character" and extemporized. The results are pretty ghastly. Also, there is the jailhouse interview that director Ted Demme makes of George Jung, the real person. This is also pretty disedifying, consisting at the end of Demme sitting next to Jung on a bench and saying similarly inarticulate and poorly thought out things, like, "Yeah, its like schoolteachers make minimum wage and there's truckdrivers making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year..." Now, I am an ex-schoolteacher and though I did not make a mint at my job I certainly did not make "minimum wage" and I worked for one of the most underfunded school districts in the country. One has the impression of being a witness to a guy blowing his mouth off on the balcony of somebody's post-college get-together. Not pretty. How Demme ever got people to trust him with millions of dollars remains a mystery: the man is simply not preposessing intellectually. Also, his world is morally vague and equivocal. He tells Jung he takes a non-judgemental stance to his crimes and then says that he himself has skeletons in the closet, its just that his are not so well known. Now, I kind of doubt that Ted Demme is himself a serious criminal who has simply evaded discovery. But that is what he is in effect implying, in bad faith to George Jung - a hardcore criminal. The real implication is that any degree of malfeasance is equivalent to any other. If one man has smuggled enormous quantities of drugs, and another man has left the cap off his toothpaste well, they're pretty much the same: we all do bad things. Interestingly, the stance that Demme takes is NOT that what Jung did was not morally wrong. His stance is that, though it was wrong, so what? I can respect and perhaps agree with someone who says that smuggling drugs, though illegal, is not immoral. I can understand the argument that by and large it is an utter liberal myth that anybody is forced to use drugs by anybody else. Peer pressure? One gravitates to "peers" with similar interests. If you get into drugs and your friends don't, you find new friends: druggie friends. This happened in my circle of friends and I have seen it happen first-hand. I had many druggie and non druggie friends and I never saw anybody use drugs who did not want to. And there is simply no substance so addictive that it turns a straight arrow into a degenerate against the straight arrow's will and inclination. Drugs simply help you along in the direction you are inclined.
All this being said, I can agree with someone who does not morally judge George Jung. Personally I am morally indifferent to his actions. But this is not the same thing as saying that what he did was wrong but so what we all do bad things. If I once ignored a parking ticket, is this the same thing as being a murderer? I suspect that Demme's thus cozying up to Jung actually lowered him in Jung's regard.

Luff ist der drug
Let me be clear, this is a great film. It actually reassures me that all movies are not garbage. But for me the best part of the movie is Franka Potente's performance as Barbara, a comely stew who, so far as I can tell, is not supposed to be German. It is a special pleasure for me to watch Franka Potente, with her thick Cherrrmann accent, ya? trying to speak in a vey zat iss recognizeable as chust typical yanqui American dialect. I also thrilled to her performance in The Bourne Identity, hearing her deliver such lines as, "But he vas chust shining us all on" like the Munchen-frau she is. Yeah, I'll get all liquored up on Spaten Premium, or maybe even brave the forbidding slopes of the Optimator, then I'll hunker down for a triple-bill of Run Lola Run, Bourne Identity, and Blow. Its like my own private Oktoberfest that I chust by myself heff got going on, ya?
unt ich bein auss. ... Read more

Description

A young man struggling to access sublimated childhood memories finds a technique that allows him to travel back to the past. Occupying his childhood body, he is able to change history. But every change he makes has unexpected consequences. ... Read more

Reviews (209)

This film is very underrated...
Ever since I first saw previews for this film, I was excited about it. Anytime the subject of time travel is approached, it usually makes for an interesting and exciting film. However, the film did have the critics going against it, and Ashton Kutcher trying to play in a dramatic role.

I finally got to see the movie recently, and I was pleasantly surprised at how good this film turned out to be. While it is not the best time travel film I have ever seen, it was extremely entertaining and suspenseful to see all the different lifetimes being played out. I really enjoyed the fact that Kutcher's character used his mind to travel in time and not a machine. The movie can be frustrating at times. In fact, after the first 20 minutes of the film I had serious doubts. Things would happen, followed by Ashton's Kutcher's character having a blackout right at the moment when an explanation was needed. This left myself and the rest of the audience feeling confused at what was playing out. But after the film gets over the initial speed bump in the beginning, The Butterfly Effect turns into a riveting thriller and everything is explained in the long run. The entire cast did a fantastic job in my opinion. While I still feel that Ashton Kutcher is not a very good actor, he did a lot better than I thought he would. Especially, when you consider the fact that he is known for being a comedy actor.

One of the best things about this film was the ending. It was not your typical happy ending. While every character's life turned out for the better, Kutcher's character still experiences loss and regret by how the story turns out. I was very happy with the ending, because it actually manages to leave your emotions feeling conflicted, which gets you thinking about how things could have been. Anytime you leave the theater in discussion about what you would have done differently, it means that the film made an impression on you. That is definately something that The Butterfly Effect manages to do.

I really don't understand the harsh treatment from critics. In Entertainment Weekly, the average grade for this film is a "C-". While The Butterfly Effect does have its flaws, it turned out to be a riveting thriller, with an original take on timetravel and an unpredictable ending.

A solid 4 out of 5 stars.

Don't Listen to the Critics - Good Movie
Because most of the critics slammed this movie, I went to see it expecting a lot less than I got. I thought the movie was fine: rich plot, good pacing, intense drama, and solid performances by all of the actors. Ashton Kutcher, who has a great screen presence (I've never seen him before; don't watch much TV) played the role with just the right degrees of intensity, bewiderment, and desperation. Amy Smart's performance fluctuated convincingly from loyal lover, to air-headed ingenue, to hardened prostitute, etc. And I loved the way the other supporting characters changed personalities with time shifts.

The kid actors looked very much like their adult counterparts, especially in Kutcher's case, so that the constant transitions between pre-teen, teen, and adult versions of the characters were very smooth... this was important to keep the audience suspending its disbelief.

The screenplay delved into taboo subjects fearlessly, which I think added to its richness and made it all the more riveting.

Most of the critics didn't like this film, and I suspect a lot of that has to do with their personal disdain of Kutcher. That's neither relevant nor fair. Roger Ebert tried to be fair in his review and did say some good things about the movie, but he was bothered a lot by the inexplicably artistic quality of the drawing and the note-lettering penned by the Kutcher character. I agree that this high quality this was kind of odd, since the character was never portrayed as an artist, but I think that's a minor detail that detracted only slightly from one's enjoyment of the movie. Overall, Butterfly Effect was a handsomely-filmed, "sci-fi" movie that didn't rely on special effects to hold my interest and entertain me. It was a great ride. What more could the critics want?

Great movie- I have answers
I absolutely loved this movie and I think that anyone would enjoy it if they would just actually watch it. All those people that say it was a horrible movie because it doesn't make sense, are just flat out stupid.<br /> It is called the butterfly effect because every little change he makes in his past has a devastating effect on his life and everyone around him. A butterfly flapping his wings, though very insignificant, can cause a typhoon in wherever. I'm not saying it's true, but that's the reason it's called the butterfly effect.<br /> If your'e wondering why evan had the knife, Evan goes back in time to destroy the blockbuster, and he gets a knife. However, he drops it when his mom walks in the room, and is unable to destroy it. <br /> When he is in the cell with carlos, and he goes back in time, he puts scars in his hands so carlos can see them. When he goes back in time and jabbs his hands into those two sharp things, it is not a big enough change to have that big of an effect on his life. His past is not changed and so everthing leading up to the jail still happened. The only difference is that now he has scars in his hands.<br /> This movie is very violent but all of it's for a reason. The passion of the christ is has just as much gore if not more, and it really get's your attention. It gives the movie more emotion. It makes you think. I agree that this is not suitable for children, but this is a great movie. If you get a chance, i strongly suggest watching this movie.

Excellent Film---Believe It Or Not!
The first time I ever saw Ashton Kutcher was the very first episode of "That '70's Show"---a show that I fell in love with right away. As it went on to become one of the best sitcoms in the past ten years, I at first saw star Topher Grace as becoming the superstar of the bunch. However, as the third season began, I began to realize that Ashton Kutcher was the valedictorian. As terminally clueless, and childishly impish, stoner Michael Kelso, the former straight-A college engineering student has created one of the most memorable sitcom characters of the modern television era. His impending superstardom seemed more & more destined to be. By the beginning of the year 2000, I was wondering when his first movie would come out. By the end of the year 2000, my question had been answered, though not my prayers.

As Ashton's film career began with the incredibly unfunny DUDE, WHERE'S MY CAR?, I shook my head with disappointment at how the lowest-common-denominator mindset of Hollywood was going to drag him down along the forgotten road of Typecast Alley. I missed the few other comedies he did afterwards (TEXAS RANGERS--2001, JUST MARRIED, MY BOSS'S DAUGHTER--both 2003), but after viewing my DVD rental of THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT (2004) last week, I was disappointed no more.

THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT shows the beginnings of Kutcher's hopefully-maturing career-turn as a real all-around actor. This isn't an Oscar-caliber performance, but he brings a real heart & soul to his portrayal of a young man whose future seems inexorably bound to his past---a past to which he discovers he can return at any time in order to affect his present. Evan tries to fix what went wrong in his life; however, in doing so he creates unintended consequences for himself and his beloved Kayleigh (a radiant Amy Smart, showing real depth of character here).

This DVD shows both the original 113-minute Theatrical Version and the full 2-hour Director's Cut. I saw only the latter version, which is said to be the superior cut. I have not yet seen the original, so I am unable to compare the two versions. I will just say for now that the Director's Cut had a similar effect on me as the incredible Adrian Lyne-directed 1991 psycho-horror flick JACOB'S LADDER (1991): both films begin as strangely perplexing, but develop a strangely hypnotic and engrossing quality as well. As much as I wondered what the *beep* was going on, I just couldn't take my eyes off the bizarre action unwinding onscreen. And then *THE ENDING*---> Unexpectedly blindsiding, it pulls the previously indecipherable clues all together, and makes total sense out of senselessness, order out of chaos. Funny that the central theme of THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT *is* Chaos Theory!

Although it displays some of the more unpleasant qualities of a conventional horror flick (foul-mouthed youngsters doing things they have no business in doing, cute dogs existing purely for the purpose of being sadistically put to death), there is no doubt that Eric Bress and J. Mackye Gruber---the co-writers and directors who had previously teamed up to write the 2002 chiller sequel FINAL DESTINATION 2---have crafted a truly original story that contains a deceptive amount of substance behind the blurry, slick style. Some people---especially kids, it seems---did not particularly like the Director's Cut ending. I say that this is the only true ending this story could have had. (It also serves my strongly-felt theory that movies like this are most decidedly not meant for kiddies.) It makes me all the more curious as to what alternative kind of ending was edited into the Theatrical Version in order to 'please' the audience (whatever it was, it sure didn't seem to please many). Well, it looks like I'll just have to purchase this loaded-with-extras DVD to find out. That's just fine with me, as the Director's Cut alone is worth the money! If you're like me and passed on seeing THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT during its theater run, take another look at it on DVD. It may just surprise you, too!

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED; AGES 16 & UP

THE BEST MOVIE
THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT was one of the greatest movies on earth. I hear a lot of Ashton Kutcher with everybody talking about him, I thought he would wreck this movie up A LOT, but man was I WRONG. Ashton plays the part of Evan in the movie. As a kid he had many interesting moments and had blackouts. So his doctor told him to write in a journal each night about that day. Ever since he became older, or an adult, he had the journals, and everytime he became in a bad moment, he read the journals which sucked him up back to that time to change it, and as he was older things have been going wrong.....I don't want to spoil all of the movie for you but you MUST buy this movie if you are into action and drama like this. I would rate this movie a 100 out of 5, it was one of the best movies on earth!! ... Read more

Amazon.com

Wonderfully pointless, enthrallingly irrelevant, the Discovery Channel's Monster Garage is a highly entertaining reality show about what it takes for complete strangers to cooperate 16 hours a day, 6 days in a row while re-tooling ordinary cars and vans into, well, really dumb but awesome stuff. Led by a heavily tattooed and likeable outlaw named Jesse James (yes, he claims to be a descendant of the original), each of the teams of mechanics, designers,and welders assembled in the first season's 13 episodes are faced with such meaningless yet ultra-cool challenges as transforming a convertible sedan into a glorified, speedy lawn mower, or turning a van into a garbage truck, complete with a container-lifting arm that extends from behind a makeshift, gull-wing door.

Other engineering glories include a stretch limo adapted into a water-pumping firefighter, a sporty Chevrolet reinvented as a Zamboni (the team even gets an assist from Richard Zamboni, creator of the ice-rink smoother), a school bus reborn as a pontoon boat, and a pickup truck outfitted as a tree shaker (thus liberating many an almond from branches). Seeing these Frankenstein monster machines in action is fun, but the real kick from these shows is watching sundry loners and iconoclasts from the worlds of motorcycles and drag racing trying to get along together, and collaborating with folks from the auto industry, community colleges, and the arts world. Tensions run high, dramas become fascinating, hopes turn bleak, but somehow the mission is always met within time constraints and tight budgets. Monster Garage is good for kids, too, who discover that even outlaws need to know their geometry, hydraulics, and physics to be happy gear-heads. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Amazon.com

If, as they say, you're in a certain mood, Message in a Bottlecan bejust the ticket. Based on Nicholas Sparks's bestselling novel, this handsomebut overly calculated romance tale stars Robin Wright Penn as Theresa, aChicago Tribune researcher who finds a note encased in a green bottlethat has floated onto a Cape Cod shore. The message within is a heartfelt,yearning declaration of love to a woman named Catherine, but the author isunknown until Theresa (rather improbably) tracks him down in North Carolina.He's Garret Blake (Kevin Costner), a taciturn builder of sailboats and agrieving widower whose late wife, poetically speaking, was the intendedrecipient of the seafaring note Theresa found. Theresa, a divorc&eacute;e with ason, decides to meet Garret, only to find him as bottled-up as his message. Nevertheless, a romance blooms on the strength of quality time in a sailboatand lots of cuddling, though the script tosses in bits of conflict to keeptheir relationship spicy. Directed by Luis Mandoki (When a Man Loves aWoman), this love story is entirely by the numbers, with Costnerinhabiting (rather than performing) a stock fantasy of a man perfect in everyway save his broken heart. Penn brings more vibrancy to her equallypredictable part, but fortunately for all, Paul Newman, John Savage, Robbie Coltrane, and Illeana Douglas are on hand in nicely textured character parts.Sometimes predictability is exactly what one wants when settling in for anevening of home video, and this movie fits the bill nicely. The appealingcinematography is by ace cameraman Caleb Deschanel. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (114)

Sappy story but somehow lackluster
Kevin Costner and Robin Wright Penn, along with Paul Newman and Robbie Coltrane star in this stomach-turning film based on Nicholas Sparks's titled novel. Penn plays Theresa Osbovue, a woman who falls in love with a man she has never met. A single-mom following a heart-breaking divorce, Theresa retains custody of her son Jason. On a solitary vacation while Jason visits his dad, Theresa is jogging along a remote stretch of coastline when she picks up a sand-immersed bottle containing a passionate letter signed G. The letter turns out to be a heartfelt soliloquy to Catherine. After Theresa's boss publishes the sappy note on the newspaper, Theresa unexpectedly receives a plethora of responses and oddly more letters of the same letterhead turns up at her office. The bittersweet poetry from the letter pulls Theresa's heartstrings and prompts her to search for this man known as the initial G. The movie has adopted from Sparks' novel and seen minor modifications such as the locations of places and the much. Theresa's search for Garret Blake is somewhat cut short in the movie. So if you're interested you should read the novel before watching the movie. Other than that the movie sticks with the original plot:still sad, poignant and heartbreaking, and a bit stomach-turning. Kevin Costner and Robin Wright Penn make an interesting couple to watch. I have to compliment on the beautiful cinematography. The movie, however, is not a bad selection for those who want to enjoy a cozy quiet evening at home. 37/50 3.7 stars.

One of Costner's Best Films
This is a great love story.

Had to watch this one two times!

I highly recommend it for husbands and wives who want and need to rekindle their relationships.

Not anywhere near as good as the book.
They changed SO much from the book to the movie version! Paul Newman's character as the father had his name changed, as well as Theresa's son; Garrett already had a boat, he did not have to build one; his wife was not a painter; Theresa lived in Boston and worked for a fictional newspaper; etc. The movie just lacked so much. There was zero chemistry between the main characters. Kevin Costner was the only wonderful part in the movie as he played the character of Garrett so perfectly that it felt like they stole him right from the pages of the book and breathed life into him to star in the movie. He is the reason to watch this movie - there aren't any other reasons. Read the book - you'll get a more satisfying experience and a more satisfying cry.

Romantic
The plot of this movie was simply beautiful, especially coming from brilliant Nicholas Sparks. The movie was sweet and subtle showing the relationship between a man and a woman.

A woman is a writer, and finds a bottle written with a very beautiful note. She wants to find the author of the notes and possibly write a story on him.

She does meet him, and ironically falls in love with him. She collects the notes any way she can loving him even more. While on her journey, she spends a lot of time with the new man she's fallen in love with.

She has to leave to be with her son who was with his dad over the holiday. Problems arise, and hardships are endured.

The novel and movie are both very touching and romantic.

Left feeling Empty
I like romantic movies. I want the ending to leave me feeling happy, not depressed. Life isn't the fairy tale, thats why I watch movies, otherwise I wouldn't waste my time watching them. I want the fairy tale, the things that could and would never happen in real life. I ABSOLUTELY LOVED THIS MOVIE, until the end, I even stayed up on a work night until 1:30am. If they created this ending to make the movie "more realistic" they failed miserably. I thought I found a new romantic chick flick to add to my collection, I was sorely disappointed. ... Read more

Reviews (71)

Subject matter meaningful for some...not for all
In Hanging Up, the phone is the umbilical cord for the family in this story, three sisters and their dear old dad. While Hanging Up was touted as a comedy, at least that's the impression I got, I'm hard pressed to remember much about it that was funny, it's a drama if ever there was one.

We meet Eve, played by the effervescent Meg Ryan, the overwhelmed middle sister in a family of driven, slightly neurotic individuals. Oldest sister, Georgia (Diane Keaton who also directs) is typical oldest child, overachiever material with her own Vogue-esqe magazine, named Georgia. Youngest sister Maddy is a somewhat spoiled soap opera star played to whiney perfection by Lisa Kudrow. Last but not least, is the dying father, Lou, with the ever-grumpy and inappropriate Walter Matthau at the helm.

The film has woven together the present with a series of flashbacks to Eve's childhood as well as flashbacks during her time with her father in her adult life. Amidst all the flashbacks, is the busy, crazed daily routine of party planner Eve and her attempt to understand what is happening to her father. She must also deal with a level of resentment towards her sisters for being an interruption into her life with all their phone calls, but not being a shoulder to lean on for her where their father is concerned.

Hanging Up does a great job demonstrating just how stressed out people can get. There is regular day-to-day stress and then there is the stress you bring on yourself purely because of a basic personality flaw. I have firsthand knowledge of making stress out of things that don't have to be stressful. First ulcer at age fourteen, thank you very much. I can understand Meg Ryan's character and her propensity for making mountains out of molehills.

The most rewarding thing about watching a character like that is watching the "change". Let's not forget, folks, in a movie, the main character usually makes a personal change, has an epiphany, changes their life, or ends a destructive pattern. What is drama? Putting an ordinary person in extraordinary circumstances. What Eve does early on in the film is reach a level of frustration that is so high she makes a scene in the middle of a hospital corridor.

Why is that so entertaining? Because she sort of freaks out and that's something regular people WANT to do, but CAN'T because we behave within the confines of societal norms. If I'm having a bad day, and I am in the middle of St. Anthony's and start yelling and flailing my arms, someone is gonna drag me to the fourth floor. In the movies you can scream and act like an idiot, in real life people look at you and say, "the cheese has slipped off her cracker".

Despite the frenetic pace of Eve's day to day routine and the frequent flashbacks, Hanging Up lacks the same gusto in its attempt to impact the viewer with the seriousness of a dying parent. Matthau's character seems to be little more than window-dressing with his scenes all virtually being nothing more than one-liners from the confines of his wheelchair or hospital bed. I guess I feel a dying parent would be a more significant story factor here than it seemed to be.

While I admit to becoming a little misty from time to time during the film, I was looking for gut-wrenching Terms of Endearment stuff. Hanging Up fell a little short for me but I'm sure people to whom a similar situation has happened may have a stronger emotional reaction.

However, there are two instances where Hanging Up was borderline daring, dealing with subject matter that I have seen little of, if ever. There is an obvious rift between Eve and her mother, from whom Lou was divorced many years before. We are given a taste of Eve's view of her mother from the flashback scenes, but the real drama comes when, in one of the flashback scenes Eve pays her mother a visit.

Eve goes to her mother (Cloris Leachman) to plead for her to return home because her father is so unhappy. Aside from that being a difficult confrontation for anyone to deal with, is the revelation that she's not all that satisfied with being a mother in the first place. Other girls couldn't wait to grow up and become mommies, so she thought she did too and it didn't take. The thought of hearing that coming out of a mother's mouth is almost like a kick in the stomach, which is exactly the reaction Ryan's character seemed to have. Talk about taboo, admitting to your child you wish you weren't a mother. Somebody call Jerry Springer, next topic, "I Wish You Were Never Born".

Another explosive element is the basis of the father's illness. His memory and clarity are more off than on. The sadness of a person slowly losing their mind, slowly forgetting everyone and everything dear to them is pathetic and emotionally charged. Hanging Up touches on this hopelessness in a moment of confusion, when Matthau's character confuses his daughter with someone else he used to know and basically, is hitting on her. Eve has to remind him that she's his daughter, not this other person and he becomes angry, stating he doesn't have any daughters. It's icky. But sometimes life is icky and this scene is a blatant reminder of just how icky things can get.

Hanging Up finally gets its message across when Ryan's character must basically get a grip and learn when to say when. She can't be superwoman, bearing the responsibility of what is happening to her father all by herself. I must also stress the importance of the sister relationships to the film as well, which I have no understanding of either since I have four younger brothers. I always wanted a sister, but with all those brothers, what I got instead was my own room. Women with sisters may take more away from this movie than any other viewer. Hanging Up isn't for some, great for others. This is one where your own life's experiences will impact your perspective on the film.

Better than the critics would have you believe
It seems the critics really hated this movie, but I found the premise one that really deserved addressing. The issue of one child being left to care for an ailing parent, while the other selfish siblings are heard from only if things aren't going their way, is an issue with which I'm sure many people have to deal.

In this movie, Meg Ryan plays the one that gets all the work and none of the credit. She does just a wonderful job, as does Walter Matthau as the father suffering from Alzheimer's disease.

Though I might question some of the casting, based on ages of the actors (17 years difference between the oldest and youngest children!), even Kudrow and Keaton play their parts well...as spoiled, self centered siblings.

I believe what may be a turn-off to some is the presence of TOO MANY obnoxious personalities. The movie would have been much better without the presence of Adam Arkin's or Jesse James's characters...and I probably would have felt more sympathy for Meg Ryan's character as well.

Though the movie was far from perfect, there were some emotional moments in the movie that made up for its shortcomings.

I think the biggest problem with the story line was the unrealistic unity of the sisters at the end of the movie. Self-centered individuals do not suddenly change their ways. Had Meg's character gone on her way, leaving the sisters to SEE the error of their ways, it would have been a much more effective ending.

As for the transfer....as usual, a fantastic anamorphic widescreen picture from Columbia. The special features are not great, but certainly more than one gets on most basic DVD's.

In the end, I would say this is an enjoyable...though not completely fulfilling movie. It could have been better, but it is definitely worth a rental...or if you can find it in the bargain bin as I did....a cheap purchase.

{As an added challenge....see if you can recognize the film error as the cars are racing to the hospital toward the end of the movie.)

Sometimes You Just Need to Hang Up
When I first saw this movie, I have to admit that I wasn't very impressed by it. You're going from sister to sister, scene to scene very quickly. I didn't have much time to understand what was even going on. So I decided to give the movie another chance, mostly because Diane Keaton is my favorite actress. So I did and as I watched, I became more aware of what was going on. Meg Ryan, Lisa Kudrow, and Diane Keaton all give stunning performances in this movie. Walter Matthau gave a great performance as the father. The sad part is, is that this was his final film before he passed away. Cloris Leachman has a very small part in the movie, but the parts that she is in are quite effective.

Many people view this movie as a comedy. It is definitely not a comedy. It is a drama. If you watch closely and really pay attention to what is going on, then you'll see the difference. Eve (Ryan) is trying to balance her son and husband and caring for her father. Something that Maddy (Kudrow), a soap star and Georgia (Keaton), the head of a magazine entitled 'Georgia' will not do. They are too wrapped up in their own lives to come and help care for their dying father. Yes, the ending is a little predictable, but it is also very touching. If you're looking for a movie that has everyone getting along all the time, don't rent this. But if you want to watch a movie that shows what true family can be, rent this. Granted, many families are not like this, but hey, you never know!

Not that bad, not great, either
I just watched this film on DVD, and to a regular guy like myself (I think I'm pretty regular), it was not a bad experience. Maybe it's because my mom and her siblings are currently dealing with their mother right now, and the movie struck a chord...

Anyway, I thought Meg Ryan was terrific in this film. In her other films she always tried to be cute and funny. When I was younger I liked that, but then I found her boring. But she's good in this one as the middle child who has the (mis)luck of caring for her dying father. Keaton, on the other hand, is totally unconvincing as either a magazine mogul or first daughter, and she had no screen presence at all; plus her outfit and makeup, which are meant to make her character look younger than the actress herself, are a disaster. Kudlow does what she does best: playing a dumb, clueless blonde.

As for the story, it has certain charms, but ultimately falls apart because it's confusing and melodramatic. (Be sure to watch a deleted scene on the DVD.) As some reviewers pointed out all too often the movie seems directionless, and the on-screen chemistry of the three sisters is rather lacking. Funny Evie keeps asking about the name of a "bland" actress from the 50s; the movie just gets more and more bland. But Ryan is good enough that she keeps the film moving and makes me like her again.

How could it be THIS bad?
Damn, with this cast, and with Nora Ephron, how could they make a movie that's this terrible? And the saddest thing is that it turned out to be Walter Matthau's last movie cuz he died shortly after the filming. I figured the negative reviews might be wrong, that it really couldn't be all THAT awful - but I didn't finish watching it. Clicked off the TV and went to bed with a good book. Sheesh, what a shame. ... Read more

Description

Thanks to the support of a loving dog that he helps nurse back to health, an aspiring young artist never gives up hope, despite being subjected to all sorts of terrible hardships. ... Read more

Reviews (18)

A Boy Meets A (Very Unique) Dog: Classic Tale for Children
It's a long loved story from the pen of the 19th Century then popular female writer Ouida, and now "A Dog of Flanders" is again treated as a movie for family viewing. Though the result turned out a mixed bag, it's not totally a messed job, and if you think about giving something to a kid, this is not a bad choice. And this film displays something very intersting about the cultural difference between Japan and USA.

This famous short story follows a hard-working Belgian boy Nello, whose ambition is to be a great painter, namely this case, Reubens. Through the boy is loved by his grandfather Daas and his girlfriend Aloise, and not least his Bouvier dog Patrasche, his life is not an easy one, bringing milk to the town every day with Patrasche pulling the cart. One day, he is "found" by a graet master of painting Michell (Jon Voight with a hevey accent), and Nello learns from the master that there is an annual contest for aspiring painters. But while he was trying to finish his work, a tragic accident happens to his life.

The film makes great changes to the original short story (especially the ending), but how you respond to that liberty will depend on your judgement. The fact that the critical reaction was at best very luckwarm proves that adults viewers might find this one very ordinary and mundane, and probably the film deserves better treatment. Though the locations are perfect, the story looks too banal, and -- this is more important -- it doesn't know its audience. Parents might be uncomfortable to see a dog is beaten by a drunken guy, or most of all, the secret of Nello's parentage is revealed. In fact, Nello's mother comes back home in the opening blizzard scene with a baby Nello -- clearly an echo of "Oliver Twist" -- but some kids (under the age of 3-6) may find it hard to understand why she think she is "disgraced" (the film uses this word at the end). Strangely Victorian here, but anyway, not a big matter, though.

As a whole, "A Dog of Flanders" is a satisfactry movie for older kids, and though it shows its hands too predictable way, the story itself is good, and it conveys surely its messages to kid's heart. The leading actors are in good form, and the dog is ... er ... very unique. so if you like dogs, you may be interested. And for adult viewers like me, it is a good thing to see Cheryl Ladd (ex-Chalie's Angels) again.

[ABOUT THE DIFFERENT ENDING OF THE FILM: COULD BE A SPOILER ... MAYBE NOT]

The Japanese version of this film has a different ending, which imdb doesn't seem to record. Japanese version doesn't have the last 5 minutes of the American counterpart, making the ending faithful to the original book. This is because this story is a vastly loved one in Japan owing to its very popular TV series made about 20 years ago, and every Japanese viewer knows its original ending. Producers, therefore, must have judged it unwise to "compromise" its ending as its new American version does. The actual difference is as follows:

Japanese version: Nello meets his mother again; they hug each other; (then the film directly jumps to the final cut of American film showing statue of Ruebens); two lights, presumably souls of them, going up to the Heaven; end credit rolls up.

This is a minor thing, I know, but it is intersting to note this differnce between Japanese and American sensibility.

And if you like this one, you may watch older version made in 1959. There is a Japanese animated version (2000) too, and this fact testifies to its popularity of this story. The original writer Ouida (a pen name for Louise De LaRamee, Bristish writer) herself loved dogs so much, and she is known for her life surrounded by dogs in Italy when she was old and impoverished. Check out the book too, if you like.

not as good as the 1959 version
This remake of A Dog of Flanders was a decent movie but pales in comparison to the original version. Jeremy James Kissner was likeable enough as the young artist Nello, but the dog Patrasche was hideous looking. I've never seen an uglier dog in all my years of watching film. My advice is to rent the 1959 version with David Ladd.

Good story - poor performances
The story and photography are quite good, but the acting is some of the worst I have seen, especially Nelo. Besides, why does a poor boy on the verge of starvation have perfectly styled hair and tons of screen makeup. He looks like he should be on Baywatch. Personally, I would give this film one star, but my kids didn't seem to notice the bad acting and other failings. Perhaps it's worth borrowing from a friend, but not worth buying.

Really sweet and winsome
It starts out slow with what looks to be a really boring rainy village dog film but turns out to be a wonderful and original movie. The acting is great on all hands but especially by the lead actor who plays Nello. Adults and children alike will enjoy it. There is a fight scene with a cleaver which though not bloody at all could frighten young children. Also a scene with a gypsy fortune teller that as achristian I zipped over. It is a sweet story that is very inspiring.

Aboaned,Misguied,Blamed ,and worst of all he suffered it!
Young Nello Daas and his mother Mary Daas were very poor they were both aboaned bye the anoymous father of Nello.Soon Mary travels too her father's house .6 years later Nello is now about 6 or 7 his mother is dead and he is living as a traveler milk seller .He is so happy until oddly his world comes crashing down very soon a new chacter arrives on the scene Master Stephens a very sturub man who makes Nello and his grandfather pay the rent.3 years later Nello is soon misguied bye his best friend Aloise's father .Later on the shed was caught on fire in the middle of the night .Nello was blamed soon Nello realize's that he won't become a great artist.With that he looses a art contest ,but things look up when he finds a wallet.knowing it is Master Cogez wallet he returns it then runs .This is not a drama master piece .But in 1999 Kevin Brodie did win a Oscar for this film .No it's not a masterpiece but it did win a Oscar and this is all it needs .1.A Good Title 2.Great Actors 3.Terrific Music 4.Some religon mentioned 5.Action 6.Must be emotional 7.A award 8.Romace is good 9.A good intersing plot last but not least A good feeling.This movie just still sends chills up my spine .Just watching how Nello struggles and how he starts too relize that he is loved and that he does have a father that loves him dearly. This on a scale of 1 to 10 a perfect 10!!!! ... Read more

Reviews (14)

This horror movie rocks!!!
Scary, dark and fun -- this is every kid's worst nightmare. Alone in a house, during a blackout, and there's some very creepy things in the walls. It's very suspenseful for a direct-to-video thriller and has a cool atmosphere. There's three really scary scenes that really stick out in my head.

It kept me up the night I saw it. My friends dug it too and we hate most low-budget horror movies. This one's a good purchase...

Very enjoyable
I liked this film alot. It was scary at times and the effects were good. I'm a fan of Kevin Zegers' acting and have seen most of his films. One downfall to this DVD is the "Screener Copy Only" message appearring evry chapter or so. It must appear 3 or 4 times during the movie. It's on the bottom of the screen and dissappears after a few seconds. I wonder if anyone else has noticed this or if it's just my copy. Hmmm, very wierd. A great movie to watch in the dark.

Movie was pretty good
This is a great movie for a younger audience but still halfway decent and enjoyable for adults, something I would rent. The story is ok and acting is suprisingly good by the main characters. Effects are nice and a few of the scenes were actually creepy, well creepier than any mainstream horror flick Ive seen recently. Overall, judging by the young actors talent with such a simple story line I would give it a 6 out of 10 for their effort.

Directed at the reviewer before me: I think what the smoking scene intended was to show the brother is still just a kid even though he talked tough sometimes. I had my first cigarette when I was 14 and I didnt inhale either, I mean who did? Its not like you would have an adult teaching a kid how to smoke so you just watch and learn. I thought that scene was a very accurate portrayal of an older brother trying to act cool in front of the younger one. Most males probably couldve related to that scene and remembered how they were at that age.

Surprinsingly suspenesful
This isn't a terrific movie by any stretch. There are more than a few laughable scenes and silly, ridiculous occurrences. We laughed out loud when Kevin Zeger's character, Dale, was smoking. Like Clinton (*cough*) he didn't inhale, although he took several drags on the cigarette. My question for that scene is: why bother having the kid smoke if he's not going to inhale? Obviously Zeger doesn't smoke, and for that I applaud him, as so many actors and actresses in Hollywood do.

Regarding the silly occurrences. Say you're a father with a child that has a terrible fear of the dark. Would you:

a) Put a number of floodlights where they could be easily reached, say a chest in an open area, or
b) Put them in a dark attic?

Of course the movie chose "b".

Regardless, I was immensely surprised when I found myself trapped in suspense. There were moments of dramatic tension that actually made me a little nervous (perhaps even a little scared, although I never jumped), and when the movie was over, and I walked into my office (being 1:00am, my entire condo was dark, and my office darker than any other area) I really did take a tiny "gulp" until the light turned on. The same for returning to bed - until the light on my nightstand was turned on, I was somewhat on edge

Given the movie's obvious flaws, this made me more than a little embarrassed. But like I said, they handled some of the scary scenes quite well, even though I rolled my eyes during the stolen scene from the Frighteners. That was unnecessary. I can't imagine why they chose to write that scene into the script. Again, regardless, congratulations to the movie for making someone edgy who just doesn't ever get edgy from watching horror films.

Tense and scary
I don't scare easily. I try to watch every horror that comes out. I can say that this is one of the few good ones out there. It has a lot of tense and nervous moments and was pretty scary. I would say about 1 in 20 horror movies are worth buying or even watching at all and this is the one that is. Even though it has the same dark theme as the other movies mentioned, it is different and the best one. ... Read more

Amazon.com

When released in 1997, The Gingerbread Man was the only John Grisham movie that did not use one of the popular novelist's bestsellers as its inspiration. Rather, it's based on an original screenplay by Grisham that displays the author's familiar flair for Southern characters and settings within a labyrinthine plot propelled by his trademark narrative twists and turns. Sporting a spot-on Georgian accent, Kenneth Branagh plays a Savannah attorney who comes to the assistance of a troubled woman (Embeth Davidtz) and finds himself enmeshed in a scenario involving the woman's father (Robert Duvall) that grows increasingly complex and dangerous, where nothing, of course, is really as it seems. It's a totally absorbing movie made in the modern film-noir tradition; what's most interesting here (and most underrated by critics at the time) is the combination of Grisham's mainstream mystery and the offbeat style of maverick director Robert Altman. Despite a battle with executives that nearly caused Altman to disown the film, The Gingerbread Man demonstrates the director's skill in bringing a fresh, characteristically offbeat approach to conventional material, especially in the use of a threatening hurricane to hold the plot in a state of dangerous urgency. Unfortunately overlooked during its theatrical release, this intelligent thriller provides a fine double bill with Francis Coppola's film of Grisham's The Rainmaker. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more