Reviews (115)

Not bad if you're an Angelina Jolie fan
Originally, this wasn't a movie I was very interested in watching until I realized Angelina Jolie was the co-star. Okay, so I admit-I'm an Angelina Jolie junkie. But that's beside the point.

The plot of "Original Sin" isn't too original. Wealthy Cuban landowner Antonio Banderas buys a mail-order bride (Jolie) and gets a little more than he bargained for. Not only is his soon-to-be bride more beautiful than the photo she sent, she is quite the hellcat in bed. Not exactly the demur Virginia schoolteacher she professed to be.

Following the typical Hollywood "stupid male" syndrome, Banderas signs over his fortune to his new bride, only to find she has absconded with his money. Not only does Banderas go off half-cocked in search of Jolie, but when he finds her, he only wishes to bed her, not concerned his fortune is gone. A bit too unrealistic here, considering Banderas was homicidal and violent only minutes earlier. Of course, Jolie is also following the Hollywood stereotype of female characters that fall in love with men who wish to kill them.

Thomas Jane adds an exciting dimension to the movie as the psychotic sidekick of Jolie, although their relationship isn't quite defined, nor explained. The "spit in the mouth" routine was a bit much for me and could have been left out with no detrimental affects to the movie.

In all, if you wish to see a lot of Angelina Jolie naked, this is the movie for you, although the flapping breast image was a bit much. Myself, personally, I could have went without seeing the naked butt of Antonio Bandera repeatedly, but to each their own. "Original Sin" is a skin flick of mild entertainment value.

-...

I Like them both...
I haven't seen it(yet) but I like them both, but I heard that Antonio has a few"eye popping moments" How much does he show exactly? Like everything? Or what? Just so I am not surprised when I do see it.. How much?

Mildly entertaining chick flick
WARNING: SOME VERY MILD SPOILERS*****

The first time I saw this, I was prepared to laugh at a sleazy, direct-to-video Harlequin novel-on-celluloid. What is it about Antonio Banderas? He's very handsome and not a bad actor, but he seems to choose a lot of really cheesy projects, "Femme Fatale" being a particularly awful one I recall watching.

But I thought this was a decently entertaining, if not brilliantly deep film. I was unaware at that time of it's provenance -- it's based on an excellent novel by Cornell Woolrich called "Waltz into Darkness". The book is well worth reading if you like this film. It was also made into a film in the mid-sixties by Francois Truffaut called (inexplicably ) "Mississippi Mermaid". Strange title, because the original novel is set in 1870s New Orleans and Julia travels to meet Louis on a steamer down the Mississipp BUT in the Truffaut film he reset the story in the 60s and the action of the film in colonial Africa and the French Riviera!

"Original Sin" is, interesting, vastly closer to the novel than the Truffaut version. The setting is changed to Cuba, presumably to accodomodate Bandera's accent, but the period is correct and the story doesn't work well in modern times, so overall, I find "Original Sin" to be the better of the two movies -- and that's saying a lot, as Truffaut is revered as a brilliant director. ("Mississippi Mermaid" is NOT by any means one of his better efforts, however.)

An early cautionary tale of "personals ads" and blind dating, the story seems even more relevant today than when it was written. Luis (Banderas) writes to a mail order bride, who is supposed to be plain, shy and religious. He is surprised when stunningly beautiful and sexy Julia (Angelina Jolie, of the collagen injected lips) shows up. Even though she betrays him and cheats on him and steals all his money...he still loves her. Both film versions clean up the ending -- I won't give the film ending away -- but in the book, Julia/Bonny actually kills Louis/Luis. A very bleak ending. Don't worry, the movie is a lot more fun.

The kind of film that falls under the heading of "guilty pleasure", "Original Sin" has lots of great costumes and sets and Banderas and Jolie are two of the sexiest people imaginable and we get to watch them getting hot and heavy. (BTW: the "unrated version" isn't really all that dirty...I don't get the rating thing. The sex isn't graphic or bizarre in any way -- it's two people who are MARRIED and making love. In the age of "Sex in the City", what the heck is the big deal?)

Anyways, call over your best girlfriends, microwave some popcorn and have a good time....

Some Memorable Lines From An Otherwise Forgettable Movie
Overall, I would rate this film a passable 3-plus stars, just above ok, but I just had to add the comment for anyone thinking of buying (or renting) this movie that I thought it had some unexpectedly apt and quoteable dialogue and astute observations on the nature of love. It has interested me in seeking out the book on which this film is based.

Being Sinful Can Be Good
Antonio Banderas plays a wealthy Cuban who is to be married to an American woman he doesn't know. He marries an actress, played by Angelina Jolie. But she isn't the woman he thinks she is. This movie had twists and turns wondering where it would lead the viewer. It was a seductive and captivating movie. Angelina Jolie plays the role of a seductress very well. Antonio Banderas is gorgeous as a dashing, yet naive man. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

At his best, director John Woo turns action movies into ballets of blood and bullets grounded in character drama. Face/Off marks Woo's first American film to reach the pitched level of his best Hong Kongwork (Hard-Boiled). He takes a patently absurd premise--hero and villain exchange identities by literally swapping faces in science-fiction plastic surgery--and creates a double-barreled revenge film driven by the split psyches of its newly redefined characters. FBI agent Sean Archer (John Travolta) must play the villain to move through the underworld while psychotic terrorist Castor Troy (Nicolas Cage) becomes a perversely paternal family man while using every tool at his disposal to destroy his nemesis. Travolta vamps Cage's tics and flamboyant excess with the grace of a dancer after his transformation from cop to criminal, while Cage plays the sullen, bottled-up agent excruciatingly trapped behind the face of the man who killed his son. His attempts to live up to the terrorist's reputation become cathartic explosions of violence that both thrill and terrify him. This is merely icing on the cake for action fans, the dramatic backbone for some of the most visceral action thrills ever. Woo fills the screen with one show-stopping set piece after another, bringing a poetic grace to the action freakout with sweeping camerawork and sophisticated editing. This marriage of melodrama and mayhem ups the ante from cops-and-robbers clichés to a conflict of near-mythic levels. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (284)

Face Off DVD
The DVD of FACE OFF is one of the best, and a must-buy on the format. John Woo, uber director of The Killer (1989), Hard Boiled (1992) and Broken Arrow (1996) proves that even after the move to Hollywood, he still knows how to create fantastic action and Face Off is no exception. Building on the good but not great BROKEN ARROW, this one is a fantastic action ride. The film stars Nicholas Cage as Castor Troy, a villain, and John Travolta as agent Sean Archer, the only man who can stop Castor from unleashing a nuclear device.
Woo's trademarks are all present here: slow-mo gunfights, explosive action and those perennial doves. And both Nic Cage and Travolta are brilliant, especially Cage, whose eccentric performance is one of his most unrestrained and outstanding. One of the best (If not THE best) action films ever made. Excellent.
The DVD extras are sparse, with only a trailer. One hopes a future re-release will come soon...

Face/Off
Director John Woo's famous big-budget action-packed flick.This is the film that put John Woo on the map in America.Packed with guns, bullets, bombs, explosions and action scenes that are so original there choreographed like a ballet or a dance routine.

FBI agent Sean Archer (John Travolta)has been trying to apprehend terrorist, Castor Troy (Nicolas Cage) ever since he murdered Sean's son six years ago.Sean apprehend's Castor during a violent shoot-out in an airport and as a result of this puts Castor into a deep comma.Sean then undergoes new surgery involving swapping faces with Troy.He does this to try and find out where Castor has planted a deadly bomb hidden somewhere in L.A.Castor awakes from his comma, with Sean's identidy and takes over his life.Sean(really Castor) disarms the bomb which he planted and becomes an instant hero.Meanwhile Castor (really Sean) is a high-tech prison trying to find information about the bomb from Castor's brother, Pollux (Alessandro Nivola).Since Sean(Castor) has destroyed all evidence about the surgical swap, Castor has to try and break out of prison.Not only does he have to fight for himself but for wife Eve (Joan Allen) and daughter Jamie.

This is a superb film with enough plot to become a series.It does sound far-fethced in places but John Woo makes it believable and real.Great performances all around including the two main stars, Joan Allen and the sexy tough female Gina Gershon.

face off
he best movie in the ear 1997 it is perfect action good and adventure good nice acting for john travolta and nice acting for nicolas cage

One of my all-time favorite action films!
Place this modern action classic up there with DIE HARD, SPEED, and THE NEGOTIATOR as one of my personal favorite action films.

Before watching FACE/OFF completely, I had taken a look at one of director John Woo's Hong Kong action epics, THE KILLER. I must say, I prefer FACE/OFF better. Sure, both films have that same over-the-top operatic style, but at least FACE/OFF isn't as shamelessly sentimental as THE KILLER was. In THE KILLER, Woo's main characters both demolished hundreds of extras in graphically bloody style, and towards the end it got a bit too much even for me. In FACE/OFF, the gore isn't quite as graphic, and while the body count is still pretty high, it never got to the point that I was disgusted.

I'm not a knee-jerk admirer of John Woo as some people are. That slow-motion technique of his can become wince-inducingly excessive, especially now that many lesser action directors have started to rip off his style. In this case, though, one is too engrossed in the plot and in awe of the high-energy action staging to notice.

Of course, most people probably already have an idea of what the plot is about: criminal Castor Troy (Nicolas Cage) dies, but he has planted a bomb somewhere in LA, so obsessive detective Sean Archer (John Travolta) literally swaps identities with his arch-nemesis to go undercover at a high-tech prison to find out where that bomb is. Obviously, this situation leads to various complications as Troy wakes up from his coma, takes Archer's face, kills the doctors who performed the operation, and then tries to find Archer. It's the typical body-switch, and I would be remiss to mention that Troy is responsible for the death of Archer's son many years ago, and thus Archer has a vendetta against him that explains his obsessiveness.

It's a potentially laughable premise, but the actors and director make you buy it. Travolta and Cage are both convincing and have a lot of fun playing each others' characters, and the supporting cast is just as believable. The script, by Mike Werb and Michael Colleary, may have its bum dialogue lines here and there, but it's filled with ingenuity, plot-wise, as Troy tries to fit in with Archer's family and Archer tries to function in a prison. And of course the script gives director Woo plenty of leeway to go all-out with action scenes, and Woo does not disappoint, giving us plenty of stylish gunplay and loud explosions for about three action films, and even an audacious soundbite of "Over the Rainbow" as characters blow each other away. Woo sure lets his inventiveness run free here.

So okay, the film may be a little overlong, and that final gun battle at a church is perhaps too reminiscent of a similar battle in THE KILLER, right down to the flying pigeons motif. But all its flaws are forgivable in this case, since the movie is so thrilling matters of logic fall by the wayside. FACE/OFF may not be Woo's best film ever (I haven't seen HARD-BOILED yet), but it's pretty close to it, and in comparison to other modern action films, it stands pretty high there too. It'll ceratinly forever be one of my favorites. Recommended.

Action as Art
While the plot of this movie is relatively interesting, this movie is really about two things:
First, the lead actors get to do the characters they do best as fully as they know how. Cage is his typical, neurotic, repressed, and emotionally conflicted self. Travolta hams it up in the outlandish, larger-than-life way that he often does. Despite what could be seen as overacting by both the leads, the almost absurd disparity between them is one of central things that makes this movie work.

Second, this movie has the most beautiful action sequences of any action movie I have ever seen (excluding epic-type movies, i.e. LOTR, Star Wars, Braveheart, etc.). This is a film that knows it's an action movie and revels in it. The cinematography in the fight scenes simultaneously displays the nature of the characters and the intensity of the battle between them. There are so many moments when you will just delight at the visual art that is every action sequence in this film. Needless to say, this movie has all the gunfights, fistfights, chases, and large explosions that one would expect in a serious action film.
If you like action movies, this is the first one I would recommend. ... Read more

Amazon.com

61* is an endearing ode to the baseball days of yore when the press was the enemy, salaries were in check, and breaking records with bat and glove took on Ruthian proportions. In 1961 baseball expanded its season from 154 games to 162, allowing weaker pitching into the major leagues and two New York Yankees teammates--the colorless Roger Maris and golden boy Mickey Mantle--to make an assault on the sport's ultimate record: Babe Ruth's 60 home runs. To add to the stew, baseball commissioner Ford Frick announced any record set in the last eight games of the season wouldn't count toward the official record; records had to be achieved in 154 games.

Director Billy Crystal guarantees success for his movie in the perfect casting of the leads. Barry Pepper (Saving Private Ryan's religious sniper) is deft as Maris, and Thomas Jane is a perfect Mantle, a superman in a Yankee uniform. Despite the differences between family man Maris and hard-living Mantle, they form a rewarding friendship amid the media and fan frenzy. The shy Maris took the brunt of the storm, even facing boo-birds in his home stadium. Crystal and first-time writer Hank Steinberg keep the pace moving quickly between the field, the locker room, the press box, and the home front. The film never tries to dazzle with more than the facts (and it softens Mantle up a bit), yet it belongs on the short list of grand baseball movies. --Doug Thomas ... Read more

Reviews (80)

An Excellent Baseball Film
A truly outstanding movie, as director Billy Crystal and actors Thomas Jane (Mickey Mantle) and Barry Pepper (Roger Maris) bring the 1961 baseball season and home run chase to life. This movie is as authentic as perhaps any sports movie I've ever seen, and the two stars give powerful performances--Mantle's charisma and legendary carousing as well as his tape-measure home runs made him a hero to millions, while Maris was a quiet, shy type who didn't want the limelight. But he was Mantle's equal on the field that year, and the pair was chasing the home run record of perhaps the biggest legend of all, Babe Ruth.

The Yankee fan will love this movie, as Crystal went to great pains to recreate Yankee Stadium and cast actors as baseball players who looked and played not only like Mantle and Maris, but Whitey Ford (Anthony Michael Hall), Yogi Berra, Elston Howard and all the rest. The relentless sportswriters (including a fine performance by Richard Masur as "Milt") who wouldn't leave Maris alone ring true, and Ford Frick, the commissioner of baseball back then, is a bit of a villian--he loved Ruth and clearly didn't want the record broken.

One of the most touching aspects of the film is the open and close, where Crystal intercuts actual footage of Mark McGuire tying and breaking the Maris record with actors and actresses portraying Maris's widow Pat and their kids looking on. Likewise, Crystal's daughter, Jennifer Crystal Foley, is excellent as the young Pat Maris.

The extras on this DVD are nearly as good as the movie itself. Crystal offers off-camera audio and narrates each scene of the movie, which is fascinating, and there's an hour-long behind-the-scenes look at the making of the film which is also powerful...it includes a clip of the "Dinah Shore Show" from 1977 when Crystal, then starring on "Soap," sat next to Mantle, introduced himself and showed his hero a program with his signature from 1956.

Strongly recommended, a movie which will stand the test of time for baseball fans, and another feather in the cap of Billy Crystal--there's very little he can't do, and if nothing else, you'll realize what a true baseball and Yankee fan he is.

Five Stars Is Not Enough
It was the summer of 1961, Roger Maris and Mickey Mantle were chasing the illusive home run record held by none other than Babe Ruth. This is the story of that fateful summer. "61*" is probably one of the best baseball movies I have ever seen. I would have never imagined that Billy Crystal would have ever been able to put together such a great film.

The cast in this movie is wonderful. Roger Maris, played by Barry Pepper, who was also in "Saving Private Ryan" and "The Green Mile," was played very well. I can't comment on accuracy of the actual character as I was not alive when this story took place. But, the roles were very believable. The struggle that Roger Maris went through as a result of the media blitz that surrounded him and the ghost of Babe Ruth, must have been so painful.

Now, I don't claim to be a baseball expert, nor would I say that I am actually a fan of the game in the state it is in today. But, this film was when baseball was a game and people still played for the love of the game. Yes, there were rich ballplayers, but many still had winter jobs and needed playoff bonuses to stay afloat. They had a head for the game and they had heart for the game, now most have a head for the game and a heart for real estate.

This movie is wonderful. If I was a producer, I would defiantly give Billy Crystal money for a movie. . . I do know that Mr. Crystal is a fan of the game. So, I do wonder slightly if the movie is accurate or if it a fan piece. . . But, honestly, I do not care. The story was amazing.

epc

This movie was a lot like baseball-slow and going nowhere
This movie is just like baseball...you sit in a seat for hours watching an incredibly slow game while you drift off to sleep. Sorry all you baseball fans...but I'm a football fan and I need action to sustain life when I'm sitting in a small stadium seat for numerous hours. You have to hand it to Barry Pepper, who plays Marris quite well. I thought that he had hit an all-time low when he played the ape-like human with dred locks in "Battlefield Earth". Back to *61. What is the deal with the asterik? Is that the most interesting thing that a baseball columnist can think of? But with respect for Marris for breaking the Babe's record, I have to give the film two stars, cause if I gave it one you'd all probably find me and beat me with his signed baseball bat.

Region 1 Encoding
Just a quick note about the Region encoding for this DVD for UK customers. This DVD WILL work on the PAL PS2 when used with a product called "DVD Region X" (about £10). Just make sure your TV can display 60Hz. 50Hz TVs will play the movie in black and white.

61*
This is now one of my favorite baseball movies of all time. I had never seen this movie until I purchased it on amazon. First, it is needed to say that I hate the Yankees. Even with my bias view of the team, this is the first (and last) time I will ever pull for the yankees. The bottom line is simply that this is an enjoyable movie for both baseball fans and those who do not follow the game. ... Read more

Reviews (220)

Charming and Very Funny
When I saw "The Sweetest Thing" in theaters this past spring, I was quite surprised by how frequently and loudly I laughed. I went into the screening expecting some sort of limp, sentimental romantic comedy, but instead I got something much better: a raunchy, girl-power! gem of a romantic comedy that actually has very little to do with romance. Yes, the journey of Christina (Cameron Diaz, never sweeter) to find her new dream man (a pleasant Thomas Jane) gives the movie a bare thread of plot to follow -- but it's all just an outline and set-up for the many funny gags that are to come. I'm not going to spoil any of them, but without giving too much away, I'll say that the moments I really roared with laughter involve the the dress in need of dry cleaning, the public men's restroom, the man on the motorcycle and a cast sing-along that will forever change the way you think about the song chosen for the scene. Considering I haven't even mentioned Selma Blair's character and her boyfriend's strange choice for an occupation, there's a guarantee for plenty more hilarity, some of it subtle and barely noticable, but 98% of it dirty and straight forward. To be certain, the best thing this movie has going for it is the cast. Each one of the performers knows not to take any of this too seriously, and they all manage to be charming and amusing in their assigned roles. And, surprise! -- the most valuable actor on screen isn't the always reliable Diaz, but instead Christina Applegate as Diaz's confident, intelligent and witty friend Courtney. In her performance, Applegate exudes all the qualities anyone might want in a best friend -- man or woman -- and her chemistry with Diaz is so perfect that we have no trouble wanting to follow the misadventures of these sexy single gals. "The Sweetest Thing" is a highly likable comedy, fresh and light-hearted, but ultimately weighed down just a little by poor direction. If it weren't for everything else on screen, this might be dismissable as another sex-obsessed, awful comedy that has no respect for its characters and wants to destroy every remaining shred of their pride. Thankfully, with a mostly sharp script (writer Nancy M. Pimental kinda fumbles the romance, but nails the big jokes) and bright ensemble, this actually turns out to be a lot funnier than most recent gross-out comedies, including both "American Pie"s. The DVD special features aren't too great, and if you want to get the unrated version, it's best to purchase it on Amazon.com; it's very difficult to find anywhere else.

Why can't they make a decent romantic comedy?
Another idiotic, so called "romantic comedy". Basically the story includes Cameron Diaz(who can't act if her life depended on it but still has fame and twenty million per movie) and Christina Applegate acting like fools in pursuit of some guy, convinced that he is the one. There are plenty of jokes and gags follow that supposed to be hilarious and aren't. Granted, some movies are stupid but funny. This one doesn't even come close-its simply dull, ridiculous story that doesn't evoke any emotion in you and you definitely don't give a damn about any of these characters

Because of a song
The main reason i loved the unrated verson was b/c of the song that they sing in the Chinese restarunt about a certain part of the male anatomy.....it's histerical...i laugh so hard everytime i see it....anyone who hasn't seen this movie has no clue as to what they are missing

Turning it off...
I feel compelled to write a review for this unspeakably awful offense on humankind, especially after reading four and five star reviews of it. If this has come to be quality entertainment in this country then we have sunk lower than my worst fears. It's not the crude humor - I like everything from South Park to Old School. It's the unbelievably awful screenwriting and tired, hackneyed humor that permeates this 90-minute disaster, most of which leaves you in a stunned embarrassed silence.

Who is this film supposed to be for? Women? I surely hope not. Most women I know do not enjoy seeing their gender portrayed as the brainless, horny airheads that populate this debacle. Is it for men? Dear God no. I think I speak for all of us when I say that men do not enjoy watching attractive women act like twelve-year-old boys. Is it for kids? Absolutely not, given the sexual lewdness throughout. There's nothing wrong with sexual lewdness in itself, as long as it has a morsel of comedic value and possibly contributes to the plot or characters in at least an indirect way.

But with "The Sweetest Thing" discussing things like plot and characters is like arguing about the arrangement of the deck chairs on the Titanic. Instead, let's discuss the film on it's own level, something that would make sense within it's context and to the cinematic connoisseurs that seemed to enjoy it - we'll just play a simple game.

The rules are simple, and the first two are the hardest - you have to watch at least fifteen minutes of it, and you have to get someone else to do it with you. There. The rest is all downhill. Just count the number of times each of you says one of the following: "Oh my God," "How did this get made?", "Did the actors read the script before they agreed?", "*Was* there a script?", "How do big stars do movies like this?", "I feel insulted," "Do people really think women act like this in private?" and lastly, "This may be the worst movie I've ever seen, definitely top five."

If you reach ten, congratulations, you win. You can stop watching, a prize worth fighting for.

hillarious!!!!!
I dont care what anyone else sayz, but this movie is so funny!!!!! there is no reason not to like it. i love it! its funny, romantic, and just plain fun. ... Read more

Reviews (147)

cute midnight movie
Kristy Swanson (MANNEQUIN ON THE MOVE), stars as blonde, bouncy Buffy, who learns of her calling as "The Chosen One" in the cute cult flick BUFFY THE VAMPIRE SLAYER.

Buffy's life changes when she meets tall, dark Merrick (Donald Sutherland) who tells her that she is the one to rid the world of the vampires and their ruler, Lothos (Rutger Hauer). Buffy is even more busy with her scruffy suitor Pike (Luke Perry). Between her boyfriend, school, cheerleading and vampire slaying, it's no wonder she's a nervous wreck!

For her role here, Kristy Swanson was trained in martial arts, cheerleading skills and gymnastics. The comedy also marked the screen debut of Luke Perry, star of the hit series BEVERLY HILLS 90210.

Also featuring Hilary Swank, Paul Reubens, David Arquette, Candy Clark and Liz Smith.

Buffy the (Boring) movie
We are far away from the smart and successful TV show in this lackluster movie. 16 year old valley girl and cheerleader Buffy (no last name) has dreams of past lives, and monsters in the night. And then a strange man named Merrick (Donald Sutherland) arrives and provides answeres; Buffy is a Vampire Slayer, one girl who is chosen to fight all the creatures that go bump in the night. This script is much different from the one I read by Joss Wheddon, it is a lot lighter, and that is not a good thing. I really would have liked to have seen the prom burned down to kill all the vampires. Buffy is played by Kristy Swanson, who is no where near as sweet and convincing as Sarah Michelle Geller. And while we are at it, do not be expecting Willow, Xander, Giles, or Angel. This movie was made long before the series. What we do have is Pike (Luke Perry), a slacker who is accendently cought up in the mess. The threat of the movie is Luthos, played by experienced bad guy actor Rutgar Hauer. Paul Rubens (aka Pee-Wee Herman) is Luthos's main underling, and he is so silly it's impossible to take him seriously. There are also a few cameos by future stars; Hilary Swank is another vally girl. David Arquette plays one of Pike's friends who's turned into a vampire. And Ben Affleck is uncredited as a rival basketball team player. Anyway, this movie is too silly . I know that is the point, but it is still not dark enough, and Buffy's attraction to Luthos isn't enough. I know I am horribly biesed by the TV show, but I can't help it. It is still watchable, if it's on TV somewhere.

The one and true Buffy!
I can't really say it's better than the show, for I haven't watched the show. The only info I've heard is from friends and family. I can tell you, without a doubt, that I like Kristy Swanson more than Sarah Gellar. Whenever I hear the name Buffy, I think of Kristy. I like Sarah Gellar in many of her movies, but she just isn't Buffy to me. I would watch a show if someone paid/lend for it, because I can't get TV reception. But I don't buy stuff I'm unfamiliar with, especially when it's fifty dollars. And that's all I've got to say about that.

The Bad Buffy
Buffy the Vampire Slayer is definetly not as successful as it's counterpart T.V. series but it served up a pretty well rounded story.The characters were fairly likeable.Joss Whedon is very creative and intelligant ; I give him thumbs up for trying something new.I just kinda felt weird after watching it.I guess I expected to much from it.If you watch it ; thinking it will be sucky you probably won't feel as bad.Luke Perry did a pretty good job with Kristy Swanson who got very annoying after an hour and a half.The plot was really good but they didn't use it the right way.The vampires seemed to fake and when Buffy staked them they did not turn to dust; I always enjoyed that from the T.V. series.Check this one out only if you have nothing better to do.Blonde, bouncy Buffy is your typical high school cheerleader - her goal is to "marry Christian Slater and die" and nothing gets in her way when it's time to shop.But all that changes when a strange man informs her she's been chosen by ill fate to kill vampires.With the help of a romantic rebel, Buffy is soon spending school nights protecting L.A. from Lothos, The Vampire King, his sidekick, Lefty, and their determined gang of bloodsuckers.It's everything you'd expect from a teen queen in the valley.

"Not bad but pales to the terrific TV show."
-- Gerry Shamray, SUN NEWSPAPERS OF CLEVELAND

Not as Good, But Still Original
It's easy to bag out Kristy Swanson in the role of Buffy after many years of watching Sarah M Gellar, but you have to admit that the girl had talent, looks & the physical fittness to make a good slayer.
Many of the reviews have bagged out this film in relation to the series, however it did lay the ground work for the story and convince a network to green light the series which has made them millions.
The film itself has some good moments and a sense of humour.
If you are a die hard fan you should check it out simply to have the story which leads into the pilot episode and it wouldn't hurt to check out creepy old Don Sutherland as a watcher.
The film does have a simple finale, but on the bright side it comes to an end, unlike many of the open doors the series leaves.
Another great aspect is the cover of Oingo Boingo's 'We close our eyes', which The Bangles lead singer Susanna Hoffs does for the closing credits (unfortunately spoken over however). ... Read more

Description

Each DVD at launch will include a 28 page mini-comic inside the amray case.

The comic is the first ever prequel comic to a movie. It is an alternate origin story to the Punisher and ends with the opening dock scene of the movie.It is written by Garth Ennis, premiere writer of Punisher comics, and the cover is illustrated by Tim Bradstreet. The comic is being written exclusively for this promotion, and will not be anywhere else in the marketplace for 6 months. The comic is full color and has a retail value of $2.25.

10,000 comics out of the total run will have a unique cover and be positioned as a limited edition.They will be randomly inserted into the DVDs and randomly distributed to retail. ... Read more

Reviews (109)

Better than expected
Much better than the 1989 direct to video adaptation which starred Dolph Lundgren in the title role, the Punisher, the latest film adapted from a Marvel comic, succeeds where Hulk and Daredevil failed. Capturing the feel of the comic (for the most part anyway), this ultra violent actioner finds undercover agent Frank Castle's (Thomas Jane, perfectly cast) retirement and bliss destoryed when his entire family is murdered by money laundering mobster Howard Saint (John Travolta in oily villian mode). Castle survives, and vows revenge against the people who ruined his life. Director/co-screenwriter Jonathan Hensleigh knows the source material for the most part, with scenes and characters taken directly from classic issues of the comic. Hardcore fanboys may not be too happy with some differences between the film and the comic (such as the change of scenery from New York to Tampa for one), but the overall film is more than satisfying. Plus, the epic fight between Frank and the Russian (wrestling star Kevin Nash) is one of the best filmed fights in recent memory. The great casting is also a highlight, with Will Patton as a sadistic gangster, Mulholland Drive's Laura Harring as Saint's wife, Rebecca Romijn-Stamos as Frank's neighbor Joan, Samantha Mathis as Frank's wife, and Ben Foster (excellently cast) as Frank's heavily pierced neighbor Spacker Dave.

THE PUNISHER WILL BE BETTER THAN DAREDEVIL
If for no other reason, the Punisher should be better than Daredevil thanks to NOT having Ben Affleck in the movie. I don't see a problem with a $30 million dollar Budget. Unlike Spiderman, Hulk, or even Daredevil, the Punisher will require very little in the way of special effects.

The Story will change slightly from the comics. Undercover FBI agent and former Marine Frank Castle (Thomas Jane) is devastated when his wife and children are killed when they accidentally witness a mafia hit, and with nothing left to lose, decides to dedicate himself fully to the eradication of crime (organized and otherwise) from America, as an army, assassin, judge and jury all rolled up into one man (and a whole lot of guns): The Punisher. Wearing a menacing black battle suit with a white skull emblazoned on his chest, the Punisher first sets his sights on the crime syndicate that was responsible for the murders of his family. Along the way, his vendetta quest leads to the son of Howard Saint (John Travolta), a former underworld boss who had gone straight, but the death of his son leads him to get back into crime, and guess who's he gunning for...? (Harring plays Travolta's wife; Romijn-Stamos plays Joan, a woman who assists the Punisher; Pro Wrestler Kevin Nash plays a Russian assassin.)

I've seen Jane in a couple of movies, Deep Blue and Dreamcatcher and he was pretty good. Anyone has to be better than Dolph Lundgren. I expect this to be short on plot and big on flying bullets and explosions. Travolta will add some star power and I predict this will be a money-maker.

Awesome
I thought the plot was great, awesome fight scenes, some humor mixed in made for an incredible movie. Definitely followed up to what I would hope to expect for a Punisher movie. Bringing back the Rambo bow to the screen was nice to see as well. I definitely hope they make a sequel considering I think this is a much better Marvel movie than spiderman.

Decent But Could've Been Better
This movie seemed like it was rushed. I was also expecting more of a bada$$ heavy then say John Travolta. He has never really played a decent bad guy. Though I must say that the action was decent though not spectacular. I was expecting a more bombastic movie more on the level of Spiderman, which by far has been the best translation of a comic book to big screen. With the Punisher there were too many dry spells in between the action. And why in the world does Frank Castle reveal that he is alive in the middle of the film? Wasn't the whole point of being the Punisher or calling himself the Punisher was declaring that the old man that he was is dead? The plot was a little disjointed but overall a decent movie, I wouldn't say that it was better than Daredevil though.

A realistic take on an unrealistic hero
I'll be the first to admit this was not the movie I was expecting to see. After all, any movie called The Punisher, well, one would expect to see PUNISHMENT. And while they do dish out a certain amount of revenge (sorry..."justice") it's not really what the movie is about. In my opinion, Frank Castle isn't even really "The Punisher" until the last few minutes of the movie (though the action is spread throughout).
Think of this movie as more of a prequel than an actual "PUNISHER" film...the story that tells why and how Frank changed from a loving husband/father into a barely human Terminator.
It's not the film I thought I was getting...but it was the right way to do the story, and a solid film to boot. If you liked X-Men, you should like this. And just like X-Men, the sequels should only get better. ... Read more

Description

Four young friends perform a heroic act and are changed forever by the uncanny powers they gain in return. Years later, on a hunting trip in the Maine woods, they are overtaken by a blizzard, a vicious storm in which something much more ominous moves. Challenged to stop a deadly alien force, they confront an unparalleled horror, with the fate of the world in the balance. ... Read more

Reviews (261)

It's not terrible, but it's not that good either
Considering the roasting that Dreamcatcher received upon it's release, I went into this film with very low expectations, and while the film isn't as bad as it is reputed to be, it is far from being the best Stephen King adaptation. The story revolves around four life long friends (Thomas Jane, Jason Lee, Damian Lewis, Timothy Olyphant) who share a special gift that was handed down to them by a seemingly mentally challenged friend (Donnie Wahlberg) whom they had saved as children. When the four go on their usual trip to a snowy cabin in Maine, they become enthralled in the middle of an alien invasion while the military makes a strike against them. Morgan Freeman and Tom Sizemore also star as military officials; Freeman's character has a few ulterior motives, while Sizemore is just looking to do the right thing. Director/co-screenwriter Lawrence Kasdan and co-screenwriter William Goldman, as good as they are, had a tough time adapting King's epic novel into a 136 minute film, and while their screenplay misses quite a bit, I think all together they did a decent job. The special effects are nicely done, and there are some surprisingly good blood and gore effects to be had for horror afficiandos. Despite it's advantages (the great cast, director, effects, etc.), Dreamcatcher misses quite a bit thanks to quite a number of plot holes, loose ends, and a terrible ending that is nothing like King's book (the alternate ending included on the DVD is much better). Despite all that, Dreamcatcher is best enjoyed with low expectations, and it is a solid B-horror movie with A-level features.

Scary and well made, but...
BORING!!! This movie had a wonderful concept, and managed to scare audiences every scene, but there wasn't any action or scares in the first hour. For this Stephen King novel's adaptation, they had to have the best actors, best stuntpeople and the best writers. It's very thrilling and scary, but, I'm saying as a piece of educated advice: Don't Waste your time.

**1/2 out of 4

Awesome
This is a good movie i dont care what anyone says. this is my favorite movie ever. I DUDDITS!

Really pretty good
I just saw this movie last night, and I don't get why there are so many negative reviews up here. I thought it was well-filmed and well-acted, with the possible exception of whoever played Henry. I kept thinking he sounded like the doctor guy from the spoof "Airplane." ("Not war, water! Mr. Gray wants water! And don't call me Shirley!") Beav (Jason Lee, I think) was hilarious, though, despite his weird toothpick obsession. Morgan Freeman wasn't bad, I guess. He reminded me of an inept Hannibal Lecter with eyebrow toupees.
The movie/plot/character development was all interesting and true to the book. It really wasn't scary, more action/adventure, but I didn't mind and most viewers probably won't. I figure the reason most people watch or read horror anyway is because they like seeing people who are worse off than themselves, and this flick had that in spades. (Giant intestinal parasite, anyone? No? How about some evil Space Truffles or whatever the fungus thing was called?) Its high point was the relationships between the characters, something King has always been really good at portraying.
Anyway, this movie was fun and good for a Friday night. I'd recommend it. Enjoy!

What were they thinking?
I won't be the first to write on the schizophrenic mess this film is, but having squirmed my way through this film I need to 'exorcise' the ill feeling it gave me.
I've had a firm belief that, beyond "Carrie['76]", "Salem's Lot ['79]" and "the Shining ['80]", all other Stephen King film vehicles are basically the same - churned out with the same flimsy mysticism that chokes his already portentious prose. "Dreamcatcher" is the culmination of so many illogical, half-baked 'Stephen King-isms' that you have to wonder, does Stephen King need to get out more? The latter day adaptations of his films (and that horrid "Kingdom" debacle on TV) only confirm that his stories are better left where they came from- a preprogrammed computer which only requires slight name / location changes and... voila! A new bestseller.
Yuck. ... Read more

Amazon.com

With a voracious trio of mako sharks wreaking havoc, Deep BlueSea dares to up the ante on Jaws, but director Renny Harlin trades the nuanced suspense of Spielberg's 1975 blockbuster for the trickery of the digital age. In other words, why build genuine terror when you can show ill-fated humans getting torn into bloody chunks? The aforementioned makos have been lab rats in an effort to harvest a miracle cure for Alzheimer's disease from the brains of sharks, but the research has an unfortunate side effect: the sharks get smarter, and they're determined to break out of Aquatica, the deep-sea complex where they've been penned.

Model-actress Saffron Burrows plays the researcher; Thomas Jane pulls double-duty as shark expert and action hunk; Samuel L. Jackson's the corporate sponsor who chooses the worst time for an Aquatica tour; and rapper LL Cool J is nicely cast as Aquatica's cook and comicrelief. Michael Rapaport, Jacqueline McKenzie, and Stellan Skarsgård round out the cast, most of whom are turned into shark food as the makos turn Aquatica into a floating junkyard. Harlin takes devilish pleasure in providing sudden, unexpected shocks--no small feat in such a derivative thriller--andas a series of action set-pieces, Deep Blue Sea never disappoints. It's inevitable that Burrows should end up in her underwear like Sigourney Weaver in Alien, but even then the movie offers a credible reason for the strip-down; that Deep Blue Sea can be simultaneously ridiculous and sensible is just another one of its shlocky charms. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (326)

The best shark film since Jaws?
Whilst 'Jaws' featured a (realistic) half-glimpsed shark sweeping through the water like a stream-lined demon, chasing unfortunate humans with a preternatural hunter-instinct, 'Deep Blue Sea' goes more for the 'here's a great big CGI shark chasing a mixture of cliched characters through some utterly implausible yet big blockbuster situations' approach. Spot the difference?

Not that 'Deep Blue Sea' was utterly devoid of hope. One scene early on features Samuel L. Jackson looking down at the surface of the pool, and a distorted image of a shark the size of a bus swims past. It's one of those 'take-your-breath-away' moments, that makes you go: 'woah, this is gonna be good.' But then, suddenly, we go underwater, and the film dies. The animatronic sharks were quite cool. The CGI sharks were absolutely appalling, and being as most of the film was CGI, it looked like some two-bit cartoon extravaganza. Each of the 'terrifying' death scenes were some of the most hysterical moments I've ever watched. Computerised sharks is one thing, but computerised people, with arms and legs kicking around like some wind-up bath-toy? It was the fact that you never really see the shark until right at the end that made 'Jaws' scary; the mako sharks in 'DBS' are unveiled after about five minutes in all their too-smooth-to-be-real glory. The scene in 'Jaws' where Richard Dreyfuss is in the cage peering out into the murky ocean was one scene they couldn't steal; the CGI water was absolutely crystal clear so that no matter how far away the shark seemed to be, we could see it.

The story line is rather plodding, our hapless heroes blundering from one mishap to the next. The initial moral question about genetic manipulation, and the quest for a cure for Alzheimer's seemed to be forgotten quite early on in place of the 'who's going to die next' formula. The sharks were hyper-fast and hyper-intelligent one moment, then really slow and kind of stupid the next (they recognise the gun, but with their highly evolved sense of smell, one of them can't smell gas). Oh, and every character is munched with one chomp, except a particularly tough rap star, whose leg is made of titanium. I'll touch briefly on the characters: rigid, cardboard, who really cares if they live or die? The only exception to the rule is LL Cool J, whose preacher cook is humorous, interesting and always a pleasure to watch. The only saving grace of this movie, and the only reason it got two stars, was LL Cool J. Admittedly, he plays it very similar to his role in Halloween H20, but why change a formula that works? The rest of the film can sink to the bottom. And don't get me started about Saffron Burrows...

Surprisingly good would be shlock thriller
So many sci-fi/horror films since Aliens hit in 1986 have tried to take the formula of "take a bunch of people, confine them with whatever killer beasts we can think of, and see who survives". Rarely it comes off as enjoyable, but Deep Blue Sea is a surprisingly good sci-fi yarn that is entertaining and surprising until the credits roll. The oh so hot Saffron Burrows plays an Altzheimers researcher who is experimenting on a trio of Mako sharks in the undersea complex of Aquatica. However, some never thought of side effects have happened, and now she and the crew (which includes Thomas Jane, Samuel L. Jackson, LL Cool J, Stellan Skarsgard, Michael Rapaport, Jacqueline McKenzie, and The Soprano's Aida Turturro) are swimming for their lives. Director Renny Harlin (Cliffhanger, Die Hard 2) pretty much does the same thing here that he did with Nightmare on Elm Street 4; sacrifice tension and suspense for blood and gore; but it surprisingly works. The performances are great, and the special effects are good considering the time the film was released. This is the film in which Jane would get noticed and his first in a leading action hero role which he has since followed in Dreamcatcher and the upcoming The Punisher, and his action hero talents are on high display. All in all, Deep Blue Sea is worth checking out.

14 year old Michelle
I loved this movie! My brother saw it with his friends when it came out, and I loved movies like these but was not able to see rated R movies, but my mother made & exception because my bro saw it first and said that it good, this movie is probbly the most realalistic when it comes to the sharks, shark attack scene's and special effect's, the cast was great, and the cast is & inportent part of a movie, with a bad cast it reck's the whole movie, but everything about this movie rocked, the shark's are so real, it's scary, I'm still shaky about going in the water, the shark's are anamatronic, outside of the really gruseum attack's, that's another thing, if you like movies like this and want violence, gut's, blood, gore and scary diolouge, then this movie will be your favorite, I own the movie, and just to let you know about the badder stuff in it, such as Profanity and Sexual content here's the 411, they have the F- word in it 4 times, though on of the time it is not clear because the man is gasping for air when he say's it, it has G-D- in it like 3 times, (YUCK!) and other not so bad languge that you can watch on t.v., and as far as sexual content, there is none, except when a girl takes her clothes off so her clothes don't catch on fire, but she's in her underwear, you could see that part on t.v., that's another thing, DON'T WATCH IT ON T.V.! They butcher the scene's, it ruin's the movie, watch it on dvd, they take out a few shark attack scene's, This movie is probbly my favorite in this genera, all in all, it rock's WATCH IT! NOT ON T.V.!

DEEP BLUE SEA
THIS IS SUCH A GOOD MOVIE. I LOVE IT. ITS MY 5TH FAV. MOVIE. ITS GREAT. THE SHARKS LOOK SO COOL AND IT MAKES U HAVE THAT OLD FAMILOR FEELING. ITS NOT SAVE TO GO BACK IN THE WATER.

No Jaws, in a class of its own
Deep Blue Sea is one of those new millenium type shark movies.
Little character, big action- lots of CGI monsters and guts.
But don't get me wrong, its all good, well, mostly.
The acting from the main cast (Saffron Burrows, Thomas Jane, LL Cool J, Samuel L Jackson) is reasonable enough for this type of movie.
The effects are mid-range. Absolutely awesome robotics is hindered by poorly crafted CGI sharks.
Explosions and debris abound, all well presented and created.
Some 'shocking' deaths of important characters when they shouldn't have, stunted people's ideas and viewing pleasure, but had some very good action sequences, example the shark attacks in the elevator shaft and Burrows' bedroom.
Relatively well done directing from Renny Harlin, okay script-with some good emotional and comedic moments. ... Read more

Reviews (115)

Not bad if you're an Angelina Jolie fan
Originally, this wasn't a movie I was very interested in watching until I realized Angelina Jolie was the co-star. Okay, so I admit-I'm an Angelina Jolie junkie. But that's beside the point.

The plot of "Original Sin" isn't too original. Wealthy Cuban landowner Antonio Banderas buys a mail-order bride (Jolie) and gets a little more than he bargained for. Not only is his soon-to-be bride more beautiful than the photo she sent, she is quite the hellcat in bed. Not exactly the demur Virginia schoolteacher she professed to be.

Following the typical Hollywood "stupid male" syndrome, Banderas signs over his fortune to his new bride, only to find she has absconded with his money. Not only does Banderas go off half-cocked in search of Jolie, but when he finds her, he only wishes to bed her, not concerned his fortune is gone. A bit too unrealistic here, considering Banderas was homicidal and violent only minutes earlier. Of course, Jolie is also following the Hollywood stereotype of female characters that fall in love with men who wish to kill them.

Thomas Jane adds an exciting dimension to the movie as the psychotic sidekick of Jolie, although their relationship isn't quite defined, nor explained. The "spit in the mouth" routine was a bit much for me and could have been left out with no detrimental affects to the movie.

In all, if you wish to see a lot of Angelina Jolie naked, this is the movie for you, although the flapping breast image was a bit much. Myself, personally, I could have went without seeing the naked butt of Antonio Bandera repeatedly, but to each their own. "Original Sin" is a skin flick of mild entertainment value.

-...

I Like them both...
I haven't seen it(yet) but I like them both, but I heard that Antonio has a few"eye popping moments" How much does he show exactly? Like everything? Or what? Just so I am not surprised when I do see it.. How much?

Mildly entertaining chick flick
WARNING: SOME VERY MILD SPOILERS*****

The first time I saw this, I was prepared to laugh at a sleazy, direct-to-video Harlequin novel-on-celluloid. What is it about Antonio Banderas? He's very handsome and not a bad actor, but he seems to choose a lot of really cheesy projects, "Femme Fatale" being a particularly awful one I recall watching.

But I thought this was a decently entertaining, if not brilliantly deep film. I was unaware at that time of it's provenance -- it's based on an excellent novel by Cornell Woolrich called "Waltz into Darkness". The book is well worth reading if you like this film. It was also made into a film in the mid-sixties by Francois Truffaut called (inexplicably ) "Mississippi Mermaid". Strange title, because the original novel is set in 1870s New Orleans and Julia travels to meet Louis on a steamer down the Mississipp BUT in the Truffaut film he reset the story in the 60s and the action of the film in colonial Africa and the French Riviera!

"Original Sin" is, interesting, vastly closer to the novel than the Truffaut version. The setting is changed to Cuba, presumably to accodomodate Bandera's accent, but the period is correct and the story doesn't work well in modern times, so overall, I find "Original Sin" to be the better of the two movies -- and that's saying a lot, as Truffaut is revered as a brilliant director. ("Mississippi Mermaid" is NOT by any means one of his better efforts, however.)

An early cautionary tale of "personals ads" and blind dating, the story seems even more relevant today than when it was written. Luis (Banderas) writes to a mail order bride, who is supposed to be plain, shy and religious. He is surprised when stunningly beautiful and sexy Julia (Angelina Jolie, of the collagen injected lips) shows up. Even though she betrays him and cheats on him and steals all his money...he still loves her. Both film versions clean up the ending -- I won't give the film ending away -- but in the book, Julia/Bonny actually kills Louis/Luis. A very bleak ending. Don't worry, the movie is a lot more fun.

The kind of film that falls under the heading of "guilty pleasure", "Original Sin" has lots of great costumes and sets and Banderas and Jolie are two of the sexiest people imaginable and we get to watch them getting hot and heavy. (BTW: the "unrated version" isn't really all that dirty...I don't get the rating thing. The sex isn't graphic or bizarre in any way -- it's two people who are MARRIED and making love. In the age of "Sex in the City", what the heck is the big deal?)

Anyways, call over your best girlfriends, microwave some popcorn and have a good time....

Some Memorable Lines From An Otherwise Forgettable Movie
Overall, I would rate this film a passable 3-plus stars, just above ok, but I just had to add the comment for anyone thinking of buying (or renting) this movie that I thought it had some unexpectedly apt and quoteable dialogue and astute observations on the nature of love. It has interested me in seeking out the book on which this film is based.

Being Sinful Can Be Good
Antonio Banderas plays a wealthy Cuban who is to be married to an American woman he doesn't know. He marries an actress, played by Angelina Jolie. But she isn't the woman he thinks she is. This movie had twists and turns wondering where it would lead the viewer. It was a seductive and captivating movie. Angelina Jolie plays the role of a seductress very well. Antonio Banderas is gorgeous as a dashing, yet naive man. ... Read more

Amazon.com

In the industrial wasteland just outside of Los Angeles, circa 2027, there's a covert war raging between the cyborgs and the humans. "86.5% is still human," insists superagent Alex (Jean-Claude Van Damme wannabe Olivier Gruner, complete with kickboxing credentials and thick Euro-warble), but as the cyborg conspiracy builds around him he discovers that humanity is more than simply a matter of flesh and blood. Borrowing elements from Blade Runner, The Terminator, Escape from New York, and The Road Warrior, and looking ahead to digital "data couriers" of Johnny Mnemonic, director Albert Pyun turns the sci-fi spy story into an engine for a visceral thrill ride of sleekly designed action sequences driven by a dancing camera and a breakneck editing rhythm. It's a glorious triumph of style over substance, the vigorous pace leaving the story far behind and nimble set pieces belying a tiny budget with ambitious action choreography and impressive displays of property damage. Apart from a few clumsy special effects at the conclusion and the requisite collection of scene-chewing performances, Nemesis is a thoroughly entertaining piece of sci-fi trash, a classic example of cinematic energy overcoming the obstacles of plot. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (18)

Nemesis - Underrated B-Movie
Alex Rain (Olivier Gruner) is a half-human, half-machine LAPD cop who is the best at what he does. When the terrorists he is after questions his humanity, Alex questions himself and leaves the police force. He goes underground and becomes a chips-smuggler, however this doesn't last long and he is assigned a last job for the LAPD. The final assignment is to apprehend an old partner, who Alex loved, who has stolen security data. Alex once again must question his allegiance to LAPD when things go sour.

The movie has mediocre special effects, the stop-go animation in parts is reminscent of the Terminator. However, there are a few very nice looking explosions and some great gun-fu. Gruner brings his experience from his military service and his kick-boxing training and leaves the fewer satisfied.

Overall the movie is pretty good, aside from some pretty odd scenes (like Thomas Jane walking around naked). If you like movies such as Blade Runner, the Terminator, or any other Olivier Gruner movie, you will like this one. If you pick-up the DVD version, you will be treated to a Making-of featurette and Nemesis TV Spots.

Nemesis - Great Underrated B-Movie
Alex Rain (Olivier Gruner) is a half-human, half-machine LAPD cop who is the best at what he does. When the terrorists he is after questions his humanity, Alex questions himself and leaves the police force. He goes underground and becomes a chips-smuggler, however this doesn't last long and he is assigned a last job for the LAPD. The final assignment is to apprehend an old partner, who Alex loved, who has stolen security data. Alex once again must question his allegiance to LAPD when things go sour.

The movie has mediocre special effects, the stop-go animation in parts is reminscent of the Terminator. However, there are a few very nice looking explosions and some great gun-fu. Gruner brings his experience from his military service and his kick-boxing training and leaves the fewer satisfied.

Overall the movie is pretty good, aside from some pretty odd scenes (like Thomas Jane walking around naked). If you like movies such as Blade Runner, the Terminator, or any other Olivier Gruner movie, you will like this one. If you pick-up the DVD version, you will be treated to a Making-of featurette and Nemesis TV Spots.

A Low Budget Treat
It's not a great movie, but it's great fun, especially after a few beers. It's basically on the same level of the 80s film Hardware, though Nemesis has more action and a better ending.

If your looking for something fresh give this one a try, just try not to think too much while watching it.

Another piece of space junk from La La Land...
If there was a setting for "0" stars I would give it to this movie. This movie is TERRIBLE! Okay, take a bunch of kids from some mindless bedroom community in about, say, grade 7 that have never left the burbs, give them some decent camera equipment and then ask them to do a variation on Blade Runner and this movie is EXACTLY what you would get. The dialogue that exsists is mindless, boring drival that you can't wait to end, low-budget pyrotechnic gun fights set in rural scrap yards. I think most of the budget was spent on designer sunglasses and black leather. The lead guy (a french actor), is SO bad that he can't even keep his accent consistent - sometimes he sounds Russian, then French, Eastern European, American, the guy is really, really bad and boring as %$&^!. I think I even recall seeing one of those Darryl Hanna Blade Runner athletic back-flip things. I think it's funny how directors keep trying to ripp Blade Runner off but since they have no taste, they always fail. Don't even think of renting/buying this film unless you are a tasteless, mindless fool and then by all means, waste your money.

Admittedly, A Guilty Pleasure
An Albert Pyun production can threaten the mental stability of even the most diehard B movie fan. This director is a master of cheesy, low budget films loaded with hammy acting, molasses like pacing, and terrible scripts. As far as I know, there are only two Pyun films really worth watching: the early 1980s sword and sandal picture "The Sword and The Sorcerer" and this movie, the 1993 science fiction thriller "Nemesis." Two good movies out of a slew of stinkers doesn't mean I wouldn't watch any of his clunkers, though. If anything, a bad movie always promises to deliver a few laughs. Anyway, Pyun's name is synonymous with junk in B movie circles. Just scan some of the movie review sites on the Internet and laugh out loud at the abrasive comments aimed in Al's direction. The success of "Nemesis" eventually led to several sequels, each a victim of diminishing returns. The first one is a winner worth watching, but still contains plenty of plot holes for the discerning viewer to giggle over.

Los Angeles cop Alex Rain works hard to break up crime rings and terrorist groups. It's the year 2027, and humanity has changed quite a bit in the near future. It appears that technology dominates, with doctors capable of implanting robotic machinery directly into the human body. In 2027, you've got millions of people ambling around the country with implants, many of them more machine than human. The growing numbers and strength of these cyborgs is starting to become a real problem for the rest of humanity. Eventually, some people fed up with the increasingly metallic composition of the population form resistance groups to fight the growing cyborgs. It is Alex Rain's job to help keep the peace, and to bring in these people when they break the law. After all, killing a cyborg is still a crime since most of these creatures still possess a significant percentage of human parts. Many of Alex Rain's fellow police officers have machine implants. Actually, Rain himself has a few parts in him, too. In the future, it is just too difficult to discern who is completely human and who isn't, and it's about to get much harder. After a lengthy opening sequence that shows us how Alex ends up in retirement, the movie starts in earnest.

Rain's old boss, Farnsworth, approaches him about a new mission. The United States and Japan have decided to merge into one country (a process not unusual in the near future, according to the movie). A cyborg that worked with the police rebelled against the system and took some important information about the merger with her to Java, where she is presently hiding out while attempting to contact a terrorist organization named the Hammerheads. Rain, who has a contentious history with this sexy cyborg, must go to Java and kill her in order to retrieve this critical information. Rain reluctantly goes for reasons made obvious in the film, and soon discovers that things are not quite what they seem. It turns out that the mission Farnsworth sent Rain on is merely a cover for a much more important mission involving the fate of the planet, humanity, and the cyborgs. We don't find this out for some time, and until we do, the movie does tend to confuse the viewer. Not to worry, though, as you can content yourself with the bevy of beautiful women wearing tight skirts, some nudity, massive amounts of gunfire, and a healthy dose of bloody special effects. "Nemesis" may well rank as one of the most violent shoot 'em ups made in the last few years. The movie contains elements that reminded me of both "The Terminator" and "The Matrix," although I wouldn't go so far as to say that "Nemesis" serves a bridge between those two movies. I will say that if you love films overflowing with huge guns and a super high body count, you will love this Pyun picture.

The plot zips along at mach speed, but the acting often fails to engage. Lead star Oliver Gruner, a French actor who must have once been on the same "up and coming action star" list as Jean Claude Van Damme, tanks as the tough yet caring cop Alex Rain. I suspect Gruner graduated from the Joe Dallesandro School of acting because his wooden expressions to some extent resemble those of the co-star of "Blood for Dracula" and "Flesh for Frankenstein." The female stars take second fiddle, and are usually on screen to serve as eye candy for the mostly young male audience that would watch a film like this one. At least "Nemesis" gives us the ever reliable Tim Thomerson in the role of Farnsworth, along with late B movie star Brion James as one of Farnsworth's sidekicks. James's pseudo German accent alone makes this movie worth watching. In fact, I doubt I would have even watched this movie if I hadn't known beforehand that Thomerson and James appeared in it.

The DVD gives us several extras, including a trailer and some behind the scenes action about the film. The extras list said there were a few television spots, but when I selected that option, I got more behind the scenes footage. At least the transfer is decent, although it isn't as good as it should be. Colors occasionally look washed out, and there are a few rips on the print. Overall, I give a hearty round of applause to Albert Pyun. It is going to be tougher for me to criticize this guy after watching "Nemesis." The movie not only entertains, it is entertaining enough to watch again. This picture just goes to show that even a hack filmmaker can turn out a great treat every now and again. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The impressively muscular chest of Tom Jane is the focal point of The Punisher, a movie based on a Marvel Comics superhero. Frank Castle (Jane, Deep Blue Sea) retires from the FBI, which means--as any moviegoer expects--that his family is toast. Howard Saint (John Travolta, Face/Off), a shady Florida businessman whose son waskilled in Castle's last mission, orders a hit not only on Castle's wife and child, but also on his parents and a whole bunch of aunts, uncles, cousins, and so forth. The killers shoot Castle himself in the chest, but he inexplicably survives and--as any moviegoer expects--sets out to even the score. Implausibly, given his sometimes curious and roundabout methods, he succeeds. Also featuring Will Patton (Armageddon) as an oily thug, Laura Harring (Mulholland Drive) as Saint's fleshpotwife, and Rebecca Romijn-Stamos (X-Men) as a waitress with bad taste in men. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (263)

vastly under-rated movie
This is one of the best comic book movies I have ever seen, and I think would be an enjoyable movie for people that don't like comic books.It is true that the plot is not really original.The plot is basically the plot of Mad Max.A scene in this movie is even inspired by the scene in Mad Max where Max runs to his family just after they have been run over.But what this movie lacks in an original plot, it makes up for in other ways.Thomas Jane is great as The Punisher and I don't think there is anyone else who could have played him better.In fact, I'm not sure why Jane wasn't chosen to play parts such as Batman or Spiderman in the past.He's what a superhero should be.The movie is refreshing in that, as the director explains in the commentary track, there are virtually no CGI effects.The movie is stripped down and raw with nothing extra added, just like the Punisher himself.I really get tired of looking at phony CGI effects.This movie was shot old-school and is meant play like an old sam peckinpaw movie.The movie has a great soundtrack and there is some suprisingly good acting in this movie, especially from the supporting cast.I think the critics unfairly bashed this movie.The movie is pretty violent in keeping with the comic book.However, there are some light-hearted moments too with the supporting cast.Can't wait for Punisher 2!

Just terrible.
I don't think the director understands what the punisher is all about. the punisher is not a hero. he is a monster. a ruthless, cold-blooded killer who has given up his humanity in the pursuit of justice. there is nothing heroic about him. this movie's biggest flaw is trying to portray him as something more than that.

in one scene where he interrogates a mobster he tells him he will burn him with a blowtorch. he tells him he will feel nothing but cold for the first few minutes and smell sizzling meat. the punisher then pokes him in the back with a popsicle while he cooks a steak (ofcourse the mobster can't see all this). the mobster then tells him what he wants to hear and the punisher lets him go. WHAT THE HELL?!? the real punisher (or at least garth ennis' punisher which is the only one worth reading) would never do that. his whole purpose is to kill mobsters. i've read issues where hes blown out men's kneecaps and put them through woodshredders to get the information he wants. the stuios wanted to make an action flick with a hero you can sympathize with. but thats the thing. YOU DON'T SYMPATHIZE WITH THE PUNISHER. what he does is unjustifyable. cool, but still wrong. so what we end up with is a watered down frank out for vengeance--sorry, punishment.

aside from that, theres the GAPING plotholes. John Travolta (who does an awful job of portraying the badguy) hires the Russian, a beefed up Russian hitman who can crush a .45 with his barehands, to take care of the Punisher. the Russian goes to his apartment and is killed after a long stupid fight. then, Travolta orders his right hand man to go get him. for the whole movie Travolta knows where the Punisher is with NO EXPLANATION!!! none at all. and then the punisher confronts the badguy, infiltrating his base with a bow&arrow. he kills a few men (under twelve which is ridiculous for a Punisher movie--I mean what happened to him mowing down legions of wiseguys with an M60???) and kills travolta. oh yeah, and in the beginning he survives being shot point blank in the chest.

Bootom line: this movie sucked. if you want to see the real punisher, read anything with garth ennis written on the cover.

Typical.
Overall this film was good, though fairly predictable. I did have certain expectations being a comic collector in my youth, some were met, some not. The faults: again predictable, though Frank Castle says he's not in it for just the revenge, it's basically a revenge tale. Tom Jane did a decent job, but the casting wasn't really perfect. Travolta as always added nothing, and a hundred other guys would have made a better villain. Laura Harring, who was Travolta's wife, is smoking hot, and needed better scenes. The death of her and Travolta's best friend were lame. Also, this getting an R rating, and being The Punisher, It seemed rather tame, and I expected more violence, etc. However, it was still a good movie, and made for a good 2 hours of escapism.

meh
I came into the punisher expecting great things, seeing as my favorite comic book character happens to be the punisher ever since I was 6. I wish I didn't see it so I could still hold it as a potential hit. I wont pussyfoot around and get to what I liked and disliked about it.

Liked:
1. There were scenes that made it cool and funny at different times.
2. The whole plot was genius in terms of the actual revenge against the big bad guy.
3. The acting was good and believable.
4. It's the f***ing punisher.

Disliked:
1. It wasn't violent enough. Its not that I'm a violence-crazed maniac, it's just that the punisher isn't really as light as portrayed in the movie. Unfaithfulness more than a light movie.
2. Not enough of the punishment scenes (one to my count)
3. Most of the dialogue was cheesy and just frigging bad.
4. It's not 30% faithful to the comics. I hate people who bitch about that but I hate to see it happen. If it was as faithful as the Spider-man franchise was in the newer movies then I would have been happier.

see it if its on tv, or borrow it from someone who owns it

Still almost to light for what the punisher really portrays.
I grew up reading the Punisher comic books.I barfed at the first movie adaption with Dolph Lundgren..was not even the same thing.Just like when they made the batman movies more like cartoons than of a vigilante justice crusader.I was leary of this one, but had to watch it.

The problem is, Frank Castle is an extreme hardcase.He knows no boundaries.In the comics, he kills with a sneer, not a smile.He is a killers killer.Now I think the movie did touch close to this premise but was still a bit off.I think Jim Cavaziel's character in "the red dragon" would have been a better cast fit.Cavaziel with dark hair looks very similiair to the Punsiher.All in all an okay movie, but not what we want when portraying the punisher.

An ordinary lawman goes outside the law to carry out his own brand of justice in this dark-themed thriller. Frank Castle (Thomas Jane) is an FBI agent who deeply loves his wife and son, but is also strongly devoted to his work. Castle's investigation of a powerful crime cartel leads to a gunfight which claims the life of a young boy, whose father is underworld kingpin Howard Saint (John Travolta). Furious and eager for revenge, Saint arranges for Castle and his family to be murdered in retaliation. However, while Castle's wife and son are killed, he somehow survives, even though he's believed to have perished. Bent on stopping Saint once and for all, Castle remakes himself as The Punisher, a ruthless and heavily armed killing machine who will not rest until Saint and his crew have been wiped clean from the Earth. Based on a Marvel Comics character first introduced in 1974, The Punisher also stars Rebecca Romijn-Stamos, Laura Elena Harring, Roy Scheider, and Kevin "Big Sexy" Nash.
... Read more

Description

Thisaction-packed sequel to THE CROW explodes on screen with hot new stars Vincent Perez (I DREAMED OF AFRICA) and sexy Mia Kirshner! After a brutal attack by an evil drug cartel, the murder victim (Perez) is brought back to life by a mysterious crow. With the help of a beautiful woman named Sarah (Kirshner), he exacts revenge on his killers one by one ... only to realize his enemy, the lethal Judah, has discovered the one weakness that can destroy him forever! ... Read more

Reviews (103)

Timeless, just like the first...
I realize this movie is seven years old, but I was surfing the net and happened to see that Crow City of Angels was on television, so I thought I'd put in some positive words for this film. This is like the 20th time I've watched it. First of all, you have to forget THE CROW. It has no ties to the first one, it's a completely original character and story. It goes without saying, the first one is better. THE CROW is my favorite movie of all time. This movie is not bad though. It received so many negative reviews from critics however, which is too bad, because it is a very good movie. Vincent Perez does a wonderful job portraying Ashe; a man murdered along with his son, Danny, after witnessing a murder. Sarah (the litte girl from the first movie) returns in City of Angels, played by Mia Kirshner, to look after Ashe. Judah, played by Richard Brooks, doesn't even come close to Top Dollar, who was the main villain in the first movie, but he's ok. Judah does have one of the film's best lines though, when Ashe tells him to go to hell and he says "Already been there, and I must confess, I like what I saw."

The dark and dreadful mood is still wonderfully intact, which I love. The look of this film is just as good as the first. There are so many great moments in this movie that I can never forget, such as when Sarah paints Ashe's face with Danny's old paints, the part where Ash pulls Curve's body out into the water and flowers surround him in the form of a crow, and the unforgettable ending when Judah is destroyed. It's classic. Another great aspect of this movie is how Ash mocks the words of the killers - what they said just before they killed him and his son - just before he kills them.

I think most people never even wanted to give this movie a chance because of what happened to Brandon Lee, and that's understandable but at the same time a shame because a great talent was passed over in Vincent Perez, and a great movie as well.