Description

This 4-title boxed-set contains all of the titles in the Batman series, including: Batman, Batman Returns, Batman Forever, and Batman & Robin. ... Read more

Reviews (49)

The Dark Legend
BATMAN.......this movie was a classic, the original Batman, we've got Michael Keaton as the alleged Masked hero, and outstanding performance by Jack Nicholson playing the one and only Joker, of corse we've got outstanding makers of this film, Tim Burton's first time directing which was extrordinary, he really put the right image of the Dark comic book version of Batman in Gotham City, and let us not forget the beautifle masterpiece of Batman's theme and the score by Danny Elfman in which he won an oscar for. Batman Returns,a very most darker tone, the same people,includinge new stars; Michelle Pheiffer and Danny Devito as the sick and twisted Penguin, this movie had some insite with its story of Batman, Catwoman and, Penguin. Batman Forever.......this movie was a completly different point of view of the Dark Batman Knight, with Zanny Jim Carrey as the Insane Riddler [aside from the possible oneliners to be said, it was a great role] and of corse the great Tommy Lee Jones as Two-Face, but this wasn't Batman, Keatonless, Burtonless, Elfmanless, the greats that made the first 2 landmarks, yet the director did capture the cartoonish Batman comic style introducing Robin. As for Batman & Robin, whew! nice cast and all but, these guys are flying through the air,swinging from strings, Mr.Freeze is frozen not Mr.super human strength, Poisun Ivy.....just think Uma Thurman, it was a nice role, too many pointless oneliners, interfacing with God only to put a dramatic realization to the un real, un dark, un batman story and not only that they dragged it on for 2 hours or so, the only thing worth the price of admission is the cast and the "action". Aside from the 4th, the first 2 are absolutly incredible movies the 3rd is entertaining and watchable and.......worth the price.

Batman Legacy
The film version of BATMAN saw director Tim Burton ditch the campy 60s "KAPOW!" action and outrageous villians and go much deeper and darker. Michael Keaton IS Batman, evoking the same troubled character from the DC comics, and of course, Jack Nicholson as The Joker, a great character played brilliantly. Burton, master of the bizzare, was the perfect man to bring the legendary comic book to the screen, and he does it wonderfully. Danny Elfman's excellent score is another added plus, and the action is well done. The look of Gotham City is inventive and fascinating, creating a nuance of comic book-styled-action and dark storytelling.

BATMAN RETURNS is much darker than the first film, yet still satisfying, popcorn-munching fun, with an apt blend of comic book action and trademark Burton weirdness. With Michael Keaton returning as the bat, Danny DeVito as the creepy pengiun and Michelle Pfeiffer as the sexy Catwoman, Batman Returns has everything fans could want. The styilised look of Gotham City is fantastic. Danny Elfman's exciting yet creepy score fits perfectly with the film's tone. The only thing slightly amiss is the plot, but that hardly matters when it's Burton at the helm, and a sharp script and some witty one-liners make up for it's flaws.

BATMAN FOREVER has it's flaws, but it's still a solid entry into the franchise. Val Kilmer takes over the role of Bruce Wayne, and while he's not as good as Michael Keaton, he manages to portray the character well. Joining Kilmer is Chris O'Donnell as Robin, and the bad guys; Tommy Lee Jones as the disfigured "Two Face" and the suitably manic Jim Carrey as the crazed Riddler. There are problems; the action takes over most of the time, leaving little in the way of exposition or plot for that matter. And the vertigo-inducing camera angles and frenetic pacing leaves the audience wanting something perhaps a little more grounded.
And then BATMAN AND ROBIN came along and killed the franchise. One of the worst movies ever made. Joel Schumacher owes me two hours of my life back!

BATMAN REVIEW
Okay, for all those people who are wanting to know which of the four batman movies are the best. Well here is my two cents.
Batman#1- staring Michale Keaton as the dark night himself batman, Jack Nicolson as the dark comical feind joker,and Kim Basinger as the sexy Vicki Vale. This was a dark beginning for the series and it explained the troubles of Bruce Waynes two lives Billion Dollar buissness man, and the dark night. Michale Keaton played an awsome batman, his two attitudes as both characters Bruce Wayne and Batman never reveal that they are the same person. Jack Nicolson as the joker was pure brilliance. His facical expressions through out the movie and his remarks make him the number one batman movie villian. This movie was directed by the brilliant mind of Tim Burton.
Batman#2- Batman returns- staring- Michale Keaton returns as the role of Batman , Michelle Phieffer as the sly sexy Cat Woman, Danny DeVito as the sewer ridden Penguin, and Christopher Walken as the notorious Max Shreck. This movie was again directed by the brilliant mind of Tim Burton. This was the darkest of all four movies. It shows the trials and errors of masterminds against the dark knight. Danny DeVito played a spectacular role as penguin. He was definitly the man for the part. Michelle Phiffer as cat women was a great selection. Props on the skin tight body suite. This was another good movie from a good cast, and a great director. Until #3
Batman#3-Batman Forever- staring- Val Kilmer as Batman, Nichole Kidman as Dr. Chase Meridian, Chris O'Donnelle as the boy wonder Robin, Tommy Lee Jones as the physcotic Two Face, and Jim Carrey as the clever Riddler. This was the worst of the 4. Jim Carrey played an awsome Riddler, Tommy Lee Jones played a fantastic two face. Nicole Kidman played a beautiful role as the sexy physco-therapist. But the other two was the downer. Starting with the least of the worst, Chris O'Donnell as robin. He was good in the beginning but as the movie progressed, his image slowly died out. Drew Barrymore played a quick role as one of two faces girls. But the number 1 reason for the faliure of this movie is the man himself Batman, played by a no personality Val Kilmer. Dont get me wrong Val is an awsome actor, but not for Batman. He had no personality, except when he tried to rival with Edward E. Nigma (The riddler for the non true batman fans) other than that he had no personatlity split between the two Bruce Wayne and Batman.

Batman#4-Batman and Robin- staring George Clooney as the role of Batman, Chris O'Donnell as the return role as Robin, Uma Thurman as the sensual Dr. Pamela Isley, also known as Poison Ivy, amd the governator himself Arnold Schwarzenegger as the bone chilling Mr. Freeze. This was an alright movie but not the best. Again the role of batman was trivialized by another actor. George Clooney as batman was good, on paper, but his performance was too wity for some. Again not seperating the lines between batman and Mr. Wayne.
So all in all the batman series is a definite DVD collection to have my ratings on the movies are.
BATMAN#1-*****
BATMAN#2-****
BATMAN#3-**
BATMAN#4-***
TAKE FROM A TRUE BATMAN FAN. ITS A GOOD BUY.

Its all about personal taste!
Whats there to say about these four movies? Plenty!

The first Batman stars "Michael Keaton" as Bruce Wayne A.K.A"Batman" and Jack Nicolson as "The Joker" the plot evolves from the major crime boss of Gothem played by Jack Palance gets a little upset to find out one of his men is having an affair with his girl! So he sets him up to be captured by the police, only to have that man be accidently tossed over a rail into a batch of toxis waste and thought to be dead! But he's not, after he recovers and has some surgery he has become a new man, and calls himself "The Joker" and he takes over as the new crime boss of Gothem, and beeing ruthless he has sent out a mysterious virus that is killing people off slowly and Batman comes along to save the day, along the way there action, explosions , new gadgets and some cool effects! Kim Bassinger plays the leading lady and this movie is worth watching, its the best of what came out of these four movie....the first may not be the original, but its the original to this series of the Batman saga, and its the best of these four!

Batman returns has had alot of mixxed reviews. some like it, some dont! Me personally I dont think its a great movie! Batmans back and this time he has a new villian to deal with, a man who was abandend by his parents almost after birth and has been living in the seweres since .... and when he emerges he has become the golden boy of gothem, suckering people into making him beleive hes a good guy. That man is the Penguin played by Danny Devito! Batman knows he's dirty and sets out to proove it! Also Michelle Pheifer plays the Catwoman, many i think liked the film because of seeing her in a tight costume, seeing as how sex doesnt sell in my book, it may be why i dont see this film as beeing any good! Also stars "Christpher Walkin" he plays a wealthy buisness man who is not a nice man, and with such scum running around gothem, Batman is there to try and save the day once again from the crime around gothem!

Batman Forever I would bet money on is in any ones top 10 worst movies of all time list! This movie starred a new leading man for Batman "Val Kilmer" as Batman and also bringing in the new villians of The Riddler (Jim Carey) and Two Face (Tommy Lee Jones) and the new leading lady is played by barf girl (Nicole Kidman) even with a cast like that this movie failed! Its plot is bad, the whole serisness and almost beleiable first two movies have just completly taken a 180 turn and gone into a stupid comic book looking city with some of THE worst acting of all time! The only actor who played a decent role was the other new comer to the series Robin (Chris O'donnel)

Batman & Robin introduces "George Clooney" as Batman, Chris O'donnel returns as Robin, and introduces Alicia Silverstone to play Bat Girl.... two new villians have emerged in Gothem , Mr.Freeze (Arnold Shwartzenegger) and Posion Ivy (Uma Thermon) this movie was a bit better then the last one, but Arnolds acting is by far some of his worst! And Uma's parading around in tights trying to sell a sexy image does not do it for me! George Clooney IMO did not play that bad a role as Batman, he is certinlly better then Val Kilmer, but no where near as good as Keaton!

Final Advice on these movies
1 - Good, well worth watching ***** five stars!
2 - Eh, wasnt as good as the first **** four stars
3 - ONE OF THE WORST MOVIE OF ALL TIME! / Zero Stars
4 - An improvment on the last, but not good enough *** 3 stars!

My advice is to buy only the first one and maybe the second one if you liked it! But if you buy Batman Forever, you will make one of the worst purchases of all time! You will regret it! And the 4th isnt really worth having...if you get a great deal on all four, then go for it, but IMO part one and two is the only ones worth getting!

The worst downfall to ALL of these movies, is not one of them comes with any bonus features!!!! I remember heaps of stuff that was around when all 4 of these films where made, starting with the trailer to the first movie "a man in black" and its very disapointing that they neglect some of the biggest movies of all time like this!

Great Box Set
This is a great movie and I recomened it too anyone who has ever liked Tim Burton, Batman, or action movies. So you should think about getting this set. Some of these films can be dark sometimes but they will always remain entertaining. Michael Keaton is the best actor for Batman. George Clooney is a great actor but he wasn't too good as Batman and Val Kilmer was almost as good Michael. If they ever did make a 5th Batman movie, they should use Michael Keaton, even thou he is getting quite old. But who the hell cares. These are great films that you could watch with your kids, just don't let kids under 5 watch the second one. It is a bit too dark for younger viewers. But I'm sure you can let your kids under 5 watch the other ones.

Batman-This is the best one of the series of coarse and has the best bad guy, The Joker played by, who else but Jack Nicholson. He's the only one who could have done the Joker. This film isn't as dark as the others and is a great action film.

10/10
Rated PG-13 for violence, mild graphic violence, stylized action and some language.

Batman Returns-This is a great film and was one dark dark movie. Danny DeVito was great as the Penguin and made it an enjoyable bad guy, not like alot of bad guys out there today.
Michael Keaton is Batman for the last time in this one.
8/10
Rated PG-13 for violence, dark humor, language, and stylized action.

Batman Forever-Val Kilmer should have been Batman is Batman and Robin. He is almost as good as Keaton is. This time the bad guys are The Riddler played by the one and only Jim Carrey, and Two Face as the great Tommy Lee Jones. The thrid time around is great for most third sequels never really work out.
9/10
Rated PG-13 for violence, dark humor, and stylized action.

Batman and Robin-This is an ok entry in the Batman series but could have been much better. I think Joel rushed through it to get it out as quick as possible. George Clooney puts up an ok job as Batman and Arnold is awsome as Mr. Freeze. And that's my opinian.
7/10
Rated PG-13 for violence and stylized action.

So all in all I would have to give this set a 9/10 and is well worth your money. ... Read more

Reviews (37)

The ultimate revenge trip
This screen adaptation of the A.J. Quinnell novel has received mixed reviews, but I found it remained generally true to the spirit of the book.

Creasy (Denzel Washington) is a broken-down, alcoholic, ex-special forces assassin. Visiting his friend Rayburn (Christopher Walken) in Mexico City, he ends up taking a job as a bodyguard to make ends meet. A kidnapping spree has spread throughout Latin America and a wealthy young couple hires Creasy to protect their young daughter. Less concerned with her safety, their primary reason for hiring him is to fulfill the terms of a kidnap-insurance policy.

Pita (Dakota Fanning)'s spunk and unabashed friendliness slowly penetrate Creasy's veil of pain and alcoholism. Soon, he's not only protecting her, but is also coaching her at swimming and helping with studies. Then, in the turning point of the film, despite Creasy's quick-witted defense, Pita is kidnapped from her piano lesson and Creasy left for dead with multiple gunshot wounds.

Corrupt cops, mobsters, and other officials are all taking their cuts from the kidnapping game. As Creasy begins to recover, he sets off on the ultimate roadtrip of revenge. And all hell breaks loose.

I rated this film four stars. Tony Scott has to tone down the nausea-inducing quick cuts, fades, over-exposures, and other tricks of the trade. When he gets into story-telling mode, he does his best work, as Fanning and Washington are nearly perfect in their roles. Do yourself a service and read the books. Nothing matches the entire Creasy series.

Makes "Deathwish" look like a cakewalk.
"Death is his art. And he's about to paint his masterpiece."

That is the right line for this movie, spoken by Christopher Walken, the right actor. Obsessed with the grandeur of bloodshed, "Man On Fire" is apocalyptic, spun from the roughest parts of the Old Testament. Tony Scott's movie is a kidnapping drama set in Mexico City - a "special place" according the end credits. Special indeed - take the film at its word, and half the cops are corrupt and in competition with kidnappers for ransom money. The corrupt judicial unit, dubbed "La Hermandad," is impenetrable. Unless you're Denzel Washington.

In a performance that melds elements of his Oscar-winning turn in "Training Day" and his work in "Courage Under Fire," Washington is John Creasy, a suicidal alcoholic ex-Marine offered a job through war-buddy Rayburn (Walken) to protect the daughter of a sweatshop industrialist (Marc Anthony). This daughter, Pita, played by the increasingly skilled Dakota Fanning - who's given dialogue and mannerisms better suited to a 16-year-old - charms Creasy out of his shell, makes him become her swim coach. Fanning is, in a sense, a peculiar little girl, so far beyond her years in gestures that when she laughs at a joke of Rayburn's that she'd have no way of understanding, we begin to wonder if her maturity has been misused.

So then - Pita's snatched in a setup, Creasy's shot, and after he recovers, his counterpunch makes "Deathwish" look like a cakewalk.

"Kill them all," Pita's mother (a glammed-out Radha Mitchell) whispers as Creasy holds his Bible. This vengeance either invigorates you or it doesn't. As these films go, "Man On Fire" is among the most violent and malevolent. The script, by Brian Helgeland, pretends to ask the larger questions about sacrifice and morality, but it isn't into sparing lives. There is torture, then more of it, then death. When a nightclub is blown up, the crowd roars. That's quite a bit unlike the recent fire in Rhode Island.

The most controversial scene involves a rectum bomb set to Creasy's digital pager. "I wish - you had more time," Creasy intones ironically. A corrupt cop, stripped to his underwear and bent over a car under a freeway, has no more time.

Cynical and a bit beefier, Washington is good as the tough hombre with a rocket launcher. The mark of a good actor is to want what he wants even when we shouldn't. Washington's that guy. Walken shuffles around with his offbeat cadence, utters the movie's best line, and disappears. Anthony is jittery in a limited role. Mickey Rourke makes a cameo using his real, non-sandpaper voice. Mitchell isn't much of an actor, but she's platinum gorgeous, and a perfect trophy wife she makes. Between her and Anthony's character, you wonder where Pita got her smarts.

Mexico City, when we can get a clear view of it from Scott's dizzying camera, is a bright, messy backdrop. Scott's editor on "Spy Game," Christian Wagner, achieves the feat making sense out of chaos and vice versa, though an early scene featuring a drunk, bawling Creasy could have been pieced together more clearly. Helgeland adapts A.J. Quinnel's novel, and it's not his best work - the plot holes are big enough to drive Hummers through. Scott resorts to flashing dialogue, both Spanish and English, on the screen in a pop-art, free-verse-poetry presentation that's at first unique, then distracting, then annoying. Notice, too, that it doesn't start happening until Fanning's offscreen.

As it unfolds on a desolate bridge near a Biblical tree in the middle of Mexico, the end of "Man On Fire" is the kind of preordained, wide-shot-to-show-significance material Scott has loved since "Enemy of the State," the first of his "import" trilogy that hopefully ends with this film. Prior to that Will Smith vehicle, Scott made hard-boiled, straight-ahead popcorn flicks - "Days of Thunder," "Top Gun," "The Last Boy Scout" "Crimson Tide" - that were shallow, lurid, painfully macho but, at the very least, aware of themselves and fun. "Man On Fire" is enamored with its potential greatness when it's really a B-movie playing with an A-list star and budget.

Washington is Creasy Bear...storyline diverges from the book
If you've read the book, the movie's storyline is a little disappointing. If you've seen the movie and haven't read the book yet... You really need to. It is most satisfying, and will give you a better understanding and appreciation of the character Creasy.

The location switch from Italy to Mexico works well. Of course, we miss out on the Isle of Gozo. As with most novel-to-cinema adaptions, we miss out on a lot of subplot (Creasy's women). And as is inevitable with a major studio production, the ending has been "Hollywood-ized." (can't tell you more without giving away the ending... read the book).

However, Denzel Washington does an excellent job portraying the character Creasy, as I knew he would. Dakota Fanning is Pinta, no question about it. Christopher Walken, always a good choice, was an excellent casting choice here. A.J. Quinnell would be proud. Marc Anthony...? Well, A.J. Quinnell would understand.

Great Movie
Denzel Washington is one of the greatest actors around. And Dakota Fanning is absoultely amazing.
The script just has you on the edge of your seat the entire time. With alot of surprises and suspense.
Very enjoyable, one of the best movies this year.

Absolute Masterpiece
This movie is by far once of the best movies I have seen in a very very long time. One guy made the comment that Denzel didnt have a character that was believeable, this couldnt be anymore further from the truth. This movie is great from opening credit to the closing credits. Denzel once again not only wows me but Dakota Fanning did an outstanding job also. Anybody that hasnt seen this movie really needs to take the time and watch this. GREAT, AWESOME movie. you will all be happy you did...September 14th cant come soon enough.....5 stars isnt a good enough rating for this movie but its all i can give it

GO SEE THIS ... Read more

Reviews (73)

Have you noticed that no one ever gives this film 3 stars...
It's always 1 or 5 (the occasional 2 or 4 are just cowards...). This is a film you either adore or detest. Those who adore it (moi, for instance, as the 5 star rating clearly indicates) are usually very patient movie watchers who like to watch a film unfold at its own pace. How many films can you name that are still going through exposition an hour and half into the film?

David Bern once said that movies are nothing but pictures and images; stories are just a trick to get you to watch them. You could turn off the sound and mix up the reels (some probably think that happened when they saw it in the theatre), and this would still be a feast for the eyes. Cimino's lush vision of Montana is overwhelming. It's like a stroll through a moving Bierstadt exhibition. It contains pieces that are almost perfect acts of filmmaking - such as the skating sequence, which could stand alone as a short (the 1 star folks just stopped reading, muttering the word "dilatant" under their collective breaths).

But despite its cinematic saturation, Heaven's Gate has a powerful, complex story. It's a story about class barbarism, and how the American Aristocracy of the last century committed mass murder in the West, with the help of the Government and the Military. It has a love story between two people who wouldn't have touched each other in the "civilized" East. It has intense performances by Isabella Hupert, Kris Kristofferson, Christopher Walken, Sam Waterston, et al.

Yes, this is clearly not a film for everyone - in fact, if it was made for anyone, it was for Michael Cimino - but it is a film that some of us are glad was made. If you like LONG, CHALLANGING films by self-indulgent artists, rent it - and if you love it, you'll have to buy it; and if you hate it, well, you probably wasted five bucks and couldn't even get to the second tape...

How the West was Won
Cimino may not have made a blockbuster, but he did make one of the best Westerns in cinematic history. Unfortunately, most people can't sit through a 4-hour movie. If you are one of those persons who can appreciate a complex narrative, delivered by a stunning cast, that tells a more candid tale of the West, then "Heaven's Gate" is a real treat.

Cimino has collected a set of compelling stories that swirl around the range wars of the Montana. He relates these stories through his protaganist, a federal marshall played by Kris Kristofferson. His thoughts drift back to Harvard Yard in the opening sequence, where he reveled in the commencement ceremonies with his old schoolmate, John Hurt. Much of this scene was chopped out in the theatrical release, undermining the content of the film. It is this Eastern view, which Cimino wants you to take note of. How one can meld into the West as Kristofferson does, and how one can become part and parcel of the cattle syndicate as Hurt did.

The stories mainly focus around the Eastern European immigrants who attempted to carve out a life in late 19th-century Montana. They came up against the great cattle syndicates, who owned much of the range, leaving little for the immigrants to settle on. Cimino gives you a very intimate view of the events. His camera angles take you right into the action. This is a very visceral movie.

Eventually these immigrants come up against the cattle barons, who had formed their own vigilante gangs in an attempt to combat the encroachment of the new settlers on their land. Kristofferson has grown close to the immigrants and eventually chooses to support their claims, leading to a final gut-wrenching confrontation, which includes his old schoolmate, John Hurt.

The cast is first rate. Walken, Bridges, Huppert, Watterston all give excellent performances. Cimino has inverted many of the myths that surround the Old West, and provided a living history. The film almost has the quality of a sepia tone, as he has muted his colors to give the sense of age. The [fourty]... million budget seems paltry by toda's standards, but at the time it was one of the most expensive films ever made. Unfortunately, not everyone was ready for it.

Quite Possibly the Most Maligned Picture Ever Made
When self-appointed film experts talk about the worst movies of all time, Heaven's Gate invariably enters the conversation. Until the release of Ishtar, this depiction of the Johnson County War in the late 19th Century enjoyed the dubious distinction of being the biggest box office flop of all time. In my view, however, a box office flop doesn't necessarily denote a bad movie. A bad movie is one with low production values, bad effects, and/or muddled script, like Plan 9 From Outer Space or Manos: The Hands of Fate. Heaven's Gate, though it may have been a box office flop, is actually a very good movie that got it's undeserved reputation due to director Michael Cimino's obsession with perfection. This resulted in multiple takes of scenes that most directors could have shot in one or two. Ultimately, the picture cost three or four times its original budget to make. Negative pre-release publicity from a reporter who managed to get into the film as an extra after Cimino refused to grant him an interview, and the critical shellacking that it received from the critics when released, conspired with the well reported cost overruns to doom Heaven's Gate before it was even out of the starting gate.

Personally, I like this movie. And while I appreciate Cimino's insistence on period authenticity in such things as trains, costuming and sets but I have a problem reconciling it to a script that takes such artistic liberties with recorded history. The real Jim Averill was a cattle ruster who along with his wife was hanged. He was not the noble sheriff with an Ivy League background as portrayed in the film by Kris Kristofferson. Nevertheless, Heaven's Gate is a superb motion picture in many respects. The cinematography by Villnos Zsigmond is nothing short of magnificent, and the acting performances are all good, especially those of Kristofferson, John Hurt, and Christopher Walken. Although many previous reviewers have criticized the sound quality, I found nothing wrong with it. I also didn't find the plot all that hard to follow, as others claim. Perhaps they expected the movie to give them a clue without any sort of thinking on their own. Of all the complaints that have been levelled against Heaven's Gate, the only one I think that has any merit to it is that the pacing is painfully slow. That said, I don't believe it distracts significantly from the enjoyment of the movie. Incidentally, have I mentioned that David Mansfield's score (sadly, not in print) is beautiful?

Sure, Heaven's Gate is considered to be a flop. But I would suggest to anyone reading this review that you watch it for yourself and decide. It's really not as bad a movie as others have led you to believe it is.

Check it out for the camerawork; there's nothing else there
"Heaven's Gate" is one of the most beautifully photographed films ever made. Every frame seems almost antique, a dazzling combination of sunlit exteriors and naturally lit interiors with candles and oil lamps that give the film a burnish unlike any other.

And there's several brillantly directed sequences that are unlike anything in any other film. A hyper-active rollerskating dance that transforms into a waltz between the romantic leads. A massive graduation dance on the lawn of Harvard (actually shot at Oxford) that is breathtaking in its scope.

However, all this camerawork and virtuoso editing is wrapped around one of the dullest screenplays ever written. The story is so simple, it could have been covered in 90 minutes instead of 3 hours and 40 minutes, and most of the movie consists of long pensive silences between the actors that lack any kind of dramatic interest or narrative thrust. The movie meanders, wanders, stops dead in its tracks, only occasionally remembering to pick up the storyline and go somewhere with it.

Kristofferson is utterly passive and uninteresting.

The film spends its first half-hour setting up a friendship between Kristofferson and John Hurt that has no bearing or meaning to to the storyline.

The love triangle aspect is contrived and dull.

And the victimized immigrants in the film are so shrill, panicky, and annoying that you almost wish they'd get killed.

Pictorially, the film is a masterpiece. But as a narrative film, it utterly fails on every level.....never before has so much care gone into making a film with so little substance.

As you can tell, this is a very ambivelent review. I think "Heaven's Gate" is worth a viewing just for those lovely images and sequences.....pure eye candy. Just don't expect to be entertained past that level.

Cimino's Hellish Disaster
I was one of the people who went to see this movie when it first came out in New York City - if you blinked, you missed it because it was pulled after one week! That's an indication of how bad this movie really is.

While I was watching the movie, I started trying to read lips because the sound was just so horrendous, you could barely hear or understand what was being said - I'm not kidding. I could hear wagon wheels turn and horses trot better than I could the actor's voices. By the end of the movie my glutimus maximus was numb - along with the expressions on the audience's faces. You could hear a pin drop in the place - then the avalanche of boos and scathing reviews started pouring down. I've never experienced anything like it before or since.

The scenery and music is fantastic, everything else is truly horrendous. Cimino had over 200 hours of film which needed to be cut down to between 2 and 3 hours - it's impossible to make a cohesive, intelligent movie from such a huge amount of film - storylines get trimmed or cut completely leaving you to wonder what the heck is going on or why certain things seemed disjointed and/or untold.

You're left wondering how someone who created a spectacular movie like The Deer Hunter could have become so self-absorbed that he created a disaster of enormous proportions. $40 million might not seem like much nowawdays, but in 1980, it was a heckuva lot of money. (It's equivalent to $100,000,000 today!)

Such a shame that Cimino threw his career down the toilet with this movie. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Robert Redford's underrated directorial follow-up to his Academy Award-winning Ordinary People, The Milagro Beanfield War is a loose and whimsical fable about community pride and social activism in the face of modern progress. Sonia Braga (Kiss of the Spider Woman) plays a local mechanic in a small New Mexico town who takes up the challenge of rallying support for a local farmer who uses water owned by a real estate developer to grow beans in his field. Everything escalates to a showdown between the townspeople and the developers, with unexpected results. The strongest aspect of the film is the way it doesn't take itself too seriously, with Redford adopting a leisurely tone and allowing his fine cast (including Ruben Blades as the pragmatic town sheriff and Christopher Walken as a nasty state police officer) to deliver finely nuanced performances that touch on themes of faith and perseverance without seeming heavy-handed. The Milagro Beanfield War is an overlooked gem. --Robert Lane ... Read more

Reviews (36)

A real New Mexican comments
You can read in other reviews about the DVD quality, the excellent cinematography, and the passable acting (a bit over-acted on Sonia Bragga's part, but not as bad as in "moon Over Parador").Redford is also a good director.If you can choke down another socialist good-people-of-the-land versus greedy developer plot, this isn't a bad film.

Milagro in reality is Truchas, NM, a very old hardscrabble Spanish farm village between Chimayo and Penasco (that's in the real high country north of Santa Fe).Water rights are indeed sacred there and it is a delightful area if you don't mind a snowy winter and being a long way from a supermarket.or the new age nutballs coming in from Santa Fe.....

But it's not the edenic area the film makes it out.This would have been a way better film if the director and writer had admitted that the average folk in that area have really severe drug problems and aren't exactly high on smarts or initiative.

Nonetheless, a cute little film and a great look at my home asrea in glorious northern NM.

DVD should be splendid.
I received the UK DVD release of The Milagro Beanfield War several months ago and the digital transfer of this beautiful film is truly breathtaking-- the saturated colors, the wonderful New Mexico light. If the British DVD is any indication, viewers should be in for a very special treat. A great cast. A warm, whimsical slice of life which affectionately captures the wonderful essence of New Mexico, the Land of Enchantment. Not to be missed!!!

Overlooked for far too long
Others have summarized the plot below so I will try to add a few relevant thoughts.First of all, the story is basically a skim off the John Nichols novel.Like all his books, it is so deep in back story that no movie can contain more than a tithe of the actual narrative.This screenplay actually does it justice, though.The strength of the work is not the plot but the characters.In Nichols' novel, each character has such richness and depth, they become very much alive and real.Sadly, no movie can ever capture all of that, but I think Redford's efforts here managed to pick up enough of it to make the film work because the most important character in the film is the town of Milagro itself.By getting even a glimpse of such venerable old-timers as Amarante Cordova, Onofre Martinez, and Nick Rael's crazy mother, we understand much more of Milagro's personality.

Within the movie we get some very nice depth added to other characters, as well.Reuben Blades as Sheriff Bernabe Montoya, for example, is tripping over his feet jumping a ditch in one scene and using cunning wisdom to disarm a firefight in the next.Sonia Braga's passive-aggressive manipulation of John Heard's lawyer-activist is brilliantly played by both of them.James Gammon as Horsethief Shorty, the one Anglo who may love Milagro as much as the local Hispanics, is perfectly played, as well.

The film is beautifully photographed and Redford's love of the American Southwest is visually documented here with a very nice touch.The soundtrack also adds a lot of character to the piece and is very well placed.Finally, two small roles that I thought added a lot to the movie were Julie Carmen as Nancy Mondragon, Joe's wife, and also Freddy Fender as Milagro's mayor, Sammy Cantu.

Overall, this is one of those movies that isn't so much about what happens in the film as it is about how the director and the actors portray it, which in this case is done beautifully.

Great Film-Better News
Milagro is the classic good vs. evil/David vs. Goliath story but not as serious as most of the others. The little guy occasionally gets help from the strangest places-his own townfolk. This is a great family movie with minimal profanity.
Now the good news-thanks to all the letters to the distributor, this will be released in Region 1 DVD on or about may 31, 2005.
Horrayyy!!!!! for the little guy-you and I can make a difference.

A Former New Mexican
It's Christmas and two years since we left New Mexico.I wanted to order The Milagro Beanfield War for my husband for Christmas and was so sad to find it's not available on DVD.I was in Santa Fe for the premiere and saw Robert Redford strollng around the plaza.
It's a beautiful movie; full of humor, great characters and beautiful scenery.
We can't get green chile or our Christmas tamales here, but had hoped to feel New Mexico again by watching this movie.I hope to see it soon on DVD. ... Read more

Reviews (66)

Surfing through Warhol's '80s
Painter Julian Schnabel made his film directing debut with his impressionistic biography of his late friend and fellow '80s Warhol hanger-on, Jean-Michel Basquiat. A charismatic, young heroin addict, Basquiat started out as a graffiti artist who called himself SAMO (as in samo bulls--t) and, depending on where your aesthetic tastes fall, his success represented either a great rebirth of artistic orgininality OR yet another sign that the American art scene was becoming a victim of trendiness. The same, of course, was said of Schnabel at the same time. Luckily for myself as a viewer of this film, I'm in the former camp. For the latter group or the growing number of people who see, "I don't know nothing about art but I like what I see," as the height of critical thinking, this film probably isn't for them.

Told in a freeform fashion, Schnabel's vision of Basquiat's life is rather uneven. The story is occasionally rather muddled (Basquiat's rise from homeless drug addict to prodigal Warhol son seems to come out of nowhere) and plotwise, Schnabel is rather conventional in his structure -- Basquiat reaches the heights of fame and forgets all of his former friends before being redeemed at the end. (His own eventual death of a heroin overdose isn't shown beyond a title card at the end credits -- though the film strongly hints it was related to his own depression concerning the death of Andy Warhol.) However, the film is also blessed with occasional flashes of genius that make this a film that is worth watching. Not surprisingly, Schnabel has a strong visual sense and he uses his limited budget to his advantage, capturing a strange sort of grimy fantasy world. Some of his enigmatic images are haunting. Basquiat continually sees an image of a lone figure surfing whenever he looks up to the sky. Why does this child of New York have this surfer in his head? No explanation is given or really needed. The surfer just happens to be there, just as Basquiat's artistic talent just happened to be there -- unexplainable but definitely real.

Schnabel also proves himself to be a capable director of actors. The film is full of cameos from the actors who always seem to show up in independent, art cinema and at first sight, the cast list looks a little self-conciously hip. At the same time, the celebrity casting somehow works brilliantly. Early on in the film, Basquiat stares through a window at the Warhol crowd standing in an art gallery. That "crowd" is made up of David Bowie, Dennis Hopper, Gary Oldman, and several other recognizable faces and its somewhat jarring to see all of these familiar actors gathered together -- just as it was probably jarring for Basquiat to stare at the "icons" of his world. Plus, for the most part, these actors all give strong performances and don't just coast on their image. Bowie, especially, surprised me as Warhol. Its not a deep performance but at the same time, he never allows the artist to become a fey caricature. Parker Posey is wonderfully haughty as gallery owner Mary Boone while unusually restrained work comes from unexpected sources like Dennis Hopper, Paul Bartel, and Willem DaFoe. Christopher Walken has a wonderful cameo as a pretentious interviewer and nicely satirizes his own intense image. Of the supporting cast, the four strongest performances are given by Clare Forlani (who has never been allowed to be a strong and sexy as she is here as Basquiat's lover), Michael Wincott and a pre-traffic Benecio Del Toro (playing early friends of Basquiat -- Del Toro especially has some hilarious monologues early on), and Gary Oldman who is basically playing Julian Schnabel and brings a wonderfully arrogant glee to his scenes. (A highlight, late in the film, is the image of Oldman dancing with his daughter in front of one of Schnabel's trademark epic canvasses).

The best performance and the linchpin that holds the film together comes from Geoffrey Wright who found his first taste of fame playing the doomed Jean-Michel Basquiat. Wright, quite simply, is a revelation. He brings a touch of childlike vulnerablity to a character who isn't always extremely sympathetic and manages to add a much needed cohesion to Schnabel's uneven composition. His scenes following Warhol's death are especially haunting. Much as Schanbel's second film introduced many of us to Javeir Bardem, Basquiat serves as an introduction to Wright as well. When Wright sees his surfer, you don't wonder what a surfer's doing above the New York skyline as much as you share Basquiat's (and Wright's) excitement at what possibilities the future might hold.

Deep movie about a shallow art scene.
Basquiat (Julian Schnabel, 1996)

Schnabel has made two films in five years. I'm still wondering why the man hasn't yet been immortalized. Less talented directors have gotten stars on the Walk of Fame for less accomplishment than Schnabel showed with his second film, Before Night Falls, alone. His first, Basquiat, is damned close to being as good, and yet it fell almost completely below the radar of American cinema upon its release, despite a stable of talent so broad it's almost ludicrous.

Schnabel (played in the film by Gary Oldman, incidentally-- and Schnabel's real-life family plays Oldman's family in the film. heh.) gives us the story of Jean-Michel Basquiat, one of the brightest lights of New York's avant-garde art movement in the seventies and eighties before his 1988 overdose. Basquiat himself is played by the always-engaging Jeffrey Wright (recently seen giving Sam Jackson trouble in _Shaft_), and while the film never fails to center on Basquiat himself, Wright's brilliantly low-key performance seems almost a backdrop for a slew of A-list actors in minor roles (Willem Dafoe, Christopher Walken, Dennis Hopper, Tatum O'Neal, etc.) and up-and-coming stars who have since gone on to eclipse even Wright (Benecio del Toro, Courtney Love, Vincent Gallo, Linda Larkin, Caire Forlani, Michael Badalucco, et al.). But the show is truly stolen by David Bowie as (a believable, believe it or not) Andy Warhol. Bowie doesn't do a whole lot of acting, but when he does, he's usually wonderful at it (viz. The Hunger, Christiane F., etc.). He takes it to new heights here, and Bowie and Wright give a sense of the friendship between Warhol and Basquiat that does far more in far less screen time than most buddy movies could dream about. Of course, that may be because Schnabel, an artist himself, is a virtuoso at conveying the shallowness of the New York art scene. What's more, he manages to do so without turning Basquiat into a shallow film. Not an easy task, by any means.

Fantastic all the way around. **** 1/2

abysmal twaddle about egocentric junkies
Good performances can't save this self-indulgent tale of yet another artist whose out of control ego is supposed to be interesting to the viewer. Even the scenes of his "creative process" are meaningless, and no better than watching a wall being defaced by spray paint; somehow we are made to assume Basquiat is an inventive genius, when what the screen shows us is a man who has no respect for anyone (for instance, there is a scene where he goes to a lovely home for dinner, and urinates in the hallway), no gratitude to those who help him become famous, and is more interested in self-promotion than art.

It has a stellar cast of character actors, among them David Bowie, who shines as Andy Warhol (and is sporting one of Warhol's actual wigs), and Gary Oldman as "Albert Milo", which is an alias for artist and writer/director of this film, Julian Schnabel, and uses Schnabel's paintings, including one he made for Basquiat (the one he shows Jeffrey Wright/Basquiat saying he painted it for a friend who died).
The reproductions of Basquiat's work were also done by Schnabel.

Will Basquiat's work be known 100 years from now ? I doubt it; though it is lauded now, I believe time will reveal it to be no more than glorified graffiti.
For superior films on other self-obsessed, but far better artists, see "Pollock" or "Surviving Picasso", for a humorless depiction of substance abusing bores, an aimless script, and jumpy editing, this is your film. Total running time 1 hour and 46 minutes.

Watch and listen
I'm totally ignorant of art, but this film is very exciting especially in Jeffrey Wright's scenes with actors Claire Forlani, Michael Wincott, and Benicio Del Toro. The way Basquiat's success changes his relationship with his girlfriend and friends and the way he seemingly unwittingly uses people and is also used by people makes for great entertainment. I'm not sure about the Andy Warhol scenes, and nothing much is learned of the relationship between he and Basquiat, but I enjoyed the reunion at the end between Basquiat and his pre-fame best friend Benny. My two favorite scenes would be the one where Basquiat ruins his girlfriend's painting sparking a wonderful argument and the scene between Basquiat and Benny in the car when Basquiat accuses Benny of being a racist. Benicio Del Toro's response is awesome in this scene: "What gives you the audacity to even think that..." I really appreciate the fact that Jeffrey Wright's performance does not allow Basquiat to become merely a symbol for oh-so-cool self-destructive artists. At times he is sweetly sympathetic and at other times he is very irritating and self-righteous. What I think is tragic about the film's Basquiat is that he is constantly being judged based on his race and set apart rather than being embraced solely for his artistic talent. Although Schnabel is an artist himself I don't feel the film is a visual film, it is visual/audio similar to Scorcese's Mean Streets but without that film's violence. The music soundtrack is so important and the songs are so well chosen that it feels like many of the scenes were filmed to fit a specific song. The wonderful soundtrack includes songs by The Pogues, Tom Waits, Van Morrison, Miles Davis, and John Cale. I especially like the use of the songs Fairytale of New York and Summer in Siam by The Pogues and Hallelujah by John Cale. Great music fills plot holes and connects fragmented scenes together. For me the dialogue is very musical as well, especially as delivered by such uniquely talented actors. This film can be watched many times without becoming boring, and therefore I recommend owning it.

Too fragile for the World / Excellent Film
Basquiat is an amazing true life story of a man too fragile for the world. Jean Michel Basquiat posessed a child like quality that made people want to help him and an innate charisma that made people want to be around him. This is a man that was almost too creative for this world a tortured soul who could not deal with fame Julian Schnabel captures that in this film. This movie really depicts his struggle with fame. Basquiat wanting fame / recognition so badly then finally reaching it & not knowing how to or can't deal with it. The acting is phenominal Jeffrey Wright is amazing he is Basqiuat in this movie to the exact detail. David Bowie plays a great Andy Warhol. The cinematography and symbolism in the film is incredible there's a scene where Basqiuat is walking down the street and sees on a billboard a man surfing catching a wave which pretty much symbilizes his drive & wanting to be at the top. This film also captures that exciting time in the early 80's where art met music & fashion when artists were the superstars. Sad story of an eccentric man whose talent was exploited & became more of an image then a soul. A must see I own it on VHS one of my top 10 favorite films, the soundtrack rocks too. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Annie Hall is one of the truest, most bittersweet romances on film. In it, Allen plays a thinly disguised version of himself: Alvy Singer, a successful--if neurotic--television comedian living in Manhattan. Annie (the wholesomely luminous Dianne Keaton) is a Midwestern transplant who dabbles in photography and sings in small clubs. When the two meet, the sparks are immediate--if repressed. Alone in her apartment for the first time, Alvy and Annie navigate a minefield of self-conscious"is-this-person-someone-I'd-want-to-get-involved-with?" conversation. As they speak, subtitles flash their unspoken thoughts: the likes of "I'm not smart enough for him" and "I sound like a jerk." Despite all their caution, they connect, and we're swept up in the flush of their new romance. Allen's antic sensibility shines here in a series of flashbacks to Alvy's childhood, growing up, quite literally, under a rumbling roller coaster. His boisterous Jewish family's dinner table shares a split screen with the WASP-y Hall's tight-lipped holiday table, one Alvy has joined for the first time. His position as outsider is uncontestable he looks down the table and sizes up Annie's "Grammy Hall" as "a classic Jew-hater."

The relationship arcs, as does Annie's growing desire for independence. It quickly becomes clear that the two are on separate tracks, as what was once endearing becomes annoying. Annie Hall embraces Allen's central themes--his love affair with New York (and hatred of Los Angeles), how impossible relationships are, and his fear of death. But their balance is just right, the chemistry between Allen's worry-wart Alvy and Keaton's gangly, loopy Annie is one of the screen's best pairings. It couldn't be more engaging. --Susan Benson ... Read more

Reviews (115)

Annie Hall has truly stood the test of time. And I loved it
I have a confession to make.

Until now, I've never seen a Woody Allen movie.

Boy, I sure was a "miss out".

Annie Hall, made in 1977, is a classic. Why, oh why, did I wait so long?

First of all it's a story, and a very funny story at that, about a New York Jewish comedian, played by Woody Allen and his WASP girlfriend, played by Diane Keaton. It pokes fun at many social mores that we take for granted and I found myself laughing throughout. There's the New Yorker who never learns to drive, the mid-westerner who orders a pastrami sandwich on white bread with mayonnaise (which seems almost grotesque to a New Yorker like me), the pretentious movie critic, the neuroses of modern romances, and the differences between the New York and Los Angeles way of life.

The film runs along at such a fast pace that there is almost no time at all between funny moments. And, to make it even better, there are some wonderful film techniques. For example, while Diane Keaton and Woody Allen are talking about photography, there are subtitles on the screen about the physical relationship that they are really thinking about.

If the film were made today the phone calls would have been made on cell phones. But surprisingly, that is the only detail that might be changed. Annie Hall has really truly stood the test of time. And I loved it.

Quintessential Woody, in arguably his best form..
Plenty of reviews here claim this is Woody's best and I'm hard-pressed to differ: chronic New York neurotic/comedy writer Alvy Singer can't commit to anything except his own misery and falls in love (and meets his match in psychoses) with Annie Hall (Diane Keaton in her Oscar-winning role), the Waspy flibbertigibbet who wants more out of life but she's not sure what. Oscars also for Allen's direction, his screenplay (co-written by Marshall Brickman) and Best Picture. Look quickly for Jeff Goldblum's cameo ("I forgot my mantra") at Paul Simon's So. Cal. Party, John Glover in a flashback party scene with Annie, Shelley Hack in a sidewalk scene, veteran character actor Tracey Walter and Beverly D'Angelo in the sitcom tape Roberts is sweetening with a laugh track in an edit bay, Woody's longtime friend and future producer Jean Doumanian in the coke scene, and at the film's end Sigourney Weaver (trust me it's her, but it is in a long shot and no dialogue) as Alvy's latest girlfriend. Best reaction shot: Allen with Keaton and Walken in a car after Walken has proclaimed his sudden urges of death. Also, I too wish I could do what Allen does in shutting up a movie-line pontificator like he does with media expert Marashall McLuhan.

A superb and passionately funny film between the hot cold relationship between two people. Woody Allen delivers the goods in this terribly witty and romantic film, Diane Keaton matches his quality too. Expect to see neurotic behaviour from Allen as we get a firm grasp of the two main characters as their relationship develops. For me, this is an absolute pinnacle film of it's genre and should not be missed.

Brilliant!
Woody's self searching and unique form of humor make this a brilliant movie. Diane Keaton is the perfect co-star.

I saw this last year after not seeing it since it came out in the late 1970's...still just as fresh and wonderful. I just wish my wife liked Woody Allen humor as much as I do.

Not His Best but Still Very Good
People just adore Annie Hall. I like Annie Hall. Manhattan and Hannah and Her Sisters work better for me but I can think of about a billion worse ways to spend 90 minutes than watching Annie Hall. Even though I'm not particularly charmed by it, I freely admit Annie Hall is better than 98% of all American movies ever. Funny, smart and endearingly offbeat. Certainly worth the going price.

Because we need the eggs
Ok, let me get this one thing out of the way: when I was 12, Annie Hall beat Star Wars for the Best Picture Academy Award, and I was not a happy kid. However, time can do funny things...

I first saw this picture a few years later, with my first real girlfriend (hi, Lisa!) on the revival circuit. I found it witty and intelligent, as I have with most of Woody Allen's films. I have to say that, to my 16-year-old mind, it still didn't make a huge impression. Twenty years and a failed marriage later, however, I think I can honestly say that I now get it.

Annie Hall is, to me, Woody Allen's greatest triumph as a filmmaker and a storyteller. It's a bittersweet, often hilarious recounting of a relationship from its start to its inevitable end. We see Allen at his most honest, at times brutal examination of himself and his destructive approach to relationships as he plays Alvy Singer, a funny, neurotic comedian (not a great stretch for Woody, granted). All the angst, the neuroses, and manic phobias that at first seem so idiosyncratic and charming, eventually become tiring and sad. Here is a man who is so attached to his psychoses that he would be an empty shell without them, and we see the painful fact of this in his reflections of previous relationships and marriages throughout the course of his adult life. Ultimately, this is a character so galvanized by his fears and phobias that he is simply incapable of managing a complex adult relationship, one free of paranoia and anxiety and this is his tragic downfall. In short, he is a small child trapped in the body of a small man.

This is not, however, one of Allen's Bergmanesque forays into introspection. The knee-slapping hilarity of many of the scenes help draw us into his world and the relationship he has with Annie (Diane Keaton, marvelous as always), his friends, his family, and the world around him. A particular favorite is when, on their first meeting, Alvy and Annie exchange basic getting-to-know-you small talk, and their hidden meanings and anxieties are shown to us in subtitles. Other scenes involving a movie-line blowhard, a lost mantra, and Annie's decidedly white-bread family are the stuff of legend, and they never fail to bring a smile to my face.

Though this film is nearing thirty-years old, it shows no sign of aging. The themes are familiar and universal; who hasn't fallen desperately in love, only to feel the painful tentacles of fear come creeping in the moment they've opened their heart for all the world to see? This film will never lose its place in my heart as one of the best films I've ever seen. ... Read more

Reviews (94)

Mystery and Suspense Without Sherlock Holmes
One of the finest suspense movies that I have seen in long time. Avery has had the unfortunate luck to have his sister kidnapped and ransomed for $2,000,000. Unfortunately, neither he nor his father have that kind of money. So he and his friends kidnap retired mob boss Charlie Bartolucci (expertly played by Christopher Walken) so that he can use his contacts to find the girl and pay the ransom. Shocked, angered, and ultimately amused by his novice captors, Bartolucci agrees to help with Avery's sister. While doing so, one of his contacts lets him know that the kidnapping had help from an inside party. Slyly playing the friends against each other with this information, the tension slowly continues to boil until the movie's explosive climax. With an underrated but excellent supporting cast (including Jay Mohr, Sean Patrick Flanery, and Denis Leary), this movie keeps you on the edge of your seat the entire time because you're never sure who to trust. Perhaps the most brilliant aspect of Josh McKinney's script is the unending depth of the characters. Denis Leary's role is a perfect example: as Bartolucci's lieutenaant he posesses an expected viciousness and sarcasm. However, he allows a good soul to shine through at odd moments: like when he shows up to question a friend of the boys and instead protects her from the forced advances of her stepfather. Filled with tension that is only heightened by the film's biting humor and its complex characters, this is a great flick to watch with a bunch of friends so you can all guess whodunnit and be shocked by the ending.

Very Funny and Dark
"Suicide Kings" is a very good movie with a great ensemble cast. Different viewers will chose their particular favorites, but if you are an admirer of Christopher Walken you have all the reason you need to see this film. Denis Leary is the second best aspect of this film, and that is largely due to his smaller, but critical role. His defensive riffs on justifying his $1500.00 Stingray boots that others acknowledge as, "fish-boots", is quality stand up material.

Four prep-school, rich kid, lifelong friends, and a fifth that they mislead as only friends can do, decide they need to kidnap Christopher Walken for his diplomatic skills. His character is a modern version of Don Corleone so a decision to detain him against his will is poor judgment at best and lethal at worst. When Walken contacts his attorney to unravel this mess his first comments include, "don't send your kids to boarding school". The unwitting friend Ira, as played by Johnny Galecki is a riot as he frets over his parents newly finished floors and marked liquor labels, while, "The Godfather", is duct-taped to his father's favorite chair.

Christopher Walken is an amazing actor that deserves more recognition than he has been given. If there is an actor who can play a more sinister, purely evil character, without raising his voice, I have never seen him. This role is comparable to the part he played in another film when he introduced himself as the Anti-Christ. As brilliant a, "Player", as his character is, there is also a pair of low level goons that are the mob's equivalent of Laurel and Hardy.

The R rating is appropriate for the violence, and language that may or may not offend some viewers. There are no, "adult situations".

A movie to watch time after time
I don't exactally know what made me watch this movie. I think my dad picked it up from some $5 bin and one day while bored out of my mind I picked it up a random movie and decided to watch it. But I am glad that I watched it for sure. It is a movie that I have literally watched twice in the last week (well that could be due to the fact that I have nothing better to do...) and cracked up thru both times. and everytime i watch this movie knowing the ending I am still questioning who the inside player is and how everything is going to end. basically it is in my top 5 favorite movies of all time and it is a movie tht i recommend to everyone who likes dar comedies and doesnt mind blood and cussing.

Christopher Walken the Great.
Great script, great directing, great acting, great movie. it is a blend of crime drama and thin satire. it combines very smoothly the abilities of great actors (Christopher Walken)with the exuberance of young prospects. and Dennis Leary was born for his role in this motion picture.
this is a must have for any christopher walken fan, and movie lovers in general. you will not be dissapointed, especially with the deleted scenes and alternate endings extras. enjoy.

1 of my favs
christopher walken is a mob boss kidnapped for ransom by a bunch of college kids who didnt plan well dennis leary is the mob boss hitmen coming to find the kids who kidnapped his boss to compound the problem the kids cutoff the mob boss fingers then regret it and panic a dark comedy/thriller many people have not seen cause its an independent film buy this killer dvd today ... Read more

Reviews (173)

Crystal Comedy Sparkles
Billy Crystal writes, produces and stars in a "boy-loses-girl", "boy-gets-girl" tale with a twist or two along the way. Crystal plays Lee the publicist sent to placate the media with a "junket" and get separated "American Sweethearts" Gwen Harrison (Catherine Zeta-Jones) and Eddie Thomas (John Cusack) back together again. Gwen is the self-centered movie star sister with a Spanish live-in lover with a lisp, Hector, played by Hank Azaria. Eddie is the soon to be ex-husband who has spent the last six months with his East Indian guru, Alan Arkin, getting over being betrayed. Julia Roberts as sweet sister Kiki is Gwen's personal assistant who also happens to be in love with her brother-in-law. Can you imagine a fat Julia Roberts? Flashbacks show us Kiki before she slimmed down. A great cast that also includes Christopher Walken in a pivotal bit part and a cameo appearance by Larry King. Great fun!!

Cute and entertaining
Catherine Zeta-Jones plays the star actress with a diva attitude, Julia Roberts is her ever-so-kind and helpful sister and personal assistant, and John Cusack is the love-sick estranged husband of Catherine Zeta-Jones'. Although they have been living apart for a year, are going to be divorced, and try to avoid each other, Zeta-Jones and Cusack both star in a movie which the movie's producer is anxious to earn big bucks from. Billy Cristal is the PR guy hired by the movie's producer to encourage (let's say, "dupe") Zeta-Jones and Cusack into making a star appearance at the film's premiere and he also orchestrates a series of "scandals" for the reporters and tabloids, just to make more money (as they say, no publicity is bad publicity, or something like that.) In the process, Zeta-Jones and Cusack end up in all sorts of funny, embarassing circumstances which they both try very desperately to extricate themselves from.

Cusack is not at his best, but he's entertaining. Roberts is looking good (and I wonder if she did really put on all that weight for this movie, cos it looks so real!). Zeta-Jones is stunning and ever-so-convincing in these diva roles.

I wouldn't say this is a great movie... but its a good one for renting for those nights in (with lots of crisps and popcorn at the side!). It does have enough unpredictability and gags in it to keep you chuckling, and the nice little happy ending will make you go "Awwww...." with a smile :)

Cusack is America's Sweetheart
This is Cusack at his best . . . quirky, new age, obsessive over Catherine Zeta-Jones, who is the most loveable self-absorbed prima donna ever to grace a screen.

I'm mad about this movie, it is probably the one that pushed me over the Cusack edge.

Star Studded Folly
How did someone take a light-hearted but cute premise, big name stars, and turn it into such a lame and inane film? The talent is obviously there, but the movie simply doesn't work. Alternating between over-the-top (which I think was the point) and deadly dull (which probably wasn't), this film stalls and fizzles.

Won't Win Any Oscars
This movie wasn't amazing, but it was a cute story. It was interesting to think about everything that goes into publicizing a movie, and what the actors are like in real life. Crystal's character was very funny. See it at some point if you don't have anything better to do, but don't spend too much on it. ... Read more

Description

In THE STEPFORD WIVES, Walter (Broderick) and Joanna (Kidman) Eberhart are the newest residents in a suburban neighborhood in Stepford. Seeing that the women she surrounds herself with all seem to be cut from the same mold, and are seemingly incapable of thinking for themselves, Joanna begins to think something suspicious is going on in Stepford.Upon realizing that her friends have been replaced by robots and that she's next on the list, Joanna and Walter decide to turn the tables and expose the truth about what's really been going on in Stepford. ... Read more

Reviews (73)

Under-appreciated
Honestly. This movie really is underappreciated. Aside from an all-star cast, the plot really isn't -that- bad. I will admit that there are a few holes, (Okay, so there are more than a few....) but it all made sense to me. The part about how the wives are Stepford-ized really should have been cleared up, but I didn't think it was that hard to understand.

The actors in this movie made it come to life. Nicole Kidman had my attention from the beginning, all the way through to the end. She is such an amazing actress, and deserves a lot more credit than she gets. Bette Midler, as always, does a bang-up job. She is incredibly hysterical, and has some of the best lines in the movie (The stuff about pine cones is a riot.) Christopher Walken is just as sinister as always, but he fits the role of Mike to a tee. Faith Hill was sorely under-used, but funny in the two words she did have. Glenn Close was wonderful, even if she didn't look her best, and Matthew Broderick...was in it. Don't get me wrong; I love him (especially in Ferris Bueller's Day Off), but he seemed slightly out of place in TSW.

There isn't exactly chemistry between Kidman and Broderick, but I think that's part of the whole point. I mean, they did have their moment after their fight on the stairs, and, of co urse, at the ending. Speaking of the ending, I thought it fit perfectly with the theme of the movie, even if it was extremely different from the ending of the first movie (which I haven't seen) and the book (which I have read). This new version of TSW isn't as dark and cynical as the original, or as the source novel, but it's message is more clear for today's MTV generation. All in all, I thought it was done very effectively, for all it's plot holes, and was just a generally entertaining movie. I didn't stop laughing from beginning to end, and I left the theater with a refreshed outlook on marriages today. Quite a feat from a two hour movie. Go see it. Soon. It's fun, and it's funny.

Remake marred by political correctness
In 1975, Katharine Ross starred in the original THE STEPFORD WIVES, in which an unsuspecting wife, Joanna Eberhart, moves with her loving husband to an idyllic town, where all the wives are suspiciously perfect and their husbands are up to something (besides Boys' Night Out playing cards) in a secretive men's association. The film was a low-key horror flick, and the ending would leave any respectable feminist seeing red, as in spilled male blood.

This 2004 version stars Nicole Kidman as the same Joanna, a high-powered, TV network CEO that's canned when one of her reality shows generates a lawsuit capable of bankrupting the organization. Her husband Walter (Matthew Broderick), a VP at the same network, quits in sympathy, and moves the family to a gated Connecticut town called Stepford so that Joanna can de-stress. Almost immediately, she perceives something wrong with all the other wives. They're almost all blonde, and invariable physically fit, perfect housekeepers, wonderful cooks, oversexed, and perkily devoted to their husbands' every whim. Only one woman seems "normal", the smart-mouthed, disorganized writer, Bobbie Markowitz (Bette Midler), who isn't afraid to sass her own demanding mate. But, after Joanna and Bobbie are almost caught one night while spying on the menfolk in their posh mansion clubhouse, the latter undergoes a terrifying transformation. And Joanna knows her days as an imperfect woman are numbered.

Besides gawking at the sumptuous Connecticut estates which provide the exterior location shots, the best reason to see this version of THE STEPFORD WIVES is the ever svelte and gorgeous Nicole Kidman as the high-strung and apprehensive Joanna. (How does she manage to stay so thin?!) The plot itself is more darkly comedic than the 1975 version. This, by itself, could have resulted in a more engaging film except that the screenwriters chose to extend the ending beyond that of the original into a denouement that, apparently thought necessary for the enlightened twenty-first century, had to be politically correct, and thus came out just silly. I felt like walking out of the theater during the last, over-the-top scene involving Claire Wellington (Glenn Close) and the head of her husband, Mike (Christopher Walken).

Women of the world, unite! By God and Gloria Steinem, those evil and smug males can't be allowed to get away with it!

great potential marred by a lack of consistency
A film by Frank Oz

Joanna (Nicole Kidman) is an executive who runs a television network. She seems to be responsible for some of the big reality shows that are being aired (we meet her as she is announcing several new shows that take "reality tv" to a ridiculous level). When one of the reality shows backfires in a public way, Joanna is fired from her job and suffers and emotional breakdown. It is to help Joanna and to begin a new life that her husband, Walter (Matthew Broderick) moves the family from the big city up to Connecticut to a town called Stepford.

Stepford seems like the perfect town. Everyone is pleasant, if a little too perky and perfect. Joanna and Walter are welcome to the community by Claire (Glenn Close). Claire seems to be the leader of the Stepford women's group and the town seems to be organized around the Men's Club and the Women's Day Spa. Walter is welcomed right into the Men's Club and he feels at home. Joanna, on the other hand, is very skeptical because all the women seem like they are exaggerations and someone else's idealizations. For example, the women all exercise wearing dresses because they wouldn't want their husbands to see them wearing black sweatsuits and have stringy hair (which was exactly what Joanna was wearing at the time). Joanna befriends Bobbie (Bette Midler) and Roger (Roger Bart), the only other two women who are not in the "Stepford" mold. A note about Roger: Roger is a gay man, but because he fits the stereotype so well of what a gay man is, he counts in Stepford as "one of the girls". Together, the three of them try to find out what is going on in Stepford and why the women are all so strange (and why one of them seemed to spark at the ears during a dance). Why are all the women such male fantasies and the men remain their geeky selves?

This 2004 adaptation of "The Stepford Wives" is more of a comedy than the horror leanings that the original is said to have had (I admit, I have not seen the original film, nor have I read the book). Since I cannot compare the film to either the novel or the original film, I can only work with what I am given on screen. The first half of the movie is fairly effective and interesting as the world of Stepford is being set up. The problem lies in the fact that the second half of the movie may or may not have contradicted information given in the first half. Something is going on with the women in Stepford, that is clear. The question is: What is going on with the women in Stepford. The term "Stepford Wives" is such a part of the Americal cultural lexicon that many people have an idea of what a Stepford Wife is, but the film never quite makes the connection. It sets up one idea, then gives us another idea, but in the end the film does not answer the question as to what exactly a Stepford Wife is. I am trying not to give away a spoiler, though the film's trailer gives away much of the twist of the movie, so the most I can say is that "The Stepford Wives" as a film does not seem to know exactly what a Stepford Wife is at the most technical level.

It is my confusion with what the premise of the film ultimately is (and thus what the ending means) that is leading to my growing dissatisfaction with "The Stepford Wives" as a movie. I enjoyed my time in the theatre watching this movie, and it is pleasant enough, but the inconsistency of the plot is enough to knock the film down a couple of notches.

-Joe Sherry

Pure Entertainment
With an all star cast like this film has and the filming location of Connecticut how could you go wrong. The film is extremely campy and has something for everyone to enjoy. Wonderful costumes, great acting, beautiful music just adds to the enjoyment of pure entertainment on a grand scale. This film does differ from the orginal but a few scenes are played out exactly as the older film but in extremely good taste. The new ending is just an added bonus and Matthew Broderick has that never aging cute face. There is no stress and no gore on viewing this film, just pure popcorn mutching, relaxing, laughing and having a good time. Enjoy!

Funny, but a misfire.
THE STEPFORD WIVES, as it was written, was supposed to be scary, but, in this version reimagined by director Frank Oz and screenwriter Paul Rudnick, it's a farce.

It's not a particularly successful farce, though it is occasionally funny. Nicole Kidman stars as a castrating, domineering harpy who's neglecting her family. Matthew Broderick is there but doesn't make much of an impression. Bette Midler's somewhat funny.

But co-star Roger Bart, playing a gay "Stepford Wife," and the magnificent Glenn Close pretty much steal the movie. ... Read more

Reviews (51)

Walken from Heaven with a taste of Hell
I am a die-hard Christopher Walken fan and this is by far the best movie of his career (the 2nd best being Prophecy 2). Sure this movie is about the battle between Heaven and Hell for the destiny of the entire human race, but who cares? It's Walken that matters. As the holy-turned-evil angel Gabriel he is extremely creepy and powerfully scary, but the awesome twist is that he is hilarious as well. Some actors have good scenes and some actors can steal certain scenes, but Walken is so twistedly diabolical and shockingly funny that he steals the entire movie. So much that you find yourself dying for the next scene to happen just so you can see more of him. I was very surprised at how Biblical the film is without being Biblical at all. It's very smart that way. Very spiritually exciting in an epic Biblical possibility kind of way. And the action sequences and effects are charged with power. This is truly a masterpiece and the best "Biblical-esque" science fiction action/horror film I have ever seen. GOD and the Devil and the End of the world. But who cares? It's all about Christopher Walken!

Very interesting and thought provoking film
Throughout this decade I've watched some pretty horrible horror films. The only good films I could find were Candyman and Event Horizon. But then I came across The Prophecy, which is one of the best horror films of this decade. It's not frightening in your usual horror film sense, but has more of an intellectual feel to it. It's not an insult to your mind as most slasher films are. This film is full of intriguing thoughts and ideas, especially with writer-director Gregory Widen's version of how an angel's physical form on Earth would be like. The film starts off a bit confusing but becomes more easy to understand as the film goes along. There's the soon to become priest named Thomas Dagget, played very well by Elias Koteas who now has a high-profile due to his role in The Thin Red Line. You can also catch Koteas' role as a demon in Fallen in which he is even better at it than Christopher Walken! Anyway, Thomas sees visions of angels being killed, he loses his faith and becomes a cop. This might sound kind of funny on paper but watching it is pretty serious. A good angel named Simon (portrayed perfectly by Eric Stoltz) murders another angel, Usiel who is one of Gabriel's men, in self-defense. Autopsy reports show Usiel has the physical attributes of an aborted fetus, has no eyes and never did, and is a hermaphrodite. Thomas investigates on this case and discovers a bible on Usiel that has a 23 chapter of Revelations that states of the Second Coming, another war between angels. It states the war occurs because angels are jealous of the fact God loves humans more than angels because humans have souls. In order for this war to begin, the bad angels, led by Gabriel in an unforgettable performance by Christopher Walken, need the soul of a recently deceased Colonel Hawthorne, who is supposed to be the most evil person on Earth. Simon manages to steal Hawthorne's soul before Gabriel and places it in the body of a young girl named Mary. Thomas and Mary's teacher, Katherine (in a fine performance by Virginia Madsen) get caught up in this storm of events and must find a way to prevent the apocalypse from occuring.

What I've just typed down about The Prophecy must be very confusing. It's actually a lot easier to understand then it seems. The acting in this film was very good. The lead performances by Koteas, Madsen, Walken, and Stoltz were excellent. I liked Stoltz's character the most but he left the movie too early. The overall plot idea was great and had an epic feeling. There was one particular scene where we see a vision of hundreds of angels impaled that I found very disturbing. It's one of the more haunting images on film these days. This film is also very humorous with most of the comedy supplied from Walken.

There were a couple of things I didn't like too much about this movie. Why did Simon visit Thomas? That seemed more of an excuse to get Thomas even more involved in the war. The fact that this movie is very short. It left some interesting ideas or scenes that could have easily fit in. The ending, but it's a very minor problem, isn't as great as the rest of the movie. Without giving too much away I feel a downbeat ending like in The Exorcist and The Omen would have worked better in The Prophecy. After all, a prophecy is something you can't prevent. But the ending's somewhat made up for with Koteas' thought-provoking final words and the musical score. Some people may not like the fact that Gabriel is portrayed as a jealous celestial being. All in all, The Prophecy is a supernatural thriller that should not be missed if you enjoy movies like the Exorcist or if you're a fan of the cast. There is a sequel to The Prophecy and another one in the works, but I don't plan on watching them simply because I am mostly content with the way the first film ended.

Not worth it
As I watched the movie I couldn't help but feel that the director was just stabbing out at a few concepts, rather than character development and story line. 2 bad angels and 1 good, what kind of a war is going on here? Seems pretty week to me. How is one human soul going to help them in their great battle anyway? Is this war going to somehow change God's mind? Can these evil angels who are obviously acting against the the will of God, aka sinning really expecting to have things return back to the way they once were? What is the purpose of an angel, and even more important, What is the purpose and meaning of life for humans in this movie. What motive is there to be a good angel? There has to be some kind of reward. Why do we only get the perspective from the devil and evil angels? Where is the word of God during the movie, and what of his worshipers? Not worth your time or waste of thought.

Yup :-)
I'm speaking of the 3 movies I've seen in this series of movies, Christopher Walken is one of the best actors I have seen and this roll is his apex in my mind, totally funny + he gets weirder as the movies go along, the writers know what they are doing + christopher playes it perfectly + adds his amazing performance in a perfect roll for him. Top Rate!

excellent and thrilling.
Excellent, intelligent movie. Christopher Walken was superb in this apocolyptic thriller. His charecter Gabriel chills the bones. Liked the way it showed Angels as things to be feared rather than fat babies or woman. Judgement is coming people! ... Read more