Reviews (13)

To Be Continued
I am a big Star Trek fan and I enjoyed the idea of going back to where it all began, 150 years from now but also 150 years before the original with Capt. Kirk and crew.The problem I have is the continuing story line that started at the end of season 2.There are too many shows on TV where you have to have seen the previous show to know what's going on.It works for Deadwood and Desparate Housewives, but not for Enterprise.They tried to fix this in season 4 where they were like a series of mini series, but I much prefer stand alone episodes.I have some life and don't have time to keep up with all the shows that are now using this soap opera format.To be fair to this second season most of the shows are stand alone but ends with a major cliff hanger.Season 3 is one very long episode.

Well written, acted, and filmed - just one thing wrong...
As a long time fan of the Star Trek franchise, I tend to be among the more lenient fans as far as where the writers and producers take the stories.I suppose this is what to expect from a fan who was drawn in by Star Trek: The Motion Picture.

Nevertheless, I thoroughly enjoyed Enterprise as a series on it's own, but it is very obvious that there are differing views on where the fans wanted the series to go as opposed to the writers.

I understand the producers desire to explore new ideas (Temporal Cold War, Xindi) but we Trek fans are nitpickers, and there were so many good opportunities to "fill in the gaps" created by the other four series.What caused the various conflicts with the Klingons and the Romulans?How was Section 31 started?And season four left me wanting for more about the early development of the Federation.

There were some very notable episodes this season, particularly Carbon Creek, Horizon, and Bounty.Minefield makes you want for more of the origins of the Starfleet-Romulan conflict, and Dead Stop seems to foreshadow the Borg storylines better than Regeneration, as I feel it was unnecessary to actually have the Borg in Enterprise at all.

The ultimate shame is that the last season was the one that the fans wanted, and was actually so good that I was anxiously awaiting the next episode after watching each weeks' story.It might be nice to see an occasional made for TV movie with this cast, maybe with a creative idea for a Romulan war (hint, hint.)

I will say, though, if you are only willing to invest in a single season, wait for the fourth one.It's truly worth it.

The Worst of the Four Seasons
If in season one "Star Trek:Enterprise" lurched to its feet like an amnesiac zombie formerly known as "Star Trek:Voyager," it just resigned itself to keeling right back over by season two.Retread plots, inconsistent characterizations, and a thumb to the nose regarding continuity with the original series were just some of the offenses that helped drive millions of viewers away.Most of the blame rests with the producers, who seemingly saw fit to endorse these obvious shenanigans, and the writers, who took a paint-by-numbers approach to plot and dialogue. Scott Bakula, despite a fine turn in "Quantum Leap," continues to register "zero" in the charisma department; it's amazing that William Shatner is so often lampooned for his staccato and swagger in later episodes of the original series when Bakula, with his herky-jerky, angry-for-no-reason approach to Jonathan Archer, is just as affected in his acting style--he's simply not remotely as effective.The rest of the cast is fine.In fact, Connor Trinneer, Jolene Blalock, and John Billingsley easily could have carried the show without Bakula, even if the producers and writers insisted on propping up his bland character as someone of significance while making the others look like sycophantic observers.Too bad the U.S. ethnic minorities on the show generally get less attention than the guest aliens of the week or the many cumbersome and jargony phrases that no real person would utter, like "polarize the hull plating." However, many episodes of season two are blessed with topnotch special effects, so there are pretty pictures to look at, even if the pacing and music that accompany them are usually as directionless as space itself.

By season three, "Star Trek:Enterprise" started to show signs of life, even if it had turned into a soap-operatic serial involving a "Star Wars"-ish race to stop a planet-killing weapon.The best season easily is its last--save for the high-school-quality "Daedalus" and the insultingly awful "These Are the Voyages."Cheers to Manny Coto for a valiant effort at breathing life back into a series so determined to commit dramatic suicide.Too bad he wasn't around from the beginning, when it would really have mattered.

Enterprise crosses intoSeason two
The second season dealt with the completion of the Shockwave cliffhanger. Unfortunately the show really took a turn for the worse viewer-wise as many trek fans abandoned the show. I liked the idea of the temporal cold war but it was indeed a bit ambiguous and confused fans. Not enough appearances by the Andorians or Tellarites in season 2-two races that helped form the UFP. This show had so much potential and by the end of this season, with an exciting episode "The Expanse" ,we see a Xindi story-arc that would take us through all of season 3.

In all honesty the seeds of failure were planted in the second season with some truly weak episodes, despite that the idea of this show remained bright, it was only the poor writing that drove off viewers. Cannon violations and lack of addressing important pre-federation issues was obvious.

But I still loved ENTERPRISE...after all it was in its infancy as a series.

Reboot or parallel timeline?
With the second season, ENT continued to anger many long-time fans as Archer and his crew tangled with the Borg, the Ferengi and the Romulans long before TOS and TNG did. The back door excuse that continuity was maintained was that the crew never learned of their names (though the Borg issue remains very muddled). Brannon Braga -who was asked by a fan to explain the Borg episode Regeneration - seemed to confirm that this Trek was a complete Reboot of the franchise or a Star Trek that occurs in an alternate universe. There is something called Many Worlds, a parallel time theory that contends that most historical occurrences, such as the signing of Magna Carta and what not, did happen only that principles might have been slightly different.And that essentially, since Star Trek: First Contact, the entire franchise now exists in this parallel timeline.Essentially, what happens is the Borg and TNG Enterprise journeys into the past and changes history. Here, then, reality splits into two versions -one road depicting the changed history, and the other road is were the original reality exists before the change.In the end, it is the only way to explain the Borg episode and Star Trek: Enterprise. Had Braga and Berman basically thought this out, maybe I could've forgiven them for the drivel they put out for three seasons until Paramount and UPN let Manny Coto take over the last season (which has been the best since DS9). I'm sad to say that Trek really ended with DS9. All others, have just been pale imitations.
... Read more

Reviews (39)

NOT the original version of the show - music edited
If you are one of those idiots who says "oh shut up and stop complaining, it's just the music, waaa waaa", take your DVDs and BURN them. You know nothing about what it means for the music to be an important part of the show and are just a complete moron (I can't express in words the anger that goes through me reading someone go "it's just the music"; it's NOT just the music!!!, it's the SHOW that is screwed up!!!)
Quantum Leap is one of those shows where the music is crucial aspect of show; the music is not just some background noise; it sets the mood. The show is completely ruined and is not worth a cent without the original soundtrack. Awful job on the part of Universal.

excellent series
No matter what this series is excellent. Anyone griping about the music must remember its better to have the series on dvd rather than not available at all. Hopefully season 4 will come out soon as its my favorite!

Hey, Universal, call me when you come to your senses.
Having read that Universal once again mucked up the music, I won't be buying Season 3 of Quantum Leap.There are some shows in which the music doesn't really matter - Laverne & Shirley's first season, for example, mentions on the box that the music is different, but the songs in Laverne & Shirley are merely incidental, background sounds.In QL, the music was a major part of the show, helping to set the time period, helping to set the mood.

I have read some of the reviews from people who claim that the change in music makes no difference (generally such comments are written in a boorish, bumptious, hectoring tone, a fact which I find rather interesting and quite telling).No?Close your eyes and imagine the Lord of the Rings movies with elevator music instead of the soaring splendor of its real score.Ponder "American Graffiti" with the sort of synthesized slop that has replaced the original music in QL. Then try to tell me that music doesn't matter.

The choice is not these travesties or nothing for most QL fans; it's a choice of a poorer-quality taped-from-TV video with the real music, taking up more shelf space than a DVD set; or a better-quality picture with no commercials that has had much of the atmosphere stripped from it. I'll take my tapes, thank you very much.If Universal comes to its senses and releases QL in unmangled form, even if it costs more, I'll buy it. Until then, count me out.

Classics never get old!
I have been waiting for this season for a long time now. The series reached its peak with episodes like "The Leap Home" and "The Boogie Man". Scott and Dean do their best work when the story really gives them the chance and the episodes of the third season really give them the best chances of the entire five-year run! It is pure pleasure to watch them perform. It is a shame that they only got five years! They could have gone on for many more!!!
(BTW, if anyone is confused by the other reviewers complaints about the change in the music, don't worry about it. What you heard on TV is what you get. They didn't change the music for the DVD release - which is exactly what I thought they were complaining about!) So buy this DVD set! You won't regret it!

Forget It
Music replacement abound, once again.A truly great show is being given the shaft by Universal, who only percieves it's formidable fan base as an open wallet.Boycott.Don't listen to the soulless collectors who only want to line their DVD shelves.QL without the original music arrangements is a travesty. ... Read more

Amazon.com

It was a short but sweet fifth season for Sex and the City, as HBO's resident comediennes found themselves affected by forces beyond their control--the pregnancies of both Sarah Jessica Parker (Carrie) and Cynthia Nixon (Miranda). A truncated shooting schedule to accommodate the actresses forced this season to be reduced to a mere eight episodes, and indeed, you can tell both actresses are expecting. (Carrie's wardrobe became more outlandish and more concealing than usual.) Still, the actresses and creators forged ahead, creating a handful of episodes that if short in content were long on emotion and laughs. Whereas the fourth season found all four grappling with various relationships, the fifth season focused on the perils of being single, with a new intensity lacking in the previous sexcapades. Carrie and Miranda wrestled with their solitary lifestyles, albeit with new attachments--Miranda had new baby Brady and single motherhood, while Carrie found herself in the world of publishing as the author of a real-life book of her columns. Charlotte (Kristin Davis) wondered if she'd ever find another man, while Samantha (Kim Cattrall) finally got rid of the one that had been vexing her far too much, hotelier Richard (James Remar). If the season as a whole felt less than the sum of its parts, those parts were some of the best comedy in the show's history, from Samantha's anointment as the "Michiko Kakutani of vibrators" to Carrie's stressful, one-degree-from-fiasco book launch party. (And fear not, Chris Noth's Mr. Big does pop up now and again.) The season's climactic episode, "I Love a Charade," found all four at the straight wedding of a seemingly gay pal (Nathan Lane) and contemplating their future with a wry, bemused tone. It was one of the series' best episodes ever, equally touching and funny, and grounded the show in an emotional maturity that announced that after all their wild travails, these women had truly grown up. --Mark Englehart ... Read more

Reviews (189)

8 episodes same price as 24
Ok, the folks at HBO publishing are getting greedy. Season 5 was only 8 episodes. So in HBO's infinite wisdom they decided to charge us fans the same list price as a 24-episode season, with no extras worth mentioning. (However they do split it up onto 2 DVD's to make you think you're getting more for your money.)
While the shows are great I have to ding this season with 3 stars because of the blatant disregard for loyal consumers.
In season 5 we have Carrie being free and single, Miranda dealing with the baby and Steve, Samantha dealing with Richard, and Charlotte in life after Trey.
If you're a junky/collector I guess you'll end up purchasing it like me, otherwise send a message to HBO and just rent it.

Sex and The City Season 5 Short but sweet
I like the zillions of others across the world am a huge fan of Sex and The City. Not having HBO, I discovered the series through word of mouth and then via rentals at the video store. Season 5 was short but sweet and with the pregnancies of both Cynthia Nixon and Sarah Jessica Parker, was there much more that the producers could do than offer up eight episodes?! What if they had decided no season at all? God we'd have all been in mini therapy groups! So let's not complain and take what we can get girls cuz eight episodes were better than nothing! WHERE MY CHIEF COMPLAINT does come in is the exorbitantly high price of the DVD set. Come on HBO lighten up a bit! Two discs with only four episodes on each can surely be priced @ $15-$20 tops! As for me,since I've rented season five on DVD, I'll wait until the passing of time and the eventual lower price I'll find in a used copy.

Too expensive!!!!!!!
I am not rating this season low because of content--the content was excellent--and I realize that the pregnancies of Sarah Jessica and Cynthia are unavoidable...but come on! Don't charge us all the same price for less than half of the normal number of episodes!!!

Review on SATC--the MATERIAL--free of whining about $$
I really like Sex in the City. I feel sad that no one has even TRIED to duplicate it--I know full duplication can't be done but since it's leaving I would even have settled for some decent knockoffs of the show (laughter). In no other show/film have sex and relationships from the point of view of women been explored this frankly--it will probably never happen again-at least not in my lifetime. I am in the middle of watching the fifth season. I'm enjoying it. We have all watched these four women for four years now. Are they supposed to remain unchanged in any way for that long? Shouldn't they have different changes and challenges in their lives? I will admit that the fifth season did not come as close to perfection as the others did. (Has your work been almost perfect consistently everyday in everyway 365 days a year for 4 straight years? Mine hasn't-it's called being human.) Season Four in my opinion is still an essential for anyone who really connects with this one-of-kind series. Being that I respect the brave work of this ground-breaking show and because this format is supposed to review the material and the work--(...) Also don't you find it amazing the things people put their passion and rage behind? Homeless mothers who need health care for their children express this level of passionate anger about overpriced prescription drugs-however a person ranting about the cost of a HBO sitcom on DVD-and going on and on like some of these people have here?? I tend to wave that off as "You have some serious issues and buying SATC is probably the least of your problems" Some reviews can be dismissed right away like the ones from misogynists who obviously just hate to see independent women having fun and enjoying sex/relationships/career in the free-wheeling way men always have. They secretly want all women to be like Afghan women were under the Taliban. (...). (...)

We can be so hard on celebs. We love them yet we hate then and we are ultra critical of them. Lastly, I again want to remind you, dear reader, to consider the source and look up any info you can find on a reviewer and weigh that against whatever they write. Also take totally anonymous reviews with a big grain of salt. And again...I enjoyed the fourth season of Sex In The City even with it imperfections!

Sex and the City meets the average girl
As a devotee of Sex and the City, I never wanted to admit that anything was wrong with the show... until I saw Season 5. A lot of people will say that Season 5 is what's wrong with SATC, but I say that Season 5 is what's RIGHT about the show! Season 5 is the most realistic of all six seasons. Playfully dubbed "the season without men" by the show's writers, there are very few long-term (or short-term, for that matter) relationships for the women in this season. Until Season 5, the women of SATC have gone through a seemingly endless string of semi-serious to serious relationships without any real examination of what and who the women are without men. This season forces all of the women to show their true colors without men. Even Samantha's antics are toned down and used more to expose who she is rather than what she does.

Many fans complained that Season 5 wasn't funny enough. Not enough men, not enough sex. Real single women know that Season 5 was the closest of all the seasons to what all of us experience in our daily lives - loneliness, good friends, occasional romantic connections, and a lot of "in between". Season 5 isn't "filler" or a poor season - its real life. Fans of the show who don't enjoy this season are, perhaps, happy to forget about their own lives while following those of Carrie, Charlotte, Miranda and Samantha. I prefer to think of the women of SATC as myself and my friends - and Season 5 proves that they are. ... Read more

Reviews (93)

"You Just Keep Thinking, Butch...!"
This film truly deserves the description of being a "Classic." Paul Newman and Robert Redford (in the company of Director George Roy Hill and a particularly appealing Katharine Ross), take the history of the bloodthirsty "Hole-in-the-Wall Gang," and turn it into an affectionate cinematic portrayal of male bonding and cultural change.

Taking place at the end of the 19th century, Butch and Sundance are, as veteran actor Jeff Corey, playing a sympathetic sheriff and accidental existentialist, snarls, "two-bit outlaws on the dodge!" They spend much of the movie dodging a posse hired to hunt them down and kill them in the wake of a series of amusing train robberies. The location shooting of their escape is breathtakingly beautiful.

Ultimately, they have to flee the closing frontier, and end up in Bolivia, which is portrayed as a kind of low-rent version of the Old West. Their trip to South America is an intermezzo, done in sepia tint, focusing on their stay in New York, which, with its (relatively) modern conveniences, underscores how anachronistic their lifestyle has become.

Their inability to rob banks in Bolivia without using Spanish-language crib sheets is both hilarious and touching, a kind of paradigm of cultural and technological dislocation.

In keeping with its 1969 release date, the film has a strong antiestablishment cant to it: Authority is faceless, unyielding, and, mostly, inept. It is telling that Butch and Sundance kill no one until they "go straight" as payroll guards. Their criminal lifestyle is romanticized as a kind of "On The Road" on horseback. That this doesn't offend the audience is a measure of how fine this movie is. The warmth and humor overcome both the moral relativity of the characters and their sad ending.

Newman and Redford are wonderful together as the affable outlaws. Newman's Butch is a charming, flaky visionary who is trying desperately to cling to the past. When confronted with the new alarms and teller's cages at a favorite bank, he dismisses the guard's explanation of, "People kept robbing us" with a wistful, "It's a small price to pay for beauty."

As Butch says: "The future's all yours, you lousy bicycles!" In a sense: the Western Outlaw was succeeded by "Public Enemy Number One" when cars succeeded horses, and train and bank robberies became Federal crimes. "Your times is over!," Jeff Corey insists, and he's right.

Redford plays Sundance as the stylish straight man, never quite falling prey to Butch's dreams, but never able to dismiss them utterly: "You just keep thinking, Butch, that's what you're best at!" The onscreen chemistry between Newman and Redford is so palpable that although they only made two films together ("The Sting" in 1973 is a modernized version of "Butch & Sundance"), they can easily be considered one of the finest comedy duos ever, anywhere. The dialogue between them is banter between two very good, very old, very comfortable, friends. Maybe there was a script involved, too.

"Butch and Sundance" may be short on facts, but it speaks a kind of truth for which facts are not needed.

Newman & Redford's First Film Together
Paul Newman and Robert Redford are two of the biggest movie stars of all time. They are also the best of friends and that friendship shines through on their first film together, Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid. The film is set in the old west, but it has a definite 60's feel to it. Butch and Sundance are anti-heroes who defy the "establishment" by robbing trains. Finally the train company gets fed up and sends an elite team of bounty hunters to track them down. This inspires the film's classic catchphrase, "who are those guys" as Butch & Sundance can't shake their pursuers. The film has a light comical side to it as Mr. Newman is at his charming best as Butch and Mr. Redford elicits laughs as the uptight Sundance. Katherine Ross provides a pretty diversion as Sundance's beautiful schoolteacher girlfriend, Etta Place. Mr. Newman & Mr. Redford are instantly likable in the lead roles and you can feel their real affinity for one another come through in the film. The movie was a major box office hit and won and William Goldman won an Oscar for his crisp and witty script and But Bacarach and Hal David won an Oscar for the film's theme song "Raindrops Keep Fallin' On My Head" which B.J. Thomas took to number one in late 1969.

Style and Substance
I remember seeing this movie at the cinema as a kid (many years ago)and being knocked out by how COOL Redford and Sundance were. You know the scene in Blues Brothers, the doorway of the transient mens refuge and the rocket launcher, and they just get up, brush themsleves off, music resumes and go on as if nothing happened. That cool. And so when they get to the stage of being concerned "who ARE those guys" we have substance for the actions they take afterwards. Now watching this movie on DVD with my kids, they didn't get enraptured as I did at their age. As you might guess, not enough action for their generation - and yet, when there is action, it plays with as much emotion as the best of hollywood today. A tremendous cast delivering a tremendous performance, this will always be one of my favorite movies.

Sticks pretty well to historical fact
For one when Butch and sundance are being chased up the mountain by the posse Butch mentions Joe LaFors (sp?). I checked a while ago. LaFors really existed as a lawman at the time. But Etta Place (Kathryn Ross)though she really existed was actually not a school teacher. More likely she was a prostitute.

Butch & the Kid
Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid is one of the best movies (if not the best!!!) I have ever seen. The action, the interplay and the chemistry between the 2 leading stars (Newman, Redford) is like "poetry in motion". The action is non-stop, as well as the comedy, especially of Newman. Even though there is quite a bit of violence throughout the movie, I would recommend that everyone buy the video!!! ... Read more

Description

During the past century, thousands of people have gone missing.When 4400 of them return all at once unharmed and looking the same as when they disappeared, the government investigates, unsure of how this can be possible.What the government does not know is that the presence of these 4400 will change the human race in many unexpected ways. ... Read more

Reviews (82)

Fireworks!
What was the greatest kiss ever committed to the silver screen? For me it comes from the Alfred Hitchcock thriller, To Catch a Thief. Grace Kelly tempts Cary Grant, a reformed jewel thief by the name of John Robie, with her diamond necklace, to a backdrop of fireworks over the French Riviera. Finally, having had just about enough of her tomfoolery, he says, "You know as well as I do, this necklace is imitation." To which, the stunning Kelly responds, "Well I'm not..."

That is movie magic and so is this wonderful, light-hearted and thrilling romp across the south of France as everyone goes in search of the identity of a new jewel thief reeking havoc throughout hotels on the French Riviera.

Lush cinematography, beautiful costumes, breathtaking vistas, and delightful performances by Kelly, Grant, and Jessie Royce Landis make this an extremely enjoyable film outing.

Cat on a Hot French Roof
Suspense takes a back seat to romance as former cat burglar Grant turns detective to track down the culprit behind a recent string of jewel robberies, becoming involved with beautiful heiress Kelly during the course of his investigation. Proof that lesser Hitchcock is still far above average, with Grant at his most suave and debonair; Kelly at her most ravishing; an engaging comedic turn by Jessie Royce Landis as Kelly's down-to-earth mother; and some sparkling (and suggestive) dialogue by John Michael Hayes. Add in some truly beautiful costumes by Edith Head and breathtaking, Oscar-winning color cinematography by Robert Burks ... and what's not to like? Even though the mystery is a bit slight, you won't be bored!

The DVD offers a wonderful video transfer with crisp, clear sound and a brightly color-balanced, anamorphic widescreen picture. There are three unique mini-documentaries about the making of the movie, featuring Hitchcock's daughter and granddaughter; a documentary about costumer Edith Head (which is being included on many Paramount 2002 DVD releases which feature Head's work); the Original Theatrical Trailer; and a truly grand assortment of vintage production stills and posters from around the world. All in all a quite nice package that's definitely worth a look.

With Class and Grace
To Catch A Thief marks a departure for director Alfred Hitchcock. Here, he sheds the moniker as The Master Of Suspense, going more for romance and comedy--rather than any of his well known plot twists or thrills. The film may not be the best of his career, but thanks to a strong leading man and a radiant leading lady the movie still works.

John Robie, (Cary Grant) is a reformed cat burglar, out to prove himself innocent of a recent crime spree. As he tries to capture the thief who's terrifying the French Riviera, he attracts the attention of the lovely Frances Stevens (Grace Kelly), a wealthy and spoiled American traveling the Riviera with her widowed mother (Jessie Royce Landis). However, things do not begin on a romantic note. Robie is more interested in clearing his name than in pursuing the beautiful American, but the two will not go their separate ways so easily. When Mrs. Stevens has her jewels stolen, the snubbed Frances puts the police on Robie's trail. Now the dashing Robie will have to win the confidence and assistance of Frances if he is to ever set things right.

Grant and Kelly light up the screen together, with an entrancing chemistry that sparkles, especially in the impromptu ad-libbed dialogue of the picnic scene. A series of elaborate set pieces combined with the spectacularc Riviera scenery make the film an enduring piece of American cinema. Hitchcock lets his leads pick up for any of the film's lack of excitement, that traditionally peppers the director's films. I have always had a "crush" on the late Grace Kelly, and this film just helps to solidify those feelings.

The DVD contains three well produced making of featurettes. "Writing and Casting," "The Making of To Catch a Thief," and "Alfred Hitchcock and To Catch a Thief", will give you a well rounded look at the film. But things would have worked out even better if these were edited together as one larger whole. Long time Hitchcock collaborator, costumer Edith Head, is highlighted in a fourth featurette, that also tops off the disc's bonus material.

To Catch A Thief is recommended for any Hitchcock fan..

A Hitchcock romantic mystery
Cary Grant and Grace Kelly are funny and witty and they keep you involved in the story. Not what I expected from Alfred Hitchcock, but it was a great movie none the less.

So-so Hitchcock jewel caper
As a connoisseur of Hitchcock's work, To Catch a Thief was merely adequate. Lacking any real suspense, the movie was held together by the excellent cinematography offered by the picturesque French Rivera locale.

Cary Grant was at his suave and debonair best as John Robie, a retired cat burgular who is suspected when a rash of jewel thefts plagues the swanky Riviera. Realizing, he must apprehend the actual thief, whose m.o. parallels his own, he plots a scheme.

Grace Kelly, whose acting ability does not rival her beauty, plays a perfectly typecasted role for her. As a spoiled, bored, rich socialite Frances Stevens, she and her wealthy but earthy mother, played exceptionally well by Jessie Royce Landis are vacationing. The elder Mrs. Stevens has a valuable collection of jewelery that Grant theorizes would make excellent bait.

Hitchcocks creates a predictable plot, with the usual love affair. There is however, little in the way of mystery or tension or even chemistry between Kelly and Grant to make this flick anything more than mediocre. Edith Head provides a high point with her fantastic wardrobes created for the costume ball scene. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Screenwriter Paddy Chayefsky (Marty) sinks his satirical fangs into this story of an American naval officer (James Garner) selected to be the first victim at the invasion of Normandy. Julie Andrews plays a prim, British war widow who falls for him. Cynical in tone, the story becomes an interesting collision of manipulative interests and renewed life, the same formula that worked so well in Chayefsky's scripts for Network and Hospital. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (17)

Nobility In Cowardice
Charlie Madison (James Garner) is pretty much content in his role as "dog robber" in World War II, providing this superiors with liquor and pliant women and keeping out of harm's way.Unfortunately, his commanding officer get's the bright idea of having a Navy man provide the first casualty at Normandy and Charlie is elected to photograph this moment.What's a committed coward to do?I can accept the film's central premise that one should be true to your nature even if you are a swine.What is a little hard to take is that the D-Day invasion was a pivotal event of World War II and critical in breaking the backs of Nazi tyranny and I find it a little hard to accept that cowardice at such a crucial time is noble.That said, Paddy Chayefsky's clever script advances this notion well under the competent direction of Arthur Hiller.Garner has the charm to make Charlie likable and, yes, noble.Julie Andrews, playing against type, is sensuous as Emily, the British war bride who falls for Charlie despite herself.The chemistry between Garner and Andrews is dynamic and was repeated years later in Blake Edwards' "Victor, Victoria".James Coburn as Charlie's "buddy" and Melvyn Douglas as the Admiral also contribute fine performances.

DVD of Classic Satire Looks Good
The Americanization of Emily is one of the best movies of the Sixties and certainly one of the very best of Julie Andrews' career.However, it was relatively overlooked at the time--sandwiched, as it was, between Mary Poppins and The Sound of Music, two films that swamped everything in their massive popularity and influence.It's a pity that this film is not better known, even though it's reputation has continued to grow over the years.With its release on DVD, now is the time to discover (or rediscover) this gem.

The plot has been discussed in other reviews here, so I won't add anything to them except to say that the only fault I see in this film is its partial lack of attention to period detail.It is most obvious in wardrobe and hairstyles.This movie was filmed in 1963 (released in 1964) and the clothes and hairstyles, especially of the actresses, are right out of that time period.It's as if the actors walked in right off the street and onto the soundstage without changing a thing.Did the director forget they were making a World War II movie?This complaint aside, The Americanization of Emily is a highly enjoyable film which deserves to be more widely seen.

The DVD looks and sounds fine for the most part.There are only occasional glimpses of debris, but these are not distracting.Kudos once again to Warner Brothers for the care they put into most of their classic releases.

More dark humor than anti-war
I saw this movie in the theatre when it came out, and I love it. My favorite line is in the beginning when they meet and Garner is directing the delivery of luxury food and liquor to his admiral's quarters, and admiral's driver Andrews (seeing all the luxury items) chews out Garner by accusing Americans of "enjoying" the war. Garner replies, "Let me tell YOU something: Americans would not be here if it weren't for 2,000 years of European barbarism!" It brought the theatre down in cheers and applause.

This story is more dark humor than anti-war, and Paddy Chayefsky is the master of dark humor. In the `70s, he co-wrote with Joan Rivers "Girl Most Likely To...", a dark humor about an ugly-duckling-turned-Cinderella co-ed played by Stockard Channing, that I've been waiting for to come out on DVD.

If you haven't seen "Americanization of Emily", you must. Sure beats the new stuff out there these days.

Finally, I can see and hear this movie, that I have loved
I have loved this movie since I first saw it in the theater in the sixties.I saw it twice then.I was rapidly losing what hearing I had left at the time. I loved what I saw, could put together, and the little that I did hear.Garner's facial expressions told the story to me.
My husband finally got a VHS copy for me about 10 years ago.Unfortunately it was not captioned.I shared it with my grown children.I never thought the movie would come out captioned in DVD.And I could not understand that as Garner himself had said it was his favorite movie that he made.......I "heard" that on a captioned Larry King interview.

Now I will finally be able to know every one of the words, my own copy, with captions.

If you have not seen it, I just highly recommend that movie so highly, it is my favorite of all time.The anti war message is obvious, but it is so funny, in a biting sort of way.There is one scene with Julia Andrews and her mother, along with Garner.I love the dialogue there.

And as I said, the facial expressions are wonderful.That is a tribute to the actors.Who would think a movie with D Day as the center happening to which much leads could be funny, serious, yes, and it is serious, but it is also funny.That takes the sting out of the serious parts.For some reason the black and white seems to work in a way that I cannot imagine color doing.I just cannot recommend this movie highly enough.

I have waited almost 40 years to hear all the words, own the movie myself.I am sure it is worth it.I wish it had not been so long.

ginger jones

One of the BEST movies I'v ever seen
I love this movies. When I first got it for a gift I thought it would be terrible. I love Julie Andrews and James Garner but when I saw it was in black and white I thought it would be dull. I was very wrong it is one of my favorite movies along with Victor-Victoria, also staring James and Julie. I wish the dvd has some special features but atleast its finally coming out on dvd. I have watch the video so many times I think it's begining to break. I LOVE THIS MOVIE!!!!! ... Read more

Amazon.com

The Waltons' nearly 10-year run on network television grew out of the popular, 1971 made-for-TV movie The Homecoming, which was derived from a Depression-era, rustic setting ("Walton's Mountain"), and characters based on Earl Hamner Jr.'s autobiographical novel Spencer's Mountain--itself the source for a very nice 1963 feature film starring Henry Fonda and Maureen O'Hara.That's a lot of entertainment sprouting from Hamner's prose. But something about his seminal story of family values, rugged independence, and big dreams amidst a hardscrabble existence captured the hearts of American audiences, many of whom personally recalled severe economic adversity in the 1930s.

The Waltons: The Complete First Season collects those initial episodes from the series building on the strengths of the Homecoming pilot, which introduced the extended Walton clan led by a strong-willed mill owner, John (Andrew Duggan), and his equally resolute wife, Olivia (Patricia Neal). The Waltons recast those key roles (as well as a few others) with Ralph Waite and Michael Learned (yup, a female), but Richard Thomas carried over as oldest child John-Boy Walton, an aspiring writer whose cusp-of-manhood view informs the series. Will Geer (Seconds) replaced Edgar Bergen as Grandpa Walton, Ellen Corby remained as Grandma, and John and Olivia's large brood (seven kids in all) were filled out by largely unknown, young actors. The episodes, still delightful and touching, strong on production values and unusually tight and polished for primetime drama, tended to focus on creator Hamner's pet themes of self-sacrifice and heroic effort when the going got tough.

Year 1 highlights include "The Carnival," in which the impoverished Waltons, who can't pay for tickets to see a circus performance, end up sheltering stranded carney folk. "The Typewriter" is a classic about John-Boy "borrowing" a museum's antique typewriter, only to have his sister Mary Ellen (Judy Norton) sell it as junk. "The Sinner" concerns the arrival of a fundamentalist minister on Walton's Mountain, finding comfort in the words of religious iconoclast John Walton after the clergyman makes a fool of himself with moonshine. That's Hamner himself providing touches of narration. During the long run of the multiple-award-winning The Waltons, there were many changes in casting and storylines. But this boxed set reveals a fine series in its pristine state.

Year 2 still finds the original cast complete and the show humming along nicely on nostalgia for an earlier America, specifically the Depression-era 1930s, a time of sacrifice and family unity as The Waltons portrays it. The characters we came to know so well in season 1 continue to live in a spirit of cooperation and generosity, and with hope that a younger generation of Waltons will prosper and dream new dreams for everyone. The 24 episodes included in this boxed set feature a number of very strong stories, including a handful of classics, all immersed in the series' typically old-Hollywood production values. (Several season 2 shows were directed by Waltons star Ralph Waite.) Among the best is the premiere, "The Journey," in which the ever-noble, college-bound John-Boy (Richard Thomas) passes on a school dance and an important date to take an aging neighbor, Maggie Mackenzie (Linda Watkins), on a special, final journey. "The Separation" finds Grandpa (Will Geer) and Grandma (Ellen Corby) Walton feuding--even living apart--after the former crafts a secret plan to raise money to pay the family's electricity bill. (Their reconciliation is one of the series' most enjoyable and tender moments.) The memorable "The Thanksgiving Story" is a nail-biter in which John-Boy, facing a hopeful future as he awaits college and a visit from his girlfriend, endures a head injury in the family mill and must undergo surgery. Finally, "The Honeymoon" sees John (Waite) and Olivia (Michael Learned) finally taking their honeymoon after 19 years of marriage and seven kids. Throughout all the major storylines is a constant buzz of subplots concerning John-Boy's younger siblings--their joys and disappointments, first loves, accomplishments and relationships with one another. The Waltons never slows down, but it is capable of revealing the most delicate of feelings within shared or private moments. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Description

This hilarious look at dating, mating and relating in New York is "a thinking person's sitcom, brutally honest and hilariously funny." - The San Francisco Examiner. Can women have sex like men? What's it like to date someone younger? And what is "The Rabbit"? Find out in "Sex And The City."

(c) 2003 Home Box Office.All rights reserved.HBO(r) and Sex And The City(r) are service marks of Home Box Office, Inc. ... Read more

Reviews (236)

Sophisticated & Fun: Loved It!
This must have been great Cable-TV when it was on HBO, to which we don't subscribe. It's even better in the DVD version. High quality resolution AND surround sound via DVD make this a must-see for intelligent, sophisticated viewers who don't find much to satisfy on standard network TV.

In fact, if even movies were this good, we'd be going all the time! The writing is superb, as is the acting, sets and fast-paced story line. If you've ever lived, as a single, in a large urban city and were remotely involved in the 'dating game', then you'll be able to relate to the characters. While mostly women, there are enough male characters for both sexes to connect with the 'dating game' and its ups and downs-- and the characters' ambitions, loves, fears and shared joys. Now I know why there has been so much "buzz" about this series... It's a totally sexy, hip romp! (Note: this is defintely not something that "Christian Coalition" types will admit to liking....!)

A great collection of one of the best shows on TV
Sex And The City and HBO are the only reasons I keep that too-expensive premium cable package. Sex And The City makes it worth it. I only started watching this funny and strike-a-chord series this summer and don't know why I waited so long. Fortunately, you can catch up instantly on the first season and second seasons on video/DVD. Each season has 12-18 episodes, and they're like an amazing batch of chocolate chip cookies. You will not be able to stop and you will not be bored, even if you go through the entire season in one sitting. It left me wanting more. The characters' through-it-all friendship will have you appreciating your own tried and true friends. Carrie, Charlotte, Miranda and Samantha are all likable, real, complex, funny and a pleasure to spend one or eighteen episodes with. If you've been a single woman for more than six seconds, you'll also appreciate the bewildering and recognizable behavior of the men in these friends' lives. New York City as the vibrant backdrop makes the show even more watchable. Interestingly, a male writer wrote several of the episodes, so clearly, there are some good ones out there. And guys, I know several men who are surreptitiously hooked, also ... for any men out there who'd like to know what women think and talk about when they're on their own ... here are all our secrets spilled. I recommend this great series to everyone.

The beginning.
The first season was just ok, it had more of an unfocused feel to it. The show also had more of a grainier texture to it. The first season really doesn't deal with relationships that much, it focuses mostly on random dating, which makes it hard to get a reading on these women aside from their generic label (the sexually adventurous one, the cynic, the uptight one). Only SJ Parkers character is explored deeper, even though her character is mostly negative, self-absorbed, neurotic and prone to relationship sabotage. As for people who critize SJP looks, she isn't supposed to be a model she's supposed to be a normal woman who is comfortable with her looks, a woman normal women can relate to. Overall an ok season. EP

PSEUDO-INTELLECTUAL DRIVEL!
(...)This reveals exactly why the terrorists hate our country. Shallow, materialistic, decadent, pseudo-intellectual drivel. I remember hearing one sentence of the show (before throwing the tv out the window) where the main character said "I finally realized" followed by some pseudo-existential "witticism" with a straight(dumb)face. The only positive aspect of this show is to teach kids to stay in school.

Fresh and fabulous
I got into this series when it was almost over and can recommend it. Yes, it's explicit at times so beware of that, but it's fresh and fun and most importantly absolutely fabulous. The characters are all played wonderfully by this cast and the stories have you chatting later about it with your friends saying things like "GEEZ, I'd never put up with that" etc. Depending on your favorite character as a woman it's easy to find yourself in one of the cast.

LOVE THIS SERIES! ... Read more

Reviews (147)

Early DiCaprio is great
This is a great movie, which features Leonardo DiCaprio, playing a role which is so distant from any other roles he's ever done, and he really shines. If you've seen Titanic, and a couple of his other movie roles, you'll be really shocked, that he can play a totally different role. He's not a pretty-boy as he normally is.

It's never really explained what's the matter with Leo's character, Arnie. He has a lot of different characteristics which relate to different special needs people. I tend to think he's autistic, but he never comes across as especially autistic. So it does get a bit confusing.

There is a really powerful connection between Johnny Depp's character, Gilbert, and Arnie. Gilbert is really protective of his younger brother, and ashamed by everyone else in his family. This relationship comes to a terrific climax later in the movie, which will shock everyone who's enjoyed their relationship up until then.

Juliette Lewis plays the girl Gilbert falls in love with, and who he gives up his older, married lover for. Most people in other reviews I've read don't seem to like her character, but I do. She was great for the part, and although I wasn't keen on her too short hair, I loved everything else about her role.

Darlene Cates plays the abnormally obese mother, who hasn't stepped out of the house in 7 years, until Arnie gets arrested. I'm not sure whether the sheer size of her was for real, or whether it was body padding/suit kinda thing. Her size is almost too realistic to be a body suit.

All in all, this is a terrific movie, which wrenches at your heart strings, and has you in tears with the dramatic finale.

THIS IS AN ENTERTAINING, ENJOYABLE AND SWEET MOVIE.
"What's Eating Gilbert Grape" is the kind of movie which you don't expect too much before you see it, but after you've seen it, a smile in your face will appear.

The movie tells the story of Gilbert Grape, a nice guy trapped in a small town, with a dysfunctional family (as almost every family is), a job without a future and a relationship with a married woman. And despite all this, he is not a sad man, he is not depressed, he is not worried about himself; his main reason to live is to take care of his family. Everything else comes in a second place, including himself.

Johnny Depp is the center of the movie and his low-key performance is excellent, but the reason why this movie works so fine is the supporting cast; Leonardo DiCaprio is terrific as the mentally retarded brother, he and Depp are the fuel of the story. The rest of the cast includes: Darlene Cates as the big, big, big mother, John C. Reilly as Gilbert's best friend, Juliette Lewis as Gilbert's new love interest and Mary Steenburgen as the married woman who is having an affair with Gilbert, all of them are terrific in their roles.

The main purpose of "What's Eating Gilbert Grape" is to entertain audiences, and it does...a very enjoyable movie.

Excellent
This movie is indeed a tear jerker, yet work seeing.

What's eating Gilbert Grape?
..Well that's very simple. It's Gilbert's (Johnny Depp) disfunctional family. His brother (Leonardo DiCaprio) is mentally challenged, his mother (Darlene Cates) is morbidly obese, his youngest sister is a brat, there is also a house wife (Mary Steenburgen) who orders groceries from the store Gilbert works at, she has reasons of her own that does not include the need for food. She's quite capable of going to the supermarket herself. Let's just say she has more than a little thing for Gilbert. Gilbert's father passed away years earlier. Now only himself and the older sister seem able to take care of the home and family. I would like to mention that actress Darlene Cates has lost over 200 lbs. since this film was made. What's Eating Gilbert Grape is a wonderful, funny, sad and off beat drama that is sure to have something for everyone. I think it was very silly for one reviewer to say that this film makes fun of obesity and mentally impaired people. Are we not ever to have these types of characters in movies? I'm not sure if this person watched the entire film. It does have a positive message about these issues. This film doesn't make fun it only points out ignorance in people who do. When you see an overweight person do you stare at them? What if they are very overweight? I really liked the scene when Gilbert's mother said "I haven't always been like this." and Becky (Juliette Lewis) said "I haven't always been like this either." As if Becky didn't even notice that Gilbert's mother was of a beyond plus size. I myself work with mentally challenged kids everyday so Arnie just seemed like a kid to me. But in reality I have to say Leonardo DiCaprio was superb. On a less superb note however the DVD has zero extras. Well I guess if you wanna call having a theatrical trailer an extra feature go right ahead. I think a few featurettes and a director commentary is a must now days. Other than the lacks of DVD features this is a must purchase. Add it to your movie library ASAP.

the heart: you'll know it when you see it.
Needless to say this movie is NOT about making fun of the mentally retarded, the obese, grocery store stockers, randy housewives, or anyone else.
This movie is about the human heart, its complexity, pain, love, and cruely.
Gilbert is trapped by his heart. He wants to be a 'good person', but really he's already good enough, and its killing him: his spirit, his hope, and his love.
This is a wonderful movie if you can withstand the bleakness of Gilbert's life and not despair.
In the end, the story is lovely and the actors are marvelous. And where there's a good heart, there's hope. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The hugely ambitious Beckett on Film project gathered together 19different directors to turn the 19 stage works written by Samuel Beckettinto films. The range is vast--from the 45-second Breath to the twohours of his most famous play, Waiting for Godot--but all the worksreflect Beckett's penetrating obsessions with memory, regret, and thesimple, excruciating experience of being. Not every film succeeds--likeall great theater, Beckett's plays demand interaction with a live audienceto express their full intent--and though scholars tout Beckett's everyword as genius, several works are slight (Catastrophe, OhioImpromptu, or What Where will leave many viewers unimpressed).But all the plays feature Beckett's uniquely distilled language; thegreatest of them--including Waiting for Godot (in which two trampspass the time while they wait for someone who may never come),Endgame (in which a blind man and his lame servant bicker and jokeas the world declines), and Play (in which a love triangle isbitterly recalled by two women and a man in urns)--are astonishing in boththeir potent humor and piercing grief.

Though Beckett's stature drew in animpressive array of directors (including Anthony Minghella, PatriciaRozema, and Neil Jordan) and actors (including Jeremy Irons, JulianneMoore, Alan Rickman, Kristin Scott-Thomas, Michael Gambon, and JohnGielgud), some of the finest work comes from relative unknowns. But thegem of the collection is Krapp's Last Tape, about an old manrevisiting his life through recordings he has made throughout his years.It's the perfect marriage of text, actor (the incomparable John Hurt), anddirector (Atom Egoyan, The Sweet Hereafter); in their hands, theplay spins from deeply funny to deeply sad, all with only the slightestdim of the light in Hurt's eyes. --Bret Fetzer ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Worth a look.
2 stars is misleading. I would recommend this to anyone interested in Becket. To see a directors interpretation of his work provided invaluable insights into both the works themselves, and the process of directing film.
That being said, I was not amazed. The potential of a four disk DVD and large booklet, exclusively Becket, was unlimited. The product was a half-dozen enjoyable plays, and not even a documentary on Becket. In their great humility, they made a documentary, about themselves, making the DVD you are about to purchase. Great.

Who Put the Film in the Beckett on Film Project?
Directors working on stage-to-screen adaptations find themselves torn between dual obligations to both the original work and the new medium. In the case of creating a collection of films meant to highlight the playwright's vision, questions raised by these obligations become even more controversial: should they remain true to the text, even if elements of the play don't work well on film? Dare they change those elements to better fit their new mode of expression? And in the case of Beckett, what percentage of the collections' earnings should go towards manic-depressive treatment centers? Of course, total objectivity in stage-to-screen adaptation remains a pipe dream. But we have to remember that even a theatric production has a director, who-while possibly faced with less decisions than a film director-invariably must makes choices leading to his own personal interpretation of the play. Ultimately, every production of a play, be it for DVD or Broadway, interprets rather than mirrors the original work. Therefore, the Beckett on Film Project should not be regarded as an unbiased representation, but rather an ambitious interpretation of one of the greatest playwrights of the twentieth century. And in this regard, with few exceptions, the Beckett on Film Project shines with commendable effectiveness.

I wish to illustrate a few interpretive anomalies in the collection, to give you an idea of both the kinds of adaptive problems these directors had to face and some of their solutions. Consider "Act Without Words II," a short and dialogue-free play in which two characters mime their different daily routines against a narrow backdrop "violently lit in its entire length, [with] the rest of the stage in darkness." Director Edna Hughes chose to divide this backdrop into three film frames and to add a movie reel-like quality to the video. This constant reminder that we are watching a film is the same sort of self-referential metatextuality we find in many of Beckett's plays. Hughes' interpretive decision regarding the background also reinforces the repetitive theme of the play. That is to say, these characters' routines will go on and on, day after day, just as this very movie is being filmed-one frame after another. Hughes' use of a freeze-frame effect also highlights the technological superiority that film holds over its older cousin, theatre. The play calls for a "Frieze effect," but only on film can this be accomplished literally; in theatre it must be acted out. These changes by Hughes show intelligence in both his reading and adapting of the play to screen. Now, for something of a contrary example, consider one of Beckett's most famous short plays, "Play," in which three characters, trapped in urns, are forced to perpetually retell the story of the love triangle between them. The inquisitor: a lone spotlight that dictates which one of the three urns speaks, when, and for how long. But director Anthony Minghella's version gets rid of the light altogether, in favor of a loud and sometimes shaky camera, whose stronger presence is meant to take the light's place as these characters' inquisitor. Minghella's technique here ultimately falls somewhere between failure and success. The audible clicks and zooms of the camera do, for a time, give the viewer a feeling of submersion within the scene; since the camera now questions these characters, and we as viewers share the camera's gaze, the film achieves an interesting effect that draws us into the world of the story. But the camera cuts between the three urns so many times that the sense of a "unique inquisitor," as Beckett requests, soon dissipates. Not that the adaptation adds nothing to the play; once or twice, the camera pans around to give a broad scene of the background, a dark, foggy, and graveyard-like field littered with many more people in urns. While this background reduces the ambiguity of setting present in the original play, it does so perhaps necessarily, and in addition, clearly suggests that these characters' situations are in fact meant to be symbolic of some greater human condition. Ultimately, we recognize a tradeoff for every one of these questions of adaptation, but by and large, as these two examples illustrate, the gain outweighs the loss in the Beckett on Film Project. Or, put simply: the directors and actors earn their paychecks.

Now keep in mind that despite the interpretive decisions I just described, the main thrust of this collection remains Beckett's. What does that mean? It means that these plays glimmer and shine with a bleak despair. The most dramatic moments are often the most comedic, and the only happy characters-well, forget about happy characters (after all, "Nothing is funnier than unhappiness," as Nell from Endgame tells us). But, dismal as they can be, Beckett's plays always manage to match their gloom in originality, creativity, and importance. They pose critical questions about what it means to exist as a human being. Do we simply spend our days idly, waiting-for Godot or anything else? Do we bury ourselves in the desert when we say "I do"? Can our condition be reduced to the emblem of a solitary finch, living in a draped cage with a dead mate and only a cuttle-bone to eat, in a darkened room stalked by a black cat whose own life depends on a suicidal man standing at a window? Whether or not you agree, you cannot help but ask, once Beckett has shown you the shadowy corners of his imagination. And keep in mind his influence on theatre and even art in general. Often touted as odd and sometimes inaccessible, but always brilliant, Beckett's plays deserve our attention, whether or not we choose to buy the Beckett on Film collection. What these productions add to Beckett's vision is an important sense of a modern moment. How have the technological advances made since Beckett's death affected what it means to be Beckettian? And how do the questions his work poses affect you? It's worth your time to find out.

Mixed bag
Those who are familiar with the original productions will find this collection both exhilarating and frustrating. The more faithful the directors are to Beckett's vision, the more successful the adaptation to film. Come and Go is perhaps the purest of them, and also the most chilling. Other effective adaptations include Krapp's Last Tape, Rough for Theatre II, Act Without Words II, A Piece of Monologue, and Play (Minghella's truly -cinematic- adaptation probably deserves the highest marks). I'm ambivalent about many others, not least Ohio Impromptu and Catastrophe.

Unfortunately the longer plays (Godot, Happy Days, and Endgame) suffer from the directors' mistaken impression that Beckett's characters must be decrepit, disgusting, and/or humorless. Quite the contrary, there is levity and compassion to be found in Beckett's work, and without it his meditations become intolerable rather than incisive. Godot has its moments, but it's not nearly as effective (or funny) as any number of previous productions.

Pacing is also a significant issue here. Beckett's plays (excepting Not I and Play) demand a very slow reading, with an abundance of silence. Many of these adaptations simply plow through the texts with no apparent consideration of heft or nuance; Rockaby is probably the most egregious example. Other directorial liberties make Not I and What Where wholly unacceptable; these simply cannot be considered Beckett's work.

Happily, more Beckett productions are becoming available on DVD. You can purchase Happy Days with Irene Worth's excellent performance on this very site, three plays (Eh Joe, Footfalls, Rockaby) starring Beckett's favorite actress Billie Whitelaw, and a DVD of Beckett Directs Beckett (the three long plays) hopefully in the near future.

Excellent, with one exception.
First let me say I've been waiting my whole adult life for this collection. I've spent 30 years trying to collect audio and video recordings of Beckett's work, and suddenly here are all the theatre peices in one beautiful package. The chance that you will ever find another film version of most of these works, or ever have a chance to see them on stage, is almost nil. If you love Waiting for Godot and Endgame, you will not regret the money spent on this. Unlike most plays and almost all movies, these are peices to be seen again and again, over a lifetime, letting the beauty and subtlety of Beckett's language slowly soak into your being.

That being said, I was disappointed with only one peice: Endgame. With Michael Gambon as one of the leads, I expected the most from this play. But I'm afraid he was badly misdirected in this. He simply enjoys his dispair too much. He enjoys being a selfish, cruel master and his "Perhaps I could go on..." speech (one of Beckett's greatest)loses all its power. Gambon delivers this with hardly a pause, rambling on with the same puckish tone as the rest of his performance. (I thought maybe I was just too used to an earlier film version directed by Beckett, so I went back to the script to check this. After almost every phrase in the speech, Beckett has written (Pause). Without these pauses to let the anguish of the words sink into our minds, the speech carries no more weight than the rest of the text. Well, probably much more than you wanted to know.)

Short Review: BUY THIS NOW! You'll be watching these films again and again as long as you own a DVD player.

The Artist of the Century
Curious that DVD Basen, the wonderful Danish web-compendium of dvd reviews from all over the world, has yet to register a word on BECKETT ON FILM, by any measure the dvd release of the year. These film renditions of Samuel Beckett's nineteen works for the stage (which is not the same as his "complete dramatic works," which would include radio plays and scripts for television), are, for the most part, thrillingly successful. The plays fall into two types. WAITING FOR GODOT, ENDGAME, KRAPP'S LAST TAPE, and HAPPY DAYS, however revolutionary in their time, still more or less conform to the conventional understanding of what a play is, ie: they contain recognizable characters and the shortest is an hour long. Despite the filmmakers' protests to make true movies of these plays, as opposed to "filmed plays," each of their single-locale settings make the theatrical origins of each work inescapable. Having said that, they are the best "filmed plays" this viewer has ever seen. Most of the remaining plays, particularly the late plays, are very short (under 15 minutes), and as Alan Rickman remarks, seem more like installations or "performance art," then full-fledged plays. What makes these works among the greatest plays ever written is precisely their inability to be transfered to another medium. With one exception, each of these little films, even the most brilliant of them (I'm thinking of the mind-blowing PLAY), must somehow compromise itself as a play in order to make the transition to film. The exception is OHIO IMPROMPTU. The intensity of this two character, ten minute piece perhaps reaches the full measure of its power as a film. Beckett's stage directions specify that its two actors be as alike as possible. On film, they can be exactly alike, by virtue of being played by the same actor, namely Jeremy Irons, who has famously played twins before. Despite the actor's disavowal, the characters of Reader and Listener can't help but conjure the image of DEAD RINGERS' Elliot commiserating with his twin brother Beverly aeons from hence in their own personal purgatory. Irons' performance is impeccable and affecting, although the Beckett purist might wish there were a little less of it. The performances throughout the plays are deliriously good, with the sad exception of the beautiful FOOTFALLS, which suffers from an overly mannered delivery on the part of its two actresess. One can only feel sorry for the director saddled with the relentlessly uncinematic THAT TIME. But BECKETT ON FILM is mostly a box of treasure, and a gift to the world. ... Read more