Reviews (46)

wow!
this is a great movie for anyone with the patience to watch it develop. at the same time cheerful and ominous, it is deeply moving. the acting is superb - menshikov and the two mikhalkovs form a brilliant trio. though it moves slowly and it takes some time to figure out how all the characters are related, it is more than worth the wait. i don't speak russian, but i forgot i was reading subtitles by the first half hour. "burnt by the sun" is extremely accurate when it comes to the many arrests ordered by stalin. some background of the bolshevik revolution is needed, but even without it, the movie captures viewers. the emotions come through clearly, and the sets are beautiful. oleg menshikov isn't so bad looking either . .

A Pretty Movie
"Burnt by the Sun" is a nice movie, quite similar in thematic content to the recent "Life is Beautiful", and shot on snazzy, high-quality, expensive film (those of you who have seen earlier Russian films will heave a collective sigh of relief). Ah, the advantages of capitalism. It's just too bad that the fall of communism in Russia had to bring along some less auspicious consequences. Unlike their predecessors, films made in Russia after 1991 had to actually make money. This resulted in an overall "Westernification"--a slicker package at the expense of complex themes and poetic photography. "Burnt by the Sun" is a perfect example of this. You won't be struggling to comprehend all of the different levels of meaning in "Burnt by the Sun" the way you might in "Andrei Rublev". Things are spelled out quite clearly here, and the plot is easy to follow and takes precedence (somewhat of a rarity in "highbrow" Soviet films--compare this one to "The Color of Pomegranates"). There's also very little of the wonderful symbolism you find in the earlier films--in "Burnt by the Sun", water is just water. It is by no means a bad movie--in fact, quite good by Hollywood standards--but I can't help but wonder what might have become of it had it not been made under the commercial pressures of capitalism. If you're in the mood to be entertained (and, perhaps, made to cry) by a good foreign film that doesn't require an inordinate amount of mental input, "Burnt by the Sun" is for you; if you want to see Russian film at its height, better go look up Tarkovsky or Eisenstein.

Under the Shadow of Stalin
Mikhalkov always had a flair for Chekhovian drama, and he doesn't disappoint the viewer in this movie, which essentially updates "The Cherry Orchard" to Stalinist Russia. What we get is a tumultuous day in the life of a theatre group in a tranquil rural community, lorded over by the proud Commander Kotov, as the small town prepares for the celebration of Stalin's first ride in an air balloon. Mikhalkov deftly mixes humor with pathos, the hallmark of all his movies, as the bucolic life is broken by the return of Mitya (impeccably played by Oleg Menshikov). We slowly get to learn of Mitya's mission with a profound sense of foreboding. The acting is purposely staged to give the scenes their rich theatrical air, yet there is a naturalism too, as Mikhalkov has such a fine eye for detail. To reveal too much of the movie is to give away its stunning climax. It was one of the first films to emerge from the post-Soviet era and gave Mikhalkov a broader international audience, earning him an Oscar in 1994.

Heartbreaking
This is one of the most powerful movies I can remember seeing. In many movies about the Holocaust or the gulags, the focus is on the suffering in the camps. This movie shows the idyllic life ripped apart by the paranoia of Stalin and his overwhelming cult of personality. The whole movie rings true with everything that i have read about the Soviet Union during the purges.

The pace is slow, but the acting is brilliant, the cinematography gorgeous, and the ending packs a punch.

Uh... I thought this was the band, burnt by the sun!
Okay, i bought this thinking it was about burnt by the sun the grind/metal band...Well, i was wrong ! Anyways, i got a change to actullie read the book & i was quite impress better then any other book i've read before. Interesting plot and it has the best ending! Buy it now ! ... Read more

Amazon.com

Based on Susanna Kaysen's acclaimed journal-memoir, Girl, Interrupted bears inevitable resemblance to One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, and pale comparison to that earlier classic is impossible to avoid. The mental institution settings of both films guarantee a certain degree of déjà vu and at least one Oscarwinner (in this case, Angelina Jolie), since playing a loony is any actor's dream gig. Unfortunately, director James Mangold seems to have misplaced the depth and delicacy of his underrated debut, Heavy, despite a great deal of earnest effort by everyone involved. It's easy to see why Winona Ryder chose to star in (and executive-produce) this nearly worthy adaptation of Kaysen's book, since it's a strong vehicle for female casting and potent drama. Mangold certainly got the former; whether he succeeded with the latter is not so clear.

To be sure, Ryder conveys the confusion and chaos that signified Kaysen's life during nearly 18 months of voluntary institutionalization beginning in 1967. But the film seems too eager to embrace the cliché that the"crazies" of the Claymoore women's ward are saner than the war-torn world outside, and lack of narrative focus gives way to semipredictable character study. Susanna (Ryder) is labeled with "borderline personality disorder," a diagnosisas ambiguous as her own emotions, and while Jolie chews the scenery as the resident bad-girl sociopath, Ryder effectively conveys an odyssey from vulnerable fear to self-awareness and, finally, to healing. The ensemble cast is uniformly superb, making this drama well worthwhile, even as it treads familiar territory. If it ultimately lacks dramatic impact, Girl, Interrupted makes it painfully clear that the boundaries of dysfunction are hazy in a world where everyone's crazy once in a while. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (231)

So, what's your diag-nonsense?
The movie is based on the real life story of Susanna Kaysen (Winona Ryder), who was admitted to Claymoore, a mental institution, in the late 60's after drowning a bottle of aspirin with a bottle of vodka. She insists this wasn't a suicide attempt, but her parents and psychiatrist don't agree. While at Claymoore, Susanna meets the ohter inmates, Georgina (Clea Duvall), her roommate, who's a pathological liar, Polly (Elisabeth Moss), who everyone calls Torch and has been badly scarred by fire, Daisy (Britanny Murphy), who won't eat in front of anyone, Janet (Angela Bettis), who won't eat at all, and most importantly, Lisa (Angelina Jolie). Lisa is a sociopath. She constantly escapes Claymoore, only to return after having a crisis (or running out of money). She "runs" the place and is a major pain in the ass for Nurse Valerie (Whoopi Goldberg).

Soon after, Susanna starts to wonder if she's indeed crazy or if she's turning crazy by being there. The doctors at Claymoore, Melvin (Jeffrey Tambor) and Dr. Wick (Vanessa Grave) seem to think she's mentally ill, while her boyfriend Toby (Jared Leto) disagrees.

Susanna has to deal with the situation, trying not to spiral into insanity, but at the same time finding a substitute for a home amongst this group of rejects.

As for the acting, it is solid all across the board. Ryder does a convincing job as the lead character and all of the other actresses shine in their roles, especially Murphy, but this is Jolie's film. She steals almost every scene she's in, from the distressed crying on one of her downs, to frighteningly mad outbursts, to maniac lunacy. She earned a well deserve Oscar for her supporting role.

The director, James Mangold, has also helmed films like Cop Land (1997, with Sylvester Stallone, Robert DeNiro and Harvey Keitel), Kate & Leopold (2001, with Hugh Jackman and Meg Ryan) and Identity (2003, with John Cusack, Ray Liotta and Amanda Peet).

"I didn't try to kill myself...I had a headache"
"Girl, Interrupted" is the true story of Susanna Kaysen (Winona Ryder), a young woman who was diagnosed with borderline personality disorder during the 1960s. My favorite parts of the film were the transitions between scenes; the movie flowed beautifully. Susanna signs herself into Claymoore, a mental institution, after a failed attempt at suicide. At Claymoore, she meets a wide variety of different girls, each with different problems. There is Lisa the sociopath, played by Angelina Jolie and Daisy, a loner, played by "Clueless's" Brittany Murphy. Whoopi Goldberg rounds out the cast as Valerie, the head nurse on Susanna's floor. A bit reminiscent of "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest," "Girl, Interrupted" is one of the finest films I have ever seen. Winona Ryder is brilliant, I have never seen her portray a character better.

One Flew over the Girl
Of course any movie made about people in a psychiatric ward will resemble the classic 'One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest'. This we also do not know for sure if the leading character is sane or not.

Winona Ryder is great in this movie, though a little too pretty. The best perfomance comes from Angelina Jolie, who is just amazing. The movie is sometimes a little sad, frightening, scary but also moving. The ending is a little sweet but not too sweet. A happy ending with a twist.

The music is great since it plays in 1968, although the theme of the sixties is a little underplayed. It is still a great movie though.

It gives you a new look on how normal some people are.
This is one of the most brilliant movies. The acting is superb, and the story grabs you. Angelina Jolie and Wynona Ryder do really good performances. The movies makes you think about how different people are and not to judge and be more aware of people's feelings. The movie is awesome. I highly reccomend it.

BORDERLINE PERSONALITY DISORDER
Girl Interrupted was on last tonight. You know when the shoplifter reads about BORDERLINE PERSONALITY DISORDER? What a revelation! That's me - well, except for the CASUAL SEX - but the DIRECTIONLESSNESS and the SELF-DESTRUCTIVE ACTS (I quit my job the other day).

All this time I thought I was an existentialist. I was wasting my evenings on Camus and Kierkegaard (my back is like a tightrope dancer's, twisted in my childhood, and therefore it is easy for me. One, two, three - I can walk upside in existence). What comfort: the condition is medical not metaphysical.

All I needs do is clear up my skin. Then I aim to complete those symptoms ... and I'd like to begin with Anjelina Jolie ... and even if she got all serious on me, that would be okay: I'd explain to her: the disorder was what was casual (- it was part of my directionlessness). Not you. My aim is true - I'm an existentialist. ... Read more

Description

Expect big, big laughs when funnyman Danny DeVito (TWINS, RUTHLESS PEOPLE) joins forces with talened director Penny Marshall (A LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN, BIG) to deliver a lively five-star comedy you're going to love! DeVito plays a down-on-his-luck businessman who desperately takes the only job offered -- a teaching position in the U.S. Army. His mission: keep a ragtag bunch of underachieving misfits from flunking out of basic training! Be on alert for laughter as this unlikely new teacher and his underdog class unexpectedly inspire one another to be all that they can be! ... Read more

Reviews (27)

Comedy plus Shakespeare
I can't believe that only 10 people have wrote a review for "Renaissance Man." I thought it was a lot more popular than that and I know that it deserves all the praise and popularity that it can get! Bill Rago (Danny DeVito) takes a job as a teacher in the Army even though he doesn't have any teaching experience and doesn't really want the job. Yeah I agree that that does sound a little far fetched, but not all movies have to tell a true story!

Bill doesn't exactly know what to teach about, so he just teaches the 'students' about something he really likes, the book, Hamlet. Will the army students enjoy learning about Hamlet or will they think it's boring? Will Bill Rago be a good teacher or a fluke? I recommend watching the movie to find out.

I thought "Renaissance Man" was a great movie. Unlike what many people might think or might had heard about it previously, it's not really a full-fledged comedy movie. Danny DeVito is hilarious in the movie and the part that I'll remember the most from the whole movie is one of the funniest parts I've ever seen in any movie!! I couldn't quit laughing at the part where Danny DeVito got to the top of a tall place in the army, and he has to try and work his way down with a rope even though he's TERRIFIED of heights. "Renaissance Man" has a few other hilarious parts, but really when it all comes down to it, it's more of a drama movie and more of a feel-good movie than it is a comedy. Not that that's bad, but that's the only complaint I have whatsoever about the movie, it could've had a few more hilarious parts where more people would have given it rave reviews and remembered it the rest of their lives. However, it wasn't bad enough to take away any of my rating for it, so I still give it a 5.

If you like great comedy/drama movies, I recommend getting "Renaissance Man." You'll laugh your head off and feel the drama at the same time.

Genius Point
Danny DeVito was perfect for his character as Bill Rago. The story is about an unemployed man who becomes a teacher in the Army to train eight iffy soldiers. DeVito's job is to teach his kids to comprehend. The thing is, if DeVito fails, that's it for these guys, they're out of the Army and out of a job. DeVito instructs the kids early in the film to bring something to read to class. Then a soldier asks DeVito what he was reading. He responds, "Hamlet." One of the soldiers then identifies the book as a story about a little bitty pig. But as anyone knows it is written by Shakespear. The kids show great interest in it. The film goes on and DeVito starts to bond with the kids he once hated.

DeVito had been typecasted as a man who is halfway good/halfway bad due to his roll in "Taxi," but he shows his true acting talent here in this film. Rent it, it's a great movie.

I Love this Movie!!!!!!!!!!!!
I love this movie. All of the great actors and actresses that are in this movie are incredible. I can't get enough of this movie. I watch it almost everyday. This movie is a classic. This movie is to me as The Godfather is to guys. That's how much I love this movie.

Danny De Vito
I simply adored this movie with Danny De Vito! I really cracked up with the scene where he goes up the victory tower and has to come down. I also love Lillo Brancato and his impersonations of "Scarface" and the "Raging Bull." I'm not a real Shakespeare fan, but I admit that I definitely got into this movie. Danny is on my top 10 of favorites.

Above average and more sensible than you think
Yes, there really are English teachers in the Army. My sister-in-law was a civilian hired to improve the writing and reading of GIs who needed extra help. This is a very funny movie and Danny Devito makes it worth watching. It takes the right teacher to make Shakespeare worth reading. I'd have paid a lot more attention in English class if I had a teacher like him! ... Read more

Reviews (106)

Better Than "Silence of the Lambs" or "Natural Born Killers"
Yes...this is another movie review by PR...but please don't delete and move on until you've read this.

I just finished watching a film I never knew existed until my demented camera film processor guy once again suggested I see a film that would knock my socks off.

He's done it again!

This one, entitled "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer", makes "Natural Born Killers" look like a baby. This thriller has it all...and the title tells all.

Hannibal Lechter was frightening and sometimes unreal...HENRY IS REAL!!!!! AND SO FRIGHTENING you may not survive the first 5 minutes. If you do, then fasten those seat belts and get ready for one of the most chilling crime thrillers you have ever seen.

And figure this. Most chillers, thrillers and killers involve the cops. Not once during this 2-hour film do you see a cop trying to find this maniac. This is, definitely, a "portrait" of a maniacal killer...and there are scenes that are so real, you may wanna add an extra bolt to your door, look more often into your rear view mirror, and never see another chiller again.

Henry is portrayed by little known Michael Rooker. He is the spitten image of Woody Harrelson in "Natural Born Killers", but much more believable. This guy is totally in tune with being insane...and he's great in this insane role.

Then there's Tom Towles as "Otis", just as deranged, and even more so a total pervert. He is the brother of love interest "Becky", played by Tracy Arnold.

This one is a solid "10" for crime buffs. If you loved "Silence of the Lambs" and "Natural Born Killers", ya gotta see "Henry".

Each of you needs to have a buddy like I have at the local camera shop. This guy is even more deranged than me. He loves the same flicks that I do...and he has been an invaluable resource.

In the crime thriller...deranged serial killer...totally insane murder flick genre', "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer" is a top notch TEN....10...10...10. Don't miss this one!

AN OVERRATED MOVIE
I'm sure you've kown that situation in your movie lover life : - all your friends have seen a movie you haven't seen yet and they keep telling you it's the best movie of the year and they can't understand why you're the last one of the whole wide world who is still resisting. And you feel a little bit ashamed. Oh, just a little bit but painfully ashamed ! That has happened to me with HENRY. So, eight years later, spread the news, folks, I have bought the DVD ! Yesterday, I sat in my sofa, put the DVD in the player and watched. ... 90 minutes later, I have watched it, I was still in my sofa and I felt terrible. How TIME Magazine could put that movie in its list of the ten best of 1990 ? HENRY is a kind of clinical film ; it depicts the life of a serial killer living with an ex-con and his sister. John McNaughton chose to show us the pure facts without any critical point of view and, in fact, without any linear story. So, we see Henry kill, eat, laugh and drive and we don't know, at the end of the movie, the motivations which lead him to kill. Because Henry always lies even when he seems to make a confidence. It's OK for me if the director had the purpose to present a documentary but if he wanted to present a movie, he failed. For me, I have another word to qualify this kind of stuff : A BOOK. Without pictures. A DVD for the butchers, a corporation I admire very much.

Brutally Candid Horror..
Body after body is depicted together with murdering agonizing screams as a background sound. This is the beginning of Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, which instills a nightmarish vision of the mind of a serial killer. The film is loosely based on Henry Lee Lucas who was emotionally, physically, and sexually abused as child by his mother while living with his handicapped father who had lost his legs in an train accident. Henry had been forced to wear dresses and watch his mother having sex with strangers, which has created internal enraged emotions toward women. In addition, Henry shows an emotional numbness whenever he has killed someone as if he had just finished the last of his coffee.

The story takes place in the Chicago area where Henry lives with Otis and Becky. Otis spent time in jail with Henry where the two became friends. His sister Becky has recently escaped an abusive relationship while Henry goes about trying to find odd jobs and killing women in random ways as it will not leave a trail back to him. However, when living in close quarters with others it is does not take long before Otis finds out about Henry's secret, but instead of going to the police they partner up. Henry teaches him the secret of killing for pleasure and together they begin to find ways of sharing these grotesque moments with each other.

Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer has some interesting cinematic moments where a camera is use for the main point-of-view, which later is transferred into the living room. This brings a morbidly surreal experience to the audience as the fetish of the disturbed characters is brought to the eyes of the audience in a revolting manner. Yet, it is a subtle transition, which most people have experienced through their own home video moments. The story is filmed with highly grained film stock, which enhances the realistic acuity of the environment as it brings further horror to the minds of the audience. Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer is a highly disturbing film that experiments with audience participation in the film in a most clever way, which leaves the audience with a truly horrific cinematic experience.

Now THIS is a truly scary horror flick
After watching the entire run of 'Nightmare on Elm Street' and a few of the 'Friday the 13th' flicks, I found myself rather unimpressed by the whole slasher-horror deal. I was given a couple starts here 'n' there, and was occasionally grodied-out by a few of the more gratuitous scenes of gore, but overall I didn't find any of the flicks particularly scary or disturbing. Thanks to these movies I was about to give up on the horror scene, seein' as how I wasn't actually scared, shocked, or all that disturbed by what I had witnessed. That's when 'Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer' came to the rescue. Now, THIS film really is quite disturbing, and is very scary at times. It's most likely due to the fact that it's loosely based on the exploits of serial killer Henry Lee Lucas, and was set in the real world where there aren't any Christmas-sweatered burn victims killing you in your dreams, nor a seven-foot-tall hockey-masked machete-wielder aimin' to hack you to bits. The whole this-could-actually-be-happening-right-now-somewhere angle helped fill me with a good sense of dread, and gave me more of a scare than any ghost-&-goblin fare could ever hope to.

I couldn't believe the pleasure the titular character and his buddy, a near-'tard of a killer-in-training, took in the murder of a motorist and an abusive fence (stolen goods dealer). Then there's the home invasion that they video taped for posterity, which I understand caused some viewers to walk outta the theater at a few of the film festivals this played in. The eye-stabbing scene was pretty hard to witness, even though it was a rather brief cut, and it was apparent that the head that received the eyeball-stab was a dummy head made up to sorta look like the character who suffers the injury. Topping things off is the utterly strange 'romance' that develops between Henry and Otis' sister, which culminates in one of the saddest most eff'd-up endings I've ever witnessed. Put these all together and combine 'em with Henry's deceptive façade of harmlessness, and you've got a horror movie that's truly horrible. I'd finally found what I was lookin' for...

Included with the DVD edition of the movie is a half-hour-long interview with writer-director John McNaughton, who discusses his filmmaking background, what inspired him to create 'Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer', and a few of the difficulties he encountered making the movie and keeping it within its low budget. Also thrown in are brief text production notes, English subtitles, and trailers for 'Henry' 1 and 2. Although I haven't heard too many good things about Part 2, the trailer to it looked promising. Methinks I know what I'll be checkin' out, next time I hit the local Blockbuster...

'Late

Mean as a junkyard dog
The reputation of John McNaughton's "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer" is enormous in the realm of independent cinema. Made on a budget of over one hundred thousand dollars back in the 1980s, the movie went on to polarize viewers and critics alike. Some praised McNaughton's unflinching vision, his nihilistic portrayal of two lower class killers with nothing to live for and nothing to lose. The other camp rejected the film outright, deriding it as the worst sort of exploitative trash cinema. I tend to favor the former opinion; I think McNaughton's film is a brilliant look at a microscopic segment of society we all know exists even if it is rarely discussed. Besides, bashing the film as exploitative beggars the question of who it is exploiting. Serial killers? Guys like Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer, and Henry Lee Lucas (the killer McNaughton loosely based the film on) could stand to have a bit more mud slung on their already malevolent reputations. I cannot find one scene in the movie that idolizes what these two guys do in their spare time. And, unlike slasher films and sundry other horror films, "Henry" demonstrates that violent acts have serious consequences.

"Henry" takes place in the dirty, gray streets and alleyways of Chicago. Henry (Michael Rooker) and his prison pal Otis (Tom Towles) spend their days working low paying jobs, drinking beer, and watching television. Otis toils at a gas station in between trips to his parole officer. Henry works as an insect exterminator (!). Things start looking up when Becky (Tracy Arnold), Otis's sister, moves in with the pair to escape the doldrums of small town life. Although she has some problems back home with a troublesome boyfriend, Becky takes a shine to Henry almost immediately. She pesters her brother for information about the man and is not disturbed in the least when Otis tells her that Henry went to prison for murdering his mother. In fact, she finds this information rather intriguing. Henry comes to like Becky too, so much so that he steps in when Otis treats her in a disturbing manner. The presence of Becky complicates the odd relationship between the two men, a relationship that is soon to take a horrific turn as Otis discovers what Henry does in his spare time.

Henry is a serial killer, a despicable murderer who preys on total strangers. He thinks nothing of following a potential victim home from the mall, or picking up strangers in bars and then dispatching them in grisly ways. Henry likes the feeling he gets from his crimes, and he soon involves Otis in his gruesome activities. Why his friend decides to help is a mystery. Perhaps he feels Becky driving a wedge between him and Henry. Otis exhibits many of the behaviors associated with a follower, and Henry is definitely a take-charge sort of guy, so maybe that is the overriding reason. Whatever the case, Otis soon becomes as enthusiastic about murder as Henry. When Otis complains about being angry one evening, his pal helpfully relieves the tension by tricking a passing car into stopping so the two can shoot the driver. A broken television set provides the impetus for a killing at a fence's office. The absolute worst crime involving these two, however, is something we see on videotape as Henry and Otis relive their thrills. Predictably, Becky soon discovers what her brother and his friend do when they aren't at home. The conclusion to the film is a shocker.

Any way you cut it (no pun intended), "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer" is an excruciating experience. The crimes, while not overtly gory, revel in the sheer sadism of the act. If McNaughton was attempting to evoke a sense of outrage on the part of the audience, he succeeded wildly. You cannot even stand to look at these people after awhile, so repulsive are their actions. I found myself praying for a police officer, a security guard, a neighborhood watch guy-anybody in authority to show up and put a stop to these two goons' activities. But as evil in real life often goes unchecked, so do Henry's and Otis's extracurricular activities in Chicago. The film accomplishes what it sets out to do largely because the performances of the two actors playing the principal characters do such a good job. "Henry" was Michael Rooker's first film, and I agree with McNaughton when he says in the interview on the disc that this actor had star written all over him. Rooker plays Henry as a sort of withdrawn, soft-spoken type that probably would appear unthreatening to potential victims. Just as good is Tom Towles as the grubby Otis, who portrays his character as an insufferable extrovert who occasionally sinks into pouty silences. Without these two actors, one wonders whether "Henry" would have become the cult classic it is today.

The DVD version of the film is a good one. A lengthy interview with John McNaughton tells the viewer everything they ever wanted to know about the movie. The director explains the long road to finishing the project, his experiences when it finally opened in a theater, and the lengthy battle with the MPAA over the rating for the movie, a battle which saw the censors pushing for extensive cuts to avoid the dreaded 'X' rating while McNaughton fought to keep his vision intact. Considering some of the extreme films floating around out there today, the concerns of the censors seem rather archaic now. Still, the film has lost little of its power to disturb deeply. Fans of offbeat cinema, if they have not done so already, will wish to pick this one up soon. ... Read more

Description

Based on Tom Clancy's bestseller, directed by John McTiernan (Die Hard) and starring Sean Connery and Alec Baldwin, THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER sweats with high-tech anxiety and the tension of men who hold Doomsday in their hands.A new technologically-superior Soviet nuclear sub, the Red October, is heading for the U.S. coast under the command of Captain Marko Ramius (Connery).The American government thinks Ramius is planning to attack.A lone CIA analyst (Baldwin) has a different idea: he thinks Ramius is planning to defect, but he has only a few hours to find him and prove it - because the entire Russian naval and air commands are trying to find him, too.The hunt is on! ... Read more

Reviews (157)

Fantastic adaption of Clancy's novel
A first-rate thriller that provides the goods again and again. Excellent cast, good direction (the almost always reliable McTiernan--see "Last Action Hero" for the only real blemish on his record), plenty of suspense and thrills. There are a few differences between the novel and the film, but only purists will quibble about that. And yes, Scotsman Connery plays a Lithuanian, but he does it well, and as always, brings a touch of class to the role. I despise Alec Baldwin, but he's perfect as Ryan--the right age and look combined with the proper mix of guile, humility, and cockiness. The film also boasts an excellent supporting cast, with kudos to Sam Neill, Richard Jordan, and Courtney Vance for their performances. Scott Glenn and James Earl Jones are also solid in their roles. The occasional "technobabble" and military talk may confuse those unfamiliar with such terms, but it doesn't detract from the plot or action--in other words, you can still understand and follow the film even if you don't understand the terminology. The DVD features no extras of note, unfortunately, but the transfer quality--while a bit off-color at times--is still far better than VHS, and those of you with home theaters BEWARE--the sound quality (5.1 Surround) is frighteningly good at times (is that torpedo in your living room, or on the screen?!?). A so-so disc, but an incredible, intelligent thriller that's worth buying in any format.

Decent film; terrible DVD
"The Hunt for Red October" is a smart, tightly directed adaptation of Tom Clancy's novel of the same name. It's probably one of the more entertaining submarine movies (if you'll buy into the genre). There are some wonderful performances (especially by Joss Ackland, Courtney B. Vance, and the late Richard Jordan) as well as some inspired casting (most notably Tim "Dr. Frank-N-Furter" Curry as Dr. Petrov). While this film is certainly no "Das Boot," it is highly entertaining for all of its 134 minutes.
However, as an avid collector of DVDs and laser discs, this is perhaps the worst video transfer I have ever seen. In fact, I've seen Chinese bootleg copies of other films that have been superior in terms of video quality. For example: In the opening sequence there is a great deal of dust and dirt on the screen - like you're in a third-rate theater watching the film after it has been showing for about a month and a half. Another example: There is an important interior scene on the USS Dallas that features a wonderfully acted and written interplay between Seaman Jones (Vance) and Seaman Beaumont (Ned Vaughn). However, each shot of Jones is inexplicably awash with so much video noise that it completely distracts from the performances.
Why Paramount would neglect such a film is beyond me. The other huge disapointment on this disc is the complete lack of any extras. This disc is a complete bust. Frankly, I hope that another edition is released out of respect to this worthy film.

The best of the Jack Ryan film series.
Based on Tom Clancy's 1984 novel of the same title, "The Hunt for Red October" is the first Jack Ryan adventure on film. Although I like Harrison Ford better in the role of Jack Ryan than either Alec Baldwin or Ben Affleck, "Red October" is the best of the Ryan films partly because of the script, but largely because of the ensemble cast including Scott Glenn, Sam Neill, Tim Curry, James Earl Jones and, of course, Sean Connery as Captain Marko Ramius, the Lithuanian-born commanding officer on the Soviet nuclear submarine Red October who seeks to defect to the United States. Tension builds as Ramius and the Red October move closer to U.S. waters with the Soviet Navy in pursuit and U.S. forces unsure of Ramius' true intentions. "The Hunt for Red October" is a taut thriller, an excellent movie based on a modern masterpiece of a novel, and I fully recommend it.

One of the best movies you will ever see
Tom Clancy is a master writer. His books are amazing thrillers and the moives haven't been that bad either. This is the best of all the Tom Clancy books that have been made into moives and is one of the best book adaptations ever.

Captian Ramius(Connery) is the best the Soviet fleet has to offer. He's trained most of it and he's now in charge of a new Soviet sub. This sub has a new drive system that runs silent meaning it can't be detected by other subs sonars. After Ramius writes a letter to the Soviet Naval command the search is on. They alert the Americans saying Ramius and his crew has gone mad.

The Hunt for The Red October is on. The U.S. can't play around on this idea because the October could park in any U.S. bay and launch hundreds of Nuclear missiles. Jack Ryan(Baldwin) is a CIA Operative that gets selected to help with this mission. He's met Ramius before and doesn't believe that the man wants to harm the U.S. He believes that Ramius wants to defect along with his officers to the U.S., but he's not sure how Ramius is planning to do it. He now has only a couple of hours to prove the intentions of Ramius and save the ship before the U.S. or Soviet fleets find it and sink her.

All the actors are fantastic in the movie. Alec Baldwin is Jack Ryan is flawless. He played the role to perfection and it's the best movie he's ever made. Sean Connery is the man. Instead of killing Soviets he plays one to perfection in this moive. I love his accent and I though he did a great job of faking it. I loved Sam Neil in the moive. His character Vasily has always been one of my favorites because of his loyalty to Ramius. One of Neils best performances. Tim Curry is good as the weasal Soviet doctor. He plays a weasal better than anybody else. James Earl Jones is himself in this movie and like Connery is just the man. I also like Courtney Vance as 2nd Petty Officer Jones. He gives one of the most memorable performances of the movie. This is an all star cast and everybody is fantastic.

John Mctiernan is one of the best directors in Hollywood. He was one of the biggest when this moive was done with hit titles under his belt like Die Hard and Predator. He can make a good action thriller and this is one of the best ones ever made.

The cinematography is great in the film. You feel like your on real naval ships. The uniforms are authenic on both fleets. The sound is fantastic. This is such a well made movie and the is the movie that all submarine movies should stive to look like.

This is such a good movie. It's made to perfection with a great cast, well made, awesome score, and is just flawless. If you want to sit down and watch a good action thriller than this is it. You will struggle to find a better made movie than this.

Best of the Series
Though I have to admit that I prefered Harrison Ford as Jack Ryan, I'll have to give THFRO the nod for the best in the series. The show's brilliant. Brilliant script that is well executed by wonderful acting. Sean Connery's the man. Can't imagine anyone else playing Ramius. Baldwin did a wonderful job playing Ryan. His best role till date. Would have been greeat to have seen him develop the character in the sequels. And furthermore, James Earl Jones aka the voice of Darth Vader makes his presence in all 3 movies felt though his air time's brief. His presence was greatly missed in The Sum of All Fears.

If the studios are planning another Jack Ryan movie..... please get rid of Affleckand bring back Baldwin. ... Read more

Description

Featuring an all-star cast headed by Laurence Fishburne, fireballs of high speed air action explode off the screen in this exciting story of the "Fighting 99th," the first squadron of black American pilots to be allowed to fight for their country. Based on the true story. ... Read more

Reviews (19)

Excellent portrayal of courage regardless of race.
This is an inspiring movie about how African-American pilots overcame great odds on and off the battlefield. I have seen many war movies and this is one of the best, especially since it is based on a true story. Until I saw this movie, I wasn't aware of the great achievements of these pilots during WWII. This movie is definitely a testimony to the fact that courage is not dependent upon a person's color.

American History at its very best
The story of the magnificent 332nd Fighter Group is woven into a dramatic tapestry of the horror of war and the disjointed approach of many Americans to a difficult time and a situation many would have preferred to ignore. The performance of the pilots who graduated the Tuskegee Training Program (they NEVER lost an escorted bomber to enemy action!) unfolds against the backdrop of misunderstanding, racism and political machinations that nearly destroyed the entire enterprise. This film does a magnificent job of telling the tale without being melodramatic, preachy or snide, but does full justice to the accomplishments of the pilots and their eventual victory against both German pilots and their own nation's refusal to recognize their talents. For the student of World War II, this is a well-known and much-respected story. For the student of African-American History, it is a tale of pride which shines as brightly as the stars on the American Flag these men so courageously defended. Fishburn and Cuba Gooding are superior as men caught between their own humanity and the de-humanizing effects of war. If ever a film deserve a 5-Star rating, this one does.

Outstanding film about outstanding men! Long overdue!
This film is long overdue! The Tuskegee Airmen were one of the bravest groups of men to ever grace the uniformed services. They fought so much than just the "official" enemy. They fought racism on levels that most of us can never comprehend. Imagine the stress they must have been under at all times. Yet, they still took a stand for their country and changed things for all of us, regardless of race. These men have been so under-appreciated by the country, and especially by our home state, Alabama.

This movie should be incorporated into every Alabama history class in the state and every American hstory class in the country. It is an outstanding movie about an outstanding group of men. Every American should own it!

Note: In spite of what others may feel about the bravery and "kill counts" of the German fliers, the 332nd never lost a bomber that they were assigned to escort and even saved a few that they were not assigned to escort! Talk is cheap when there is documented proof! The Tuskegee Airmen rocked!

Outstanding!... But Could've Been Better
I was thrilled to hear about the coming of this movie--then saddened to realize that it was only to be shown as a TV movie. It seemed to me that the saga of these marvelous aviator warriors--treated as they were as second-class citizens by their own government--is one which deserved to be a silver-screen triumph. Our four-engine bombers were being punched out of the sky by the Luftwaffe, but NEVER when the Tuskegee pilots graced their wingtips. Their combat record was nothing short of amazing. The movie was well done, with great story, great actors, great acting. Still, I came away wishing that it might have been better in one respect: During the aerial combat segments, you hear the pilots bantering back and forth loudly over the radios using these rediculous phrases: "Take that, Gerry!" "That's for yo mamma, Gerry!" This was such a great movie; why did they have to dip into corny dialogue during the dog-fighting? It was a flawless procduction till it went hackneyed in those moments.
Aside from that, it was awe-inspiring, moving, even gripping. I just hope the subject is not dropped, and that someday the Tuskegee heroes' story is given even better homage--on the silver screen. This is a far more important story than, say, the sinking of the Titanic.

Proud of these heroes
I'm a white 64 year old Air Force veteran. Watching these heroes of WWII in dedicated, valorous performance, who never lost a bomber to the Nazis, brought tears and pride from me for them. For those still on the ground and for those still "On Patrol", thank you! ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Widescreen fans please note...
...you can order a very good quality print of this film from Amazon France's marketplace sellers. The only drawback is that the English version has French subtitles which can't be erased using the menu. However, when you see the low price, even accounting for postage, you won't complain.

A movie that needs to be remade
Don't get me wrong. This movie is fun but as historical accuracies go, it falls pretty flat. The movie doesn't even use the real names of the people involved.

I'm a big fan of epic period pieces and I think there is a lot going for this kind of movie to be made today (with an international cast)

First I'd choose John Milius, Michael Mann, or Mel Gibson as director

Sample Cast
George Clooney or Billy Zane.....US Marine Major
Catherine Zeta Jones...Russian countess
Elizabeth Hurley....British ambassador's wife
Tom Sizemore.....US Marine sgt
Chow Yun Fat.....Prince Tuan
Michelle Yeoh....Empress Dowager
Brian Cox....British Ambassador
Ioan Gruffudd (Hornblower) or Heath Ledger....British Captain
Jermey Irons....German Colonel
Sophie marceau....French ambassador's wife
Alan Rickman....Russian ambassador

You get the picture :-)

spectacular yet intimate
Before the era of political correctness, Caucasian actors donned make up to play characters of other races; roles which, for whatever reason, could not be filled by non-white actors at that time. If you are the kind of person who gets mad watching white people play "sinister" Chinese roles then stay away from this movie or be prepared for this kind of thing:

Prince Tuan: "Your majesty, the execution has been stopped!"

The Empress: "Who!"

Prince Tuan: "Jung Lu!"

However if you can keep that momentary suspension of disbelief going just long enough to allow yourself to get into the story, then you can believe Flora Robson is the Empress and 55 Days is one of the most underrated films of all time: the action sequences are extremely well paced and choreographed and the film, for the most part, stays faithful to history. Obviously the producers could not reproduce the entire Forbidden City so the "palace" exterior scenes are somewhat hokey, but the legation compound and the city wall are reproduced in a convincing way and as set pieces they are used to great effect.

Look for Walter Gotell (General Gogol from the 007 films) and Nicholas Ray himself (in wheelchair) as the American ambassador.

55 days at peking
With all the wham, bam, thank you not madam junk that is prevasive now, this has a superb plot and it has class. This is a 5 star in a world of -1 s! Niven is wonderous and Ava is regal with her feet of clay.

Enjoyable epic and star vehicle
"55 Days At Peking" is an unusual and enjoyable epic and star vehicle. Not least among its admirable characteristics is a set re-creating in Spain an authentic impression of the old Legation Quarter of Peking. The set makes sense to anyone who knows the actual site in modern-day Beijing. That is a considerable achievement in the pre-digital cinematic art of illusion. It shows, too, that there was a great deal of China knowledge behind the making of the movie. Well into the 1990s, many Boxer Rebellion-era structures survived in the old Legation Quarter of Beijing. Due to enduring political and cultural sensitivities, the historical significance of these structures was unsignposted and ignored by the official Chinese tourist authorities, and most of the area was occupied by Chinese Government organisations. The gate of the former British Legation which was recreated for the movie could still be seen just off Chang'an Avenue in Zhengyi Street, a short walk southwest from the Beijing Hotel. The layout and other striking architectural features of the area are well-recorded in books such as Michael J. and Yeone Wei-Chih Moser's "Foreigners Within The Gates" (Oxford 1993). The movie takes liberties with history--overplaying, for instance, the US military contribution, and making the British Minister (played by David Niven) appear a more militarily energetic figure than he seemed to contemporary observers of the siege of the legations. Some purists might find jarring the poor Chinese calligraphy in graffiti, and the casting of (generally well made-up) Caucasian actors in major Chinese roles. However, the standard caveat applies that this is an entertainment, not a documentary. Talent like Chow Yun-Fat, John Lone, Gong Li, Zhang Yimou and Wayne Wang wasn't available to western moviemakers in 1963. "55 Days At Peking" entertains with a creditable impression of this historical episode when China warred by proxy on the rest of the world. It is an interesting film to compare with "Khartoum", in which Charlton Heston also plays the lead, as part of the canon of epic moviemaking about imperial and colonial wars. The casting and illusion of China is worth comparing with "The Inn Of The Sixth Happiness" (1958), in which Robert Donat plays a Chinese mandarin and Wales substitutes for China. It would be fascinating to see a remake of this film with a re-worked story and script, a re-arrangement of Dimitri Tiomkin's excellent score, digital technology, and cross-cultural casting and direction. However, as it probably still could not be shot in China without unacceptable interference, it might need "Red Corner" treatment. ... Read more

Reviews (15)

A Fine Piece
Dubbed as the comeback for the three starring actors, this movie is rather laidback and allows the stars to easily do their best and make the movie work. Nick Nolte easily plays the bum who is taken in and cleaned up by the rich family and who is a charmer. Richard Dreyfuss plays the rich man who takes Nolte in and he does a good job with many funny scenes. Bette kinda steals the show as the rich, stuck up wife who is rather standoffish as she seems as if she's better than others in her own mind. The supporting cast which includes Little Richard, a dog, and others help to make the movie work well as they support everyone else with a nice chemistry throughout. THe movie also works because it is both funny and touching at the same time. Good Job!!

Good comedy which should have been great
Based upon "Boudu Saved From Drowning", this flick also reflects other works such as Moliere's "Tartuffe", maybe even a bit of "The Rainmaker". As such, it's got a solid basis upon which to build a movie.
What is presented is a mildly amusing soft-hearted satire of contemporary life among the rich who spend more time self-analyzing than most people working. Richard Dreyfuss is fine as the suddenly successful manufacturer and Bette Midler is perfect as the suddenly rich spouse trying to put too many pieces together at the same time. Nick Nolte is the "down and out" (?) visitor who is saved from drowning in their swimming pool. He immediately becomes all things to all the neurotics involved. It's an obvious plotline which follows.
In a scene seemingly derived from Mazursky's earlier "I Love You, Alice B. Toklas!", the madness culminates in a big party. Next door neighbor Little Richard, as the decidedly flambouyant Orvis Goodnight, gets down on piano and rocks out on the uptemo "Great Gosh A'Mighty" [a successful single for LR in '86, by the way]. It's a fun scene, but it's shot too much like a video and the music is not up front. Richard does a nice job in an earlier scene which does not involve music. He appears suddenly in Dreyfuss' backyard, raving about the kind of emergency help available for whites as opposed to blacks. The racial overtones seem dated here, as they do in scenes with Nolte and the domestic help.
The movie has an under-developed air about it, like Mazursky's "The Pickle" and the above mentioned "...Alice B. Toklas". The viewer wants to be challenged into deciding if the suicide attempt was a put-on by Nolte so as to hang with rick folks for a while. You might want to fire up the treadmill or vacuum while this tape rolls.

A Must See Comedy
It has been some time since I saw this flick, but it is a must see for anyone who has not seen it.

One of the best comedies ever made
Despondent over the loss of his dog, Jerry the bum is rescued from an attempted suicide in the swimming pool of a wealthy Beverly Hills businessman, Dave Whitman, and subsequently teaches Whitman to eat garbage, cures the neurotic dog, seduces Whiteman's ungreencarded maid, new-aged-gurued wife, and anorexic daughter, gives the gay son permission to come out of the closet, destroys Whitman's New Year party, teaches the whole family to walk on hot coals and ruins the garden by urinating on the flowers. All of this and a good deal more, produces continuous laughter.

Still great
After more than 15 years, this comedy still elicits huge laughs and the primary reason for that is it's sharp. It bites. No comedy can last through the years without some noticeable degree of sharp social irreverence built into it. It just can't be done. And this comedy is nothing if not irreverent.

Based on the '30s French farce Boudu Saved from Drowning, the American director Paul Mazursky does a terrific job of fusing stinging satire with mock pathos as Nick Nolte's street bum Jerry, having lost the last thing important to him--his dog--decides to end it once and for all. Stumbling into the upper crustean Beverly Hills, he manages to locate a swimming pool at whose bottom he decides to meet his maker. The pool, as it happens, belongs to Richard Dreyfuss' Dave Whiteman, a very wealthy wire hanger mogul, and his daffy wife played by Bette Midler.

Dave's maid, the always fetching Elizabeth Pena, is playing hanky-panky with Dave, yet Dave is not without a heart. He catches sight of Jerry right after his plunge and rescues him, and the rest, as they say, is hysterical.

Everybody, as it happens, winds up loving Jerry--Dave's wife, Dave's maid, Dave's dog, Dave's son, and Dave's daughter. And even Dave himself. What 'love' means here depends on who is doing the loving. Dave's neighbor is Little Richard who can't help but toss in a couple of his songs here and there, which adds to the romp that is this film. Jerry manages to teach just about everybody a thing or two about life--even the dog learns how to eat regular dog food from him.

These days, as the rich get slightly--but not a lot--less rich, and the poor definitely get poorer, it's refreshing to see a comedy that irreverently laces into both. This really refers to class under attack here, and that word has more than one meaning. Social class, what we think of as class (as in 'a class act'), and what we learn from each other (it's Jerry who leads the class--he's the real teacher here) all get the treatment.

A great satire well worth watching, if not owning. Don't miss. ... Read more

Reviews (7)

Book vs. Movie
If anyone has read the book series than you will know that they are better than the movies. I personally like the book series better because they for one go into a lot more detail and they have better storie lines.Even though i am very excited about the new movie comming out, I wish they would have made the first and second movies related to the books.

I really do like the movies, but if you have read the book series than the movies are not as good. I am so excited to find out who Mia marrys in the second princess diaries movie! I wish too that the movie would have come out in movie theaters so then we could have seen the movie sooner!

Just different
Although I am an avid follower of the books, I realize that movies when adapted from books are often quite different. So then the question is the movie still enjoyable? While I was saddened by some of the changes in the first movie, it was still very entertaining. I think that this second movie, though now almost entirely different from the books, looks like it too will be entertaining. And I have to say that the Prince Nicholas guy looks more like what I imagined Michael to look. I was not impressed with the Michael from the first movie. He was really not like the character in the book, so I feel no loss at his removal from the second movie. My advice, enjoy the movie for what it is rather than moment by moment comparison to the books.

not as bad as you might think
When I had heard that there was going to ba a sequel, I was excited. I saw a six minute preview, and yes, she is 21. The story line is this: her grandmother is going to abdicate from the throne. Mia will become the queen, but she must marry within 30 days. There is a big hassle to find the right man, and it is down to two guys.I like the fact that they use the same people for the same characters, like Lilly and Joseph. And though other people might think otherwise, I think that this movie will be entertaining, though I agree that the plot does make the first movie pointless.

Look things up folks!
This movie is not strictly set with the books. It is basically a continuation of the 1st movie with a catch.

Other sources I have seen mention that Mia is 21 not 15. A college graduate to boot! Michael would have been a great catch for her except that he was older and graduated high school before she did.

I refuse to give movie spoilers.

No Michael, No movie
I think anyone who has read all 5 of the book series would agree with me that this movie is a waiste of time unless michael and mia are together. If this movie is about her finding another guy to MARRY, then why did they have michael and mia together in the first place? I am not interested in this movie at all, and it is a big dissapointment if you read the books, although the books are 10 times greater than the movies anyways. ... Read more

Reviews (1008)

The Partisan
I'm no fan of Michael Moore, but my roommate talked me into seeing this film a few weeks ago, and I have to admit being fairly impressed with it. "Bowling for Columbine" is, among other things, quite enjoyable. Moore has grown considerably as a filmmaker, and here he shows a keen eye for pacing and indulging his viewers' sense of mystery. For the most part, he also manages to counterbalance the need for moving and amusing the audience with the danger of making light of a very serious matter. If you want to spend two hours thinking about dark, politically-charged subjects in an entertaining manner, this movie will do the trick.

However, Moore remains prone to all of his old, annoying habits. Self-righteous sarcasm? Got it. Manipulative, callous grandstanding? Got it. Playing fast and loose with the facts? Yes -- but it could be worse.

What "Bowling for Columbine" does best is bury most or all of the "single-answer" explanations for American gun violence. Over the course of the film Moore explores many of the typical, and not-so-typical, scapegoats. These include gun makers, race relations, Hollywood depravations, paranoid minutemen, video game violence, the news media, the NRA, our unravelling social safety nets, and Marilyn Manson -- but no one cause ever stands out as central. The movie makes a very strong, though understated, case that the true root of gun violence is the social and economic breakdown of American communities, and that only by developing a more vibrantly interreliant and nurturing society will we be able to turn the tide of that breakdown.

Unfortunately, though every piece of evidence points Moore towards that conclusion, in the end he throws his anti-gun allies a bone and goes after gunmakers and the NRA with both barrels blazing. It's ironic, because while both those villains certainly have blood on their hands, Moore's partisan tactics reveal him to be as enmeshed in our violent culture as those he would demonize. Welcome to America, old buddy. Maybe we can shoot our way out.

Justice to complexity
Michael Moore has produced a brilliant film in "Bowling for Columbine," beginning to examine the question of gun violence in America. What makes me appreciate this film the most is that it does not provide empty platitudes or draw simple conclusions, simultaneously keeping the level of conversation easy to understand and approachable. Seeing Moore's work mature to this level is uplifting and encouraging, and we see it develop even further in his "Fahrenheit 9/11." He asks more questions than he answers, and does justice to the complexity of the topics (within the confines of a documentary film). Whether you agree with him or not, Moore's gift is to get us talking and to ignite the flashpoints that will catalyze this country's continued growth.

Merciless film of Michael Moore!
This film plays hard. Moore has become in the rebel voice and one of the most irreverent personalities in USA . His brave position deserves him many admirers . The dramatic documental turns around a lot of things but he emphasizes the cruelty , the insanity and the corrupt atmosphere in certain minds .
The handle camera goes from the catoon to the awful drama in just a second . The inquiring position lets to many interwiewed without much to say . He makes himself the questions and tries to find the answers . Mostly the answers simply don't exist and other you deduce for yourself . Even I don't agree in all his opinions, this documental is an important reference for the future of the story in USA.

Extreme Disappointment
I admittedly saw Fahrenheit 9/11 before I saw Bowling for Columbine and that may skew my impressions, but this movie is no where near as good as its reputation would have you believe. The central theme of Bowling for Columbine is gun control and ownership, yet Moore's thesis has nothing to do with guns. Rather he states we are a country gripped by fear, and then spends 2 hours talking about nothing but guns. This disconnect between point-to-be-made and evidence ends up giving viewers no idea what Moore's final point really is. And as a result people walk away from this movie picking and choosing what points they like to back up their own personal beliefs without having any clue what Moore was actually trying to tell them.
As a result this is first and foremost a bad documentary. Its certainly educational but poorly thought out and poorly executed. Also Moore's style of gotcha interviews are all unnecessary and seem extremely forced on his part. They attempt to make him look like a moral deacon, but are more corny than compelling. I miss the Moore of TV Nation, where he stuck it to people who deserved it and caused havoc for havoc's sake. Now he's more concerned about himself and acting emotionally affected over other people's plight (key word: acting).
Even though this is a poor documentary, it is still enjoyable to watch and most people will find it educational as to the state of the country. So even though I give it two stars for dishonest and disjointed execution, I still would recommend at least viewing it once.

To the nay-sayers...
I'm not going to proselytize; my feelings on the quality of this movie have already been adequately expressed by previous reviewrers. However, to those who criticised the movie; a couple of suggestions.
Firstly, the name-calling; it doesn't give a very flattering representation of those who call him names, and indicates a lack of any valid criticism of the film. And considering that the majority of name-calling comes from statistically the most obese nation on Earth, the insults of 'fat pig' etc come across a bit hollow. He's fat- get over it. It doesn't make the film any different.
Secondly, the claims of it being a 'lie-fest.' There are several innacuracies, none of which were vital to the film's meaning and message. While this is inexcusable, if the 'huge' errors were so damaging, why hasn't Moore been sued?
Thirdly, to those who claim Moore is anti-American; the anger and disrespect he shows for the Bush Administration does not indicate a hate for America. Rather, it indicates that he believes the current administration is bad for America, and wishes for a more competent President. The fact that he was compelled to make a film about these matters actually shows how much he loves his country.
Fourthly, to those who calls it liberal propaganda; yes, it is, inescapably, propaganda. An idiot could see that it is unashamedly partisan, and is therefore not a documentary in the strictest sense of the word. However, I am sick and tired of people using the outdated 'left-right' political spectrum to disagree with issues they feel uncomfortable about. If you forget the liberal/conservative labels, you'll actually find that there is a lot of common ground.
Finally, to those people who say 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people,' that is incorrect. A better maxim would be 'People with guns kill people.' ... Read more

Reviews (6)

Not the most classic of classic TV
Novel plots, zany characters and Blake Edwards' superb jazz sound track distinguish this series. But all told they do not compensate for its lack of other outstanding features nor make it the best of its genre. Those who love classic TV and/or private investigator/police drama have many other better choices available.

Even better than the first set, if that's possible!
This show is very addictive and it serves to remind us what REAL "cool" is all about. No kiddies, it's not a face full of rings and studs and a tattoo on your butt. It's not some numb-nutted, no-talent, rap-squawking pimp-daddy grabbing his croth on the Leno show. It's not the concept of bacterial life in Martian rocks. It's not your baseball cap on backwards and a pair of stupid-looking three-quarter-length baggy pants. Here is the truth: Peter Gunn is COOL personified! A smooth, immaculately dressed private eye who hangs out in a jazz club (where his girlfriend is the Julie London-esque chanteuse) and mixes with, truly, some of life's beatnik eccentrics.... all to the sounds of a perfect Henry Mancini score and produced by Blake Edwards. How cool is that? Also what is really good about this series (especially for you older guys out there) is the number of familiar faces and character actors that we used to see in 50s/60s TV shows and Elvis movies. I swear that while I was watching this dvd I asked myself "When is Floyd the Mayberry barber from the 'Andy Griffith Show' gonna turn up?", and lo and behold, in the very next episode, there he was as an eccentic antiques dealer. I also like the bongo-playing skindiver with the apartment full of hula girls.... this is Atomic Age bachelor pad excess, I love it!! Yeah, I agree that the transfers are not up to the usual A&E excellence and in some shows the tape hiss is very noticable but hey, given the vintage of this stuff, I'll live with it. Can't wait for further volumes of this ultra cool TV noir and hope and pray A&E release BOURBON STREET BEAT, 77 SUNSET STRIP, SURFSIDE 6 and HAWAIIAN EYE in box sets. I highly recommend this dvd. Buy it, check it out, let the "cool" flow over you like molasses and put it up there on your shelf next to "Jazz On A Summer's Day" and "The Saint" mega-set.

Gunn-derful!
Nothing is overdone here. The acting, the sets, the music (oh, yes, enjoy the MUSIC) and most of the stories are cool. Craig Stevens is sublimely in control in the title role, Lola Albright's unspectacular singing voice but unmitigated charm fit into the unspectacular but charming setting of Mother's, the nightclub where Gunn hangs out with her, and Herschel Bernardi is the harried and weary police detective sometimes at odds with Gunn, the private detective. But how often have you seen that cop/dick relationship overplayed on TV series and in movies. Here it is understated. That is not to say the show is so low-keyed as to be boring. There are mysteries, there's humor (including an episode in which the immaculately tailored Gunn is scurrying about town with a trained seal in tow), and a good rock 'em sock 'em fight every episode. And all this is surrounded and united by the brilliant Mancini music. You will have fun and won't get tired even if you watch a bunch of episodes at one sitting.

Would you buy a film for its music? I did.
A great experience in life: all that mystery involved in a "film noir" crime scene. The splendor of the "Peter Gunn" series, one of the most wonderful and famous TV series. And the music of Mancini setting the scene! It's a treasure! It's a perfect demo of how to prepare our hearts and minds with music for a movie scene. Mancini is a master forever. This package is very worth of the impact of watching to the complete series at a time or at least half of it. There are volumes 1 and 2. Buy both for the complete series.

Better than we remembered.
Forty years old and still high quality entertainment. The quality
of the images and sound are better than we ever saw or heard on those primitive TV sets of the 60's. The acting is clearly for fun and the dialog is laced with good comedy moments. The talent of Blake Edwards, Henry Mancini, the actors and musicians, is clearly on display. You will watch it again and again. Whenever there is nothing worth watching on the networks or dish we enjoy Peter Gunn all over again. ... Read more

Description

London 1893 is home to a killer with a macabre nickname... and also to a visionary genius who would write "The Time Machine." But what if H.G. Wells' invention wasn't fiction? And what if Jack the Ripper escaped capture fleeing his own time to take refuge in ours - with Wells himself in pursuit? ... Read more

Reviews (49)

When Times Collide
Noted visionary author H.G. Wells (Malcolm McDowell) plays host to a group of friend's at his home in London 1893. The reason for the get together is for Wells to show off the time machine that he built. One of his guests is a "wolf in sheep's clothing". Dr. John Stephenson (David Warner), is really none other than Jack The Ripper, one of the world's most notorious serial killers. When the London constables begin to close in on the elusive murderer, Stephenson uses the time machine to escape to the 20th century, to continue his crimes. Wells takes action and decides to follow him and bring him back to face justice. Once Wells arrives in "our time" he meets Amy (Mary Steenburgen), the two fall in love (on screen and off), while they close in on the Ripper.

This adventure from writer/director Nicholas Meyer (best known for Star Trek II) mixes these 2 men of history with a tale whimsy that works better than you might imagine. Meyer fills the movie wth plenty of fun, romance, excitement, and social commentary about our cuture. Meyer keeps things moving along in his freshmam effort as director,. All three of the main actors give good performance and really sell the idea of the film. Watching the film again, after about a decade since my last viewing, it didn't seem as "dated" as I recall. TIME AFTER TIME is a good little film that deserves a look.

The DVD boasts an all new digital transfer that looks great. The commentary track from Meyer and McDowell, seems as though each of them were recorded separately, then edited together later, to make it sound like they were in the same room. I can't be sure though. The disc also has an iteractive essay called "It's About Time" Finally, there are 3 theatrical trailers: One for this film, one for the film version of THE TIME MACHINE from 1960, and the remake from 2002.

The DVD is recommended and worth your time (pun intended)

"We Haven't Gone Forward, Herbert. We've Gone BACK."
For some reason, when I mention this 1979 film to friends, they inevitably confuse it with 1980's Somewhere in Time. Despite the similarity in titles, and the time travel concept, these two movies couldn't be more different.

Writer/Director Nicholas Meyer's inspiration for Time After Time boils down to a simple "what if?". Namely, what if Time Machine author H. G. Wells had really built a time machine and traveled to the future? Meyer, a die-hard Anglophile, also had the inspiration to include Jack the Ripper in the story. Those who've seen Meyer's other films (Star Trek II and VI, and TV's The Day After) know he has a keen sense of directorial balance. The result is a bracing blend of action, romance, humor, and sly social commentary, alongside the usual time travel paradoxes.

There is wonderful chemistry between Malcolm McDowell's Wells and romantic interest Mary Steenburgen as 20th Century bank-teller Amy Robbins. (It was apparently based on genuine attraction, as they married shortly after this film was made.) David Warner's performance as the villain avoids the usual bad-guy cliches and is entirely believable. One could easily imagine Warner's "Jack" slipping undetected into any American city, much as Hannibal Lecter does in later film ventures. The performances are enhanced by Miklos Rosza's superb score.

This film does not aspire to the high-minded social ideals of H. G. Wells' novel. The deepest message is the fictional Wells' contention that "every age is the same, it's only love that makes any of them bearable," which is pretty hard to refute. However, in many ways this movie is more successful and compelling as purely cinematic entertainment than either of the "straight" movie adaptations. Disbelief is suspended, and the audience is swept along for the ride.

On the movie itself.
Forgive me. I've not yet gotten this DVD, but the movie is a long, long time favorite of mine. Consider my two cents limited to the movie itself.

Something I hear very little of in the other reviews is the introspection, the emotional turmoil of the Wells character himself. The character Wells' point of view on the world and of human nature, circa 1893, does seem to be a artistic snapshot of the real wells. His views of Socialism and government and human nature, while presenting rather unheadily, were transported out of the 19th century past into the 20th century present (circa 1979). The love story with the modern Amy Robbins and the science fiction of the time machine, are for me secondary to the real point of the movie.

Obviously there are lots of cute, artistic ties between what Wells sees during his visit future and what he later is known to have gone on to write about. There are plays on the "War of the Worlds" title versus "world war II". But that's the cutesie fluff. More importantly, this Socialist is compelled to fix his unwitting mistake (the Ripper using his machine) and protect Utopia, but finds that not only is there no Social Utopia, but rather that the world seems to have degenerated into a cold, inhuman Anarchy where even religion fails. Note that the entire experience arose from the discovery that, beyond a shadow of a doubt, his best friend of many years was, in fact, one of the most evil people in the world. The time machine was meant as a tool in Wells' personal study of humanity. In stead its first use was at the hands of evil, as is unfortunately so often the case.

Wells love interest Robbins, is another good plot device in making the business of fighting even even more personal for Wells. Ultimately JOhn (Jack The...) threatens Robbins, absolutely forcing Wells to give in and take up arms - Wells' ultimate anathema.

People have mentioned technical flaws like solar power at night and the time machine changing its location. OK, clearly there was room in the production for someone of Trekkie ilk who could toss in suggestions along the lines of "how about Heisenberg Compensators for the transporter??" With a really vivid imagination and an obsession with sci-fi time travel it's not terribly difficult to fill in some gaps. However, if you watch closely, nowhere ever is there either the suggestion of silly things like a paradox, neither in the dialog nor in the story flow. Indeed, the time travel as a story tool works very nicely. At one point Well and Robbins find something out about the future and try to catch the Ripper in the act. Try as they might, however, they are unable to change the future. Later, another aspect of the future they believed would happen, did happen accurately, but not they way they expected. One could actually take this as a very deep philosophical point. Perhaps paradoxes can't exist; Perhaps there's something more to this one single universe keeping everything running smoothly, including time travellers. Personally, I find the infinite parallel universes idea interesting philosophically, but a total and embarassing cop-out in science fiction. This movie was not attempting to be a Star Trek style sci-fi flick by any means. For this I'm thankful, since it doesn't bog down tis other messages with technical hooey.

To this day, with the obvious likely exception of A Clockwork Orange, I've never seen a Performance by McDowell come anywhere close to this one. For absolute historical accuracy I couldn't speak, but the character he ends up portraying, with the body langauge, facial expressions, and tone of voice, is exceptionally well done.

Let me acho a similar sentiment for Steenbergen and Warner. For her role in this movie, I've had a crush on Mary Steenbergen for all too many years now. (is 25 years too long to hold a crush on someone?) I saw another review here that said there wasn't enough character development on Jack the Ripper. I agree somewhat. I think this was one of Warner's best performances, too. I do wish he'd had even more chance to bring us the pathology of the killer. I know it would have been great. However, in real life Jack the Ripper remains a mysterious figure to this day, not to mention that it wasn't really all that applicable to the rest of the story. Were it a more recent production, I'd expect to see multiple scenes with Warner either put back into the DVD release or at least included elsewhere on the DVD. Fans would like to see it, but it wasn't really necessary to have it in there (think the cut ending scene in The Terminator).

No, it's not a technical masterpiece. It's no The Shining or The Joy Luck Club or Aliens. Hardcore 21st century movie fanatics will likely go "Huh? Why are we watching this?? Where are the CGI transdimentional space aliens and all the Matrix-like gunplay??" To be fair to them I witthold one star.

Personally, I LOVE this movie!

Incredible movie
I won't go on about this great movie's virtues, as that has been done very well by other reviewers. The one point I want to make is to give credit to the most compelling single line I have ever heard in a movie. Herbert speaking:

"The first person to resort to violence is the first person who has run out of ideas".

Think about that........

Time After Time is a Gripping Story.
That H.G. Wells (played by Malcolm