Amazon.com

Luchino Visconti's adaptation of the Thomas Mann novel is the very definition of sumptuous:the costumes and sets, the special geography of Venice, and the breathtaking cinematography combine to form a heady experience. At the center of this gorgeousness is Aschenbach (Dirk Bogarde in a meticulous performance), a controlled intellectual who unexpectedly finds himself obsessed by the vision of a 14-year-old boy while on a convalescent vacation in 1911. Visconti has turned Aschenbach into a composer, which accounts for the lush excerpts from Mahler on the soundtrack (Bogarde is meant to look like Mahler, too). Even if it tends to hit the nail on the head a little too forcefully, and even if Visconti can test one's patience with lingering looks at crowds at the beach and hotel dining rooms, Death in Venice creates a lushness rare in movies. For some viewers, that will be enough. --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (36)

Visconti's heart-breaking vision of unrequited love
When I saw "Death In Venice" I was haunted by it's images for weeks. To this day, I cannot think upon this film without again experiencing some of the original feelings that it inspired. This is not, without question, an easy film to watch. The dialogue is sparse and the music is basically limited to Mahler's gorgeous Adagietto from Symphony No. 5. Notwithstanding, never has the marriage of music and film been more vital or more atmospheric. Mahler's haunting music was seemingly composed for this film and the effect is chilling. Dirk Bogarde is perfection as the bitter, vitriolic Gustav Aschenbach, a man so consumed with what he considers ideal beauty that he welcomes his own destruction for a moment in it's company. The young Bjorn Andresen is, too, equally captivating as the object of Aschenbach's obsession. Even though his role is essentially a non-speaking one, what he achieves within the lmiits of the role is extraordinary. The beautiful and elegant Silvana Mangano is on screen too infrequently for my taste, but her contribution is nonetheless wonderful. At times I found myself enveloped by this film, as if though I were a guest of the grand hotel quietly seated on a wicker chair watching these events unfold before me. Venice has never been more tangible on film than it is here. Do yourself a favor and watch this masterpiece of a film. One warning, though; "Death in Venice" is a devastating film and it takes it's toll on the viewer. Watch it in the company of loved-ones and on a beautiful, sunny day.

Impressive and brave
I have recently re-visited Visconti's Venice after an absence of too many years and I am reminded again of what an impressive - not to mention brave - piece of cinema this was for its time, and continues to be.

Adapting this novella to film was never going to be easy, yet Visconti did a superb job, so, too, his actors. There are some changes from the book, with the first sixteen or so pages omitted, and I also found the film Tadzio to be more flirty than his novel counterpart, but these changes do not jar within the film.

What I found truly frustrating was that the video I have is not in wide-screen format and I did feel I was missing something happening out of shot - and I hate to miss anything in this wonderful movie.

This is not a movie for those with the attention span of a house-brick, but if you're in the market for thought-provoking and have a love for all things beautiful, this is a must-see. While the film runs for just over two-hours, it's not the sort of 2hr movie that has you checking your watch after the first hour.

Should the distributors see fit to release a wide-screen version on video - yes please, I'll have a copy of that, too.

MASTERPIECE!
Luchino Visconti's 1971 film adaptation of Thomas Mann's novel "Death in Venice" is nothing short of a masterpiece in every sense of the word. The more I watch this film, the more I realize how perfect it is.

For those unfamiliar with Thomas Mann's 1911 novel of the same name, there are a few differences. No movie that I'm aware of follows its original book to a "T". But the changes that Italian director Visconti adds to the story are intriguing and beautiful. I don't mind his personal touches in the slightest. Indeed, the film wouldn't be nearly as good otherwise.

The intuition to make the Aschenbach character really be Jewish/Austrian famed composer Gustav Mahler and set the movie's soundtrack to that of Mahler's 3rd and 5th symphonies was brilliant. I can't say if Thomas Mann originally intended the Aschenbach character to truly be Mahler in the novel or not?

Having the main character be a tired, worn out Gustav Mahler is a brilliant masterstroke of pure genius. We're left with a film that condenses everything brilliant that is Europe. Using Mahler's own music creates a depth and haunting realism to the film as well.

The casting in this film is extraordinary! You could not have casted a better cast to play these characters anywhere. The young man who plays the beautiful Tadzio looks like a Norweignean version of a sculpted Apollo youth. His features are those of a god. His silouette against the backdrop of the sparkling sea pointing out over the waters is one the most erotically charged scenes I've ever seen in a movie. It's breathtaking really, and one almost forgets the possibly taboo homoerotic connotations such a scenario is from the standpoint of the aged Aschenbach.

I have seen many films shot in and around Venice, Italy ("the Italian Job" most recently), but none have come as close to this as personifying the city and showing it as beautifully. In my opinion, Visconti's "Death in Venice" is to Venice what Fellini's "La Dolce Vita" is to Rome.

Foreign film lovers should not miss this classic. Travelers who've been to Italy, or dream of visiting one day, also should not miss this beautiful film. I may not recommend the film to younger audiences who probably aren't ready to understand why a dying man would entertain fantasies of a physical passion for a teen boy. In such cases, I would say the film is probably unsuitable for viewers under the ages of 15 or so.

The DVD has a nice picture in 16x9 widescreen for widescreen televisions and is compressed lightly with low grain and nice blacks and contrast. The sound is stereo and in the English language, so subtitles aren't necessary. The film is also shot in glorious color in a vivid but controlled manner. When I first saw this film I was sorry that it wasn't filmed in black & white, but now that I think on it, this story works better in color and the colors of this film are gorgeous. Venice always photographs well, but I have rarely seen the old city look so sumptuous as it does here. Some grade-A, top-notch cinematography went into the making of this rich and luxurious movie.

Obsession in the Time of Cholera
Based on Thomas Mann's famous novella, Luchino Visconti's DEATH IN VENICE is the account of a middle-aged man and his obsession with a teenage boy. Gustav Aschenbach, a German composer, (Dirk Bogarde) on holiday in Venice in 1911, sees the young Tadzio and his Polish family at the hotel where they are staying and becomes sexually obsessed with him. Visconti has the difficult task of keeping the viewer interested in this sometimes slow-moving film since there is very little dialogue here. (The man and boy never speak.) What Aschenbach is thinking must be shown by facial expressions and body language. Both director and actor, however, are superb in conveying what is going on inside Aschenbach's head.

DEATH IN VENICE is a beauty to behold. The opening scenes of the city are lush and beautiful; however, as the film progresses and Aschenbach begins his frenetic attempts to find out why many of the visitors are leaving Venice-- the city fathers are afraid they will lose the tourist lira if they are aware of a cholera outbreak-- the scenery takes on a sinister, deathly quality as the city becomes deserted. Visconti leaves no stone unturned in his attention to detail to create the mood and time period of this movie. Gustav Mahler's music (Bogarde looks a little like the composer) adds the final touch on this nearly flawless production.

Visconti is a master director.

Thank you for the DVD
This had been one of my favorite movies when I had seen it years ago in the theatre, but I was only able to get a VHS tape 6 months ago. Unfortunately it was a full screen version and while the movie was recognizeable, it lacked the impact that I remembered from the theatre.

This dvd makes all the difference. The sets and camera work are largely what make this movie work and the pan and scan used with the tape just about destroyed it. Now with the DVD, I can see that virtually every shot, set-up I think it is called in the business, is a work of art of composition and color. This is a film from Italy, a nation with a preeminent tradition in the visual arts and Death In Venice shows this visual sense to perfection. I have never seen another movie as artistically shot as this.

The plot and story line are very much underplayed and frankly many people I know don't get this film. The story developes, more than is told as in a conventional film. Rather than watching it, you live this movie. You watch it in delight at the what you are seeing and experiencing of being in Venice at the turn of the century. The story just sort of unfolds around around this visual experience, rather like real life.

While the picture quality of the DVD is very much better than the VHS tape, the sound is only somewhat better. Nevertheless there is less wow and flutter than in the tape or than I remember from the theatre. Unfortunately the movie predates the general adoption of stereo sound, let alone Dolby surround. Given the extensive use of music, especially Mahler's 5'th symphony, one can only dream as to what this movie would be like with modern sound. ... Read more

Description

When Bess, a naive young woman, marries Jan, a handsome oil-rig worker, she experiences passion and physical pleasure that she never imagined. Their bliss is cut short when an accident on the rig leaves Jan paralyzed. Believing he will never make love to Bess again, he tells her to take other lovers, convincing her that this will help his recovery. Bess is sent spiraling into a world of dark emotions she cannot understand ... Read more

Reviews (120)

Harsh/Graceful Modern Retelling of Orpheus, Joan of Arch, ..
Try at a short(ish) review: Breaking the Waves reminds me of Ingmar BergmanÕs work and other great auteurs who not only play with our emotions but reach into our gray matter and belief systems, stirring them all up. After 6 years, I finally felt prepared to view this passion play. It went from being a movie I should see to one that I am grateful I saw and will see again (when I am ready).

Emily Watson is stellar and accompanied by a cast that almost seamlessly makes the strange premise of a wife trying to save her husband by sexual encounters with other men believable. Even the chapter breaks connote a sense of the story looking real but also not looking real. To keep this telling from being too stark and unyielding, Lars von Tier presents an unexpected sensuality and sense of humor in the first half. Otherwise, I donÕt think we could care about these extremely religious and/or secular people for 2 1/2 hours. On the other hand, it takes its cameras, not filtering the sound of the film running through the camera spokes, into the scenes of BessieÕs search for men. It is a very painful adventure into Hades for such a simple woman child.

Ultimately, it is a story about attaining love but goes beyond to finding grace. It is a marvelous work to be in the collective consciousness and definitely not meant to be a popcorn movie. The film has an Achilles heel or two but so superficial that I hardly feel they need be noted. Make sure you have the stomach and compassion. It rang the church bells in my heart and mind.

Try pairing this movie with EgoyemÕs ÔExotica,Õ any of BergmanÕs films, Marcel CamusÕ ÔBlack Orpheus,Ô Allen's 'Crimes & Misdemeanors' or DreyerÕs ÔPassion of Joan of Arc.Õ Then go out and get some sunshine, have a good walk and dinner with loved ones.

Not your average God-obsessed-nympho movie...
A fascinating but not entirely successful fantasia that owes just about all of its power to Emily Watson, making a stunning film debut. Watson is the mentally unstable Bess, who talks to God (God seems to talk back in her voice). Bess, a virgin, marries the burly but sensitive oil-rig worker Jan (Stellan Skarsgard). Once she tastes the joys of sex, Bess becomes delirious with love for Jan. But soon he must return to the oil rig, where he has an accident that paralyzes him. The erratic and heavily medicated Jan takes it into his head to ask Bess a favor: she must sleep with other men, and tell him about the encounters, to keep him alive. Both Jan and God seem to want Bess to go through with it.

It's a mistake to take this sort of fable literally, but director Lars von Trier makes everything seem realistic with artsy touches like handheld camerawork, jump cuts, and saturated photography (by Robby Muller). He also, for whatever reason, divides the movie into chapters, and the chapter headings are surreal landscapes with sometimes grating '70s rock songs played over them. You nod and understand all the points von Trier is making, but everything is so symbolic and predetermined that it seldom truly reaches you. The film is haunting but mechanistic and, in its last third, borderline ludicrous -- the meaningful masochism gets to be more than a little much. Yet Emily Watson, who's in almost every frame, very nearly puts the entire gigantic daft movie across all by herself. Her elastic face is a playhouse for violently conflicting emotions, and she's never less than touching. With anyone else in the role (like Helena Bonham-Carter, who was going to do it but dropped out), the movie would probably collapse.

Note: Nothing on the featured cover artwork or in Amazon.com's description indicates whether this DVD is letterboxed. I'd have a look at the back cover or rent it first to make sure, as this is a widescreen, 2.35 movie that needs to be seen letterboxed, though since there is an existing widescreen VHS edition, I see no reason why Artisan wouldn't have letterboxed the DVD.

Beautiful...
This film does NOT endorse what it depicts. Obviously, the memebers of the church are misguided, in fact a great deal of the film points that out. But the film is not about them, it is about Bess, and about her love for God and God's love for her. What happens to her in the movie is not God's torture of her, it is human free will being exercised on a pure spirit, and the beauty is how her spirit always remains pure. That is why God loves Bess. God does not sugarcoat the world, and all who wish to follow him go through trials. Bess made it through those trials, and this is, as such, a TRUE CHRISTIAN FILM.

Not to mention it is cinematically the best film I have ever seen, as Heilman says, it is transcends words and descriptions. Do not let any review scare you away, if you don't like graphic sex turn it off, but this is a film about the love God has for all the how beautiful a pure spirit is.

ALERT TO CHRISTIANS
I loved dancer in the dark. I found it to be one of the saddest, most beautiful films that i have ever seen. This led me to search out other films by Lars Von Treir. This one was said to be the most comparable to it. This couldn't be further from the truth.

If there are any true christians out there, i can't tell you how strongly I advise you to stay away from this film. Maybe, like me, you saw dancer in the dark and are looking for something similar or just as good. THIS MOVIE WAS ABSOLUTELY HORRIBLE.

There are graphic sex scenes in this movie, which if alone wouldve been reason alone to not see this film. The way they depicted God in this film was what was most offensive to me. Throughout the movie there are constant scenes depicting a church involved in mass ritualism, who have no love for God or his people. They enjoy seeing people in sin and have no problem seeing them go to hell. They are constantly showing hatred towards others and fail to reveal one ounce of compassion. Another problem with how they depicted God was that he was a cruel and evil person that likes to play little games with the world. They made him out to be someone who hates his creation and wants to hurt them in the form of teaching them a lesson. They even stated that God told the main character to become a prostitute. The God of this movie shows absolutely no love.

There are many churches and people like the ones depicted in this movie. People like this do not accurately depict anyone who truely knows and loves God.

God is not someone who sits up in heaven, bitter and scolding everyone, and taking pleasure in seeing people suffer. He did not come into the world to condemn the world, but that through him the world might be saved. He loves us more than everything we could ever know. God loved us so much that he became a man, was beaten to near death and then crucified for all of us.

He loves everyone and wants to have a loving relationship with anyone who will ask him. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever (anyone) believes in him would not parish, but have everlasting life, John 3:16.

If you are a christian, listen to this review from someone who loves God, and stay away from this film. If you are not a christian, God loves you more than you could ever comprehend. All he wants is for you to love him in return. Jesus Christ is God, believe and recieve.

So disappointing...
A long, slow study of life in a small northern Scottish town, ruled by the old men of the village's Calvinist kirk, as seen through the eyes of a village lass who appears to be able to hold conversations with God. And I mean sloooooow. At times fascinating and at times just frustrating, the story moves along at its own pace, broken into sections that are annoyingly introduced with still frame shots and titles.

The movie is at times beautiful and at times clearly an exercise in self-indulgence on the part of the director, Lars von Trier. What I found absolutely inexcuseable was the final, very final shot. Without giving the ending away, hearing the bells was beautiful. It was transcendant. It made up for the length and leisurely pace of the whole movie. But then von Trier spoiled all the goodwill he had just created with me by showing me the bells. Why? Oh, why? The ending ruined the movie. What, we're too dense to put two and two together and figure out for ourselves where the peels were coming from? ... Read more

Amazon.com

Joel Silver (48 Hours, Die Hard, The Matrix) has a theory about action movies--you need a good bang-up scene about every 10 minutes. The people who made The New Seduction operate on the same principle, only instead of car chases and explosions, the curvaceous Jaime Pressly takes her clothes off and then, more likely than not, has sex with someone. If Seduction had been made 60 years ago at Warner Brothers, nobody would have gotten naked, but otherwise this gleefully trashy bit of film noir would have fit right in. The plot's a reworking of the original; this time, Ivy's sister Violet returns after 11 years to wreak havoc on the family that turned her mother (the family maid) out onto the street for sleeping with the man of the house. Pressly brings both a smoldering energy and sense of fun to her very-bad-girl part. As the lonely daughter who was Violet's best friend, Megan Edwards is both appealing and strong enough to avoid being simpy. While this movie lacks the relative subtlety of the original, it's a whole lot more fun than the morose first sequel, Poison Ivy 2. --Geof Miller ... Read more

Reviews (27)

Jaime Pressly is the only feature here
Jaime Pressly is a knockout, but that's about as far as the movie goes for interest. She's a young woman who returns to a home where her mother had an affair with the father of a family when Jaime was a child. Supposedly her mother's life was ruined by the family after the affair was compromised and Jaime holds the family responsible. So she's up to some evil tricks for revenge. It's fairly erotic and Jaime Pressly is worth seeing. Not a lot of difference between the "R" and "Unrated" version (both available on the same DVD). What's hilarious is the "letterbox" mode that only imposes black bands on the upper and lower sections of the screen, there's no actual change in the ratio of the screen, except that the upper and lower sections are covered to create a letterbox format. Best to watch in the full-screen mode.

A sexy, fun movie
I was incredibly surprised by this movie. After having endured and zapped countless, boring Cinemax-like erotic thrillers, it was great to see one that is extremely sexy, intelligent, witty and fun. Jaime Pressly is absolutely stunning as the girl out to avenge her mother. Her performance is also outstanding, a great balancing act between being a teenager, a femme fatale, but all this done in a tongue in cheek way. By the way, her nude scenes are jaw dropping.
The movie also has fun with itself, playing with many of the genre's clichés. All in all, a great surprise.
The DVD contains the R-rated and unrated versions, as if anybody would want to see an R-rated version. It contains no extras. It would have been great to have seen behind the scenes footage and interviews with the cast and director. Still, a great buy.

Greg and Jamie
Greg Vaughn was so hot in this movie. His facial expressions and body are great. He doesn't look too hot now on GH, bad casting for character Lucky Spencer :( Jamie is soo hot. She has a great body. In this movie you get to see Jamie and Greg nude!

The joke is on me
Picked up a used copy of this DVD and didn't look carefully--I fully assumed I was taking home the original "Poison Ivy" with Drew Barrymore and Sara Edwards. As I now know, this edition of "Poison Ivy" brings the Violet character (lovely Jaime Pressly) into the lives of banker Michael Des Barres (Ivan) and tennis star Megan Edwards (Joy), who's eager to please a hard to please dad. Violet is returning to her childhood home a decade into the future and carries considerable baggage from her past--which is intertwined with the aforementioned characters.

Although the first "Poison Ivy" wasn't exactly "Citizen Kane," it did feature fine performances by Barrymore and Edwards. Not in this bomb, however. There's nothing mysterious whatsoever about this flick--it's clear that Pressly is on her way to seducing and/or killing each member of the family. This is supposed to be an erotic flick, but because there's nothing remotely sexy in Violet's mannerisms and actions, the sex scenes are ice cold. Eventually the maid gets wise to Violet, but it's too late for her. Ditto for Joy's boyfriend (whom Violet has already seduced). Ditto, eventually, for Ivan (whom Violet has already seduced). But what's truly ridiculous is the ending. There's no point in going into it--suffice it to say that it makes no sense whatsoever and completely sinks this wretched film.

There are rabid five-star reviews for this film, and I have no doubt that most of them came from the enjoyment of Jaime Pressly in the buff. I understand--but it is possible, guys, to make good movies with steamy sex scenes. Takes good directing and acting. This has neither.

Oh, yeah--if it's worth anything to you, you can watch both the R-rated version and the unrated version on this DVD.

DAMN!
I didn't give this movie five stars for Oscar-winning performances. Yes the cast does do an okay job, but Jaime Pressly's flawless body steals the show. Like I said, DAMN! So, if you're looking for a deep, thought-provoking movie look esle-where, but if you wanna see a great T&A flick this is the one. ... Read more

Description

Described by director Dziga Vertov as an experiment in the language of pure cinema, "The Man With the Movie Camera" is perhaps the most dazzling and sophisticated, not only of Soviet, but of world silent cinema. Music by the Alloy Orchestra. ... Read more

Reviews (17)

A Russian movie classic
Dziga Vertov's 1929 film is a montage of one day in the life of the Russian people as told (or viewed) by a cameraman. Starting in a movie theater with the audience preparing to view the film, Vertov's cameraman takes them on a whirlwind tour of Russian life, from daybreak and visions of people sleeping on the streets and benches, interspersed with a young woman lying in her comfortable bed, to the everyday people working in the mines and factories.

It's a fascinating way to show the usage of the camera as a tool to document life, to display reality. In addition, the viewers get to see how a movie is made, with many shots of the cameraman hulking the huge camera from place to place, cranking the handle in order to get the desired sequence on film.

The version I saw also has a great score by composer Michael Nyman and written biographies of the Dziga Vertov and michael Nyman. A unique film that is a must-see for any cinophile.

The Visual Language of Creative Zeal and Activity
This 1929 silent film, "Man With The Movie Camera" by director Dziga Vertov, is one of the earliest examples of non-fiction wordless narrative film making. On this 1996 DVD edition, a viewer has the choice of experiencing the work accompanied by an informative audio essay from Yuri Tsivian, or with an accomplished musical score composed and performed by the Alloy Orchestra.

"Man With The Movie Camera" shows a film maker in the process of documenting Soviet city life from a kind of utopian philosophical perspective. It describes the course of a typical day in the life of a wide range of the city's inhabitants. It considers such a life as full of possibilities for personal growth and emotional fulfillment, while also showing instances of an occasional personal setback. The footage was assembled from shots taken within Moscow, Kiev and Odessa, over a number of years, during the mid 1920's.

Throughout the film, the director conveys an almost manic sense of intelligence and enthusiasm regarding the range of subjects being portrayed. The subjects include: home life, people commuting within the city, workers operating complex machinery, the machinery itself, emergency workers, people both shopping and selling goods, images of all kinds of architecture, and the activities of people during their leisure hours. An astonishing variety of perspectives, for capturing these ordinary subjects, are shown within this sixty-eight minute work.

According to the audio essay by Yuri Tsivian, in the film's time and social context, it was used partly for entertainment and partly to further a particular ideology, or interpretation, of communal life within the Soviet Union. Vertov was a visionary, however, who always carried with him the poems of Walt Whitman, so this film might now be better considered as highly accomplished artistic work, rather than as an obsolete socialist manifesto.

"Man With The Movie Camera" is recommended viewing for all students of new media. It provides some first-rate examples of inspired film editing, along with creative uses of camera placement and innovative choices for camera motion. It holds up well to, and perhaps requires, repeated viewing for a full digestion of it's dense content.

Obviously inspired Reggio and Fricke
If you're a fan of Godfrey Reggio and Ron Fricke's the Koyaanisqatsi, Powaqqatsi, Naqoyatsi trio or the even more narrative-driven Baraka (Fricke), this hugely innovative, groundbreaking film is a MUST-SEE. You'll be amazed at the sort of filming and editing techniques these guys (and girl) employ during that period of time-- especially in comparison to what American cinema was like at the time.

Kino Eye
Dziga Vertov's Man With the Movie Camera (1929) is a narrative-free silent film plucked right from Stalinist Russia. In it, Vertov envisions a world as seen from the lens of a camera...marriages, divorces, deaths, accidents, transportation, daily work, sports, beach-going...everything is seen from the camera's eye view. The film is edited using a number of innovative techniques, and throughout the 68 minute assault on your visual sense, you as viewer basically BECOME the Man with the Movie Camera, but because we frequently see a man with a movie camera, it becomes multi-layered. We are the camera filming the filmer. Vertov believed that film would triumph as a medium free of the narratives of literature or the standards of the other arts, that it could be truly an exquisite tool of the proletariat. Interestingly, he was not given approval from the Stalinists who felt that his commitment to aesthetics went beyond his commitment to ideology.

One of Vertov's key themes is the comparison of human labor with machines. He wrote, ""I am kino-eye, I am mechanical eye, I, a machine, show you the world as only I can see it. My path leads to the creation of a fresh perception of the world I decipher in a new way a world unknown to you."

Incidentally, a collection of Vertov's writings called The Kino Eye does exist in the world (1984).

A mixed bag
"Man with the Movie Camera" is a technically audacious film which chronicles daily life in Russia in the 1920's. Vertov's innovative use of rapid camera movement and split-second editing are often startling, at times dizzying to behold.

The images which Vertov juxtaposes are incongruous and entertaining. In one frame you see a dog sitting on a sidewalk. In another, you view people huddled together going to work and then a close-up of someone brushing their teeth. Many scenes feature machines, factories and buildings representing Russia's industrialization. There is a sense of detachment and dehumanization conveyed in the starkness of the concrete and steel structures you see emerging over cities as Russia modernizes.

Vertov introduced new and exciting techniques to the craft of filmmaking. Yet I found his use of these techniques excessive, self-indulgent, and distracting as if he were "showing off" his technical prowess instead of enhancing the story. Also, his repetition of the same or similar images dulls their impact.

Still "Man with the Movie Camera" is worth seeing. But it's a mixed bag. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Despite its reputation as an oversimplified epic, King Vidor's War and Peace remains a stellar showcase of Hollywood prestige. While Cecil B. De Mille was reviving ancient Egypt for The Ten Commandments, Vidor was transforming Italian countryside into war-torn Russia, bringing massive resources to bear on this sumptuous, if ultimately misguided adaptation of Tolstoy's classic. Given the marquee casting of Audrey Hepburn as Natasha and then-husband Mel Ferrer as decorated battle hero Prince Andrei, this is a movie you watch for star value, not literary fidelity (for the latter, look to Sergei Bondarchuk's Russian version). Henry Fonda serves Tolstoy more effectively as Pierre, whose passive observation of Napoleon's invasion turns this grand moral tale into an intimate study of individual passions. The battle scenes (directed by Mario Soldati) remain impressive, as does the film's grand parade of pomp and circumstance. Slow, regal, and peppered with brilliance, this epic falls short of classic but it's still a visual feast. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (25)

Lovely , simply charming and heartwarming
This movie touched my mind in so many ways. One thing it brought to mind was that the most important things in life are still free. The cast was excellent and the cinematoghraphy was beautiful. I truely enjoyed this movie. An excellent choice for those who love history with a lot of romance.

Good Entrainment with a Few Flaws
Great Cast with a great story is not always the best combo, but this DVD is a keeper. Audrey Hepburn as Natasha does the best with her multi expressions & cute dialogue during the many courtships throughout the film. Henry Fonda as Pierre comes in a close 2nd, but at 1st he seems out of place, too passive. Later this lack of emotion or evolvement shines forth as he goes though many hardships as a prisoner of Napoleon. Mel Ferrer as Prince Andrei, then Audrey Hepburn's real husband, has the same problem as Henry Fonda, he drifts in & out of character. I believe the problem with the main male actors is that they played it too straight. The woman who played Prince Andrei's 1st wife did the worst, she over acted like a silent movie star. The supporting cast does a great job, specially the actor playing Nepoleon. This is exactly what I think Nepoleon looked & acted like in the early 19th century. The phyical height & size for the French emperor are perfect, & the letting of free opinion to be express, yet at the same time having the over powering will to bring Europe to his knees. Desite the flaws, this version of "War & Peace" will give you a short stroll, with a "to the point" idea of a western classic with great photography & sound. I try not to watch it too many times because I don't want to wear it out.

the Hollywood version
This film is a bit of a mess, but nevertheless very entertaining, mostly because of Audrey Hepburn...her charisma and enthusiasm make up for a lot of the muddled and mixed performances that surround her in this star-studded production of Tolstoy's masterpiece.

Hepburn's then real life husband, Mel Ferrer, does a pretty good job as Prince Andrei and Henry Fonda is Pierre, who despite sounding like "Young Mr. Lincoln", gives a convincing performance, and has several fine scenes. Nino Rota's score is a curious one, as the beautiful Italian-flavored melodies we're accustomed to hear from him are replaced by Russian folk tunes and battlefield music.

Perhaps too many big names and too many writers (6 of them !) made the heart of the book get lost, but this is Audrey's movie, and she's a delight to watch.

Still The Best
This is an appeal to Hollywood, if anyone's listening.
I first saw this film in 1956, when it first opened in the UK.

I've seen it several times since, but all I can get here across the pond, is a second hand video at an extortionate price of nearly £ 40.

Please can we have it on DVD? SOON!

Hello?
Hasn't anyone ever heard of something called DIGITAL RESTORATION? Why must evryone keep waiting for sudios to release all these movies on proper 3- disc sets with a proper restoration. i mean, look what they did to My Fair LADY, it was so well restored that i couldn' tell the difference. even gone with the Wind hasn't had a proper DvD release yet. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Based on real events, Soldier of Orange tells the story of Dutchman Erik Lanshof (a star-making performance by Rutger Hauer) and a small group of students as they struggle to survive the Nazi occupation to the end of the Second World War. The destinies of the characters range from joining the German army to making for England, the OSS, and the Resistance. Across a canvas lasting almost three hours, director Paul Verhoeven unfolds a saga of friendship, espionage, and romance with almost documentary realism--though not as graphically violent as his later American films, the torture scenes are intense--crafting a deeply affecting film widely regarded as the greatest ever made in Holland. Comparable recent films such as Enigma (2001) and Charlotte Gray (2002) do not come close. Hauer is brilliant at the heart of what is a detailed and thoughtful drama made with integrity and passion. Twenty years later in 1997, Verhoeven made Starship Troopers, a satirical science-fiction companion to this modern European classic. --Gary S. Dalkin ... Read more

Reviews (20)

"A Dutch Treat"
"Soldier of Orange" is the story of several young residents of the Netherlands who become involved in World War II. I believe it is the best film directed by Paul Verhoeven - far better than anything he has made since coming to the U.S. from the Netherlands. Rutger Hauer is also excellent in the film. A VHS version of this film was available some years ago in the U.S. but letterboxing brings the film back to its original theater experience. This film is absolutely in my "Top 10" of all time list.

Pretty Good Stuff
I'm a big fan of Paul Verhoeven's American movies. Once I moved to Holland, I thought I'd check out his older Dutch movies. I found an English-subtitled version through Amazon.com and I wasn't dissappointed. It is one hell of a war movie. One of the best I've seen. It was pretty cool to see Rutger Hauer acting in his native Dutch language before he went off to Hollywood as well. Another recognizeable actor, Jeroen Krabbe, is in this too.

I didn't even mind reading subtitles through almost the whole movie(some parts of it are in English).

If you like war movies, check this out. If you like Paul Verhoeven's weird sense of humor, check it out too.

Soldier of Orange - DVD with commentary by Verhoeven
Soldier of Orange with commentary by Director Paul Verhoeven is a must-see for all history buffs, WWII historians and lovers of war movies. Based on the life of Erik Haselhoff Roelfzema, it chronicles his life in the resistance and that of a small group of law students in Leiden, The Netherlands. Verhoeven's commentary is worth the price of the DVD as he explains scene by scene what he tried to portray, while asking some very thought provoking questions. Verhoeven and I are the same age, and both of us lived in Holland during the occupation. His view of the conditions in Holland and the responses of the Dutch under occupation are very different. I also think his references to Das England Spiel are inaccurate. Having said all that, I still consider the DVD one of my most favorite productions, including the film itself. Soldaat van Oranje is my choice for best ever Dutch film. Those interested in learning more about the real Eric Hazelhoff Roelfzema should read "Soldaat van Oranje Omnibus" which includes "De Verre Tamboer (The Distant Drummer)" and "Op Jacht naar het Leven (In pursuit of Life)" all by Eric Hazelhoff Roelfzema.

Excellent Foreign WWII movie
One of the best WWII movies I have ever seen, and the only one I recall from Holland. The first time I saw this I was amazed by the fact this was one of the best foreign films I had seen up to the mid 80s. I had seen Rutger Hauer in Blade Runner a few years before I caught this movie and I thought he was great. After I saw this I knew it. This is by far one of his best dramatic roles, if not his best. Anyone that enjoys war movies will probably like it. If you enjoy the dramatic ones like "Schindler's List" and "Das Boot" you will definitely enjoy it. Although it is a bit long it did not seem long to me since the pace was good. Keep an open mind about when it was made when you see the special effects and you will find it both compelling and a movie of craftmanship. I have ordered this on DVD because it is difficult to find anyone renting this any longer. Unfortunately it is not a mainstream war movie so most the local rental stores don't carry it. I highly recommend you see it and any fan of war movies will probably want it for their collection.

Great movie
I couldn't buy this DVD in the Netherlands (had to buy it in the UK)... what kind of crazy world is this? :s

Anyway, the movie starts with a recording of queen Wilhelmina stepping out an airplane at the army airport "Valkenburg" (near Leiden) at the end of the WWII. She's accompanied by Eric Hazelhoff-Roelzema, adjudant to the queen and soldier of Orange. The movie tells the story of Eric Hazelhoff-Roelzema (Eric Lanshof in the movie). He studied law in Leiden and was in fact one of the last students to graduate at Leiden University during the second world war. He also was a member of the Dutch resistance. Eventhough the movie and the book he wrote about the war are not very similar, the situation and circumstances of the war in Holland are nicely shown.

In Leiden you can still see the room right accross the Academy Building, where Eric lived at the beginning of the war.

A great movie for its time. Not as good as warfilms like Schindler's List; the Pianist; or The Band of Brothers series, but good nonetheless. The music of Rogier van Otterloo is just perfect. For a Leidener and lawstudent in Leiden as myself, a must have! ... Read more

Description

Filled with topflight performances and unforgettable music, this entertaining and critically acclaimed story was cheered by audiences everywhere! When Harry, a struggling but highly imaginative funnyman, forms a singing group with an unusual group of friends, "The Harmonists" go on to become an overnight sensation in prewar Germany. But as their wave of success inevitably collides with the nation's changing political tide, the group's members are forced to face unprecedented challenges that will try their wills and test their loyalty!An award winner at several prestigious film festivals -- THE HARMONISTS is another outstanding motion picture you don't want to miss! ... Read more

Reviews (14)

A Fantastic Film on Many Levels
The Harmonists is a movie about the real life singing group which rose to fame during World War II. The group was torn apart by the Nazis and ended their brilliant career abruptly.

The movie does a great job of showing how the six men had very different personalities from each other but blended together to create incredible music. There was love and bitterness, friendship and joy. The group focusses on singing for their audience, but in the meantime the Nazi power grows.

There are three Jewish men in the group, and each one looks at his faith differently. There are also Jewish women involved with the men, and each situation causes friction and difficulty. The group gets more and more pressure to abandon its Jewish members.

The group does visit New York, where all but one member want to stay. Because of that one member, though, the group returns to Germany. Shortly after, they are banned from singing and the three Jewish members leave Germany permanently.

The actual group, the Comedian Harmonists, are still considered to be one of the greatest groups in Europe and their records are treasured. If you haven't heard of this group before, be sure to watch the DVD! The musical performances are a real treat and the story is quite moving.

The View from Germany
This is an excellent movie, a knockout in several ways. It tells the true story of a popular German singing group in the 30's called the Comedian Harmonists. Unfortunately the group had several Jewish members and not even their huge popularity could save them from official sanctions as Hitler's thugs came to power. Not only is The Harmonists musically and historically impressive, it's also interesting because it's the first German production I have ever seen that deals with pre-WWII Nazi bigotry. It's got some aspects of Cabaret in that respect, but this is a real story and all the more gripping for it. The acting is first rate, the writing is superb. I watched it a second time immediately.

Great music threaded into the story line.
The time and place is Germany as Hitler is coming to power. The story centers on the genesis of the Comedian Harmonists, a group of five singers and the piano player who accompanies them. We can't be sure how much of the story has much truth value, but we do know that the Harmonists were a real group and their music was much appreciated, and remains so even today. They are called "comedian" because of their lighthearted and humorous approach to the music they sing.

The founder of the group is a jew, Harry Frommermann. He is a talented singer/arranger and his vision is to bring together an exceptional group of men to sing "jazzed up" and highly stylized versions of popular songs. Harry is a perfectionist and the first third of the film shows him first cajoling and then badgering his singers to develop a musically unique and visually entertaining style. He succeeds beyond even his ambitious dreams. Soon the Comedian Harmonists are a feature act in demand not only in Germany, but internationally.

Unfortunatley for the Harmonists, Hitler comes to power in 1933, just as the group is headed for true stardom. Jews in Germany are beginning to feel the impact of the racial hatred that will end in the holocaust. Of the six members of the Harmonists, three are jews and as the story progresses, first restrictions and then cancellations of their concerts prevent the group from finding an audience in Germany for their work. They head to New York and find success there. Harry would like to remain in America, but the rest of the band still believes there is a chance for some success in Germany, so they head home again.

The Harmonists' error in judgment is typical of the mistake of many jews in Germany who thought they only needed to patiently wait for reason to return to their country. At the end of the film we see the Harmonists on stage in Munich performing to an audience that knows that something very special is being lost to them. The Harmonists disband and the jewish members escape to freedom. The group left in Germany tries to reconstitute the band, as does the group that leaves, but they do not experience the success of the original members.

If it were not for the music, which is truly first-rate, this story would be interesting, but not worth four stars. Because the music is so much a part of the film, those viewers who enjoy vocal singing at its very best are sure to enjoy this unusual film.

Harmony, Religion, Fame, Fortune & Prostitues
The true story of one of the greatest singing groups ever to hit the scene during the World Depression Era is effective in showing Berlin during emminent Nazi take-over, but seems to focus mainly on the issue of religion. Other than debating who's Jewish and who isn't, there is a preoccupation with the services of prostitutes, and marrying the same once successful.

The group member with the initial idea to "do something" is shown eating bird seed, implying he can not even afford groceries. Once gathered, the ensemble reheares for months without pay, for the sheer chance at eventual success. Of course they do make it big; too big for the liking of certain political party sympathisers.

For fans of the original music (including the FDR Presidential Campaign song "Happy Days Are Here Again") this film delivers. Many of the legendary tunes are worked into the plot. The "naughty" suggestions in "Veronika, der Lenz ist da" are accepted by even respectable upper class theater guests, paving the way for recording contracts and world stardom of the newly discovered "Comedian Harmonists".

This German/Austrian co-production filmed in German has high production values. The setting reminds of "Cabaret", however the story (although based on true events) is rather thin. The overuse of some of the above mentioned situations becomes unnecessary and boring. As a viewer with a background extremely partial to this story I looked for detail and could see several obvious embellishments for the sake of drama. There must have been more than wine, women and song to tell about. The final minutes somewhat redeem the earlier shortcomings, delivering a tear-jerking love story along with sad good-byes amidst still-cheering audiences.****

Brilliant, gripping, and based on a true story!
I was unaware that this was based on a true story until the very end of the film, when photographs of the original Comedian Harmonists were shown. The story line is so gripping, it almost seems too contrived to be true. And, given the immense talent and popularity of the group (in its heydey), I was surprised that I had never heard of them. The story is about a group of six musicians, three of whom are Jewish, who rise to fame in Germany in 1930s. Tension grows within the group as the Nazis become increasingly powerful in Germany. After the group performs aboard the USS Saratoga in New York harbor, there is some question about whether they will return to Nazi Germany or stay in the US. The group plays its final concert to a sold-out crowd shortly after the New York trip. The movie will leave you wanting to know much more about its members, particularly Mr. Frommerman, and its music. As an added bonus, the five-part harmonies are FANTASTIC. This is one of the most gripping shows I've seen in several months, it came as a complete surprise. ... Read more

Reviews (58)

Flea recites Shakespeare. What more do you need to know?
Well-dressed "indie" hack Gus Van Sant (who's about as indie as Evan Dando) received lots of kudos for this pretty-boys-in-ripped-jeans, "loose adaptation" of "Henry IV, part 1". If this is a loose adaptation of Henry, then "The Rainmaker" is a loose adaptation of "Bleak House". This sometimes decent-looking piece of fluff is so desperate to live up to its "loose adaptation" hype, it actually (painfully) inserts some actual dialogue from the play into the middle of the movie. OK, yeah...get it. Thanks.

River Phoenix is actually quite good & handles the vague, sappy story of boy-hooker-with-a-heart-of-gold with class & subtlety. His task is a thankless one: he plays a character who honks on bobo, hangs out with danceclass reject thugs, and has the occassional grand mal seizure on the highway. That and he's looking for Mama. Sure, but that's always the issue, isn't it?

What's his name? Keanu Reeves gives his usual Frank Gifford-on-thorazine performance. He plays a rich kid who hustles to get back at his family. Reeves is uniformly awful throughout. The interaction between Reeves and Pheonix is like watching two popular college guys go to their favorite hole-in-the-wall bar in the seedy section of town and attempt to "fit in". Meanwhile, they try to pay the tab with a VISA Platinum.

The shame of the movie is that what looks like might turn out to be a dark, intriguing portrait of a troubled twentysomething (nothing earthshattering, there, I grant you) winds up being a J. Crew travelogue that desperately wants to be (1) literary and (2) a cult film. Unless your name is Ed Wood, you can't just effortlessly toss off cult films. Even Wood had to wear fake breasts and fondle a cashmere sweater.

In truth, this would be a really good film student project if it were fifteen minutes long and in a language I couldn't understand. As it is, Van Sant doesn't have near the talent or original vision (see Psycho, the rape of) to pull off a formless character study or a literary cult film. Two stars because of Reeves, the first ten minutes and it's not based on a Tom Robbins novel.

Reality check...
This movie shocked me at first, but I soon realized that Gus Van Sant and the actors, especially Phoenix strove to present us with a picture and a reality we often don't see or don't choose to see. Welcome to the world of male hustlers. I didn't expect to be taken on a date in the first few minutes, and I was sad to learn how a person can give over their body for a 20$ bill. I was impressed and touched by River Phoenix's preparation for this character. His effort paid off beautifully! I understand through reading some of the biographical books about him; he always threw himself into every character. It is said that in preparation of the film, he spent a great deal of time with one particular hustler, a young man, whom he portrays. In addition, he lost an incredible amount of weight to look the part. Mike Waters is a young man looking for something. From highways to gay bars and back again, he searches for his mother, an ethereal character from his dreams, nightmares, and semi-wakefulness from his bouts of narcolepsy. The fits of instant sleep provided some comical moments, yet I enjoyed it because I was finding out what gave Mike stress. He was also looking for love from a man, and not from turning tricks. The actors often reffered to having sex with another person, for free, which gave you wings. The extent to which Mike and other actors will go to search and strive after a goal is unbelievable: From the high plains to the sea-board cities to France, they wandered from place to place looking for Mike's Mom. There is a conflict between Mike and his older brother, who is more a part of Mike life than he realizes. I was inspired by the courage of the characters to show the depth of comittment that a young man will go through to discover truth, no matter how difficult.

I highly recommend this movie to become aware of what happens all around us. We can love others better when remove the labels and love them regardless of where they came from. As a pastor and reviewer, I benefited greatly to seeing a brand new perspective of life and it helped in my work to aid people I know in these situations. It made me wonder - in this season of Christmas why our homes are not open to rejected teens. Loving and intimate relationships are free to give. Mike and his companion had a intense relationship of companionship which didn't revolve around sex That should inspire us to think how we treat the people around us.

"My Own Private Idaho" (just one more)
I forgot one more story, related to what I wrote, already. As if you'll print this, but maybe.
When "Sweet November" came out, I realized it was a remake of the 60s film, only it starred Keanu Reeves and Charlize Theron, this time. I'd seen the original, with Sandy Dennis and Anthony Newley, back in the 70s, when it was on TV late one night, with Susie, my ex-girlfriend I wrote about earlier--the one who gasped, when I called her from the hospital and told her I think I'm an alcoholic. We'd loved that movie--and the "irony" there is that her birthday is November 17th, and that date features prominently in the new movie. It's also set in San Francisco, and I live just north of there, at Muir Beach. What an "irony." Sometimes, when I see "coincidences" in movies his friends and family make and my own life, I now think this was maybe River trying to tell me something from the Great Beyond.
When I wrote Susie of this "irony," after yet another hiatus in our relationship--she is fundamentalist Christian and has right-wing beliefs, when no one I know on purpose does, anymore, really--she ignored me. So bye-bye, Susie, and maybe that is for the best, since she wasn't in sobriety, even though we smoked and drank and took drugs, though she didn't favor that last.
I have related stories--such as when I saw Summer, River's youngest sister, in "Wasted," for the first time. I like this movie, though I can do without the sex scenes. And she can't relate it to River's OD, though it's about heroin addiction and is dedicated, in part, to those who lost their lives due to this disease.
I will go to sleep, now. I had no idea I'd write so much, and it's late. I have a bit of a head cold, but I thought I'd write you, since you sell me a bunch of River Phoenix things, suddenly, and you might want to know why, incidentally.(...)

Weird and wonderful...Keanu Reeves can actually act??
Being fairly new to the world of 'art-house' movies, i first found this a little confusing, and i was concerned that this strange approach would hinder the emotional impact of the film, rendering it yet another overly stylish, powerless and incomprehensible piece of modern film-art. I had also heard that it was extremely shocking and controversial. However, i began to understand Gus Van Sant's language, and it soon seemed completely natural. The claims regarding its explicit sexual nature have been, fankly, grossly exaggerated and probably the result of mild homophobia. The camp fire scene is the most memorable, with River Phoenix's perfomance as Mike, subtle and shining as usual, bringing to mind the very similar camp-fire scene in "Stand by me". Having only seen Keanu Reeves appear in such films as 'Speed' and 'the Matrix', in which he hardly demonstrates any power or skill as an actor, it came as somewhat of a pleasant surprise to see his humorous and striking portrayal of Scott. A sensitive choice of music contributed to the mood, both in the comic, nostalgic steel-string guitar to the gentle folk song that plays as Mike vows through tears to find his mother (by the way, does anybody know what that song is or how to find out?). I was slightly disappointed and depressed by the ending, which is extremely inconclusive, but i suppose movies don't always need a conclusive ending to make them good. Overall a visually stylish, emotionally powerful movie, with some fantastic acting by River Phoenix and Keanu Reeves.

wierd, different, and sad
I did not know exactly to expect when watching this movie but I am a big fan of River Phoenix so I decided to give it a shot. I watched about the first third or so of it and found myself thinking I can't believe I rented this, with the exception of a few scenes that I thought were pretty funny, but when the campfire scene happened I became more involved with the film. I started to see Mike more as a person searching for love and his mother instead of just a male prostitute that fell asleep a lot. I thought River's acting was brilliant. Everything I have seen him in so far is so believable to me. For example, when he sees Scott and his new girlfriend kissing at the dinner table he blows smoke at them, out of obvious jealousy, and he can't sleep when he hears them making love in the next room. I think he was excellent in picking up people's mannerisms and the little things that people do. I ended up being so mad at Scott in the end and was saddened in how it seemed that Mike would live that life until his death. The role of Mike was played perfectly in that it seemed that he didn't even like being a prostitute, evident by his fits of sleep during most of those situations, but he was just trying to get by and find love. The believable acting, mostly by River, and the sadness and emotional vulnerability of the second 2 thirds or so of the film more than make up for the beginning. I hope to look deeper into people's lives and less likely to judge others, something that I must admit needing a little more help in. It really saddens me that there are people right now as I'm typing this review living lives similar to this one feeling like the "road never ends" for them. God bless them and everyone else. ... Read more

Reviews (5)

Les Compères
Les Comprères is a must for French classrooms. Students 7th through 12th laugh hysterically at the comical duo of Depardieu and Richard!

Pleasant and funny road trip about a boy w. two dads
Fed up with his father getting on his case, Tristan Martin, age sixteen-and-a-half and a dead ringer for someone in Menudo, has run away from his home in Paris, accompanied by Shannon Doherty-lookalike Michele Raffart, to Nice. His parents, Paul and Carol, report his disappearance to the police, who don't seem to care. It's like a stolen car-the question is, when will it turn up? A visit to Michele's rough-speaking father yields nothing.

Fed up with her husband's weakness in handling the situation, Carol turns to an ex-beau from seventeen years before, Jean Lucas, a journalist whose book hinted at a connection between a prominent French senator and Rossi, the gambling kingpin of the Riviera. She tells him that Tristan is actually his son so she can get his help. He refuses because he doesn't buy her story or motives, so Carol turns to Francois Pignon, a former schoolteacher and depressive who being the romantic idealist that he is, is only so glad to be reunited with his son. "I've no job, my wife has left me, I live with my mother and hate it. I've no plans, no future, everything is scr---d up... great, isn't it?" Things get really cockeyed when Jean changes his mind, with Carol and Francois none the wiser. Jean is planning a sequel on his book, which could lead to his boss sending him a wreath.

Through circumstances, Jean and Francois are united in their perceived common quest, and we see the differences in their personalities straight off. Even before they meet Tristan or realize the connection between them, the adventurous Jean envisions Tristan as someone like himself, a little brute, strong as an ox, and a fighter, while the nurturing Francois sees Tristan as a dreamer, moody, alienated, writing poetry. Also, Jean is tough, which comes in handy when they get in trouble with the leather-clad bikers Tristan hangs out with. Francois, having just suffered a breakdown, has tendencies to cry for no apparent reason. They go to Nice in Jean's snazzy-looking BMW, at least snazzy for a while. Hint--what else does BMW stand for? And where Jean goes, trouble follows, in the form of two toughs sent by Rossi to intimidate, and later, to kill him.

One of the main things to come out of this story is that, as Francois and Jean, the latter whose fathering attitude towards Tristan comes and goes, learn, is that fatherhood must be earned. That's something that Paul, Tristan's father should have learned. His defense that he cared for him well and gave him all he wanted, well, doesn't cut the surface. There's understanding as well. And as for Tristan, he's not a bad kid, just a teenager undergoing growing pains who needed a stronger sense of understanding from his parents, and the right sort of understanding, which comes from Jean and Francois, who actually take a caring interest in him. His outing proves to develop his character.

Having seen this road trip comedy three times in one year, I can say right now it's one of my favourite French films of all time. Gerard Depardieu (Jean) is still the solid, tall, handsome box office draw that he was in France, and I feel an affinity towards curly-haired Pierre Richard (Francois), best known as "the tall blond man with one black shoe" Having seen this, I'd have wanted a father like Francois, caring, emotional, someone with feeling even if a bit too melodramatic.

An hysterical classic
Gerard Derpardieu and Pierre Richard are magic together. This film is even funnier than when they teamed up in "La chevre". There is a good reason why hollywood tried to remake this very popular film for American audiences. However, the American remake can't hold a candle to this French original.
Pierre plays the bumbling unaware despressive to comic perfection while Gerard's tough no nonsense character provides the perfect contrast resulting in a sensational comedy duo. The mismatched characters pair up to try to find a runnaway boy in hopes of finding out which of them is the rightful father. The humour lasts throughout the film and is great for adults and kids alike. This film is a classic and is known by all in France. It is a must see!

Everything in Life has Two Sides
When I first watched this film here in The Netherlands,
I thought it would just be one of those run-of-the-mill
typical overexploited tear-jerkers which you might choose
to watch if there was nothing else on television and you
have a boring long weekend ahead and nowhere to go. After
just five minutes, however, I was totally riveted.

The situation of a ex-hippy-type mom, properly married now,
whose teenage son ran away from home, may not be all that new,
but the manner which she uses to find him is comically unique.
She contacts two ex-lovers (from the hippy period of her life,
you understand), tells them, during separate lunches, that the
boy is theirs, and in this way inspires both of them to help her
locate him. As both men are childless, both suddenly begin to
entertain ideas of fatherhood, and imagine the pride they would
feel once the boy is found. Since two heads are better than one,
they decide to conduct the search together. The fact that they
are looking for the same boy creates some tension for a while,
but not enough to dispel the comedy of the situation, a kind of
modern "comedy of errors", if you will. In keeping with the mood
of the film, the boy, in the end, tells both men, again during
separate conversations, that both of them make the perfect
father. The problem is resolved for all sides - dad, mom, boy,
ex-lovers - a kind of "as you like it" scenario. "All is well
that ends well", and if there is anything we learn, it is that
there is indeed more than one way to skin a cat, and that if you
have to solve a problem, you might as well have fun on the way.

The film is light and entertaining, an approach which we might
think of applying to the business of ordinary life, which, if
viewed from another angle, might not be all that heavy after all.
It's a cry, a laugh, a sigh and a scream all in one.

Hilarious and touching, but mostly hilarious.
This is the first French film I ever saw and it is my favorite! I never get tired of watching it. The story centers around a runaway sixteen-year old boy named Tristan. His frantic mother decides to look up two old lovers (Depardieu and Richard) to help. She tells each of them that they are the father, and would you please go to Nice and look for him? The two start off separately and meet in Nice by coincidence, where they both realize they're looking for the same kid. The chemistry is brilliant between the two: the wimpy (but loveable), emotional Richard and the take charge, tough-guy Depardieu. This is a great movie for people who grew up in the eighties, like me, you'll see the French dressed in funky clothes just like we did back then! There was a recent remake of this film called "Fathers' Day" starring Billy Crystal and Robin Williams which I did not see. It got weak reviews, and no wonder. I really don't think any remake could top this great movie. Even if you don't speak French, see it! There are subtitles and you'll become a French film fan right away. Richard and Depardieu have teamed up in several films; they are wonderful French comics. You'll love the slapstick humor and hilarious situations they get into and there's fine acting all the way through. A brilliant film or, "Un film genial", as the French would say. ... Read more

Reviews (659)

Underrated Science Fiction Classic
Starship Troopers is a truly underrated classic. Directed by Paul (Robocop) Verhoven, the story takes place far into the future where the world has become a 'Facist Utopia'. It's a world where citizenship is earned through military service and values are taught in war. The original story, written by sci-fi master Robert Heinlein in 1959, took such a future very seriously. Not so with Verhoven, he attempted to approach this Brave New World with camp and satire and I think many people missed this point.

Narrated by a futuristic internet that includes satirical recruiting commercials, we follow the lives of a group of friends - Johnny Rico (Casper Van Diem), Carmen Ibanez (Monica Richards), Dizzy Flores (Dina Meyer) and Carl Jenkins (Neil Patrick Harris). Johnny joins the service because of his girlfriend (Carmen) but is followed right along into service by another girl (Dizzy) who has a major crush on him. However, it becomes clear that they all joined the service just in time as attentions soon turn from each other to that of the enemy - Giant bugs. These giant, killer bugs have declared war on the Earth from their home world of Klendathu and are using long distance asteroids to inflict catastophic damage.

The movie kicks into high gear when soldiers are sent to the extraterrestrial battlefields of Klendathu - a kind of out-world Armageddon. A violent and graphic war is under way as soldiers are ripped apart by these giant bugs, some of which include built in flame throwers. The interaction between the bugs and soldiers is nothing less than spectacular. Indeed, in this era of The Matrix and The Phantom Menace, the digital FX in Starship Troopers easily rank as some of the best you will ever see. At one point, the soldiers are defending a fort against a HUGE army of insect warriors, some of which fly, in a scene that looks like some sci-fi version of the Alamo - Very effective. I will say, however, it struck me strange that a people who have created such advanced interstellar travel would not create better insecticide as the soldiers use pretty standard machine guns that take awhile to put a bug down. Also, Klendathu looked dull - colorless and full of rocks. Oh, well.

All in all, this movie is great. Don't take it too seriously, have fun with it.

Revised Review After Re-Viewing
"Starship Troopers" is a great, action-packed, shoot-'em-up, kill-the-bad-guys (bugs) science fiction adventure film with lots of great special effects. The battles scenes, both in space and on the ground, are graphic, complex, and exciting.

The movie is supposedly based upon Robert Heinlein's science fiction classic, written in 1959. He had three goals:

1) Put forth the idea that a true American patriot could be anti-war and need not be fanatically anti-Communist, a la Joe McCarthy.

2) Satirize war by glorifying it in a tongue-in-cheek manner and by shoving its horror in your face, much like "Saving Private Ryan" did seriously, and much like Archie Bunker did comedically to racism and bigotry.

3) Put forth the philosophy that freedom and responsibility are inextricably linked. Many people today have forgotten that, and moral decline is the result.

What does the movie do with these ideas? It misses the point entirely and sarcastically (not satirically) attacks war, patriotism, AND responsibility. It does this by turning the whole story into a farce, and by minimizing the role of the teacher of responsibility and sometimes portraying him as a bitter fanatic.

The young cast, whom I attacked before revising my review, actually did the best they could with a script that sometimes sounded like it belonged in a Saturday morning cartoon. In their defense, I would guess that most of the cast read the script and not the book. They also did not live through the threat of global war, which was fanned as much by McCarthy's inflammatory anti-Communist rhetoric and fanaticism as it was by Stalinism, Leninism, and Marxism. What defense does the producer and the director have?

The voice-over narration was a big mistake. It furthered the effect of having this film become a caricature of the book, and it was totally unnecessary.

If you want to watch a good science fiction adventure film with lots of special effects, action, and gore, this movie is for you. But, please do not take it seriously or think that it represents Heinlein's book faithfully. If you want to think about this movie and its ideas, please do two things first: read the book it was supposedly based upon, and either read the history of the era that birthed the book or talk with someone born before 1934 at length about the era.

listen up all n64 fans.
in the far future,the armed forces battle giant bugs on thier planet.one of the drill instructers is played by the pervert in sleepers.this movie is far to violent for chilkdren.i cant belive the second part even came fromthis one.this one rules but the sceond one left a lot to be desired.i think military,action and sci fi fans will all enjiy this one.anyone who is squeamish will not like it,as it is very graphic and very violent.there are 2 basic chicks in this movie.a air force chick whose playing two guys and a sexy red head who pines after one of those guys.i think the first chick is nasty but the red head is awesome.she must be pretty co mfortable without a shirt because she takes it off a number of times.this movie kicks butt!some of its futuristic concepts are neat.the violent parts are very graphic.legs flying,guts spraying...........its great.

A complete wast of budgeting
Starship troopers, probably set in the year 4000AD or something is a complete fasico, honestly. What kind of sick moron would create a movie about a bunch of sexy, small titted geeks joining the federal service thing to fight a bunch of mutated insects on the other side of the galaxy. attack, then lots of blood and death (and yet Rico some how manages to be listed corps, but he lives in a bath of green goo) and then they go back for more. Whoopee doo da. Rubbish, and i dont core if you disagree. The most unrealistic film since, well, since ever! From psycic people to roughneck. Thats not the human world. no way! The human world would probable nuke the hell out of "klendathu" the archnids home planet leaving a larghe collection of ash and rubble. And the real world probably wouldn't waste billions of pounds of huge space ships that are going to blow up from cosmic sperm. Nah, we would send thermonuclear probs or something, dodge in and out of the sperm and fly into a random guess at the best spot. Or, instead of using nuclear weapons we could take the right piss. Build a hug maginifying glass over the planets and use there own stars against them and magnify the heat 10,000 times and fry the bastards.

Denise richards must have been pissed to have said yes to acting in this film. What was she thinking?! Why is her hair so long?! and why does she have to smile all the time?! Does here mouth ever close? She did my head in in this "film" her acing may be up to scratch compared to the other actors but she could have done better (compare "the world is not enough"). Johny Rico quite cleary is dressed up to look like one of those life sized action men, the right hair anyway. His freak friend, I forget his name but I know he has been in many other films before. He didn't show up often which was a releif because he is quite ugly. but i suppose being able to mentally control and read the emotions of other animals counts against it.

On the plus side of this film (Yes there is one!!) the graphics and that of the big sacestations is quite good, not as good as say the matrix but it is good. just good. I admit to enjoying them little news reports from the "federal network" but thats about it. Starship Troopers is the perfect example of an over budgetted film and too many speciall effects which drive the film prducers of making a film of good acting. I think the proper scientific definition of this is the matrix revalutions and reloaded.

Only good bug's a dead bug.
Early on, in my formative years, I was introduced to horror films by my mom. Our local late-night horror-fest was Creature Features, hosted by the immortal Bob Wilkins. Through this forum, I was exposed to the great Universal horror films of the 30's, the silly Japanese rubber-suit monster movies, and my favorites, the atomic-age big bug films of the 1950's.

Fast-forward to winter, 1997. I'm sitting in a theater watching Starship Troopers, and it feels like I've stepped into a time machine. This is possibly the best of all the big bug movies, and it's not afraid to show its roots. Sometime in the future, Earth is under attack by huge bugs from another planet. We follow the lives of a few of Earth's best and brightest, as they join the army and head off in different directions. What really struck me about this film is that they actually took the time to develop a three-dimensional world for the characters to inhabit. That's what makes the difference to me. Yes, the young actors are mostly pretty eye candy, and their performances, while not Oscar-caliber, are light years beyond their forebears of the 50's. The world of their future is seemingly fascistic (service in the military guarantees citizenship and other perks, such as the right to vote and the right to have children. Hmm - a future in which people's active participation in their country allows them greater freedoms, provided they take personal responsibility for themselves and their future? I've heard worse notions...). We follow the idealistic youths through basic training, all the way to several epic battles on other worlds and we see their progress as soldiers and as humans along the way. It's this kind of attention to detail and character development that sets this film apart from many others. And yes, everyone makes noise about the coed shower scene, but I have to say that is one of the more important scenes in the film. It shows that the cadets have grown as soldiers, that they are capable as seeing each others as parts of a team, instead of just a bunch of good-looking naked people. Those who have a problem with this scene - grow the heck up. It just adds to the sense of realism of the whole movie. Oh, yeah - there's the bugs, too...

As far as I'm concerned, the bugs are real. I don't know that I've ever seen the make-believe so realistically brought to life in any other movie. These are truly nasty creatures, devoid of compassion or humanity in every way. The effects work (courtesy of master Rob Bottin) is truly incredible. The beasts take apparent glee in tearing apart their human foes, and they do so in spectacular ways. The bugs are so magnificently realized that I literally found myself on the edge of my seat as the troops find themselves ambushed in a deserted fort, with the entire horizon blocked out by herds of thundering bugs.

Paul Veerhoven (Robocop, Total Recall) has a fanatical eye for detail, which is yet another aspect of this film that just compels the feeling that what is happening might just be real. He maintains a sense of humor throughout, which works brilliantly when contrasted to the raw, brutal carnage we're being subjected to. The primary actors, the pretty young kids, do the best they can within the limits of their youth and talent (the standout is Dina Meyer, who's just great), but the real stars of this movie are Clancy Brown as the quasi-sadistic Sergeant Zim, the cadet's Drill Instructor, and genre favorite Michael Ironside as Lt. Rasczak, the kids' teacher at home, and also out on the battlefield. These two guys deserve as much attention and credit as possible for always turning in great performances in character-driven roles. They, even more than the bugs, give this film its heart.

All in all, you just couldn't ask for a more fun Saturday afternoon monster movie. Just avoid any sequels, because invariably, they just can't live up to this fun, breathtaking achievement. ... Read more

Amazon.com

In the first and finest RoboCop movie, director Paul Verhoeven combined near-future science fiction with a keen sense of social satire--not to mention enough high-velocity violence to satisfy even the most voracious bloodlust. In Starship Troopers, Verhoeven and RoboCop cowriter Ed Neumeier take inspired cues from Robert Heinlein's classic sci-fi novel to create a special-effects extravaganza that functions on multiple levels of entertainment. The film might be called "Melrose Place in Space," with its youthful cast of handsome guys and gorgeous women who look like they've been recruited (and in some cases they were) from the cast of Beverly Hills 90210. Viewers might focus on the incredible, graphically intense action sequences (definitely not for children) in which heavily armed forces from Earth go to off-world battle against vast hordes of alien "bugs" bent on planetary conquest. The attacking bugs are marvels of state-of-the-art special-effects technology, and the space battles are nothing short of spectacular. But Starship Troopers is more than a showcase for high-tech hardware and gigantic, flesh-ripping insects.Recalling his childhood in Holland during the Nazi occupation, Verhoeven turns this epic adventure into a scathingly funny satire of fascist propaganda, emphasizing Heinlein's underlying warning against the hazards of military conformity and the sickening realities of war. It's an action-packed joy ride if that's all you're looking for, but Verhoeven has a provocative agenda that makes Starship Troopers as smart as it is exciting. The DVD includes an above-average commentary by the director and Neumeier, several deleted scenes, a behind-the-scenes documentary and promotional featurette, cast bios, production notes, and more. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (659)

<