Amazon.com

One of the best films of 2004, Kinsey pays tribute to the flawed but honorable man who revolutionized our understanding of human sexuality. As played by Liam Neeson in writer-director Bill Condon's excellent film biography, Indiana University researcher Alfred Kinsey was so consumed by statistical measurements of human sexual activity that he almost completely overlooked the substantial role of emotions and their effect on human behavior. This made him an ideal researcher and science celebrity who revealed that sexual behaviors previously considered deviant and even harmful (homosexuality, oral sex, etc.) are in fact common and essentially normal in the realm of human experience, but whose obsession with scientific method frequently placed him at odds with his understanding wife (superbly played by Laura Linney) and research assistants. In presenting Kinsey as a driven social misfit, Condon's film gives Neeson one of his finest roles while revealing the depth of Kinsey's own humanity, and the incalculable benefit his research had on our collective sexual enlightenment. With humor, charm, and intelligence, Kinsey shines a light where darkness once prevailed. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (66)

Pretentious Attempt
In retrospection, Kinsey is over-rated. It rides on the 21st century's fetish of sexuality and pretends to be another "Beautiful Mind" but fails and flops. It is one of those pretentious artistic attempt.

Truth or Perversity?
This became more and more difficult to watch as the movie went along.A selected biography in the style of Ray or Delovely, but quite a different choice of subject matter.

Kinsey's father set the tone of Kinsey's own life, with a certainty that becomes obnoxious.The certainty that he knows what the answer is, in this case to the issues of human sexuality and its associated ignorance and taboos, and as with all people who think they know, there is a fall.At the time that Kinsey was achieving his fame there were restrictions on the entire subject of sex practices and sex mores.It stands to reason that the only people who were working in this area were strange themselves, or at least unconventional.That's where I had difficulty.Were Kinsey and his associates really as perverse as they appeared in the movie?Or were their banter and actions exaggerated for the sake of a good story.

I found no sympathy for Kinsey nor for anyone else in the movie.And some of the conclusions that they reached seem so counter-intuitive that they defy belief.I didn't know whether they were trying to find truth or to present perversity.

Potent Film with Certain Foundation for Heated Debate...
Galileo Galilei and scientists alike announced through in-depth research that the Earth was not flat and faced heavy persecution.Their different thinking broke the standards of the 16th century pious beliefs, which had been used a long time before scientists questioned the validity and reliability in what they observed.This offended the Catholic Church who proclaimed that they held the highest truth, a truth deeply rooted in unquestioned morality.The questioning of the religious beliefs triggered a witch-hunt of the scientists that disagreed with the moral teachings of the Catholic Church.However, the truth eventually emerged, as Galileo's theories are still the instruments of current astronomical research that continues to evolve the human existence beyond the earth.

The Catholic Church and Lutheran Church persecuted people with different ideas of Christianity.Those who desired to exercise their own freedom of religion sought refuge in America where they could exercise their freedom to express their own ideas of religion.After the War of Independence, the founding fathers formed the Congress that drafted the 10 amendments.The first amendment brings the people freedom of speech, which includes religion.However, the very same ideas that sought freedom in America later turned from being the persecuted to the persecutor, as these notions harassed new different thinkers.The notion of cyclical history comes to mind when scientists like Alfred Kinsey are being silenced based on morality and unfounded facts.

Kinsey (Liam Neeson), a biologist, was brought up under strict puritan rules, as his father consistently proclaimed being the ultimate source of knowledge.In a sense he grew up with similar persecuting standards as Galileo, but instead of conforming to the rules he broke the bond with his father when he accepted a partial scholarship to Bowdoin to study biology.Kinsey's father wanted him to become an engineer, which has a certain level of irony to it, as his father believed that all modern inventions at the beginning of the 20th century were evil.The pursuit of the biology degree brought him through Harvard to Indiana University where he took a position as an assistant professor while studying stag beetles and later the American Cynipidae also known as the gall wasp.

Years of research and collecting the American Cynipidae allowed Kinsey to meticulously catalogue his gall wasp library.During this time Kinsey met his wife Clara (Laura Linney) with whom he had three children.However, before having the children they had difficulties in the bedroom, as Clara assumed it was because they physically would not fit together.This was an unacceptable answer for Kinsey who approached the problem, as if there were an answer, which there was.It simply was painful for Clara to have sex as her hymen was too thick, and with a quick procedure by a doctor she had this fixed.Consequently, Kinsey continued to help other couples with problems of sexual nature, but realized that he did not have any real answers to the questions that were posed to him.

In the 1940s, Kinsey got his chance to do teach a marriage course in regards to sex and the social aspects of sex between husbands and wives.As the class went on his interest deepened through the vast number of questions people asked in regards to sex.This concluded in Kinsey beginning to research the taboo ridden topic, which so many have been taught to avoid at all costs except for the purpose of having children.Kinsey opposed the abstinence with his statement, "society has interfered with what should be a normal biological development..."

The sex research forced Kinsey to travel uncharted waters, as he had to find a way to collect data that were valid and reliable.Through this process he design an interview style that had to be nonjudgmental in order for the interviewee to reveal everything without having to feel any negative feelings.This process gave them surprising facts about sex, as they also encountered homosexuality, extramarital affairs, and premarital affairs.They also found evidence of deviant sexual practices, which most of the society rightfully did not tolerate such as pedophilia.An important note to this is that Kinsey was only collecting data, he did not advocate harmful sexual practices.However, in the eyes of the society Kinsey was in the end drawn into the mud, as much of his intentions was misunderstood.

Nonetheless, Kinsey helped breaking the ice of the forbidden issue that in the end opened up the society to understanding this hushed, but normal behavior.If Kinsey did not push the envelope the society might have continued its intolerance towards sexual issues, an intolerance that would force many to hide their true identity in the fear of repercussions and prejudice based on hatred and fear.For example, John Edgar Hoover created a profiling center for homosexuals and other undesirables.The very same intolerance would function as a shield that would have protected many of the Catholic priests that have been uncovered to molest children.It is thanks to Kinsey and researchers alike that it has become acceptable to discuss this taboo topic in media, where horrendous crimes such as child molesting can be caught.Yet, there are still many who believe that Kinsey was wrong to do what he did, and they are naturally free to have their own opinions.As they should let the truth be unveiled from darkness and not let erotophobia, i.e., learned negative emotional response to information of sexual nature, affect any decision-making that could help human beings discover a better future.

Kinsey is a political and potent film that will undoubtedly make many feel awkward and uncomfortable.Yet, it is also an important film, as it displays the importance of learning the truth and not hiding behind groundless rules and laws based on fictionalized morality.The film also has historical value to our contemporary society where many laws often are passed based on morality, which ends up hurting a fraction of the society and slows the progress of humanity.When this happens, history seems to be have drifted into oblivion as prejudice and intolerance continues to haunt the society.Hopefully, the film Kinsey offers an opportunity for debate and insightfulness, and not continued narrow-mindedness.

On balance, a positive contribution to human understanding
Alfred Kinsey did a great service to the study of sex.Yes, some of his methodologies were suspect, "self-selection" throwing a monkey-wrench in the whole randomization requirement.His subjects were perhaps not the most representative sampling of the population.Furthermore, he and his staff became too personally involved in the work.His assistants comprised a sort of swinger's club.Kinsey could be faulted for not having anticipated the conflicts brought about by such activities among colleagues.

Unfortunately, these aspects of his life and the film will obscure - for many - the more significant meaning of his work: Bringing the discussion of sex out of the dark corners of human consciousness and into the light.Also, by removing the shame factor from sex, a natural healthy aspect of the human animal, Kinsey legitimized the scientific study of sex.

As far as the film per se, I was impressed with the honesty of the piece.Contrary to what some reviewers have said, this film does not make Kinsey a hero.It rightly credits him for his work, yet reveals a conflicted, troubled psyche at the same time as Kinsey tries to navigate the line between his objective scientific observation and his subjective sexual experiences.This blurring is where Kinsey erred.

Interesting insight into groundbreaking study
Alfred Kinsey was a pioneer in the study of human sexuality. He was a professor at Indiana University and spent the first 20 years of his career studying an insect, the "gall wasp." This movie, starring Liam Neeson in the title role, depicts Dr. Kinsey as having an obsession with his study of the gall wasp, collecting hundreds of thousands of specimens and devoting his life to studying this species. Tapped to teach a course on marriage and the family, Kinsey developed an interest in human sexuality and he bacame as obsessive in this study as he was in his earlier endeavor. He was driven and pushed his staff hard. He employed interviewers who spoke with thousands of people in taking sexual histories. Kinsey was very hands on as he personally instructed his staff on how to put subjects at ease as they conducted the interviews.

Dr. Kinsey was the son of a morally strict father, convincingly played by John Lithgow. Neeson's depecition of Dr. Kinsey shows the results of this upbringing. His characterization of Kinsey comes across as very stiff and uptight. He is not one to really let his hair down yet, in his groundbreaking study, there is no taboo that he is unwilling to explore. Indeed, he explores his own sexuality as he has an extramarital gay affair. Despite serious misgivings at first, his wife, played by Laura Linney, is accepting.

The studies were very controversial, having been done in the 1940s, long before the "sexual revolution." Some people found his findings to be very liberating in that they discovered that they were not alone in their sexual feelings. Other people were shocked, believing that the subject was taboo and should not be discussed. There is one brief scene in which a woman, who agonized over her lesbian inclinations, was liberated by Dr. Kinsey's findings and, thereby allowed herself to enter into a relationship. Others, including Kinsey's father, were scandalized. Ultimately, however, Kinsey's father allows himself to be interviewed by his son and reveals his own, painful secrets of a repressed childhood.

We live in a more sexually open era than we did, generations ago. This movie gives an insight into one of the reasons this is so. I recommend this dvd. ... Read more

Amazon.com

One of the best films of 2004, Kinsey pays tribute to the flawed but honorable man who revolutionized our understanding of human sexuality. As played by Liam Neeson in writer-director Bill Condon's excellent film biography, Indiana University researcher Alfred Kinsey was so consumed by statistical measurements of human sexual activity that he almost completely overlooked the substantial role of emotions and their effect on human behavior. This made him an ideal researcher and science celebrity who revealed that sexual behaviors previously considered deviant and even harmful (homosexuality, oral sex, etc.) are in fact common and essentially normal in the realm of human experience, but whose obsession with scientific method frequently placed him at odds with his understanding wife (superbly played by Laura Linney) and research assistants. In presenting Kinsey as a driven social misfit, Condon's film gives Neeson one of his finest roles while revealing the depth of Kinsey's own humanity, and the incalculable benefit his research had on our collective sexual enlightenment. With humor, charm, and intelligence, Kinsey shines a light where darkness once prevailed. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (66)

Pretentious Attempt
In retrospection, Kinsey is over-rated. It rides on the 21st century's fetish of sexuality and pretends to be another "Beautiful Mind" but fails and flops. It is one of those pretentious artistic attempt.

Truth or Perversity?
This became more and more difficult to watch as the movie went along.A selected biography in the style of Ray or Delovely, but quite a different choice of subject matter.

Kinsey's father set the tone of Kinsey's own life, with a certainty that becomes obnoxious.The certainty that he knows what the answer is, in this case to the issues of human sexuality and its associated ignorance and taboos, and as with all people who think they know, there is a fall.At the time that Kinsey was achieving his fame there were restrictions on the entire subject of sex practices and sex mores.It stands to reason that the only people who were working in this area were strange themselves, or at least unconventional.That's where I had difficulty.Were Kinsey and his associates really as perverse as they appeared in the movie?Or were their banter and actions exaggerated for the sake of a good story.

I found no sympathy for Kinsey nor for anyone else in the movie.And some of the conclusions that they reached seem so counter-intuitive that they defy belief.I didn't know whether they were trying to find truth or to present perversity.

Potent Film with Certain Foundation for Heated Debate...
Galileo Galilei and scientists alike announced through in-depth research that the Earth was not flat and faced heavy persecution.Their different thinking broke the standards of the 16th century pious beliefs, which had been used a long time before scientists questioned the validity and reliability in what they observed.This offended the Catholic Church who proclaimed that they held the highest truth, a truth deeply rooted in unquestioned morality.The questioning of the religious beliefs triggered a witch-hunt of the scientists that disagreed with the moral teachings of the Catholic Church.However, the truth eventually emerged, as Galileo's theories are still the instruments of current astronomical research that continues to evolve the human existence beyond the earth.

The Catholic Church and Lutheran Church persecuted people with different ideas of Christianity.Those who desired to exercise their own freedom of religion sought refuge in America where they could exercise their freedom to express their own ideas of religion.After the War of Independence, the founding fathers formed the Congress that drafted the 10 amendments.The first amendment brings the people freedom of speech, which includes religion.However, the very same ideas that sought freedom in America later turned from being the persecuted to the persecutor, as these notions harassed new different thinkers.The notion of cyclical history comes to mind when scientists like Alfred Kinsey are being silenced based on morality and unfounded facts.

Kinsey (Liam Neeson), a biologist, was brought up under strict puritan rules, as his father consistently proclaimed being the ultimate source of knowledge.In a sense he grew up with similar persecuting standards as Galileo, but instead of conforming to the rules he broke the bond with his father when he accepted a partial scholarship to Bowdoin to study biology.Kinsey's father wanted him to become an engineer, which has a certain level of irony to it, as his father believed that all modern inventions at the beginning of the 20th century were evil.The pursuit of the biology degree brought him through Harvard to Indiana University where he took a position as an assistant professor while studying stag beetles and later the American Cynipidae also known as the gall wasp.

Years of research and collecting the American Cynipidae allowed Kinsey to meticulously catalogue his gall wasp library.During this time Kinsey met his wife Clara (Laura Linney) with whom he had three children.However, before having the children they had difficulties in the bedroom, as Clara assumed it was because they physically would not fit together.This was an unacceptable answer for Kinsey who approached the problem, as if there were an answer, which there was.It simply was painful for Clara to have sex as her hymen was too thick, and with a quick procedure by a doctor she had this fixed.Consequently, Kinsey continued to help other couples with problems of sexual nature, but realized that he did not have any real answers to the questions that were posed to him.

In the 1940s, Kinsey got his chance to do teach a marriage course in regards to sex and the social aspects of sex between husbands and wives.As the class went on his interest deepened through the vast number of questions people asked in regards to sex.This concluded in Kinsey beginning to research the taboo ridden topic, which so many have been taught to avoid at all costs except for the purpose of having children.Kinsey opposed the abstinence with his statement, "society has interfered with what should be a normal biological development..."

The sex research forced Kinsey to travel uncharted waters, as he had to find a way to collect data that were valid and reliable.Through this process he design an interview style that had to be nonjudgmental in order for the interviewee to reveal everything without having to feel any negative feelings.This process gave them surprising facts about sex, as they also encountered homosexuality, extramarital affairs, and premarital affairs.They also found evidence of deviant sexual practices, which most of the society rightfully did not tolerate such as pedophilia.An important note to this is that Kinsey was only collecting data, he did not advocate harmful sexual practices.However, in the eyes of the society Kinsey was in the end drawn into the mud, as much of his intentions was misunderstood.

Nonetheless, Kinsey helped breaking the ice of the forbidden issue that in the end opened up the society to understanding this hushed, but normal behavior.If Kinsey did not push the envelope the society might have continued its intolerance towards sexual issues, an intolerance that would force many to hide their true identity in the fear of repercussions and prejudice based on hatred and fear.For example, John Edgar Hoover created a profiling center for homosexuals and other undesirables.The very same intolerance would function as a shield that would have protected many of the Catholic priests that have been uncovered to molest children.It is thanks to Kinsey and researchers alike that it has become acceptable to discuss this taboo topic in media, where horrendous crimes such as child molesting can be caught.Yet, there are still many who believe that Kinsey was wrong to do what he did, and they are naturally free to have their own opinions.As they should let the truth be unveiled from darkness and not let erotophobia, i.e., learned negative emotional response to information of sexual nature, affect any decision-making that could help human beings discover a better future.

Kinsey is a political and potent film that will undoubtedly make many feel awkward and uncomfortable.Yet, it is also an important film, as it displays the importance of learning the truth and not hiding behind groundless rules and laws based on fictionalized morality.The film also has historical value to our contemporary society where many laws often are passed based on morality, which ends up hurting a fraction of the society and slows the progress of humanity.When this happens, history seems to be have drifted into oblivion as prejudice and intolerance continues to haunt the society.Hopefully, the film Kinsey offers an opportunity for debate and insightfulness, and not continued narrow-mindedness.

On balance, a positive contribution to human understanding
Alfred Kinsey did a great service to the study of sex.Yes, some of his methodologies were suspect, "self-selection" throwing a monkey-wrench in the whole randomization requirement.His subjects were perhaps not the most representative sampling of the population.Furthermore, he and his staff became too personally involved in the work.His assistants comprised a sort of swinger's club.Kinsey could be faulted for not having anticipated the conflicts brought about by such activities among colleagues.

Unfortunately, these aspects of his life and the film will obscure - for many - the more significant meaning of his work: Bringing the discussion of sex out of the dark corners of human consciousness and into the light.Also, by removing the shame factor from sex, a natural healthy aspect of the human animal, Kinsey legitimized the scientific study of sex.

As far as the film per se, I was impressed with the honesty of the piece.Contrary to what some reviewers have said, this film does not make Kinsey a hero.It rightly credits him for his work, yet reveals a conflicted, troubled psyche at the same time as Kinsey tries to navigate the line between his objective scientific observation and his subjective sexual experiences.This blurring is where Kinsey erred.

Interesting insight into groundbreaking study
Alfred Kinsey was a pioneer in the study of human sexuality. He was a professor at Indiana University and spent the first 20 years of his career studying an insect, the "gall wasp." This movie, starring Liam Neeson in the title role, depicts Dr. Kinsey as having an obsession with his study of the gall wasp, collecting hundreds of thousands of specimens and devoting his life to studying this species. Tapped to teach a course on marriage and the family, Kinsey developed an interest in human sexuality and he bacame as obsessive in this study as he was in his earlier endeavor. He was driven and pushed his staff hard. He employed interviewers who spoke with thousands of people in taking sexual histories. Kinsey was very hands on as he personally instructed his staff on how to put subjects at ease as they conducted the interviews.

Dr. Kinsey was the son of a morally strict father, convincingly played by John Lithgow. Neeson's depecition of Dr. Kinsey shows the results of this upbringing. His characterization of Kinsey comes across as very stiff and uptight. He is not one to really let his hair down yet, in his groundbreaking study, there is no taboo that he is unwilling to explore. Indeed, he explores his own sexuality as he has an extramarital gay affair. Despite serious misgivings at first, his wife, played by Laura Linney, is accepting.

The studies were very controversial, having been done in the 1940s, long before the "sexual revolution." Some people found his findings to be very liberating in that they discovered that they were not alone in their sexual feelings. Other people were shocked, believing that the subject was taboo and should not be discussed. There is one brief scene in which a woman, who agonized over her lesbian inclinations, was liberated by Dr. Kinsey's findings and, thereby allowed herself to enter into a relationship. Others, including Kinsey's father, were scandalized. Ultimately, however, Kinsey's father allows himself to be interviewed by his son and reveals his own, painful secrets of a repressed childhood.

We live in a more sexually open era than we did, generations ago. This movie gives an insight into one of the reasons this is so. I recommend this dvd. ... Read more

Reviews (120)

Powerfully acted, psychologically mesmerizing.
At one point in "Gods and Monsters," Ian McKellan's character, James Whale, gestures to his head and remarks, "The real monsters are up here." The film spends its entire creating a way of life around this observation, portraying the last days of the well-known film director in ways that evoke humor, touching emotion, and above all else, emotionally haunting reflection on one's life.

It's a most unusual film, not completely a biopic, yet not entirely fictional; it's more of a speculation on his latter days, based on the novel "Father of Frankenstein," written by Christopher Bram. The reality of Whale's life, from his superior and delectable wit to the memories of war and Hollywood that delight and haunt him, is the basis of the novel and the film, as Whale relates them to a young gardener in whom he takes an emotional and physical interest.

The story begins by introducing us to Whale's way of life, from his slowly deteriorating health and mental state, to his luxurious home, where he lives with his maid, Hanna (Lynn Redgrave), who is caring yet keeps up a stern demeanor when it comes to his dealings in homosexuality. The presence of the new gardener, Clay Boone (Brendan Fraser), strikes a chord within Whale, who resumes his sketching by asking the young ex-Marine to pose for his drawing, offering a face-only clause as a way of quelling Clay's obvious insecurities.

The film's own openness with the issues of sexuality effectively portrays the flamboyance of its main character, who apparently saw no shame in his ways despite the resentment of homosexuality in the 1950's. The movie embodies this ignorance in Clay, who, at first, is unaware of his newfound friend's orientation. Once he discovers the truth from Hanna, his discomfort becomes even more unstable, to the point where he storms out in a rage of fury over the old man's excessive way with discomforting words. And yet, he returns to act as Whale's model, intrigued by the heartwarming and heartbreaking stories he offers as he sketches.

This is a most fragile and unsteady friendship, yet in spite of the discomfort that surrounds their bond, their is a certain degree of comfort to be found within it. This stems from director Bill Condon's avoidance of character glorification: in "Gods and Monsters," everyone has flaws. We see Whale's mood swings, his obsession with young boys in his old age, and his reluctance to recall his past; Clay also spends his time running, from his family, commitment, and stability. Ultimately, this makes their friendship mutually beneficial, allowing Clay a broader, richer view of life while allotting Whale the chance to face memories he would otherwise hide away forever.

All of this is painted in broad strokes by Condon, who employs humor, wit, and sadness into his stunning adaptation. The discomfort that arises as a result of Clay's discovery of his friend's sexuality is handled lightly in earlier scenes, slowly gaining resonance and meaning as the plot moves along its dreamlike path. Whale's memories of filming the "Frankenstein" movies are realistic in their approach, while his recollections of war and his lost love are emotionally charged. All of this is given a slow yet mesmerizing pace that allows us into the deepest subconscious of the characters, so that we not only see what is going on in their minds, but can feel it as well.

In the film's favor is its credible casting choices, most notably McKellan, who employs wit and real emotional range as Whale. Making sudden and drastic jumps from jubilant to unstable, McKellan's Whale is portrayed as someone whom we feel for, a man whose life is put into perspective in a manner that calls us to look at it with unblinking eyes. Fraser evokes a subtle sexual tension and eroticism as Clay, whose resemblance of Frankenstein's monster is the focal point of Whale's fascination. Redgrave makes a wonderful turn as Hanna, putting her wit and sarcasm to good use as the woman who embodies a maid, a wife, and a mother all at the same time.

Above all else, the most perplexing aspect of "Gods and Monsters" is its connection to Whale's film, "Frankenstein." Clay's resemblance and sense of naivety when in the presence of Whale is very much like the scene from that earlier film that this film's final scene. Seeing that final scene is to finally realize and acknowledge the film's purpose; it's one of those forceful moments in cinema that only come once in a blue moon. The film itself is a most touching achievement, deriving its success from its examination of Whale's life in a manner that makes it compelling rather than interesting.

The best acting since Fonda in "Ulee's Gold"

I see a lot of movies. I see very few outstanding performances.

"Gods and Monsters" is that rare combination of a good story, well-told and brilliantly acted by Ian McKellen.

I was nailed to the couch during the entire video and plan to rent it again.

It's not light, air-head entertainment. It's strong in subject and substance.

For my money, McKellen has turned in one of the most astonishing performances of his (or any) career.

Brendon Fraser will surprise you, too.

I saw Judy Dench's performances in both "Mrs. Brown" and "Shakespeare in Love". She deserved the Oscar for "Mrs. Brown". She did not deserve it for "Shakespeare in Love".

Perhaps too few Academy members actually saw Lynn Redgrave's perfect portrayal of the loyal maid....or perhaps Dench's win was a kind of consolation prize for losing with "Mrs. Brown". Whatever it was, the Academy made a big mistake...huge mistake.... Redgrave was hands down the most obvious choice for Best Supporting Actress this year and her in-nearly-every-scene certainly beats the devil out of Dench's 8-9 minutes on film.

When the price goes down, this movie will be on my shelf at home and it has already made my "All-time Top Ten" list....it's that good.

Good movie but slim on the extras
Without a doubt, those who appreciate fine, character-driven films will find much to like in Bill Condon's 1988 critically acclaimed biopic on legendary horror director James Whale. Ian McKellen delivers his finest performance to date as the charming, charismatic director whose best days are behind him along with Lynn Redgrave as the doting maid and Brendan Fraser as a young gardener who strikes up a quick and quirky friendship with Whale. The beauty of this film lies in its narrow scope with its very small palette of locations and supporting characters, giving the film a very intimate feel in the close confines of the three major players along with the subtlety of their interaction.

On the disc itself all you'll get is a poorly transferred trailer and a ho-hum 30 minute featurette that offers little in the way of further value. Also disappointing is the lack of a proper Dolby 5.1 audio track - all you'll get on this shiny disc is a paltry 2.0 mono job.

A modern classic about the classics
Forget the dreadful "Shadow of a Vampire". This is the one to watch.

Here Ian McKellen possibly does his best performance to date (Yes, it is better than Gandalf but not by much!) and so does Brendan Fraser. So two actors have their best roles ever in this movie and that says a lot about the quality of this film. This one has also got a few Oscars, even though that might not say much, it is still quite an achievement given that this film is pretty much a medium budget movie with limited locations and sets.

The story is about the director James Whale who was primarily a horror director in the 1930s and 1940s. This is the story about the perils of old age, sexual discrimination, lust, anger, manipulation and love - all played out to the tune of a film that documents the reasons for this director's status as one of the all time greats.

McKellen is frighteningly real at times. He has an old-age seizure on camera that looks stunningly realistic. The man is an impeccable performer and takes on his role here like a bull by the horns. You feel sadness and grossness for him at the same time. He is a manipulator, a conman, a sexual deviant- but also a great heart. Strangely enough this film has similar themes as Lord of the Rings. Tolken wrote many of the battle scenes, especially the Dead Marshes, because of his real experiences during the war. Whale is also attributing much of his own personal horrors that he paints on his canvas (both films and portrait artwork that he makes) to these artefacts of battle. There is a lot of depth to Gods and Monsters and plenty of emotion to boot. It spans across nearly every era between the early 1900s and the 1940s. Much of it is told in flashbacks especially the making of Whale's horror films.

The plot is basically about Whale and his gardener (Fraser) and their relationship. It is a bit like asking questions and getting answers and showing a bit of skin in-between. Not only do both these actors stand out but Lynn Redgrave plays Whale's housekeeper in her best role to date too! She is an absolute side-splitting hoot and her cynicism is second to none.

It would be hard to tell you much more about the plot without giving lots of it away but let's just say that you will learn a lot about everyone in this delightful film and it does come with a shock attached towards the end as the characters move a little closer to one another. The ending is moving and filled with sadness and loss with the passing of time. You can bring a lot to this movie and take a lot of it away with you too.

This is an inspiring movie about talent, friendship and filmmaking. It is hard to find dramas much better than Gods and Monsters...

Interesting DVD of an interesting film...
The film is so interesting that the DVD capitalizes on the opportunity of further informing the viewer about the real facts behind the "fact-tion" story of director James Whale. Unfortunately the production of the special features seemed a bit rushed and "unproduced," apparently (according to the director) much the same way as the film itself. Interesting insight into the world of indie film and leaves the audience wondering what glorious heights this one might have reached had the filmmakers had ample time and resources to recognize their vision. Nonetheless, it is a beautifully acted and packaged piece...well worth the time and attention! ... Read more

Amazon.com

One of the most critically acclaimed films of 1998 and winner of several awards including the Oscar for Best Adapted Screenplay, Gods and Monsters is a compassionate speculation about the final days of James Whale (1889-1957), the director of Frankenstein and 20 other films of the 1930s and '40s, who was openly gay at a time when homosexuality in Hollywood was discreetly concealed. Adapted and directed by Bill Condon from Christopher Bram's novel Father of Frankenstein, the film stars Ian McKellen in a sublime performance as the white-haired Whale, who is portrayed as a dapper gent and amateur artist prompted by failing health into melancholy remembrance of things past. Flashbacks of lost love, World War I battle trauma, and glory days in Hollywood combine with Whale's present-day attraction to a newly hired yard worker (Brendan Fraser) whose hunky, Frankenstein-like physique makes him an ideal model for Whale's fixated sketching.

The friendship between the handsome gardener and his elderly gay admirer is by turns tenuous, humorous, mutually beneficial, and ultimately rather sad--but to Condon's credit Whale is never seen as pathetic, lecherous, or senile. Equally rich is the rapport between Whale and his long-time housekeeper (played with wry sarcasm by Lynn Redgrave), who serves as protector, mother, and even surrogate spouse while Whale's mental state deteriorates. Flashbacks to Whale's filmmaking days are painstakingly authentic (particularly in the casting of look-alike actors playing Boris Karloff and Elsa Lanchester), and all of these ingredients combine to make Gods and Monsters (executive produced by horror novelist-filmmaker Clive Barker) a touchingly affectionate film that succeeds on many levels. It is at once a keen glimpse of Hollywood's past, a loving tribute to James Whale, and a richly moving, delicately balanced drama about loneliness, memory, and the passions that keep us alive. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (120)

Powerfully acted, psychologically mesmerizing.
At one point in "Gods and Monsters," Ian McKellan's character, James Whale, gestures to his head and remarks, "The real monsters are up here." The film spends its entire creating a way of life around this observation, portraying the last days of the well-known film director in ways that evoke humor, touching emotion, and above all else, emotionally haunting reflection on one's life.

It's a most unusual film, not completely a biopic, yet not entirely fictional; it's more of a speculation on his latter days, based on the novel "Father of Frankenstein," written by Christopher Bram. The reality of Whale's life, from his superior and delectable wit to the memories of war and Hollywood that delight and haunt him, is the basis of the novel and the film, as Whale relates them to a young gardener in whom he takes an emotional and physical interest.

The story begins by introducing us to Whale's way of life, from his slowly deteriorating health and mental state, to his luxurious home, where he lives with his maid, Hanna (Lynn Redgrave), who is caring yet keeps up a stern demeanor when it comes to his dealings in homosexuality. The presence of the new gardener, Clay Boone (Brendan Fraser), strikes a chord within Whale, who resumes his sketching by asking the young ex-Marine to pose for his drawing, offering a face-only clause as a way of quelling Clay's obvious insecurities.

The film's own openness with the issues of sexuality effectively portrays the flamboyance of its main character, who apparently saw no shame in his ways despite the resentment of homosexuality in the 1950's. The movie embodies this ignorance in Clay, who, at first, is unaware of his newfound friend's orientation. Once he discovers the truth from Hanna, his discomfort becomes even more unstable, to the point where he storms out in a rage of fury over the old man's excessive way with discomforting words. And yet, he returns to act as Whale's model, intrigued by the heartwarming and heartbreaking stories he offers as he sketches.

This is a most fragile and unsteady friendship, yet in spite of the discomfort that surrounds their bond, their is a certain degree of comfort to be found within it. This stems from director Bill Condon's avoidance of character glorification: in "Gods and Monsters," everyone has flaws. We see Whale's mood swings, his obsession with young boys in his old age, and his reluctance to recall his past; Clay also spends his time running, from his family, commitment, and stability. Ultimately, this makes their friendship mutually beneficial, allowing Clay a broader, richer view of life while allotting Whale the chance to face memories he would otherwise hide away forever.

All of this is painted in broad strokes by Condon, who employs humor, wit, and sadness into his stunning adaptation. The discomfort that arises as a result of Clay's discovery of his friend's sexuality is handled lightly in earlier scenes, slowly gaining resonance and meaning as the plot moves along its dreamlike path. Whale's memories of filming the "Frankenstein" movies are realistic in their approach, while his recollections of war and his lost love are emotionally charged. All of this is given a slow yet mesmerizing pace that allows us into the deepest subconscious of the characters, so that we not only see what is going on in their minds, but can feel it as well.

In the film's favor is its credible casting choices, most notably McKellan, who employs wit and real emotional range as Whale. Making sudden and drastic jumps from jubilant to unstable, McKellan's Whale is portrayed as someone whom we feel for, a man whose life is put into perspective in a manner that calls us to look at it with unblinking eyes. Fraser evokes a subtle sexual tension and eroticism as Clay, whose resemblance of Frankenstein's monster is the focal point of Whale's fascination. Redgrave makes a wonderful turn as Hanna, putting her wit and sarcasm to good use as the woman who embodies a maid, a wife, and a mother all at the same time.

Above all else, the most perplexing aspect of "Gods and Monsters" is its connection to Whale's film, "Frankenstein." Clay's resemblance and sense of naivety when in the presence of Whale is very much like the scene from that earlier film that this film's final scene. Seeing that final scene is to finally realize and acknowledge the film's purpose; it's one of those forceful moments in cinema that only come once in a blue moon. The film itself is a most touching achievement, deriving its success from its examination of Whale's life in a manner that makes it compelling rather than interesting.

The best acting since Fonda in "Ulee's Gold"

I see a lot of movies. I see very few outstanding performances.

"Gods and Monsters" is that rare combination of a good story, well-told and brilliantly acted by Ian McKellen.

I was nailed to the couch during the entire video and plan to rent it again.

It's not light, air-head entertainment. It's strong in subject and substance.

For my money, McKellen has turned in one of the most astonishing performances of his (or any) career.

Brendon Fraser will surprise you, too.

I saw Judy Dench's performances in both "Mrs. Brown" and "Shakespeare in Love". She deserved the Oscar for "Mrs. Brown". She did not deserve it for "Shakespeare in Love".

Perhaps too few Academy members actually saw Lynn Redgrave's perfect portrayal of the loyal maid....or perhaps Dench's win was a kind of consolation prize for losing with "Mrs. Brown". Whatever it was, the Academy made a big mistake...huge mistake.... Redgrave was hands down the most obvious choice for Best Supporting Actress this year and her in-nearly-every-scene certainly beats the devil out of Dench's 8-9 minutes on film.

When the price goes down, this movie will be on my shelf at home and it has already made my "All-time Top Ten" list....it's that good.

Good movie but slim on the extras
Without a doubt, those who appreciate fine, character-driven films will find much to like in Bill Condon's 1988 critically acclaimed biopic on legendary horror director James Whale. Ian McKellen delivers his finest performance to date as the charming, charismatic director whose best days are behind him along with Lynn Redgrave as the doting maid and Brendan Fraser as a young gardener who strikes up a quick and quirky friendship with Whale. The beauty of this film lies in its narrow scope with its very small palette of locations and supporting characters, giving the film a very intimate feel in the close confines of the three major players along with the subtlety of their interaction.

On the disc itself all you'll get is a poorly transferred trailer and a ho-hum 30 minute featurette that offers little in the way of further value. Also disappointing is the lack of a proper Dolby 5.1 audio track - all you'll get on this shiny disc is a paltry 2.0 mono job.

A modern classic about the classics
Forget the dreadful "Shadow of a Vampire". This is the one to watch.

Here Ian McKellen possibly does his best performance to date (Yes, it is better than Gandalf but not by much!) and so does Brendan Fraser. So two actors have their best roles ever in this movie and that says a lot about the quality of this film. This one has also got a few Oscars, even though that might not say much, it is still quite an achievement given that this film is pretty much a medium budget movie with limited locations and sets.

The story is about the director James Whale who was primarily a horror director in the 1930s and 1940s. This is the story about the perils of old age, sexual discrimination, lust, anger, manipulation and love - all played out to the tune of a film that documents the reasons for this director's status as one of the all time greats.

McKellen is frighteningly real at times. He has an old-age seizure on camera that looks stunningly realistic. The man is an impeccable performer and takes on his role here like a bull by the horns. You feel sadness and grossness for him at the same time. He is a manipulator, a conman, a sexual deviant- but also a great heart. Strangely enough this film has similar themes as Lord of the Rings. Tolken wrote many of the battle scenes, especially the Dead Marshes, because of his real experiences during the war. Whale is also attributing much of his own personal horrors that he paints on his canvas (both films and portrait artwork that he makes) to these artefacts of battle. There is a lot of depth to Gods and Monsters and plenty of emotion to boot. It spans across nearly every era between the early 1900s and the 1940s. Much of it is told in flashbacks especially the making of Whale's horror films.

The plot is basically about Whale and his gardener (Fraser) and their relationship. It is a bit like asking questions and getting answers and showing a bit of skin in-between. Not only do both these actors stand out but Lynn Redgrave plays Whale's housekeeper in her best role to date too! She is an absolute side-splitting hoot and her cynicism is second to none.

It would be hard to tell you much more about the plot without giving lots of it away but let's just say that you will learn a lot about everyone in this delightful film and it does come with a shock attached towards the end as the characters move a little closer to one another. The ending is moving and filled with sadness and loss with the passing of time. You can bring a lot to this movie and take a lot of it away with you too.

This is an inspiring movie about talent, friendship and filmmaking. It is hard to find dramas much better than Gods and Monsters...

Interesting DVD of an interesting film...
The film is so interesting that the DVD capitalizes on the opportunity of further informing the viewer about the real facts behind the "fact-tion" story of director James Whale. Unfortunately the production of the special features seemed a bit rushed and "unproduced," apparently (according to the director) much the same way as the film itself. Interesting insight into the world of indie film and leaves the audience wondering what glorious heights this one might have reached had the filmmakers had ample time and resources to recognize their vision. Nonetheless, it is a beautifully acted and packaged piece...well worth the time and attention! ... Read more

Amazon.com

A stylish though inferior sequel to its classic predecessor, Bill Condon's Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh deepens our knowledge of what made the murdered Daniel Robitaille turn into the monster that haunts dreams and mirrors. But some of it is still pretty routine: schoolteacher Annie takes a long time to connect her family's plantation-owning past and her own artistic talent with the legend, and is far too ready to say the Candyman's name five times in a mirror to debunk her pupils' fears.

The setting: New Orleans at Carnival time with a disc jockey whimsically reminding us that Carnival is the last farewell to pleasure before the rigors of Lent. Tony Todd, who returns as the Candyman, gives a quiet dignity and sadness to the monstrous specter with a hook for a hand. His life was torn from him and he is mad for vengeance, yet he has an artistic temperament and loved Annie's kinswoman Caroline. Condon captures an attractive elegiac tone in much of this, as well as moments of brutal horror. --Roz Kaveney ... Read more

Reviews (30)

Candyman: Farewell To The Box Office.
This has to be one of the worst movies i have seen in my live of loveing horror films. CANDYMAN 1 was a god film and i had big hops for this one, but waht can you get out of must sequels these days. It's nothing to original, but it thalls you how Candyman became candtman etc, etc. And it had some good gore scenes, but only see this film win you have a movie to see you know is good.

Rated R for horror Violence and Language.

good sequel
this one has Tony Todd reprising his role as the Candyman. good horror and the story drags here and there but its fast going and enjoyable nontheless. Todd knows how to stick it to the people, especially in the beginning where the guy is sliced in the bathroom. other scenes like when the cop chants the guys name in the mirror and suddenly he is hooked and he is thrown out of the window, then the brother of the woman gets shot down I thought was a highlight in the movie. it tells also of how Candyman came to be, he was a slave and they caught him with some guys daughter, they tortured him and cut off him hand(thats where his hook comes in at) then they rub honey all over him and the bees just start crawling on him. its pure fun if you can stand the slow pace and some wooden dialouge but in the end it pays off.

This is the last film that was good under Candyman
This movie is a little less that its prodessesor but still is quite scary. Definitely watch this movie on a Friday night, you will be disturbed beyond your wits. once again do not watch it repeatedly. u will get bored..lol. i recommend this film..but dont get the sequels to this..please dont waste your time watchin them.

Prety decent horror movie
They don't make horror movies like they used to. (Shining, Omen, Exorcist.) If you happen to be browsing by the Horror movie section, skip the Friday the 13th, and the Holloweens, rent this one instead. And if you are building a Horror movie DVD library, include this one. I saw the first one and honestly I liked them both equally. The blonde this time is Canadian Kelly Rowan being pursued by Candyman Tony Todd. There's plenty of blood, and screaming and the New Orleans setting is also a nice touch. I dropped the fifth star because I'm an old hag at horror movies and still waiting for a really scary one.

Come . . . Be Candyman's victim
Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh takes up the story of the Candyman legend and runs with it, giving us a much greater understanding of the man who would become the hook-gutting avenger of wronged souls; it offers a short and respectable summary of the first movie and then proceeds not to redo what has happened before but to carve its own name indelibly in the flesh of cinematic horror. I think this movie stands as a testament to proper sequel-making in the horror movie genre.

I love the opening sequence of this film. The smarmy academic professor who is an expert on the Candyman but does not believe in him (the same man who needled Helen as she worked on her project in the original movie) is speaking about his new book in a New Orleans bookstore. Naturally, he proves his disbelief by theatrically calling out Candyman's name five times in front of his own reflection. Let's just say he ends up a convert to the Candyman religion. Then we meet Annie Tarrant (Kelly Rowan), a devoted schoolteacher in a poor neighborhood of town. Her brother is accused of killing the lecturing professor, but Annie does not believe his own statements of guilt. She believes something about her father's death is responsible for her brother's unexplainable behavior. That death, we learn, precipitated an enduring tragedy in the Tarrant family. Annie's mother is dying of cancer and seems to be holding something back from her questioning daughter. Annie herself, foolishly trying to prove to her frightened students that Candyman isn't real, calls him, and then things really get ugly. People die, many of them Tarrants, and the Candyman seems to engage in some sort of romantic courtship of Annie. Tarrant family secrets are eventually revealed, and in the process we get a bird's-eye view of the suffering inflicted upon Daniel Robitaille a century earlier - for those who don't know, he was lynched for having loved a white woman; his right hand was cut off with a rusty blade, and then he was smeared with honey and left at the mercy (or lack of it) of a whole colony of angry bees.

By the end of the movie, Candyman is not some horrible monster bent on destruction just because he enjoys gutting people; he is quite real, and his humanity shines through the robes of gore he has wrapped himself in over the decades. If you saw off his hand, will he not jam a hook in the stub of his arm and start gutting people? If you scratch his face, will not hordes of bees pour forth from his body? I love Candyman; he really is one of the most complex, sympathetic yet disturbing "monsters" wandering the horror universe today. Much of the credit for his power must go to Tony Todd, who portrays him brilliantly. Maybe the ending of this movie leaves a little bit to be desired, but the journey features some pretty decent gore and a lot of almost philosophical horror ruminations. If you want to call Candyman, go ahead; he's real enough to me that I'm not going to do it. ... Read more

Reviews (11)

TEACHER PET
MURDER 101 written and directed by Bill Condon (who would later grab an Oscar for GODS AND MONSTERS) is a great little movie that I had never heard of. Suffice to say, Condon's neat little script gives us two big surprises at the end. The murderer is hard to spot and the ending is just "Wow, did I just see what I think I saw?"
At any rate, Pierce Brosnan in his pre Bond days stars as a best-selling crime writer who teaches a class in how to write the perfect crime novel. Brosnan gained famed writing a true crime thriller that sent his friend to prison for murdering his wife. Brosnan returns to teaching, to meet his estranged wife, played sweetly by Dey Young, who has taken up with another professor, played smarmily by Mark L. Taylor (Fangs). Another friend of his is Detective Mike Dowley (played with a surly masculinity by Antoni Carone). Soon, though, things take a demonic twist when Pierce is set up for murder by one of his students. Rachel Sbarge in a crafty performance seems to be the one who is setting him up.
The pace is good; the script witty and inventive; and overall, a tidy, surprising mystery.

Nothing But Praise For Brosnan's Performance
I really enjoyed this 1991 t.v thriller starring Pierce Brosnan, before stepping into the role of suave secret agent James Bond, Brosnan was College professior Charles Lattimore returning back after a leave of absence due to writing his novel. No sooner when he gets back he tries to ignite his relationship with his ex-wife but she is with someone else. As well he's back into teaching. His first assigment he has for his students is to plan the perfect murder, no sooner one of his students is murdered and he comes under fire from the local autothies. Be prepared for the surpirse ending is nothing you would expect. This film does examine that even people of high moral integrity can still fall for the usual mind games inoving love and passion. Pierce Brosnan in this role has all the crediabillty and durabilty for the viewer to sustain beief. It is indeed a well made film.

It is one of the best
I can't believe i have finally seen this movie. I saw the movie like 13 years ago but i never new the title and did not know any of the actors.(i was just 9). So i did not know anything. Then later,i saw Mrs. Doubtfire and i was like hey i know this guy(this was like 1994). Yesterday i just saw one of my notes where i had written the story down and i said "oh yeah" i always wanted to see the movie. so i got on the internet and started searching. You can imagine going thru all of pierce Brosnans movies and reading the reviews and storyline. bcos i did not know the title. but ihave found it after such a long time. i am soo happy. So ihope yu get a copy of this movie. It is one of the best.

nice little mystery flick
This is a good little mystery movie set on a college campus with none other than Pierce Brosnan playing a prof who has his class try to write the perfect murder. Considering the low price, this movie is definitely worth a look. You won't be disappointed, and if you like Brosnan anyway, you'll probably fall in love with this one.

A Surprisingly good little mystery
With another actor I may have given this 3 stars for me... as in a good little mystery. With brosnan in it i give 4 stars. ... Read more

Reviews (7)

Huge Stoltz fan
He played the killer part well enough to keep me In suspense the whole time.

SHE SEES DEAD PEOPLE...
This is a spooky, southern gothic film about two sisters, both haunted by their pasts. Living together in an exquisite, antebellum mansion in the bayou of Louisiana, the Bonnard sisters struggle to meet each day as it comes, running a bed and breakfast. One sister, Lucy (Jennifer Jason Leigh), is somewhat fey and seems to need a reality check. The older of the two, Charlotte (Judith Ivey) is the more grounded sister. Or is she?

Together, they run the bed and breakfast with the help of a hunky handyman and childhood friend, Etienne (Benjamin Mouton), who is sweet on Lucy, despite Charlotte's watchful eye. Charlotte also has someone sweet on her, the local sheriff, Cleve Doucet (Dennis Lipscomb), whom she is on the verge of losing, because for some inexplicable reason she refuses to marry him. One day, Matt Rutledge (Eric Stolz) arrives at the Bonnard bed and breakfast, where he is to be a guest. He, too, seems smitten by the lovely, ethereal Lucy, much to Charlotte's consternation and Etienne's annoyance.

What follows is a series of macabre events, fueled by secrets of the past and misguided perceptions. While the plot is engaging, parts of it are a little over the top. Still, it is so well done that it keeps the viewer riveted to the screen. Terrific performances are given by all, with those of Jennifer Jason Leigh and Benjamin Mouton being especially fine. The ending is also particularly memorable. Shrouded in the mists of the Louisiana bayou, it is a vindication of Lucy's visions and a fitting memoriam to love everlasting. This is a film well worth viewing. Those who enjoyed that other southern gothic, "The Gift", will, undoubtedly, enjoy this one, as well.

review of sister sister
this is one of my favorite movies growing up, and i cant find this movie anywhere. since the movie is based in the south, and i'm from the south i just love it.

Haunting
Very pleased with this movie Sound and picture quality are very good. It cost me a fortune to purchase but it is rare and out of print at the moment.

Excellent Southern Gothic
Long before he won an Oscar for writing Gods and Monsters, Bill Condon showed his talent with Sister, Sister -- an atmospheric slice of Southern Gothic suspense that deals with two sisters who run a hotel, a swamp that holds many ghosts, and the prerequisite deep dark secrets of the past. If you really waste your time deeply analyzing the plot, it won't make a bit of sense by waste your time doing something as silly as that? With excellent performances from Judith Ivey, Dennis Burkley, Jennifer Jason Leigh, and Eric Stoltz, this is one of the most entertaining, low budget horror films that I have ever seen. This movie was made before Leigh and Stoltz achieved their current levels of fame and is recommended to anyone who knows them only from their more recent, more commercial films. ... Read more