Reviews (177)

The Depths Of Depp
Johnny Depp plays George Jung, your every day man turned multi-millionaire drug dealer. The amazing journey starts with just a bit of weed going to people on the beach, soon he and his friends are working their way to Mexico in major exports. After a brief stop in jail Depp changes from marijuana to cocaine. Soon Depp has so much money he can't fit anymore in his house. It is in this time he meets his wife-to-be decently played by Penelope Cruz. A mishap with his wife later and he is in jail again. The part about this film that sets it apart from most drug movies is that it shows the highlights of the illegal exchange business but it also shows the bottoming out. The other thing it has is a connection with the characters. You actually begin to feel for Depp as he is separated from the one thing that he loves in his life, his daughter. Franka Potente (Run Lola Run) and Paul Rubin (Pee Wee Herman) also have roles in this film that has heart and substance(s).

Strong Powder
BLOW is based on the true story of George Jung (Johnny Depp). In the 70s and 80s, Jung was the single largest importer of Columbian cocaine, to the United States. Therefore, he alone, changed America, and helped to create the "drug culture" in this nation. At the film's center is the partnership between Jung and Pablo Escobar, (Cliff Curtis) and how they operated, with and against each other. It really is true what others have said about Depp's performance in the film. He doesn't let this highly complex role intimidate him. He pulls it off brilliantly. He scenes with Penelope Cruz are pure magic. Directed by the late Ted Demme, BLOW offers viewers an inside look into how some people got very rich off of other people's addiction to drugs. Even though some have blasted the film because, in their opinion, it glorifies drug use, I see it more as an anti drug film. Having said that, dont expect an overt anti-drug message in the movie either. My take on it is that the "message" hides as a subtext as an implied theme. If the film does have any connection to any indictment against drugs, that comes from the fact that Demme died last year from apparently using the stuff himself.

The DVD is part of New Line Cinema's Infinifilm series. Like all other discs in the series, it is packed with extras, allowing viewers to have more of an interactive experience, while watching the film. Hearing Demme talk about drugs on the commentary track with Jung, may unsettle some, given what happened to him, but there really isn't much of that on the track. The deleted scenes don't really add much to the film and were properly edited out of the picture. The Ted Demme Production Diary is cool because it takes us through how movies are made (I always enjoy that stuff). Rounding out the standard features are trailers, filmographies, and a Nikka Costa Music Video. The disc also has a few DVD-ROM extras. The Infinifilm extras include interviews with Jung conducted by Demme, a trivia track, among others. Use of the Infinifilm mode gives you access to these features for a unique look at BLOW.

Thanks to powerful performances and solid, well produced extras, BLOW is a Highly Recommended film/DVD **** and a half stars.

Blow is about the life of Mr. George Jung from childhood to
his final drug bust for which he is still serving time. Johnny Depp carries this movie very well, like all movies about gangs or drugs or anything crime related, this movie starts off with everything going well and then everything starting to go downhill again, it is a true story, obviously with quite a bit of Hollywood fabrication but none the less, it inspires sympathy for the characters, I for one am someone who isn't really a very emotional person when it comes to movies, at least I don't think so, but this movie brought a tear or two to my eye, especially the ending, where Depp recited a poem written by Jung and it is the saddest thing, the special features are quite amazing, I would recommend this movie to people over 14 because it does have an R rating which is due to a lot of language, drug content, extremely brief nudity and some violence here and there. Enjoy.

extras no good
I rated this movie 5 stars, until I got a load of the DVD extras. These extras actually serve to drag down the enjoyment of the movie. First, there are the "character outtakes" whatever that term is supposed to mean. These consist of various characters being interviewed about George Jung - the character, not the real person. They say poorly thought out and inarticulate things like, "This guy... he's like... this guy don't care what anybody thinks, you know?" My impression was that the actors just got in front of a camera "in character" and extemporized. The results are pretty ghastly. Also, there is the jailhouse interview that director Ted Demme makes of George Jung, the real person. This is also pretty disedifying, consisting at the end of Demme sitting next to Jung on a bench and saying similarly inarticulate and poorly thought out things, like, "Yeah, its like schoolteachers make minimum wage and there's truckdrivers making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year..." Now, I am an ex-schoolteacher and though I did not make a mint at my job I certainly did not make "minimum wage" and I worked for one of the most underfunded school districts in the country. One has the impression of being a witness to a guy blowing his mouth off on the balcony of somebody's post-college get-together. Not pretty. How Demme ever got people to trust him with millions of dollars remains a mystery: the man is simply not preposessing intellectually. Also, his world is morally vague and equivocal. He tells Jung he takes a non-judgemental stance to his crimes and then says that he himself has skeletons in the closet, its just that his are not so well known. Now, I kind of doubt that Ted Demme is himself a serious criminal who has simply evaded discovery. But that is what he is in effect implying, in bad faith to George Jung - a hardcore criminal. The real implication is that any degree of malfeasance is equivalent to any other. If one man has smuggled enormous quantities of drugs, and another man has left the cap off his toothpaste well, they're pretty much the same: we all do bad things. Interestingly, the stance that Demme takes is NOT that what Jung did was not morally wrong. His stance is that, though it was wrong, so what? I can respect and perhaps agree with someone who says that smuggling drugs, though illegal, is not immoral. I can understand the argument that by and large it is an utter liberal myth that anybody is forced to use drugs by anybody else. Peer pressure? One gravitates to "peers" with similar interests. If you get into drugs and your friends don't, you find new friends: druggie friends. This happened in my circle of friends and I have seen it happen first-hand. I had many druggie and non druggie friends and I never saw anybody use drugs who did not want to. And there is simply no substance so addictive that it turns a straight arrow into a degenerate against the straight arrow's will and inclination. Drugs simply help you along in the direction you are inclined.
All this being said, I can agree with someone who does not morally judge George Jung. Personally I am morally indifferent to his actions. But this is not the same thing as saying that what he did was wrong but so what we all do bad things. If I once ignored a parking ticket, is this the same thing as being a murderer? I suspect that Demme's thus cozying up to Jung actually lowered him in Jung's regard.

Luff ist der drug
Let me be clear, this is a great film. It actually reassures me that all movies are not garbage. But for me the best part of the movie is Franka Potente's performance as Barbara, a comely stew who, so far as I can tell, is not supposed to be German. It is a special pleasure for me to watch Franka Potente, with her thick Cherrrmann accent, ya? trying to speak in a vey zat iss recognizeable as chust typical yanqui American dialect. I also thrilled to her performance in The Bourne Identity, hearing her deliver such lines as, "But he vas chust shining us all on" like the Munchen-frau she is. Yeah, I'll get all liquored up on Spaten Premium, or maybe even brave the forbidding slopes of the Optimator, then I'll hunker down for a triple-bill of Run Lola Run, Bourne Identity, and Blow. Its like my own private Oktoberfest that I chust by myself heff got going on, ya?
unt ich bein auss. ... Read more

Reviews (97)

Leary fans rejoice!
Denis... ah, you whimsical angry poet. He's at his best in this one, folks! A burglar (and a good one) forced into taking hostages in order to escape a slightly botched robbery, finds himself held hostage by his prey! In his own words, "I've kidnapped my parents!" This was also before Kevin Spacey was REALLY famous, too, so you know there's some good acting involved. Not all around, I will admit, the son is a bit tenuous and immature. Some of the characters a little dry, but that actually changes later in the movie. The star, of course, is Denis. Riding close behind him, though, are Spacey and Judy Davis, the bickering couple Leary is stuck with.

Spacey and Davis play off each other beautifully in this film, as a couple in DESPERATE need of marriage counseling. They have both lost sight of why they married in the first place, are stuck in life-ruts, and are considering a divorce. Then, Leary steps in and the fur starts to fly. I can't say too much without giving it away, but it's a witty and slightly warm movie about rediscovery and redemption. After all, it is Christmastime! Oh, and that element adds to the humor value, by the way.

If you are a Leary fan, no question, just buy it. If you are a comedy fan, same thing. If you like Spacey, while his part isn't the biggest in the film, he really shines as usual, so again... buy it. ;-) I recommend it all around! Especially if you've 'been there' on the holidays with 'the family' (you know what I mean). :-)

Very funny Leary flick
Ok, let's get it out of the way...yes this has a slightly "Trapped in Paradise" (the movie with Nichols Cage, John Lovitz, etc.) feel to it. Criminal with a good heart gets stuck somewhere during the holidays. But whereas the folks in "Trapped in Paradise" were hospitable to a sickening level, the family in "The Ref" are absolute bickering nightmares.

Enter Leary planning the rip-off. He gets stuck with this married couple (with one son) who fight, tooth and nail, over every excruciating detail of life. They are already in therapy and in part their troubles stem from the wife's former infidelity. Kevin Spacey plays the bitter husband who is equally as harsh towards his unfaithful wife. But Leary's involvement in the two...I won't give away how it comes about or how it ends...but let's just say it is absolutely priceless.

If you know Leary's style and attitude, just place it in the context of him having to deal with two [people] who are, presumably, deep down good people. His wit and delivery are impeccable. You will love it!

Defintiely get this DVD if you are at all thinking about it. I had not even seen it until I purchased it on DVD and I was so glad that I went ahead and made the purchase. I wager you will as well.

What did I miss??
This movie sucked! I was just wondering how this many people could be so wrong! There were very few funny parts and absolutely NO "laugh out loud" funny parts. Save your money folks....or better yet, I have one for sale, only viewed once!

Very Funny Farce
We were really surprised at this sleeper of a movie. I had not heard of it before, and since first viewing it, watch it three times.

It is a holiday movie, where the holiday is understated. This movie with Kevin Spacey playing the husband is just hilarious. There is a lot of language in the movie, so, be prepared for that. The angst that Spacey and Davis going at throughout the movie is simply hilarious. You wonder how people could hate each other so much. The interplay with Spacey's extended family is really funny.

It is like taking a Christmas dinner where the family does not get along, and adding a lot of spice to it. There are so many funny scenes in the movie that you will not know what is coming next.

This movie is great for couples and friends to watch together, not a family movie, the language is too stiff.

A surprising hit....
Honestly, I rented this film not really expecting much. I ended up being very pleasantly surprised. It has an outstanding cast, that really bounces dialogue off each other well, and believe me, you'll be laughing aloud many times. Not only is Dennis Leary funny as a catburglar who breaks into the wrong home(as in a bickering married couple that never shuts up), but Kevin Spacey is great as the fed-up husband. This film transcends the normal throw away comedy fare, and ends up being a very touching, moving piece on how couples can grow apart years after marriage. This is one film that you'll definitely want to own, you'll laugh in all the same parts, making it a true classic comedy! ... Read more

Amazon.com

This town drama from Ted Demme centers on former classmatescoming together for their 10-year reunion. Scott Rosenberg's (Things to Do in Denver When You're Dead) script thoughtfully passes over the usual grumblings of young adults who can't believe they still live in the same snowbound town. They accept--even welcome--their blue-collar jobs, whether plowing snow or cutting hair.Willie (Timothy Hutton), the lone wanderer, returns to his listless house in a state of flux, the piano-bar circuit wearing thin as is his relationship with Tracy, a well-off attorney (Annabeth Gish). Heisn't the only one with problems. Tommy (Matt Dillon) occasionally sleepswith his now-married high school sweetheart Darian (Lauren Holly) while theearnest Sharon (Mira Sorvino) is left to wait. Paul (another thickheaded rolefor Michael Rapaport) refuses to commit to Jan (Martha Plimpton) until it'stoo late. Paul is enamored with the idea of the supermodel (the title's "beautiful girls") that, he believes, can make life perfect. It's avery satisfying comedy, with some forced poignancy (Willie's description of Tracy as a "seven and a half" comes off as a death sentence). Rosie O'Donnell's dissertation on why Playboyand Penthouse have ruined males' expectations is much like MegRyan's orgasm scene in When Harry Met Sally...: it's hilarious, even memorable, never wholly believable.

The two wild cards thrown into Beautiful Girls give the film its kick. Uma Thurman enters asthe local barkeep's (Pruitt Taylor Vince) radiant cousin. From the bigcity, she can flirt with the awestruck guys and still keep her head. Willie's real emotional tug is from Marty, the precocious 13-year-old neighbor.If you didn't see Natalie Portman's sophisticated work in the The Professional, her performance here will come as a revelation. You deeply believe that Willie and Marty are connected despite theirage difference. Their courtship will never come to be, but the way the twotalk (and talk some more) about their lives is the most insightful part of Rosenberg's script. Everyone's so comfortable in his or her rolesthat you may truly feel sad when the film ends. --Doug Thomas ... Read more

Reviews (103)

One of the definitive 'Gen-X' movies
Well now that the Natalie Portman fanclub has had their say, perhaps it's time for some unbiased reviewing. Even if you don't think the sun shines out of young Nat's nether regions, you will still enjoy this film. It's a mature and down-to-earth look at love and commitment in the nineties.

Timothy Hutton is in great understated form as Willie, a struggling musician returning to his hometown for a highschool reunion. Willie is wary of committing to his long-term girlfriend, fearing if he does, he'll miss out on something better. He has this so set in his mind that he even begins to see possible alternative love in a local thirteen year-old girl (Portman) much to the derision of his buddies.

Said buddies are having similar troubles with there own relationships. Tommy (Matt Dillon) is cheating on his faithful girlfriend Sharon (Mira Sorvino) with local harlet Dariam (Lauren Holly). Goofball Paul (Michael Rapaport), is struggling to keep his girlfriend Jan (Martha Plimpton) from leaving him.

Of course, before the movie is over the guy's, after a series of humourous and moving encounters, and aided by a fleeting visit by an almost ethereal Andera (Uma Thurman), realise how special the women in their lives are after all.

Even if the movie is biased in favor of a male viewpoint, it's a timely reminder for guys out there to stop waiting for that dream girl, she doesn't exist (and you won't get her anyway). Learn to appreciate the real women in your life who will love you back.

Beautiful Girls has capable acting from a strong ensemble but with no particular standouts. The script is what makes the film standout. Well done Scott Rosenberg, it's a pity you had to go and do Con Air after this, but I guess we've all got to eat.

Btw. In response to all the other posts, Natalie Portman really isn't all that great in Beautiful Girls, it's a pretty straight-forward role. Check out Leon to see a much better showcase of her particular talents. To be fair I should now point out the best roles of everyone else in the cast, but since their BG performances haven't consistently been getting overrated on this message board, I won't.

Twenty-Something Fun, Guy Style
This is one of the most fun and interesting films I've seen in recent years. Fun, yet not without its serious side. The cast is great, with Timothy Hutton, Matt Dillon, Lauren Holly, Annabeth Gish, and Uma Thurman portraying classic characters in their late twenties. Natalie Portman nearly steals the show as a precotious 13-year-old, who sets her heart on Timothy Hutton.

We all know people (friends) like these characters. They ring true to our life experience. I think all guys struggle with the issues these guys are struggling with. (Maybe its true for women and the female characters as well?)

Do you look back to your past with longing for what could have been, or forge ahead into the future with whatever it brings?
Do you cling to the wild and independent spirit of your youth, or settle down into "commited" and maturing relationships?

Throw in a bar fight, some car crashes (all excused as raging male hormones), and you have a mix that could result in disaster (movie-wise), but director Ted Demme keeps it all together, and with just the right level of finese, comes up with a film that works, and works well!

Dumb Guys but Sweet
Ted Demme has offered us a sweet reunion of small town, New Englander, twenty-somethings. There is some Big Chill here 1990's style, but for the most part, the guys that stayed home and married or almost married are blue-collar, beer drinking, and chick panting types. High school big man, Matt Dillon is still respected for his womanizing skills. Tim Hutton has a girl back in New York City, but his musical career is getting old and his thirteen-year-old neighbor girl attracts. The relationship between a young man and an adolescent could have been really creepy, but there's some deft writing and directing, so we enjoy this impossibility for a few hours. Uma Thurman vamps as the perfect chick. Each of the single guys gives her a rush, but she's just out of reach as any apparition. My wife really liked this one. Maybe there's more appeal to chicks in this flick because Rosie O'Donnell in a minor part sure makes a mockery of men and their desires.

LOTS TO LIKE
I saw this film once before but, unawares, rented it again and, even though I realized I had seen the movie previously after it started, I enjoyed even more the second time. This is quality movie-making: good production values, a good script, good acting. I even ordered a Neil Diamond album after watching the "impromtu" singing of Sweet Caroline in a fun bar scene. Ensemble acting at its best, we have Rose O'Donnell, Uma Thurman and Matt Dillon featured along witn talented others. Timothy Hutton is perhaps the most interesting character in the film as a lost soul and his 30-something character's "romance" with thirteen-year-old Marty played by Natalie Portman is truly remarkable. I don't know what federal laws I was breaking but I was in love with Marty and I secretly hoped that Hutton's character returned to get her when she turned eighteen. What an amazing adult woman in a thirteen-year-old's body! They had a fascinating and strange relationship. Uma Thurman is good as the unavailable spirit who visits and then disappears. Her line about looking for a man who can say (and supposedly mean) just four words ("Good night, sweet girl") was memorable. Rosie O'Donnell's rant about men and their attraction for the false and superficial beauty of media images of women was hilarious and almost show-stopping. Lots to like here.

Wonderful and Overlooked
Humphrey Bogart would say the Beautiful Girls in this film are the "stuff dreams are made of." They stand for the idealized version of women that men seek and never find, the constant promise of a better woman just around the corner that keeps men from being able to commit to the real women in their lives.

The principle men with that "beautiful girls" hang-up are Willie (Hutton), Birdy (Dillon) and Paul (Rappaport). They hold on to that dream of a better life with a better woman and thus sabotage (consciously or not) all their relationships. Birdy clings to the memories of his high school flame, Paul papers his walls with supermodels and names his dog Elle McPherson, and Willie just wants something beautiful in his life. Although in a relationship with a nice-looking attorney, Willie grudgingly acknowledges she would only score a 7.5 on a 1-10 scale.

While not actively looking to replace his "above-average-but-not-great" girlfriend, Willie stumbles into the most charming and memorable sub-plot of the film: his relationship with his thirteen year old neighbor Marty (a totally engaging Natalie Portman). Willie sees in her all the possibilities he dreams about: she is kind, sensitive and dazzles him with her knowledge of psychology and Shakespeare. When she develops a teenage crush on him, Willie must consider the possibility of waiting for this great girl to become an even greater woman. Even though parallels are drawn to the pedophilic exploits of Roman Rolanski and Jerry Lee Lewis, there is nothing creepy or sexual about Willie's feelings for the young girl.

The stories play out in a picturesque New England town, deep into a frozen winter. All the guys are re-uniting for their ten-year high school reunion and are forced to deal with the personal revelations accompanying that important moment. Presented with a karaoke bar's dream soundtrack and told with a thoughtful narrative that is poignant and touching without being sappy and sentimental, Beautiful Girls is a wonderful exploration into the love lives of 20-something males. ... Read more

Reviews (49)

A serious movie that also happens to be pretty funny
Yes, this movie has plenty of funny moments, but there is a very real and sometimes rather touching story that takes precedence over everything that happens. You can't get through the most serious of situations without the palliative of laughter now and again, and Life actually does tell a serious story. Eddie Murphy proves once again that he is a great actor, and Martin Lawrence was surprisingly good as the more serious of two men sentenced to life in prison for a murder they didn't commit. One night in 1932, fate brought Rayford Gibson (Murphy), a smooth-talking hustler with big dreams, and Claude Banks (Lawrence) a respectable fellow about to start a good job, together in a New York nightclub. For entirely different reasons, both guys have to face the displeasure of the club owner's wrath; and so it is that Gibson and Banks end up going on a bootlegging run to Mississippi. One dead man later, and both men are sentenced to life in prison for murder. Since Banks blames Gibson for getting him into all this mess, there relationship varies in quality as the years go by, but gradually a real friendship develops between them. They try to escape several times but end up spending basically their whole lives in prison. Along the way, we meet with several sub-plots involving some of their fellow inmates, but the movie never strays far from the lives of Gibson and Banks. The passage of time is marked by clips of historical events, and some excellent makeup works makes both men look old and worn out as they advance into their senior years.

This is not a prison story of hopelessness, however. While no pardon ever comes their way, justice has a way of willing out eventually, and the final ten minutes of the film are just terrific. Since the story does take place in Mississippi in 1932 and beyond, race plays a major part in the film, but it does not define the movie by any means. There are a number of funny scenes, especially those involving pie and cornbread, and Eddie Murphy will definitely make you laugh - Martin Lawrence sort of plays the heavy here to Murphy's periodic antics. Some familiar faces pop up in the movie: Rick James plays the New York club owner, Bernie Mac has a relatively minor role, and Heavy D plays a small but important part. Wyclef Jean contributes an original score for the film. The whole cast is excellent, and a very good script keeps the film on pace and lively.

This isn't Stir Crazy; there are plenty of laughs, but I wouldn't call this a comedy - Life the movie is funny in the way life itself can sometimes be - laughter can get us through the hard times, but it doesn't hide the fact that the hard times are there. This movie really deserves more attention than it has received; with its serious underlying quality, it ranks among Eddie Murphy's most impressive films.

Eddie is hilarious!!
This is a wonderful movie. Eddie Murphy is totally hilarious in this movie. Its basically about two guys (Eddie and Martin) who have to serve a life sentence in jail for a crime in which they were framed. Its about them forming a bond of friendship, but as you will see this takes years. Great effects on ageing Martin and Eddie in different stages of their lives. The only bad thing about this film was that it tended to drag at certian points. This type of movie reminds me of Oh Brother Where Art Thou with its southern humor and setting in the past. I highly recommend both of these movies.

FUNEEEEE!!!
I may be biased cause I love Martin and Eddie, but this movie has me in stitches every time!!!

Boring!!!
After watching this movie, I felt as if my own life was wasted just from watching it. What a piece of garbage. Eddie Murphy is funny, but not always and this movie is the exception. This is by far one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Anyway.. here's the basic plot:
In the mid-1990s, two inmates bury the burned bodies of two lifers at Mississippi's Parchman Farm; a third old-timer relates their story. They'd served 65 years for a murder they didn't commit, framed by a local sheriff while buying moonshine whiskey for a Manhattan club owner to whom they owed money. Although the plot may sound good.. trust me it's not.

Great Film!
This film was perhaps the last film that Eddie Murphy was geniunely funny in and Martin Lawrance was a geniunely effective actor. Both comedians truly shined in this film and were funny as hell! I recall the scene where Murphy and Martain's character staged a fight and Murphy spelled out SOFT and his taughts against Claude. Funny film and great acting! ... Read more

Amazon.com

How did Hollywood make so many great, challenging, offbeat films in the 1970s? A Decade Under the Influence lists the reasons--or rather, lets the people who did the filmmaking list the reasons. The decade-shaping interviewees include Martin Scorsese, Robert Altman, Francis Coppola, et al. The film's argument has actually been conventional wisdom for at least 10 years, but it's well-supported by an abundance of clips, which should inspire even hardcore film buffs to seek out rarities such as Thunderbolt and Lightfoot or The King of Marvin Gardens. One might observe that the scarcity of women directors or black filmmakers suggests that the decade was not entirely golden, and the memories may be burnished a bit by nostalgia. But there's no question that the big studios were far more adventurous back then, and this briskly moving survey gives a lively Film 101 lecture in exactly why. --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (7)

Shallow & self-serving & so disappointing.
I can only agree with those other viewers who found major gaps & omissions in the "documentary". No mention of Michael Ritchie or John Boorman that I could see. But lots of footage of "hot" & "trendy" folks like Mazursky, Avilsen & Hopper. Even the bit of commentary from Friedkin, Altmen & Coppola that might have given this effort some real substance is too slight & superficial to matter. It's stuff you've read or heard a thousand times before.

Too bad. They really blew it.

An incomplete look at a pivotal cultural moment
This quick, glitzy documentary, which looks at the maverick filmmaking that reshaped Hollywood in the late 1960s and throughout the '70s, has its ups and downs. At first I thought the lack of a central narrative voice, "telling" us what we're supposed to know, was kind of cool: "Yeah," I thought, "We're smart enough to understand what happened, and all these intelligent, thoughtful rebel filmmakers -- Coppola, Scorcese, Altman, Hopper, Dern, Eastwood, et al. -- can guide us through the history better than any dumb old narrator can... After all, they *lived* it, man...!!" But, sadly, this was not true: by the end of the three segments, I felt a little lost, and even a little cheated... I wasn't really sure what these advocates of independent cinema were trying to tell me, and while the parade of film clips and archival artwork (wish I'd taken notes!) was entertaining, it wasn't particularly well contextualized. The story arc, as such, was that Hollywood, having lost its bearings (and ability to produce hit movies) by the mid-1960s, almost accidentally discovered the rich offerings of low-budget, independent cinema. Suddenly, young, unproven writers and directors were given unfettered creative license, and throughout the 1970s they pushed the boundaries of artistic expression, breaking down taboos against exploring sexual, political and drug-related themes, as well as demolishing the boundaries of language and onscreen violence. Then, as the '80s opened, the push towards producing blockbuster hits reestablished the dominance of the old studio system. But the material between these central points is a diffuse parade of spectacle and insider asides, not as well structured or as informative as it could have been.

Also, on a technical note, why was the DVD version so hard to navigate? What was up with having to start up each segment of this film separately? Watching it on VHS might actually have been more rewarding...

WILL SMITH FILM FANS WILL NOT APPRECIATE THIS DOCUMENTARY
I was mesmerized by it all, plus I added several films to "My List" [of films to watch]. What a fantastic compilation of clips and testimony to mid-20th Century film. Going from films of the squeaky 50's and early 60's like Liz Taylor's "Giant", and Doris Day's "Pillow Talk", to darker, deeper films like "Midnight Cowboy", "Easy Rider", or "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" was a trippy journey, and the documentary takes you from one end to the other, and not without adequate homage to our European influences (the Europeans were at least a decade ahead of us/they had Fellini's art while we STILL had Doris Day's ever-lasting virginity).

There is no way to compile this cinematic metamorphosis in a single DVD, so the complaint that this was all too vague is asking for too much on one plate. For what this is, this is a brilliant, enlightening, delightful trip into America's film past.

So how could anyone not enjoy this compelling documentary? I suppose if you liked "Independence Day" you probably couldn't appreciate it.

Too-Vague Take On A Too-Big Topic
The problems with both ADUTI and the similar doc EASY RIDERS, RAGING BULLS are: they are generally fawning in tone; they play fast-and-loose with the truth by presenting only selected bits of film history; and - most importantly - they attempt to explain the zeitgeist of the 70s by restricting their view only to movies, when movies are (and have always been) a milk container in the cultural icebox...taking the flavor of whatever's sitting next to it. The 'counterculture', or 'new aesthetic' (or however you want to phrase it) lasted longer and more meaningfully in other media (music, art, fiction) where there was substantially less money being invested. I love many late 60s/70s films...in fact, that whole era is genuinely fascinating...but 'explaining', or just examining in depth, that window in time is more properly the domain of a Ken Burns-length documentary series. (You'd need 10-15 hours just to take in the full view.) And blaming everything that didn't work or fell apart on either drugs, JAWS, STAR WARS, or all three, is as pat and false as showing a married couple sleeping in twin beds during the heyday of the Production Code.

For instance, Bogdanovich is trotted out like a High Lama of Personal Cinema but the audience never gets the sense of how his lousy old-Hollywood imitations like AT LONG LAST LOVE and NICKELODEON catastrophically imploded his career, right in the middle of that halcyon decade (and STAR WARS didn't have a blessed thing to do with it). We get clips from DIRTY HARRY and MAGNUM FORCE, as if Eastwood's proto-fascist genuflections before Ruthless Authority were somehow considered hip and edgy by the intelligentsia of the decade, when they were uniformly bemoaned and despised. We get many cloud-cuckooland memories intimating that 70s cinema reflected the audience's desire for meatier, more challenging fare, when nothing could have been further from the truth (the top box-office stars for much of the decade were not Dustin Hoffman or Robert DeNiro but Eastwood, Burt Reynolds and Charles Bronson). The biggest hits of the 70s were all spun off the AIP model, not the Truffaut/Godard model: sensation ruled the day, then as now. People stood on long lines stretching several times around city blocks to see THE GODFATHER or SERPICO because - as a Roger Corman ad campaign might have phrased it - they "rip the lid off today's shocking headlines!!"

It's one thing to say that Hal Ashby and Francis Coppola made terrific films (they did indeed); it's another to claim that they made films during a golden time when the audience was, for once, on the side of the Artists. That time has never existed. Before JAWS, before STAR WARS, folks were packing theaters for DEATH WISH, BILLY JACK and THE EXORCIST - and not because they were diehard Cahiers du Cinema subscribers.

And what is not even touched upon is the long-term effect of the heightened gory violence of 70s films. We hear auteur after auteur hiding behind that sad old trope of "in order to show people the HORROR of violence, we had to truly show the EFFECTS of violence". Gee, thanks, Teacher....I'd've never dreamed that getting shot in the head might actually hurt, otherwise. Too bad the nonstop,desensitizing, rolling-snowball-momentum of all those squibs and open wounds is with us still, and it is almost 100% due to the movies of the 1970s. Coppola's triumphs may be a thing of the past - but Moe Green getting shot point-blank in the eye is forever. Scorsese has run out of heartfelt Little Italy stories to tell us, but he's still 'teaching' us how it might feel to have your eye forced out of its socket by having your head squeezed in a vise, or simply how liberating & invigorating it is to be turning that vise on behalf of the Mafia. I recall a 70s-era Pauline Kael column called "Fear of Movies" where she chided the audience for being prim, prudish wussies afraid to viscerally experience the primal excitement of violent films; a year or two later, she was fretting over the increasing 'brutality' of mass-entertainment. Way to chart cause and effect, Pauline!

Sorry. But if you're going to celebrate the films of the 1970s, you have to shine a little light on the warts and moles under the makeup too...or you end up with a puff-piece. Which is the case here, good intentions notwithstanding.

Dissapointing
I was really looking forward to seeing this documentary but it left so much out that...It's simply too uneven. Where is Spielberg, Woody Allen etc...? Why is Milos Forman completely brushed over? Why wasn't there more about Polanski? Why is there nothing discussed about Melvin Van Peebles or black film really in general? Nothing about Elaine May or Mike Nichols except a clip from the Graduate. What about George Roy Hill? Werner Herzog? Why isn't there an interview with George Lucas or more of a discussion about the Star Wars phenomena? What about Alan J. Pakula who did all the president's men? Mel Brooks? Robert Downey Sr.? Larry Cohen? John Landis? And to not have more about De Palma is unforgiveable to me. And if you're going to talk to actors of the seventies why don't we see interviews with Hoffman, Redford etc...? And why isn't the Ellen Burstyn interview included? Why aren't there interviews with today's filmmakers and how they have been influenced by the films of the 70's (i.e. Paul Thomas Anderson, Spike Lee, Wes Anderson, Sofia Coppola, Nick Cassevetes-and he was one of the interviewers for god's sakes). This documentary is like a weird hodge podge of people Lagravenese and Ted Demme (R.I.P) liked. As a film lover and being very familiar with this period in film history I thought it [was] a big fat lemon. Gets two stars from me as opposed to zero only because there is the occasionally good interview (i.e. Julie Christie)that really hits the target of why we should be talking about 70's film in the first place...Which is because you CAN'T make them like they used to. But what a dissapointment though. :( Don't buy this unless you're a teacher at a film school...Otherwise beware! ... Read more

Description

Two bumbling rookie cops investigate the murder of their former boss, who had refused to sell his barbershop to a greedy real-estate developer. ... Read more

Description

Denis Leary (TV's THE JOB) and Martin Sheen (THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT) star in this explosive story about the power of loyalty, community, and friendship in the world of organized crime. In a tough Irish-American neighborhood, Bobby (Leary) is a small-time car thief working for the area's top mobster (Colm Meany -- CON AIR, THE SNAPPER). But then, Bobby's own gang kills members of his family, leaving Bobby faced with a tough choice: defend his family honor or obey the rigid neighborhood code of silence! With co-stars Billy Crudup (ALMOST FAMOUS) and Famke Janssen (GOLDEN EYE), MONUMENT AVE. is gripping entertainment in the tradition of GOODFELLAS! ... Read more

Reviews (12)

Denis Leary shines!
This movie is one of these small gems that manage to slip by everybody in the theatres. But fortunately, it's now available on DVD and for rental. Monument Ave. is pretty cliched in terms of it's story line about a criminal who must choose between his loyalty to his friends or that of his boss. However, the true ingenuity of the film is the dialogue. It flows off the screen in a current of truth and harsh realities that rivals that of Tarantino. Listen to it carefully. The performances are very good, especially that of Denis Leary. The way he balances comedy, which is his forte, and drama is very good. I was truly impressed with this breakout performance by him and hope to see him in more dramatic roles. Colm Meany, who plays the Irish crime boss is equally effective as a character who will be your best friend and stab you in the back at the same time. This film was directed by Ted Demme, yonger brother of Jonathan Demme, the dude that directed the Silence of the Lambs. With this film, Ted Demme again proves that he is a distinct talent, seperate from his brother.

One of the Great Gangster Movie Performances
This is an unjustly neglected film. Director Ted Demme died far too young, leaving behind a solid list of films that suggested great possiblities from the mature filmmaker we will never get to see. One of the significant things about his work is that he is the only person who really understood how to use Dennis Leary. In a word, Leary is great here. His conflicted emotions about escaping the narrow confines of his violent world and the actions he takes that only ensure his failure power a character that rivals Micheal Corleone (without the operatic granduer) or John Garfield in Force of Evil. The harsh locations, the sub-culture within a subculture, the suddenness of the violence, the twadriness of the criminal enterprise are all vividly captured in a film justly called "the Irish Mean Streets".

A great role for Leary in "Monument Avenue"
I bought "Monument Avenue" on a whim. I'm a Denis Leary fan, and was interested to see how Leary performed in the role of an Irish thug type. It's a fitting role for Leary. He was properly cast as Bobby, a small time car thief. Leary excelled at the role, coming off as very authentic. I agree with the other reviewer who said Leary doesn't have to play piss and moan roles to shine.

The movie has a couple slow spots, but it's a good mobster story nonetheless.

dynamite performance by Denis Leary
Leary gives a grand and different styled performance. Billy Crudup gets killed by Colm Meaney and Crudup was Leary's cousin because Crudup did a bad thing to Meaney. Martin Sheen is the corrupt cop in the movie and Famke Janssen is the woman who is in a relationship with Meaney but pints over Leary. its story is good but it lags here and there. the end where Leary goes to see Meaney then pulls out a gun, shoots his guys and then him was surprising and is the highlight. other actors like Janeane Tripplehorn, Jason Barry, Noah Emmerich and John Diehl contribute supporting roles.

Monument Ave. Review
Monument Ave. is an excellent film though it certainly is not what one call upliftng. Leary is a coke-addicted car thief from Charlestown who rolls with his gang of buddies including his cousin from Ireland, a cab driver, a fellow car theif, and a goofy Irish bigit-type.

The film is very dark at times but there is a lot of humor as well as Leary adds some very funny stuff. This film is one of my personal favorites. It really showcases Denis Leary as the excellent actor that he can be offered the right role. This is pretty much the Irish equivalent of films such as Mean Streets. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

The Best Show EVER!
Read some of the other reviews.This was the BEST show on television!It was WAY ahead of its time...probably why it only made it 6 episodes on FOX!Thank GOD F/X showed all 13 episodes the following summer.Place your e-mail and let Sony Pictures Home Entertainment (wwwDOTspheDOTcom) know that we NEED this on dvd!Also go to wwwDOTtvshowsondvdDOTcom and vote for a season release.GOD was this the best show!

THEY BETTER RELEASE THIS ON DVD!
this is the greatest show ever!if you haven't seen it, you're really missing out.PLEASE enter your email address so maybe it will be released!!my vhs copies taped off tv are starting to wear out so PLEASE RELEASE THE DVD SOON!!!

This unparalleled TV comedy should be on DVD by now !!!
So I'm reviewing a DVD that doesn't exist (yet). The main reason I'm writing anything at all is to urge anyone who stumbles upon this to enter your email address above, requesting to be informed by Amazon should this title ever actually make it to DVD. There's no obligation to buy, but entering your email address will count as a vote toward convincing the studio to release this incredibly clever, outrageously funny and stingingly accurate TV show from 1999 (Fox). The 13 half-hour episodes, plus a few bonus features, would fit nicely on 2 discs. Starring Jay Mohr and an outstanding ensemble cast, plus some big Hollywood names playing, and satirizing, themselves, it's as good as any TV comedy I've ever seen. I've been a huge fan of The Honeymooners, Barney Miller, Taxi, Cheers, Bosom Buddies, Seinfeld, Friends, Sports Night, Arrested Development, Scrubs and, recently, The Office (the Steve Carell version - haven't caught the British original yet). If your TV comedy tastes are even remotely close to mine, you will absolutely love Action. ... Read more