Description

The swashbuckling classic comes to rip-roaring life in this lavishproduction, filled with breathless romance and derring-do! In the eyes of high society, SirPercy Blakeney (Brideshead Revisited's Anthony Andrews) is a typical fop, surroundedby adoring ladies and clueless gentry. However, he is also a master of disguise and bearsan infamous secret identity: the Scarlet Pimpernel, dashing and fearless rescuer of victimsof the French Revolution! Sir Percy also falls head over heels for the beautiful Marguerite(Somewhere in Time's Jane Seymour), who is also wooed by the villainous PaulChauvelin (The Lord of the Rings' Sir Ian McKellan), Robespierre's Chief Agent for theCommittee of National Security. Suave, stylish, and utterly irresistible, this dazzlingadventure is sure to capture your heart! ... Read more

Reviews (161)

Better Each Time
It's the type of movie that I always expect to be entertaining, but not really 'great.' And every time I see it I find myself wrong. This is THE BEST adaptation of the Pimpernel. Other films have gotten some elements right but not others; this one bags them all (except that I still prefer the most recent version's interpretation of Robespierre, he's priceless). Anthony Andrews is the definitive Sir Percy: hilarious at parties, charismatic in battle, irresistable in love, and unrecognizable in every disguise. Jane Seymour is perfectly lovestruck and intense, and Ian McKellan as Chauvelin shows a man being eaten alive by jealousy. All the portrayals are larger-than-life, but suitably so, for the film has no place for realism. Scenes swing from very funny to almost painfully tense to heart-stoppingly romantic. This production hits every note right (although I wish someone would assasinate that hateful blond child). Not to be missed, definately. So why can't I buy it, I've been trying for a year now? Let's hurry up the DVD.

Sink me! But it's demmed brilliant!
Hopefully "The Scarlet Pimpernel" will someday make its way back to the big screen, but in the meantime this television version holds the place as probably the best one to date. First and foremost, the script never has a dull moment, as it's jam-packed full of romance, intrigue, suspense, and adventure. The action continuously bounces back and forth between England and revolutionary France, where the mysterious Scarlet Pimpernel is saving innocent lives from the cruel blade of Madame Guillotine. Anthony Andrews, as foppish Sir Percy Blakeney, an English aristocrat with a big secret, never fails to deliver. His droll, dry delivery of Percy's lines contrasts brilliantly with his dashing Pimpernel persona. Jane Seymour is a perfectly lovely Marguerite, entirely believeable as a spirited French actress caught between her loyalties. And Sir Ian McKellen is delightfully menacing as Citizen Paul Chauvelin, an agent of the French Republic and Marguerite's spurned lover. The plot is fast-paced, and every scene is as well done as the one before. It is truly a classic to be treasured. Unfortunately, the DVD is only a basic transfer and has no bonus material, but at least it's finally getting its due!

Great Movie, Horrible DVD
When the first second of the first scene shows you little cubes instead of people's heads, the walls, and the torches, you might think the DVD transfer has some problems. When not even the letters in the credits stay stable, you begin to wonder whether you wouldn't be better off buying an old VHS copy and turning it into a tiny-sized Divx file. ARRRRGH!

Which breaks my heart, because this version of The Scarlet Pimpernel is one of my all-time top ten movies. I'd be rating this with one star if the movie wasn't five-star. Too bad I can't actually see it!

Sink me! I'm renting it, and now I've ordered my own copy!
I've watched this movie five times in one weekend, and yet I still want to see it again. The copy currently in my DVD player is one that I'm renting. But I love this movie so much that I've ordered my own copy to add to our home library. Anthony Andrews is the best Sir Percy Blakeney/Scarlet Pimpernel that I've ever seen. I wish there was some way they could make sequels with the same cast members all looking as they did when this 1982 movie was released.

Sink me! Indeed
I took a chance and purchased this dvd purely based on your reviews. I must say that I am simply enamored by this movie. Yes, it differs to the book but it is certainly forgivable. One simply has to understand that it is based on two of Baroness Orczy books and then it all falls into place.

Now, for the movie. Anthony Andrews as the foppish/valiant Sir Percy was excellent. I thought he delivered an exceptional performance. I could not find any fault in his performance especially since the book Percy is so inane and a complete idiot...well, at least, his alter ego in any case. At times, it is so amusing to watch him, especially when he tries to undo Chauvelin. **smiles** I cannot say enough about his performance. When he is also conflicted by his love for Maguerite and his cold treatment of her, it is also beautifully done. His expressions are so real. His concern for the families of the aristos adds such a beautiful side to his character as well. You can actually see that he cares.

Jane Seymour as Maguerite was wonderful as well. The chemistry between her and Anthony Andrews was superb. They conveyed so much fire simply by a glance.

Ian Mckellan was also good. I must admit that when I realized he would play the villian that did not sit well with me (I love him as Gandalf but he really looks different out of the wizard's costume), however, it worked out well.

In conclusion, I thought this was a splendid movie. The sets, the music, the dances, etc were all engaging. There was never a dull moment. I actually ordered the film for my mum since I figure she would love it as well. Though I have never seen any of the other versions, I cannot imagine another one uprooting the love I feel for this one. It would be demmed near impossible. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

An appealing, free-floating lunacy fuels What's New Pussycat?,and there's enough of it bubbling around to carry the movie past its manydefects. The cast is like a collection of terribly attractive people stumblingover each other at a disorganized cocktail party--they aren't always witty, andsome of them are drunk, but there's enough going on to keep you distracted.Peter O'Toole plays a swinging London womanizer seeking help for his addiction,who makes the mistake of consulting one Dr. Fritz Fassbender (Peter Sellers), ademented psychoanalyst. Woody Allen made his movie debut here and wrote thescript (much altered, to Allen's chagrin, in the filmmaking process). This movieand Casino Royale--which also features Sellers, Allen, Ursula Andress,and a Burt Bacharach song--are overstuffed '60s artifacts, brimming with modchaos. Alas, neither film is as funny as it should be. --Robert Horton ... Read more

Reviews (24)

Typical sixties flick
Funniest movie ever made, besides Casino Royale and
It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World. I used it to write a grad psychology paper. Got an A. Everybody in the movie has a diagnosible mental illness. Ursula Andress (pictured on the cover) is a nymphomaniac. Peter Sellers (also on the cover) is bipolar. Peter O'Toole is Narcissistic. Capucine is Histronic Personality Disorder. Romy is Borderline Personality Disorder.
The wife is Bulemic (she is 300 pounds and wears a viking helmet with horns, chestplate and spear). Woody Allen is Dysthymic Personality Disorder. (We used to call this disorder Neurotic). There is also a pyromaniac. Funnier than Analyze This.

Old Cat
What's New Pussycat is a dubious start for the great Woody Allan, but it is an important film because after this disaster was released Woody vowed to never let anyone again direct a film he had written.What's New Pussycat starts off with a lot of promise.The animated titles with the song of the same name as the film sung by a young Tom Jones sets you up for a fun time.The opening scene with Peter Seller's as a mad psychiatrist fighting his Wagnarian wife is very funny.Then What's New Pussycat goes off the rails.Scenes of two drunks slurring their words and staggering around waking up the neighborhood are slow, boring and as unfunny as the real thing.Peter O Toole and Peter Sellers just go through the motions.The scenes with Woody Allan are good, but these moments don't really fit the film.What's New Pussycat goes about an hour too long.
Although the director clearly focusses his attention on madcap lunacy rather than the plot, it is interesting to wonder what Woody actually intended What's New Pussycat to be.The film as it stands is so different to anything else he worked on (disregarding Casino Royale, because his input on that was minimal).If he had directed this film I suspect scenes would have been tightened, the dialogue more realistically delivered, the slapstick would have been staggered and not overwhelm everything else, and Peter Sellers, if he had any respect for Woody as a first time director (which is doubtful), may have beem induced to really shine.Even so, I can't see What's New Pussycat being among his best work, but it would be a lot less boring than what it is now.
Although I have panned this film I gave it two stars because some scenes are genuinely good and it is of historic significance.

Yes, a forty-year old movie blah, blah, blah
I love reading reviews by my God and Goddess-like contemporaries. It's so easy to pass judgement on distant bits of culture from our high and holy PC Olympus! I imagine if the Puritans had had the opportunity to write movie reviews they'd have had about the same tone.

Back in the Sixties (which, oddly, had a history other than that involving Viet Nam, Civil Rights, and Feminism) folks were shaking themselves loose of the straightjacket that had been on them since, at least, the Great Depression, at most, the 13th Century. People wanted fun, color, and wackiness, and they enjoyed getting it. Why else would big no-nonsense film companies interested in profits sink dough into plotless wonders like this film and, say, Casino Royale?

This is kind of a fascist age. Folks of all political stripes are into no-compromise black and white ethics. Everyone's got an opinion. Everyone knows what's right for you. A movie like this is just great for those of us who find all this SERIOUSNESS tiresome, just as it was great for our kindred sisters and brothers back in the Sixties who were sick of their parents lecturing them (Nowadays it's our kids that sound like our dopey tight-[censored] parents--how did we let that happen?). There's no relevancy here, no addressing of pressing social issues--it's just mindless incorrect stupid fun. Buy it and hide it before the young'uns get around to burning it. Watch it while half-listening for the sound of jack boots on the front porch.

this is my fave of all time
One has to enter into the spirit of the thing: this is a B-movie and doesn't aspire to be anything else.I love the ambiance, the actors, and many of the quirky lines.One of the reviewers said that beautiful women were throwing themselves at Allen, Sellers, and O'Toole, but it's really only O'Toole (it may be the only film where Allen is rejected as much as he would be in real life were he not rich and famous).I admit that as a feminist I have to suspend certain principles, but it's too fun not to love it regardless.My favorite line is the stupidly charming "You are a monster and a monster in that order" by the long-haired psychoanalyst played by Sellers.This is the only movie where Sellers doesn't annoy me to death and is more and more the only one in which I can watch Woody Allen without wanting to strangle him.Not Romy Schneider's best work but always fascinating to look at.

The Ridiculous and the Sublime
Maybe sublime is too strong a word. This is one mess of a movie. It's like a nerdy kid trying desperately to be cool. Most of the jokes are unbelievably juvenile and even lame, and it's often obvious many of the cast members realized they were in a piece of crap and decided to at least enjoy themselves-- which actually helps.

That said, there are moments (and I mean moments) that make it worth watching. Paula Prentiss steals the show from everyone, there are some laugh-out-loud lines in the picture and some of Peter O'Toole's reactions are priceless. Another good scene is the one Peter Sellers and Woody Allen share. Finally, there may even be one emblematic shot in it too, during the getaway at the end of the picture.

What's new Pussycat is endearingly goofy and AWFUL, but I'm looking forward to it coming out on DVD. ... Read more

Reviews (106)

DVD is one of My Favorite Christmas Presents of 2002!
I have seen several different movie adaptations of A Christmas Carol and have liked them all but I think the three best versions are this George C. Scott adaptation, the Alastair Sim adaptation and the adaptation starring Patrick Stewart and I also like the adaptations starring Albert Finney, Reginald Owen and Sir Seymour Hicks. This adaptation is very good and I'm very impressed with George C. Scott's acting, he gave an excellent performance as Ebenezer Scrooge and I also liked David Warner as Bob Cratchit and there are many other fine performances too, Edward Woodward, Suzannah York, etc. I very highly recommend this adaptation which seems pretty faithful to the Charles Dickens classic and I like that they included aspects of the book that are not in the other Christmas Carol movies! I had seen some of this version a few years ago but didn't see the whole movie but I got this DVD today for Christmas and I just finished watching it and I loved it, definitely one of my favorite Christmas presents of 2002.

The best CAROL ever, with the best Scrooge ever
There's a reason that of all the stories woven around the Christmas season, and of all the tales Charles Dickens told, this one is still being retold over a century later. And it's the same reason Clive Donner's version, out of all the many filmed and staged retellings, is still around and now being offered in DVD format: they are, quite simply, both the best of their breed. The script is faithful to Dickens' original text as few other versions have been, the production values are sumptuous and conscientious in their historical accuracy, and the performances from a star-packed cast are pure British sterling, above all the late, lamented George C. Scott's unforgettable limning of an all too human Ebenezer Scrooge. Also not to be missed are Edward (THE EQUALIZER) Woodward as the Ghost of Christmas Present, cruelly rebuking Scrooge with his own words; Mark Strickson (Turlough of DOCTOR WHO fame) as the young Scrooge in the Christmas Past sequence; Roger Rees, Susannah York, Frank Finlay as a suitably fearsome Marley's Ghost, the always reliable David Warner as Bob Cratchit, Angela Pleasance as the gentle Ghost of Christmas Past, Joanne Whalley (the former Mrs. Val Kilmer, of SCANDAL and many other films) and Michael Gough (another DOCTOR WHO veteran [the Celestial Toymaker in Hartnell's First Doctor era] and Alfred the butler in the BATMAN films).

Seeing Scott as Scrooge crying out in anguish over his own gravestone, "Why show me this if I am past all hope?"; then on Christmas morning, jumping up and down on his four-poster with glee; showing up on his nephew's doorstep, properly shame-faced and hoping for a chance to begin again -- these moments bring a tear to my eye and a lump to my throat every time. If you need a reminder of why this season is so important even to those of us who have lost faith in the Christian church, bookend this film with Clive's brother Richard Donner's equally excellent updating of Dickens' classic tale, SCROOGED, starring Bill Murray (his speech at the end is worth the price of the DVD all by itself!) for a night of holiday laughter and tears like no other. Scrooge embodies the hope that all of us have that, whatever our failings and our misdeeds, our lives may yet be counted of value and our souls admitted into heaven; and this version of his odyssey from miserdom to redemption makes it abundantly clear why this one short story holds such a special place in the canon of Western literature.

Why (Officially) I Love This Movie!
Every winter, I enjoy watching A Christmas Carol on TV whenever I can, and the 1984 version is my favorite. The production and performances add up to a moody, realistic and touching adaptation of the Charles Dickens' classic.

Director Clive Donner (editor of the much celebrated 1951 Alastair Sim version of Scrooge) presents a stunningly authentic recreation of Dickens' London. From effectively foggy streets to Ebenezer's own cobwebbed-infested manor, Donner provides a gritty, appropriately dark atmosphere, enhanced by the wonderful score.

The film's pacing is exquisite. In showing Ebenezer the error of his ways, the filmmakers give equal time to his past, present and future, never once lingering to the point of boredom. Thus the story seems to fly by compared to the other adaptations.

George C. Scott is excellent as Scrooge. Like all of those who've portrayed the character, his old miser starts out mean and bitter and ends up joyous and thankful! But throughout his performance, true sadness runs deep. Scott makes his emotional transformation subtle, painting a realistic portrait of a man haunted by the mistakes of his past, taking his pain out on the world.

But what separates the 1984 production of Christmas Carol from all others is the terrific supporting cast. David Warner may give the warmest performance of his career as Bob Cratchet (all the more poignant considering the many villains he's played over the years). Frank Finlay is the most compelling Jacob Marley I've ever seen. You can almost feel this man's torture just by gazing upon his unblinking expression. Edward Woodward brings great depth to the Ghost of Christmas Present, communicating tremendous power, yet just the right touch of humor. Finally, this adaptation of the Dickens' tale features the scariest, most intimidating Ghost of Christmas Yet to Come you'll find anywhere!

Most of us look forward to a healthy dose of A Christmas Carol at the end of each year and we all have our favorite version. Thanks to the handsome production values, expert pacing and perfect cast, led by the magnificent George C. Scott, I believe they truly got it right in 1984!

The Best All Around Version of a Christmas Classic!
Some people are under the impression that this is an American production of A Christmas Carol while others (namely the 1951 Alastair Sim version) are British. Truth is, while the George C. Scott 1984 version was televised on an American network, it was filmed on location in England, and presents an effectively murky, gritty atmosphere where other versions, including the most recent Patrick Stewart version, look a little too "pretty".

Perhaps most telling is that the director of the 1984 Christmas Carol is Clive Donner. Not only is he British, but he was also the editor of the 1951 version...the very same Scrooge featuring Alastair Sim's acclaimed performance! This indicates that Donner had a unique perspective when he decided to revisit A Christmas Carol. He could easily have chosen to tell the tale just as it was done in 1951, but he diverted slightly. Thus, the George C. Scott production is much more atmospheric and concentrates a little more on Scrooge's present and future whereas the Sim version devoted way too much time on Scrooge's past. In giving Scrooge's past, present and future equal time, Donner is able to depict Scrooge's emotional tranformation convincingly and realistically (having George C. Scott doesn't hurt either).

The 1951 production of Scrooge: A Christmas Carol will always have Alastair Sim's celebrated performance, but this 1984 production has become the definitive film version of the Dickens classic!

lower class adaption
I saw this video two weeks after reading the book. It came across as flat and lifeless compared to the book and the 1951 Alastar Sim version I have. Instead of taking you back to the time of Dickens, it takes Dickens up to our time. Another problem is that the characters have lower class characteristics with their confrontative behavior and their arrogance which is always a cover for incompetence. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

They Shouldn't Have Messed With The Book
The novel, by Geoffrey Household, is well-paced and builds to a satisfying climax based on profound revelations. The movie pushes those revelations to the beginning, which robs the main character of his motivation to swing into action at the end. I enjoyed the movie to a point, but this is one of those cases where the film makers would have done better to stay more consistent with the book.

Rogue Male
I had seen this movie on TV once. It is a good movie, very interesting and holds your interest. My only complaint is the quality of the VHS tape I received. Color and sound were of poor quality and small portion of tape was unviewable. I know this was a TV movie, but I would think there would be a better quality transfer to VHS tape.

The "Rogue Male" is Superb!!
I saw this movie 6 years ago and wondered how I'd missed it for so long. O'toole gives an awesome performance as he fumbles and then haphazardly (with the greatest of luck) eludes his pursuers. This movie puts a great spin on the statement "what if" some one had killed Hitler, though it is in no way a documentary. It's the "CAT & MOUSE" standard in my book!!

ENJOY.

awesome o toole
Beautiful reparte's by OToole trashing Germans ... Read more

Reviews (25)

A powerful love story, unlike any other!
I stumbled across this film at Blockbuster about seven years ago. I've shared it with numerous friends. If you believe in love, believe some loves are pre-ordained, that love can be magical and two people can always want the best for each other, this is a movie for you. It saddens me that it is unavailable for purchase... it's a "must see" and a "must own." Treat yourself to a movie that will leave you feeling great about love, in awe of this couple and their dedication, in tears about the tragedy of their time period.

History's greatest love story!
I don't think there are words to describe how great this movie is! It's by far one of the most wonderful and touching love stories ever. What makes it even more wonderful is that it's the true story of Abelard and Heloise. I recommend this movie to anyone who has ever been in love!

why is this movie so funny???
Maybe I'm just cynical but, this movie cracked me up. Sex in a monastery, castration, clergy in funny hats, this movie has everything. And the 80's keyboard music, really captures the spirit of medieval France. Watch it and laugh heartily.

A beautiful movie for the hopeless Romantic, a true story
This is one of my alltime favorite movies. I't not so much that the acting is the best I have ever seen (not to say it's not good acting) but it's the captivating story line. To know that this was a true romance....ahhhh, what every heart desires. The hardships they had to face due to their own circumstances and the century that they lived in is simply heartbreaking. But to overcome such obstacles in the name of love says so much about the deep love they shared. It was the first I had heard of Abelard and Heloise, who now are stuck in my mind forever. I hear that lovers still grace their graves with flowers in France to this day. If you have a romantic bone on your body, this is a must see. Grab a box of tissues, while your at it.

Great, educational movie.
Having heard the true story of Abelard and Heloise for the first time in 1989, when I was walking through the ruins of the Parvis de Notre Dame in Paris, when I saw Stealing Heaven, I enjoyed every minute of it. I tried to read the book that was written in old English (very difficult to understand considering I'm not a native speaker), so I felt I was losing part of the history. This movie made me learn more about the beliefs in the past. I really felt sorry for this couple who loved each other so much and had to go through so much pain in their lives. Two incredible minds who fell in love while debating... delicously exciting! I highly recommend it! Try to visit the Parvis of Notre Dame, as well, and if possible, read the book "The Letters of Abelard and Heloise". ... Read more