Reviews (47)

One of the all time classic horror movies.
Featuring a rabid St. Benard who turns into a vicious killing machine who traps a wife and child in a broken down car in the middle of nowhere, Cujo takes suspense to a whole new level.

Sure, the first half of the film is pretty paint by numbers stuff that features no horror and gore whasoever, but that was so you can get acquainted with the characters.... Cujo is technically an innocent victim of an evil disease, you can see that King didn't want this to be the typical "evil dog vs. caring owners" storyline... but basically ir comes down to a dog named Cujo getting bitten by a rabid bat. He then goes on a killing spree. Tad Trenton and his mom go to a farm to get their car fixed. Too bad when they get there, the people who were supposed to fix the car get killed by the dog. Then, the car breaks down, and all hell breaks loose.

The problems with the movie are few, but deadlier than the vicious streak of Cujo. The movie is too boring early on, and the ending ... a big one. Plus, the DVD features no extras whatsoever, just improved sound quality and scene selection. The visuals are the same as they were in the 80's, so dont expect anything too great.

This is not a revolutionary film by any means, but Cujo delivers what King wanted it to: a tale of evil vs. good, but with shades of gray. And Cujo just looks too cool to be ignored for long. I reccommend seeing this movie without a doubt. It is one of my favorite horror movies of all time.

blooper
i have watched the movie several times........but have never noticed the blooper when cujo is at the window and the phone is ringing...you can vividly see a hand reach up and pull him out of the window......

A great film that's quite hard to watch.
This film can be quite disturbing and hard to watch. If you do not like seeing very young 5-year old children suffering and crying their eyes out and screaming you may not like this. Ok, so most of the film at the beginning drags a bit, but it introduces you to the characters and it deeps down into their lives. But once Cujo kills his first victim the real scary stuff begins to happen.

The film is about a dog named "Cujo", who gets bitten by a rabid bat while he is chasing a rabbit. We then move to a family: mom (Donna), dad (Vic) and their son (Tad) and we look at their lifestyles and problems. We then go back to Cujo, who is beginning to get very dirty and hiding in many places away from his owner in their farm. Cujo soon transforms into the monster he becomes after the rabid bite and kills the owner. Then, Donna and Tad are driving along the road, when their car suddenly stops in the middle of Cujo's far. No one is in sight, until Cujo suddenly appears. Donna and Tad are forced to stay in the car, so Cujo can't kill them.

Whenever Cujo tries to attack the car it can be quite disturbing and frightening. There are also lots of jumpy moments and un-predictable ones. I would only watch this if you are a hardcore horror movie fan, or a Stephen King fan. But there are some really shocking scenes which could be too much for others.

great King movie
Cujo is one of those great Stephen King movies. The book translates well into film (sure, the ending is different, but while the one ending is right for the book, this ending is right for the film). The acting is superb. The writing is great and believable. The direction and cinematography is great. Dee Wallace is wonderful as is Danny Pintauro (who played Tad), but the true star were the five St. Bernards, the one mechanical head the the guy in the suit that played Cujo. A lot of King's books have trouble making it to film. Cujo isn't one of those.

Simple But Great
Cujo, a st.bernard, gets bitten by a rabid bat and soon starts to manifest the symptoms of rabies. When a mother and her son get trapped inside their car with Cujo nearby ready to kill them as soon as they open the car door. ... Read more

Reviews (17)

Not Too Bad For A Sequel
THE JEWEL OF THE NILE is a sequel to ROMANCING THE STONE. The director and the screenwriters are new but Michael Douglas, Kathleen Turner and Danny DeVito are back in their old familiar roles. The cast also includes Spiros Focas and Avner Eisenberg.

This time the adventure takes place in North Africa where Turner is invited to accompany a wealthy Arab to his own country. She soon finds herself caught in another big mess in a very strange land. Naturally Douglas has to rescue her as he did before in ROMANCING THE STONE.

Danny DeVito's best scene comes near the beginning of the film when he suddenly emerges from a barrel on a dock with a rapid-fire description of his experiences in a Columbian jail. On balance JEWEL OF THE NILE is an entertaining movie but it does not quite recapture the magic of ROMANCING THE STONE.

A sequel that mostly makes the grade
Rarely does a sequel to a smash movie rise to the same level as its predecessor - but perhaps Jewel of the Nile is the exception (along with some of the Indiana Jones follow-ups).
This sequel to Romancing the Stone, a rip-snorter adventure/romance with Kathleen Turner and Michael Douglas, set the stage for this 2nd one. They've been together since the end of the 1st movie, living on his yacht. She is on assignment in the Middle East when she's abducted, and it's up to Douglas and of course Danny DeVito, to rescue her.
Good stuff, but not quite 5-star.

Very Well Done
Jewel of the Niel is the sequel to Romancing the Stone also with Michael Douglas,Kathleen Turner and Danny DeVito. The Movie stars off kind of slow but once the movie goes over seas to the Middle-East it gets alot better I don't want to give away to much but this movie should not be missed. Also to readers of this review if you like these two movies you the actors in it you should check out WAR OF THE ROSES

Skip this one. Just watch "Romancing the Stone" again.
Not too bad for a sequel, but this film has absolutely none of the "magic" of the original. Everything seems forced, contrived, and artificial by comparison. As others have noted, the story ended precisely where it should have at the close of "Romancing the Stone." Too bad they did not leave well enough alone.

Good Sequel But Not A Contender
"Jewel of the Nile" is the sequel to "Romancing the Stone" and reunites Michael Douglas, Kathleen Turner, and Danny DeVito in another adventure involving treasure, mystery, and danger in a foreign land.

It feels very much like a sequel, as in, "This all worked the first time, so let's do it again." The result is a somewhat formulaic and predictable film, with less magic. Without it's predecessor, viewers would be confused about what was going on with the characters. But, without it's predecessor, it would have stood out more. Or, it might have flopped. A definite case of sequelitis, but a much milder case than the awful "Jurassic Park: The Lost World" which completely went awry, in my opinion.

All that said, "Jewel of the Nile" is still an above-average, fast-paced action/adventure film with enough of a plot and enough good acting to make it worth watching. It has an exotic setting, a good, if not memorable, musical score, and plenty of action. "Romancing the Stone" is a keeper; this one is a good rental (or to buy a used one cheap). ... Read more

Description

An anthology of three Stephen King short stories, connected by a supernatural stray cat who wanders through each tale. ... Read more

Reviews (13)

Great horror trilogy from the master of terror!
Stephen King ( whom wrote the screenplay for this movie) brings you three terrifying tales of horror done in the "Creepshow" style as told from the eyes of a traveling stray cat. The first story " Quitters Inc." is about a family man ( James Woods) who just can't stop smoking as he signs up for a program called "Quitters Inc." which secretly monitors his smoking habit, the next tale is in Atlantic city called " The Ledge" which a tennis player makes a bet with a boss to walk a hotel ledge. Then finally our title cat in " The General" must protect a young girl ( Drew Barrymore)from an evil goblin who wants her soul.

Entertaining and well-made collection of comic-book stories with Hitchcock-esque and Twilight Zone-esque tones to them. Good acting and some good special effects for it's time especially the goblin make this worth watching.

Highly recommended if you enjoy the works of Stephen King, Creepshow 1 & 2 and Tales from The Darkside: The Movie.

P.S.: Look for cameo's by Stephen King's other famous characters like " Cujo" and "Christine".

Entertaining Film.
This tells, three stories from the Point of View of a Cat. A Man (James Woods) try to give up smoking by going to a successful Company named Quitters, Inc by being stalked by a Business Man (Alan King) by making him trying to quit smoking. A Crazed Millionaire (Kenneth McMillian) pushed a Tennis Pro (Robert Hays) by making him walking all around the Buliding from a Ledge. The Cat is trying to protect a little girl (Drew Barrymore) by a Monster Troll by stealing Kids Breath and Murdering them.

Directed by Lewis Teague (Alligator, Cujo, Navy Seals) made a fun, entertaining, dark humor, tongue in cheek horror film that becomes a Cult Classic. This wasn`t a huge hit in theaters back in 1985. There`s amusing Performances by Woods, King & McMillian. DVD`s has an terrific anamorphic Widescreen (2.35:1) transfer and an strong Dolby Stereo 2.0 Surround Sound. DVD`s Extras are the Original Theatrical Trailer and an Audio Commentary by the Director. There`s an amusing trivia that never make it in the final cut:The Original Opening, when a little girl (Barrymore again) dies in her sleep, murder by a Monster Troll and the mother (Patti LaPone) thinking that the Cat has murder her daughter. Trying to take the law in her hands by taking a Machine Gun and trying to kill the Cat. Watch for James Rebhorn, Mike Starr & Charles S. Dutton in Cameos. Screenplay by Novelist:Stephen King (Maximum Overdrive, Sleepalkers, Silver Bullet). Joe Dunton Camera Widescreen (J-D-C Scope). Grade:A-.

Mostly a comedy, but definitely not a horror.
I think it is odd that people view this movie as a horror and then get upset by it. The movie cannot be completely categorized in any one genre since each story attempts to create a different mood. The only pervasive style, however, is dark comedy.

The first segment is nothing but humor, with a slight touch of morbid moments. A good example of the type of humor that's in this story is when James Woods' character has tried to quit smoking and he goes to a party. The room is completely smoke-filled and everybody offers him a cigarette every three seconds. Soon, he starts to hallucinate--and sees a giant pack of cigarettes walking around and taunting him. Obviously, this isn't horror.

The second segment is the most serious of all three. It is supposed to be a suspense story, and it is mostly successful. I've always enjoyed it, but given that it is surrounded by much campier material, it seems out of place here.

The third segment is an adventure story. It could, because of the presence of the troll, be considered a horror by some viewers, but it is incredibly silly. It's the story of a cat fighting out a duel with a little monster, replete with Howie-Mandel-esque voice-overs. It alternates quickly between humor and adventure, but it is not scary unless you are a small child.

The movie suffers only for two reasons: one is that some special effects shots have suffered greatly (although quite a few are still amazing). The other is that whenever the movie does try to be serious, it never works as well as it should. It's like watching a clown do a routine with seltzer water, and then trying to recite a soliloquy from "Hamlet" without changing his make-up. By the time the movie does reach its more serious moments, you'll already be in a laughing mood.

one of my own favorite Stephen King's
It saddens me that this film was not a box office success. It's one that I can wath over and over again, and will always have fond memories of. The framing device is a stray tom cat that is visited twice, in some of the more surreal moments of the film, by the spirit of a young girl, (8-year-old Drew Barrymore,) who is, in fact, still alive. (Perhaps she visits the cat while asleep, in her dreams.) The first two stories a non-horror, non- supernatural, (unless you count the scenes where the girl appears,) cliff hanger stories, in the vein of REAR WINDOW and NORTH BY NORTHWEST. The first is about a company that helps smokers quit, no matter what the cost. The second is about an ex- tennis pro who, after being caught trying to run off with a mob boss' wife, is forced to walk a five inch ledge at the top of a twenty-story building. The last segment is the horrific supernatural tale, when the cat finds the girl, Amanda, just in time, as a miniture troll is about to sneak into her room and suck her life force while she's asleep. However, this isn't really any scaryier than GREMLINS, and it might help to watch it as more of a comedy during the scenes with the troll. Still, a film not to be missed.

Is this meant to be funny?
This is NOT horror, and the effects are tacky. But it's still an average film. Cat's Eye tells the story of a tortoise-shell cat, who seems to be able to save everybody from monsters and other scary things.

The first tale is quite creepy, and is a bout a man who tries to give up smoking. The Quit Smoking company try sinister methods to try and get the man to quit.

The second part is the main NON HORROR film. It's about a man who is forced to walk around a ledge on the top of a tall hotel. An average thriller, but not scary.

The third is where the supernatural comes into it, but the monster has little bells on it's head and is about ten centimetres tall, so this is the worst story of the lot. In places, it's funny, but is it meant to be?

There are better films out there, but watch this if you have nothing better to do. ... Read more

Reviews (38)

Good but not Great
Charlie Sheen was not as passionate in this as he was in Platoon, which by the way, was intense. Biehn was decent, but he could've had better writing. The producer was definitely thinking you throw a couple names together, along with some two-bit typical Hollywood writing, and you'll get a blockbuster. That's not the way it works, and it showed. It was, however, good for action and mild gore. As an Military Officer myself, I can say that the scenes of Navy tactics are midly accurate, albeit modified slightly for TV. The action, as said earlier, is pretty good, especially given the era in which it was produced. The plot was pretty ridiculous, not true to life in any aspect. The idea of a SEALs unit operating indepedent and autonomous of the Navy Chain of Command is downright unheard of and the plot offers no consolation to the hackneyed Hollywood writing. Navy SEALs has the repuation for being a "shoot 'em up" movie, with little to offer in any other department. This is pretty much true. There are good gunfights, lots of explosions, bad guys who hit everything but their targets and consequently die, BADLY, but nothing to stimulate the intellectual modern barbarian. Basically, if you like shoot 'em up movies and don't care about too much of a plot, this is for you. If you want to be stimulated, go buy some sappy chick flick.

The Navy SEALs seem pleased with Michael Biehn¿s performance
I love the movie, but readily admit there are parts that could most definitely use some improvement. It does, however, have lots of action, emotional moments, and even comedic relief throughout; making it fun to watch no matter what mood you're in.

I believe the SEALs deserve the utmost respect and was a bit upset that some parts of the movie, a movie bearing their name, didn't seem to do them justice. Though I don't know how your average Navy SEAL feels about the movie itself; they seem to be very pleased with Michael Biehn's (yay!) portrayal as a Navy SEAL. I read an article (I'm not sure if I'm allowed to cite in a review, an internet search should lead you to it though - fan club) that said the SEALs were excited about the prospect of Mr. Biehn being the narrator for the U.S. Navy UDT/SEAL Museum in Florida's new film. The film (I believe, as I haven't had a chance to visit the museum yet) is running continuously, showing the history and evolution of the United States Navy SEALs. Biehn, honored, narrated it for free. The SEALs seem to feel that Michael Biehn's depictions as a SEAL in "Navy SEALs" and "The Rock" were very accurate and well done. This is further evidenced by the fact that after his part in the museum film was completed, he received a special honor from Rear Admiral E.T. Olsen; he was awarded with a plaque and named Honorary Frogman for Life. This is a real honor since the SEALs say that the Admiral has only done this a few times and rarely gives such glowing compliments to anyone.

So, though the movie has it's faults, and what movie doesn't, it's still a good movie. Give it a try and enjoy if for what it is, a movie. If you're a Michael Biehn fan, it's a must see. Also, though Charlie Sheen's portrayal of a SEAL may not, putting it mildly, be the greatest, don't be too harsh a judge; remember, he's just doing the best he can, which is pretty darn good, with the shoddy part he's given.

misinformed viewers
I have read many reviews that have been compared to the "real" SEALs.I would agree, there are some parts about the film that seem unbelievable. However, if you are going to do enough research into the SEAL teams to "know" this movie is unrealistic, here is an idea for you. Research a navy SEAL team called Red Cell. After reading about it, you will agree that this movie is almost exactly to a tee on how that team operated. Keep that in mind next time you watch the film.

I'm no Charlie Sheen fan, but he deserved better than this
1990 wasn't a good year for Charlie Sheen. As if "Navy Seals" wasn't bad enough, he followed it with "The Rookie", another brainless action flick that both he and director/co-star Clint Eastwood would like to forget. But of the two, I'd have to say that "Navy Seals" is worse. Overflowing with cornball dialogue, stupid action scenes and MTV filler (remember that golf-cart chase set to music?), this movie was made for a twelve-year-old. Watch "Black Hawk Down" and see how a real modern war film sould be made.

navy seals
well hmm i was a little skeptical about this movie and was even laughing at it at the beginning but that is just because it is so outdated.. this is an era before everyone had cell phones, and the music is laughable except for a good ted hawkins song. i found the main seals sheen and beihn to not be particularly believable as seals ( they didnt have the builds, and there hair was to pretty boy) however i was impressed with the supporting seals. i liked seeing slider from top gun, and pedro cerrano from major league as beleivable seals, and paxton plays a good sniper. i didnt like the romance with the lebonese reporter and beihn, and couldnt really find out what she did to help the seals. the beirut scene was good with the apc and seal rescue, but i could have done without some of sheens silly antics and overacting by other cast members. the movie is oh so predictable but it is still very entertaining. they do cover a good bit of actual seal techniques from halo's to 12 mile swims to cqb, bu they did not use stealth to the degree that actual seals would. tears of the sun is much better although it is modern so they are not really comparable. watch it though its good enough ... Read more

Amazon.com

Pamela Sue Martin kicked off the goody two shoes from her Nancy Drew image to play the feisty farm girl with Hollywood dreams who walked out of the Biograph on the arm of John Dillinger the night he was killed by the FBI. John Sayles wrote this depression-era gangster drama, loosely based on the real story of Polly Hamilton (renamed Polly Franklin for the film), and stuffs plenty of sex and social commentary around a surprisingly faithful recounting of the real-life event. Martin transforms from naive young thing to brassy hustler without losing her sweetness, and Robert Conrad is quite the gentleman hoodlum as Dillinger, but the unsung hero of the piece is Robert Forster, uncredited but indelible as a hit man who falls for fallen woman Polly. Colorful, action packed, and full of underdog spunk, this is exploitation moviemaking with a populist sensibility. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (2)

A little Titanic, Speed 2, and House on Haunted Hill
(Warning: may contain some spoilers!)This movie is about a group of friends who decide to charter a fishing boat for a day of fishing in the Bermuda Triangle. Then during their trip, the engine breaks down, their instruments go haywire, and they become engulfed in a hazy, yellow fog. Then when the fog subsides, a massive ocean liner, the SS Queen Of Scotts (a cheaply animated, rusty version of the RMS Queen Mary), which disappeared in 1939, appears and the friends find their way aboard to find a radio to get help, to find a machine part for their engine, and one of the men is looking to salvage some gold, jewels, and money from the purser's safe. Then their boat vanishes and they're stuck aboard a rusting old ship, (that looks like the a banquet hall with party stuff and miscellaneous pieces of junk just strewn about, very cheap). The group then tries to find out what happened to the ship, and it is something pretty sinister, though it is not fully explained. Then a ghost boy leads one of the friends away and gives him a heart attack, the evil in the ship drives the greedy, fortune-hunting, friend crazy and he starts trying to kill off the rest of the group so he can take the valubles from the safe. Eventually two of the people kill the insane friend and jump overboard, but the evil in the ship does not want anyone to escape so it drives the ship after them but they are able to get away and give the movie a literally Big, Explosive, ending.

I thought this movie was pretty good, despite its cheesey, tv movie status. It had its small problems, such as plot (which was still good but not too good). And the characters were not that likeable, I don't know if it was their acting or just the character but some of them were just not very interesting.

Overall, though, it was a very good movie, I really enjoyed seeing what the Queen Mary would have looked like if it had been lost in the Bermuda Triangle (at least the exterior). The interior sets looked okay, but were rather cardboardy, as said, and the engine room and bridge were almost as good as new, despite the fact that the ship had been at see for fifty years.

Anyway, the movie was pretty good and I rather enjoyed it, so if you like big ships sinking/exploding, horror, and/or a Bermuda Triangle mystery movie, this one is the one for you.

The Triangle...Fwahahahaha....
The Triangle is a movie with multiple facets... mystery, intrigue, horror...

Follow a group of friends as they make the biggest mistake of their lives, and boy have they ever made mistakes on trips. When they decide to fish in the Bermuda Triangle, something evil has its own ideas. The group comes upon an abandoned ship, lost in the triangle for years, and the evil breaks lose... The group quickly begins to fear even themselves on this ghost ship. Watch as they fall apart, and then watch as two of the originals are rescued... 4 years later...

What better setting for a good mystery than the infamous triangle, and what better prelude to evil than an encounter with a wicked voodoo priestess? You'll watch this again and again! ... Read more

Reviews (47)

One of the all time classic horror movies.
Featuring a rabid St. Benard who turns into a vicious killing machine who traps a wife and child in a broken down car in the middle of nowhere, Cujo takes suspense to a whole new level.

Sure, the first half of the film is pretty paint by numbers stuff that features no horror and gore whasoever, but that was so you can get acquainted with the characters.... Cujo is technically an innocent victim of an evil disease, you can see that King didn't want this to be the typical "evil dog vs. caring owners" storyline... but basically ir comes down to a dog named Cujo getting bitten by a rabid bat. He then goes on a killing spree. Tad Trenton and his mom go to a farm to get their car fixed. Too bad when they get there, the people who were supposed to fix the car get killed by the dog. Then, the car breaks down, and all hell breaks loose.

The problems with the movie are few, but deadlier than the vicious streak of Cujo. The movie is too boring early on, and the ending ... a big one. Plus, the DVD features no extras whatsoever, just improved sound quality and scene selection. The visuals are the same as they were in the 80's, so dont expect anything too great.

This is not a revolutionary film by any means, but Cujo delivers what King wanted it to: a tale of evil vs. good, but with shades of gray. And Cujo just looks too cool to be ignored for long. I reccommend seeing this movie without a doubt. It is one of my favorite horror movies of all time.

blooper
i have watched the movie several times........but have never noticed the blooper when cujo is at the window and the phone is ringing...you can vividly see a hand reach up and pull him out of the window......

A great film that's quite hard to watch.
This film can be quite disturbing and hard to watch. If you do not like seeing very young 5-year old children suffering and crying their eyes out and screaming you may not like this. Ok, so most of the film at the beginning drags a bit, but it introduces you to the characters and it deeps down into their lives. But once Cujo kills his first victim the real scary stuff begins to happen.

The film is about a dog named "Cujo", who gets bitten by a rabid bat while he is chasing a rabbit. We then move to a family: mom (Donna), dad (Vic) and their son (Tad) and we look at their lifestyles and problems. We then go back to Cujo, who is beginning to get very dirty and hiding in many places away from his owner in their farm. Cujo soon transforms into the monster he becomes after the rabid bite and kills the owner. Then, Donna and Tad are driving along the road, when their car suddenly stops in the middle of Cujo's far. No one is in sight, until Cujo suddenly appears. Donna and Tad are forced to stay in the car, so Cujo can't kill them.

Whenever Cujo tries to attack the car it can be quite disturbing and frightening. There are also lots of jumpy moments and un-predictable ones. I would only watch this if you are a hardcore horror movie fan, or a Stephen King fan. But there are some really shocking scenes which could be too much for others.

great King movie
Cujo is one of those great Stephen King movies. The book translates well into film (sure, the ending is different, but while the one ending is right for the book, this ending is right for the film). The acting is superb. The writing is great and believable. The direction and cinematography is great. Dee Wallace is wonderful as is Danny Pintauro (who played Tad), but the true star were the five St. Bernards, the one mechanical head the the guy in the suit that played Cujo. A lot of King's books have trouble making it to film. Cujo isn't one of those.

Simple But Great
Cujo, a st.bernard, gets bitten by a rabid bat and soon starts to manifest the symptoms of rabies. When a mother and her son get trapped inside their car with Cujo nearby ready to kill them as soon as they open the car door. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Navy SEALs are a top antiterrorist unit that goes anywhere (SEa, Air, or Land) to fight for and protect the American Way of Life.When a SEAL team rescues American hostages in the Middle East, they discover the terrorists have a warehouse of deadly Stinger missles.Rather than risking his entire team, Lt. Curran (Michael Biehn) orders his men to leave without destroying the Stingers. But when civilian aircraft start getting shot down--and when one of Curran's men is killed by terrorists--the SEALs make it their personal business to track down and destroy the deadly missles--and the fanatics who want to use them.Made in the Top Gun mold, Navy SEALS features stock characters (including Charlie Sheen's loose cannon) and at times seems like a recruiting film for the SEAL program.But the action sequences are well done (especially the final battle in war-torn Beirut) and the special effects and cinematography are first-rate.There's also a certain gung-ho, testosterone-driven, adrenaline-junky sensibility that seems appropriate to the sort of impossible missions SEALs are asked to do.It's a good time, as long as you don't take it too seriously. --Geof Miller ... Read more

Reviews (38)

Good but not Great
Charlie Sheen was not as passionate in this as he was in Platoon, which by the way, was intense. Biehn was decent, but he could've had better writing. The producer was definitely thinking you throw a couple names together, along with some two-bit typical Hollywood writing, and you'll get a blockbuster. That's not the way it works, and it showed. It was, however, good for action and mild gore. As an Military Officer myself, I can say that the scenes of Navy tactics are midly accurate, albeit modified slightly for TV. The action, as said earlier, is pretty good, especially given the era in which it was produced. The plot was pretty ridiculous, not true to life in any aspect. The idea of a SEALs unit operating indepedent and autonomous of the Navy Chain of Command is downright unheard of and the plot offers no consolation to the hackneyed Hollywood writing. Navy SEALs has the repuation for being a "shoot 'em up" movie, with little to offer in any other department. This is pretty much true. There are good gunfights, lots of explosions, bad guys who hit everything but their targets and consequently die, BADLY, but nothing to stimulate the intellectual modern barbarian. Basically, if you like shoot 'em up movies and don't care about too much of a plot, this is for you. If you want to be stimulated, go buy some sappy chick flick.

The Navy SEALs seem pleased with Michael Biehn¿s performance
I love the movie, but readily admit there are parts that could most definitely use some improvement. It does, however, have lots of action, emotional moments, and even comedic relief throughout; making it fun to watch no matter what mood you're in.

I believe the SEALs deserve the utmost respect and was a bit upset that some parts of the movie, a movie bearing their name, didn't seem to do them justice. Though I don't know how your average Navy SEAL feels about the movie itself; they seem to be very pleased with Michael Biehn's (yay!) portrayal as a Navy SEAL. I read an article (I'm not sure if I'm allowed to cite in a review, an internet search should lead you to it though - fan club) that said the SEALs were excited about the prospect of Mr. Biehn being the narrator for the U.S. Navy UDT/SEAL Museum in Florida's new film. The film (I believe, as I haven't had a chance to visit the museum yet) is running continuously, showing the history and evolution of the United States Navy SEALs. Biehn, honored, narrated it for free. The SEALs seem to feel that Michael Biehn's depictions as a SEAL in "Navy SEALs" and "The Rock" were very accurate and well done. This is further evidenced by the fact that after his part in the museum film was completed, he received a special honor from Rear Admiral E.T. Olsen; he was awarded with a plaque and named Honorary Frogman for Life. This is a real honor since the SEALs say that the Admiral has only done this a few times and rarely gives such glowing compliments to anyone.

So, though the movie has it's faults, and what movie doesn't, it's still a good movie. Give it a try and enjoy if for what it is, a movie. If you're a Michael Biehn fan, it's a must see. Also, though Charlie Sheen's portrayal of a SEAL may not, putting it mildly, be the greatest, don't be too harsh a judge; remember, he's just doing the best he can, which is pretty darn good, with the shoddy part he's given.

misinformed viewers
I have read many reviews that have been compared to the "real" SEALs.I would agree, there are some parts about the film that seem unbelievable. However, if you are going to do enough research into the SEAL teams to "know" this movie is unrealistic, here is an idea for you. Research a navy SEAL team called Red Cell. After reading about it, you will agree that this movie is almost exactly to a tee on how that team operated. Keep that in mind next time you watch the film.

I'm no Charlie Sheen fan, but he deserved better than this
1990 wasn't a good year for Charlie Sheen. As if "Navy Seals" wasn't bad enough, he followed it with "The Rookie", another brainless action flick that both he and director/co-star Clint Eastwood would like to forget. But of the two, I'd have to say that "Navy Seals" is worse. Overflowing with cornball dialogue, stupid action scenes and MTV filler (remember that golf-cart chase set to music?), this movie was made for a twelve-year-old. Watch "Black Hawk Down" and see how a real modern war film sould be made.

navy seals
well hmm i was a little skeptical about this movie and was even laughing at it at the beginning but that is just because it is so outdated.. this is an era before everyone had cell phones, and the music is laughable except for a good ted hawkins song. i found the main seals sheen and beihn to not be particularly believable as seals ( they didnt have the builds, and there hair was to pretty boy) however i was impressed with the supporting seals. i liked seeing slider from top gun, and pedro cerrano from major league as beleivable seals, and paxton plays a good sniper. i didnt like the romance with the lebonese reporter and beihn, and couldnt really find out what she did to help the seals. the beirut scene was good with the apc and seal rescue, but i could have done without some of sheens silly antics and overacting by other cast members. the movie is oh so predictable but it is still very entertaining. they do cover a good bit of actual seal techniques from halo's to 12 mile swims to cqb, bu they did not use stealth to the degree that actual seals would. tears of the sun is much better although it is modern so they are not really comparable. watch it though its good enough ... Read more