Description

Notorious raider of the eighteenth century sea lanes, Captain Vallo, a.k.a. The Crimson Pirate, and his band of buccaneers overtake a Spanish galleon filled with guns and ammunition. When he decides to sell the stolen arsenal to rebel leader El Libre on the island of Cobra, the representative of Spain, Baron Gruda, offers Vallo 50,000 florins if he will deliver El Libre instead. Vallo is soon caught between the Spanish, the rebellion, and even the mutiny of his own men. But having allen in love with El Libre's daughter Consuelo, Vallo gains back his crew's trust and leads the island of Cobra to freedom. ... Read more

Reviews (18)

Pirate comedy at it best!
Fans of Bloom and Deep's Pirates of the Caribbean, should check out pirate camp is done by the old pro Burt Lancaster. This is one riotously funny movie with Burt Lancaster and partner Nick Cravat (they were real partners in a circus act, childhood pals, before breaking into film!) and they get to strut them stuff in this really great film. Lancaster and Cravat play Pirates, in the true tradition, and while tweaking the local authorities nose and robing them blind, they come across Consuelo (Eva Bartok). She is the daughter of a local rebel who they are going to hang and she wants Lancaster to help free him. Tossing
James Hayter's absentminded Professor Prudence and Christopher Lee (an actual sword-fighter!! - watch Saruman in his younger days!!) you get all the perfect mix for slapstick humour at its best.

A long neglected classic and is fun for the whole family.

Burt Lancaster at his acrobatic best.
Burt Lancaster and Nick Cravat teamed up many times in their long careers, but never, I think, as well as in the Crimson Pirate. Both are fine athletes and acrobats and turn the movie into a circus romp of stunts and high jinx. Don't worry much about the plot. From beginning to end Burt, the Crimson Pirate, and his sidekick Ojo, Nick, engage in nonstop action and adventure as they swing from yardarms, dash around town, swim underwater for what seems like hours, and fight continuously all the kings soldiers and all the kings men who fall down like dominoes as Burt and Nick punch and kick them down or overboard. They are kung fu supermen slightly before their time. All in good fun.

The Crimson Pirate is Saturday Afternoon at the Movies at its best. With a bright clear picture and good sound coming from the DVD transfer, all you need is popcorn and a cold drink for an entertaining afternoon with the kids.

WOW!!
I like movies about Pirates and I had taped this movie a couple of years ago when it was shown commercial free on a TV station called PLEX but for some reason I never got around to watching it until last night and I must say that I was very impressed! The Crimson Pirate is now one of my favorite movies about Pirates and the action, fight scenes were amazing and I also loved the love story between Captain Vallo (AKA, The Crimson pirate) and Consuelo. Burt Lancaster and Nick Cravat who were both circus acrobats before getting into the movies were fantastic and the fact that they did all their own stunts was just amazing! I highly recommend this movie and I'm thinking of buying the DVD!

Still a Great Romp!
Watching Burt Lancaster movies in my youth made me a lover of cinema. I can watch "The Crimson Pirate" and "The Flame and the Arrow" over and over. It was interesting to see how many bits and pieces of "The Crimson Pirate" were incorporated in "Pirates of the Caribbean." This is not to take anything away from Bruckheimer and company as their final product was quite enjoyable. The fact that Lancaster and Cravat did their own stunts along with great costumes, scenery and music, this film does stand the test of time.

The term "when it was a game" often applies to baseball in the 1950's, namely the real deal. No steroids, real grass, no special effects. The same can be said of "The Crimson Pirate."

Classic
Simply stated: This is a classic adventure spoof. Wonderful timing both humorously and acrobatically, ... Read more

Reviews (551)

A fun, dark superhero film
No, it's not as good as Tim Burton's Batman, nor the original Superman or the recent Spiderman movies. But Daredevil still is a good comic book film that wins much of my praise by being true to the page in creating a very dark character in a harsh world

Still, it is not without its flaws, and if it weren't for some very unique traits I would rate this film as only mediocre. But what works here works exceptionally well. Beginning with the traditional origin story of Daredevil (Ben Affleck), a blind superhero whose remaining senses are greatly heightened, the movie shows how he became a vengeful vigilante who kills the bad guys rather then turning them in to face a potentially corrupt court system (Daredevil's alter ego Matt Murdock is a lawyer by day). This world is mean, and so is its superhero. But he wrestles with his conscious and wonders if he is a bad guy too. In this comic book world, people die. Including those you don't expect to. In other words, it more accurately depicts real life while still in a superhero world.

One particular unique thing about the film is how it illustrates Daredevil's radar sense. The vibrations he picks up are shown in a fantastic visual effect that has to be one of the best film realizations of a superpower in history. From the origin scene when he goes blind to a wonderful scene with Elecktra in the rain where he first "sees" what she looks like from the drops of rain on her face, the technique is used for characterization and "film moments," and never just to show off a cool special effect.

Unfortunately, the movie isn't perfect. There isn't enough development of Elecktra and Daredevil's relationship, and bad guy Kingpin (Michael Clark Duncan) doesn't have enough screentime to villainify his presence. All the characters could have benefited from further characterization as well. But this is a comic book movie, after all, and in the end what matters most is how much fun it was. And Daredevil is a blast.

Truth Or Dare
Daredevil is yet another comic book hero that takes a crack at movie stardom. Created by Stan Lee and Bill Everett in 1964, for Marvel Comics, the film adaptation ends up as a mixed effort at best.

At the age of 12, young Matt Murdock (Scott Terra) is left blinded by dangerous chemicals, while running away from a the scene of a crime, in Hell's Kitchen New York. Soon after, he realizes that the same chemicals that took his sight, have somehow enhanced his remaining senses and made him superhuman. As Matt grows up. he vows to use his powers to fight crime and bring order to Hell's Kitchen...Now an adult Matt (Ben Affleck) is a defense lawyer by day and the masked Daredevil by night...Our hero is being hunted by a ruthless assassin named Bullseye (Colin Farrell), who was hired by the Kingpin of Crime (Michael Clarke Duncan) to take him out. Things get even worse for Matt as the woman he loves, Elektra Natchios (Jennifer Garner), blames his alter ego for a devasting loss.

Written and directed by Mark Steven Johnson, the film serves the character's origins pretty well, in other words, it stays true to the original comic book.. The film boasts some cool action sequences and solid effects. I especially liked the way in which Daredevil used his power and how that was shown on screen. Since many of the stunts in the movie were staged by the team that handled the Matrix. I was never bored or put off by what I saw there. As usual actors Jon Favreau, playing Matt's pal Frank Nelson, and Joe Pantoliano, as New York Post reporter Ben Urich provide the film some comic relief. Cameo watchers will notice creator Stan Lee and a famous comic book fan turned film director in the film as well.

While the film does have its good points, I found the casting of the film troublesome, and in the end, that's why I only rate this film 2 and a half to three stars. When it comes right down to it, in order for a super hero film to work, it has to be well cast. Without a solid cast to breathe life into the characters, the best special effects can't do it alone. Take the villians. Colin Farrell (can you say over exposed), Hollywood's latest rebel, with his raspy portrayal of Bullseye, come sacross as having a bad case of laryngitis, instead of posing any threat. I also thought the nature of the Kingpin character was lost because other than the film's finale-MCD really had little to do in the film-even though sequels are a certainty, the role was all too brief. Therefore I felt any bald actor could have played the role.As for Affleck, he was just kind of just there, like so many of his roles, he seems to be on cruise control. He did Ok I guess. But at the same time he didn't WOW me either. As good as Garner may be at kicking butt, I didn't think she
shared a lot of chemestry, with Affleck and she seemed to over play it at times in the film. My final gripe with Daredevil is its running time. At just above 90 minutes, the film felt rushed for a comic book flick Fans of the character will see the film anyway. All others might want to skip it and wait for it to come out on video or DVD

Daredevil rocks with or without the mask
Affleck has never been my favorite actor but his Matt Murdock made this movie for me. I can relate to his desire to see justice done and to stand up for the little guy. I loved it that he only defends clients that he believes are innocent even if they can't pay him. I also liked the fact that he grappled with his own morality and battled to keep his desire for revenge from getting in the way of his desire for justice. The Kingpin is Daredevil's enemy and like Daredevil he comes from a violent past. It's Daredevil's struggle to remain on the side of justice that makes him different from the Kingpin. They are as different as they are the same. Will there be a Daredevil sequel? Daredevil was a money maker and the plan all along was to get Elektra off the ground next and that's what's still being planned. We'll have to stay tuned to see exactly what's next for Daredevil at the movies. Meanwhile we have the Daredevil DVD. It's too bad so many people insist on wanting Daredevil to be another Spiderman but I like Daredevil for he is. With or without the mask Matt Murdock is a guy with his heart in the right place who struggles with his demons and tries to do what's right.
I like that.

A FEW MISTAKES, BUT OVER ALL PRETTY GOOD
First of all I would like to say that I am a big Marvel comics fan, and I happen to think that Ben Affleck is a good actor. Now with that said....

Lets get the mistakes out of the way first.

1.There was not enough time spent with the Kingpin, we should have gotten his back story as well. [he was white in the comics, but Mr. Duncan did a good job.

2.some moments wee very cheesy. [see foryourself]

3.And finally.....that's it.

The film was actually better then I thought it would be, I mean after the Hulk came out I thought Marvel was slippin. I now see that I should have seen this in theatures. I can just imagine what it would have looked and sounded like on the big screen.
The effecs in this film were off the hook as well, as well as the camera angles courtesy off Ericson Bore. As far as dialouge goes that could have been a little better at times but over all good, that would be credited to mark steven johnson. I also liked the fact that one of my favorite filmmakers shows up, Kevin Smith. That right there alone makes me want to buy it, oh wait I already did. Casting was on point with this on, putting Ben Affleck as Daredevil was like putting Tobey as peter parker it's a perfect match. And Michael Duncan did a good job as The Kingpin Wilson Fisk. I think the addition of Colin Ferrell as Bullseye was key, he did an excellent job. And Jennifer Garrner did an ok job as Elektra, could have been a little better. Over all I feel that this was a pretty good film, u should check it out.

the man without fear
lets get its flaws out of the way first.its not necessary to show a small boy being blinded,screaming in agony at the hospital and the like.what is it with movie makers and graphic portrayels of kids suffering?damn!would you all stop it already.the whole daredevil comic was also summed up in one movie.it has been out a long time.some of daredevils stunts all over the rooftops were hardly belivable,especialy for a blind man.and lastly,that the kingpin is a gigantic,fat white guy not a pretty big,thick,black man.are we color blind?does it just not matter what a guys color is?i bet you a lot of people would get mad if a movie got made about oprah with rosanne playing her or one about martin king with danny devto cast as the doc.now the cat woman is black too.this is stupid.can eveyone just stay the right color please?in this one a kid gets blinded .his other senses get bettter,but his take off to super extraordinary levels.he becomes the daredevil.lawyer by day,masked vigilante by night.well,the kingpin whos now a homeboy crimeboss.since were on the subject,crimeBOSSES,are almost always white.the thugs are black.check your statistics!but,anyway the kingpin is getting pod that his men keep getting wasted.yes,they are white.so,he gets this crazy irish guy called bulleseye to kill him.bulleseye has a few powers of his own.1-anything whatsoever he picks up,he can use lethaly.2-he never misses-except in this movie when hes fighting the daredevil,3-his bones are laced like wolverines with admantium.im betting they didnt use that in the movie either.ben affleck plays daredevil.it is the best ben affleck movie ever! i like jay and silent bob strikes back better.but he was in that for only a few minutes and whined like a littlke girl the whole time.youre the parent you make the call with this one.i couldnt really say.it is one of the better comic book films lately.if you liked them,youll like this one too.elektra is a long time rival of daredevils in the comic book but here shes his girlfriend and she is HOT!!!!!!!!!too bad she never goes full frontal.hype says its not that good.the real deal is its better than the average comic flick.the action is awesome.there is a fight between dd and everyone i named.will there be a sequel?if you watched the credits,and lets be honest,nobody does,you ll see bullseye all muffed up in a hospital bed.now this did happen...........wait a minute!no it didnt!daredevil had a building fall on him from bulleseye.nevermind!its a good movie.the creators just had a hard time seeing to make it with thier heads so far up thuer asses.maybe thats why its about a blind guy. ... Read more

Amazon.com

If you're expecting bandaged-wrapped corpses and a lurching Boris Karloff-type villain, then you've come to the wrong movie. But if outrageous effects, a hunky hero, and some hearty laughs are what you're looking for, the 1999 version of The Mummy is spectacularly good fun.Yes, the critics called it "hokey," "cheesy," and "pallid." Well, the critics are unjust. Granted, the plot tends to stray, the acting is a bit of a stretch, and the characters occasionally slip into cliché, but who cares? When that action gets going, hold tight--those two hours just fly by.

The premise of the movie isn't that far off from the original. Egyptologist and general mess Evelyn (Rachel Weisz) discovers a map to the lost city of Hamunaptra, and so she hires rogue Rick O'Connell (Brendan Fraser) to lead her there. Once there, Evelyn accidentally unlocks the tomb of Imhotep (Arnold Vosloo), a man who had been buried alive a couple of millennia ago with flesh-eating bugs as punishment for sleeping with the pharaoh's girlfriend. The ancient mummy is revived, and he is determined to bring his old love back to life, which of course means much mayhem (including the unleashing of the 10 plagues) and human sacrifice. Despite the rather gory premise, this movie is fairly tame in terms of violence; most of the magic and surprise come from the special effects, which are glorious to watch, although Imhotep, before being fully reconstituted, is, as one explorer puts it, rather "juicy." Keep in mind this film is as much comedy as it is adventure--those looking for a straightforward horror pic will be disappointed. But for those who want good old-fashioned eye-candy kind of fun, The Mummy ranks as one of choicest flicks of 1999. --Jenny Brown ... Read more

Reviews (749)

The Greatest Mummy Film, a True Classic ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
Director/Screenwriter Stephen Sommers delivers this new take on the mummy legend. His mix of humor and horror is terrific! The casting was very, very worthy, and the plot was downright exciting! This film begins with a prolouge in ancient Egypt, where the priest Imhotep and the Pharoah's mistress Anck-Su-Namun murder pharoah Seti the 1st. He is condemed to be buried alive with flesh eating scarab beetles, and an eternity as one of the undead. Flash forwrd to 1926, were librarian Evelyn (Rachel Wiesz) and her brother Jonathan (John Hannah) recruit legionarre Rick O'Connell (Brendan Fraser) to lead them to the ancient city of Hamunaptra. In route they meet up with a group of American cowboys out to plunder the same site. The general bickering ends when they accidentally revive Imhotep's corpse, who needs the flesh of his desecrators in order to regenerate! More over, he unleashes the biblical ten plauges of Egypt. Before you can scream "Mummy!", Rick and everyone else are fighting for their lives and trying to save the world! Harrowing thrills and spectacular visual effects by Industrial Light and Magic, make "The Mummy", one of the most draw droppingly spectacular films of the year. Right up there with "The Matrix" and the highly over rated "Star Wars: Episode One: The Phantom Menace". See this film, you won't regrete it!

Mummy Dearest
This 1999 blockbuster harks back to the old 40's and 50's Saturday morning matinee serials. It also, and not too discretely, does the Indiana Jones thing too. The movie is totally cartoonish. Is that bad?. Of course not. The movie was meant to be a fun, entertaining ride, and it's just that. Brendan Fraser stars as our hero who is propositioned by Egyptologist Evelyn(played by the lovely Rachel Weisz), to guide her to the lost city of Hamunaptra. The City Of The Dead. It sounds charming. Once they start digging there, they find the mummified corpse of Imhotep. He was a man who was buried alive millions of years ago because he was sleeping with the pharaoh's daughter. Even back then men didn't know better. Anywho, he is revived by a spell Evelyn accidentally reads and all hell breaks loose. He plans on resurrecting his love, which includes a lot of gore and violence. He sucks the life out of the people who were there at the dig in order to be regenerated. Oh boy, there's always a catch!. The action scenes are fun and campy. There is a nice, quirky touch of humor throughout the film that is quite funny. The effects and make-up are all good. The cast is pretty solid, if not a tad mediocre. The sets are truly wonderful and are filmed wonderfully by director Stephen Sommers. It's a highly enjoyable and entertaining 'popcorn' flick that is only to be as such. The fun was sort of lost on the overstuffed sequel. Still, this is a entertaining movie.

This is a Indiana Jones of it's time!!
This movie is an Indiana Jones of it's time. It has romance, action, horror, and some drama to it in the beginning. It all starts with a sort of affair between Imhotep and the pharhoa's mistress Anck Su Namun. The pharohoa comes in on the while they make out. So, Imhotep hides. Then, Anck Su Namun and Imhotep kill the pharoh. The rest you much watch it's all very interesting and exciting. With the mummy sucking the fluids out of people and man eating bugs that devour people in second's, it all adds up to be very, on the edge of your seat type of movie. But, that's what make's it great and it's why it get's 5 golden star's!!

The Story of Imhotep and Anck Su Namun overshadows all!!!
The Mummy is a WONDERFUL movie, set during the interwar period in Egypt, dealing with the adventures of an unlikely group that has banded together for a variety of reasons in exploring the lost City of the Dead-Hamunaptra.
The acting is very good, the costumes are extraordinary, and the plot is GREAT! The Mummy successfully combines adventure, horror, humour and romance, but what really steals the show is the "villains" who had me rooting for them throughout the whole movie.
There is a very strong element of archaeology and mythology; what with the lost City of the Dead, the Gold Book of Life and the Black book of death, the gods Anubis and Horus etc.
Deserts, Pyramids, Heroes, and Villains are all about...
Strongly recommended to those who are fascinated with archaeology and history, especially those with a keen interest in Ancient Egypt. It is a definite "must see" together with the sequel The Mummy Returns, as well as the Scorpion King and Stargate, which also fall into the same category of movies, theme-wise.

A Nice Remake.
The Mummy is full of action and adventure as well as good acting. Usually I find when films are shot in the desert the plot gets old and boring (ex. Hidalgo) but not this film. This has a little Indiana Jones and a little bit of Alien mixed in. It is a really good popcorn movie. One thing I have to say is that I think they could've got a better actor for the lead role instead of Brenden Frazier. The british girl played a good role. The special effects were awesome and the story really grabs you. See this or rent it. I highly reccomend it. ... Read more

Reviews (20)

"On your word as a fraud and a fake?"
What a great movie! Lesser known than many other great swashbucklers, "Scaramouche" is nonetheless a top-notch production in every way.

Stewart Granger stars as the quick-witted Andre Moreau, a charming drifter who after the murder of his best friend dedicates his life to the destruction of the murderer, the cold-blooded Marquis de Maynes (Mel Ferrer). Along the way he fights many duels, romances sweet Janet Leigh AND fiery Eleanor Parker, and has several close shaves.

"Scaramouche" features a solid script, beautiful sets, lush costumes and gorgeous cinematography. The cast is excellent, with Mel Ferrer in particular giving shading and nuance to the role of the villain. The last 20 minutes of the film feature a long, spectacular sword fight that is a must-see for fans of the genre. I highly recommend "Scaramouche" to any film buff and especially to those who love adventure films.
GRADE: A

(As a side note, I have also read the novel on which this movie is based, and I found it very entertaining. The movie differs from the book in several key areas, so if you have yet to read the novel, don't worry, the movie won't spoil it for you.)

Crème de la crème of swashbucklers
This lavish and witty adventure was based (very loosely) on the once-popular novel by Rafael Sabatini. It had been filmed before as a silent, much more faithful to the original. This Technicolor "talkie" takes liberties -- and has a lot more fun, despite its themes of revenge and hopeless love. There's even a Napoleonic sight gag in the final shot. The cast is ideal: Stewart Granger is rugged yet suave as the cynical hero and Mel Ferrer is appropriately icy as his aristocratic nemesis. (Ferrer is dressed in whites and silvers, Granger in warm colors.) Granger is loved by both Janet Leigh and Eleanor Parker, the former a sweet Bourbon, the latter a sexy coquette. To complicate matters, Miss Leigh is adored by both Granger and Ferrer. (One contemporary critic sighed: "It's quite a plot!") The third female is Nina Foch, the most elegant Marie Antoinette you'll ever see. Unfortunately, her role was partially cut in the final editing. The picture moves on several levels. At !the beginning, Granger's character André Moreau ("Born with a gift of laughter and a sense that the world was mad", to quote Sabatini's famous first sentence) is a careless man who knows nothing about politics and cannot use a sword. In seeking vengeance for his friend's death, however, he joins the forces of liberté, égalité, fraternité; and, studying with masters, he becomes the most dangerous swordsman in France. Hiding from the authorities, he takes up with a seedy group of traveling players and, under his influence, it becomes a brilliant commedia dell'arte success (hence the title).The climatic duel takes place in a glittering Parisian theatre, the antagonists moving from the boxes, down a broad staircase, through the crowded auditorium, and onto the stage itself. All this to a dashing Victor Young score. One viewer has called "Scaramouche" a no-music musical. Actually, M~G~M originally meant this remake to be a musical starring Gene Kelly. The director George Sidney alternated between musicals and "straight" films. It isn't flawless: One of Ferrer's victims gets the fatal thrust twice in the opening sequence, once in long shot, then in close up. And don't dwell too long on the "surprise" ending (a variation of Sabatini's) or you may wonder why the marquis has to be introduced to the queen's protégée at the beginning. He would have known her or at least her name for years.

Forget the swordplay--LOOK at it!
Scaramouche has possibly the most beautiful Technicolor cinematography of any MGM film. It's just gorgeous! The film, of course, is a delight in the great Errol Flynn tradition, but with Janet Leigh and Eleanor Parker, it's primarily a feast for the eyes. Incidentally, this is the only film I know of that gives an accurate representation of commedia dell'arte, and the theatrical scenes are a delight.

Best Swordfights in movies ever!!!
One of the few instances where the movie is far better than the book which inspired it, this version of 'Scaramouche' has some of the most fantastic sword fights ever put on film.
A favorite of my childhood, it is still in my 'top ten' list of adventure movies; Hyperkinetic, humorous, it never gets dull.
Stewart Granger never has been better, even as in other favorites of mine as 'Prisoner of Zenda' or 'North to Alaska'. Mel Ferrer is the suavest villain you can get, Eleanor Parker never has been so attractive, and Janet Leigh is a vision of Heaven.
Why the current adventure movies are not so enjoyable anymore?

Scaramouche
Loved every moment of this film. Glorious story and plot based (with artistic license) on the Rafael Sabatini novel of the same name. Victor Young's music provides an excellent accompaniment to the film's action and romantic scenes. A minor criticism, I only wish the DVD was offered in a "letterbox" (wide screen) format. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Dismissed in 1968 as a plodding rip-off of The Dirty Dozen--without that 1967 film's sardonic, antiestablishment satire--The Devil's Brigade now plays like a nostalgic last gasp of the sentimental World War II action genre. Celebrating the 1st Special Service Force (a commando-like unit formed to fight in Norway but ultimately deployed in Italy), this typically broad Andrew V. McLaglen production recounts the teaming of some miscreant GIs with "the handpicked best of the best-trained army in the world"--the Canadians--under a U.S. officer (William Holden) who had never commanded men in combat. The first hour, heavy on machismo and low comedy, depicts the unit's training at an abandoned base in Montana, with nonstop international rivalry until Yanks and Canadians bond in a lusty saloon brawl. After that, the Germans are easy meat. Holden is solid, as usual, and so is the widescreen work of veteran cameraman William H. Clothier, impeccably rendered on the DVD. --Richard T. Jameson ... Read more

Reviews (24)

One of the Elite units of WWII
This film is about one of the elite units of WWII, a unit that is part of the lineage of modern day Special Operations. The film does a very good job of depicting the main points of the birth of this unit and some of the trials and tribulations that it had to go through. The film is historically accurate in the depiction of the undesireable soldiers that the United States contributed to the unit and the better trained Canadians. This film does an excellent job of showing how Special Operations units are unappreciated by the main stream military brass. Having served in the United States Army Special Forces for 5 years, I know how hard it can be to depict special operations capabilities in such a short movie. Again, this film hits the high points and is entertaining. It is a must see for any war movie buff and especially any student of special operations history.

Not a Dirty Dozen ripoff!
The Devil's Brigade is a WWII story about the formation of a Special Forces unit meant to help the war effort in Europe. A ragtag bunch of Americans and a crack unit of Canadian troops are brought together to train to form this unit. Excellent cast with William Holden, Cliff Robertson, Vince Edwards, Dana Andrews, Carroll O'Connor, Richard Jaeckel, Claude Akins, Jeremy Slate, Andrew Prine, Luke Askew, and Richard Dawson in a pre-Family Fued role.

Critics said The Devil's Brigade is a ripoff of The Dirty Dozen, but it really isn't. While the storylines are similar, the overall idea of the movie is much different with the The Devil's Brigade dealing with a true story. This movie is a great guy film with excellent performances by much of the cast. There are some funny scenes as the Yanks and the Canucks get used to each other before the mandatory bonding scene during a barroom fight with a group of lumberjacks.

The DVD presentation is good with the widescreen presentation and the theatrical trailer. As another reviewer pointed out, the trailer contains Richard Jaeckel screaming as he falls from the cliff, something not in the movie. Excellent World War II adventure story with great cast and good action scenes. Don't miss it!

A Brigade of Character Actors
A movie noteworthy mostly because of the supporting cast of character actors. Most notable are Richard Jaeckel (THE DIRTY DOZEN), Claude Akins (RIO BRAVO, tv's SHERIFF LOBO), Luke Askew, Andrew Prine (tv's V-THE MINISERIES/THE FINAL BATTLE), and even Richard Dawson (tv's HOGAN'S HEROES, FAMILY FEUD). Otherwise this is a basic WWII action flick with some big name stars (William Holden, Cliff Robertson, Carrol O'Conner, Micheal Rennie, Vince Edwards). An Allied special forces commando unit is hastily created to enter the early days of WWII to keep the Germans occupied until the actual American forces can send troops. This commando unit consists of misfit American GI's and elite Canadian soldiers. Part of the movie is a cliched plot where the ragtag Americans must get along with the posh Canadians. At first the two groups hate each other until fisticuffs at a local bar againts lumberjacks unites the two groups. Then, when this happens they become a fine tuned fighting unit. Pretty predictable stuff, but entertaining nonetheless with some great war action sequences and cliched characters. Standout performances by Richard Jaeckel as Pvt. Omar Greco (supposedly an acrobatic circus performer), and Claude Akins as Rockman.

History vs Hollywood
The 1st Special Service Force really existed and accomplished far more than this film would indicate. Any critic who whines about "improbable events" is a gabbing ignoramus...

Having said that... Most veterans of the Force do not like the film. The idiots with checkbooks would only back the film if it was "rousing" (read Hollywood treatment) rather than lovingly accurate.

The chief technical advisor was Lt. General Frederic (ret) himself... so the producers and director certainly had the facts to hand. Many of those facts and much of the history never made it onto the screen.

What don't the Forcemen like? Well, the Americans certainly had more than their share of guardhouse sweepings and tough characters sent their way by other commands (though those who could not learn to accept discipline and bond with others were rapidly washed out...) and excellent Canadians... but the "border warfare" premise is essentially false.

U.S. uniforms for all but the Americans got higher pay... (different pay days for each group, so always borrowing from each other) When the drek was chased off both nationalities settled in quite well with each other.

Kiska was almost bloodless (Canadian and American troops did accidentally shoot each other when the Japanese proved to have pulled out... but not the Force... their fire discipline was superb...) One part of the Force was prepared to make a parachute drop into action... The Force had the "friction" of battle without the losses... This honed them to a fine edge... and the film ignored the whole episode.

Their jump training was almost ignored (except for jump boots and jump wings shown on the screen) along with their demolition and amphibious training. Their loving relationship with Helena and its people was reduced in the film to a night of whoring, boozing and brawling.

In short, many vets of the Force did not recognize themselves in the film. Relatively few people knew about the Force, and those seeing the film would either think it total fiction or else have a skewed view of what Winston Churchill called "The finest fighting force of its size ever fielded by North America..."

When viewed as a movie, rather than as history... Well the cast is pretty good. Many cameos (not "bit parts") by fading stars such as Grechen Wyler and Dana Andrews... give it a certain class.

William Holden would have been perfect in the part... a dozen years earlier when he was doing Bridge on the River Kwai... Frederic was almost a "boy general" by the time he left the Force... Holden was a bit long in the tooth and tired... On the positive side, he conveys authority and was quite happy to get his hands dirty making the film.

Cliff Robertson is fine as Major Crown and most of the rest of the cast is good. Claude Akins is fine in his role as Rocky... but for all of his size, strength and toughness... his character is a waste... he gets captured on the earlier raid and rather than do what all good soldiers must in an assault... keep moving... he bounces around a critically wounded soldier, kills his prisoner and is absent from where he is needed. His love of Peacock is believable, but is mawkishly displayed on the screen.

So having said all of the above, why would *I* give the film a (qualified) rating of 4 stars (an unqualified five would go to Lawrence of Arabia...)? In part because of the subject matter... However much the Hollywood treatment and however mucked up the history... the Force was one of the most remarkable units ever fielded.

The director (Andrew V.) had some fine films to his credit, but too many of the other kind... to the point where some would call him a "hack director..." But it is obvious in The Devil's Brigade that he had a fondness for the unit and the men who served in it. The cliches and overly broad humor can't hide this.

Most of the cast (and assigned soldiers) give the impression that when the cameras stop rolling that they really felt like part of a team doing something special (even if a few of them refused to follow Holden into the pyrotechnic strewn fields...)

While the film could have been better... to truly tell the story of the First Special Service Force... a multi-part effort such as Band of Brothers would be required to do the subject (and the surviving Forcemen) justice...

I have served with Canadians in two wars... While there are some very real differences, at the "sharp end" the teamwork is outstanding... Never more true than with the 1st Special Service Force...

Great war picture!!!!......Great DVD
The title says it all. The Devil's Brigade is a great war to watch. The movie is based on a true story in WWII, where a unit of American soldiers and a crack unit of Canadian troops formed the 1st Special Service Force a.k.a. the first special forces group. This movie has great acting, great cinematography, great battle scenes, and great actors, like William Holden, Cliff Robertson, Vince Edwards, Richard Jaeckel, Claude Atkins, Andrew Prine, Richard Dawson, Robert Watson, and in some bit parts, Dana Andrews, Carrol O'Conner, and Michael Rennie. If you want to see a great war movie, give Devil's Brigade a try. I recemend it to WWII movie fans. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The success of Under Siege made a sequel mandatory according to Hollywood's rules of maximum revenue, and as sequels go, this one's not half bad. Steven Seagal returns as former Navy SEAL and skilled chef Casey Ryback, who's trying to spend quality time with his niece on a cross-country train trip. But as luck and action-movie formulas would have it, the train has been hijacked by a demented genius (Eric Bogosian) who is using the train as a moving platform to seize computerized control of a top-secret U.S. satellite that is capable of causing earthquakes from space. Seagal has to stop the train or the villain (whichever comes first), and the action is fast and furious on its way to a high-speed climax. He's not as wacky as Tommy Lee Jones in the first Under Siege, but Bogosian has got a delirious quality that serves the comic-book plot, and action fans get more than their fill of dazzling stunts and special effects. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (44)

A spectacular sequel to an action classic!
And this is a rare thing . . . a sequel that's just as superb as the original. Steven Segal is the cook again, and he boards the Grand Continental luxury express train with his niece. But trouble brews . . . a group of terrorists led by a disgruntled ex-CIA operative hijack the train to take control of a covert space satellite weapons platform, holding the passengers hostage and blackmailing the Pentagon and others into paying a huge ransom. And, of course, ex-Navy SEAL Casey Ryback(SEGAL) goes into action to stop the terrorists from causing a nuclear attack on the Pentagon with the space weapon. OK, the plot is mind candy, but this movie delivers some stunning action scenes and speeds along with a great sense of urgency as it thrills! The DVD enhances the enjoyment big style as the action comes across as more explosive, the sound effects will rock your living room! The cinematography is also nice to look at - great scenery and train footage for any railroad buffs(like me) watching. Also, if one looks at the film's climax, one could say it was inspired by a brilliant 1976 movie called THE CASSANDRA CROSSING, which I would also strongly recommend. But as far as UNDER SIEGE 2 goes, nobody beats Steven Segal in the kitchen!

I've seen it, now give it a rest!
I've always put off watching Steven Seagal movies, due to the fact that they've never really appealed to me. But after a lot of persuasion (arm being twisted up behind your back, you know, the usual), and being told to wait outside until the menus etc had passed, the start credits of the movie was met with a big "oh no!"

It doesn't really make that much sense to watch a sequel, when you haven't seen the original, so lets not go there.

The first thing I thought about this movie was that it had similarities to True Lies. In True Lies, it was Arnie-baby trying to rescue his daughter (Eliza Dushku) from the hands of an evil tyrant. In Under Seige 2, it's Steven Seagal trying to rescue his niece (Katharine Heigl). But apparently, it's just a coincidence that these two films are similar.

Eric Bogosian didn't really come across as your typical bad guy, which I thought was quite good. He looks like a wimp, one of those guys who sits staring at his computer, day in, day out. And the mop-top of curly hair just added to the whole effect.

Steven Seagal doesn't seem your typical action hero either. He doesn't seem to have the muscles that Arnie flexes constantly, nor does he have the drop dead gorgeous looks. (I'm not saying that Arnie's drop dead gorgeous, I'm just - oh never mind) Maybe he would appeal to me more if he cut off that silly ponytail (give me a pair of scissors, I'll do it gladly) and toned up a bit. And he's so deadpan! Imagine someone Botoxed up to the eyeballs, and you'll have Steven Seagal. He shows no emotion either in any of his scenes, and manages to break guys necks left, right and centre quite convincingly. In that way, he's good as the good guy. He gets rid of the bad guys, each time in a different way - although he does break three guys necks. He does set a couple of people on fire.

What I also noticed is that at the end, like True Lies, when the girl originally hated her dad/uncle, she's now all over him like a rash.

It's a shame that Peter Greene - aptly named "Mercenary #1" - has to die in this movie (one of the three who gets their neck broken). He always seems to play the bad guy, and whereas he is quite nice looking, it must be his looks that make him bad guy material.

Overall, it was an OK film, if not a little long between action scenes. Thankfully, none of it follows on from the first, so it's not like you're watching a sequel that you have to have seen the first, to understand the second. But unlike some people, I won't be going all out, and buying the Steven Seagal doll (sorry, it's NOT an action figure). When a film get released, it can sometimes have "action figures" to accompany the movie. So why was there never one to accompany The Matrix? I want to play with Keanu :) Shame it's all plastic, au naturel is so much better.

Enjoyable Obligatory Sequel
If Under Siege (US) is Die Hard on a boat, than Under Siege 2 (US2) is Die Hard on a big fancy train. US2 could also be accurately titled Under Siege Lite. A perfunctatory, though blessedly unpretentious, cashing on the success of its predecessor. The cast isn't nearly as star studded this time around and the whole production seems a bit flat. Siegal is even more blank-faced as usual as he methodically wittles away at the horde of bad guys. Siegal utilizes every possible way to kill a person in close quarters combat and then there's the inevitable explosion and the movie ends just like that.

NOT AS GOOD AS UNDER SIEGE 1, BUT...
THIS TIME, A TRAIN IS HIJACKED AND IT'S UP TO CASEY [STEVEN SEAGAL] TO SAVE THE HOSTAGES. WHILE NOT AS GOOD AS ITS PREDECESSOR, IT STILL DELIVERS NONSTOP EXCITEMENT. IT'S JUST TOO BAD THAT THIS MOVIE DOSEN'T HAVE A VILLAIN LIKE TOMMY LEE JONES. BUT STILL, THAT DOESN'T STOP THIS MOVIE FROM BEING A THRILL RIDE. AGAIN, SEAGAL FANS SHOULD BE THRILLED BY THIS MOVIE.

Entertaining
There are action movies (Schwartzenneger) and then there are Steven Seagal movies. Seagal's movies are nothing fancy. They aren't really there to make you think (although Seagal occasionally explores some right on themes like the problems facing Native Americans and the environment)in a way he's a modern day Billy Jack you might say. But one thing you can always count on with a Steven Seagal movie is even when its bad its kind of good. Generally he has great actors in his films and this one isn't an exception to that rule (i.e. Morris Chestnut, Eric Bogosian) and he always throws in some very likeable characters. And then of course there is his martial arts skills which are pretty top notch considering. This is the sequel to the very successful and superior Under Siege. But this film ain't half bad. I love the train setting. And the shootouts are pretty tight. The only really weak link to this film is the complete implausibility of the plotline. Even for most action films this one is way out there in terms of something that could possibly happen in real life. Watch the film if you're a die hard action film fan. Don't watch it if you're looking for high action art like say Terminator, Robocop, True Lies or anything remotely like that. As I said before there are Schwartzenneger films and there are Steven Seagal movies. ... Read more

Amazon.com

This action-comedy from 1990 makes the critical mistake of trying to mix a potentially suspenseful plot with the kind of humor that Mel Gibson can only get away with in his Lethal Weapon movies. It doesn't work here because the movie's supposed to be a Hitchcockian thriller and Mel's wisecracking--not to mention some implausible plot twists and ridiculous chase scenes--makes it impossible to take any of this movie seriously. It works best as a lightweight vehicle for Gibson and Goldie Hawn, who bring their own established appeal to their roles as old lovers who are reunited under unexpectedly dangerous circumstances. After testifying against some drug-running killers, Mel's been safe under the protection of the FBI's witness relocation program, and Goldie coincidentally enters his life again just as the bad guys are hot on Mel's trail. They join up and go on the run from the villains and ... well, let's just say director John Badham doesn't have any big surprises up his sleeve. Goldie and Mel are enjoyable, as always, but you'd have to be their biggest fan to watch this movie more than once. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (17)

Bird On A Wire Review
I think that Bird on A Wire was a brilliant movie because the Writers and Producers brought 2 wonderful actors together to make the stunning movie it is. With the comedy of Goldie Honking the BMW Horn and driving crazy to the suspense of the story of her old boyfriend Rick(Mel Gibson) who was supposed to have gotten killed years and years before.
This movie is one of my family's favorites and they have rented it and watched it more than 8 times! I think that Bird on A Wire is very good Classic and even though it was made in 1990 it is still a huge hit for the young and old.
In fact if you can I would say first before buying it you should rent it at your local movie renting store and watching it before buying it so you can see just how funny, suspenseful and Story-packed this movie is.
I rate this movie FIVE STARS because of this great combination to make this movie the most undescribable and fun movie in years that I have seen as a 'Classic'.

A GREAT COMIC PAIRING!
Superstars Mel Gibson and the loveable Goldie Hawn star in this enjoyable, action-comedy. The plot is somewhat convoluted but the general story is that Rick (Gibson) is hiding under the FBI witness re-location program but he gets nervous when an old flame, Marianne (Hawn) recognises him. Before he can assume a new identity, the man he put in jail (David Carradine) is released and comes to pay his respects. Rick and Marianne find themselves reunited when they are thrown into a cross country, action packed adventure, avoiding gangsters, police and an amorous veterinarian, played by Joan Severance. There is nothing short of great chemistry between the two leading players, even if there roles are quite typical of roles they have both played in other films. Never the less this film holds many laughs and good points and the unforgetable climax in an elaborate zoo exhibit is where the film really scores best.

Mel and Goldie are sexy, but they are wasted in this film
At some point my wife and I had the conversation where you talk about who is sexiest person in movies. She named Mel Gibson and I named Goldie Hawn. After she did the expected double take, I pointed out that Mel and Goldie had done a movie together, "Bird on a Wire," that neither one of us liked. This 1990 film clearly wanted to be a Hitchcock film, but with a broader sense of humor that the master of suspense ever evidenced in any of his masterpieces. Director John Badham clearly settled on a particular voice in this film, and it was just the wrong one.

Gibson is Rick Jarmin, who is in the Federal Witness Protection program because he testified against some government narcs 15 years earlier and they are still looking for him. Now he is working in a gas station in Detroit. Hawn is Marianne Graves, a New York lawyer, who drives into the gas station and recognizes him. He does it, but she knows better, and when she returns to confront him she arrives just in time to save him from being killed by a couple of thugs. It turns out that 15 years ago they were dating each other and then he suddenly disappeared. In "North By Northwest" Cary Grant's life is detoured because he calls out to a boy with a message; in "Bird on a Wire" the we get hammered with two giant coincidences, one on top of another. So much for the subtlety of the master.

Besides, "Bird on a Wire" now turns into something of a slapstick comedy, full of stunts not to try at home. I know the obvious comparison at this point is to Mel Gibson's "Lethal Weapon" films, but there are more similarities to Hawn's "Foul Play." David Carradine is the bad guy who is gunning for Mel and Goldie, since she insists on tagging along. I am not sure why Hawn's character is a lawyer because you keep waiting for it to really matter in this film and it never happens. I would not mind Goldie slipping into her patented bimbo in distress role if they had not made a point of her being a lawyer in the first place. But then the opening sequences of "Bird on a Wire" are completely at odds with the rest of the film. Goldie Hawn is still at the top of my list, but despite this movie, not because of it.

It is a watchable movie
When this was out critics bashed this movie had very few nice things to say about Bird on a wire. The truth is the critics are wrong Bird on a wire is full of action and funny too. I like it how they paired up Mel Gibson and Goldie Hawn for this movie Mel Gibson acts exactly like he does in Lethal Weapon. I never get what the critics are talking about the movie is funny and never is there a dull moment and the stunts are funny. It is sure worth buying or at least renting.

Mel going after Jack Burtons Wife.
I enjoyed this movie a lot more than the critics. Maybe because I love goldie and mel, both of whom have been known to sign autographs for fans. ... Read more

Amazon.com

The director of Dead or Alive, Takashi Miike, made his name on the international scene with Audition, a chilling psychological thriller that builds from a quiet start towards a prolonged torture sequence almost too unbearable to watch. But such deliberate pacing isn't typical of Miike, whose movies often assault the viewer with an onslaught of slam-bang action that makes John Woo look like Eric Rohmer. Dead or Alive, his most successful cops-vs-yakuza thriller to date, kicks off with six nonstop minutes of machine gun-paced violence, sex, and slaughter, all set to a pounding heavy-metal beat. Thereafter things calm down a little, though not much. Given Miike's penchant for murky, livid-toned visuals and skewed camera angles, it's not always too easy to work out exactly who's doing what to whom, but the general outline's clear enough. The Tokyo underworld is being torn apart by a turf war between the yakuza gangs and the invading Chinese triads. Ambitious yakuza member Ryuichi (Riki Takeuchi) isn't above playing both sides off against each other in his bid for power, while police detective Jojima (Sho Aikawa), himself none too scrupulous in his methods, is out to destroy the gangs.

Into this conventional plot framework Miike piles enough warped characters and bizarre, twisted happenings to fuel half-a-dozen Tarantino movies, while cheerfully borrowing--and inflating--key moments from such hard-boiled gangster-noirs as The Big Heat and Kiss Me Deadly. One character deep-fries his own hand, a stripper is drowned in a paddling-pool filled with her own excrement, and the literally apocalyptic finale, the showdown to end all showdowns, will leave you gasping. The appallingly prolific Miike, who regularly makes about five movies a year, has since directed two sequels--the first only three months after the original. --Philip Kemp ... Read more

Reviews (16)

Flabbergasting!
The first and last five minutes of DEAD OR ALIVE are truly you-hadda-be-there experiences... and the ending.... well, the ending isn't just over-the-top, it's fall-off-a-cliff-and-no-bottom-to-hit.

This overheated crime noir is the brainchild of Takashi Miike, Japan's answer to Ken Russell and Quentin Tarantino rolled into one, a workaholic who in only a decade has something like forty-five films to his name. Here he pits the sneering Riki Takeuchi against the cool-eyed Sho Aikawa (both direct-to-video crime-movie stars in Japan), with the former being a yakuza with ambitions to ace everyone else out and the latter being a vice cop obsessed with squeezing him to pay for his daughters operation. The two ooze through Japan's underworld, where stomachs full of ramen noodles are blown all over the camera lens and you're as likely to die of being drowned in a wading pool of excrement as you are being shotgunned at your birthday party while in a stork suit.

What makes Miike more than just an exploitationist is his unusual attention to character and incident. Beyond and above the noise and splatter of his images, there are real people on screen here: Takeuchi's criminal is so hardened that he can't even hear the cries of despair from the younger brother he allegedly did so much of this for, and Aikawa's cop is so estranged from his family, he's almost going through the motions of trying to save them. Then both of them are jarred into action by circumstances, and that leads to the showdown I mentioned above. Which REALLY has to be seen to be believed... or disbelieved.

There are two other DOA movies, but interestingly, they have no common elements except a) crime and b) the presence of the two leads. Call them "side-quels," if you will, and here's hoping the rest of them find their way to the USA sooner rather than later...

A DVD zone APOCALYPSE WOW !
Takashi Miike belongs to this new wave of Japanese directors who appeared in the mid-nineties. Hysterical editings, almost unbearable scenes of torture and sexual perversions, heroes who seem to have jumped out of a comic strip are the main trademarks of the cinema of these directors.

Now are they worth the time you'll spend watching their movies ? In the case of DEAD OR ALIVE, the answer is definitively YES. The two main actors, Riki Takeuchi and Sho Aikawa, are surprisingly good and the ten first and last minutes of DEAD OR ALIVE proove that Takashi Miike is a director deserving an international recognition. Anyway, it has given me the wish to see other films of Miike.

The KINO DVD offers as extra bonus a 10 minutes interview with the director who's as crazy as his movies and a bunch of trailers of japanese movies. Sound and images average, no more.

DOA Is what you expect from Takashi Miike
I had recently ordered the package of DOA and Ichi The Killer, both unedited/unrated. I was very pleased with DOA, and it has earned its spot in my DVD collection.

The acting, plot twists, filmwork... all of it ties in well. Although contrary to what others have said in their reveiws, I was not as taken by the ending as others seem to. I enjoyed the movie itself more than the last few minutes.

Overall, this DVD delivers. The quality is great, the subtitles are accurate, and the short interview with Miike is a plesant surprise. I recomend Miike fans, and even people who do not know of his film making, both purchase this DVD.

Out of control Action
This movie rules, the first 10 minutes are all action, no dialogue. Typical Cops verse Dealers but it has a kind of "King Of New York" feel where anybody in the movie can be killed at any time with any weapon. Crasy surprise ending. Worth every penny.
Rent-Yes
Buy-Yes

"If a movie has one great shot, is it worth it??"
This is an intresting question asked by Takashi Miike in the 10 min. interview included in the special features section of this disc. I believe the answer quite possibly is ..yes. But Miike needs not ask that question in regards to this movie. There are quite a few of "those" shots that us cinema geeks live for, (most having to do with really cool looking actors like Sho Aikawa, and Riki Takeuchi flowing towards the camera in slow motion with a group of equally tough and cool compatriots following along)because Takashi has a vision.
An underworld on the edge of implosion, a top cop refusing to help maintain the balance between "good and evil" as he sets out to crush the yakuza and triad gangs. The same cop having to give into the temptation in order to save his dying child then believing he can erase it with the pull of a trigger. A Japanese gangster of Chinese origin trying to destroy both criminal factions so he can profit from a third Taiwanies faction trying to take control. Both sides loosing friends and loved ones in this vicious turf war until all that is left is....well I'm not going to give it away.
Miike creates these very intresting characters with a minimum of exposition, and a maximum of visual interpretation. And what great characters, from the supercool,and tough(Aikawa, Takeuchi)to the twisted, and amoral they all seem to have their moments of cinematic grandure.
The influences jump off the screen from Seijun Suzuki(Branded to Kill, Tokyo Drifter..) to Ringo Lam and John Woo, to our beloved Tarantino. Like all the great filmakers from the second half of the 20th century, and the beginning of the 21st century Miike takes,steals, and borrows. Throws it all on a canvas, swirls it mixes it and adds his secret ingrediant..the wratcheting up of the violence, the realistic blending to the absurd.
I think he is taking his place among the best at his craft.
DVD- Quality is crisp and sharp. Although there are not alot of extras here, what is here is good. A trailer gallery is a wonderful highlight and a great tool to search out some of the best Japan and Hong Kong have to offer. ... Read more

Reviews (203)

Nigeria's Bitter Tears
TEARS OF THE SUN starts out as an actioner for star Bruce Willis, but soon morphs into an introspective soul-searching film that disguises itself in a series of bloody jungle ambushes. Director Antoine Fuqua presents an image of Africa that has become increasingly commonplace in the media, a continent rent with tribal internicene warfare that degenerates into genocidic ethnic cleansing. Fuqua chooses Nigeria as the background for some truly horrific tribal slaughtering. The elected president, his cabinet, and his family have all been executed by advancing rebels who do not pause to kill anyone found in their path. Monica Belluci is Doctor Lena, a good-hearted woman who chooses to tend to the suffering of a tormented population. With her is a priest, Father Gianni (Pierrino Mascarino) and a nun Sister Grace (Fionnula Flanagan), all of whom choose to remain in harm's way rather than abandon some 70 wounded natives. Enter Bruce Willis as Lt. A. K. Waters, who is ordered to enter Nigeria with his Special Ops team to extricate only Doctor Lena. Waters and his team find Doctor Lena, but she refuses to go with them unless her 70 wounded can go too. Most reluctantly, Waters agrees to this change of orders. Until this point, Waters is a strictly by the book officer, one who regards this war, this country, and its natives as irrelevant to his mission. But he cannot close his eyes to the ubiquitous suffering to which he has a ringside seat. He surprises Doctor Lena, and probably himself as well, by making a genuine effort to extricate the entire group of helpless natives.

TEARS OF THE SUN is a violent film filled with both disturbing images of jungle battle and the even more malific glimpse into the depths of sadism and inhumanity that seemingly reside within the collective breasts of all the rebel commanders. Malick Bowens as rebel Colonel Sadick is especially convincing as one who is as equally determined as is Lt. Waters to complete his own mission but allows not his conscience to bother him in the least. To Colonel Sadick, natives of his own country, but of a different tribe, are disposable people. As a moral counterbalance to Sadick, Sammi Rotibi as Arthur Azuka, the son of the slain president, is the reincarnated collective soul of his bitterly abused people, most of whom see in him the restored dignity of a once proud Nigeria. TEARS OF THE SUN suggests that the evil and insanity of ethnic cleansing is a moral disease that, far from being an epidemic, afflicts only those who are predisposed to violence. Lt. Waters and Arthur Azuka remind the audience that for good to triumph, brave men must show their bravery, not to an armed enemy wearing a different uniform, but more to their own kind ordering them to commit acts that differ from those of the rebels more in degree than in kind. The tears of the son that are being shed for his people are constant reminders that this sort of bravery cannot be assumed to exist in any great quantity.

Not bad, but it just didn't do it for me
You can't really call "Tears of the Sun" a bad movie. By any account it's certainly a decent action war movie, and I enjoyed it. Where "Tears of the Sun" fails to succeed is in it's somewhat one-dimensional and shallow aproach at including policical and social messages, and in it's seeming impotence at crossing the lines from mediocrity to greatness.

The plot is pretty much a no brainer that gets set up right from the get-go. The Democratic government in Nigeria gets ousted by a military coup and rebel forces execute the presidential family and begin an genocidal killing spree, killing christians and rival tribes. Bruce willis and his small special forces team is sent to to find and evacuate several US Citizens, including a doctor working at a christian mission. The doctor wont leave without her patients, and so Willis and his team agree to escort the people to the Cameroon border. Of course they are followed by the rebels the whole way and are grossly outnumbered and it becomes a race to get to the border and to safety before they are completely over run.

Not exactly full of surprises and not much food for thought. of course there is the initial lie/double cross, and then the classic (not to mention very cliche) moment where our heroes grow a conscience after witnessing the horrors and extent of ethnic cleansing that is taking place and decide to help the people as thier way of making amens with thier own guilty consciences. other than this there is little to talk about plot-wise.

The acting is pretty good, although it varies throughout. Willis himself does a very good job playing his charcter though other than him and the doctor none of the characters grew on me. The setting is great, and the shots of the african landscape were very nice. For being an action war movie, "Tears of the Sun" offered only sporadic action until the climatic battle at the end which was mildy impressing, though nothing you havent scene before.

There is a constant attempt throughout the movie to bring attention to the brutality the ethnic cleansing that occurs in Africa that most americans are unaware of. We hear about bosnia, kosovo, but not so much about the many war torn regions in africa many of which are subject to constant guerilla warfare, famine, tribal clashes, and civil wars. The current attention being given to the situation in Sudan is very similar to what is shown in the movie. The look we are given however, although sad and mildly graphic, is a little one dimensional, and doesnt really explore the complexity of the political, ethnic, and religious angles of african conflicts. instead this is all reduced to "good guys vs bad guy" with the US as the good guys who sit idley by of course. I think many people will wish that the movie had a more realistic and more complete look at this angle of the plot rather than just showin "a bunch of rebel guys in red hats who run around killing all the christians and guys from the other tibes".

Other than that there is an overwhelming lack of depth and substance to the movie. Character development was underdone and there just arent many layers beyond what you see on the surface. And what is on the surface, though not bad, is not spectacular either. While I liked the movie over all, it just didnt have enough meat to it I felt. There were times I would just feel like something I couldnt put my finger on was missing to this one.

"Tears of the sun" does win points however for atleast trying to shed some public light to the attrocities in africa that most of the world lives happily ignorant to. It also serves as an effective, and enjoyable military action movie that is hard to hate but impossible to love.

One-dimensional but...
I really have quite ambivalent felings about this movie. From one hand, it's full of cliches and very simpleminded. You pretty much know what will happen, a lot of things are overdramatized (not the scenes of atrocities though). The acting is mediocre but it's not a problem of actors but rather of a bad script. On the other hand, the scenes of atrocities in the movie (somewhere in Africa - Sudan comes right away to mind) make people to realize that such terrible things are really happening today. It did really resonate through probably some shock - at least that's the way I feel. And who knows, maybe a simplemindness of this movie helps to deliver the message. I would give one star for cinematographic qualities and five stars for revealing the problem and showing disasters really happening in the world today.

DOA Near the End....
Rent it when you've seen the better combat stories. Well I had high hopes for this one at the theater, and the first half was good enough. Then on the second half the whole "reality" of the movie fell through. If you ever read any real SEAL stories you will wonder what happened at the end. Bad tactics, bad acting, and just poor story. They all died about the start of the "big battle", somehow walking out in the B-movie end. Total science fiction. Sorry, that was just too much. And Why? No one to write a realistic script? Ran out of ideas? What a waste for the budget and huge effort. Thats my take. BlackHawk down Was a good movie though!

Tears for Humanity
Bravo to the filmakers for making this movie based on the plights of many war torn countries in Africa. This film exposes some of the atrocities faced by Africans, genocide, rape, torture, mass graves and the list only grows. A very necessary exposure for the world as it sits back and watches a great nation destroyed.

The direction is excellent, war scenes mixed with touches of humanity and nature giving a sense of what people are fighting over. Some of the acting is a bit overdone, but then what other reason is there to watch a Bruce Willis movie? The most touching scenes are unfortunately the most brutal, the slaughter of towns, the piles of dead bodies, innocents pleading for life and the factual account of women being raped by militias who "de-breast" them so that future generations are deprived of something as simple as a mother's milk.

I highly recommend this film for the horror it provokes and try to imagine the nations of Africa pleading for their lives while our fat and happy nation only fights for oil. Shouldn't war be about saving lives? This movie says it all....the right way. ... Read more

Description

An American merchant marine captain ferries a group of = Chinese refugess down the Yangtze River to escape the Communists. ... Read more

Reviews (9)

Ferryboat to Hong Kong
"Blood Alley" is a big, sprawling, grandly mounted and sumptuously photographed adventure story starring John Wayne and Lauren Bacall that tells the tale of a merchant sea captain (Wayne) who has had his freighter stopped and boarded illegally in international waters by the Red Chinese, and who has been imprisoned by them for some time since. A village downriver from the prison where Wayne has been kept antes up a bribe to the prison guards and gets Wayne sprung. Taken downriver by his "contact", big Mike Mazurski made up to look oriental, Duke is informed that the entire village wants to escape to Hong Kong and they want him, Duke, to captain them all down the Formosa Straits ("Blood Alley") to Hong Kong and freedom...and they want this to be done on a leaky, creaky, pokey-slow and prone-to-breakdown stern-wheeled ferryboat. With no charts.
Wayne mulls this and decides he has no choice in the matter. He makes a homemade chart from memory and sets about to put the escape plan in motion, taking everyone with him, including the headstrong daughter (Bacall) of a medical missionary, and an entire family of loyal communists who can't be left behind because their masters would kill them as "responsible" for this flight.
Down the straits goes the ferry boat, dodging commie gunboats day and night and slipping into forests of reeds for camouflage when their pursuers draw too near.

The telling of the story of this journey is so well done that the viewer tends to be detoured away from the story's great glaring logical pothole. This escape is set in the mid-1950s and NOT the EIGHTEEN fifties. Decades earlier it COULD have happened the way it is shown, but NOT in its supposed time period. The reason? Airplanes. In the mid-1950s Communist Chinese forces would have aircraft up and down the Formosa Straits LOOKING for this ferry and they WOULD find it. Yet there is never a mention of aircraft here and no aircraft ever shows up anywhere in the movie. Its almost as though there is no such thing as a search plane in existance...or any kind of plane at all!!!

Very Strange. Yet, it is only later that you realize this. Throughout the film the movie-makers keep you so involved with the dangers and rigors of the journey that you don't even THINK about planes while you're watching it. Very clever diversion.

There is good chemistry with Wayne and Bacall and they go through the typical "difficult" time with each other before becoming hard-breathers as they enter Hong Kong Harbour together.

Aside from some minor silliness (Duke perpetually talks to an "imaginary friend" named "Baby"....which happened to be Bogart's pet name for Bacall) and the aforementioned mysteriously missing aircraft, this William Wellman-directed story hangs together well and delivers the goods on excitement and interest.

Good movie overall.

Now...WHEN are they EVER going to release one of Wayne's all time masterpieces? WHEN are we EVER going to see "The High And The Mighty"???????

Let me get it correct for everyone
First off, you can't beat the Duke in just about any movie. Blood Alley and The Sea Chase were a departure from his typical westerns and WWII movies, but he handled them in his true dominating fashion.

Now, I noticed that in other reviews, there was some discussion about how many movies John Wayne died in. Let me give you the complete list of those from 1939 onward. I don't know how many he may have died in during the 1930s, if any, because I haven't seen that many of his B westerns.

1. The Shootist (1976)
2. The Cowboys (1972)
3. The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance (1962). He is dead at the start of the movie, and the entire story is told in a flashback.
4. The Alamo (1960)
5. The Sands of Iwo Jima (1949)
6. Wake of the Red Witch (1948)
7. The Fighting Seabees (1944)
8. Reap the Wild Wind (1942)

Great John Wayne Flick
I saw this a couple of times on TV. It's a fine action movie.
One review here suggests to get it on DVD-wisescreen, but I can't find where any such version was made. VHS is the only choice.

also WAKE OF THE RED WITCH
Last saw Blood Alley on tv long, long, ago. I didn't even know it was available on video, but I will pick this up soon to add to my library. A good action movie.
I THINK John Wayne also died in Wake of the Red Witch.Can we say that he 'died' in "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance"?
3/10/2004 JULY 2003? time sure flies.Just got the VHS (was looking for DVD, can't find).Great, better than I remember from tv.Not just action, there's commentary, and some of the Chinese characters are sooo stereo typed.Note the Chief Engineer is Nisei (2nd gen Japanese American, see GO FOR BROKE i think).

He has died in 4
John Wayne also died in the Fighting Seabies ... Read more

Amazon.com

A lot has changed in the biker-movie genre since Hell's Angels on Wheels, and Torque may be the new benchmark of feverish chopper action. Martin Henderson plays Cary, a speed king and relatively civilized outlaw with a knack for annoying everyone, including drug smugglers, the FBI, an ex-girlfriend, and, worst of all, biker gang leader Trey (Ice Cube), who thinks Cary killed his brother. On the run from everyone, Cary survives by playing all sides against one another. But the story is less important than the frantic, over-the-top, tongue-in-cheek action surrounding it. The Fast and the Furious producer Neal H. Moritz is responsible for this crazy, violent, yet appealingly sardonic cowboys-on-wheels piece. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (34)

It's a simple math problem.
Add xXx with 2 Fast, 2 Furious, minus the great looking leading men (and women), minus memorable lines, minus originality (both in screenplay and car/bike chase scenes) and it equals the terrible Torque.

Nothing was new, original, or worth watching if you saw and liked xXx, The Fast and the Furious, and 2 Fast, 2 Furious because you will get nothing more for Torque than a good two stars lower than you rated those previous movies. This movie did TERRIBLE in the box office compared to the other three.

Ice Cube is no Vin Diesel (not even Tyrese for that matter), and Martin Henderson is a much older and more average version of Paul Walker. The only near-leading lady (if you don't count the 5 minute cameo of the pretty Christina Milian) is easily upstaged by all the extras. So obviously this copy-cat movie isn't even saved by a good looking cast.

The acting was very average, but that's to be expected since not many members of the cast have a long movie credit list. The one-liners were downright silly at times, not that there were many to being with.

The basic plot was a biker guy (after coming back from 6 months in Thailand running from the police) gets framed for a murder by another group of bikers because "Ford" (Martin, our main character) won't return the other-bikers' bikes that have drugs in them. Did I mention the man they killed is the brother of the leader in ANOTHER biker gang (this gang happens to be a -ridiculously- urban group for a gang who's in the middle of nowhere) and he goes after Ford too? The gallant Ford, his two friends and his girlfriend have to clear his name. Of course, cars are blown up, people die, car/bike chases ensue and all that jazz.

It sounds complicated because the movie (obviously) tries to hard but the movie is surprisingly (err...well not THAT surprisingly) forgettable.

I generously gave it 2 Stars because it reminded me to give even more credit to xXx and the t.F.a.t.F. and it's sequel. The blatant (and repeated) stealing of the great ending computer generated scene in xXx and it's -desperate- attempt to have more dazzling action scenes than The Fast and the Furious made three years prior to Torque.

This movie doesn't succeed, in any way. Maybe four years ago, but not after the handfuls of better action and action/drama flicks that have hit the box office in the past three.

This is not a film for the cynical.
I see no reason to not like this movie if you paid money to go see it. If you didn't realize it would be a cheesy action flick with clique driven dialogue, you are so completely ignorant on your movie selections that you disserve to be disappointed.
The plot is a so recycled I can't even remember what film should get the credit for using it originally. The dialogue is so corny that the characters even make fun of each other after delivering their one-liners. The action is such over-the-top physics-defying fluff that it comes off as a science fiction film, and a good one at that.
Martin Henderson and Monet Mauzer act extremely well with the limited dialogue they were given. It seemed as though they knew how over-the top it was and just had fun with it, which makes for a very enjoyable viewing experience. The thing that sets this film apart from movies like The Fast and The Furious, Two Fast Two Furious or Biker Boyz is that it doesn't take itself nearly as serious as those films do.
Torque is director Joseph Kahn's first feature film. His background includes a celebrated career as a music video director and it shows.
So, if you know going into this movie that it is basically an eighty-one minute music video, and that concept is not offensive, you should have a wonderful time. If that doesn't sound like your bag, don't waste your time by going to see it then further waste your time by writing a review of the film like you thought it was going to get the Oscar for best picture of the year.

I wouldn't watch it again.
I didn't have high expectations from a this movie from the start but it was far worse than I ever thought it could be. Most of the stunts are completely rediculous. I've never heard of people "bunny hopping" a 450 lb. crotch rocket 10 feet in the air or fist fighting on two bikes weaving through traffic at what appears to be warp speed (whatever that is). The only reason I would watch it again would be if I'm drunk and want to pass out.

What Was I Thinking ?
Ice Cube is one of the greatest rappers of all-time. "Torque" continues the string of cinematic evidence that he shouldn't give up his day job.

Great cin