Amazon.com essential video

If Franz Kafka had been an animator and film director--oh, and a member of Monty Python's Flying Circus--this is the sort of outrageously dystopian satire one could easily imagine him making. However, Brazil was made by Terry Gilliam, who is all of the above except, of course, Franz Kafka. Be that as it may, Gilliam sure captures the paranoid-subversive spirit of Kafka's The Trial (along with his own Python animation) in this bureaucratic nightmare-comedy about a meek governmental clerk named Sam Lowry (Jonathan Pryce) whose life is destroyed by a simple bug. Not a software bug, a real bug (no doubt related to Kafka's famous Metamorphosis insect) that gets smooshed in a printer and causes a typographical error unjustly identifying an innocent citizen, one Mr. Buttle, as suspected terrorist Harry Tuttle (Robert De Niro).When Sam becomes enmeshed in unraveling this bureaucratic glitch, he himself winds up labeled as a miscreant.

The movie presents such an unrelentingly imaginative and savage vision of 20th-century bureaucracy that it almost became a victim of small-minded studio management itself--until Gilliam surreptitiously screened his cut for the Los Angeles Film Critics Association, who named it the best movie of 1985 and virtually embarrassed Universal into releasing it. This DVD version of Brazil is the special director's cut that first appeared in Criterion's comprehensive (andexpensive) six-disc laser package in 1996. --Jim Emerson ... Read more

Reviews (302)

the definitive look at this masterpiece
Brazil is, arguably, Terry Gilliam's crowning achievement. Originally called 1984 1/2, this film was embroiled in an infamous battle to be distributed. The studio didn't like Gilliam's version and cut together one of their own. Gilliam went to the press and got the L.A. critics behind his movie and finally shamed the studio into releasing his version.

Criterion's 3-DVD set documents the struggle Gilliam went through to get his film shown. Disc One contains his cut of the film with an informative and entertaining commentary by the director. The second DVD contains the bulk of the extra material. Not only is Gilliam's struggle documented but also various aspects of the production are examined -- including the screenplay, costumes, art direction, etc. The final disc contains the studio's ....py cut with a film historian's audio commentary documenting why this version sucks.

Once again, Criterion comes through with an exhaustive look at an important film of modern cinema. Brazil is a brilliant satire of a dystopian society run amok by pointless bureaucracy. Anyone who has worked a souless job in an office will immediately empathise with the protagonist's plight. Like any great work of science fiction, Brazil offers more questions than answers -- not everything is wrapped up neatly, instead the viewer is left questioning certain aspects of our modern society. Great stuff.

Great movie about dreams and hope
Brazil, despite the science fiction, social commentary and surrealism, is at it's core a film about a man who trapped by the mundanity of life, imagines himself in a more fantastic world.

Jonathan Pryce stars as a tiny unimportant member of a vast hyper-capitalistic society. Life is cold and dreary for everyone. All his spare time is spent dreaming of magical romantic worlds and the beautiful woman who lives there. One day, a simple beaucratic mistake causes a monumental disaster. Not that anyone cares... they just don't want to be blamed. Sent to solve the problem, or maybe to be a scapegoat, Pryce accidentally meets the literal woman of his dreams. As he pursues her, he brings suspicion on himself of being a terrorist (the scourge of the government), and his dreams begin to invade his waking thoughts.

A suprising list of talent lend themselves to the film and is written, minus Kafka and Orwell themes, by Monty Python's Terry Gilliam so expect some obvious humor and much biting satire throughout. Depressing and magical without losing it's hope, any person who can identify with the main character should find themselves entranced.

Despite being made in 1985 the special effects prove to be suprisingly effective (although easily noticed). I personally think this movie is the second best Science Fiction film, 2001 being first, and the best 1984 type movie ever made.

Much loved, but I never got it ...
This is a cult classic, but I find it over-rated. It delivers the zaniness, surreality and crazy camera work, but the film has no interest in its characters -- you'll feel nothing for them, and for me that leaves a big hole in the center of the movie.

For a movie with a similar feel but considerably more heart, try Barton Fink instead. Or even Amelie.

Boring
This movie is really disappointing and boring.

a bizzare and frightening film
If you enjoy futuristic Sci-Films then I would heartily reccomend this, as it presents a number of interesting and imaginative concepts.
The setting is the far future.The world is a polluted wasteland. A strange network of wires covers the ceiling of every room.
A corporation-government, Central Services, controls all trade enterprises. Any who indulge in the businesses they control (which are almost everything) without the proper paperwork are labeled terrorists. So, unfortunately, are those who criticize Central Services' inane policies.
Their Cops, clad in spacesuits that look like they came straight out of David Lynch's adapatation of "DUNE", frequently capture these "terrorists" to be interrogated, tortured, and/or executed with bizarre devices.
The "food" eaten by the characters in this film is premasticated garbage, into which are stuck pictures of what the characters believe they are eating.
The rich and powerful under Central Services rule get daily facelifts and parties,
and they strike the viewer as stupid and frightening.
The plot of the film concerns a daydreaming young paper-pusher (Jonathan Pryce) for Central Services' Ministry of Information who discovers a glitch in some paperwork that led to the wrongful arrest and unfortunate execution of Archibald Tuttle, who was mistaken for Archibald "Harry" Tuttle (Robert DeNiro), who has fallen out with the law because of his entrepeneurial fix-it man services.
Soon, a truck-drivin' gal(Kim Greist) who witnessed Archibald Buttle's wrongful arrest pleads for his release to the Ministry of Information, who label her a terrorist.
Later, The young MOI employee notices her picture in the lobby of his workplace, and decides to pursue her. He saves her from being arrested, and, in doing so, is labeled an enemy of society, which eventually leads to his tragic end at the hands of his friends(Ian Holm and John Palin).
This frightening look at the evils of technology, corporations,wrongful arrests, and totalitarian governments is not to be missed by any except the very young(if it gave ME nightmares, imagine the effect it would have on a seven-year old boy!) . ... Read more

Reviews (114)

I can dig it!
I am 21 years old. My mother raised me with the monkees music and tv shows. I did not see this movie until 2 years ago. I was impressed. And so should everyone else be that called them a "fake" band and so on. The talent is remarkable, as well as the direction and the writing. This film involves all of the angst and emotion of their personal lives as well as the sign of the times. They were trying to find love and peace in a world ridden with war. At the time they were so passionate about their beliefs, as well as with trying to strip off the stereotypes that people put on them by thinking that they weren't original or by comparing them to the Beatles (with whom they were friends with and hung out with on a regular basis). Everyone will have a different opinion after watching this movie. My opinion is that it is thoroughly enjoyable and an absolute shame to never see. There are so many different scenes and wonderful actors and great music! I think I am going to watch it again right now. Oh, and remember:Nobody ever lends money to a man with a sense of humor.

The Ultimate Acid Trip
Bob Rafaelson and Jack Nicholson were at a party with the monkees while all of them were stoned and asked them questions about their fame, their desires, and their fantasies and the result was Head, a psychodelic, plotless mindtrip which flows like a good Monty Python Episode.

Those tuning in to see the rapid-fire improv-filled laughtrack which was the TV series are in for a shock as this has none of their ultrasticom comedy, but hey! Hey! it's still the monkees....everything is just a bit more abstract and surreal :) And let's not forget the music! Wow! The monkees have never sounded so good, writing nearly all of their material. Mickey shines on Psychodelic "Porpoise Song" (while we see him jump off a bridge into a mermaid-filled sea) and the sweet ballad "aas We go Along. Mike Nesmith really rocks on "Circle Sky" and Peter Tork gives us more songwriting weirdness with his rapid fire "Long Title: Do I Have To Do This All Over Again?"

This is a good movie to sit back with your friends and watch entranced at its path. Lots of fun cameos by the likes of Teri Garr, Frank Zappa, and of course Victor Mature and his hair!

Groovy!

cult classic
All I have to say is if your a true monkees fan your wasting your time I'ts terrible. How ever if your a huge fan of Rocky Horror Picture Show, Shock Treatment,J-Men Forever and any movie that director
Ed Wood did "except" Orgy Of The Dead (thats just asking for punishment.)than this movie is awsome.
I don't under stand why Peter Tork is the star of the movie ,he's on the least compared to the other guyes.

Head is a trip!
What is so unique about HEAD is that it's dreamlike in a way that few movies are. A uniquely crafted film inspired by the underground films of the 50s & 60s. Few movies manage to be entertaining solely on the strength of editing, but here a series of dreamsequences are seemlessly strung together in a fun and innovative way. The most revolutionary part has to be the way the beginning and end sequences were connected by the events between them yet are the same scene with only slight variations. Huh? As the Monkees put it, "when you see the end in sight the beginning may arrive". How they do it is masterful. If you try to make sense of this movie, you'll be missing the point. The best thing to do is just mellow out before you watch it and allow HEAD to mess with your head a little. It will if you give it a chance and that makes for a truly rewarding viewing experience. Outside of the Monkees trying to escape their manufactured image, nothing really makes sense in this strange little movie. However, criticising HEAD for it makes about as much sense as critising your dreams for being equally strange and nonsensical. Where comedy is concerned, HEAD is not funny in a humorous way but rather in a peculiar way, similar to the way dreams have you saying, "what was that all about?" later on. If this had been a hit, it could have taken popular filmmaking in a whole new direction.

The Definitive Anti-Masterpiece
When this film was made the career of the Monkees was already in decline as their show had been cancelled and their music was no longer charting ('Porpoise Song' from the "Head" soundtrack got up to number 62 on Billboard). The group was tired of their squeaky clean image as the 'Pre-Fab Four', and they just wanted out. This film was conceived in an effort to reach out to more adult audiences, and to hasten their departure from the scenes as the prototype MTV 'boy band'.

The film itself is a quirky, stream of consciousness movie that treads the line between anti-war statement film to over the top comedy in scenes where, for instance, they have to frolic on the scalp of Victor Mature (in a sequence known as 'dandruff') and are subsequently sucked into a giant vacuum cleaner by Victor Mature's hairdresser. There is no plot as such, but there is some redeeming social commentary such as when Frank Zappa tells Davy that he needs to work on his music more (but compliments his dancing, done with Toni Basil). At the end of the scene Frank Zappa's cow offers her opinion of the Monkees, in a scene that must be my favorite of the movie.

Some of the music is great, with the Nesmith tune 'Circle Sky' getting top mention. It's a great song, filmed live in a scene designed to show how the boys had been devoured by their public image. Other musical numbers are a bit lacking, particularly 'Daddy's Song' and 'As We Go Along.'

Highlights in the film are in the cameos. Not only do Toni Basil and Frank Zappa put in appearances, so do boxer Sonny Liston (who fights Davy), Terry Garr (who pleads to have poison sucked from her finger), Annette Funicello (who pleads tearfully with Davy in a love interest scene), and Jack Nicholson and Dennis Hopper in a cantina scene. Most peculiar of all credits are for writers and producers, namely longtime Monkees collaborator Bob Rafelson, and Jack Nicholson, who later collaborated on "Five Easy Pieces" and "The Postman Always Rings Twice", among other projects.

There are also extras consisting of theatrical trailers, including one in Portuguese, and television ads for the film. The film was essentially not promoted, certainly didn't connect with the typical Monkee demographic, and was a disaster at the box office. This didn't trouble the band, as it gave them a clear path out, with Peter quitting very shortly after the movie was released. This is as unlike the Monkees TV show as can be imagined, and I recommend it for anyone looking for a trippy sixties flashback stranger than most any other. I was fortunate enough to see this in a theater, and have loved it ever since. I recommend the film to people who know about the Monkees or just think they do. I guarantee that it will shatter your preconceived notions of the band. ... Read more

Reviews (105)

Insane!
Someone hit it right on the head when they said: "It doesn't make much sense, but that's why it's great!" That IS the point. It was about destroying plot in a movie. It was meant to be a movie of interesting and funny part that were only very loosely connected. People who don't understand this totally fail to understand the Beatles or the sixties in general. It was meant to be a creative, interesting, funny movie.

Unfortunately, it didn't live up to its promise. It was so impropmtu that the acting wasn't brilliant and some of the skits weren't too funny. The kind of person you are will determine how you react to the various. The camera work and directing could have been better. It could have been a masterpiece, but ended up being an innovative (but sometimes weird to the point of boring) film by a bunch of amateurs. It is essential because of its music, its humor, the fact that it contains the first music videos, its ideas, and the fact that we get to see the Beatles goofing around at the height of their powers.

P.S.: The music videos for "I am the walrus" and "Blue Jay Way" are outstanding.

Shamefully underrated and quite enjoyable
When I first saw this film I simply couldn't understand why so many people ganged up to trash it. I've seen it two more times since then with friends and my opinion has only strengthened.

To me this is a far more interesting film than overrated boomer nostalgia like a "Hard Day's Night" because it gives a better look into their personalities--this is their film, and the truest test of just how much you're on the Beatles' wavelength, which means a liking for Goon-show type humor and pop surrealism. Therefore people who expect every movie to have a "point" or nice understandable plot should go back to kino-kindergarden and skip the film. (The sort of people who beat words like "self-indulgent" and "weird" into the ground to describe what isn't instantly understandable) MMT is basically a set of music videos loosely held together by the various goings-on during a Ken Kesey-esque coach trip. And at 55 minutes it's too short to be boring anyway. The entire point is to sit back and not bother--to quote Bob Dylan--shoveling each dream into the ditch of what each one means.

The film of course has large flaws. There are quite a few comic situations, but the Beatles don't really develop them.(John and George are more out of it than Ringo and Paul too.) Some of the lightly sketched sequences do drag a bit as a result.But the movie's strength lies in its resolute silliness--like an overlush, parodic seaside "love affair", John dressed up as an Italian waiter endlessly shoveling mud-like spaghetti for a obese woman, or the Beatles capering around in wizard's outfits like kids who've eaten too much sugar. That silliness shades into genuine pop surrealism with the primitive, excellent videos for "I Am the Walrus" and "Blue Jay Way," featuring the most captivating use of superimposition, odd props in even odder locations, children, extreme lighting, and fleet-footed but purposeful intercutting.(McCartney made for an occasionally clumsy but effective director) They live up to the mood of the songs--they seem genuinely dream-like and make a good match with the Beatles' captivating videos for "Strawberry Fields" and "Penny Lane." Those videos, especially the former, freaked parents out in their day, and an extended music video like "Magical Mystery Tour" still manages to irritate people to this day. (Especially all those poor souls who begin by saying "I'm a huge Beatles fan but...")

On (off) balance not THAT bad
Of the many reviews of this film, those approaching it from the perspective of Music Videos tied together with comic interludes exhibit the best approach. Recall, in the UK the music was originally issued as a double EP (only the five songs in the film). Those who comment on songs being left on the cutting room floor are confusing themselves due to the UK LP having a second side of previously only available as singles material.

However, if the Beatles invented MTV (as George opined in Anthology), they did so by accident. Consider, many of the AMAZON reviewers have complained that "Strawberry Fields Forever," "Penny Lane," and "Hello Goodbye" were 'cut' from the film -- but they have it all backwards. Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane were released prior to the release of Sgt Pepper, and so also their repsective promotional films. "Hello Goodbye," the song and the film were recorded and released after Magical Mystery Tour, if I'm not mistaken -- the Sgt Pepper gear an embarrassing attempt to buy back some good will with the fans and press. And these songs were include only on the US version of the LP (as noted above)

Also, the selection of songs themselves are not quite up to par. "Blue Jay Way" drags on too long (Don't be long, don't belong..." ad infinitum), "Your Mother Should Know" just isn't the kind of show topping finale for which one would hope, and "Flying" simply rumbles on, in a nice but going nowhere sort of way. Indeed, only "I am the Walrus" and "Fool on the Hill" stand out -- the Title track being okay, but certainly not proto-MTV video quality.

All in all, it's a nice film and quite off-balance, and nowhere near as bad as many have painted it (expectations way too high on this one); however, it's also nowhere near as good, nor as interesting as many have suggested. As Beatles products go, it's worth a viewing, and perhaps a purchase (if properly warned, disposed, and prepared). One would hope that it will be re-issued in a restored edition with much additional footage to give the unitiated a better perspective (and maybe the 'cutting room floor' songs, eh?).

A good movie
When I first saw this movie I liked it. Even though I wasnt taking drugs and smoking pot. So what if the beatles made a movie about a trip across England that made no sense. I LOVE THE BEATLES evan if they came up to me and beat me up I would still love them. So dont say your a huge beatle fan and you hate this movie.

Great band, great album, horrible film
INTRODUCTION:
In 1967, the Beatles released the third of their five movies, Magical Mystery Tour. It was accompanied by the release of their studio album of the same name. This film is the one that tends to get bashed the most. Are the bashers correct, or is this film an underrated masterpiece? Read on for my review of Magical Mystery Tour.

BASIC PLOT:
The four members of the band have gotten onto a tour bus and basically go around acting silly. That's about it for the plot of this movie. And, of course, like every Beatles film, there are some music videos (known as promotional films back then) thrown in various parts of them movie.

FILM OPINIONS:
I love the Beatles. I love the Magical Mystery Tour album. But this film is the band's biggest blunder of all! The movie has no true plot, and there is absolutely no character development - we don't even know if the members of the band are supposed to know each other in the movie! The only real reason I gave the film two stars instead of one is because of the videos for the band's songs that appear throughout the movie - some of these are actually quite entertaining. Likewise, some of the film's scenes are pretty funny (the scene of John shoveling pasta onto a large woman's plate in a restaurant is particularly amusing), but you're going to be left dazed and confused most of the time. If you don't believe that the Beatles ever did drugs, watch this movie and your mind will be changed.

DVD:
This DVD version of the film contains a newsreel and some behind the scenes footage. These are good extras, but I was really hoping that the DVD would contain both the color and black and white versions of the film (the film was made to heavily emphasize color, but it was originally aired on British TV in black and white, much to the band's dismay.) Having both versions of the film would have been great for comparing the two.

OVERALL:
It pains me to speak so harshly of my favorite band, but even they made a few mistakes - and this was the biggest mistake of all. Unless you're a die-hard Beatle maniac, I recommend steering clear of this film. Of course, even some die-hard fans of the band hate this film with a passion (myself included.) Don't be expecting much from this film - you're not going to get much. ... Read more

Reviews (37)

DVD is nice update of a very odd cult film
I first saw this movie in a theater during its original release, and my immediate reaction was to loathe it. I was horrified. But after a few days I decided that, after getting over the shock, I enjoyed it in a quirky way. It is a great snapshot of a subculture of the 1980s. It does move a bit slowly compared to other modern films, but the costuming and characters are engaging. The music is a perfect companion to this weird piece. It is not for everyone -- there are some flashes of violent sex, adult language, and a lot of casual drug use. The DVD adds a few extra behind-the-scenes stuff, though not as much as some other DVDs. Plus it is a better quality copy than my VHS. This movie is for people who like movies like "Repo Man" or "Eating Raoul", and makes a nice addition to a collection of cult movies.

Everyone wants to be a performance artist
An extremely thin premise stretched across a tight budget...that's what you are, baby. Yet this movie gives us valuable insights as to what the early 80's "New Wave" culture was like, and along the way we are treated to bad acting and fluorescent paint and a clunky script and lesbians and little tiny aliens and a woman rather obviously playing both a "boy" and "girl" part.

Nonetheless, Liquid Sky will remain with you, even though you did not live in Greenwich Village at the time and missed the whole party. I still quote lines from this film, and it reminds me of our shared experience of the 80's past in a way that its imitators like "Valley Girl" do not.

Wow This was everything but amazing
This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.This movie was awful.

Painful to watch, even more painful to know I paid for it
This is by far the worst movie that I've ever seen in my life. If it turns out that we all live more lives after this one, it's the worst one I'll see for all of those lives. The only reason I watched it was because I bought a vintage poster of it at Goodwill for 49 cents and wanted to see what it was about. I felt more uncomfortable watching this than I felt when a proctologist gave me my virgin exam. Honestly, for all directors and actors who have ever made a beautiful movie, throw this out and burn the trash can to the ground. If you aren't convinced that the movie is that bad, go ahead and watch it and then you can regret for the rest of you life that you will never get those two hours back. But, if you are going to be wise and not watch it but still want to know how bad it is...stick your head in a rest stop toilet that hasn't been flushed and breath and swallow at the same time. After you've done this, cover your body in peanut butter and lay down near a giant mound of ants.

Liquid Sky is the biggest mistake in a movie rental I ever made, if I ever feel compelled to do so, I might just start a world campaign to dispose of every copy until the world has been ridden of such trash. Godspeed.

80's fashion, music and fantasy flick: bizarre characters!
I have loved this movie since 1984. It's a cult classic that rivals films like THE WALL, REPO MAN & THE ROCKY HORROR PICTURE SHOW. And it's better than any of the above, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION. I never known a film-maker with such a bizarre, fantastic imagination, a native sense of pure shock-factor and just plain fun!!! The dark atmosphere/mood is unparalleled.

Basically, LIQUID SKY is the irresistible story of a gorgeous, androgonous, female fashion model who is addicted to heroin (or something equally bad news), and who gets her drugs from her female lover Adrian. She dresses as both a man and a woman--the height of 80's beauty and mystery. The actress, Anne Carlisle, who plays the protagonist could not have been better cast. In fact, I think she helped write the screenplay and the novel on whivh the film is based. She's pure genuis and pure sexuality.

There are elements of sexual & chemical adiction, male-hatred by lesbians and lots of voyuerism.

Thhis movie is so far out, nothing has even come close to its allure since 1983, when it was first released on VHS.

YOU MUST SEE THIS FILM!!!! ... Read more

Amazon.com

It's easy to understand why the late, great screenwriter Paddy Chayefsky removed his name from the credits of Altered States and substituted the pseudonym Sidney Aaron. After all, Chayefsky was a revered dramatist whose original source novel was intended as a serious exploration of altered consciousness, inspired by the immersion-tank experiments of Dr. John Lilly in the 1970s. In the hands of maverick director Ken Russell, however, Altered States became a full-on sensory assault, using symbolic imagery and mind- blowing special effects to depict one man's physical and hallucinatory journey through the entire history of human evolution. It's a brazenly silly film redeemed by its intellectual ambition--a dazzling extravaganza that's in love with science and scientists, and eagerly willing to dive off the precipice of rationality to explore uncharted regions of mind, body, and spirit. William Hurt made his bold film debut as the psycho-physiologist who plays guinea pig to his own experiments; Blair Brown plays his equally brilliant wife, whose devotion is just strong enough to bring him back from the most altered state imaginable. From the eternal channels of sense memory to the restorative power of a loving embrace, this movie rocks you to the birth of the universe and back again. And while it's clearly not the story that Chayefsky wanted on the screen, the directorial audacity of Ken Russell makes it one heck of a memorable trip. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (46)

Nice DVD Remaster of Award-Winning Sci-Fi w/ Great Cast!
A sci-fi favorite of mine, this Academy Award winning film had fallen into obscurity on the video shelves, but is now back with all its original impact in a sharp, well-colored remaster with a brilliant digital 5.1 rendering of the Oscar-winning soundtrack. Ken Russell directs one of his more accessible films (compared to, say, THE DEVILS) based on the novel by Paddy Chayefsky, who, in a move remeniscent of Stephen King on THE SHINING, had his name taken off this movie because he didn't like the director's interpretation of his subject matter.

The film boasts a high-quality cast of young actors from William Hurt in his major film debut to John LaRocquette in the small role of an X-ray technician. Whoever cast this knew whom to select from the period's roster of young talent. Charles Haid, frankly, has never been more impressive as the fast-talking and brilliant skeptic and Bob Balaban is outstanding and self-assured in the role of the supportive friend who forgives Hurt his eccentricities but worries that he may be going crazy. Blair Brown is sexy and appealing and frequently nude as Hurt's just-as-brainy wife anthropologist, and one of the most interesting aspects of this movie is the dialog between these two intellects from the moment they first begin their sizzling sexual liason through their matter-of-fact decision to marry, then divorce, then finally redeem their relationship -- while nearly losing Hurt's character to his high-risk experiments.

Among other interesting subplots is Hurt's spiritual ambiguity since his father's fearful death, Hurt's notion that schizophrenia and related conditions may be "altered states" rather than diseases, Blair Brown's pragmatic decision to love Hurt's character, and marry him, despite the fact that he appears not to be wired to love her in return.

For the sci-fi fan there is the once-removed-from-reality premise that man may be able to physically alter his reality through changes in consciousness, whether via the isolation tanks Hurt utlizes in his experiments, or through complex hallucinogenic drugs he researches after an experience with an obscure indian tribe in Mexico. The special effects and the special make-up for Hurt's "throwback" missing link are first rate for their time and still look fairly stunning today. One of the things that impresses me about this movie is that the hallucinatory sequences, while wowing us in a post-psychedelic kind of way, also make sense in terms of the protagonist's life and experience; far more than just kaleidoscopes, the content of the montages are grounded in the story, rather than detouring us from it with eye candy. Ken Russell's religious viewpoint plays a part in the choice of imagery here, but the symbols of crucifixion, the beast and the Bible do not seem intrusive or sensational because they fit seamlessly with the Hurt character's internal struggle.

For the student of sociology, this movie offers a peek into the "turned on" 60s idea that drug experiences actually led somewhere -- a notion we now know to be tragically false. But at one time there was speculation that some drugs "expanded the mind" and deepened the life experience, either in terms of increasing one's understanding of the meaning of life or in some fashion maturing one's personality. The only reason this movie still works today is because the movie makes clear that in some tribes, there are substances that are traditionally and successfully used in spiritual rituals, and it is one of these that Hurt uses, in combination with sensory deprivation techniques, to try to get in touch with his own "genetic memory", for lack of a better term.

Again, this movie has much to recommend it, and the DVD release makes possible an experience in the home viewing much like we enjoyed in the theater on first run. Popularly priced, I snapped it up without hesitation for my collection and was rewarded with a very nice presentation of an old favorite. Not much in the way of extras here, just trailers and some text screens for cast, crew and background, but it's still a value, and you get to see the whole 1:1.85 image.

Alterations
The sci-fi film Altered States, is on the one hand, a landmark for the genre, while at the same time, it's not quite a classic either...

Research scientist Eddie Jessup (William Hurt, in his first film role) believes other states of consciousness are as real as everyday reality. Using sensory deprivation, then adding powerful, hallucinogenic drugs, he explores these altered states and endures experiences that make madness seem a blessing.

While Altered States features a solid cast that also includes Blair Brown, as Jessup's wife Emily, Bob Balaban as Arthur Rosenberg, and Charles Haid as Mason Parrish, Professor of Endocrinology at Harvard Medical School, as well as stunning visuals. Thanks to problems with script and the original novel's author Paddy Chayefsky displeasure with the way things were being done, the film does have a certain amount of choppiness to it at times--covered up by those effects I mentioned earlier--the impact of the film is less than it could have been. Director Ken Russell fortunately uses his best asset, the cast, to their full potential.

The DVD has very limited extras. There are only a few production notes and the theatrical trailer on the disc. On the technical side, the film boasts a soundtrack remastered in Dolby Digital 5.1 that sounds awesome. Viewers can watch Altered States in either the full-screen or widescreen formats.

The DVD is recommended, but the film's fault lies in covering up its weaknesses with albeit good looking eye candy.

Dont Believe The Hype!!!!
I'd happily soak up endless gallons of SWAK with my tongue, rather than watch this festering pile of crappola ever again!!!

Intriguing albeit silly at times
My mother recommended this film to me and I found it was definitely worth watching at least once. The premise is that a brillant scientist desires to transcend our human limitations and conducts experiements using himself as the subject in isolation chambers. He visits a Spanish speaking tribe who offer him a potent drink that has halluncinatory side effects and it is extremely freaky to see the healthy, tan tribe members turn to ghost white ash when the scientist glances at them under the influence of the drink. The visual assault certainly is stunning and I thoroughly enjoyed explosions of fire, religious scenes, crazy images a wild imagination would reel out. I found it diffuclt to sympathize with the scientist because his desire to pursue his experiments overrides his commitmment to traditional values such as family. He does manage to change into a fierce, primitive creature that reminded me of a cross between a rabid wolf and a prehistoric caveman. The change lasts a short while before he reverts to his human form, however, his skin tends to shudder and undulate helplessly after his first regression and he watches in interest. It's a good movie to see at least once because it explores a realm not dealt with often and the often outright silliness of the film downplays any terror one might be consumed by otherwise.

Something you should know about Altered States
by most reviews on here, i bought this DVD thinking it was some movie about the psychedelic trip of an experimental scientist and all the good fun he had with going back in time. FALSE. im going to be a little bit of a spoiler here, so if you dont wanna know exactly what the movies about, dont read the rest of this.
altered states is about a scientist/psychologist who is wandering about the reality of schizophrenia. that maybe its a connection that is not of insanity, but pure gift of the mind (my theory from day one). so he ends up in this dark water tank with some f-cked up voodoo LSD or sumthin from mexico. he goes back in time and evolves into an ape-man. he escapes from the tank and kills a man and eats a goat to be found sleeping naked (returned to his human form) in the zoo. his wife agrees to let him try it again. this time, it makes his face bubble up and deforms his entire body. the light and gas from the tank (how the hell it got their? some supernatural sh-t i guess) knocks out his wife and 2 scientists. the wife awakes, finds her husband, the experimenting scientist, in a swirling portal and he is screaming with an extremely disfigured face/body. she saves him from the portal of nothingness and they go back to the house only for him to turn into the deformed master of nothingness again and make her one of them (some fire girl---accident by the way), then he saves her from her nothingness. he tells her he loves her and thats the end.
yes, the movie has some trippy drug sequences but thats not what its about, really. its very impossible. i thought i was in for some good ol psychidelic fun and a guy with altered states of conciessness. i gues thats what i get for buying a movie before i see it. ... Read more

Amazon.com

By any rational measure, Alan Parker's cinematic interpretation of Pink Floyd: The Wallis a glorious failure. Glorious because its imagery is hypnotically striking, frequently resonant, and superbly photographed by the gifted cinematographer Peter Biziou. And a failure because the entire exercise is hopelessly dour, loyal to the bleak themes and psychological torment of Roger Waters's great musical opus, and yet utterly devoid of the humor that Waters certainly found in his own material. Any attempt to visualize The Wall would be fraught with artistic danger, and Parker succumbs to his own self-importance, creating a film that's as fascinating as it is flawed.

The film is, for better and worse, the fruit of three artists in conflict--Parker indulging himself, and Waters in league with designer Gerald Scarfe, whose brilliant animated sequences suggest that he should have directed and animated this film in its entirety. Fortunately, this clash of talent and ego does not prevent The Wall from being a mesmerizing film. Boomtown Rats frontman Bob Geldof (in his screen debut) is a fine choice to play Waters's alter ego--an alienated, "comfortably numb" rock star whose psychosis manifests itself as an emotional (and symbolically physical) wall between himself and the cold, cruel world. Weaving Waters's autobiographical details into his own jumbled vision, Parker ultimately fails to combine a narrative thread with experimental structure. It's a rich, bizarre, and often astonishing film that will continue to draw a following, but the real source of genius remains the music of Roger Waters. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (279)

Amazing
I saw The Wall because I really like Pink Floyd's music and was curious how the movie would look. I'm sorry to anyone who disagrees, but I think that this movie is amazing and Roger Waters is a genius. Bob Geldof was awesome in this role and I really liked the little kid who played him as a child. The movie is basically an analysis of how we build a figurative wall around ourselves to block out the world which everyone, like it or not, can relate too. The movie is insane, it doesn't stay put or follow the conventional setup of how we think a movie should be done, very much like Pink who is basically going crazy. It was a very imaginative and creative venture. Pink Floyd's The Wall makes you pay attention to what's going on, you get wrapped up in trying to figure out what exactly is happening and I must admit it can be confusing at times but it's well worth the trouble. The music really adds another dimension to the movie that you don't normally get with dialog. And of course, Pink Floyd is super-cool and amazing, so the music is very beautiful and full of life and vivid emotions. The animation is just incredible it flows in an odd fluid sort of way, it seems very different from what you normally see. Some of the themes are (gasp) dark and to watch it you're going to need an open mind, sorry! This movie may not be for everyone but I think everyone should at least try it and see what they get out of it. It's very different, very confusing at times, but very worth it. Buy the soundtrack too!! This is an incredible movie, it's different, like everything about Pink Floyd and so incredibly original it blows my mind. Watch it!!

"Spectacular Failure???" What movie did THEY see?!
I don't get it...how can film critics continue to fail in their reviews of the conceptual film that so perfectly visualizes Roger Waters' utterly brilliant concept album "Pink Floyd The Wall"? Why can't they seem to appreciate a movie that all Pink Floyd fans I've ever known (including myself) find to be such a tremendous interpretation, albeit it at times an admittedly depressing one?

What we have is a character study of A Big Rock Star who could be anyone but is actually a combination of two former founding Pink Floyd bandmates, Syd Barrett and (project mastermind) Roger Waters. The rock star ("Pink Floyd", played by Sir Bob Geldof, pre-"Band-Aid" and knighthood) has had a rather interesting life which is shown in flashback (and the occasional animated hallucinatory) sequence to World War II (where his father, like Roger Waters' own dad, was killed in action in Italy). Awkward in childhood without a father (unusual in those days) and castigated by schoolmasters (at one time busted during class for writing "poetry" -actually the lyrics to the Floydian signature piece "Money"), Pink eventually hits it big, marries...and then begins to lose control of it all, eventually leading to the meltdown that is occurring in...what is supposed to be a hotel room in the Hollywood Hills during yet another tour.

It's a bit mainstream to be considered an "art flick", but it has settled comfortably into "cult flick" status, deservedly so. Roger Waters' original inspirations that led to the Wall" album -increasing distance between the artists and their fans, alienation from societal institutions such as school, the death of a father Roger Waters never knew, the eventual insanity of close friend Syd Barrett- are all well-covered and simply enough portrayed so that subtle symbolism is never needed. The movie stands as a perfect visual accompaniment to the album...and in fact is a bit broader, particularly considering the extra themes written for the flashback scenes involving Pink's father.

For me the best of the smorgasbord of extra features is the commentary track, if only to actually hear Roger Waters' input and insights (and his brilliant Irish accent when mimicking Bob Geldof). Waters has a deserved reputation for being a bit reclusive when dealing with the media, so getting a chance to hear him discussing one of Pink Floyd's defining moments is particularly enjoyable for me as a Pink Floyd fan. He DID make it a point to mention that he thought the film was a bit too dark and didn't reflect the humor that he felt was found throughout "The Wall" as an album. I listened to "The Wall" again after hearing that comment and have yet to understand what the hell he was talking about. If there's any humor in "The Wall" at all, I've never heard it. It always seemed as brilliant and as heavy and darkly depressing as the movie is...which is probably why I've always liked the movie. See it if you haven't. If you've ever wondered what Pink Floyd was about, see this movie. Like the band itself, you'll either love it passionately or you just won't get it at all.

Cynicism run amuck...
It seems to me that Roger Waters has us all fooled, that this was actually a parody of the highest order. If you watch the interview with him on the bonus materials on the DVD, you can almost see him smile when he discusses the inspiration for this film. It's a film that we read into it what we will. To a small degree, it is autobiographical (most everyone knows about the incident when he spit on a fan during the Animals tour).

Taking that as a leaping off point, he takes the conclusion of the absurdity of the rock star life to its logical end. And it is brilliant. Pink Floyd was simply not the same after the breakup.

It is visually and viscerally stunning. I used to watch this over and over again and it seemed to tap into what I was feeling at the time and it provided comfort, a sense that someone else could relate to the isolation and loneliness I felt, even in the midst of people. I had to replace my vinyl record several times because I listened to it so much. The movie provides eye candy for the songs.

The plot is quite simple: Pink ('by the way, which one's Pink?') is a rock star whose about had enough of the excess and snaps, journeying into his brain way too far. We see the meltdown unfold and follow the transition to something much more frightening, gaining a vision of just how far human vanity can take us. The songs and the visuals form a cohesive whole.

Sure it's pretentious and takes itself too seriously at times - but isn't that the point? It works.

It's one of the darker takes on this life but it nails it brilliantly. You'll find that many of the scenes are bigger than the context of the film. Many of them could be related to events in the political or social sphere of then and today.

It's a bit dated, perhaps, or I've merely gotten older. But the extras on the DVD make it worthwhile, including the video for 'Hey You' featuring footage that didn't make it into the film.

This movie screwed my life up
This movie screwed my head up.You probably have to be stoned to wach this.I will never look at anything the same again.

still looks and sounds fresh after 22 years
I have owned this film on VHS for many years, so I was not in a big rush to buy the DVD...but I'm sure glad I did ! This is one of the rare instances where a movie complements the music instead of diminishing it (unlike Quadrophenia, for example...)

This is one film that I can't stop watching - once it starts I'm hooked until the end. The 90 minutes really fly by. And to those who say the real life and animation do not comfortably coexist - I say "rubbish !" the transitions are smooth and seamless. My favorite part is when the school kids, with their faceless masks, are marched through the factory and into the grinder. Classic Pink Floyd. And I say Bob Geldof's portrayal of Pink is flawless. Buy this DVD - you won't regret it ! ... Read more

Amazon.com

If Franz Kafka had been an animator and film director--oh, and a member of Monty Python's Flying Circus--this is the sort of outrageously dystopian satire one could easily imagine him making. However, Brazil was made by Terry Gilliam, who is all of the above except, of course, Franz Kafka. Be that as it may, Gilliam sure captures the paranoid-subversive spirit of Kafka's The Trial (along with his own Python animation) in this bureaucratic nightmare-comedy about a meek governmental clerk named Sam Lowry (Jonathan Pryce) whose life is destroyed by a simple bug. Not a software bug, a real bug (no doubt related to Kafka's famous Metamorphosis insect) that gets smooshed in a printer and causes a typographical error unjustly branding poor Sam as a miscreant.

The movie presents such an unrelentingly imaginative and savage vision of 20th-century bureaucracy that it almost became a victim of small-minded studio management itself--until Gilliam surreptitiously screened his cut for the Los Angeles Film Critics Association, who named it the best movie of 1985 and virtually embarrassed Universal into releasing it. This DVD version of Brazil is the special director's cut that first appeared in Criterion's comprehensive (and expensive) six-disc laser package in 1996. Although the DVD (at a fraction of the price) doesn't include that set's many extras, it's still a bargain. --Jim Emerson ... Read more

Reviews (302)

the definitive look at this masterpiece
Brazil is, arguably, Terry Gilliam's crowning achievement. Originally called 1984 1/2, this film was embroiled in an infamous battle to be distributed. The studio didn't like Gilliam's version and cut together one of their own. Gilliam went to the press and got the L.A. critics behind his movie and finally shamed the studio into releasing his version.

Criterion's 3-DVD set documents the struggle Gilliam went through to get his film shown. Disc One contains his cut of the film with an informative and entertaining commentary by the director. The second DVD contains the bulk of the extra material. Not only is Gilliam's struggle documented but also various aspects of the production are examined -- including the screenplay, costumes, art direction, etc. The final disc contains the studio's ....py cut with a film historian's audio commentary documenting why this version sucks.

Once again, Criterion comes through with an exhaustive look at an important film of modern cinema. Brazil is a brilliant satire of a dystopian society run amok by pointless bureaucracy. Anyone who has worked a souless job in an office will immediately empathise with the protagonist's plight. Like any great work of science fiction, Brazil offers more questions than answers -- not everything is wrapped up neatly, instead the viewer is left questioning certain aspects of our modern society. Great stuff.

Great movie about dreams and hope
Brazil, despite the science fiction, social commentary and surrealism, is at it's core a film about a man who trapped by the mundanity of life, imagines himself in a more fantastic world.

Jonathan Pryce stars as a tiny unimportant member of a vast hyper-capitalistic society. Life is cold and dreary for everyone. All his spare time is spent dreaming of magical romantic worlds and the beautiful woman who lives there. One day, a simple beaucratic mistake causes a monumental disaster. Not that anyone cares... they just don't want to be blamed. Sent to solve the problem, or maybe to be a scapegoat, Pryce accidentally meets the literal woman of his dreams. As he pursues her, he brings suspicion on himself of being a terrorist (the scourge of the government), and his dreams begin to invade his waking thoughts.

A suprising list of talent lend themselves to the film and is written, minus Kafka and Orwell themes, by Monty Python's Terry Gilliam so expect some obvious humor and much biting satire throughout. Depressing and magical without losing it's hope, any person who can identify with the main character should find themselves entranced.

Despite being made in 1985 the special effects prove to be suprisingly effective (although easily noticed). I personally think this movie is the second best Science Fiction film, 2001 being first, and the best 1984 type movie ever made.

Much loved, but I never got it ...
This is a cult classic, but I find it over-rated. It delivers the zaniness, surreality and crazy camera work, but the film has no interest in its characters -- you'll feel nothing for them, and for me that leaves a big hole in the center of the movie.

For a movie with a similar feel but considerably more heart, try Barton Fink instead. Or even Amelie.

Boring
This movie is really disappointing and boring.

a bizzare and frightening film
If you enjoy futuristic Sci-Films then I would heartily reccomend this, as it presents a number of interesting and imaginative concepts.
The setting is the far future.The world is a polluted wasteland. A strange network of wires covers the ceiling of every room.
A corporation-government, Central Services, controls all trade enterprises. Any who indulge in the businesses they control (which are almost everything) without the proper paperwork are labeled terrorists. So, unfortunately, are those who criticize Central Services' inane policies.
Their Cops, clad in spacesuits that look like they came straight out of David Lynch's adapatation of "DUNE", frequently capture these "terrorists" to be interrogated, tortured, and/or executed with bizarre devices.
The "food" eaten by the characters in this film is premasticated garbage, into which are stuck pictures of what the characters believe they are eating.
The rich and powerful under Central Services rule get daily facelifts and parties,
and they strike the viewer as stupid and frightening.
The plot of the film concerns a daydreaming young paper-pusher (Jonathan Pryce) for Central Services' Ministry of Information who discovers a glitch in some paperwork that led to the wrongful arrest and unfortunate execution of Archibald Tuttle, who was mistaken for Archibald "Harry" Tuttle (Robert DeNiro), who has fallen out with the law because of his entrepeneurial fix-it man services.
Soon, a truck-drivin' gal(Kim Greist) who witnessed Archibald Buttle's wrongful arrest pleads for his release to the Ministry of Information, who label her a terrorist.
Later, The young MOI employee notices her picture in the lobby of his workplace, and decides to pursue her. He saves her from being arrested, and, in doing so, is labeled an enemy of society, which eventually leads to his tragic end at the hands of his friends(Ian Holm and John Palin).
This frightening look at the evils of technology, corporations,wrongful arrests, and totalitarian governments is not to be missed by any except the very young(if it gave ME nightmares, imagine the effect it would have on a seven-year old boy!) . ... Read more

Description

Look out, it's Lila! A sweet-faced topless go-go dancer, Lila loves mixing S-E-X with L-S-D. Trouble is, when she starts hallucinating, she sees flashing lights and swirling colors. The freaked-out Lila then grabs a handy meat cleaver and promptly hacks up her lovers in an acid-fueled frenzy. A mesmerizing mix of murder and madness from producer Harry Novak (Please Don't Eat My Mother), this edition of "Mantis in Lace" is the premiere of the rare, uncut version, digitally remastered from the original 35mm hallucinogenic negative. Outta sight, baby. ... Read more

Reviews (8)

The good scenes are amazing
Mantis in Lace is a very mixed bag. You would think that a sexploitation / mad-slasher movie combined with the LSD subculture of the 60's would be a great idea -- and it is. But nearly half of this movie consists of extended scenes of strippers performing in the club or "trying out" on the casting couch. One can't help but feel that they only had enough time and budget to shoot half a movie and needed to pad it to get to a feature length running time.

With that said, the scenes where Lila trips out on acid and kills her prey are outstanding. Laszlo Kovacs was the cinematographer and it's easy to see that he would go on to shoot such classics as Easy Rider and Five Easy Pieces. Susan Stewart is a remarkably bad actress who can't deliver a line to save her life or even pass herself off as a mediocre stripper. But she's very cute and she has a certain charm that prevents her lack of talent from completely ruining the movie.

The DVD presentation of the movie is in full frame (1.33:1). The picture quality is outstanding for a 35 year old low-budget movie. The outtakes are actually longer than the movie itself, and it appears that there may have been a version of this movie that was far bloodier the the final cut that's presented her.

There are three short films on the DVD as extras, two of which are great time capsule relics from the 60's. "LSD: Trip or Trap!" is a 19-minute film produced by the Inglewood Police Department to warn youth of the dangers of LSD. It's sort of a 1960's version of Refer Madness. The second, "Alice Goes to Acidland", is a 12-minute nudie acid trip that almost defies description.

response to the VIEWER from Deluth
You can't compare this film to THe WALL. Here is my opinion(if u want it). People who are born from the 1980's on should NEVER compare a film they just recently watched from today's standards. The WALL was a film concerning a band member who was mentally ill and abused by his parents. Mantis in Lace (however)is a time period picture. You(as the saying goes) had to be there in the 60's experimenting with LSD and drugs (San Francisco/Haight Astbury area). In order to appreciate the fullness of the film. The two films are completely different! I, on the otherhand enjoyed this film. Hilarious, entertaining and very similar to Jack Nicholson's THE TRIP. Mantis is no better then The WALL. Both films are good but come from different decades.

One Psychedelic Trip
First of all, kudos to Something Weird Video for the Special Edition DVD release of "Mantis in Lace". SWV has done an excellent job with this DVD. I have never seen this movie before and I've wanted to buy this DVD for some time. I really love this film. I like the way it was filmed. The lighting or lack of lighting, on most of the scenes are great. The lack of lighting makes the film look like a film noir. The scenes where Lila is tripping out on acid are excellent. The colors and the geometric designs that are lighted on the actor's faces are fantastic. The director of photography, Laszlo Kovacks, has done an excellent job of capturing the psychedelic imagery to the screen. The acting is just awful, but that's what makes the film great. The movie is 87 minutes long. It was filmed between November 18-25 of 1967 and released in theaters and drive-ins in 1968. The psychedelic music sounds like early unreleased Pink Floyd recordings. It uses tapes that were cut up and then edited back together at random, backwards tapes, heavy echo, laughter, and strange music. The theme to the movie is really corny, but I found myself playing it over and over again. It's kind of like a train wreck, you don't want to look, but you know you just have to. The special edition DVD includes the original theatrical trailer of the film, an alternate psychedelic murder scene which is the same as the first murder scene, but more psychedelic designs are superimposed to the original scene. Things like fireworks going off, more geometric psychedelic designs, negative exposure of go-go girls dancing, and a fat man in a black mask holding bananas and dollar bills in his hands. The DVD also includes over 100 minutes of out takes, deleted and alternate scenes from the film. This feature doesn't have any sound, but the music and sound effect tapes from "Mantis in Lace" is dubbed in so you can hear the music and effects without the dialog. It's like having the original soundtrack on the DVD. This section also features a much longer version of the movie's theme. The funny thing is that some of the music that is in "Mantis in Lace" is also in the movie "Mondo Mod". This is because the same man, Harry Novack, produced both films. The DVD also includes The following archival short subject films:
1. Sid Davis's classic classroom scare film "LSD: Trip or Trap?"
2. "Alice Goes To Acidland"
3. "Girl in a Cage" Why this short film is added, I don't know why. It doesn't relate to the rest of the DVD.
4. A gallery of Harry Novack Exploitation movie poster art with Harry Novack radio-spot rarities.
If you want to know what an underground psychedelic/sexploitation/exploitation film is, this is the film to watch. I highly recommend it. I am very pleased with "Mantis in Lace. It's everything I thought it would be. This DVD will be played a lot on my DVD player. It's now one of my three favorite DVDs. I am not disappointed with "Mantis in Lace". This is psychedelia at its best. They don't make movies like this anymore. By the way, does anyone know what ever happened to Susan(Lila)Stewart? She's a real H-O-T-T-I-E.

It's worth just four stars
I recently bought this on VHS and finally finished watching it. Nothing really to add except that Lila's indeciferable accent is just a slight "Little Dutch Girl" twang in her speech. Far out! The ending is about what one would expect. Susan Stewart was a very attractive girl. I wonder whatever became of her.
Selling Real Estate down in Florida no doubt. Groovy, Man.

What's the deal with the bananas?

A pretty good trip
A trippy psychedelic go-go dancing murder movie. The dialogue scenes were pretty fun to watch - wish there were more of them.

One drawback was the frequency and length of the topless go-go dancing scenes. At least 4 of them seemed to last 5-10 minutes.

I actually liked the theme song (it was constantly played). The color and video looked very high quality. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Although it was made in 1936, Reefer Madness didn't become a cult hit until 1972 when the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) rescued it from the Library of Congress film archive. Thereafter, it was a mainstay on the midnight movie circuit.And it's easy to see why.The ostensible story involves a group of upstanding young high school students who succumb to the allure of the "killer weed."What follows, as if by natural progression, is a catalog of crimes that includes hit-and-run driving, loose morals, rape, murder, suicide, and my personal favorite, permanent insanity! The action is at times so hysterical, in both senses, that you may forget to inhale.Honors go to the wild-eyed, cackling hophead David O'Brien; his performance reaches a raw intensity that is hard to imagine. One measure of this film's pervasive influence is the extent to which its title continues to be invoked in news stories about decriminalization and medical marijuana. Such posterity for unintentional humor must be rare. A great film to see stoned, man. --Jim Gay ... Read more

Reviews (47)

Restored edition, fantastic!!!!!!
The movie Reefer Madness seen by itself is really nothing to brag about, but this special addition for this best-selling cult classic is fantastic. It's a must buy, because for how cheap it is, you really get your money's worth. For the first time ever, I can say that the colorized version (complete with multicolor smoke and over saturated psychedelic color schemes) is better and looks better than the original black and white, and both versions are available to watch which is considerate of the DVD producers to give us both, and it looks as good as we can ever expect. Extra features are fantastic highlighted by a hysterical commentary by Mike Nelson, formerly of Mystery Science Theater 3000, which is the sole reason why I bought this edition. The commentary by the people who colorized the film is also worth a look. I highly recommend this new edition.

Reefer Madness IN COLOR for the First Time - Fire UP!
Reefer Madness is the quintessential cult classic. Originally made as a 1930's propaganda film, it was meant to scare America's youth away from drugs, showing them that one puff of the "demon weed" turns teens into raving reefer addicts. Now, years later, this ham-fisted effort to warn you off weed has become the height of camp entertainment. A 'must watch' film among students, Reefer Madness continues to entertain today's youth with the edgy exploits of their high school predecessors. This movie is so beautifully bad, it's great!

Finally someone has released Reefer Madness the way it should be: Beautifully restored, in color for the first time, and in 5.1 surround sound. Both the color and black-and-white versions are on the disk. Plus this DVD has loads of fantastic bonus material. Mike Nelson of Mystery Science Theater 3000 does a hilarious commentary track, cracking wise from start to finish. Grandpa's Marijuana Handbook, A short film by Grandpa Ganja himself, graces this edition and tells us everything we need to know about dope.

No question this is the "FEEL GOOD" DVD of the year!

TELL YOUR CHILDREN!!!
After hearing about this movie for years I finally picked it up, and its better than I ever expected. This one dude smokes a reefer and appears to drive around the block 2 times then hits this old man and then he drives away. oh, yeah, this other guy named Ralph really loves his reefers, he smokes a few hits, then laughs, then he falls in love with Mary, he tries to win her heart by ripping her clothes off and groping her. It doesnt really work out for Ralph, because his fanciful advances cause Mary to get capped, and then Jimmy gets blammed for it because he's a total dork. In the end everything works out, because this stupid girl spills the beans to judge turtlehead, and Jimmy gets aquitted then the stupid girl jumps out of the window. all in all I loved this movie, it really opened my eyes to the evils of the demon weed. thanks for saving me from a life of crime and dispair Reefer Madness!

Re Urban Legend
To address xerxes59's question about the urban legend:

I never heard any evidence about Dupont funding Reefer Madness, but they would have a motive.

Dupont was facing enormous loses because their inventions rayon and nylon could not compete with natural hemp (in quality, cost effectiveness, not to mention environmental friendliness). Andrew Mellon, US Treasury Secretary and chairman of Mellon Bank, one of the major financers of Dupont, did appoint Harry Angslinger (who was also married to his niece) as Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. As seen in Ron Mann's documentary "Grass", Angslinger was an extremist zealot who managed to criminalize marijuana and create ridiculous sentences for smoking pot. One of Angslinger's methods was to demonize pot with completely false evidence throughout the various media (newspaper tycoon William Randolph Hearst, whose financial interests in paper mills was also being hurt by hemp, was a great ally). Of course this is a tenuous connection between Dupont and Reefer Madness, but Dupont clearly had a direct financial interest in demonizing reefer, just like the movie attempts to do.

Pointless
You mean they used to think pot was bad!!! Wow! Actually I saw this film and it was boring. It wasn't suprising, it had no point. It probably wasnt even that great back in '38. This movie is for children who just learned how to roll one and now they want to be cool. This movie SUCKS!!! ... Read more